These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

EVE Online: Inferno 1.2 Feedback

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Griffin Omanid
Knights of the Zodiac
#161 - 2012-08-09 07:20:24 UTC
Layla Ravensclaw wrote:
I thougth thats a patch should repair bugs and rebalance the game. Today has CCP shown how fast can you destroy a godd game with one patchSad

Cus thats patch is a good reasone to stop playing eve forever.

and i said it again theat patch is crap!

They transform out off the retiver and the mack now a cruiser in a Titanclassvessel . And the hulk transform them to a frig !



Just use the patch as a hint to use a more defensiv fitting on a Exhumer then you did before, and just switch to a Mackinow.

But on the other side i wait for the gankers complaining about loosing their easy targets, I´m sure it will sounds like:
"Why do i have to use a Tier3-BC to gank a skiff. This totally destroyed my EVE now i need to invest 100 mill isk to gank a 300 mill ship, not like before where 4 destroyers for 10 mill were enough. You totally destroyed my game..."

Proposal T2 BS Class Juggernaut
Dakman Frogger
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#162 - 2012-08-09 08:18:13 UTC
For some reason, I cannot read parts of dialogue and other player names. They just appear as corrupted characters or repeating ones like DddDDd d dd or something like that.
Mhari Dson
Lazy Brothers Inc
#163 - 2012-08-09 08:30:05 UTC
My assessment so far on this patch:

Barges/Exhumers: mostly great, EHP isn't there like it was on sisi

Ship rebalancing: should've started years ago, going to take far too long to be truly useful anytime soon.

Tooltip: how the hell do I turn this off? Takes up too much space and most modules give no relevant info .

Ethnic Relations: went from a necesary skill for a decent sized corp to a tax writeoff adjustment. Not a skill I'd bother training now, give me the SP back. I'll use it somewhere else.

removing the market search tab: fail, put it back dammit.

nice job re-adding the rightclick options for ore bay, drone bay and corp hangar, just want to point out a corp hangar has 7 divisions why is it only opening one?
El'ismhur Khunsiu
Les chevaliers de l'ordre
Goonswarm Federation
#164 - 2012-08-09 08:34:19 UTC  |  Edited by: El'ismhur Khunsiu
About new Frigate :

Thx for this new frigate but they are perhaps some adjustement to make.

If you take the both armor frigate (Executionner and Altron).

They are some problem with the role and the rigs (same for interceptor).

Armor Rigs = draw back on Speed.
Astronautics Rigs = draw back on Armor.

Buffer armor (plate) = malus on agility and speed.

Perhaps that will be a good idea to put all "interceptor in shield tanking" or make some modification on the draw back.
CCP Prism X
C C P
C C P Alliance
#165 - 2012-08-09 08:57:34 UTC
There is no rounding bug with R.A.M. tools. This changed waay back when we were uniforming the Sience and Industry code paths.

You don't have to like it or agree with it, but the design is if you want to "reuse" your RAM like that you'll have to use up more assembly lines. This here:
MR rockafella wrote:
The result is that a build of 100 runs/units of X-something that requires 50% of r.a.m.- tool one whould require 50 of r.a.m.-tool but build quota window wont accept 50 r.a.m.- tool it will only accept when 100 r.a.m.- tool is there and once build is press it only removes 50 r.a.m.- tool and there is 50 r.a.m.- tool left.

Is by design.

And please don't get mad at my coworkers because they do not know the reasons for something I did almost five years back (and the other people involved are sadly no longer with us). They're just trying to help where they can and they couldn't in this case.

CCP Prism X

Programmer on Team Gridlock & Expert Ranter
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#166 - 2012-08-09 09:05:44 UTC
Many devs died to bring you this information.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#167 - 2012-08-09 09:25:49 UTC
CCP Prism X wrote:
You don't have to like it or agree with it, but the design is if you want to "reuse" your RAM like that you'll have to use up more assembly lines.
But why? What was the purpose of the design?
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#168 - 2012-08-09 09:29:03 UTC
They should have just nerfed its cargo bay, so it couldn't carry enough RAM, and would depend on other POSs to bring it more RAM.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
CCP Prism X
C C P
C C P Alliance
#169 - 2012-08-09 09:34:04 UTC
It's been a long time Tippia. My purpose was to have all damage material components behave in as a uniform way as possible. I could make an argument of initial investment cost vs production cost but I'm not 100% certain that the game designer involved saw it like that and I cant ask him as he doesn't work here anymore.

But I'm not trying to convince anybody that this is the perfect lay of the land. You don't have to agree but it doesn't change facts or the point of my post: This is the design as opposed to the issue having been ignored for five years.

CCP Prism X

Programmer on Team Gridlock & Expert Ranter
Desmont McCallock
#170 - 2012-08-09 09:40:54 UTC
Same as in Biochemical reactions. Reaction requires say 100 water and produces 95 water along with the desirable product.
Same goes for Alchemy (once product gets refined).

It's game mechanics.
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#171 - 2012-08-09 09:45:07 UTC
CCP Prism X wrote:
It's been a long time Tippia. My purpose was to have all damage material components behave in as a uniform way as possible. I could make an argument of initial investment cost vs production cost but I'm not 100% certain that the game designer involved saw it like that and I cant ask him as he doesn't work here anymore.

But I'm not trying to convince anybody that this is the perfect lay of the land. You don't have to agree but it doesn't change facts or the point of my post: This is the design as opposed to the issue having been ignored for five years.


So your saying this is actually a major issue, due to coding?

It kind of seems like a paper cut issue, and could be solved fast. But are you saying it is bigger then that, despite appearances, and actually would take a long time to solve?

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#172 - 2012-08-09 09:47:12 UTC
CCP Prism X wrote:
It's been a long time Tippia. My purpose was to have all damage material components behave in as a uniform way as possible. I could make an argument of initial investment cost vs production cost but I'm not 100% certain that the game designer involved saw it like that and I cant ask him as he doesn't work here anymore.

But I'm not trying to convince anybody that this is the perfect lay of the land. You don't have to agree but it doesn't change facts or the point of my post: This is the design as opposed to the issue having been ignored for five years.
Fair enough. I'm mainly interested in how it came to be. I kind of assumed that it was something along the lines of applying a general pattern, but you never know.

If nothing else, it keeps my R.A.M. sales going since people need stacks of 100:s to produce runs that only need 10 to complete. Blink
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#173 - 2012-08-09 09:49:47 UTC
Tippia wrote:
CCP Prism X wrote:
It's been a long time Tippia. My purpose was to have all damage material components behave in as a uniform way as possible. I could make an argument of initial investment cost vs production cost but I'm not 100% certain that the game designer involved saw it like that and I cant ask him as he doesn't work here anymore.

But I'm not trying to convince anybody that this is the perfect lay of the land. You don't have to agree but it doesn't change facts or the point of my post: This is the design as opposed to the issue having been ignored for five years.
Fair enough. I'm mainly interested in how it came to be. I kind of assumed that it was something along the lines of applying a general pattern, but you never know.

If nothing else, it keeps my R.A.M. sales going since people need stacks of 100:s to produce runs that only need 10 to complete. Blink



It's hardly a big deal anyway.

How to stop it being an issue at all:
Keep enough stock that you don't fall below the 'magic number'. It's not like they go off if you don't use them.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#174 - 2012-08-09 09:52:34 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
How to stop it being an issue at all:
Keep enough stock that you don't fall below the 'magic number'. It's not like they go off if you don't use them.
…although that kind of degradation would be outright hilarious (and profitable) Twisted
kevs5678
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#175 - 2012-08-09 09:56:57 UTC
quote=kevs5678]
kevs5678 wrote:
Exploration & Deadspace

• Some DED 3/10 sites allowed battleships to enter, now they cannot

Was the intention to not allow Battlecruisers too ?

e.g

Angel repurposed outpost will now not allow a hurricane, yet it willl allow a loki or tengu and other Tech 3 strategic cruisers which are surely stronger and carry more firepower.

Seems pretty silly TBH



Is it possible for a dev to answer this so we know if this is a bug or is it intended ? so all us non tech3 explorers know whats happening Thx[/quote]
Gruedon
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#176 - 2012-08-09 10:35:39 UTC
I could have done without the loss of capacity on covetors.

I could hold 9,000 with just Exp CH 2's and T1 rigs, now I only hold 7.
And the graphics bug in the fitting window is still not fixed.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#177 - 2012-08-09 10:47:25 UTC
Nitinol wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
James Selkirk wrote:
Rapid patch deployment: check Smile
Client patched cleanly: check Smile
Patch works: check Smile

"Ethnic Relations skill changed into Diplomatic Relations. The old effect of segregating corporations by races is gone, so all corporations can have all races, always. The skill now reduces the cost to hire allies in war. The skill will not be reimbursed as it is not being removed, but changed." (Italics added)

So, Ethnic Relations has a changed name and a changed function, yet somehow this does not count as removing a skill and adding a whole different skill. Because I trained Ethnic Relations to have a multicultural corporation, not to hire allies in wars I'm not about to get into.


From a technical perspective, it's the same type with the same internal ID number. To count as removing a skill and adding a whole different skill - again, from a technical perspective - it'd mean deleting the old skill and adding a new one with a different ID.


This is an unacceptable, and condescending response. Normal user's don't care about the structure of your data tables or whether a row's key has changed.

What I care about, and what James Selkirk cares about, is that you have changed the purpose of a core skill. If you had changed the gunnery skill to affect mining there would be riots in Jita again. Just because the impact is smaller, does not make the error trivial.

I want the SP back for the skill I trained, which no longer exists. period.


I'm just trying to explain why the patchnotes say what they do. We understand that some players will be unhappy with this as they feel that some skills they've trained are less useful to them. This is however something that happens pretty much every time we make any serious balance changes, and it's been long-standing policy that we don't reimburse skill points due to this kind of change. We appreciate that this is not to everyone's liking but we currently feel it's the best way to deal with these situations overall.

Muffin Cups wrote:
Tutorial feedback


Thanks for the feedback Smile I'm with you that shortcuts are a "better" way to play the game - I'm a keyboard jockey myself - but it's not something we're going to be teaching in the tutorial, for reasons outlined in the original blog Smile

(Also, regarding skills and being podded, you can lose levels of a skill but I don't believe you can ever lose the skill itself - once it's injected there's no way short of wizardry to get it out again.)
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#178 - 2012-08-09 10:56:01 UTC
So hard for CCP to admit they are wrong. So hard.
Shogun Ashikaga Yoshinori
NoNameCorp
#179 - 2012-08-09 10:58:49 UTC
Love the new agent mission thingy, makes life much easier and quicker for those of us who are eternal isk hoarding carebears Bear

I brought a new player to the game last week, and thats the only thing he hated, and struggled with, now he loves it :)

cheers CCP.

the retriever changes are pretty cool as well, dont take as long to fill my alts orca now :)

"Duct tape is like the force. It has a light side, a dark side, and it holds the world together."
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
#180 - 2012-08-09 11:18:48 UTC
KIller Wabbit wrote:
Impossible for CCP to admit they are wrong. Impossible



Fixed that for you.