These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Duality] Sovereignty Playtest Competition

First post First post
Author
CoffinBait
0.0 Massive Dynamic
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#301 - 2015-06-25 13:44:58 UTC
Also , is it normal for a system to remain in vulnerable state after the window passes ?

Our window should have closed around 19:30 , 19:40 , but PL were able to continue capturing for at least an hour - even after breaking locks momentarily.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#302 - 2015-06-25 14:17:16 UTC
To make your structures secure after the vulnerability period ends you need to regain full control of them. If a structure is in a partially contested state it will remain vulnerable until one side or the other takes full control.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

CCP Lebowski
C C P
C C P Alliance
#303 - 2015-06-25 14:18:08 UTC
The issue with Strategic index persistence should be resolved now, let us know if your systems index looks incorrect!

CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0

@CCP_Lebowski

CoffinBait
0.0 Massive Dynamic
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#304 - 2015-06-25 15:18:36 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
To make your structures secure after the vulnerability period ends you need to regain full control of them. If a structure is in a partially contested state it will remain vulnerable until one side or the other takes full control.

thanks for the clarification
SilentAsTheGrave
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#305 - 2015-06-25 16:28:26 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I want to make sure we're clear that this was never intended to be a test of fleet compositions and tactics. Unfortunately there was no way to make those aspects realistic on a test server.

This test is intended to help find bugs, to help us improve the UI and how the system is communicated in the client, and to allow players and alliances to try out the mechanical nuts and bolts and understand them better (which helps us get better feedback).

Out of curiosity, is it possible to see the logged in player count for Duality during this playtest competition?
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#306 - 2015-06-25 16:31:02 UTC
Latest reinforcement timers:
Exit Time    Solar System    Structure    Owning Alliance    Defense Multiplier
Ongoing    YWS0-Z    IHub    Brave Collective    4.6
Ongoing    4B-NQN    Station Freeport    Freeport    4.8
Ongoing    H-GKI6    Station Freeport    Freeport    3.4
Ongoing    G-5EN2    Station Freeport    Freeport    3.4
Ongoing    9-F0B2    Station Freeport    Freeport    2.2
2015.06.25 16:47    Shintaht    IHub    Fidelas Constans    3.5
2015.06.25 16:53    H6-CX8    Station    Fidelas Constans    5.6
2015.06.25 17:01    Y-MPWL    Station    Fidelas Constans    3.2
2015.06.25 17:08    Y-MPWL    TCU    Fidelas Constans    3.2
2015.06.25 17:09    VKI-T7    Station Freeport    Freeport    3.7
2015.06.25 17:14    H6-CX8    IHub    Fidelas Constans    5.6
2015.06.25 17:18    H6-CX8    TCU    Fidelas Constans    5.6
2015.06.25 17:35    Shintaht    TCU    Fidelas Constans    3.5
2015.06.25 17:37    Y-MPWL    IHub    Fidelas Constans    3.2
2015.06.25 17:39    SI-I89    Station    Fidelas Constans    4.8
2015.06.25 17:49    SI-I89    TCU    Fidelas Constans    4.8
2015.06.25 18:00    SI-I89    IHub    Fidelas Constans    4.8
2015.06.25 18:06    Shintaht    Station Freeport    Freeport    3.5
2015.06.25 18:15    E-YJ8G    Station Freeport    Freeport    4.4
2015.06.25 18:32    D61A-G    Station Freeport    Freeport    2
2015.06.25 19:37    VKI-T7    TCU    Pandemic Legion    3.7
2015.06.25 19:43    UL-7I8    Station    Praetorian Directorate    3.7
2015.06.25 19:50    F-YH5B    TCU    Suddenly Spaceships.    6
2015.06.25 20:00    7MD-S1    TCU    Praetorian Directorate    4.3
2015.06.25 20:02    UL-7I8    TCU    Praetorian Directorate    3.7
2015.06.25 20:03    ERVK-P    IHub    Praetorian Directorate    4.3
2015.06.25 20:17    BR-N97    TCU    Praetorian Directorate    5.6
2015.06.25 20:22    S25C-K    Station    Praetorian Directorate    3.8
2015.06.25 20:29    IS-R7P    TCU    Praetorian Directorate    5.6
2015.06.25 20:31    18XA-C    IHub    I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth    1
2015.06.25 20:33    IS-R7P    IHub    Praetorian Directorate    5.6
2015.06.25 20:34    S25C-K    TCU    Praetorian Directorate    3.8
2015.06.25 20:34    IS-R7P    Station    Praetorian Directorate    6
2015.06.25 20:41    ERVK-P    Station    Praetorian Directorate    3.4
2015.06.25 21:06    BR-N97    IHub    Praetorian Directorate    5.6
2015.06.25 21:27    8P9-BM    Station    Suddenly Spaceships.    3.9
2015.06.25 21:44    F-YH5B    IHub    Suddenly Spaceships.    6
2015.06.25 21:59    H-GKI6    IHub    Suddenly Spaceships.    3.4
2015.06.25 22:18    18XA-C    Station    I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth    2.2
2015.06.25 23:24    D-6WS1    IHub    Brave Collective    2.2
2015.06.25 23:29    D61A-G    IHub    Spectre Fleet Alliance    1.6
2015.06.25 23:51    Z-RFE3    Station    I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth    3.3
2015.06.26 00:27    0B-HLZ    IHub    I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth    3.7
2015.06.26 00:40    0B-HLZ    TCU    I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth    3.7
2015.06.26 01:23    I-MGAB    IHub    I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth    5.2
2015.06.26 01:29    I-MGAB    Station    I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth    5.2
2015.06.26 01:36    I-MGAB    TCU    I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth    5.2
2015.06.26 01:43    KA6D-K    Station    No Not Believing    1.6
2015.06.26 01:47    G-5EN2    TCU    Brave Collective    3.4
2015.06.26 02:14    3KB-J0    TCU    I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth    4.3
2015.06.26 02:16    9UY4-H    TCU    Brave Collective    5.2
2015.06.26 02:19    3KB-J0    IHub    I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth    4.3
2015.06.26 02:50    G-5EN2    IHub    Brave Collective    3.4
2015.06.26 04:52    3D-CQU    IHub    No Not Believing    2.7
2015.06.26 05:55    DP-JD4    IHub    No Not Believing    2.8
2015.06.26 06:38    DP-JD4    Station    No Not Believing    2.8
2015.06.26 08:54    3KB-J0    Station Freeport    Freeport    4.3
2015.06.26 12:29    3D-CQU    Station Freeport    Freeport    2.7

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#307 - 2015-06-25 16:32:15 UTC
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I want to make sure we're clear that this was never intended to be a test of fleet compositions and tactics. Unfortunately there was no way to make those aspects realistic on a test server.

This test is intended to help find bugs, to help us improve the UI and how the system is communicated in the client, and to allow players and alliances to try out the mechanical nuts and bolts and understand them better (which helps us get better feedback).

Out of curiosity, is it possible to see the logged in player count for Duality during this playtest competition?

Chribba has you covered.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

SilentAsTheGrave
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#308 - 2015-06-25 16:57:12 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I want to make sure we're clear that this was never intended to be a test of fleet compositions and tactics. Unfortunately there was no way to make those aspects realistic on a test server.

This test is intended to help find bugs, to help us improve the UI and how the system is communicated in the client, and to allow players and alliances to try out the mechanical nuts and bolts and understand them better (which helps us get better feedback).

Out of curiosity, is it possible to see the logged in player count for Duality during this playtest competition?

Chribba has you covered.

What is your thought of player participation the last week go from about 350 peak steadily decline down to just a little over a hundred at the peak?
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#309 - 2015-06-25 16:59:54 UTC
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I want to make sure we're clear that this was never intended to be a test of fleet compositions and tactics. Unfortunately there was no way to make those aspects realistic on a test server.

This test is intended to help find bugs, to help us improve the UI and how the system is communicated in the client, and to allow players and alliances to try out the mechanical nuts and bolts and understand them better (which helps us get better feedback).

Out of curiosity, is it possible to see the logged in player count for Duality during this playtest competition?

Chribba has you covered.

What is your thought of player participation the last week go from about 350 peak steadily decline down to just a little over a hundred at the peak?

Numbers have been high enough for us to get a lot of good bug reports and feedback. From our perspective they've been fine.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

CCP Masterplan
C C P
C C P Alliance
#310 - 2015-06-25 21:59:22 UTC
Dreamer Targaryen wrote:
The system "YWS0-Z" is somehow bugged:
- When you are in the system, you are unable to see the HUD (systeminfo, route, opportunities)
- The status was: freeported station, brave ihub, no tcu.
- After putting up a tcu and activating my entosis-module on it, I went through the warmup-cycle, then the 10min capture-time (white arrow-circle) and after that nothing happened. The tcu seems to be still owned by Concorde and my module is still cycling without doing anything. (De-activating and re-trying to entosify it had no effect either.)
- The sovereign-tab of the system is blank.

Hopefully most of these bugged systems have now been sorted, and structures should explode and be replaceable in a working manner. Of course if you have any other cases of the UI breaking or s structure doing something odd, please send a bug report from your client (and maybe report it here as well to see if anyone else if having similar issues).


Greygal wrote:
On the solar system show info window, sovereignty tab, I like how it now states clearly "Station secure" or "Station vulnerable now".

However, there is no way to see what the vulnerability time window is for the system now. Also, the displaying of the current time followed by a timer that is always starting at two hours continues to cause confusion.

I think all the places where that fake 2-hour countdown was happening have now been replaced with real data. (At least they have in the build going out tomorrow, if not already in the one you have)

Greygal wrote:

That's odd... show-info on alliances always shows 10:00 to me, which is our default vulnerability window. Is your default vulnerability window 02:00 by chance?

You don't realize how much you use and depend on Dotlan until you can't use it, WTB Dotlan for Duality! Blink

Yup we've got a defect on the default vulnerability window always showing your own setting when you look at another alliance. Hopefully fixed soon.

We've got a nice update to the alliance's dashboard coming tomorrow that hooks it up to real data from the server, so you should be able to see at a glance all your own structures

"This one time, on patch day..."

@ccp_masterplan  |  Team Five-0: Rewriting the law

DNLeviathan
Cosmic Monsters
Escape Velocity.
#311 - 2015-06-25 22:18:22 UTC
Heres a little something that has been bugging the crap out of me although its not a bug. The display in the top left has blue status going left ti right, but when you open system info and view it has blue status going right to left. Can you make them both left to right please? :D
Ken Cook
Doomheim
#312 - 2015-06-25 22:23:22 UTC
So just to be clear about this...
Do you can set the individual systems to different vulnerability times?
or can you set each of the individual structures i.e. station/tcu/ihun?
or is the vulnerability window for all the sov set though the alliance sov window centrally?



Grath Telkin
Akkoro
Ocularis Inferno
#313 - 2015-06-26 00:44:55 UTC
@CCP Fozzie

I was under the impression that anything involving entosis links and capitals was x5.

This to me meant that if you had a 10 minute warm up cycle in a sub cap you'd have a 50 minute warm up time in a capital.

This was a really good way to avoid capital blobs owning the new system.




It turns out thats not the case, and I'm telling you right now that capitals will ruin your system by becoming unstopable entosis machines because it turns out its only EIGHT FRICKIN MINUTES LONGER IN A CAPITAL THAN IT IS IN A SUB CAP.

Seriously, how mad am I right now? I've been a huge fan of this new system thinking you finally had something and understood something and you do this with cap ships?

How can you not see how terrible it is that its only EIGHT frickin minutes longer to use a cap ship?

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

michael chasseur
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#314 - 2015-06-26 00:55:31 UTC  |  Edited by: michael chasseur
Grath Telkin wrote:
@CCP Fozzie

I was under the impression that anything involving entosis links and capitals was x5.

This to me meant that if you had a 10 minute warm up cycle in a sub cap you'd have a 50 minute warm up time in a capital.

This was a really good way to avoid capital blobs owning the new system.

It turns out thats not the case, and I'm telling you right now that capitals will ruin your system by becoming unstopable entosis machines because it turns out its only EIGHT FRICKIN MINUTES LONGER IN A CAPITAL THAN IT IS IN A SUB CAP.

Seriously, how mad am I right now? I've been a huge fan of this new system thinking you finally had something and understood something and you do this with cap ships?

How can you not see how terrible it is that its only EIGHT frickin minutes longer to use a cap ship?


yeah this has been awesome practice for dual-boxing archons so far, but if it's meant to empower low SP people to take sov, they're in for a rude awakening in slowcat+triage form
Lucas Quaan
New Order Outreach Division
CODE.
#315 - 2015-06-26 01:03:46 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
@CCP Fozzie

I was under the impression that anything involving entosis links and capitals was x5.

This to me meant that if you had a 10 minute warm up cycle in a sub cap you'd have a 50 minute warm up time in a capital.

This was a really good way to avoid capital blobs owning the new system.




It turns out thats not the case, and I'm telling you right now that capitals will ruin your system by becoming unstopable entosis machines because it turns out its only EIGHT FRICKIN MINUTES LONGER IN A CAPITAL THAN IT IS IN A SUB CAP.

Seriously, how mad am I right now? I've been a huge fan of this new system thinking you finally had something and understood something and you do this with cap ships?

How can you not see how terrible it is that its only EIGHT frickin minutes longer to use a cap ship?

Um... the cycle time is 5x the normal one. A t2 entosis has a cycle time of 120 s and when you fit it to a capital ship that becomes 1200 s. You can easily change the base time or multiplier if you like, but this is pretty much working as intended.

Are you saying you want a higher multiplier or a longer base cycle here?
Greygal
Redemption Road
Affirmative.
#316 - 2015-06-26 01:15:44 UTC
Lucas Quaan wrote:
Um... the cycle time is 5x the normal one. A t2 entosis has a cycle time of 120 s and when you fit it to a capital ship that becomes 1200 s. You can easily change the base time or multiplier if you like, but this is pretty much working as intended.

Are you saying you want a higher multiplier or a longer base cycle here?


120 seconds times 5 is 600 seconds, not 1200 seconds :)

Grath is correct, taking only 8 minutes longer to capture a node with a capital ship does not seem to be as intended.

If it takes 12 minutes to capture a non-bonused command node with a subcap (2 minute warmup and 5 cycles at 2 minutes each for a 10 minute capture), then on a capital it should take 10 minute warmup and 5 cycles at 10 minutes each for a total of 60 minutes for a capital to capture a non-bonused command node.

If it's only taking 8 minutes longer total in a capital ship, that does not seem to be as intended, and definitely will encourage greater use of capitals as entosis links, because if it is taking 45-60 minutes anyways and a capital only adds 8 minutes, why wouldn't you use capitals?

What you do for yourself dies with you, what you do for others is immortal.

Free weekly public roams & monthly NewBro new player roams!

Visit Redemption Road or join mailing list REDEMPTION ROAMS for information

Eve Talaminada
Chao3
Chao3 Alliance
#317 - 2015-06-26 02:30:06 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
@CCP Fozzie

I was under the impression that anything involving entosis links and capitals was x5.

This to me meant that if you had a 10 minute warm up cycle in a sub cap you'd have a 50 minute warm up time in a capital.

This was a really good way to avoid capital blobs owning the new system.




It turns out thats not the case, and I'm telling you right now that capitals will ruin your system by becoming unstopable entosis machines because it turns out its only EIGHT FRICKIN MINUTES LONGER IN A CAPITAL THAN IT IS IN A SUB CAP.

Seriously, how mad am I right now? I've been a huge fan of this new system thinking you finally had something and understood something and you do this with cap ships?

How can you not see how terrible it is that its only EIGHT frickin minutes longer to use a cap ship?


Fully supported!

Using caps for entosis cannot be just a mere minutes longer than subcaps. A significant differences of capture time between sub caps and caps, forcing the caps on the field much longer, is the only thing that will make pilots hesitate to bring a cap as an entosis ship.. They can still easily bring them as powerful grid control ships.

Grath Telkin
Akkoro
Ocularis Inferno
#318 - 2015-06-26 03:33:24 UTC
Lucas Quaan wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
@CCP Fozzie

I was under the impression that anything involving entosis links and capitals was x5.

This to me meant that if you had a 10 minute warm up cycle in a sub cap you'd have a 50 minute warm up time in a capital.

This was a really good way to avoid capital blobs owning the new system.




It turns out thats not the case, and I'm telling you right now that capitals will ruin your system by becoming unstopable entosis machines because it turns out its only EIGHT FRICKIN MINUTES LONGER IN A CAPITAL THAN IT IS IN A SUB CAP.

Seriously, how mad am I right now? I've been a huge fan of this new system thinking you finally had something and understood something and you do this with cap ships?

How can you not see how terrible it is that its only EIGHT frickin minutes longer to use a cap ship?

Um... the cycle time is 5x the normal one. A t2 entosis has a cycle time of 120 s and when you fit it to a capital ship that becomes 1200 s. You can easily change the base time or multiplier if you like, but this is pretty much working as intended.

Are you saying you want a higher multiplier or a longer base cycle here?


ALL of it should be five times longer.


So if the cycle is normally 2 minutes, it should be five times longer, however if you need to entos a thing for `10 minutes in a sub cap, it should take FIVE TIMES LONGER in a cap, or fifty minutes.

If you do anything else than make it insanely time inefficient to use caps, caps is exactly what will be used because an attacker/defenders initial strain point has been shown to be the entosis ship itself. There isn't a singular subcap that you can make immune to alpha, however carriers -which already see heavy use that CCP d- turn out to be really good at entosis work under fire, regardless of its ability to get help.

I can't stress this enough, if you don't do something about capitals doing entosis work, in the vein of how long it takes them, as in make it super super long in every regard, you're asking for what comes from this.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

Warmeister
Tactically Challenged
Tactical Supremacy
#319 - 2015-06-26 03:41:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Warmeister
i think you guys are mixing up t1 and t2 modules

t1 entosis - normal cycle time - 5 min, capital cycle time - 25 min
t2 entosis - normal cycle time - 2 min, capital cycle time - 10 min

that's how multipliers work, if you start with lower base you get x times lower result
the alternative would be to either increase the multiplier so it would only make sense to use t2 module on capitals, or to just give them a flat penalty, which is not something CCP likes to do iirc


EDIT: just realised that you guys are complaining not about the cycle times, but the fact that cycle times don't affect capture times. nvmd
Grath Telkin
Akkoro
Ocularis Inferno
#320 - 2015-06-26 03:50:22 UTC
Warmeister wrote:
i think you guys are mixing up t1 and t2 modules

t1 entosis - normal cycle time - 5 min, capital cycle time - 25 min
t2 entosis - normal cycle time - 2 min, capital cycle time - 10 min

that's how multipliers work, if you start with lower base you get x times lower result
the alternative would be to either increase the multiplier so it would only make sense to use t2 module on capitals, or to just give them a flat penalty, which is not something CCP likes to do iirc


Nobody will bother with t1 entosis links on a carrier so disregard that, you're already putting a couple billion out there, you'll use t2, so its 10 minutes.

Now, unless they find a way to extend the length of time you need to entos the thing by 5 as well then its never going to work.

Testing has shown that its EIGHT MINUTES longer to use a capital.



That is an unacceptably low barrier to entry for the capital ships that will have terrible results for this sov system and what CCP wants to achieve.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.