| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 36 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 33 post(s) |
Kaivaja
State War Academy
   |
Posted - 2008.09.01 11:51:00 -
[181]
 Originally by: Braaage
I suspect the trio of concord ships are 1 BS for the agressing pilot and 2 cruisers to jame the hell and kill any drones and if you don't use drones the cruisers will set about you as well.
You underestimate the level of Concorde technology. Concorde will simply disable all aggressing player drones. No need to jam them. |
Darius III
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 11:53:00 -
[182]
When declining a second mission without waiting out the 4 hour period, the warning message will now correctly state that a standing loss will affect both the Agent and his/her Corporation and Faction.
Are you serious? I have declined so many missions over last few months, thinking "It is only this agent-why would I care if I go to 7.9 instead of 8.0 with this one guy?"
Now I find i have been taking standing hits with their corp and faction the whole time?
I dont guess I will get any of it back via petition? I honestly cant believe that I have taken many, many hits to the faction status that I worked very hard to improve, because you have left some vague message out there for so very long. Words cannot describe the overwhelming feeling of abandonment and betrayal that I feel at this moment. Really. |
Hertford
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 12:28:00 -
[183]
Edited by: Hertford on 01/09/2008 12:28:29
Originally by: CCP Explorer
Originally by: Nyphur
I see that standing hits for killing npc corp members have been removed.
This entry has been corrected, the standings hit is only removed if the killing occurs in 0.0.
Right, that's a good change. One I suggested/bug reported over a year ago, because of people using npc corp alts to scout 0.0 space resulted in some rather trashed standings.
So, as to my previous post in this thread, is there going to be any avenue of recompense/repair for those of us with -6 standings to our own starting NPC corp?  |
Cpt Branko
Surge.
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 12:32:00 -
[184]
I find a certain part of the patch notes unclear (and potentially disturbing):
"It is also worthwhile noting that once you have been naughty enough to warrant a security status of below or equal to -5.0, you will be considered an outlaw and whenever you attack someone in a low security system you will become criminally flagged, as long as your target has a security status above -5.0. The table below shows the minimum security standing required to be able to enter a solar system"
Does this mean that agression rules have changed so that:
(a) attacking war targets as a outlaw makes you criminally flagged?
(b) attacking people who agressed you first makes you criminally flagged?
(c) attacking people who stole from you makes you criminally flagged?
Or the notes were just carelessly written? |
Lothris Andastar
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 12:52:00 -
[185]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
I find a certain part of the patch notes unclear (and potentially disturbing):
"It is also worthwhile noting that once you have been naughty enough to warrant a security status of below or equal to -5.0, you will be considered an outlaw and whenever you attack someone in a low security system you will become criminally flagged, as long as your target has a security status above -5.0. The table below shows the minimum security standing required to be able to enter a solar system"
Does this mean that agression rules have changed so that:
(a) attacking war targets as a outlaw makes you criminally flagged?
(b) attacking people who agressed you first makes you criminally flagged?
(c) attacking people who stole from you makes you criminally flagged?
Or the notes were just carelessly written?
No You just fail at reading.
It means you become criminally flagged for firing at non outlaws, whereas pirates with sec below -5 can now pewpew as much as they want. |
Nyphur
Pillowsoft
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 13:27:00 -
[186]
Originally by: CCP Explorer
Originally by: Nyphur
I see that standing hits for killing npc corp members have been removed.
This entry has been corrected, the standings hit is only removed if the killing occurs in 0.0.
Quote:
Also this: "Militia office icon is only displayed if user is signed up for Factional Warfare."
This entry remains to be corrected, there are changes but not this change.
Good stuff. I also appreciate getting a reply, thanks. Makes a nice change to see questions being answered in these threads :) |
Essque
Starlancers
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 13:34:00 -
[187]
5-6 more patches like this one and EVE might make it out of beta. who knows? |
Sergeant Spot
Black Eclipse Corp
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 13:54:00 -
[188]
Originally by: Ancy Denaries
Originally by: animal man
Drones are now affected by all forms of ECM jamming.
So i take it now if you lose target your drones will stop fighting now aswell? Where as they use to remain engaged?
Does ECM really need more boosting?
No. It does however mean that if you lock on a drone and ECM it, it will have a chance to be jammed just like any other ship. Drones may also be "jammed" by the ECM burst, which is currently not the case. Drones are currently "immune" to any ewar.
ECM Burst "might" become an extremely effective anti-drone fitting, depending how this all plays out once the patch is out. At least against drones that orbit within its range.
|
Ethidium Bromide
ZEALOT WARRIORS AGAINST TERRORISTS
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 14:29:00 -
[189]
Good work CCP!
No! Great work!
Did QA have the tranqulizers replaced with coffee? |
James Kavourias
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 16:19:00 -
[190]
When 600 ships are pew pew'ing in Zero Zero, offline Jita and shove all the power to that constellation.
kthxbi
J |
|
|
Gartanus
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 17:03:00 -
[191]
I am really liking the new fixes. Hope all goes well with the deployment. Just in case tho, I have set a 21 day skill  |
|
CCP Explorer
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 17:14:00 -
[192]
Originally by: Gartanus
I am really liking the new fixes. Hope all goes well with the deployment. Just in case tho, I have set a 21 day skill
Why? What could possibly go wrong?  |
|
Treelox
Amarr
Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 17:17:00 -
[193]
Originally by: CCP Explorer
Originally by: Gartanus
I am really liking the new fixes. Hope all goes well with the deployment. Just in case tho, I have set a 21 day skill
Why? What could possibly go wrong?
boot.ini...........anyone?????? |
Fastercart
Gallente
Ihatalo Heavy Industries
Ihatalo Cartel
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 17:38:00 -
[194]
Edited by: Fastercart on 01/09/2008 17:40:04
Originally by: CCP Explorer
Why? What could possibly go wrong?
You know better...
Edit: I fail at removing pyramid quotes. |
tzungtzu
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 18:30:00 -
[195]
Do we need to download the new patch ? |
Fennicus
Amarr
Heracles.
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 18:37:00 -
[196]
Originally by: tzungtzu
Do we need to download the new patch ?
Good news! It's a suppository! |
Daelin Blackleaf
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 18:55:00 -
[197]
It is a shame to see yet another nerf to drones even if it is a relatively small one and likely necessary one. They are however rapidly becoming something of joke outside of nano-ishtar's and Dominix's even on ships that use them as a major part of their DPS such as the Geddon and Mega.
Wasn't bandwidth supposed to allow us to carry more drones on our ships without messing with damage output? Why then are slow highly vulnerable drones on ships like the Mega not only much weaker after being skipped in the HP buff and affected by the shield regen nerf but also irreplaceable when lost.
Couldn't a little more drone bay space or drone survivability be added to such ships to allow them to operate a little longer in combat before their efficiency is drastically reduced? |
Leneerra
Minmatar
GenTech Consortium
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 19:29:00 -
[198]
Impressive list of fixes but there is one thing in there I am not happy with:
Corporations who are not involved with Factional Warfare will no longer show up as having active wars against any Militia.
So now player corps can dodge a wardec by going militia?
And why limit RP alliances from joining the fight and warring on some of the millitia's? Now they have to go pirate or dissolve their rp alliance participate it.
If you are so worried they are singling out specific corporations, then make the militias into alliances and allow people to declare on the entire militia.
What I consider even weirder is that corporations participating in FW can still declare on corporations in the same militia or the allied militia. |
|
CCP Navigator
C C P
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 19:46:00 -
[199]
Guys and girls,
We have updated the notes with some further clarifications and these shall be listed below, along with being updated in the OP.
I apologise that clarifications are being added so late, however, it is paramount that we keep you all informed and let you have the most up to date information whenever possible.
Please feel free to ask any questions and we shall respond as soon as we can 
1,An additional point has been added to Multiple changes have been made in standing hits for players who aggress a neutral player in High Security space. In addition to a significantly reduced CONCORD response time, players will receive a standings hit based on the security rating of a system in which the attack takes place. The base value for aggression is now increased by a factor of 3. Base values are Aggression of 1.5%, Ship kill is 6% and a pod kill is 37.5%.Security penalties also depend on the difference between the security status of the aggressor and the victim.
2, "Drones are now affected by all forms of ECM jamming." This note has been removed. QA are clarifying the exact changes regarding this defect and we will supply information as soon as we have it.
3, ôSeveral fixes have been applied to the multi-select issue with drone windows which will affect all commands on selected multiple drones.ö. This single note replaces two other notes that were attempting to explain the multi select issues.
4, ôôSeveral Amarr stations have had sentry guns moved slightly in order to allow for a smoother undocking procedure.ö and ôGoudiyah has had its amount of sentry guns reduced from four to two.ö have booth been removed as they duplicate other Patch Notes which cover the same issues.
5, Amended a note to read ôThe Militia office icon is only displayed on the NeoCom if the user is signed up for Factional Warfare. If a player is not signed up for Factional Warfare, but is docked in a Factional Warfare station belonging to one of the four Militias, then the Militia office icon is displayed in the station services panel.ö
6, ôEVE API: CharacterID.xml.aspx will not accept characters with periods or dots in their name.ö has been added to Changes -> Miscellaneous.
7, ôAiding someone who is being attacked by the Faction Military now triggers a second spawn to aggress the person who is assisting with remote repairing.ö û will be moved to ôCriticalö
8, Changed a note to read ôUsing non-English characters in a Windows user name will no longer cause the Map browser to appear as white and blank.ö
9, ôBlank windows will no longer appear in the market search if the prefs.ini is amended from "decimal=." to "decimal=," will be added to Changes -> Markets & Contracts.
10, ôThe EVE Message "CompiledCodeUpgradeAvailable" will now display correctly as a question when a client hotfix is advertised.ö û Will be added to Fixes -> Miscellaneous.
11, ôA change has been made to fitting ships in space that means the agility attribute is applied immediately when adding modules or rigs that affect a ships agility.ö Will be added to Changes -> Ships.
12, ôSuperfluous tables and stored procedures have been removed as they were unnecessaryö will be replaced with ôSuperfluous stored procedures have been removed as they were unnecessary.ö This is due to the fact that no tables have been removed.
13, ôThieves appear as flashing red on the Overview even when "Show pilots with sec status -5" is turned off.ö has been rewritten and will now appear as: "The overview filter ôPilot has a security status below -5ö has been renamed to Pilot is an Outlaw to clarify the option. If this setting is filtered (unticked); then people who either have a sec status below -5 OR are criminally flagged to you will be filtered.ö
|
|
|
CCP Explorer
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 19:46:00 -
[200]
Originally by: Treelox
Originally by: CCP Explorer
Originally by: Gartanus
I am really liking the new fixes. Hope all goes well with the deployment. Just in case tho, I have set a 21 day skill
Why? What could possibly go wrong?
boot.ini...........anyone??????
No... I don't seem to have any, but I have a start.ini  |
|
|
|
|
CCP Explorer
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 19:53:00 -
[201]
Originally by: Leneerra
Impressive list of fixes but there is one thing in there I am not happy with:
Corporations who are not involved with Factional Warfare will no longer show up as having active wars against any Militia.
So now player corps can dodge a wardec by going militia?
No.
The issue was that if players involved in factional warfare looked up other corporations' wars from the "other wars" tab in the corporation window, then those other corporations would show up as being involved in factional warfare, even if they were not. This was a display issue only.
|
|
K04 78
Caldari
Against all Rules
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 19:58:00 -
[202]
lol who had to write the changelog xD poor one tbh |
Daelin Blackleaf
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 20:05:00 -
[203]
Originally by: News
Many clarifications, amendments and additions have been made to the Patch Notes as of 31 August 2008 at 05.00. It is advisable that all players familiarize themselves with the changes.
Nice one. I'm sure those who don't read or post here will appreciate it. |
Gartanus
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 20:14:00 -
[204]
Originally by: CCP Explorer
Originally by: Gartanus
I am really liking the new fixes. Hope all goes well with the deployment. Just in case tho, I have set a 21 day skill
Why? What could possibly go wrong?
I really meant that as a joke. Lol. I have really never had no problems with patchs.  |
Borun Tal
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 21:35:00 -
[205]
This may have been asked already, and I apologize in advance if I missed it in this thread, but are players required to d/l a new compilation of the client and install, or is this all server-side?
Thanks! |
|
CCP Explorer
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 22:05:00 -
[206]
Originally by: Borun Tal
This may have been asked already, and I apologize in advance if I missed it in this thread, but are players required to d/l a new compilation of the client and install, or is this all server-side?
When you start your client after the DT tomorrow (server-up is scheduled at 17:00 GMT) then the client will prompt you, download an update and apply it to your installation. |
|
Jei'son Bladesmith
The Storm Knights
The Cool Kids Club
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 01:14:00 -
[207]
/emote squeals in joy and snuggle****s CCP with love  |
Malastat
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 01:58:00 -
[208]
The Concord changes make Concord infinitely more powerful than any player or navy force in high sec space.
This is a very sterilizing artificial game mechanic - bad form.
If anything, Concord response should be moderated, with an eventual overwhelming response of force.
|
Daelin Blackleaf
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 03:20:00 -
[209]
Originally by: Patch Notes
You can now Assign a shortcut to the F-keys with any combination of Ctrl, Alt, Shift, or none of those modifiers. As an example: F9, Ctrl+F9, Alt+F9, Shift+F9, Ctrl+Alt+F9, Ctrl+Shift+F9, Alt+Shift+F9, Ctrl+Alt+Shift+F9 are all possible. You can also assign a shortcut to alphanumeric keys with appropriate restrictions. They must include one of Ctrl, Alt and Shift, and if Shift is used then Ctrl or Alt must be used as well as an example As an example: Ctrl+B, Alt+B, Ctrl+Alt+B, Ctrl+Shift+B, Alt+Shift+B, Ctrl+Alt+Shift+B are all possible but B and Shift+B are not.
Awesomesauce. <3 |
Katana Seiko
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 04:56:00 -
[210]
Umm... Is it patch-related that all character pictures seem to be broken on the forums? |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 36 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |