Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
DrAtomic
Atomic Heroes
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 12:11:00 -
[91]
Originally by: Oveur Drones - We're currently hiring in new game designer, from there on a lucky guy will have this as his permanent responsibility.
Don't assign Eris... She'll only paint em pink... O.o
Thx for feedback, still worried about heat though. ----------------------------------------------- The BIG Lottery |
LeisureSuit Lisa
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 12:12:00 -
[92]
Have to add, just in case, that a remote refining platform (ship) will be a big problem for 0.0 infrastructure. If it gives any decent refining yield 0.0 alliances/corporations will loose a lot of income from outposts due loss of taxation and thus actually will make it less interesting to build 0.0 infrastructure. |
Smagd
Encina Technologies Namtz'aar k'in
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 12:51:00 -
[93]
'kay, comments on the actual blog, in order of subjective importance:
Stronger NPCS: Yes, please. I'd like to practise shooting up capital ships (Hello ign0ramus *wave*). Make them use Siege Mode, Cynos and Warp-Out if you want to be really evil. Call their support "Fighter" or "Praetor" or "Webifier Drones" instead of "Spider Drones III". They escape, no bounty, fair enough. Good practise for PvP, too. "Duo of Death" is a nice step in the right direction, and so are Officer spawns in 0.0.
HEAT: Yes, please. It's one of the things I enjoyed most in the old Star Wars: X-Fighter games. "Direct 25% energy to shield, 75% to MWD, rush in. Once in range, shield 0%, MWD 25%, guns 75%." Needs an improved GUI or it'll be a pain managing that. I like the idea of keeping it to Tech 3 modules.
Agent Missions: Random surprises pwn. Use SMALL chances so people don't expect it, less than 2%.
Systems rearranging: Moving Ore away from Trade and mission ssytem wonderful. Use the new Dead End starter system, fill them with 100s of belts and a refinery, make miners happy. Specialize systems. Could also have some specialized "travel hubs", with many jumpgates, make gate campers happy. Spice the whole with specialization areas: - Bonus to scord mining yield - Penalty on missile velocity - Penalty to ship agility - Bonus to ECM strength and are could be - near planet - near complex - near gate - whole system or constellation or region .. Tactical Environments! Could also be fun to negate a constellation-wide effect near a specific planet with a specific station.
Interbus: Would be fun if the trade convoys actually carried player orders. New incentive to shoot them up. Probably ties in nicely with factional warfare, too. But not too excited about this personally.
Drones, Relative size: Sure go ahead, but I like a high DPP value (damage per pixel). Claw ftw. With a wide field of view like currently you'll end up with icons for everyone real quick anyway, maybe except undocking next to something huge.
When done with the graphical overhaul, please start a major GUI overhaul project.
--
|
Tareen Kashaar
eXin Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 12:59:00 -
[94]
Originally by: Oveur Relative Size - The renovation project is taking this into account, it's one of the things we want to address as much as we can since we are renovating all the models. However, there are techical barriers which can prevent it all from getting it "right".
Thanks for the reply Oveur, communcation like this is very very much appreciated!
However, would you care to point out what kind of technical barriers there are that are getting in the way? As far as I'm aware from my own 3D work, adjusting visual model scale and origin or collision model did never really pose a problem... the Unreal Engine, which I used to work with a lot, has simple parameters in it's actor (=object for simplicity's sake) properties that you could adjust to scale models in all 3 dimensions. Even if the EVE engine can't do it that easily, simply editing the model file's origin and scale would do the trick, wouldn't it?
For the record, I didn't ever and don't plan to whine about the Chimera All things Caldari are ugly and despicable in my eyes anyway... I'm just a curious fellow designer
Oh, and let me know if you accept my beer bribe offer --- WTS: Forum Signatures, 30mil a piece. Evemail me!
|
Tareen Kashaar
eXin Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 13:06:00 -
[95]
Edited by: Tareen Kashaar on 11/01/2007 13:02:55 edit: quote syntax messed up
Originally by: Smagd ...Spice the whole with specialization areas: - Bonus to scord mining yield - Penalty on missile velocity - Penalty to ship agility - Bonus to ECM strength and are could be - near planet - near complex - near gate - whole system or constellation or region .. Tactical Environments! Could also be fun to negate a constellation-wide effect near a specific planet with a specific station.
I think this might be what he was talking about when he said remotely deployed effects of starbase modules... Though maybe I'm more thinking in the direction of Stasis Web area effect, Damp/ECM/etc area effect, that would be wonderful. Though of course I'd prefer if it was possible for mobile gangs to deploy those kinds of area effects as well, not just POSes.
Originally by: Smagd When done with the graphical overhaul, please start a major GUI overhaul project.
QFT... Please fix and improve the GUI. Mouse-only is sooo 1995! I want to be able to use my mouse exclusively for moving the camera, and keyboard for everything else... it's just so much quicker and more responsive. --- WTS: Forum Signatures, 30mil a piece. Evemail me!
|
|
Oveur
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 13:09:00 -
[96]
Originally by: Tareen Kashaar
Originally by: Oveur Relative Size - The renovation project is taking this into account, it's one of the things we want to address as much as we can since we are renovating all the models. However, there are techical barriers which can prevent it all from getting it "right".
Thanks for the reply Oveur, communcation like this is very very much appreciated!
However, would you care to point out what kind of technical barriers there are that are getting in the way? As far as I'm aware from my own 3D work, adjusting visual model scale and origin or collision model did never really pose a problem... the Unreal Engine, which I used to work with a lot, has simple parameters in it's actor (=object for simplicity's sake) properties that you could adjust to scale models in all 3 dimensions. Even if the EVE engine can't do it that easily, simply editing the model file's origin and scale would do the trick, wouldn't it?
For the record, I didn't ever and don't plan to whine about the Chimera All things Caldari are ugly and despicable in my eyes anyway... I'm just a curious fellow designer
Oh, and let me know if you accept my beer bribe offer
If a station was as big as it's supposed to be, say, like in how many ships it can hold, it would be so huge you wouldn't see anything else, warp to 0 would put you about 100km into it.
Senior Producer EVE Online
|
|
Tareen Kashaar
eXin Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 13:16:00 -
[97]
Ah right, gotcha. Thought you were talking about the relative scale of ships compared to other ships. --- WTS: Forum Signatures, 30mil a piece. Evemail me!
|
DarkMatter
Amarr Mineral Aquisition Group
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 13:23:00 -
[98]
Originally by: Tareen Kashaar Ah right, gotcha. Thought you were talking about the relative scale of ships compared to other ships.
It's like when you were a kid building models of cars, trucks, tanks aircraft & ships...
I was always nitpicking about the scale, I wanted everything to be the same scale dammit!
However, a 1/24th scale USS Nimitz to match the scale of all my vehicles is jus not practical...
I however do not think the difference in ship sizes are drastic enough. And planets are way to small IMO...
Building the homestead |
Sorela
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 13:34:00 -
[99]
Originally by: Oveur
If a station was as big as it's supposed to be, say, like in how many ships it can hold, it would be so huge you wouldn't see anything else, warp to 0 would put you about 100km into it.
Personally I think whatever the lore says about how big stations are should maybe be toned down a bit if that's true. Seems like the real problem here though isn't the size but the fact that you'd have to be allowed to get so close that the model detail would be an enormous task to complete and probably a waste of resources.
|
Serzath
Labteck Corporation LTD. Novus Ordos Seclorum
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 14:09:00 -
[100]
heat : not a great supporter of this. also not about targetting subsystems
capital industrial ship: nice idea. though whatever it's function is it should be worse then a POS. imo it should be station, POS, ship where ship has the worst stats. it's moveable so it can be used in deep space where no station/pos are...so it shouldn't be better then a pos. Also it should be low sec only like other capital ships.
rats, missions and all the other stuff sounds great. looking forward to capital rats, smarter rats
|
|
Eewec Ourbyni
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 14:11:00 -
[101]
Edited by: Eewec Ourbyni on 11/01/2007 14:11:34
Originally by: Oveur
Originally by: Tareen Kashaar
Originally by: Oveur Relative Size - The renovation project is taking this into account, it's one of the things we want to address as much as we can since we are renovating all the models. However, there are techical barriers which can prevent it all from getting it "right".
Thanks for the reply Oveur, communcation like this is very very much appreciated!
However, would you care to point out what kind of technical barriers there are that are getting in the way? As far as I'm aware from my own 3D work, adjusting visual model scale and origin or collision model did never really pose a problem... the Unreal Engine, which I used to work with a lot, has simple parameters in it's actor (=object for simplicity's sake) properties that you could adjust to scale models in all 3 dimensions. Even if the EVE engine can't do it that easily, simply editing the model file's origin and scale would do the trick, wouldn't it?
For the record, I didn't ever and don't plan to whine about the Chimera All things Caldari are ugly and despicable in my eyes anyway... I'm just a curious fellow designer
Oh, and let me know if you accept my beer bribe offer
If a station was as big as it's supposed to be, say, like in how many ships it can hold, it would be so huge you wouldn't see anything else, warp to 0 would put you about 100km into it.
Did anyone else have a certain flashback to a certain film involving extreme interstellar aggression.... a certain x shaped craft flying low around a certain spherical space station ... "That's not a moon..."
Anywho, is it just me or would "warp to 0" just need changing to "warp to docking ring" and moving accordingly.
Personally I'd love to see space stations that big, and tbh, they shouldn't cause anymore lag than a large building in any other mmo, in fact they should cause less as you don't need to render out all the stars and stuff that are in the background that causes such hideous lag already.
This is a sig...
-- You think this guys post is nuts.... you should see his bio --
... good, ain't it! |
Levin Cavil
Omniscient Order
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 14:24:00 -
[102]
Well thats the best dev blog ever. ---------- Eve is balanced: Caldari have to train Rails Minmatar have to train Missiles Gallente have to train Drones Amarr have to train Caldari |
Jet Collins
Dynamic Endeavors
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 14:33:00 -
[103]
Great stuff, I really like the idea on the 100 npc's becomeing 10 stronger NPC's, I just have
one question/consern:
With this change to NPC's does that mean that most BS NPS's will no longer be solo able, or are you just going to make is so they have 10x the shield and amorr HP so they last longer but have the same shield/armor repair/boost amount?
Thanks again and great Blog. Now to find those images again.
Dynamic Endeavors is now Recuiting.!!
Contact me in game for deatails about the corp. Mostly a PvE corp, with Jump clones avaiale in Empire and 0.0. |
Ifni
Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 14:47:00 -
[104]
sex0r.
Also, release a hires scene with that station in so I can have a new background plsplspls.
I know the restraining order makes things tricky, but I'd bear your children. (/me applies to CCP again.)
You take what is offered. And that must sometimes be enough. |
Dominique Vasilkovsky
Techmart Industries
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 15:13:00 -
[105]
Oveur, what is the planned time frame to deploy the new graphics engine? Spring/summer/autumn?
Also, do you know if the new DX10 client will support multicore CPUs (dual/quad), if not when do you think you will know?
|
Darklandz
Caldari Mordu's BioLabs
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 15:46:00 -
[106]
nice stuff indeed, but what about the sound ? I started playing eve about 3y ago, and for more than a year now i can't play anymore with sound coz of the terrible lag it creates.
And playing eve without sound...misses something
|
Miklas Laces
A.N.A.R.C.H.I.C.A
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 16:01:00 -
[107]
Originally by: j0sephine Just a thought; the current NPC ships are extremely underpowered, attibutes-wise when compared with typical ship of human player (in terms of damage dealt, tanking ability etc) ... this is why there's so many of them per spawn, but maybe rather than replace "100 ships with 10 bigger ones" a more logical solution would be to replace "100 ships with 10 stronger ones" (with bounties adjusted accordingly, obviously)
Exactly my thoughts. It's unrealistic that a single frigate can kill hundreds. I've always wanted way less NPCs but more challenging.
By more challening I mean: - better attributes - smarter AI, aggro thingie is silly - can switch ammo - have random fitting (some with blaster, some with rail, some with nos, etc..) - they may have an EW ship in their gang, ew type would be unpredictable - loot drop should be related to items fitted. If it was a frigate with blasters they will drop small blasters etc. They may even drop T2 now and then
A mission where you have to kill 3 ships can be challenging and dangerous !! Also remove the idiot names (guristas centurion etc) and give them names with a RNG.
|
GRIEV3R
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 16:23:00 -
[108]
If a station was as big as it's supposed to be, say, like in how many ships it can hold, it would be so huge you wouldn't see anything else, warp to 0 would put you about 100km into it.
I for one see nothing wrong with that - in fact I think it would be really cool. Bigger is better. Bigger stations, bigger ships, bigger planets and stars. I realize it might not be practical, but I still think it's a good idea.
|
Aduna
Ore Mongers SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 16:45:00 -
[109]
/offers up his firstborn in supplication to the devs
|
Victor Valka
Caldari Archon Industries
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 17:16:00 -
[110]
Originally by: Xanenal Capital Carebear Ship!
No. Capital Carebear Platform.
Originally by: Diana Marc Notice that BoB is agreeing with RA's concern. That's like Elrond and Sauron agreeing to reduce carbon emissions.
|
|
Harisdrop
Gallente ClanKillers Dusk and Dawn
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 17:36:00 -
[111]
As a pgm'er is there a time schedule you are aiming for? Does anything you wrote mean that you are going to place it in "EVE Patches" in the correct category? I would think that should be updated.
Does CCP feel the need to explain the conceptual content to the playerbase prior to implementing it into the game? If yes, does the player base have any impact prior to the implementation?
As some things in game or proposed to be ingame, VIVOX , just get washed under the rug if you did not specifically speak of them. How do we go about to get models fixed that we see day in and day out. The rings of Saturn!
Being vague in your descriptions makes everything sound cool and stuff, is there hard concrete evidence that anything you said is actually real software or some vaporware your hoping someday to actually be coded.
If you video engine is 5 years old. If you want to update it. Why not rewrite the whole interface like you did before since now we have a dozen new features that cant fit where they are useful.
Looks like you are going to have a fun year. New NPC NPC Market |
Derran
Minmatar Khumatari Holdings Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 17:48:00 -
[112]
I know someone in particular that is going to probably wet himself when he reads the last part of the blog.
Personally, I always wanted Titans to be the mobile stations they were originally described as a long time ago. I always thought they would also be something you could dock in. One of the things that made me think this was a description about 3 years ago about how if you are in a low sec station and it got destroyed, you could stand to lose everything you have in it. I'd like to see something similiar with an industrial-like capital ship. Having something like a big fat mobile base that could harvest resources and build things would be really cool.
|
Exlegion
Legion's Knight
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 17:55:00 -
[113]
Just WOW. You guys are working very very hard to improve EVE to perfection. Keep it up! I'm sooooo looking forward to Revs 1.3!
|
Roue
Privateers Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 17:58:00 -
[114]
Oveur. I may be wrong but. Isn't the size/scale issue with ships not looking that big not at all related to the size of their models. But instead to the fish eye lense view you use on the main view. A demonstration is fly a shuttle next to a station. Straight on view it is seemingly large compared to station. But if you draw the station ot the edge of the screen it becomes a monsterous huge thing. This is also demonstrated in the close fly by sequences of titans in the Blood official movie.
My suggestion would be to experiment with flat angle lensed views rather then fish eye. The view would become smaller but most people use either overview or a zoomed out tactical view in combat. This would make normal views seem, normal and not distorted.
|
Ather Ialeas
Amarr Karjala Inc. Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 18:14:00 -
[115]
Originally by: Roue Oveur. I may be wrong but. Isn't the size/scale issue with ships not looking that big not at all related to the size of their models. But instead to the fish eye lense view you use on the main view. A demonstration is fly a shuttle next to a station. Straight on view it is seemingly large compared to station. But if you draw the station ot the edge of the screen it becomes a monsterous huge thing. This is also demonstrated in the close fly by sequences of titans in the Blood official movie.
My suggestion would be to experiment with flat angle lensed views rather then fish eye. The view would become smaller but most people use either overview or a zoomed out tactical view in combat. This would make normal views seem, normal and not distorted.
It's actually FoV (Field of View) that's EVE's problem display-wise. The FoV changes based on the ship you're piloting so that your ship fits nicely to the screen without cluttering it. Also locking FoV to certain amount reduces problems like flickering textures when zooming etc. so you can't just use same FoV and zoom out automatically a certain amount when piloting a bigger ship. The real problem of this is of course that in EVE there's no real scale at all and people should think what we see as more of a wargame icon fest than a real representation of big spaceships shooting each others.
|
j0sephine
Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 18:28:00 -
[116]
Edited by: j0sephine on 11/01/2007 18:26:13
"Oveur. I may be wrong but. Isn't the size/scale issue with ships not looking that big not at all related to the size of their models. But instead to the fish eye lense view you use on the main view."
It has more to do with relative sizes, distances and camera placement, i think. But yes, indirectly the FoV plays a role here -- EVE ships are rather large (even the small ones) and to show them reasonably the camera is pulled back quite a bit and covers wide angle of view, auto-adjusting its placement to the size of ship on top of that. This makes them appear to be of the same size to your brain no matter how large each of them individually is, because you always see them take the same amount of screen space.
This also means even very large structures when located at typical distance of 10-30 km will appear small, as they'll only fill fraction of screen area. Compare this to situation where you are floating in the pod -- the field of view becomes more narrow and camera is placed closer to your pod, because the pod is small.. and this in turn causes anything that moves near appear looming and huge, because it can easily fill whole background and often doesn't even fit in the field of view at all, further conveying the sense of scale o.O;
edit: doh, Ather said pretty much the same thing already :s
|
Mordrake
MetaForge Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 18:43:00 -
[117]
Originally by: Lord WarATron
Originally by: LeisureSuit Lisa Have to add, just in case, that a remote refining platform (ship) will be a big problem for 0.0 infrastructure. If it gives any decent refining yield 0.0 alliances/corporations will loose a lot of income from outposts due loss of taxation and thus actually will make it less interesting to build 0.0 infrastructure.
Unless it has a crap refine rate
If it has a crap refine rate don't bother introducing it... noone will build one and it will be a waste of memory.
"Arte et Marte" |
Crystal Lyn
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 18:51:00 -
[118]
Edited by: Crystal Lyn on 11/01/2007 18:49:35 Oveur, what about a fix for the currently bugged T2 barges that cannot be invented? Now that module invention is sorting out the overpriced T2 module situation, what about hulks? Hulk BPO owners are making 3+ billion isk a week and nobody can invent hulks as you can't invent T2 barges. I believe somewhere a dev stated that T2 barges are now inventable, but the fact is, they are not, and they should be. Is this fix going to be coming in a patch soon? It's just not fair watching Hulk BPO owners make billions weekly because they don't have to compete with inventors thanks to a bug.
You could even go as far as to say Hulk BPO owners are continuing to get filthy rich thanks to a bug, the bug being they don't have to compete with inventors.
|
dalman
Finite Horizon
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 19:42:00 -
[119]
Originally by: Levin Cavil Well thats the best dev blog ever.
Word.
Just hope you manage to implement all this in a really good way :)
Am I forced to have any regret? I've become the lie, beautiful and free In my righteous own mind I adore and preach the insanity you gave to me |
Romeda
Minmatar Trojan industries
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 19:43:00 -
[120]
A well done dev blog, most ideas I like but the NPC change has got me concerned for solo player like myself, but I will hold on the judgment until I see more details and test the changes out.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |