EVE Search - Scripts and how they will affect modules

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Scripts and how they will affect modules

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 10 post(s)
Holy Cheater Red Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.04 08:58:00 - [121] Edited by: Holy Cheater on 04/11/2007 08:58:06 Well, I suppose the next "improvement" will be nerfed modules like guns/armorreps and enchant scrolls for them? These things will surely make game look like a Lineage.
Amaki Tint	Posted - 2007.11.04 11:24:00 - [122] I wouldnt have any complaints if it were still possible to achieve the same effect as on TQ, but to only one attribute. In the case of my arazu/lach, 74% to either locking range or targeting speed, rather than both. However, currently i can only get 54% on either. This means that 3 damps on a sensor boosted BS will only take it down to about 25km! And the 4th will make barely any difference. The other option may be to decrease or completely remove the stacking nerf on damps(and probably all of these modules)
Turin Caldari Eternity INC. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.11.04 14:35:00 - [123] Stop nerfing the F'ing game to hell for gods sakes. You guys are driving me closer and closer to the cancel button. Stop. Please. Just stop. You are ruining this awesome game. I Implore you. Stop. Stop now. _________________________________
Sever Aldaria Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.11.05 06:40:00 - [124] Please correct me if I'm wrong on my observations here. This may be an oversight, and I hope it is, but currently both tracking disruptors and sensor dampners with one of their scripts do not bring the attribute boosted by the script up to the level on Tranquility. Rather, a scripted mod will become less effective with the scripted attribute as that same attribute on Tranquility currently. For example: Singularity: Tracking Disruptor II (with optimal range script) -0% Tracking Speed Bonus -40.2% Optimal Range Bonus Tranquility: Tracking Disruptor II -46% Tracking Speed Bonus -46% Optimal Range Bonus The same trend appears for named and t1 mods as well. If this wasn't an oversight then my question is: Why do you feel that tracking disruptors should should be worse with the correct script loaded than they are now? [green]Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes, ty. If you would like further d
Kitia STK Scientific Black-Out	Posted - 2007.11.05 10:16:00 - [125] Originally by: Sever Aldaria Please correct me if I'm wrong on my observations here. This may be an oversight, and I hope it is, but currently both tracking disruptors and sensor dampners with one of their scripts do not bring the attribute boosted by the script up to the level on Tranquility. Rather, a scripted mod will become less effective with the scripted attribute as that same attribute on Tranquility currently. Yes Aldaria you are correct, damps always were more effective than there counterparts sensor boosters, however sensor boosters fill two rolls they extend your lock range enabling you to snipe and they also counter damping, were as a damp only damps, it offers no other benefit. IMO cutting the modules ability as well as making your pick lock time or lock range is a step too far. For example if you want to counter a raven in your curse, you cant use tracking disruptor's as they don't work on missiles, so you fit damps. However with the new system even with 4 damps you won't be able to damp the raven lock range anywhere near enough to get your neuts on him at 37k. Now I'm not saying force recons should be able to pwn everything, but it is a example on how the reduced attributes on the damps are too week now to work effectively, I don't want to see another situation like jamming where only the dedicated ew ship for that module can use them. I want the flexibility in the system so I can fit damps to my curse as well as tracking disruptions without it being totally worthless modules without ship bonus.
Kalith Kalmia Scrutari	Posted - 2007.11.05 11:45:00 - [126] Originally by: CCP Gangleri Scripts take one second to reload. Unless you have a full cargo hold. Then you can't change scripts at all as your cargo bay is full, which seems a bit unfair to me.
Phaedruss	Posted - 2007.11.05 11:50:00 - [127] Edited by: Phaedruss on 05/11/2007 11:50:32 Originally by: Kitia Originally by: Sever Aldaria Please correct me if I'm wrong on my observations here. This may be an oversight, and I hope it is, but currently both tracking disruptors and sensor dampners with one of their scripts do not bring the attribute boosted by the script up to the level on Tranquility. Rather, a scripted mod will become less effective with the scripted attribute as that same attribute on Tranquility currently. Yes Aldaria you are correct, damps always were more effective than there counterparts sensor boosters, however sensor boosters fill two rolls they extend your lock range enabling you to snipe and they also counter damping, were as a damp only damps, it offers no other benefit. IMO cutting the modules ability as well as making your pick lock time or lock range is a step too far. For example if you want to counter a raven in your curse, you cant use tracking disruptor's as they don't work on missiles, so you fit damps. However with the new system even with 4 damps you won't be able to damp the raven lock range anywhere near enough to get your neuts on him at 37k. Now I'm not saying force recons should be able to pwn everything, but it is a example on how the reduced attributes on the damps are too week now to work effectively, I don't want to see another situation like jamming where only the dedicated ew ship for that module can use them. I want the flexibility in the system so I can fit damps to my curse as well as tracking disruptions without it being totally worthless modules without ship bonus. Yeah good points. Tracking disruptors don't work at all against missile boats or drone boats as it is (what percentage of Eve flies those? ) so it's a bit of a cruel joke on Amarr (and yet another nerf on the Pilgrim). A Curse probably will still be able to dampen an unsensor-boosted raven effectively inside neut range with good mods and some damp skills, but inside scramble range I don't think will be possible with the proposed changes. Put a single sensor booster on the target (and who doesn't use sensor boosters these days?) and it just gets worse. There hasn't been much said about the dual use of Sensor Boosters (and to a lesser extent tracking computers/enhancers) which makes them such a versatile and powerful module and explains their overwhelming popularity. I wish a developer would confirm that they are aware of this issue because it seems the extent of the nerf on damps/tracking disruptors couldn't possibly take this into account.
BECKARD Shadows of the Dead Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.05 14:40:00 - [128] TBH, this seems like a stupid idea, made by stupid people, made for the sheeple, I mean, stupid people... <insert 1337 sig here, #ERROR/>
Sever Aldaria Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.11.05 15:50:00 - [129] Edited by: Sever Aldaria on 05/11/2007 15:51:20 Originally by: Kitia Originally by: Sever Aldaria Please correct me if I'm wrong on my observations here. This may be an oversight, and I hope it is, but currently both tracking disruptors and sensor dampners with one of their scripts do not bring the attribute boosted by the script up to the level on Tranquility. Rather, a scripted mod will become less effective with the scripted attribute as that same attribute on Tranquility currently. Yes Aldaria you are correct, damps always were more effective than there counterparts sensor boosters, however sensor boosters fill two rolls they extend your lock range enabling you to snipe and they also counter damping, were as a damp only damps, it offers no other benefit. IMO cutting the modules ability as well as making your pick lock time or lock range is a step too far. For example if you want to counter a raven in your curse, you cant use tracking disruptor's as they don't work on missiles, so you fit damps. However with the new system even with 4 damps you won't be able to damp the raven lock range anywhere near enough to get your neuts on him at 37k. Now I'm not saying force recons should be able to pwn everything, but it is a example on how the reduced attributes on the damps are too week now to work effectively, I don't want to see another situation like jamming where only the dedicated ew ship for that module can use them. I want the flexibility in the system so I can fit damps to my curse as well as tracking disruptions without it being totally worthless modules without ship bonus. Thanks, but that wasn't what the idea of what I was saying. Not even considering sensor boosters or that the non scripted attribute of a sensor damp or tracking disruptor falls to 0%. What my main message was is that the scripted attribute that gets a 100% bonus does not bring that attribute up to the level of that same attribute currently: TD II (with optimal script) -40.2% optimal vs. TD II (as it is now) -46% optimal I couldn't tell if your last paragraph addressed this but, if it didn't, I just wanted to be clear. I'm not talking about 1 sensor booster not canceling out 1 sensor dampner and I'm not talking about a scripted tracking disruptor not disrupting both optimal and tracking. I was under the impression that if you put a script on a damp or track then that scripted attribute will be brought up to the level of that attribute as is now while the non-scripted attribute will be 0. If this was the idea then the numbers need reworking because a scripted attribute is not brought up to its old level. If the idea was to make it so that even if you use a script and the scripted attribute isn't brought up to the current level, then my question is why nerf all attributes (when scripted) evenly across the board on every 2 bonus module? [green]Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes, ty. If you would like further d
Cythrawl Caldari Central Defiance	Posted - 2007.11.05 16:18:00 - [130] Damping: The thing I see most in this is a completely new change in the tactical usage of damps against snipers and the re-emergence of Falcons, Rooks, Blackbirds, and Scorpions to the battlefield as their partners. In the case of mid-range supports for fleets, ECM is going to be vital to knock locks, while dampening the lock time of snipers is going to be key to keeping them from re-targetting after the ECM is removed. It's going to be ugly in mid-sized fleets and cost a lot more in recons for certain. Snipers can exchange targetting other sniping ships for lock time mods to counter the damps and while they won't fight your snipers, they'll have the range to hit your damping platforms. Damps on dedicated damping ships need a range increase if this is the idea behind CCP's changes. Also, if they'd just reduce ECM costs in half and half the amount of time they jammed for, this would be a WHOLE hell of a lot more viable a tactic than what's going on right now with all the damp-spamming. Tracking Disruption: Pilgrims and Curses are going to have to pick one of the following in fleets: 1. Pure Support. Used to reduce the overall range of sniping ships, removing them from being able to target damping ships while allowing dampening ships to counter-act the speed of their lock. 2. Semi-Support. Decrease snipers tracking speed and get close and wail on them with friends, removing their ability to damage them unless they attempt to counter the act by changing their tracking computers to tracking speed over range. Thus countering range at the risk of loosing yourself. Not a lot of risk if you're close enough and they don't have support themselves. It'll muddy the waters a lot. Also: Script used to scramb moms with heavy dictors = pure win. I'm not too upset with the changes. I'm just gonna have to work out new tactics. .:. Originally by: Krazy Bitsch Originally by: Virtuality In before the first troll. i do believe you are too late for this....
Wolfiegoth	Posted - 2007.11.05 17:08:00 - [131] Ahhh ccp why go with such a severe change. Lets start with a smaller reduction in effectiveness and then if that does not do the trick then consider hitting the modules with a ruddy great sledgehammer as you are doing now. You patch the game every few weeks so its really not that hard to increase the penalties if you feel its not working. Might upset a lot less people aswell if you try things that way around. WTS: 10 run curse bpc's 50p each ;-)
Natalie Jax Indecision Industries	Posted - 2007.11.05 19:14:00 - [132] Heh, as much as I hate the rake in the kiester that RSD's are getting, I feel even more sorry for Amarr Recons.
Rosur Gallente	Posted - 2007.11.05 19:36:00 - [133] I thinks it a good change. But make the stat u are increaseing better than it is now For example make a RSD II have better targting range than they are now with a script in to affect that. So now u have a RSD with -48% targetting range bounes -48% scan resulation bounes I think with the changes it should be half with no scripts. Though when u add a script is should give a 50% Bounes to the bounes that the script is for. Also with named scripts(could be droen region only stuff) could increas the second stat and t2 scripts could be like RSD IIs today but the t2 scripts can only be used in t2 damps.
TZeer BURN EDEN	Posted - 2007.11.05 21:33:00 - [134] Edited by: TZeer on 05/11/2007 21:37:57 This is a big nerf to longrange setups. Before frigs had to be careful trying to tackle snipers. Now they can just rush toward you without thinking about transversal at all. Tested on testserver, max skills, 2 sensorboosters Came in at 200km, crusader was 8km from before I had it locked. This can only be seen as a boost to fastmoving closerange setups.
Celedris Stimulus	Posted - 2007.11.06 05:14:00 - [135] Hi there, CCP Gangleri. I have a question for you: Why did you decide to go with massive script changes here (+100%/-100%) instead of smaller fine-tuned changes until a better balance point is achieved? For example why not try scripts that boosted one effect by 50% while leaving the other unchanged, or have +75%/-25% or +100%/-50%? It seems like cutting the overall effectiveness of these modules in half is overdoing it. Damps in particular have had their base strength reduced by about 50% on top of splitting the bonuses. To put that in perspective, that is a much heavier reduction in power than even the one given to ECM back a year ago. In addition there are no low-slot distortion amp modules to help, and no increase to damp-ship bonuses. Ironically, it is actually the ECM specialists that have now had their ship bonus doubled. People simply will not use ships that they feel are ineffective, and with the current numbers on the test server, why would a gang support pilot use an Arazu instead of a Falcon with 14-point jammers capable of hitting past 200km? Do you intend for the script changes to make Celestis-hulls this weak?
Nian Banks Minmatar Berserkers of Aesir	Posted - 2007.11.06 05:14:00 - [136] Originally by: TZeer Edited by: TZeer on 05/11/2007 21:38:58 Edited by: TZeer on 05/11/2007 21:37:57 This is a big nerf to longrange setups. Before frigs had to be careful trying to tackle snipers. Now they can just rush toward you without thinking about transversal at all. Tested on testserver, max skills, 2 sensorboosters Came in at 200km, crusader was 8km from me before I had it locked. This can only be seen as a boost to fastmoving closerange setups. Guess I will buy a vagabond then, Maybe I will ask the CCP team what setup they use on theirs... Seriously tho, wtf is ccp doing nerfing snipers. They are a valuable integral part of eve.
KenDoll	Posted - 2007.11.06 10:09:00 - [137] Edited by: KenDoll on 06/11/2007 10:11:49 Originally by: CCP Gangleri Edited by: CCP Gangleri on 31/10/2007 15:02:29 Scripts will be built from BPO's available on the market, there are no tech2 or named versions in this release. However one of the reasons scripts were chosen over other methods of splitting bonuses is that scripts allow for flexibility and upgradeability in the future. If the options were hardwired then it would be problematic to add things like the falloff range script someone suggested here. edit: the stuff in italics is incorrect, as it stands now scripts will be seeded as NPC goods great so another isk sink for the poorer pvp'rs to waste money on, this is absurd. the arazu better be getting some kind of boost after this or its a worthless piece of junk that will cost more to run for less effectivness (damps of course), do you folks in the dev team really think about any of these "changes" carefully?
TZeer BURN EDEN	Posted - 2007.11.06 12:19:00 - [138] Another thing. A CCP official stated on SISI that this change would make it easier for people getting hit by damps to counter them.... Wrong!! Before this there was actually no need to put more then 3-4 damps on a target.... Now there is. So basically a single player being damped by 2 other players using 3 damps each, would need 6 sensor boosters to try and counter, 3 for locking speed and 3 for range. Another thing, all modules git hit with a 50% reduction, except damps. Who got hit in the nuts. And artillery who already have problems tracking will have even bigger problems. So CCP what if you didnt cut everything in half except damps? Example: -Damps get the 50% cut instead of the omgwtf nerf they got now. -All other modules get increased to their TQ value. Now you make scripts that will make damps go up to their TQ value, but it works the same way, one stat goes up, other one goes down. All other modules get scripts, but with smaller bonuses and smaller nerfs. T2 Sensor booster will be able to boost to 75% for example but only give you 30% loocking speed bonus. 1: You nerf the damps, but not as much as making them useless. 2: You dont make sniping ****! 3: Intys and other fastmovers wont be immune to snipers 4: You dont need 9000 midslots. 5: And you wont need to rebalance every ship that that this affects: Munin, eagle, stealth bombers, black ops, all long range BS, tracking on different guns ( artillery ) and so on. If someone see a negative thing with this proposal, please say so.
Zakru Anul GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.06 12:57:00 - [139] I like too see the scripts made worthless, like Civ guns on newb ships. with the same trick they do. if you repack a Rookie ship and put it back whole you get new basic miner and civ gun. the scripts ( outside Tech 2 and so) should be the same. i repack a Sensor booster and put it back on ship 2 scripts should pop up in it. and i pick the one i want. lets not give us anymore empire crap too haul around. the nerfs too that hurts bad already.
Veng3ance Prophets Of a Damned Universe	Posted - 2007.11.06 16:17:00 - [140] Edited by: Veng3ance on 06/11/2007 16:22:03 So wheres our Dev Blog? Personally, I want to see the rest of the community tear this change apart. It is terribly thought out, and should not be force fed to us after some 3 week rushed testing period. You wanted to Nerf Sensor damps, but you nerfed them so hard you ended up nerfing 5 other modules just to make up the difference. TAKE SMALL STEPS. How the HELL do you "balance" anything by throwing around HUGE changes to multiple modules simultaneously? Now you have to go back and "balance" a bunch of different ships when originally all you set out to do was balance damps! WTF I just don't see the logic.
TZeer BURN EDEN	Posted - 2007.11.06 16:56:00 - [141] You also need to turn off your module to change scripts. Good luck trying to turn off module, change script and then activate again during lagfight.
Joplin Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2007.11.06 18:49:00 - [142] Edited by: Joplin on 06/11/2007 18:51:29 Originally by: Turin You are ruining this awesome game. I Implore you. Stop. Stop now. This nerf is way overboard, if things keep gettin nerfed like this because of ppl whining or w/e, once Elite Online is released both my accounts walk
Kitia STK Scientific Black-Out	Posted - 2007.11.06 19:11:00 - [143] Originally by: Sever Aldaria I was under the impression that if you put a script on a damp or track then that scripted attribute will be brought up to the level of that attribute as is now while the non-scripted attribute will be 0. If this was the idea then the numbers need reworking because a scripted attribute is not brought up to its old level. If the idea was to make it so that even if you use a script and the scripted attribute isn't brought up to the current level, then my question is why nerf all attributes (when scripted) evenly across the board on every 2 bonus module? Yes you are correct, the script does not bring the modules single attribute up to previous levels as they are on TQ at the moment. Kit
Nian Banks Minmatar Berserkers of Aesir	Posted - 2007.11.06 19:37:00 - [144] Originally by: Joplin Edited by: Joplin on 06/11/2007 18:51:29 Originally by: Turin You are ruining this awesome game. I Implore you. Stop. Stop now. This nerf is way overboard, if things keep gettin nerfed like this because of ppl whining or w/e, once Elite Online is released both my accounts walk Mate, once David Braben gets his game company into gear and makes Elite Online, I just can't bring myself to not move to it. There is 0% chance of it not been superior, hes the godfather of space opera games and has had 13 years to come up with new ideas, frontier took 7 years to produce, looking at it, EvE doesn't look all that innovative, I only play it because there isn't an Elite Online yet. Anyway nerf away, guess I should start to practice PvPing in a shuttle. Though it will be slower as they will be nerfed also.
Joplin Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2007.11.06 20:06:00 - [145] Edited by: Joplin on 06/11/2007 20:13:49 Edited by: Joplin on 06/11/2007 20:09:39 yer mate Elite online when it eventually gets released, will set the standard for spaceship mmo's the way things keep getting nerfed in eve is getting stupid tbh, ppl get ganked they ***** on forums about it, more ppl join in the whine and b4 u know it some stupid and ill thought out nerf is announced, lol whats next ? nerf hi sp chars's as their overpowered, tbh i wouldnt be surprised in the least if some idiotic change like that was proposed , it carries on going like this and sooner or later alot of ppl will start cancelling their subs. try sorting the lag/desyncs out first ccp, not add more changes witch mean more server calculations etc, which most likely will generate more lag.
Stakhanov The Good Fellas	Posted - 2007.11.07 09:19:00 - [146] Originally by: Veng3ance Edited by: Veng3ance on 06/11/2007 16:30:41 So wheres our Dev Blog? Personally, I want to see the rest of the community tear this change apart. It is terribly thought out, and should not be force fed to us after some 3 week rushed testing period. You wanted to Nerf Sensor damps, but you nerfed them so hard you ended up nerfing 5 other modules just to make up the difference. TAKE SMALL STEPS. How the HELL do you "balance" anything by throwing around HUGE changes to multiple modules simultaneously? Now you have to go back and "balance" a bunch of different ships when originally all you set out to do was balance damps! WTF I just don't see the logic. Personally, I think this is a HUGE nano-ship boost. And we will see the continued use and growth in the use of these kinds of ships AGAIN. (Less tracking for BS's and BC's, slower lock speed = nanoship can get into orbit before you can fire, lower range of ranged ships = nano can get to you faster. ETC ETC) Ontop of all this! Besides the balance perspective it is a BAD idea for other reasons. 1) Scripts as NPC items. Great, so now we can't build them, we have to wait for scripts to be traded throughout the universe or all run back to empire before we can use the same modules we were using before the patch. 2) Lag. Just another thing for your module to hang up on during lag spikes. 3) Learning curve, more complexity for the new guy. Please do not release scripts! /signed , /signed and /signed. Quoted for concise , absolute truth. Some patches were better than others , but the trinity implementation of "balance" and questionable T2 ships is a joke. Originally by: F'nog One does not simply log into Jita.
Eraggan Sadarr Phoenix Tribe	Posted - 2007.11.07 11:13:00 - [147] Originally by: PC5 I just dont like that part where i have to put new items into my cargo bay (scripts in cargo bay? wtf?) and dont forget about x things before undocking for 1-2 minutes fight. I would like to get more fun from fight than buying stuff and preparing. I have to agree on this one... more micromanagement Eve Market Scanner
Zirator Times of Ancar Pure.	Posted - 2007.11.07 11:19:00 - [148] Epic Fail by CCP or at least Gangleri for not posting in this topic anymore. There are a lot of good ideas and arguments brought up on this topic. But it will end up in CCP just pushing the nerf through and then boosting damp and disruptor ships in the next big content patch. /me points at : ECM nerf a "long" time ago /me points at : ECM ship strength bonus boost that is currently on testserver
Phyra Caldari NEXT Incorporated	Posted - 2007.11.07 13:08:00 - [149] Hiho We need scripts manufactured from T1 BPOs and those freely available from major NPC corps like all factions' research corps or all factions' navies. No the game does not get better by introduction of yet another npc input. No the game does not get more interesting by forced logistic runs. No the game does not get more interesting by giving stuff obscure names (hint: add the word "script" at the end of each name...) regards Phyra Where is the 111eleven smiley? I need it. is not enough.
s4xon Flashman Services	Posted - 2007.11.08 00:15:00 - [150] I won't say much as it's already been said and I wouldn't get listened to anyway.... But this is one 4 year vet that will be hanging up his boots for good once this comes in. Ahhhh RL beckons it was bound to happen one day. Someone mentioned this will hurt the casual player, that's exactly what I am and would have continued to be for a few more years..... now it's just not gonna be worth the money each month for me or other niche players like me; Players that have put years of skill training into being able to perform niche roles and make a difference no matter how small that might be. I guess if I was one for joining in a blob and sitting in some lagfest each night as "just another number" then i could go on playing....but that kinda thing just doesn't appeal to me, or any of the casual players I know. I guess I should thank CCP for giving me my life back , the Mrs will be very pleased indeed!! So, thanks CCP .... and way to turn an interesting and rich game into a bland and predictable waste of time. WOW anyone? I never played it but anything has to be better than this

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: 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.