| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 19 post(s) |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
12040
   |
Posted - 2014.11.26 17:21:43 -
[1] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:I have a question regarding the tatical destroyers, not sure if it can/will be answered here so I will post it in the feedback thread also.
Will tatical destroyers remain there own gimmic and not influence strategic cruisers?
We think that the "Strategic" method of combining subsystems, and the "Tactical" method of switching between modes on the fly are both useful and viable branches of T3 ship design. You can expect us to keep working with both methods in the future, instead of trying to force all T3 ships into one or another.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
12056
|
Posted - 2014.11.27 17:45:53 -
[2] - Quote
Lil' Brudder Too wrote:How soon will be be able to test whether or not we can actually build these...you know...before it hits TQ and everyone has to wait a day because you (CCP) forgot to actually attempt an invent job on them...?
You'll be able to build them in the next SISI update. Currently the only thing holding you back on SISI is the fact that the Self-Assembling Nanolattice blueprint isn't on the market.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
12062
|
Posted - 2014.11.27 18:02:38 -
[3] - Quote
Lil' Brudder Too wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Lil' Brudder Too wrote:How soon will be be able to test whether or not we can actually build these...you know...before it hits TQ and everyone has to wait a day because you (CCP) forgot to actually attempt an invent job on them...? You'll be able to build them in the next SISI update. Currently the only thing holding you back on SISI is the fact that the Self-Assembling Nanolattice blueprint isn't on the market. Soo, what Relic is flagged for reverse engineering this? because currently the Confessor is not listed as an outcome on any of them...(that are currently listed on the SiSi market)
That would be the Small Intact Hull Section, Small Malfunctioning Hull Section and Small Wrecked Hull Section. They'll be on the market on SISI tomorrow, and they're actually accessible on SISI now through the old fashioned "hack a talocan wreck" method.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
12066
|
Posted - 2014.11.27 19:02:31 -
[4] - Quote
Ralph King-Griffin wrote: ....ok, the confessor isnt showing on combat probes. please let that be a bug 
Yup this is a known issue.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
12113
|
Posted - 2014.12.02 12:56:39 -
[5] - Quote
Sorry Andreus Ixiris, but nobody is "entitled" to always receive their preferred faction's ships at the same time as everyone else.
We plan to use this method of release more and more in the future because:
a) It allows us to release content to all you players faster with the help of the new release cycle.
b) It gives players an opportunity to have a small but meaningful impact on the world of New Eden through their participation in events.
c) Far more players have expressed support for this method than have expressed opposition.
So in the future if you want access to your favourite faction's ships right away I advise you to participate and help your people win.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
12113
|
Posted - 2014.12.02 13:11:41 -
[6] - Quote
Sable Blitzmann wrote:Torgeir Hekard wrote:Sable Blitzmann wrote:Can you comment a bit about how the bonuses work on the backend for those of us who develop fitting applications? At first it seemed to be the Amarr Tactical Destroyer Defense/Prop/Sniper Mode items secretly being applied just like any module changing the stats of a ship. However, I took a look at the effect expressions from the SISI client and it doesn't really make much sense with the current attributes / expressions even tho the modes work fine in the game, which leads me to believe that it's either 1) hardcoded for now (bad bad bad!), 2) a different method of implementation that I cannot yet figure out I bought a fresh confessor (no module active) and fitted it with a rack of pulses with scorch, 2 TEs, 2 ODs, 2 SeBos. Also then swapped some stuff for 2 EANMs and a DCU later. After running some tests with switching modes, it looks like a mode behaves like a non-stacking-penalized module. That is, it applies full force after 2 modules affecting the same stat. And defensive mode does not interfere with DCU. So pretty much like Bastion. At least the numbers match. Well, I know how the math works with the bonuses. But I was more interested on how they are expressed in the backend. CCPs usual method of assigning effects to modules and writing an expression seems to be off in this particular case, and I was hoping that they would comment. For example, Propulsion Mode mode effects and attributes using modified Phobos and pyfa's itemDiff script: [+] Amarr Tactical Destroyer Propulsion Mode [+|n] modeAgilityPostDiv [+|n] modeVelocityPostDiv [+] capacity: 0 [+] hp: 40.0 [+] mass: 100.0 [+] metaLevel: 0 [+] modeAgilityPostDiv: 1.5 [+] modeVelocityPostDiv: 0.6 [+] techLevel: 1.0 [+] volume: 5.0 Digging further, the effect "modeAgilityPostDiv" basically states to take this modules `agilityBonus` attribute and apply it as an operation to the current ship's `agility` attribute. The only problem is: this module does not have an `agilityBonus` attribute to apply. There are these other attributes: `modeAgilityPostDiv` and `modeVelocityPostDiv`, however the effects don't use them. The effects seem to be broken currently unless I'm completely missing something.
The reason for this confusion is that the mode bonuses on the Confessor use a new way of authoring, storing and loading effects that we are planning to transition into more and more. The expressions you are reading for the modeAgilityPostDiv effect (and the other T3 mode effects) are junk data that aren't used by the client or server for these effects.
I'm talking to CCP Tuxford and CCP Foxfour about how we can start making these new effects visible to third party developers and we'll probably put something up in the dev communication channels once we have a plan figured out.
In the meantime feel free to ignore the expressions that you're seeing in those effects. Sorry about the confusion.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
12119
|
Posted - 2014.12.02 16:09:20 -
[7] - Quote
Primary This Rifter wrote:Mode buttons don't display if you board a Confessor in space.
I didn't check stats to see if any of the modes were active, however.
When did you experience this? It was a known issue previously but we thought we had it fixed in the current build.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
12119
|
Posted - 2014.12.02 16:31:44 -
[8] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:You may want to give that ship a bonus to probing.. Because it's pretty terrible. Asking people to commit a set of virtue implants (roughly 1.5 billion for a low grade and 2.5 for a mid grade), while flying a destroyer class ship with no cloak, no scanning bonus and worth 40 million isnt the smartest idea.
A 37.5% to a 70% (it's a combat scanning ship with no cloak) bonus to scanning would help a ton with it (tried it earlier with the mid slots filled with scanning mods and its a pain even to scan out a basic signature (actually failed to scan down a site, and anybody with eccm will be impossible to probe out with this combat prober, even with midslot scanning mods.
Not every ship is going to have everything you would ever want all in one package.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
| |
|