These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Rubicon 1.1 Mobile Structures

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#61 - 2014-01-24 13:49:50 UTC
ok ideas, poorly implemented.

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Szu Shi
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#62 - 2014-01-24 14:48:23 UTC
why do you implement useless items, that just complicate gameplay for no benefit .. tryin to get rid of paying customers?
Eram Fidard
Doomheim
#63 - 2014-01-24 14:56:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Eram Fidard
Since rubicon, nullsec ratting income has dropped "because of inty". So, since the principal reasons behind designing the ESS was (according to soniclover) "you should have to fight for what you have" and "nullsec isk fountain too big" perhaps we could see some numbers regarding nullsec isk income before and after rubiconinterceptors online.

That is the way game design in a persistent world is supposed to work, right?

Idea>Feedback>Implementation>Metrics>Iteration

Or have you just completely ******* forgot about iterating on anything you do, and you're back to the 'old ways' of adding senseless crap, and not waiting for drastic changes to pan out before adding more senseless crap?

ie.

Idea>Cherry Pick Feedback>Implementation>Next Idea

Poster is not to be held responsible for damages to keyboards and/or noses caused by hot beverages.
Jericho D'Angel
Bourbon's Anonny Corp
#64 - 2014-01-24 17:24:22 UTC
It seems incredibly DUMB that you can't think of alternate rules of deployment except to making exceptions to the pre-existing gameplay mechanics.

All you're doing is putting up walls and roadblocks in what's supposed to be a sandbox environment.

Cloaks are for cloaking, and no one (read nothing); can see you approach or hang about - no exceptions; all this does is limit the ship class you can use to approach an ESS undetected. They still have to uncloak to access it. Otherwise, why not just make 'special' combat probes to detect cloaks or just eliminate cloaks altogether and be done with it. Its a slippery slope of *ucking things up when you start making exceptions to the rule; soon you make more until its utterly pointless. You introduced cloaks for a reason; they have there pros but they also have their cons - part of the gameplay mechanics; get over it.

Interdiction bubble nullifiers mean you fly through bubbles - no exceptions; again as above. There are other ways to create balance besides making 'sandbox nullifying', 'gameplay mechanics breaking' modifications to what already works.

As soon as you start making exceptions to the game mechanics like you're doing with the ESS, what you're really saying is you weren't smart enough to think of something else, so smarten up !!

Just saying... you can do better; you've proved that previously.
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
#65 - 2014-01-24 20:03:10 UTC
Good changes.

The Tears Must Flow
Ada Codie
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#66 - 2014-01-24 20:20:53 UTC
The ESS is a 5% nerf to Null Sec bounty. Call it what it is.

Is 20 seconds long enough for the payout window? Let's be honest, if you are going to steal from the ESS you are Either Neutral or Red to the locals and you will be in a inty, a covops or, a nullified t3 for easy get away.
Which makes the bubble silly and pointless. Because once you get the notice that the ESS is being paid out, 20 seconds isn't enough time to scoop drones, align, warp, land, then Target whoever. Unless you are in an Inty yourself; and I don't know many people who rat in inty's.

You would have to be a badArse Inty pilot to do 500+ dps and still tank.
Shepard Wong Ogeko
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#67 - 2014-01-25 07:04:37 UTC
Ada Codie wrote:
The ESS is a 5% nerf to Null Sec bounty. Call it what it is.

Is 20 seconds long enough for the payout window? Let's be honest, if you are going to steal from the ESS you are Either Neutral or Red to the locals and you will be in a inty, a covops or, a nullified t3 for easy get away.
Which makes the bubble silly and pointless. Because once you get the notice that the ESS is being paid out, 20 seconds isn't enough time to scoop drones, align, warp, land, then Target whoever. Unless you are in an Inty yourself; and I don't know many people who rat in inty's.

You would have to be a badArse Inty pilot to do 500+ dps and still tank.



I have an alt that can rat in an assault frigate, but that is sort of a gimmick for high SP players.


As it stands now though, the biggest pain about the thing is the 4 flavors of LP. Now that it is good enough to both using, we now have to figure out which ones we will use and where. And that is far more of a pain than the previous plan of outright banning it.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#68 - 2014-01-25 08:13:35 UTC
Mag's wrote:
2 questions.

Why can't you tell us how many siphons have been used or give more info?

Why does the ESS require a 5% nerf to bounties?
Just quoting myself here, as they have gone unanswered.

I and I guess others, would like more info on the siphons. I'm not interested in where they have been placed, but how many. What information was given, does I think indicate a rather low usage level. Which makes me wonder, if that's the reason for you to withhold information on them.

The second question is why does the ESS require a 5% nerf to bounties. Surely if you don't use them, then you don't reap those benefits. If you do, then you have risk versus reward. Which I could understand.
So why does it require the 5% nerf, for it to be implemented?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
The Frodo
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#69 - 2014-01-25 11:29:08 UTC
Hey it's a new topic regarding ESS. I guess CCP couldn't handle the other one (105 pages and counting).

Link to the other one:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=312575&p=105.

Short summary of those 105 pages - ESS is ********, don't get it out to the open.
The Frodo
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#70 - 2014-01-25 11:35:43 UTC
The deleted word meant - very not bright.
Ellie Katelo
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#71 - 2014-01-25 12:03:29 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Mag's wrote:
2 questions.

Why can't you tell us how many siphons have been used or give more info?

Why does the ESS require a 5% nerf to bounties?
Just quoting myself here, as they have gone unanswered.

I and I guess others, would like more info on the siphons. I'm not interested in where they have been placed, but how many. What information was given, does I think indicate a rather low usage level. Which makes me wonder, if that's the reason for you to withhold information on them.

The second question is why does the ESS require a 5% nerf to bounties. Surely if you don't use them, then you don't reap those benefits. If you do, then you have risk versus reward. Which I could understand.
So why does it require the 5% nerf, for it to be implemented?


The reason why it requires a 5% nerf to bounties is this is the entire purpose that CCP had for the ESS in the first place. CCP obviously believes that denizens of null sec are making too much from bounties. They can't outright nerf bounties so they are veiling this nerf with the illusion that you can actually make more bounties from using the ESS. In actuality, nobody will even use the ESS so the 5% nerf will be the only real outcome of this new deployable. Anyone dumb enough to use the deployable will actually lose more isk because they will draw attention to their system from inty gangs which means they will lose the isk inside the ESS or they will lose isk because they will be docked up or in a POS waiting out the inty gang to leave their system.
Samantha Godspeed
Sid Meier's Mercenaries
Sons of Sylph
#72 - 2014-01-25 12:16:09 UTC
Rekkr Nordgard wrote:
The Mobile Micro Jump Unit and Mobile Scan Inhibitor are basically useless, but that's a good thing since their original stats were game-breaking.

The Encounter Surveillance System is still garbage and should have been canned completely.


/signed
Abulurd Boniface
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#73 - 2014-01-25 12:38:04 UTC
The Frodo wrote:
The deleted word meant - very not bright.


I disapprove of obscenity filters because we're supposed to be adults here. Not that I want it to dissolve in a massive urine contest, obscenity filters also filters words that should not be filtered. To wit: the book 'Ubik' was written by Philip K. ****. <--- See? Doesn't that look silly?

So, I spell the word backwards, when I know the obscenity filter is in the way of my free expression, because annoyance should work both ways.
tekpede
BLOMI
#74 - 2014-01-25 14:58:40 UTC
ccp please don't put that ess thing in game and embarrass yourselves. should I say that ass thing?
Bloodmyst Ranwar
Menace of Morons
#75 - 2014-01-26 00:57:36 UTC
Is it possible to add the following feature to "Small Mobile Siphon Units?"

- The owner of the siphon unit is able to unfasten the Small Mobile Siphon Unit.

Although the Siphon unit is still unable to be scooped back into cargo... it can still be removed by the owner and eventually disappearing off into space...
Hayley Haruka
Mining Industry Exile Foundation
Synergy of Steel
#76 - 2014-01-27 08:10:21 UTC
Inspiration wrote:
When active, the Mobile Scan Inhibitor will prevent the operation of both combat probes and directional scanners by or against anything within its 30km radius. The structure itself is always visible to both probes and directional scans, and is extremely easy to pinpoint using probes.

Why make it visible at all, if it is capable of hiding everything around it? This doesn't make sense, certainly not from the users perspective. Warping towards it at range will reveal everything that is there, without the users seeing any Intel themselves. This block suggests it works by nullifying all signals in its influence sphere which should make itself also undetectable.

It is probably done to counter complains that it might otherwise be too powerful, but i disagree. From a user point of view it should stay hidden, else it would have very limited application. The most logical place to use for such a structure is as a rally point or as a way to hide your presence in WH space. The first use is severely compromised by its visibility, the second one is downright nullified.



pretty much this.

i can understand why let the msi scanable by probes, but i cant so with the dscan. wasn't the scan and exploration expansion all about scan and use probes before do anything else. it doesnt make sense, to let it be see by the dscan. everyone will be fast get the fact, if a msi is in my system, ill wait till it goes away, or blobwarp to it. so no surprise effect= pretty much useless.
if its not on dscan, you have to get activ (launch probes) to be sure there not such a msi. sounds much more better to me, so pls...

get it from dscan!
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#77 - 2014-01-27 15:34:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
I tend to think the "scan inhibitor" would have been better if it is was:

-unscannable or nearly so itself
-simply made everything wtihin it's area of operation(30 km from the thing) 'harder' to scan like the 'unscannable tech3s' but not impossible.

The original deployables were useful (mobile depot is best addition to the game in years IMO), but these new ones just seem like gimmicks from a DEV cadre that has run out of good ideas.
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#78 - 2014-01-27 17:54:56 UTC
If you really wanted to shake things up then update the MSI so that people inside the field do not show up in local Twisted
Fascist Jockitch
ELUSH Rehab
#79 - 2014-01-27 19:27:07 UTC
The ESS is total bull***t. Who's idea was this? Seriously... Another great feature made by people who don't play their own game.
Midnight Hope
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#80 - 2014-01-27 22:10:18 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
There is now no timer to open the ESS window where the player gets to choose to Share or Take all, but both options now have separate timers on them. Share requires 30 seconds, Take all requires 210 seconds. Moving out of range while the timer is ongoing resets the timer. This prevents players from safely leaving an alt on the ESS and sharing as soon as a hostile enters local.
Interacting with the ESS now puts a warp disruption effect on the ship interacting with it. Ships immune to bubbles are not immune to this effect.


What prevents someone from parking an alt next to the EES and simply scooping it when local goes +1 ?
As far as I could tell the scooping took no time and there was no way someone could catch you before you scooped it up.
Wait till local goes -1 and deploy again.
What am I missing?