EVE Search - New Dev Blog: When Evolution Leaps Forward

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

New Dev Blog: When Evolution Leaps Forward

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 6 post(s)
Tesal	Posted - 2009.01.30 21:23:00 - [211] One of the biggest influences on logistics is going to be the AI. If the AI kills all the drones and nuets/scrams/jams the BS and support and it is really difficult, people will just get carriers and rat in an Onieros or something insane like that, repping all the fighters and following along in an Orca to scoop the loot and salvage. Maybe they might just blob the NPC's, thats a tried and true method. The AI type is going to determine the kind of infrastructure you need to set up to kill that AI. This will make wormholes a place for people who can bring the "heavy iron" if the NPC's are too difficult or annoying. The wormhole size will determine how much infrastructure you can bring in easily. If the infrastructure needed to kill the NPC's is greater than the number of ships that can enter the wormhole and carry that in, infrastructure will have to be staged over time, and either built on site, or hauled to the new wormhole gates as they respawn which could be anywhere in the known universe. This might make wormhole space a place where people who are willing to lay down infrastructure will be the only ones to move into it. Ironically, this could make Empire wormholes the most expensive, difficult and dangerous to exploit because you won't be able to put down enough infrastructure/bring enough force to easily to exploit the space and defend yourself. Not only will you not be able to bring in support, but you will face constant attack from pirates who can trap you in the wormhole, camp it, bubble it and kill you in force. This could make wormholes completely useless for most empire dwellers. I think if CCP makes empire wormhole loot too crappy it won't be worth exploiting, it will be a novelty, with rewards similar to what we have now in low sec. Honestly, I expect very high losses from operating in an empire wormhole. Wormholes need to provide enough income to make up for those losses.
Marlenus Caldari Ironfleet Towing And Salvage Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service	Posted - 2009.01.30 21:58:00 - [212] Edited by: Marlenus on 30/01/2009 22:00:19 One thing I'm very curious to see is how hard it will be to scan down a wormhole entrance. If it's so easy that anybody with a probe launcher and the minimum skills to operate it can do it reliably in a few minutes, there's going to be a high degree of roaming through all the wormspace, vast though it may be. The security of "jump through the hole and hope nobody finds you very often" will be minimal. I don't really expect CCP to make it extremely hard to find the wormhole entrances, because that becomes a fun killer. You're lost in W-space, you know there's a hole somewhere because that's the rules, but you've been scanning for two hours without finding it? Ragequit time for a lot of people -- not for me, but I'm not normal -- and CCP won't go there routinely I don't think. What I'm hoping for is a compromise. I'm hoping wormholes are like exploration sites, with easy ones that come up fast on the probe results screen and hard ones having extremely low "signal strength" (or whatever the wormhole equivalent is) that take luck, skill, and patience to pin down. The idea being, that if you find one of the incredibly hard ones to find, you've got better odds of not being followed through it ten minutes later. Obviously it would make some gameplay sense for the difficulty of finding the hole to be scaled to the likely value of the hole. However, I'm not sure how to do this. One possibility: Making larger-mass-limit holes harder to find. (I'd need some mumbo-jumbo to explain that.) Or, how about make holes with longer duration limits harder to find? Because the short-duration ones are throwing off Hawking radiation as they get ready to deteriorate? In this scenario, the "signal strength" of the hole would go up as it has gone undiscovered for longer -- which would have two benefits. First, it makes some game design sense and minimizes the burden on the down-time cleanup routine for unfound holes; second, it neatly resolves a bunch of the meta-gaming problems with deliberately "using up" existing holes hoping for better ones. You'll get a new hole all right, but it's going to take you some HARD probing to find it, unless you're willing to wait a few hours or days until it starts spewing Hawking radiation that ups its "signal strength". And by then, you won't have many hours or a few days to plan your return expedition through the hole, assuming it takes you somewhere handy in Empire -- both because its duration is getting low and because a noisy hole in secure space will get quickly found by others who will consume its mass allocation. The final possibility, of course, is to key the ease of finding the hole to the sort of place (value-wise) it's linking to. I suppose clever designers could even work all three of those factors into the equation. It doesn't really matter -- but I do think it's hugely important that not all holes are created equal in the ease of finding them. ------------------ Ironfleet.com
Rex Lashar Amarr	Posted - 2009.01.30 22:33:00 - [213] Originally by: Bonny Lee baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaw You're not very bright if you've already forgotten the reason for this debate. You essentially flamed these four points on 0.0. Point one is mainly about the impact of NPC hunting on the mining profession. Your counter is to insist we're not discussing mining. Point two suggests adjustments to agenting missions could be made to balance out new bounty buffs. Your counter is to insist we're not discussing agent missions. Point three talks about the upcoming shift of static asteroid belts to the exploration system. Your counter is to insist we're not discussing exploration. This follows such exquisite remarks as: - NPC haulers spawns are insignificant. (even though they're a huge factor in capital production) - A boost of bad true-sec systems is needed. (even though exploration and agents violate this attribute) - Its not profitable to rat if BS have scramblers. (even though we've been there, done that) - I've never lived in low true-sec therefore I know nothing. (even though I have, before AND after 0.0 agents/exploration) Your strategy has shifted from saying ignorant things, to denying saying ignorant things. The amusing part then, is where you conclude by saying something ignorant: Originally by: Bonny Lee PS: For sure you can measure a systems worth by true-sec. Every system has a chance to have anomalys and explorations but if they have none, and there is no agent inside you look at moons, belts and rats. A -0.7 system with 10 belts is always better then a -0.3 system with 10 belts and nothing else. In your example you mention one looks at moons belts and rats in the absence of agents and exploration. Well, moons aren't determined by true-sec and even the highest end stuff can be found anywhere. NPCs are determined by true-sec, but they're also augmented by pirate sovereignty. A -0.3 True Power system in Stain is going to match or beat an unclaimed -0.7 system in Esoteria for spawns - especially when it comes to special spawns. In the last point, true-sec does mean the -0.7 will have better ore than -0.3. But only in the asteroid belts, and only for high end ore types. Not to say someone is gonna mine low ends, since they mostly come from loot and hauler spawns. And anyone serious about having an Arkonor/Bistot/Mercoxit mining op in 0.0 will do it at an exploration site which has no npcs and takes an hour or more to scan down. Even if that exploration site is in your hypothetical -0.3 system. The only time someone might choose belts over exploration is if they have a refinery outpost in the same system and there are no real hostiles nearby. Which further blows chunks out of your argument that true-sec is important and bad true-sec systems should be boosted. You take care now, space friend. If you want to pretend this never happened I will totally understand.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.01.30 22:57:00 - [214] Originally by: Aeo IV Frankly, I think trying to make w-space gang oriented is a bad idea, because most players won't ever go and do it, and it will ultimately benefit large corps the most. if you can't get 3 people together you fail. the wormholes will close if too many people go through, so you won't want a lot of people. this will let small corp compete with large ones.
Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2009.01.31 02:00:00 - [215] Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: Aeo IV Frankly, I think trying to make w-space gang oriented is a bad idea, because most players won't ever go and do it, and it will ultimately benefit large corps the most. if you can't get 3 people together you fail. the wormholes will close if too many people go through, so you won't want a lot of people. this will let small corp compete with large ones. Personally I think 3 to 5 people will be the optimal size for at least the lesser 0.0 w-space and lower with the devs hinting that the lowest quality high sec w-space will be soloable. For the top quality 0.0 w-space who knows whats guarding the really good stuff like a dyprosium moon or some uber exploration site. Then you might need to figure out how to get a larger group into the system.
Gaius Sejanus Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.01.31 02:01:00 - [216] A lot of the specific issues that might arise with wormholes will depend a great deal on specific implementation. Is W-space going to be like a shadow galaxy behind/underneath the "real" one? Do you enter a wormhole, and only access a single system with no stargates to anywhere else? Or are the wormhole areas constellation size (and, obviously, with stargates) ? region size? galaxy size? If this is just single systems, imagine going through into W-space, and having the wormhole timer close it 10 minutes later, and not appear again for another 2 weeks. Doesn't matter how much stuff there is to do in that one system...being completely deprived of normal space infrastructure is going to make this experience a vast pool of suck. Since you don't know when the wormhole will appear again, how many hundreds of probes will you go through hoping to find a new one? I know there has been mention of recalling probes for re-use, but is that infinite use of a single (set of) probe(s)? Or do they run out eventually? If they run out, then the possibility exists, no matter how many of them you bring, that through a combination of you not being online and wormhole randomness, that you just NEVER find a way out. You could seriously get completed stranded somewhere. Where's the fun/excitement/risk of being able to do...nothing? As for the "Waah, my drones will get shot"...it's easy to say when you can just go pick up more. What happens when you can't? And leaving W-space aside, how will this encourage people to ever use a drone ship in normal space when this behavior is extended to normal space? I know CCP has hated drones for a long time, but there are players who actually like them, and having an entire weapon system effectively negated (along with billions of skillpoints) is dirty pool.
Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2009.01.31 02:32:00 - [217] Originally by: Gaius Sejanus stuff. If you had read the other dev bog thread right above this one you would know that there is always a way out of a w-system. It might not lead to where you want but it will lead to somewhere. As far as drones you are going to have to micro them like you would in pvp and not just collect aggro from the room then send them out. This is ok becuase you will only be facing a few very powerful ai enabled rats at once instead of a swarm so just bring a buddy in a falcon to jam them all and have at it. Well that is if they are just as vulnerable to pvp tactics as player ships. Haven't got an answer to that question yet.
ollobrains2 Gallente New Eve Order Holdings	Posted - 2009.01.31 07:42:00 - [218] there remains 3 ancient races now think if they all get 2500 systems each in future expansions wold bring it up to 10000 wspace total that was discussed in the original blog on this so thinkg that will remain open i think a 30 min to 1 hour scan time for one pilot with reasonable skills would be ok in between sigs and anamolies
Deliceous Lone Star Joint Venture Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2009.01.31 07:47:00 - [219] I am interested to see the change of AI for large mining ops. Currently the formula is insert tank, get aggro and then bring in miners, then hauler. Kill belt, leave with miners, and hauler then leave with tank I mean it would be funny if rats would actively try and bring in a cheap haulers to steal stuff from your get cans "Crap, that rat ninja looted my ore" Or cycle though and attack haulers, or miners since for easier kills, making bringing in the 1 tank cut and paste routine a thing of the past. -No more AKF tanking for you. Have rats try and hunt you down after you run out of a belt Have some rats call in friends after a certain period of time Have some rats attempt extortion - NPC Convo button appears Pay 500,000 Isk to have NPC warp off (Yes) (no) get rather costly if this same rat keeps coming by every 30 mins Have rats actually set traps - leave hauler spawn at location once attacked it drops a Warp disruption Bubble and reinforcements arrive. Would be nice to have times when rats that you have good factions with will come by and rep you as you destroy their enemy. or for those really high standing come in as a large fleet while you are low in structure .... save you then ransom some you! Things like this would be nice as random things that happen. Would make the world of Eve more lively and interactive. Of course such things would provide lower reward than your standard rats as the reward is a breath of fresh air.
ollobrains2 Gallente New Eve Order Holdings	Posted - 2009.01.31 07:58:00 - [220] would just remove pvp then

Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2009.01.31 08:04:00 - [221] Originally by: Deliceous stuff The new ai will only effect mining ops in a w-system. All other rats except the officer spawns in 0.0 will stay the same. For now..
Carniflex Caldari StarHunt Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2009.01.31 09:37:00 - [222] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Anyway, I hope CCP have learned from their biggest mistakes, like the drone regions etc. In my opinion the biggest mistake was T2 BPO distribution thru lottery system. Mineral market was on it's way downward before drone regions already, altho yeah, drone regions were the last straw breaking the donkey. And I ahve to also to agree that mineral income in 0.0 is already quite good. Hell, hauler spawns were the thing luring me out there in the first place back when I was n00b, seeing a NPC drop more minerals than I could mine my shiny covertor in a week doing 8h days did the trick for me. There is limits what carebears can take, and hauler spawns were the straw breaking my resitance towards 0.0. After being a bit over a year 0.0 alliance footsoldier (in FIX) my corporation moved and me with it, then I found level 4 missions (there was no good lev 4 agents in Khanid anyway), took me almost a year to get good at them but when I did ... have been mostly in hi sec since then (did try low sec ones, but the new probing system flushed me out with the other 'real' low sec missionrunners) only visiting 0.0 when my corporation POS'es are under siege (and I absolutely hate current POS warfare with my every cell). Now the AI. Information seen so far seems promising. Should it ever get to the point where it's also implemented in missions and missions themselves are more like PvP it might even revitalize low sec missionrunning (as currently PvE setup is just a fat pinjata for our lowly pirates who have half a clue what they are doing). Granted, as most people do lev 4 missions to fund their 'fun' part of EVE then being very careful with the usual missions is good path to take, as backfiring in this section could prove catastrophic. So, balance the AI sysem in new higher risk areas and import it later into missions in gradual way, ie letting the mission team create new missions that take into account increased capabilities of opposition and phae out 'old' systems. Hell, perhaps we might even get something more dynamic than current 'go shoot crap at belt X for 7900 LP' over and over again. Missionrunning does not have to be as grind as it currently is, as long as there is enoughj resources available to players to 'fund' their fun (missions are one of the very few 'unlimited' resources in EVE that scale very well with population).
ollobrains2 Gallente New Eve Order Holdings	Posted - 2009.01.31 11:12:00 - [223] id like to eventually see the 4 ancient races get 2500 wspace each that would give us 10k wspace systems, factional warfare for pirate factions, i guess the jove are off for a bit and planetary interaction has a place
An Anarchyyt Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.31 15:37:00 - [224] Originally by: Tipz NexAstrum And An Anarchyyt, the trit came from the XETIC minerals Oh the irony. Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
Kardath	Posted - 2009.01.31 18:13:00 - [225] So does this mean the falcon is going to be overpowered in w space and the sleepers are going to come whine on the forums about it? Seriously sweet if ECM is going to work on NPC's.
Nyxium Dwarfers Mining Guild	Posted - 2009.01.31 18:38:00 - [226] I hope they are alien lifeforms and not another human faction. I love bug hunts.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.01.31 19:09:00 - [227] Originally by: Gaius Sejanus If this is just single systems, imagine going through into W-space, and having the wormhole timer close it 10 minutes later, and not appear again for another 2 weeks. Doesn't matter how much stuff there is to do in that one system...being completely deprived of normal space infrastructure is going to make this experience a vast pool of suck. If you dont want to take the risk - dont go there. Simple. C.
permion	Posted - 2009.01.31 22:41:00 - [228] Originally by: Nyxium I hope they are alien lifeforms and not another human faction. I love bug hunts. they are atleast as human as the Jove. and likely moreso.
Lady Ione	Posted - 2009.02.01 00:52:00 - [229] Edited by: Lady Ione on 01/02/2009 00:52:44 Originally by: Gaius Sejanus If this is just single systems, imagine going through into W-space, and having the wormhole timer close it 10 minutes later, and not appear again for another 2 weeks. Doesn't matter how much stuff there is to do in that one system...being completely deprived of normal space infrastructure is going to make this experience a vast pool of suck. Honestly, why won't people listen to what dev's are saying quite clearly. There will ALWAYS be an active wormhole in any given w-space system. Ergo, there is ALWAYS a way out.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.02.01 02:22:00 - [230] Originally by: Lady Ione Edited by: Lady Ione on 01/02/2009 00:52:44 Originally by: Gaius Sejanus If this is just single systems, imagine going through into W-space, and having the wormhole timer close it 10 minutes later, and not appear again for another 2 weeks. Doesn't matter how much stuff there is to do in that one system...being completely deprived of normal space infrastructure is going to make this experience a vast pool of suck. Honestly, why won't people listen to what dev's are saying quite clearly. There will ALWAYS be an active wormhole in any given w-space system. Ergo, there is ALWAYS a way out. Yes, that's true. but currently we dont know (and probably won't know until folks have had a trance to actually try it) how difficult it will be to find wormholes. I'd speculate that in some situations these wormholes might be actually relatively difficult to locate (lets say W > K) - so its feasible you could end up meandering around in W-Space for some time. Personally I dont have an issue with that, in fact the thought of 'exploration with the risk of getting stranded' is quite an appealing concept. C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.

Kashimir Otoko no Baito	Posted - 2009.02.01 03:13:00 - [231] "...but at the moment, know they have comparable player attributes and thus require variations of PvP fits to engage." WIN. This is exactly what I have wanted to see in EVE. Getting quite bored with overview full of NPCs doing.... well, nothing :)
Daan Sai Polytrope	Posted - 2009.02.01 03:38:00 - [232] Please don't wait too long to bring the improved AI though all missions, not just the high end officers and sleepers. Training up folks on the old npc rats is really not useful.
Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2009.02.01 04:45:00 - [233] Originally by: Daan Sai Please don't wait too long to bring the improved AI though all missions, not just the high end officers and sleepers. Training up folks on the old npc rats is really not useful. Indeed. I would just adore having the general in the last extravaganza room do something more than die horribly. Plus the bonus room could actually have a nice drop cause the npc in it would be uber and not pushovers like they currently are. Do Want Now Plz. inappropriate signature. ~WeatherMan
Zey Nadar Gallente Heavily Utilized Mechanic Mayhem Einherjar Alliance	Posted - 2009.02.01 11:05:00 - [234] Originally by: Tesal Question 2: Is this a drone nerf? I trained drones and Gallente as my chosen weapon/race. If NPC's are going to slaughter my drones in wormhole space and I can't replace them without an insane logistics setup or a legion of supply alts that doesn't bode well for me to go into that space. We lost the myrm (yah, ok, I get that), then we lost blasters, and now we are going to lose drones too? Seems like Gallente can't PVP or NPC any more if this happens. Seems to me that wormholes are making much worse some balance issues. Extremely important question. I fly gallente too, and even now if rats get a whiff that there are drones to be shot at, I will lose my primary damage output quickly.
BlondieBC Minmatar Ardent Industrial Arcane Alliance	Posted - 2009.02.01 14:06:00 - [235] Originally by: CCP Ytterbium Some clarifications about the asteroid belt changes; as we plan to put battleship spawns in low-sec, we will make sure to adjust some null-sec spawns a bit to keep a logical risk/reward ratio. We don't want low-security space NPCs to become more profitable than null security ones. We didn't consider any changes to high-security belt NPCs at the moment; having cruisers there is a possibility we need to debate, thanks for the feedback. Care to give us any hints on the null sec adjustments?
Daan Sai Polytrope	Posted - 2009.02.02 02:43:00 - [236] With all these changes to npcs and updating their combat modes to be more like PvP setups, plus the recent speed changes, can we please please have the deadspace ban on MWDs and warping in general removed!!!! We'll fit warp scrams if necessary, but as far as I can see all the old arguments that lead to the warp limitations in missions no longer hold at all.
Carniflex Caldari StarHunt Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2009.02.02 08:17:00 - [237] Originally by: Daan Sai With all these changes to npcs and updating their combat modes to be more like PvP setups, plus the recent speed changes, can we please please have the deadspace ban on MWDs and warping in general removed!!!! We'll fit warp scrams if necessary, but as far as I can see all the old arguments that lead to the warp limitations in missions no longer hold at all. As far as I'm aware it was originally placed for 3 reasons (1) To not let you buybass deadspace pockets by flying from first acceleration gate to next thru regular space (2) Speedtanking, it's powerful stuff if NPC do not change targets. (3) Refresh frequency. Your possible 'cone of interactions' is function of your speed (explained in one of the old devblogs). If you have a lot of crap lying around (like in missions) and you start moving fast then your data packets will get heavy (as EVE will send your client information for all that stuff in your 'possible interaction cone' more frequently than for stuff not in there). If I remember corect, it was a while ago when I looked at that. It will need new dungeon designs tho that would take possibility of MWD's into account. Some current ones might still get abused if it would be just flatout restriction lifting. Then again if NPC's get 'proper AI' it would need new dungeons anyway as old ones with that number of 'real like' opponents would be just deathtraps no matter what you fly.
Nova Fox Gallente Novafox Shipyards	Posted - 2009.02.02 09:30:00 - [238] Are these marco proof?
ollobrains2 Gallente New Eve Order Holdings	Posted - 2009.02.02 11:14:00 - [239] Originally by: Nova Fox Are these marco proof? wspace apparently is macro hard or macro resistant
glassmanipulator Lucian Alliance Arcane Alliance	Posted - 2009.02.02 11:16:00 - [240] "Sleepers and existing Officer spawns will receive such improved behavior and no other changes will be made to existing PvE interactions." Yea cuz people get officer spawns all the time...



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 :: 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.