| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 .. 14 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 17 post(s) |
Cassandra B
   |
Posted - 2008.03.13 03:34:00 -
[361]
Well eve is FINALLY back online =/ those welcome pages are really unwelcoming
|
Draqun
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 03:48:00 -
[362]
 Originally by: Europol Agent918
Great..another patch that will help big corps.
Imagine this. You have a can anchored in a 0.0 sys. A big alliance corp camp the place 23/7..you loose a can with whatever is inside.
I realy dont see any corps doing that when they can just blow the darn thing out of space if they find it. . . or did you mean something else
---------------------------------------
First rule of playing EVE online
If your too paranoid to play Eve
your not paranoid enough to play Eve |
Mystified
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 03:58:00 -
[363]
I'm trying to figure out why you gave the Raptor another turret hardpoint (which, btw, is not on my raptor in the game) and took away 4 powergrid. Turrets take powergrid and the 30 powergrid on the Raptor was already very tight. I realize CCP has their reasons. I'm just hoping they will choose to share them.
Signature:
It's my Character and I will play it how I want. |
Xeliya
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 04:16:00 -
[364]
Edited by: Xeliya on 13/03/2008 04:17:31
The undock change was unneeded and stupid no offence.
Quote:
[23:34] <****> this leaving station at full speed though ****es me off though
[23:34] <****> i'm 140 km form the freggin station
You should have just turned the Jita station around and all the complaints would go away as that's the only place it is annoying.
I can't wait to undock a Carrier into a fight on the station at 700m/s and be out of remote rep range before I load. Or get a wonderful black screen undocking with hostiles around only to load when they warp in and I am 20km out of dock range already. Also makes warping off worse for big ships as we need to decrease our speed which takes a long time before we align.
|
Paranoid Dreamszs
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 04:49:00 -
[365]
Lets see if I can post the first glitch of the many I am sure will follow. Cant get info on the unonwned skill books in character page. Like if i am able train but dont own the skill book you cant get info on the skill. Have to go to market to search the skill then get info. Nice way to lag the server even more. WOnder why there still has yet to be a patch or fix or something applied to address Jita? Guess all the hours your stuck in there means less lag other places for the other players....No fix needed then to lag.
Hmm an I wonder why the patch wasnt thoroughly hammered on a test setup to see the bug that delayed startup....Guess CCP got us again as we all payed for that day of seeing "Incompatible Protocal" not to mention the millions of SP lost since most people scheduled skills for the time posted..More ways to keep us sitting and paying....
Blah Blah Blah.another expample of mis management and planning.
Sorry my vent for the nearly 10 hours waiting to play and lost SP. |
DaemonExodus
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 05:11:00 -
[366]
I have been playing EvE Online for over 3 months now and I have to say it is one of the worst companies at properly deploying patches, each one I have seen thus far has had "problems, delays, setbacks"
|
dssouleater
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 05:37:00 -
[367]
Great patch ! now my overview wont stay in place , the normal APOC has better bonuses than the navy version! i do like the undock tho' itll make life more interesting in times of war!
|
Sylthi
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 06:50:00 -
[368]
I have to admit that I thought CCP had topped most politicians ability/willingness to lie with the line: "and not a single 'nerf'."
But, then, I got to thinking about it. I suppose, if you look at it the way most of the "balancing" devs look at the world (i.e. twisted, upside-down, and back-to-front) it is actually the truth. Think about it. There is in fact "not a SINGLE nerf", there are in fact, MULTIPLE nerfs. You could actually call each and every ship resist nerf its own individual nerf. So, from their perspective, the twisted way they look at things, I can see how they think they actually told the truth.
Ok... Ok... Yeah, enough is enough. I have sarcastically dragged them over the coals enough I suppose. Bottom line: Devs, it's bad enough that you stealth nerfed a bunch of ships resists and tried to pass it off as a "boost", you don't have to make it worse by sitting there and lying about it. Call it whatever you want, no matter how you look at it, a ship's stat going DOWN is a NERF; no matter how it affects anyone else who isn't flying that ship. Hope that clears that up for everybody.
Final Thoughts on the Patch: Devs: Good job on the few actual boosts that made it past the ôbalancingö hack job. I hope the people that are affected by them enjoy the moderate benefits that they offer. Great job on the few LONG STANDING bugs you finally got around to fixing. Bad job on creating more bugs while fixing the old ones; but nothing new there I guess. Most of the new features look really cool, thanks for them. They will look even better when they are all working right. Enough with the nerfbat already, this WAS supposed to be THE ôboostö patch after all. DonÆt worry too much about the massively extended DT from what was announced. Shyte happens. I work in IT, I know. It just seems that it ALWAYS happens to you guys. Funny that. And, on a final thought; how come the ôboostsö didnÆt carry through to faction ships, but the NERFS did??!!?? I.E. The Apoc boosts to grid and range didnÆt carry to the Navy Apoc. BUT, the resist nerfs to the Raven DID carry to the Navy Raven. I guess some ôboostsö are just ôboostierö than others, huh? Lords, what a crock!
Out.
*
* |
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 06:58:00 -
[369]
ôThe resolution filtering is as follows: We start with the full list of available resolutions. Then all resolutions where either the width < 1024 or the height < 768 (was 600, that is the change made) are removed.ö
Then how come the resolutions I use above < 1024 or the height < 768 have been removed? They have been in game 4 years and are the 5th most used resolution. Yet no longer in game. I cannot play eve anymore.
Passive shield tanking guide click here |
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 07:32:00 -
[370]
Edited by: Pottsey on 13/03/2008 07:32:44
Can everyone please sign my petition to get resolution added back to the game. I want to play Eve again.
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=709805
Passive shield tanking guide click here |
|
|
Ethan Joznin
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 09:18:00 -
[371]
My first impression of the patch: 
My impression after I started looking at my stuff: 
First of all, can someone explain how lowering the explosive resists on the Raven and CNR are NOT nerfs?
Also, I got a Caldari Navy Cruise Missile Launcher BPC from the loyalty store a couple of weeks ago and started training my manufacturing alt so she could manufacture them. I spent about 7 days training up to cruise missiles 1 (plus a 20M skill implant to speed things along) only to find today, as I finished up the list of skills to manufacture the launchers, that I was missing Mechanical Engineering? WTF?! I open the bpc and, sure enough, no cruise missile lvl 1 needed any longer and instead I have to buy a 10M skill book
So, I loose a week of training and 30M isk because of the f-ing patch (if I hadn't needed cruise missiles, a perception implant really wouldn't speed up training for mechanical engineering would it) ? Changing skill requirements is very frustrating; precious skill training just wasted because dev's decided to make a requirement change. I'm going to start training for a marauder soon which means a full month to take battleship to level 5. How happy am I going to be after the next patch if you've changed the requirement to battleship level 4? I'll tell you how happy I'm going to be, happy enough to cancel both my accounts.
|
Diabolyc
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 09:51:00 -
[372]
Originally by: DaemonExodus
I have been playing EvE Online for over 3 months now and I have to say it is one of the worst companies at properly deploying patches, each one I have seen thus far has had "problems, delays, setbacks"
maybe all complains what i read is true but not this one... try to play WoW and you are off every 14 days for more then 1 day. ofc game info say "only few hours". so pls, try to play other games and then you can say what game is worst.
|
Dagas Hunter
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 11:20:00 -
[373]
Why the lies CCP? It was said in the interview quite clearly that this would be a boost patch that only boosted things and that it would be NO nerfs at all and still you nerf the resistance on shields and armor! If you are going to nerf things than don't say that the patch will be nerf free because that is just lying!
|
Braaage
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 12:21:00 -
[374]
Originally by: Naomi Wildfire
Noone talking about the "undocking thing"?
I think it will kill many many players in zerospace. Get a system to lag (how difficult is this these days?) and see everyone undocking fly straight away from the station.
Well, before DT I undocked, came out the station at full speed (in a recon) left it like that until I came to a stop and was still 0km from the station so could re-dock straight away.
It may be that CCP made bigger the docking range to compensate, I'm not for one minute suggesting all stations will be like this, but at least try it before replying.
--
eve-guides.com
All about POSs, Outposts, Exploration, Mining, Invention, EVE Database + much more!! |
Lunch Money
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 12:45:00 -
[375]
One thing which wasnt mention in patch notes. Now to open cyno your speed need to be 500m/s or less
which sucks, becouse its harder to get into forcefield after opening cyno (but still possbile). so why CCP implemented that??? and why no mention about it??????
Message: 'VelocityTooHighToActivate'<br>Args: {'yourVelocity': 2726, 'moduleName': (4, 21096), 'velocityLimit': 500}
|
Malachon Draco
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 12:59:00 -
[376]
Originally by: Lunch Money
One thing which wasnt mention in patch notes. Now to open cyno your speed need to be 500m/s or less
which sucks, becouse its harder to get into forcefield after opening cyno (but still possbile). so why CCP implemented that??? and why no mention about it??????
Message: 'VelocityTooHighToActivate'<br>Args: {'yourVelocity': 2726, 'moduleName': (4, 21096), 'velocityLimit': 500}
My guess they implemented it exactly for that reason, to make it harder/impossible to open a cyno outside the forcefield and have the ship inside.
|
Braaage
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 13:30:00 -
[377]
I would hazard a guess that this is one of the exploits not yet listed. You should not be able to do that.
--
eve-guides.com
All about POSs, Outposts, Exploration, Mining, Invention, EVE Database + much more!! |
FinalFlash84
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 15:15:00 -
[378]
Originally by: Malachon Draco
Originally by: Lunch Money
One thing which wasnt mention in patch notes. Now to open cyno your speed need to be 500m/s or less
which sucks, becouse its harder to get into forcefield after opening cyno (but still possbile). so why CCP implemented that??? and why no mention about it??????
Message: 'VelocityTooHighToActivate'<br>Args: {'yourVelocity': 2726, 'moduleName': (4, 21096), 'velocityLimit': 500}
My guess they implemented it exactly for that reason, to make it harder/impossible to open a cyno outside the forcefield and have the ship inside.
Originally by: Patch Notes
Jumping a ship to the inside of a Control Tower force field will now cause the ship to be pushed outside the force field.
|
Bolavaz
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 15:19:00 -
[379]
Not sure if any one has already mentioned this but I just couldn't sit and read all 13 pages of this post. But I noticed that after I installed the new build on my Vista Ultimate machine, every time I go to exit the game the application has a problem exiting the game. Windows pops up a message asking if I wanted to close the program.
|
Vorgx
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 15:31:00 -
[380]
so now the nighthawk tank is broke and it didnt receive any damage boost because is already crap and only get kinetic bonus, the vulture passive tanked got broke and its damage is crap as usual, raven is the same crap and more with -10% less explosive resistance.
amazing that the zealot receive one more turret and every ship gets 10% less em, thats a good boost .......so lets all fly ammar now of maybe minmatar and remove the other 2 crappy races.....
is the eagle working? seems to be that i will need to sell all that crapy ships and start to train minmatar or ammar for another 3 years so i can pvp?
you really need to hire people who thinks whats "balancing"
|
|
|
Braaage
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 16:30:00 -
[381]
Quote:
Trinity 1.1: Boost Patch is being deployed, filled with helpful and thrilling modifications, and not a single 'nerf'.
You seriously need to change that wording, halving megacyte dropped from glossy compound cannot be described as anything else other than a nerf and it's not the only thing.
--
eve-guides.com
All about POSs, Outposts, Exploration, Mining, Invention, EVE Database + much more!! |
Tafkas Zarathustra
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 16:47:00 -
[382]
Edited by: Tafkas Zarathustra on 13/03/2008 16:48:12
Dont know if its been posted already, but doesnt hurt to post it again:
If the new "help" windows annoy you as much as they annoy me, press ESC in game, go to GENERAL SETTINGS, look for 3rd checkbox in first column, says "Display Welcome Pages", uncheck that... bye annoyance...
Hope it helps. Has anyone with graphic glitches tried clearing cache?
Of all the things I lost, I miss my mind the most.
- Ozzy Osbourne quoting Mark Twain (ha!) |
Ayserin
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 16:49:00 -
[383]
The 24 hour wait was disappointing, but I suppose necessary. During the downtime, I watched the dev vids, and was happy to see there were 'no nerfs.' Yet, I log in to find my Gallente ships have, in fact, been nerfed. I felt lied to ...
Why would the dev's decide to take 10% armor EM resist and 10% of my shield explosive resist away from me -- across the board? How you can couch this as anything but a nerf is beyond me. It is clearly a nerf, no matter what pretty words you use to describe it. This will effect solo missions in my Myrmadon, especially the lvl 4s I could do in that boat. It will effect me also in pvp and makes Ammar and Minmatar ships more powerful when they face me in combat. Was Gallente -that- overpowered or did those races really need that 'boost'?
I'm relatively new to this community and hope my comments don't come off as pompous, but I just don't like dev teams not telling me the truth about a patch.
Overall, I love your game.
Cheers.
|
Revolution Rising
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 17:23:00 -
[384]
api fix please
-_-
VRR Homepage
http://ineve.net/skills/character.php?charID=MzY5NDU1Nzky Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.[/url]
|
Boogerbuster
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 17:25:00 -
[385]
I had a serious FPS drop from 50ish to 20ish. I changed all the settings that got wiped during the patch and got back up to over 30. This makes the game a lot less playable for me. What is causing this and will it be fixed?
|
Tafkas Zarathustra
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 17:35:00 -
[386]
Edited by: Tafkas Zarathustra on 13/03/2008 17:36:26
Guess it's the "glass half full" type of gimmick, which they tried to spin a bit. Cannot blame them, others do it without any shame, on a daily basis (aka sugar coating nerfs). One race's boost is another race's nerf in any game. Gallente were kinda left out of the boost-give-away due to the forum uprising generated by the proposed Deimos changes. And it's only normal they feel left out. So were Minmatar, actually, but they dont need a boost(er), they make their own and steal your ship.
Quote:
Deimos
After a significant amount of testing with the changes to the Zealot, it became apparent that the Deimos had problems compared to the other close range heavy assault ships. As the damage output is already the highest of all the HACs, we looked into boosting its defenses so it had a fighting chance. One of the main problems of actively repaired Deimos setups is the high energy requirement, so we have changed the slot layout so the Deimos can accommodate a capacitor booster.
Deimos:
Slots: 6/4/5 (+1 med, -1 low)
Capacitor capacity: 1625.0en (+250en)
Bonuses:
5% bonus to medium hybrid turret damage per Gallente Cruiser level (no change)
7.5% bonus to armor repair amount per Gallente Cruiser level (replaces the MWD capacitor penalty reduction)
The above mentioned changes to the Deimos and Zealot allow them to better compete on even term with other close range HACs, such as the Sacrilege.
Quote:
Update: Based on the feedback we have received on the Deimos changes, we have decided not to implement them and will instead keep an eye it's performance when the patch is released.
Probably users were right, cannot tell since I dont fly a Deimos, but CCP's wording leaves room for a future patch. And I am sure then all the other 3 races will cry "foul", saying Gallente is favoured... More fun reading material, I guess.
Of all the things I lost, I miss my mind the most.
- Ozzy Osbourne quoting Mark Twain (ha!) |
Soule Stirling
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 19:46:00 -
[387]
I cant believe the nerf you have done with regard to resist et. al.! In order to appease the few you nerf the many. And what was the copmment about no nerfing will be done. Call it what you want but its still nerfing. I have no problem with lasers getting stronger but i do have problem with my ships being weaker. Once agn i come back from a downtime to find my position i have worked hard to achieve has been nerfed by "the powers that be". How and in what way is this fair? I worked drone skills high and got nerfed by that. I worked armor resist high and got nerfed by that. IMO this "change" is ridiculous ,most of which was unneeded with the exception maybe of laser bonuses. Thank you for yet another let down.
|
Maldus NiKunni
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 20:53:00 -
[388]
Problem number 1) Patch notes say ice miner and ore miner graphics went back to classic look.....this is true but the ice miner lasers are suppossed to be blue, ore miners are red...........all ice miner lasers are now red.....please put back to blue.
Problem number 2) For those of use with dual core systems and running 2 accts there was no lag in alt tabbing between accts......now i get a black screen until i sit here clicking for 30 sec then i get my other acct......WTF?
I thought you guys run this on the test server to test this stuff...I guess the test server is a low version of tranquility as you always get stuff that dont work here.....use a full version of tranquility to test. Just a thought.
|
RangerXT
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 23:56:00 -
[389]
did the patch completely corrupt anyone else's client? and then you redownloaded the full client and that was corrupt too??? just wondering I'm not reading the entire thread....
|
Laendra
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 02:09:00 -
[390]
wow, looks like another "quality" patch CCP. 
-------------------
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 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 |