These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

War Dec, Kill Reports and New Modules discussion

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tobiaz
Spacerats
#481 - 2012-05-20 13:00:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Tobiaz
Don't be too harsh on yourself Lol

Before launch, you might try to find some time for one helpful thing though: a confirmation box with some warnings about the rules of mutual wars. Right now it's VERY easy to get your corp locked into a mutual war if you're not careful.

Another thing: it might be a good idea for mutual wars to ask confirmation after a period of time (like 6 months or so). I noticed when the '50 most recent wars' filter was broken and it showed 555 of them instead, that there are still hundreds mutual wars open of corporations now long dead and forgotten as far back as 2005! It'd be nice if mutual wars with empty shells of corporations clean itself up at some point (without needing a petition).

And for something in the future: adding the way how wars ended (retracted, surrendered, disbanded, etc.)

Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!  Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors!
CCP Punkturis
C C P
C C P Alliance
#482 - 2012-05-20 13:26:01 UTC
Tobiaz wrote:
Don't be too harsh on yourself Lol

Before launch, you might try to find some time for one helpful thing though: a confirmation box with some warnings about the rules of mutual wars. Right now it's VERY easy to get your corp locked into a mutual war if you're not careful.

Another thing: it might be a good idea for mutual wars to ask confirmation after a period of time (like 6 months or so). I noticed when the '50 most recent wars' filter was broken and it showed 555 of them instead, that there are still hundreds mutual wars open of corporations now long dead and forgotten as far back as 2005! It'd be nice if mutual wars with empty shells of corporations clean itself up at some point (without needing a petition).

And for something in the future: adding the way how wars ended (retracted, surrendered, disbanded, etc.)


awesome suggestions, thank youBig smile

♥ EVE Brogrammer ♥ Team Five 0 ♥ @CCP_Punkturis ♥
TheButcherPete
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#483 - 2012-05-20 14:46:15 UTC
Wait, you tasked TUXFORD with fixing something?

@_@ listen to yourself speak lass!

[b]THE KING OF EVE RADIO

If EVE is real, does that mean all of us are RMTrs?[/b]
Haakyra Fly
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#484 - 2012-05-20 15:01:34 UTC
Why nobody may answer to this question?

@SoniClover.... please could u explain how exactly capacitor batteries work?

ie: i should neut 100 cap.... i neut 100 cap but 12.5 is also neuted from my cap (as reflection)?

OR

i should neut 100 cap... i neut 87,5 AND ALSO 12,5 is neuted from my cap?

thanks in advance.
mine mi
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#485 - 2012-05-20 18:04:35 UTC
I think the war dec must do 2 things, one denied insured to the opponent
Yes denied, all the contract will be suspended, and consider not only the contract but also the basic 40% until the war is over
Consider that when war is declared not only alerts you to the concord but also to the insurance company

The other thing is, no one likes the troublemakers, for each ship you lose in empire, the corp and you will lose 0.1 of the faction and 1 point for NPCcorps residing in the system’s loss.
So the war ended, or because the defender surrendered or went to low sec or the attacker can not enter into the defender's living space.
Tobiaz
Spacerats
#486 - 2012-05-20 18:13:17 UTC
mine mi wrote:
I think the war dec must do 2 things, one denied insured to the opponent
Yes denied, all the contract will be suspended, and consider not only the contract but also the basic 40% until the war is over
Consider that when war is declared not only alerts you to the concord but also to the insurance company

The other thing is, no one likes the troublemakers, for each ship you lose in empire, the corp and you will lose 0.1 of the faction and 1 point for NPCcorps residing in the system’s loss.
So the war ended, or because the defender surrendered or went to low sec or the attacker can not enter into the defender's living space.

You clearly don't understand why wardecs are a necessary part of hi-sec.

Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!  Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors!
mine mi
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#487 - 2012-05-20 18:21:29 UTC
Tobiaz wrote:
mine mi wrote:
I think the war dec must do 2 things, one denied insured to the opponent
Yes denied, all the contract will be suspended, and consider not only the contract but also the basic 40% until the war is over
Consider that when war is declared not only alerts you to the concord but also to the insurance company

The other thing is, no one likes the troublemakers, for each ship you lose in empire, the corp and you will lose 0.1 of the faction and 1 point for NPCcorps residing in the system’s loss.
So the war ended, or because the defender surrendered or went to low sec or the attacker can not enter into the defender's living space.

You clearly don't understand why wardecs are a necessary part of hi-sec.



maybe, but it's still logical
CCP SoniClover
C C P
C C P Alliance
#488 - 2012-05-20 19:04:05 UTC
Haakyra Fly wrote:
Why nobody may answer to this question?

@SoniClover.... please could u explain how exactly capacitor batteries work?

ie: i should neut 100 cap.... i neut 100 cap but 12.5 is also neuted from my cap (as reflection)?

OR

i should neut 100 cap... i neut 87,5 AND ALSO 12,5 is neuted from my cap?

thanks in advance.

Its the latter. The neut is less effective and you lose a bit more cap as well.
Rivqua
Omega Wing
#489 - 2012-05-20 21:46:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivqua
Rivqua wrote:
@CCP SoniClover:


I notice the new shield boosters don't get affected by

A) Ship Boost Bonuses (Making them directly less useful on Minmatar instead of Caldari for example) (Intended to nerf Winmatar?)
B) Are not affected by Blue Pills ?

Any comment. I realize it's late to post any changes now, but you could explain the intention for all to see ? :)

- Riv


^^ Any answer ?

Also, the new Ancillary shield booster does not count as a shield booster when it comes to the UI, it says "No Module" instead giving the amount of boost, Bug / Feature ?

- Riv

Edit: Removed Edit due to edit being wrong, so I edited it.
Masamune Dekoro
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#490 - 2012-05-21 01:49:01 UTC
Plekto wrote:
We already HAVE a method to counter missiles in the game. It just needs to be implemented properly.

It's defender missiles. The problem is that you have to manually target the incoming missile(s), every time, which is horrendous. If they automatically targeted any and all incoming missiles, then the solution would be to fit a few on a ship in your empty high slots to mitigate the damage.

Since most people group damage, you can SORT OF get away with targeting the group, but all it takes is the guy to do the old school finger across the keys trick and you have a chain of 6 or 8 missiles incoming and no way to physically click and target fast enough. Defender missiles are so useless in the game that I've never heard of anyone ever using them in PVP. Even newbies figure out that they are broken in minutes.

The "rats" do this automatically. This needs to be fixed. Then we'll not need a "nerf" by CCP. Then, if you don't like missiles, fit a defender or two in a small launcher.



Further on the defender missile idea -

IMO implementing a specific 'Defender Missile Launcher' as a utility high, automatically shooting down oncoming missiles would be nice. Even better if it had the capability to target another ship to 'defend', or if there is no ally being targeted, automatically 'defend' your own ship. Make it easy to shoot down light targeted missiles, harder to shoot down HMs and HAMs, and really hard to shoot down Cruises, and almost impossible to shoot down Torps (which already have high HP) - might address some of the other problems seen with the PVP viability of the BS sized launcher weapons.
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#491 - 2012-05-21 05:54:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Altrue
Masamune Dekoro wrote:
Plekto wrote:
We already HAVE a method to counter missiles in the game. It just needs to be implemented properly.

It's defender missiles. The problem is that you have to manually target the incoming missile(s), every time, which is horrendous. If they automatically targeted any and all incoming missiles, then the solution would be to fit a few on a ship in your empty high slots to mitigate the damage.

Since most people group damage, you can SORT OF get away with targeting the group, but all it takes is the guy to do the old school finger across the keys trick and you have a chain of 6 or 8 missiles incoming and no way to physically click and target fast enough. Defender missiles are so useless in the game that I've never heard of anyone ever using them in PVP. Even newbies figure out that they are broken in minutes.

The "rats" do this automatically. This needs to be fixed. Then we'll not need a "nerf" by CCP. Then, if you don't like missiles, fit a defender or two in a small launcher.



Further on the defender missile idea -

IMO implementing a specific 'Defender Missile Launcher' as a utility high, automatically shooting down oncoming missiles would be nice. Even better if it had the capability to target another ship to 'defend', or if there is no ally being targeted, automatically 'defend' your own ship. Make it easy to shoot down light targeted missiles, harder to shoot down HMs and HAMs, and really hard to shoot down Cruises, and almost impossible to shoot down Torps (which already have high HP) - might address some of the other problems seen with the PVP viability of the BS sized launcher weapons.


I'm against the idea of having a module in high slot that can protect your own ship, EvE is not working like that :)
Look at the reps for example, logistic can't heal themselves. I think that beeing able to protect other ships is a great idea, and it would create a 'weakness' in your fleet if one of these ships is not protected against missiles. The attacker would have to find who is using defender modules and kill this ship.
Of course, we are talking about reducing the damage of incoming missiles, not creating a module that can simply erase all missile dps. And of course, this would remplace the strange tracking disruptor change originaly planned. I believe that EvE is designed like chess : The main goal is to plan enemy's gestures and counter them. Having a mid slot that simply counter any types of weapon is against this idea. (ok you can still dps with smartbomb Roll)

(Also : Bad idea to add T1 without associated BPOs !)

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart
Tobiaz
Spacerats
#492 - 2012-05-21 09:50:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Tobiaz
Altrue wrote:

I'm against the idea of having a module in high slot that can protect your own ship, EvE is not working like that :)
Look at the reps for example, logistic can't heal themselves. I think that beeing able to protect other ships is a great idea, and it would create a 'weakness' in your fleet if one of these ships is not protected against missiles. The attacker would have to find who is using defender modules and kill this ship.
Of course, we are talking about reducing the damage of incoming missiles, not creating a module that can simply erase all missile dps. And of course, this would remplace the strange tracking disruptor change originaly planned. I believe that EvE is designed like chess : The main goal is to plan enemy's gestures and counter them. Having a mid slot that simply counter any types of weapon is against this idea. (ok you can still dps with smartbomb Roll)

(Also : Bad idea to add T1 without associated BPOs !)


Actually, defensive modules in high-slots are one of the most balanced things possible, especially when requiring turret or missile slots, because it automatically becomes a choice between defense and dps (or RR).

Also as stated by SoniClover in a earlier post in this thread, CCP made the wise decision NOT to make Tracking Disruptors affect missiles (and the CSM was quite against it during the Townhall Meeting as well by the way).

Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!  Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors!
Azura Solus
Rules of Acquisition
#493 - 2012-05-21 10:11:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Azura Solus
Hey Team SuperFriends quick idea. Would it be possible to add in a search function to the LP stores. So like say i know what i want ie a EM-806 implant. And i can just search for it like market. Just a thought.


Now on topic after reviewing the up and coming wardec changes. Thank you for the price changes the way they are on sisi now seems to be decent and will still allow for small corps like mine to continue deccing. Now on the ally system i know you stated that you wanted to put some type of contract time limit to the ally system but couldn't get it in for inferno. I believe that that should be on the top of the list. Also i believe the defending corp should have to pay on that contract weekly as well. Just my opinion tho.

In closing i like the new changes made but i still believe there is miles to go with it. Will wait and see how bad things get when they come to live defiantly wont be deccing till the kinks are worked out. Thanks for the hard work and for keeping in contact with us so far

Edit: And For the sake of all that is unholy Thank you for not going through with the tracking disruptor idea
CCP SoniClover
C C P
C C P Alliance
#494 - 2012-05-21 14:37:40 UTC
Rivqua wrote:
@CCP SoniClover:


I notice the new shield boosters don't get affected by

A) Ship Boost Bonuses (Making them directly less useful on Minmatar instead of Caldari for example) (Intended to nerf Winmatar?)
B) Are not affected by Blue Pills ?

Any comment. I realize it's late to post any changes now, but you could explain the intention for all to see ? :)

- Riv


The way bonuses are handled is inconsistent, and thus more difficult to work with. Streamlining this system is on our todo list, until then we try to deal with these cases on case by case bases, but it may be impossible/impractical to scale it completely for every single instance. Long story short, this is a known issue that we're doing our best to deal with until a complete overhaul can be done.
GetSirrus
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#495 - 2012-05-21 22:52:51 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Daniel Darkside wrote:
I noticed that inventing the Drone Damage Amplifier II requires Caldari Encryption Methods. Since this is a drone module, should it require Gallente Encryption Methods?


Yes, this was an oversight that I have rectified. Thanks for the heads up.


I asked this else, and will repeat it here. Considering that the Drone Interfacing skill increases the mining drones ability - could the DDA be expanded to include this?
Azura Solus
Rules of Acquisition
#496 - 2012-05-21 22:56:17 UTC
GetSirrus wrote:
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Daniel Darkside wrote:
I noticed that inventing the Drone Damage Amplifier II requires Caldari Encryption Methods. Since this is a drone module, should it require Gallente Encryption Methods?


Yes, this was an oversight that I have rectified. Thanks for the heads up.


I asked this else, and will repeat it here. Considering that the Drone Interfacing skill increases the mining drones ability - could the DDA be expanded to include this?



Dont mine anymore myself could never go back after that first drake kill but i digress. I think that would be a good idea for the indy guys out there. Would give them options of minerr vs drones mods, but then again with out looking at numbers might not be worth it. Eitherway +1 on the idea
Ashera Yune
Doomheim
#497 - 2012-05-22 03:01:03 UTC
Question to CCP:

Are the Adaptive armor hardeners stacking penalized like other armor modules or are they not?

"Yesterday we obeyed kings and bent our necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to truth."

 Kahlil Gibran
Copine Callmeknau
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#498 - 2012-05-22 05:42:52 UTC
Copine Callmeknau wrote:
I see a lot of dev responses here, but nothing about crap web drones being crap :p


Any word guys? Do you consider these drones balanced? Do you think the introduction of scout drones will result in more use of web drones?

Sooooooo seen as you guys don't wanna answer this, I'm assuming they're going in as broken and useless as they currently are on SiSi?

Awesome

There should be a rather awesome pic here
Quesa
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#499 - 2012-05-22 22:18:11 UTC
I have a concern about the war-dec system and it's defender component.

I didn't notice (correct me if I'm wrong) an NPC cost associated for defending another Alliance. Won't this open up the field for defender corp griefing and dodging the war-dec cost by simply signing up to defend another alliance?
Alyna Stormwind
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#500 - 2012-05-26 06:31:03 UTC
The war dec system is still bad and so is CCP