Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
Jilly Serkov
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 12:39:00 -
[151]
Originally by: Veng3ance Edited by: Veng3ance on 15/04/2008 23:33:52 Edited by: Veng3ance on 15/04/2008 23:29:23
Originally by: CCP Wrangler This has been added to the patch notes:
- NPC corporations will no longer be selling shuttles.
I understand the economics, but why guys, you could have just doubled the NPC cost of shuttles, or lowered the refine amount.
You really think making shuttles double cost would make or lose anyone a fortune? I HIGHLY doubt anyone has that many shuttles.
Compare this to the vast inconvenience of not having shuttles in NPC stations anymore.
Also, you have not removed the cap from trit, you just moved it to a different item so whatever.
EDIT: If this was any other NPC good I wouldn't care, but shuttles are insanely useful and sometimes needed in totally obscure places where no one would ever seed a market. So honestly this change just plain sucks.
EDIT #2: Also "the deed is done" , you guys have a downtime EVERY DAY. Re-seed them LOL.
For this bit read "get a BPO and go create a market". Once you have the attention of local manufacturers from ripping ppl off for shuttles at a mil apiece, competition will resettle the price. I see no problem here, only opportunity |
Nekopyat
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 15:22:00 -
[152]
Originally by: Kolmogorow
Could be reducing the volume of packaged shuttles be a means to compensate this downside so that a shuttle can be easily carried in the cargohold - at least for many ship types?
This really needs to be done now, but I am guessing they will not since that would raise the problem of 'build shuttle->move shuttle->reprocess' that CCP addressed with increasing module sizes.
*sigh*
They could at least add a 'shuttle bay' to ships though. It always seemed kinda strange that these hulking warships don't have room for even a single 'local errands' shuttle in them. That way people wouldn't use shuttles to move around ore but one could still carry a single ship with them.
Hrmm.. maybe add a small hanger (maintance bays were they called?) to every ship larger then a cruiser? just big enough to fit a single shuttle?
|
Melody Elvisdottir
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 15:26:00 -
[153]
not sure if this is a pre trinity bug, but auto targeting system 1 does nothing, no auto targeting, nor max locked targets bonus...
|
Nethras
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 18:00:00 -
[154]
Originally by: Nekopyat This [reducing packaged shuttle volume] really needs to be done now, but I am guessing they will not since that would raise the problem of 'build shuttle->move shuttle->reprocess' that CCP addressed with increasing module sizes.
Unless the item database has outdated information on shuttles (doubtful), shuttles contain 2500 trit and no other minerals, which takes up 25 m3 - that should mean that any packaged size for shuttles that is at least 25 m3 won't present a way to compress trit for transportation in a normal cargo hold... hmm, ugh, do ship maintainence bays on carriers present a problem here? I don't know how well you can pack trit into that space currently.
|
0100101001000011
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 18:04:00 -
[155]
Removing NPC shuttles is exactly the same crap as the changes of ore compression. Instead of changing the price or the ammount of trit which would only affect the ones who exploit this, the shuttles are removed completely which affects everyone who gets stuck on a station far out... This is the second time I get hit by a major nerf just because industrials exploit some game mechanics. Maybe I should start making their life harder too?
|
Eirlie
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 23:44:00 -
[156]
Originally by: 0100101001000011 Removing NPC shuttles is exactly the same crap as the changes of ore compression. Instead of changing the price or the ammount of trit which would only affect the ones who exploit this, the shuttles are removed completely which affects everyone who gets stuck on a station far out... This is the second time I get hit by a major nerf just because industrials exploit some game mechanics. Maybe I should start making their life harder too?
To recap the thread, you're never going to be stuck anywhere because: - If you don't want to fly in your current ship, you can fly in your pod. - If you don't have a current ship, you're automatically provided with a noob ship. |
0100101001000011
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 00:17:00 -
[157]
Originally by: Eirlie
Originally by: 0100101001000011 To recap the thread, you're never going to be stuck anywhere because: - If you don't want to fly in your current ship, you can fly in your pod. - If you don't have a current ship, you're automatically provided with a noob ship.
Yep, and flying in low sec in my egg or the slow noob ship is so much better than in a shuttle, or isn't it? Call it what you will, but to me it's just another stupid nerf. And as a consequence I will probably stay inside the empire where I at least won't get shot fun. |
Alcair Dovienya
TheDoctorIsIn
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 04:20:00 -
[158]
The 1.2 patch has completely ruined my installation on my MacBook. I patched from a clean install (download from a fortnight ago) and now I just get a black screen and background music when I run eve.
Next step will be to re-download the new client and see if that will run.
:( |
Alcair Dovienya
TheDoctorIsIn
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 06:44:00 -
[159]
Originally by: Alcair Dovienya Next step will be to re-download the new client and see if that will run.
Nope: clean install from a fresh download gets me nada. *baby Jesus is crying* |
Nekopyat
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 14:39:00 -
[160]
Originally by: Nethras
Unless the item database has outdated information on shuttles (doubtful), shuttles contain 2500 trit and no other minerals, which takes up 25 m3 - that should mean that any packaged size for shuttles that is at least 25 m3 won't present a way to compress trit for transportation in a normal cargo hold... hmm, ugh, do ship maintainence bays on carriers present a problem here? I don't know how well you can pack trit into that space currently.
25m3 for a shuttle sounds fair. That would satisify the need to carry around a 'local errand runabout' type ship.
newbie frigates won't fit the bill since you can't repackage them and thus can't carry them with you. Sure you could generate one but that seems like a bit of a hack and is pretty unrealistic/unelegent. |
|
Anatal Klep
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 16:22:00 -
[161]
The Bug Handler filter is not working. I have been submitting BRs for weeks since the 1.1 patch that contain large amounts of diagnostic information on the graphics resets, client crashes, and system lockups that having been plaguing myself and many other players (see this thread, the Windows blog, etc.). Not one has made it to the developers.
The game is currently very nearly unplayable if one is a trader because there is clearly a thread problem in the Market. I provide the following diagnostics as a last hope that something will be done before I have to quit the game.
(1) It happens for both Windows Vista and XP but seems to be worse for Vista. (2) Most (but not all) players with simlar problems are using NVIDIA 8700 or 8800 cards with current drivers, DirectX10, and passing DxDiag. (3) Running dual monitors or an external monitor from a laptop seem to drastically increase the frequency. (4) Premium graphics makes no difference. (5) The problem started with the 1.1 patch; I and others never had the problem prior to that. In 1.1 there were several failure modes like frequent graphics card resets. (6) With 1.2 the frequency increased but the nature of the problem narrowed to basically one manifestation. The graphics card would lock up and need to be reset. The EVE client stops responding, evidently due to the card lockup. Vista tries to announce EVE is not responding, but any interaction with the UI (e.g., to copy diagnostic information) causes a system lockup that requires a cold reboot. Sometimes Vista never gets a chance to announce the EVE problem and locks up immediately (All log server files are lost.) (7) The problem is almost always preceded by flakiness in the Market display that is manifested by one or more of the following: (7A) The Market does not respond to clicks and has to be closed and re-opened to work properly. (7B) When viewing Price History and selecting a new item, the Price History title does not change even though the prices do for a new selection. (7C) After alternating Details and Price History for different items, when selecting Price History the history displayed is for the last item examined, not the current one. When any of these occur a crash is imminent (within 10 mins and usually within 5 mins). But occassionally there will be a crash without any of these pre-symptoms, usually when the Market has high lag (Buy orders are displayed >5 seconds after Sell orders). (9) Crashes are much more frequent if the market is open when jumping, docking, or warping. Selecting an item just as one warps or jumps increases the crash probability. (10) Fairly intense market activity is required to trigger a crash when just docked a station. One must be looking at lots of items, alternating Details and Price History, creating/modifying Buy/Sell orders. (11) I have not encountered any crashes with 1.2 when I was running missions or other activities that did not involve the Market.
The BHs keep saying that the problem is not reproducible or they need log server files (which are not saved in the cold reboot). Ot is not reproducible because it seems fairly obvious that a thread in the market is either stepping on or being stepped on by another client thread. Since threads are inherently asynchronous there is no cookbook, mechanical way to reproduce the problem. So the crash can occur any time from 5 mins to 4 hours. But that is no excuse for not forwarding the diagnostic information to the developers.
[I sympathize because I have debugged 3MLOC device drivers with an Assembly debugger and no source listings. But with this much information and source listings it should be possible to make headway on the problem.]
|
Waterfowl Democracy
The Ministry of Indigenous Affairs GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.19 10:51:00 -
[162]
Several exploit issues have been fixed, making EVE a better world to live in for us all.
Still waiting on these to be released.
|
Talos Darkhart
Minmatar Republic University
|
Posted - 2008.04.19 11:23:00 -
[163]
So got to ask but removing the isk cap on Trit has get to have been the macro miners biggest wet dream? |
Kerfira
University of Caille
|
Posted - 2008.04.19 15:50:00 -
[164]
Originally by: Talos Darkhart So got to ask but removing the isk cap on Trit has get to have been the macro miners biggest wet dream?
Removing the cap is not magically going to make prices rise. They'll only rise if market conditions dictate it. Before the removal of the cap the market was artificially constricted.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
|
Waterfowl Democracy
The Ministry of Indigenous Affairs GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 10:23:00 -
[165]
Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy Several exploit issues have been fixed, making EVE a better world to live in for us all.
Still waiting on these to be released.
Bumping this thread because they still haven't been released. Is there something that CCP doesn't want us to know?
|
Wadaya
Caldari Trailerpark Industries
|
Posted - 2008.05.07 10:15:00 -
[166]
Originally by: CCP Explorer
Originally by: Dominatus Crispus Does anyone have any idea what was fixed when they where referring to:
EXPLOIT FIXES - Several exploit issues have been fixed, making EVE a better world to live in for us all.
I can't seem to find any details regarding anything that was "fixed"
We can only publish details on exploits when both the clusters, Tranquility and Serenity, have been updated.
Hi, it has been 3 weeks. Have you gotten around to doing this yet?
Wad
|
Letouk Mernel
|
Posted - 2008.05.07 18:10:00 -
[167]
They haven't fixed the overview issues either.
Damned features that they want to keep in despite the annoyances they cause!
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |