EVE Search - Tranquility Patch Deployment on Tuesday, 5 Sept from 1000-1400 GMT

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Tranquility Patch Deployment on Tuesday, 5 Sept from 1000-1400 GMT

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
Granger Gallente Tiberian Star	Posted - 2006.09.05 16:09:00 - [91] Hell, I am almost ready to say do away with bookmarks period.. add a new warp in point of 5km and maybe allow a bm for safe spoting or something like that.. So people can get out of combat if they need to and such.. But even then I do not see the point, if they warp to a planet and start hopping around or have a cloak on there ship then they for the most part will be safe till they can make a run for the gate, other then that... A 5km warp in point would be a good thing and would allow you to remove bm's in my opinion. maybe allow you to note a solarsystem if anything, so it is easier then you haveing to seach for if you can not spell like me.
tameron Gallente	Posted - 2006.09.05 16:44:00 - [92] Once again a module that was designed to benefit all has been given a nerf that suits idle pirates who wish to sit at gates . i see no point in having a mod that is supposed to allow you to slip pass guarded teritory then take any possibility of activating it and keeping it active ... gate campers already use numbers as an advantage and many mods.If the intention is to make it purely an ambush tool why have a recon ship it will not be able to get stealth intel . if your gonna make such a nerf i sugest you re introduce fortified gates that cannot be tanked and camped into 0.0 space. i dont mind low sec space being hard . but the more you nerf the less people you get out there and the higher the load and demand will be on empire space .
Joerd Toastius Octavian Vanguard	Posted - 2006.09.05 16:56:00 - [93] We tested this afternoon and the patch does indeed put covops cloaks back the way they were, ie cloaking cancels any locks in progress. Patch notes in the actual installer weren't updated.
Cohkka LoneWolf Mining R i s e	Posted - 2006.09.05 17:14:00 - [94] Originally by: Tobias Sjodin If seven months in the game is new then allright. You're either new or a fool if you believe in the patchnotes or in CCP in general. Past experiances showed that CCP will screw up patches if the playerbase doesn't provide enough feedback (for you whining). The problem is we have to whine BEFORE the patch is introduced, or it will take them at least another month to fix the problem. Now with BMs whining is huge since it affects everyone. If they screw it up there will be even more whining, so we whine in advance so CCP will hear us. The problem with BMs isn't just longer traveling time. It's basicly the issue with BS needing MWD if they want to move fast, and snipers having a huge advantage IF they screw it up. These are just 2 of countles reasons why they can screw it up, do you think they'll be able to consider everything without our feedback (whining)? Don't speak english, just F5, F5, F5...
Mitten Caldari Hellbound Saints	Posted - 2006.09.05 17:21:00 - [95] Originally by: JA RULER They should have just left it the way it was. now its a daft setup as u can only still use 4 launchers!! at range why would u use a nos or rail? means u have to get close or now fit tacking mods!! silly ccp no one will do that when it has missile bonus.. useless 5th slot unless its a launcher as well. now i cant even fit it right as 2 lows sucks Wtf are you on, they didnt change anything with the hawk... It had 5 highs, 4 med, and 2 low's before, and it still does. Wts: Clue
Vincent Gaines	Posted - 2006.09.05 18:15:00 - [96] Originally by: Joerd Toastius Originally by: Vincent Gaines If someone is lame enough to use bookmarks to lag out fleet battles, they are lame enough to use a macro to copy them after the patch. Yeah, but then they can be banned for exploiting and macroing ;) and how will it be proven? CCP admits right now they can't prove macro usage, as you can tell with the mining issue. How can you tell if the bookmarks released were made via macro or legit? My point is that the patch won't solve the issue of exploiters... anyone dumping bookmarks to lag would be banned if caught, even before the patch. so how does the limit fix anything rlating to that matter?
BlackKnight Minmatar CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.09.05 18:43:00 - [97] I'm really trying to understand and accept the nerf to BM copying. However, I've run into another little problem following this patch that may or may have not been intended, but requires clarification. Put simply, I wanted to move (not copy) all of my BMs in a folder I had created in my People and Places folder, into my hangar. And what do I discover? You can only move 5 at a time! CCP, surely moving BMs from P&P to your hangar is not being considered too much for the server to handle as well? I thought the intent of the patch was to "limit the copying process." Why has the mere movement of BMs been nerfed? TIA BK
Kedryn Caitin	Posted - 2006.09.05 18:53:00 - [98] Originally by: BlackKnight I'm really trying to understand and accept the nerf to BM copying. However, I've run into another little problem following this patch that may or may have not been intended, but requires clarification. Put simply, I wanted to move (not copy) all of my BMs in a folder I had created in my People and Places folder, into my hangar. And what do I discover? You can only move 5 at a time! CCP, surely moving BMs from P&P to your hangar is not being considered too much for the server to handle as well? I thought the intent of the patch was to "limit the copying process." Why has the mere movement of BMs been nerfed? TIA BK Actually that would probably take a shred more processing then just copying. You have to remember that when you move the BM from your P&P to your hanger you are creating an item in the game. Be it copying or moving the BM. The extra shred of processing would come from actually deleting the BM from the server in the P&P. While it would be a tiny amount, actually moving a BM would actually end up being more work for the server than just copying.
Thyro	Posted - 2006.09.05 19:02:00 - [99] Hey CCP can you please PATCH this PATCH... The column "TAG" on the overview now does not work (This worked before todays patch.) Thanks
Gordon Lore	Posted - 2006.09.05 19:34:00 - [100] Just trying to get some attention... the patch breaks EVE in Cedega. See details here: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=389650
Traxio Nacho Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.09.05 20:10:00 - [101] Originally by: Thyro Hey CCP can you please PATCH this PATCH... The column "TAG" on the overview now does not work (This worked before todays patch.) Thanks Also why wasnt the ally tab not fixed either?
BlackKnight Minmatar CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.09.05 20:11:00 - [102] Items are taking an excessively long time to "trash it" out of your personal hangar...
Sihlovian Caldari Eclipse Outsourcing Solutions	Posted - 2006.09.05 20:12:00 - [103] Originally by: Sebastato Read the suggestions fully please, mate. Autopilot should not be able to warp at 0km. The suggestion was (and I favor that very much) to be able to warp at 0km to any celestial object manually but making the autopilot warping at 15km. Limit the maximum number of BMs to 100 for every player and leave the copy-at-once-limit at 5. That would make G2G BMs unnecessary. Another suggestion would be to setup the BM copying as a station service. That could be done when server load is low or during downtimes. You put in your BMs into a BM copying array and after next downtime or so you get your copy for a little fee. Now flame. I understand where you're going, I wasn't so much referring to the casual autopilot traveller. I was referring to those who practice the use of questionable 3rd party software. And, to a degree, it's pretty sad that macro/bot software is becoming more and more prevalent over the course of time in mmorpgs. Many a game economies have been hurt already by the use of such software. I still vote nay for the 0km warps. People will gripe that they need instas/ss/ect in 0.0 and certain alliance borders, but it really is nothing more than being inflexible to using new tactics to achieve their goals. One has to remember, if you were limited to 100 bookmarks, so would your foe... choose em wisely. As for the limitation to 100, this would actually benefit alliances and large corps more than your average solo player. In a gang of 5 people, there's 500 bookmarks available to that group for use utilizing the gang warp feature. All it would take is a quick switch of whose leader. Call them the 'local expert on the area' if it suits your RP needs. Many have just gotten lazy because we can currently store bookmarks to everywhere and anywhere, without limitations on capacity. Regards, Sihlovian Eclipse Outsourcing Solutions
Traxio Nacho Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.09.05 20:28:00 - [104] Also when are you going to fix these dam forums getting bloody annoying having to login 3 times just to post something (I would have added this to my above post but for some reason it acts as if its not my post and wont let me edit it)
Femintaki Gallente	Posted - 2006.09.05 20:45:00 - [105] Thre appears to be a major issue with manufacturing introduced with this patch. I have many builders in a corp who i want to be able to build - but not be able to remove anything from any corp hangars ... BPOs are in one hangar and raw materials are in another. Pre patch if a player had query accesson all hangars then he could choose a BPO form one hangar, materials input from another and output to yet another and this would work perfectlyas long as he was a factory manager and could rent factory slots. Post patch he cannot do this - it will only allow him to build using materials if he has the Take setting and the query setting, this means that the raw materials are open to theft. Can someone advise if this is intended or not - if it is then itmakes some corp models impossible to use. this will be a particular issue for large manufacturing corps in my opinion, who often have many alt chars in the corp to use their building capabilities and need to ensure complete security whilst allowing building to be undertaken. Quote: Do or do not - there is no try!
Kweel Nakashyn Minmatar Aeden	Posted - 2006.09.05 23:03:00 - [106] I join the bm whining club. Gate campers have allready 100km+ guns, bubles, interdictors, sentries, etc... To pass a gate camp now you need a cloaking device per ship or named mwd ? Do devs know the name "headshot" ? :/ I suggested fixed coordinate bm allready, server-side, name normalized, undifferenciable from each other and collection of them called systems, collection of systems called regions so : for a copy of a whole region we just need 1 region bm (so only one record in the "who's got that region" table). Problem solved : system works like before server side and bm table loose 60% of its size by analyzing all player's bm that are at 15km less from a gate or stations... Easy to make (hire me if you dunno :p), reliable, and a nice solution for any of guys who loved the old system. Dunno why, I think bm are gone for a very very long time. :/
Valerian Xavier Beagle Corp	Posted - 2006.09.05 23:06:00 - [107] Originally by: Traxio Nacho Also why wasnt the ally tab not fixed either? qft would like this fixed as well Free HippoKing!
Attractive Spokesmodel Gallente	Posted - 2006.09.05 23:11:00 - [108] Originally by: Runt Mcgoire Good to see that the patch will finally begin to address the BM copying problem that has been plaguing the system lately. Came across this and I hope that if, no when, the BM system is replaced that it will come down to something similar. If you have to kill BMs, fine... I hope you can do it in a way that kills only the instas and not the bookmarks that lead to straight away safe spots from stations or let me mark where cans I need to loot are before I kill a mission... I don't care if you give me Okm jumps to gates (or even 3km or 5km jumps would be okay by me) or if you use a skill based system... But PLEASE do not add a module. No modules. I cannot abide by a module. I actually kind of need the slots i have and can't bear to waste another one to a mod for jumping gates.
Kweel Nakashyn Minmatar Aeden	Posted - 2006.09.05 23:12:00 - [109] Originally by: Zebler 3) Delete all bookmarks in the game (assuming you cannot just delete all the gate to gate ones). This means all the bms in ppls heads, hangars, shuttles, cargo containers...all of them :) If they go for your solution they'll probably calculate how far from gates or station are bm, and delete only those at less than 15km. :)
Alex Logan Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.09.05 23:23:00 - [110] It was a bit further back at the start of this topic but I agree with tiller. Give everyone a 'warp to 0' option but allow bubbles in low-sec. I don't think there's going to be a perfect solution to this problem without upsetting some people but by all means that sounds fair to me. Obviously there will have to be some kind of balancing to go with it, bubble size/type/placement distance etc etc. Perhaps even a new kind of empire bubble
Alex DeHaven	Posted - 2006.09.06 02:50:00 - [111] prior to patch if you had 3 drones but could only control 2 if you did a launch only 2 would launch and they would be active. Post patch all 3 would launch 2 would be active and the other would just float in space and to recover it you have to close on it and scoop.
Swillin	Posted - 2006.09.06 03:48:00 - [112] Was I supposed to see a performance gain since bm copying is nerfed? How about gate queuing? I can say after a pvp op tonight that this latch patch accomplished nothing in the way of performance. We still had pilots stuck at gates jumping through 0.0 spaces due to queuing. The lag was as bad as I have ever been in. I had to relog twice during a 50-jump pvp op to clear it up and that was just to keep up with the gang. It wasn't just me either, everyone in the gang had horrendous lag. All my chats suddenly stopped showing text and just stayed blank. The list goes on and on. Anyone else see absolutely no gain before and after bm copying?
Lucre STK Scientific Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.09.06 10:59:00 - [113] Originally by: Swillin Was I supposed to see a performance gain since bm copying is nerfed? How about gate queuing? I can say after a pvp op tonight that this latch patch accomplished nothing in the way of performance. We still had pilots stuck at gates jumping through 0.0 spaces due to queuing. The lag was as bad as I have ever been in. Yes, lag was fairly bad last night. 40-50 people in system but getting 1-2 second delays on module activation, occasionally hanging up for up to 20 seconds. Hopefully it's just balancing of the new patch needed somewhere, but was ironic after all the "to improve performance" arguments.
Estelle Matsuko Caldari The Beiatch Corp Inc	Posted - 2006.09.06 11:45:00 - [114] Kaunokka, 50 people in system. Terrible, nay crippling lag forsooth. Whatever the patch fixed, it wasn¦t lag.
Cyclops43	Posted - 2006.09.06 13:49:00 - [115] Thought downtime today might cure the lag. No such luck :-/ 55-60 people in Aramachi, up to 1/2 minute or more lag on any action. What is the matter guys? Aramachi used to be able to handle much more than this, especially right after DT!!!
DanFraser OCForums	Posted - 2006.09.06 16:43:00 - [116] Is it just me, or have rats kind of gone into hiding since this patch?
Big Al Roving Band of Bunnies	Posted - 2006.09.06 18:55:00 - [117] Lag is awful, and the mini freezes are back. Another job well done.
Plutoinum German Cyberdome Corp Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.09.06 21:57:00 - [118] Edited by: Plutoinum on 06/09/2006 21:57:48 Ok, since I didn't see an offical patch discussion thread, maybe I'm just blind: Cloaking device seems to be fixed. Did the same tests, like before this patch, but this time with good results. Although the covert ops appears visible a few seconds longer on other people's screens, they don't get a lock anymore, after the covert ops pilot clicks 'cloak'. So cloaking interrupts targetting timer. That's how it was before dragon and how it's supposed to be. Thanks. My alt can use his covert ops again.
Edu Journeyman Caldari	Posted - 2006.09.08 02:04:00 - [119] Originally by: Big Al Lag is awful, and the mini freezes are back. Another job well done. Yeah, the freezes, OMG, only don't agree they are "mini", in fact, the ones we have all the times are, but I'm having 10-15 seconds freezing in every mission, every time a NPC lock my ship, every time I warp jump, every time some NPC get into range and start shooting... One thing must be clear - it's not a hardware related issue, I was playing smothly with only Dragon. Maybe someone can come here and say: "Hey, I'm playing with 150 FPS, no lag here, what are you guys talking about? Blah blah, blah..." All my Corp mates are suffering with the same issues, have to ask other friends in other regions tho. Lets hope CCP fix this ASAP, playing with this performance is not acceptable, even for an addicted one like me Be your journeys long and prosperous. Treat the others as you like to be treated. Rude and fool are enemies.
Flax Volcanus Tea And Sympathy Ltd. Liability	Posted - 2006.09.08 14:29:00 - [120] Are you sure? I tested last night with a corp mate. He began to target my Manti and I was unable to initiate cloaking even before the lock had completed. We verified this with several additional tests. Originally by: Plutoinum Edited by: Plutoinum on 06/09/2006 21:57:48 Ok, since I didn't see an offical patch discussion thread, maybe I'm just blind: Cloaking device seems to be fixed. Did the same tests, like before this patch, but this time with good results. Although the covert ops appears visible a few seconds longer on other people's screens, they don't get a lock anymore, after the covert ops pilot clicks 'cloak'. So cloaking interrupts targetting timer. That's how it was before dragon and how it's supposed to be. Thanks. My alt can use his covert ops again.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.