| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 29 post(s) |
Callthetruth
Caldari
Logical Logtistics
   |
Posted - 2007.06.06 11:57:00 -
[61]
any word on density 1 per system just wont cut it ( having them despawn and respawn outside of dt would be better than having em refresh then) i do hope CCP dont take the easy option on this on as the late 12 hours after dt+ players miss out. Also opens em up for the farmers straight after dt even tho they aint static
Otherwise perhaps introduce variants on the unknown types
comment regarding wrecks well perhaps if a player is within 100km make them very hard to find if wrecks are just floating with no player ships around make em easier ( sort of like the deadspace shading that missioun runners have) requires very high end skills to track em down
PLaces like motsu are easy to scan mission runners for ninjasalvage tho fact u have 100-150 at any one time running missions means the 2-5% chance will yield up a couple of results on each cycle but if its one running a mission in system chances go south
|
Titus Quintus
|
Posted - 2007.06.06 12:01:00 -
[62]
Edited by: Titus Quintus on 06/06/2007 12:05:22
Edited by: Titus Quintus on 06/06/2007 12:01:07
 Originally by: CCP Greyscale
The issue with scanning wrecks is it makes mission/exploration runners incredibly easy to find due to the number of wrecks they generate.
Currently the only difference between encounters and escalation sites, as far as the server's concerned, is that the former have a much bigger signature radius than the latter. There's no other demarcation, and the multispectral probe doesn't pull signature size data currently, so there's no real way to distinguish between the two types of site without significant retooling.
???
You already got 5 different types of cosmic signatures: Unknown, Ladar, Radar, Magneto, Gravimetric. Why should it be so difficult to add a sixth category "Encouter"?
Sure it's work for the mission scripters to change every "Unknown" flag to "Encouter", but it's not like you have to reprogram everything.
The strength and range of the scanner makes sense, btw.
The on board Scanner is too strong. Snoop scan probes have a strength of 20 and the same range. Perhaps halve the scan strength to 10 of the scanner?
|
Callthetruth
Caldari
Logical Logtistics
|
Posted - 2007.06.06 12:18:00 -
[63]
15 wuld be good perhaps rigs that raise the strength of scan probe values would be in order
recon we should have a whole line of 3 and 5%+ implants affecting all scan probe related stats to
|
Helison
Gallente
Times of Ancar
THE R0NIN
|
Posted - 2007.06.06 15:04:00 -
[64]
As nearly all encounters seem to spam the chatchannels with some nonsense of their commanders: Please restrict the NPC-related messages (during missions, encounters or exploration) to ONE channel (perhaps local).
It is very annoying if 9 channels start to blink, just because you warped into an encounter!
|
Akurion
Gallente
Master Miners
Aftermath Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.06 16:11:00 -
[65]
There seems to be a massive disparity between rewards on some of these encounters. For example:
Yesterday I found a drone encounter in Mannar, a 0.3 space. It consisted of about 5 waves of drones, from destroyers up through battlecruisers. I had to retreat several times to repair (was using a PvP setup). The only loot was alloys.
A few minutes ago I scanned out an encounter in Oursulaert, a 0.9 hub system. It consisted of about 4 waves of coreli frigates/destroyers, and ended with a shadow serpentis trooper that dropped a Shadow Serp 1MN MWD and a Shadow Serp Stasis Webbifier (!).
The coreli encounter was infinitely easier, in much higher security space, at least 10x faster to finish, and gave much nicer loot.
Drone rewards need to be looked at, IMO. Alloys aren't going to cut it.
|
|
CCP Greyscale
|
Posted - 2007.06.06 16:24:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Callthetruth
( having them despawn and respawn outside of dt would be better than having em refresh then)
They already do. DT has (or should have) no effect on exploration sites.
Originally by: Titus Quintus
You already got 5 different types of cosmic signatures: Unknown, Ladar, Radar, Magneto, Gravimetric. Why should it be so difficult to add a sixth category "Encouter"?
Sure it's work for the mission scripters to change every "Unknown" flag to "Encouter", but it's not like you have to reprogram everything.
The strength and range of the scanner makes sense, btw.
The on board Scanner is too strong. Snoop scan probes have a strength of 20 and the same range. Perhaps halve the scan strength to 10 of the scanner?
In answer to the first, it would require programming work on Multispectral probes to deal with the extra type - it shouldn't be too hard, but we can't do it for Rev 2 at this stage.
In answer to the second, I'm not quite sure why you're comparing the onboard scanner (limited to exploration only) to Snoop probes (intended for finding ships)?
Originally by: Helison
As nearly all encounters seem to spam the chatchannels with some nonsense of their commanders: Please restrict the NPC-related messages (during missions, encounters or exploration) to ONE channel (perhaps local).
It is very annoying if 9 channels start to blink, just because you warped into an encounter!
This is on my post-Rev 2 To-Do list
(Also, only 9? You have it easy!)
Originally by: Akurion
There seems to be a massive disparity between rewards on some of these encounters. For example:
Yesterday I found a drone encounter in Mannar, a 0.3 space. It consisted of about 5 waves of drones, from destroyers up through battlecruisers. I had to retreat several times to repair (was using a PvP setup). The only loot was alloys.
A few minutes ago I scanned out an encounter in Oursulaert, a 0.9 hub system. It consisted of about 4 waves of coreli frigates/destroyers, and ended with a shadow serpentis trooper that dropped a Shadow Serp 1MN MWD and a Shadow Serp Stasis Webbifier (!).
The coreli encounter was infinitely easier, in much higher security space, at least 10x faster to finish, and gave much nicer loot.
Drone rewards need to be looked at, IMO. Alloys aren't going to cut it.
Commander spawns have a (small) percentage chance of occurring in all encounters - you were lucky with that Serpentis site! There's more to be said on the subject of Rogue Drone Commanders, but that's not my area of expertise so I won't muddy the waters about it here :)
|
|
Gaogan
Gallente
Solar Storm
|
Posted - 2007.06.06 16:59:00 -
[67]
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
In answer to the first, it would require programming work on Multispectral probes to deal with the extra type - it shouldn't be too hard, but we can't do it for Rev 2 at this stage.
Then don't put encounters in rev 2. If you can't do it right, don't do it at all. It is already too hard to find exploration sites as it is, having dozens of false positives thrown into the mix will make it impossible.
And AFAIK, the scrap category does nothing anyhow, so why not just rename it to Encounter?
|
|
CCP Greyscale
|
Posted - 2007.06.06 17:22:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Gaogan
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
In answer to the first, it would require programming work on Multispectral probes to deal with the extra type - it shouldn't be too hard, but we can't do it for Rev 2 at this stage.
Then don't put encounters in rev 2. If you can't do it right, don't do it at all. It is already too hard to find exploration sites as it is, having dozens of false positives thrown into the mix will make it impossible.
And AFAIK, the scrap category does nothing anyhow, so why not just rename it to Encounter?
The only direct effect Encounters are going to have on Exploration is making it harder to know if there's a non-encounter Unknown site in the system, unless there's something I've missed?
The scrap category suggestion is a good one, I'll see if it's something we can investigate further.
|
|
Helison
Gallente
Times of Ancar
THE R0NIN
|
Posted - 2007.06.06 17:41:00 -
[69]
I think something is very wrong with your timetable for patches. As soon as it possible to test the new stuff on testserver, it is already too late for any changes.
Delay this damned patch and get the needed changes in!
|
Princess Jodi
Vendetta Underground
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2007.06.06 18:52:00 -
[70]
It was once stated that existing Static Complex sites would cause a higher chance of spawing an Exploration site when Static Complexes are removed. The stated reason was that people had put up infrastructure to farm these complexes, and therefore there would be a greater chance that good Exploration sites would be found.
I think this concept is EXACTLY the WRONG way to go!
Farming of Complexes is an abused area of the game. Regardless of the infrastructure put up, there should not be a benefit in the future in these areas.
In addition...What possible reason would a NPC entity have for continuing to swarm in an area where they are habitually destroyed? Should not the opposite be true - that they moved on to less-dangerous areas to regroup?
I suggest completely reversing the proposed favortism and move the best exploration to areas that currently have NO complexes.
|
|
|
Hoshi
Blackguard Brigade
Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.06 19:25:00 -
[71]
I think you should really look at the amount of drone encounters. So far more than half of all sites I have found have been drone sites. If I am in guristas space I expect to find guristas, sure if there are a couple of drone sites here and there but they should not be the majority.
For one thing is devalues the drone regions. Why should I live there if I can get all the drone minerals I could ever want from drone encounters?
Btw what will the DED complexes show up as on the multispec? Because if it's unknown for that too they are going to be very hard to find.
----------------------------------------
A Guide to Scan Probing in Revelations |
Wizzkidy
Demonic Retribution
Pure.
|
Posted - 2007.06.06 19:26:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Princess Jodi
It was once stated that existing Static Complex sites would cause a higher chance of spawing an Exploration site when Static Complexes are removed. The stated reason was that people had put up infrastructure to farm these complexes, and therefore there would be a greater chance that good Exploration sites would be found.
I think this concept is EXACTLY the WRONG way to go!
Farming of Complexes is an abused area of the game. Regardless of the infrastructure put up, there should not be a benefit in the future in these areas.
In addition...What possible reason would a NPC entity have for continuing to swarm in an area where they are habitually destroyed? Should not the opposite be true - that they moved on to less-dangerous areas to regroup?
I suggest completely reversing the proposed favortism and move the best exploration to areas that currently have NO complexes.
I have not noticed anything different between the systems that use to have static plexes and those that don't - as far as I can see its random!
|
Deva Blackfire
Viziam
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 08:51:00 -
[73]
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
The only direct effect Encounters are going to have on Exploration is making it harder to know if there's a non-encounter Unknown site in the system, unless there's something I've missed?
Yep, you missed :)
You scan system, see unknown.
1. Drop probe at each planet (takes abt 10-15minutes sometimes), scan.
2. You find encounter, remove probe, use short range one scan.
3. Finish encounter
4. Now to check IF there is NORMAL unknown site (exploration) you need to kill ALL probes in system, drop NEW multifrequency and if you find unknown again you need to start from scratch.
Not only it doubles time needed (thx to "false" signal) but usually doubles up probes needed.
And if you stay and scan ad-nauseam AFTER you got encounter you might as well waste 1,5 hour (if encounter was only unknown site in system).
Exploration is already insane time sink (some easy empire sites took me 4x quest probes = 6 hours to find). Forcing to play "drop/remove" probe increases it...
|
|
CCP Greyscale
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 10:52:00 -
[74]
The relative strengths of Quests and Encounters means you'll be able to identify every single encounter in the system within three cycles or so. You'll probably find them all in the first cycle, but I don't think that's guaranteed. If you're hunting escalations/complexes, you shouldn't need more than two multispectrals and two sets of probes for any system, unless you're unlucky with respawns.
This is, incidentally, what I meant by "harder to know if there are non-Encounter Unknowns in the system", in that there's no way of telling if one exists without clearing the system first. It won't have any impact on people searching for Radar/Ladar/Gravimetric/Magnetometric sites, or anyone looking for encounters, but it will mean that if you're after combat sites the most efficient modus operandi will be to look for Encounters and then run a multispectral probe after you've cleared a system on the off chance that there's a more valuable site there too. It's not an ideal situation and we will revisit it again in the near future, but equally it's not going to make doing any kind of exploration completely impossible.
|
|
Deva Blackfire
Viziam
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 12:21:00 -
[75]
Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 07/06/2007 12:20:36
i know it doesnt make it impossible - but if you have exploration + encounter (both unknown) it effectively doubles time you spend in system (because launching probes also takes time - especially in larger systems when you need to launch 10 of them or fly 50+ AUs between planets)
and the time you spend ALREADY is pretty long (depending on your luck.. it seems im very unlucky lately because it takes me 4h to find stupid gravimetric plex in 0.5 system...)
|
|
CCP Greyscale
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 12:24:00 -
[76]
I agree with the general sentiment - this does make things harder than is strictly necessary, and it's something we should (and probably will) consider making easier in the near future.
|
|
Deva Blackfire
Viziam
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 12:39:00 -
[77]
Oh i have one thing id like to ask about:
Is signal. str. of exploration site fixed for each one? or is it random (to some degree)?
Also would it be possible to set harder sites = lower signal str = better rewards?
As now it happens that hi-reward radar sites (in 0.0) re usually found pretty fast (signal str of 0,3 sometimes) while empire sites are insanely hard (had 0,02str. on hisec exploration with proper probes).
If they are fixed numbers would it be possible to revise em? And maybe give plain 10% increase on all of them. Its not like "lets reduce str. - that will make it harder to find" - it just changes into "it takes longer to find".
And its pretty annoying to sit in one system for 4 hours (ok gravi plex im scanning rite now on TQ took me already 6 hours... STILL scanning - and i have 100% coverage...).
Or maybe just give another scan str. skill you could train?
|
Christopher Dalran
Gallente
Deadly Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 18:33:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Akurion
There seems to be a massive disparity between rewards on some of these encounters. For example:
Yesterday I found a drone encounter in Mannar, a 0.3 space. It consisted of about 5 waves of drones, from destroyers up through battlecruisers. I had to retreat several times to repair (was using a PvP setup). The only loot was alloys.
A few minutes ago I scanned out an encounter in Oursulaert, a 0.9 hub system. It consisted of about 4 waves of coreli frigates/destroyers, and ended with a shadow serpentis trooper that dropped a Shadow Serp 1MN MWD and a Shadow Serp Stasis Webbifier (!).
The coreli encounter was infinitely easier, in much higher security space, at least 10x faster to finish, and gave much nicer loot.
Drone rewards need to be looked at, IMO. Alloys aren't going to cut it.
Drone region residents get screwed from every possible angle in eve, this is just one examble (oh and you need a hauler to haule the ore our of the deadspace complexs and conveniently Industrial ships are not allowed to use the gates).
-------------------------------
C.D's Formula for success
-------------------------------
Credit Card = Game Time Card
Gametime Card = ISK
Therefore Credit Card = ISK.
|
Lord DarthVader
Chicas Locas
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 22:58:00 -
[79]
I have spent many an hour in the past few days scanning in a 0.0 region that has many complex's in it now and i am yet to find one, the in ability to find cosmos and complex's due to the results from encounters is just getting silly, not that i have much say in it but i think encounters either need to be removed until they can be implemented with their own scan type or a scan type needs to be introduced with them in rev 2 as i forsee many a unhappy customer as probing takes so long as it is.
ldv
|
Black Atom
Confederation of Red Moon
Red Moon Federation
|
Posted - 2007.06.08 00:41:00 -
[80]
Any plans to reduce the restriction of overlapping probes? I can't really see any justification for it other than it being annoying and adding to the time it takes to scan down sites. Tedium != fun.
Also in feythabolis I know a lot of the escalating kill missions essentially lead to non-existant rewards. 2-3 hours work to kill a station or a tower that results in a can filled with mining crystals or T1 named gear.
Angel of Death is one specific example where it was completed and there was just an empty wreck. There was another that was mining related that ended after about 4 hours of escalations in a can that had some T1 mining crystals.
Now if this is intentional so be it, but in the scheme of things for the 3-4 people we needed to complete the sites we ended up making about 13mill isk each, and that's not a lot for the amount of work involved. I don't think the small possibility of commanders will really fix this either, unless they are fairly common.
Anyways would love to hear the feedback on this.
Another Note: Escalating missions such as Angel of Death are they supposed to truncate on occasion? We ran it twice, the second time it just stopped at the 2nd part with the same message we had before saying we were too late and we had to chase down the angel of death, it just didn't provide the next beacon, GM was response was this was intentional, despite it not seemingly being correct.
|
|
|
Callthetruth
Caldari
Logical Logtistics
|
Posted - 2007.06.08 04:16:00 -
[81]
i think the comment about removing the easy combat sites then going after the escalation hard ones is valid, perhaps offering the locals a chance to assist with the plexes then going the scan after that as said not ideal but the small chance of faction at least might get peeps moving out of the mission hubs ( luckliy the farmers havent caught on yet)
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.06.08 06:57:00 -
[82]
Just a thought, but someone has considered the effect of moving belts on Ice Mining?
The best ship for ice mining is a bit specialized (mackinaw), so people needing them to fuel POS will use them almost exclusively for ice mining, and will set a ice mining operation in the system where the ice is available.
But with the new exploration system it is not guaranteed there will be a ice field in system.
While for a hulk, if the minerals in system are different you only need to change crystals and at least you get you full volume of minerals, with a mack if you need to switch to mining minerals instead of ice you cut your production heavily.
|
Hoshi
Blackguard Brigade
Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.08 09:33:00 -
[83]
A very much doubt we will get probes that can be places inside each others scan range. Probes are use for more than exploration you know. There are many situations where stacking multiple probes ontop of each other would make them overpowered for ship scanning.
As for that Angle of Death site, escalation sites are not supposed to escalate every time. There is a chance at every stage that they will just stop, and supposedly there is also just a chance at the end to get the real reward. I agree that the addition of commander spawns is going to do much unless it's a very large chance. Personally I think the whole concept of escalation sites are broken.
Venkul: They are not changing belts yet, Grayscale said it won't happen until rev 3 at the earliest.
----------------------------------------
A Guide to Scan Probing in Revelations |
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.06.08 10:43:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Hoshi
Venkul: They are not changing belts yet, Grayscale said it won't happen until rev 3 at the earliest.
True, it is not a pressing matter, but better think about possible problems when it is still easy to correct them.
Originally by: Hoshi
A very much doubt we will get probes that can be places inside each others scan range. Probes are use for more than exploration you know. There are many situations where stacking multiple probes ontop of each other would make them overpowered for ship scanning.
Yes, the possibility to stack probes will have negative effects on the security of deadspace areas, both the exploration and the mission ones.
|
Hoshi
Blackguard Brigade
Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.08 11:00:00 -
[85]
Also consider the situation of stacking 5-10x 40 au probes. Why use snoops...
----------------------------------------
A Guide to Scan Probing in Revelations |
RedClaws
Amarr
Dragon's Rage
Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2007.06.08 11:32:00 -
[86]
Will these new "encounters" spawn during the day or will they only respawn after DT?
|
Necronomicon
Caldari
KIA Corp
KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.08 17:02:00 -
[87]
I would prefer the scrap option to be fixed, the amount of wrecks that are just left is nuts, and salavgers could scan down old mission spots and clean up the mess.
Carlsberg dont make Eve Pilots, but if they did, i wouldnt be one of them.
|
Black Atom
Confederation of Red Moon
Red Moon Federation
|
Posted - 2007.06.08 18:34:00 -
[88]
Originally by: RedClaws
Will these new "encounters" spawn during the day or will they only respawn after DT?
Spawn continuously throughout the day, they only disappear when they are consumed.
If that's the case on the escalations then they're a flawed design, it's more beneficial at this point to run the same crappy mission over and over again in empire. You at least loyalty points and useful faction, in 0.0 you get nothing but wasted time and poor rewards. As it stands Unknowns aren't worth running, and unless they escalate properly they aren't going to be worth the reward.
I hope the current mindset that they shouldn't escalate 100% of the time changes, without a reward they aren't worth doing. Too difficult for the time involved.
|
Stellar Vix
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2007.06.08 20:36:00 -
[89]
replace 50% drones with mecenary/factionless pirate encounters with the likes of the Seven, EOM, Medusa or just plain mercenaries, that may make the drone ones more bearable. :) then again there isnt any mercenary/factionless encounters, plexes, or sites... sure i dont expect these guys to have a mass shipyard, but a wearhouse some back logged placed where they usually hang out, or thier blackmaret trade hubs. Dunno it will give the content folks to something to chew on.
=========
SWA Qualified Instructor and Mascot or sorts
Ensign Stellar Vix |
katz3
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2007.06.08 22:03:00 -
[90]
Yeah, it would be great if there were less drone encouters, they kinda suck. 
___________________
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |