Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 34 post(s) |
Andrue
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 07:06:00 -
[121]
ôMe and my gang have completed the missionö
should be:
"My gang and I have completed the mission".
Basic rule of thumb:If you remove the references to other people the sentence should still make sense. Obviously in the original if you remove 'and my gang' you are left with "Me have completed the mission" which ain't not good proper English.
-- (Battle hardened industrialist)
[Brackley, UK]
This is not a signature |
Taraw
Amarr Dark Rising Shadow YouWhat
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 07:14:00 -
[122]
Originally by: Hellman109 The correct paths should be changed as per below, because they will be correct in all cases:
In Windows XP & Windows 2000: User Settings : %userprofile%\Local Settings\Application Data\CCP\EVE Capture and logs: %userprofile%\My Documents\EVE In Windows Vista : User settings : %userprofile%\AppData\Local\CCP\EVE Capture and logs: %userprofile%\Documents\EVE
Not a biggie, but I did notice it
Actually, no, it's not correct in all cases. Here in germany it's "Eigene Dateien" instead of "My Documents" for example
|
Andrue
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 07:20:00 -
[123]
Edited by: Andrue on 15/06/2007 07:21:28 "A "View Market Details" entry should be on entries in the Wallet transaction log and on entries in the "My Orders" tab in the market."
/me does The Dance.
"Agent grammar and spelling has been improved. "
/me Applauds CCP
"The autopilot can now be set to have the destination as the same system as you are in."
/me is astonished and very, very grateful.
This looks like being The Best Patch Ever. I suppose it would really since today is my last day in the country and I'll only be able to play on a crappy laptop for the next week. Oh well :) -- (Battle hardened industrialist)
[Brackley, UK]
This is not a signature |
Nerogk Shorn
Caldari Royal Hiigaran Navy
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 07:21:00 -
[124]
The citadel flash nerf makes me cry. = (
I mean.... the other nerfs suck, but at least they have reasons.
D-F-A-A-B-A-A-S |
Andrue
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 07:22:00 -
[125]
Edited by: Andrue on 15/06/2007 07:20:51
Originally by: Taraw
Originally by: Hellman109 The correct paths should be changed as per below, because they will be correct in all cases:
In Windows XP & Windows 2000: User Settings : %userprofile%\Local Settings\Application Data\CCP\EVE Capture and logs: %userprofile%\My Documents\EVE In Windows Vista : User settings : %userprofile%\AppData\Local\CCP\EVE Capture and logs: %userprofile%\Documents\EVE
Not a biggie, but I did notice it
Actually, no, it's not correct in all cases. Here in germany it's "Eigene Dateien" instead of "My Documents" for example
Heh - I imagine they will be calling the appropriate API function to obtain those locations so they will be whatever your installation of Windows says they should be :) -- (Battle hardened industrialist)
[Brackley, UK]
This is not a signature |
Maximillian Power
Minmatar WOLFPACK DELTA
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 07:26:00 -
[126]
awesomeness -------------------------------- So.... |
Tzrailasa
Destructive Influence Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 07:32:00 -
[127]
Originally by: Kaptein Trefot More about missions:
Only 10 agents for each faction? Are you trying to get a Guinness world record for worst lag? I guess there will only be 4 agents with highest quality (whatever that is in low sec), one of each empire faction. You probably made 4 new lag hells in one go. Who wants to be the first to move their cap ships in there?
About the rest - Great work. Tanks
You may think so, but in reality there are only a very few of each factions agents being used. Take Caldari for example. The large majority of players using Caldari lvl 4 agents are in Motsu/Aramachi..... It'll probably be the same for lvl 5 agents, with people only using the best one...
The thing CCP should do is remove the Quality factor of agents, and just replace that with your standing towards the agent in LP/reward calculations. That way you could use any agent of the level you want, and people could spread out when your agent system was lagged....
My views are my own. They do not represent the views of my corporation or alliance. |
beor oranes
Caldari Furious Angels Requiem-Aeternam
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 07:47:00 -
[128]
Yay, I get to play with the changes before I go on holiday...can't wait to see what the changes are to Nosferatu.
------------------------------------------------ Either pick a dry year when fighting wars or civilize the moronic races and have no wars at all! |
Cassana Daystar
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 07:51:00 -
[129]
Ok, I have noticed that multi-point posts almost never get commented on by CCP, but here goes (itÆs better than spamming the thread for each pointà!)
1) LP store/transferral of all corp based LPs to a single ôaccountö I LOVE YOU GUYS! Hello LP store! Goodbye Motsu/Aramachi!
2) Cargo capacity for the Stealth Bombers has been increased as follows:
Quote:
òPurifier: 135m3 -> 260m3, òNemesis: 155m3 -> 215m3, òHound: 145m3 -> 195m3, òManticore: 120m3 -> 185m3.
Ummmà. Why the large differences? Am I missing something? I mean, why arenÆt the changes at least equal û maintaining their different total cargo sizes? Why is the Manticore getting only 65m3 when the Purifier is getting almost double that (125m3)?
3) Regarding constellation sovereignty. Ahà what exactly is your goal for this? I know that sovereignty has been a little too fluid, with long-term residents given no preference for their hard work to build up the space they occupy û and these changes will remedy this to a certain extent. But other than rewarding long term residents, what is your goal? This reads to me as if you want to help out the super-sized alliances (hello BOB, RA, GOONS) to keep the space that they now claim. (keep in mind that they claim a lot of space that often never gets ôvisitsö from the political authority û aka, absentee landlords).
Is it really your intention to keep smaller corps and alliances from owning some space in 0.0 û or do you feel that constellation sovereignty will somehow lead to greater granulation of 0.0? (less space owned by large alliances). I am not sure what the effect is for the game, but I would have to say that it will have the exact opposite effect û that it will severely limit the ability of a small to medium sized alliances or corps to claim space and keep it.
This is a serious problem, IMHO. You want to eliminate the blob û and you have gone to such great lengths as to add in AoE weapons (bombs) and effects (MOM ECM burst) just to ôbreak up the blob.ö The problem with the blob lies not with a lack of AoE weaponry, but rather that the game already encourages/rewards super-sized alliances. If you have thousands of members in an alliance, you will have blob warfare. Period.
Personally, I think a much better system would be to make it HARDER for alliances to hold Sov in multiple constellations. It seems to me that what this patch represents is a move from POS spamming to OUTPOST spamming. And once the big alliances have their eyes set on ANOTHER constellation, how is it going to be possible for someone else to compete? They simply have to out-OUTPOST anyone else. I know û this is a bit of an oversimplification û but it is nearly accurate.
If you want to eliminate the blob û then you have to find a way to BREAK UP the larger alliances. Make it so cumbersome for them to own and control vast tracts of à space. Then maybe you might see the super-alliances breaking up to an extent, in favour of more manageable, smaller alliances. THIS would be good for the game IMHO.
Sorry Molle, I donÆt want you to control all of EVE.
(Here's hoping that CCP doesn't stop reading after the first point)
|
Xerxes X
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 07:56:00 -
[130]
Edited by: Xerxes X on 15/06/2007 07:58:10 Hmmm.. after some hunting I found with regards to Trinity 2.0 from Oveur:
Quote: So when is all this coming?
Well, as an example, the new graphics engine was started last year and we're hoping we can release it at the end of this year. The other systems aren't as extensive and require less man-years to create.
End of the year. Maybe Revelations III then .
Xerxes X
|
|
Dionisius
Gallente Fallen Lords
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 07:57:00 -
[131]
What about the videos?!
_______________________
What we have here is total lack of respect for the law...
|
Xerxes X
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 08:02:00 -
[132]
Originally by: Dionisius What about the videos?!
Catered for here: Linkage
Xerxes X
|
AceOfSpace
Pineapple Blunder
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 08:12:00 -
[133]
Originally by: Baron Steiger Changes to user settings, capture and logs :
* In Windows XP & Windows 2000: User Settings : C:\Documents and Settings\%user%\Local Settings\Application Data\CCP\EVE * Capture and logs: C:\Documents and Settings\%user%\My Documents\EVE
* In Windows Vista : User settings : C:\Users\%user%\AppData\Local\CCP\EVE * Capture and logs: C:\Users\%user%\Documents\EVE
Has anything been done to ensure that data from the test server doesn't overwrite data from the real server?
Hmmm this is a good point
-it's my job to do it- |
Mikal Drey
Purgatorial Janitors Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 08:18:00 -
[134]
hey hey
Nice patch note but a few thing made me cry :(
1) Fixed an issue with lab slots in mobile laboratories that had added restrictions to them would not be displayed in the installations tab.
Does this actually mean that mobile labs that have restrictions removed so that they can be made for public use will actually work now ?
2) Drone invention.
Whilst superb I noticed that all drones use Gallente Encryption to invent. Wouldnt this be more inline with the story if each race could invent its own drones ? Galente3s making TII drones for the amarrian scum makes me wonder where their true allegiences lie.
3) Stasis Webifier II - Changed to -90%
Er.... it already is ? and the 'Fleeting' meta version is still better than the TII version which makes the TII stasis webifier pointless :(
4) NOS Changes ??
Nothings showing as different on SISI . . . sneaky sneaky :)))))
5) Exploits. . . 5A) dropping an interdictor sphere whilst caught inside an enemy bubble/sphere allows you to warp away safely :) nice to see you corrected that.
GL on Tuesday. Remember to get the hamster food at the weekend.
|
Tohmu Blackwing
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 08:22:00 -
[135]
Quote:
Improved efficiency of remote armor repairers to be slightly better than shield transporter equivalent. Skill level requirements, range, duration and meta levels now match the shield transporters.
Aaahhh.... WHY? Isn't armor tanking already superior to shield tanking?
Quote:
Added CPU requirements to "Shield Power Relays", and balanced the meta levels.
Does this mean you nerfed SPRs also - or does this mean that the named ones will now have value?
Quote:
Battlecruiser & Command Ship shield recharge rate changed to 1400 seconds.
Ah... yet another nerf to shield tanking. Again... why? I mean, really - you make these changes but you provide NO rationale behind them. If your going to make a change like this, wouldn't it make for good PR to tell us WHY you are making a change this drastic?
You must have a reason - and I hope it isn't simply to appease the complaints of gunboat PVPers who "cant break a tank" on a properly fitted Drake (and haven't bothered to adjust their tactics to fit new technology).
I would really like to hear a reason behind this. You do realize that this represents a 12% nerf to tanking - thats almost 3 skill levels (my apologies if my math is off)!! This is a pretty significant change to lay on ONE style of play - passive tanking. These ships already suffer from a complete lack of functionality (fit anything in your mids and lows but tank mods and you can't passive tank) and have a very limited ability to respond to situations - there are no boosters or reppers to get you out from under that short term burst of damage.
Now you have nerfed thier only function - to be able to absorbe DoT - Damage Over Time.
So... why?
|
Plave Okice
Gallente Combat Systems
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 08:24:00 -
[136]
I think some of the research alliances in high sec might get a little concerned.
War decs will be appearing, there's plenty of big enough BS fleets bearing in mind most high sec POS are undefended.
Love most of the changes, even those that don't affect me personally I see positive for the game.
|
Kaid Tallinu
Gallente SHAPE
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 08:34:00 -
[137]
Quote: Medium Energy neutralizer cap need and energy destabilization amount increased to 180. Range increased to 12600m.
Should that read Medium Energy Neutralizer II?
Even if it should, that still makes the T2 item worse than the best named, which neuts 180 cap for 150 cap cost, and for lower fitting requirements!
Shouldn't the attributes be the same, and just the fitting requirements be different?
/me was delighted to win a T2 BPO on the lottery. Then I found out it was for Medium Energy Neutralizer II...
|
Tythran
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 08:35:00 -
[138]
Zydrine price doubles overnight. Information regarding the quantities of items like this should not be disclosed. The price should be determined by market supply, not by prior knowledge of a possible shortage. |
Tobe Confirmed
Minmatar Terminus Reborn
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 08:37:00 -
[139]
Thankyou CCP. I have for some time been teetering on the edge of cancelling my sub but this injects some freshness back in. Thanks.
One small thing though....
I've read the notes and every post here and no-one has mentioned the 'camera reset after jump' issue? Any chance of a fix?
|
Strife Phoenix
Acerbus Vindictum
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 08:46:00 -
[140]
Originally by: CCP kieron If you think the Patch Notes are long, imagine being on the team that had to write them!
Actually, I wouldn't mind at all. Keep that in mind for future needs :) _ Win BIG ISK with BIG Lottery
|
|
Gaius Sejanus
Gallente Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 09:04:00 -
[141]
Quote: So basically you're whining because you're worried that the upcoming change as somehow mitigated your investment in probing skills in some way shape or form.
To wit: if it did, who cares?
I don't think that the built-in scanners will supercede probes, but seriously, your response is just assinine.
Picture you training Battleship 5 for 3 races, and then having all battleships removed from the game. Would you care? I think so. Your cavalier dismissal of other people's training time doesn't magically invest those skillpoints elsewhere.
|
ToxicFire
Phoenix Knights Dark Nebula Galactic Empire
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 09:10:00 -
[142]
yeassssh thats one heck of a patch list, but from whats there and what i've seen on sisi its one heck of a patch :D good job ccp. Sig removed as it lacks EVE-related content. Mail [email protected] if you have questions. -Hango
|
Andrue
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 09:11:00 -
[143]
Originally by: Tobe Confirmed Thankyou CCP. I have for some time been teetering on the edge of cancelling my sub but this injects some freshness back in. Thanks.
One small thing though....
I've read the notes and every post here and no-one has mentioned the 'camera reset after jump' issue? Any chance of a fix?
/seconded. With knobs on. And bells too.
NB:Knobs with bells on are actually not a good idea. It means they can hear you coming -- (Battle hardened industrialist)
[Brackley, UK]
This is not a signature |
Najenna
Minmatar Caldari Deep Space Ventures
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 09:22:00 -
[144]
C.C.P. has taken me by suprise!!!! i thought they would follow thier track record of delaying the release and low and behold BAM!!!! Surprise Surprise its being released wayyy before i thought it would be Kudos to you C.C.P.. But can I complain about 1 thing? Where is the minmatar carrier love at. it still seems the minmatar carrier is on the crap end of the stick what say you?
Once you get this Robotech thing in your blood its there to stay... |
R3dSh1ft
Dark Knights of Deneb Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 09:33:00 -
[145]
You can't question value for money with all this continuing evolution of the game for no extra cost. Well done for not letting the bad press put you down, and keeping on with the true purpose of the game. The fights coming are going to be so good. _________________________________________________________
DKOD - an awesome synchronised killing machine |
Grey Malkin
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 09:35:00 -
[146]
Colour me impressed.
A lot of positive changes here (or ones that dont have any relevance to how i play :-) and i just thought i should throw in my support for CCP since they have copped a fair bit of flak lately.
Now that i have finished with my suck-up, I might as well put in a request:
Rigs: Instead of just 3, have up to 5 determined by an appropriate skill. So instead of just being able to automatically chuck in 3 rigs to riggable? ship you have to train up for it. In my mind it works nicely with it being a rank 4 or 5 skill called Calibration and you can chuck the otherwise fairly pointless and fairly nonsensical ship stat of the same name. If a frigate with 5 rigs seems silly, either consider some doofus will have had to put in over month of training and 100mil+ for even cheap rigs to get that so let them waste their time. Or have number of rigs allowable also limited by ship size. Eg: Frigate: 1 Cruiser: 2 BattleCruiser: 3 Battleship: 4 Capital: 5. With all Tech II ships having their base ship type + 1.
Anyhow keep up the good work.
|
Kilmatar
Minmatar Aeria Gloris Inc United Legion
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 10:00:00 -
[147]
Still no "Camera reset after gate jump" fix???? ============= Matari Rullz!
|
Sjoep enLai
Azure Horizon Coalition Of Empires
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 10:02:00 -
[148]
I have a question about currently anchored POS guns,jammers,scramblers, etc. Will they stay where they are or will they be moved outside the bubble or unanchored when the patch is deployed?
|
Mashie Saldana
Hooligans Of War
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 10:05:00 -
[149]
Nice list of changes, must say I'm quite surprised they are ready for patching, had expected another 2-3 weeks of testing.
I hope all the new T2 items listed will be invention only.
Will the deployment of Revelations II be the official end of the T2 lottery?
We're sorry, something happened.
|
Tonto Auri
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2007.06.15 10:10:00 -
[150]
Quote: Large Hull Repairer II can not be invented from the tech 1 version.
Sooorry man? Can anyone reread patchnotes and correct typos? -- . |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |