These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 Open Period - 19/10 to 23/10

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jarin Arenos
Card Shark Industries
#81 - 2012-10-20 19:29:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Jarin Arenos
CCP Goliath wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
. And since when is precise data bad for a developer? Oh yeah, when the data runs counter to what you want.

Pretty much this yeah. Also information overload.

Are you sure this is what you meant? Because it sounds like you're saying that if feedback doesn't fit your already-determined viewpoint, you don't want to hear it. That can't be what you meant... right?

Edit: Really not trying to be a ****. But when people are already making this claim, reinforcing it probably isn't the best idea.

But I'm not CCP Soundwave, so what do I know?
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#82 - 2012-10-20 19:42:48 UTC
Jarin Arenos wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
. And since when is precise data bad for a developer? Oh yeah, when the data runs counter to what you want.

Pretty much this yeah. Also information overload.

Are you sure this is what you meant? Because it sounds like you're saying that if feedback doesn't fit your already-determined viewpoint, you don't want to hear it. That can't be what you meant... right?

Edit: Really not trying to be a ****. But when people are already making this claim, reinforcing it probably isn't the best idea.


I think you miss what he is saying.
From his previous posts he has stated he has zero interest in this wipes out drone operators.
The only thing he is interested in is testing to see of the programmed mechanics are all working.

Stuff like do the missions load, are the objects in the site all show up, stuff like that.
Of course, Fox Four did weeks of posting detailing all the testing Fox Four did, so I would expect that all to be dealt with.

Apparently it was not, so this incredibly brief testing window is for the dev's to get the specific code working, not to see if the overall concept should be implemented at all.
They have already made their minds up about that.
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#83 - 2012-10-20 19:44:59 UTC
Jarin Arenos wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
. And since when is precise data bad for a developer? Oh yeah, when the data runs counter to what you want.

Pretty much this yeah. Also information overload.

Are you sure this is what you meant? Because it sounds like you're saying that if feedback doesn't fit your already-determined viewpoint, you don't want to hear it. That can't be what you meant... right?

Edit: Really not trying to be a ****. But when people are already making this claim, reinforcing it probably isn't the best idea.



iI think he meant that he doesn't want feedback for stuff he isn't testing (which goes against what he wants). In this case, play by play stories of missions are useless, and information overload.

In other words, wanted feedback: rats are/aren't switching targets; are/aren't shooting things their own size; etc
Unwanted. feedback: Dominic sucks now; CCP hates hisec; etc

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#84 - 2012-10-20 20:14:33 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
. And since when is precise data bad for a developer? Oh yeah, when the data runs counter to what you want.

Pretty much this yeah. Also information overload.

Just wanted to say that I got a guy to make me the new Gallente destroyer on Duality, and it was awesome Lol

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}
nat longshot
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#85 - 2012-10-20 20:27:23 UTC
TO: CCP Goliath

you ask for feed back and my last post was removed for said feed back about us testing and ccp not there for testing.

iam done testing for you given you not there in the office when we're testing on the first day but out drinking per what you have said.

Poor showing of ccp for that very poor.

 [13:12:18] CCP Punkturis nat longshot you're a cutie.. OH YAH I WIN!!
Jarin Arenos
Card Shark Industries
#86 - 2012-10-20 20:55:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Jarin Arenos
Doublepost

But I'm not CCP Soundwave, so what do I know?
Jarin Arenos
Card Shark Industries
#87 - 2012-10-20 20:58:55 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
In other words, wanted feedback: rats are/aren't switching targets; are/aren't shooting things their own size; etc
Unwanted. feedback: Dominic sucks now; CCP hates hisec; etc

They are implementing the mechanic, that's a given. I had thought that they wanted feedback on balance issues as well a just mechanical.

As for the dominix sucking now... it was already one of the slowest L4 missioners (you want to blitz L4s for income, you apparently have to fly Caldari). There's already plenty of reports about missioning being impractical from actual people testing on the server. Just hoping FoxFour weighs in, as Goliath is obviously focused on other issues.

But I'm not CCP Soundwave, so what do I know?
CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#88 - 2012-10-20 21:00:54 UTC
nat longshot wrote:
TO: CCP Goliath

you ask for feed back and my last post was removed for said feed back about us testing and ccp not there for testing.

iam done testing for you given you not there in the office when we're testing on the first day but out drinking per what you have said.

Poor showing of ccp for that very poor.


Both your posts were incredibly rude and basically rants. That isn't feedback.

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath
CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#89 - 2012-10-20 21:02:46 UTC
Jarin Arenos wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
. And since when is precise data bad for a developer? Oh yeah, when the data runs counter to what you want.

Pretty much this yeah. Also information overload.

Are you sure this is what you meant? Because it sounds like you're saying that if feedback doesn't fit your already-determined viewpoint, you don't want to hear it. That can't be what you meant... right?

Edit: Really not trying to be a ****. But when people are already making this claim, reinforcing it probably isn't the best idea.


Nah, I mean giving us feedback about stuff we're not focusing on at the moment. These test windows are pretty tight and so we need to make sure the good feedback gets through. I can see how it could be misinterpreted though Lol

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath
CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#90 - 2012-10-20 21:04:55 UTC
Jarin Arenos wrote:
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
In other words, wanted feedback: rats are/aren't switching targets; are/aren't shooting things their own size; etc
Unwanted. feedback: Dominic sucks now; CCP hates hisec; etc

They are implementing the mechanic, that's a given. I had thought that they wanted feedback on balance issues as well a just mechanical.

As for the dominix sucking now... it was already one of the slowest L4 missioners (you want to blitz L4s for income, you apparently have to fly Caldari). There's already plenty of reports about missioning being impractical from actual people testing on the server. Just hoping FoxFour weighs in, as Goliath is obviously focused on other issues.


Yeah absolutely balance issues are fine to give feedback on, that wasn't what I meant at all, sorry if it was misconstrued.

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#91 - 2012-10-20 21:29:25 UTC
More people should learn programming. Especially you people shitposting all the time. It takes a lot of time and effort to make new features work properly, and yelling at the ones making the features does you no good. We like to get our code reviewed and features tested, and I personally will happily ignore people who have no constructive feedback other than rants, even if there are some good point in between. Go test, follow the testcases and post back what happened, and what you expected to happen and if something happened that you felt was not natural or felt like a bug. A better world/new Eden for everyone

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}
Jarin Arenos
Card Shark Industries
#92 - 2012-10-20 21:35:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Jarin Arenos
CCP Goliath wrote:
Jarin Arenos wrote:
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
In other words, wanted feedback: rats are/aren't switching targets; are/aren't shooting things their own size; etc
Unwanted. feedback: Dominic sucks now; CCP hates hisec; etc

They are implementing the mechanic, that's a given. I had thought that they wanted feedback on balance issues as well a just mechanical.

As for the dominix sucking now... it was already one of the slowest L4 missioners (you want to blitz L4s for income, you apparently have to fly Caldari). There's already plenty of reports about missioning being impractical from actual people testing on the server. Just hoping FoxFour weighs in, as Goliath is obviously focused on other issues.


Yeah absolutely balance issues are fine to give feedback on, that wasn't what I meant at all, sorry if it was misconstrued.

Alright, thanks for the clarification.

Now if I could just get past this can't-refit-my-ship bug, I could actually test. >.<

Edit: Nope, still borked. Bug report #145525, FYI. I'll just come back and try tomorrow, I think.

But I'm not CCP Soundwave, so what do I know?
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#93 - 2012-10-20 21:47:41 UTC
Hannott Thanos wrote:
More people should learn programming. Especially you people shitposting all the time. It takes a lot of time and effort to make new features work properly, and yelling at the ones making the features does you no good. We like to get our code reviewed and features tested, and I personally will happily ignore people who have no constructive feedback other than rants, even if there are some good point in between. Go test, follow the testcases and post back what happened, and what you expected to happen and if something happened that you felt was not natural or felt like a bug. A better world/new Eden for everyone


umm what not sure if you meant to post with this char ccp facepalm?

i bolded the parts that made me think you are a dev

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#94 - 2012-10-20 21:49:42 UTC
Hannott Thanos wrote:
More people should learn programming. Especially you people shitposting all the time. It takes a lot of time and effort to make new features work properly, and yelling at the ones making the features does you no good. We like to get our code reviewed and features tested, and I personally will happily ignore people who have no constructive feedback other than rants, even if there are some good point in between. Go test, follow the testcases and post back what happened, and what you expected to happen and if something happened that you felt was not natural or felt like a bug. A better world/new Eden for everyone



You might want to actually examine the test feedback thread in question before acting like a fanboi and flinging fecal matter at people like me who are calling CCP on this mess.

Precisely, how many people today have posted ANY feedback in the current AI thread?

BTW, from what I am seeing, the complete thrust of this particular test is broken, because one of the key features is broken.
Guess what? From my testing, HEAVY DRONES ARE IGNORED BY THE AI.

Small issue there....really easy to miss in all that coding.

My small drones were getting insta popped, my sentries were getting aggro almost instantly, but my Heavies completely ignored.
And before you start spouting off "RNG gods", consider the fact that while I am typing this, I am effectively running Sansha Recon, Level 4, GASP...AFK!!!!

I have now run 5 missions, and had Heavies out for hours of gametime, against frigs, cruisers, and BS's, for Rogue Drones, Mercs's, and Sanshas. Not once, in who knows how many AI cycles, have my heavies been damaged.

Part of the AI is working, otherwise my lights and Sentries would not get insta aggro.
But since my heavies get no aggro, the entire concept of testing the AI is thrown out the window.
CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#95 - 2012-10-20 22:09:01 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
Hannott Thanos wrote:
More people should learn programming. Especially you people shitposting all the time. It takes a lot of time and effort to make new features work properly, and yelling at the ones making the features does you no good. We like to get our code reviewed and features tested, and I personally will happily ignore people who have no constructive feedback other than rants, even if there are some good point in between. Go test, follow the testcases and post back what happened, and what you expected to happen and if something happened that you felt was not natural or felt like a bug. A better world/new Eden for everyone


umm what not sure if you meant to post with this char ccp facepalm?

i bolded the parts that made me think you are a dev


He's talking about programming and programmers in general I believe.

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath
Mund Richard
#96 - 2012-10-20 22:12:06 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh. OK. The triggers point I have already covered, and the triggers on buzzkill aren't interesting from a testing perspective when looking at AI.
Ok, out of a testing perspective, spawned webifier drones in Serpentis extravaganza seemed to love to run back to their spawn point when loosing target (warping out, drone recall), instead of going for another one. They cover the 50km fast, but possibly not intended?

CCP Goliath wrote:
You seem to be talking about the efficiency and technique of completing missions, which frankly I couldn't care less about - that's not the goal of the tests.
Ok, so rest of the feedback thatta way Arrow

CCP Goliath wrote:
You don't know our AI - I do. I also know how to effectively test it, which again, would be something you clearly do not know how to do. Kindly desist arguing with me on this topic. I understand you are entitled to your opinion, but this is my profession, I am extremely capable in it, and you are out of your element.

To quote the internet, Dinsdale, wat r u doin, Dinsdale, stahp.
Shocked
I know he is an ...interesting chap, but... I'd make a blind guess that part of public relations is also part of your profession (seeing how you post on the forum), and not sure if what I see defines as "extremely capable".

Jarin Arenos wrote:
Are you sure this is what you meant? Because it sounds like you're saying that if feedback doesn't fit your already-determined viewpoint, you don't want to hear it. That can't be what you meant... right?

Edit: Really not trying to be a ****. But when people are already making this claim, reinforcing it probably isn't the best idea.
Last point still stands.

CCP Goliath wrote:
Yeah absolutely balance issues are fine to give feedback on, that wasn't what I meant at all, sorry if it was misconstrued.

How much different is that from the previous "efficiency and technique of completing missions" which frankly you couldn't care less about? (using your words without a direct quote again).

Balance of solo without drones - unaffected.
Balance of solo with drones - bit more hassle on drones, but pulling them in every min or so prolly doesn't make it much worse, assuming a BS with small ones (at least target swap seemed to be at a bearable pace if I took on a few frigs at a time)
Balance of duo - possibly more efficient when two random players go with similar tank and gank but different sig size, since the load for each tank will be less (didn't personally test). Balance with a tanked old player (warping in first) and a newbro in a let's say thorax never exsisted before.

Balance for drone boats...
From what I saw so far (extremely limited test), sentries are fine against BS even with low dps from the ship itself, but cruisers/frigs have a mild habbit to swap. Can be worked with, since drones are in scoop-range. Though a repper on a rattlesnake is a hassle if passive fit, but a domi should have it easy (though at a loss of dps due to lack of utility highs)
Light/Medium/Heavy drones... Wouldn't want to comment on yet.


All in all, if I weren't a die-hard drone user, it wouldn't look bad at all.
Now the question is, just how die-hard drone user am I, will I find/copy a good way to break and exploit the new AI, or move on to gun/missile ships.

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#97 - 2012-10-20 23:18:33 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Hannott Thanos wrote:
More people should learn programming. Especially you people shitposting all the time. It takes a lot of time and effort to make new features work properly, and yelling at the ones making the features does you no good. We like to get our code reviewed and features tested, and I personally will happily ignore people who have no constructive feedback other than rants, even if there are some good point in between. Go test, follow the testcases and post back what happened, and what you expected to happen and if something happened that you felt was not natural or felt like a bug. A better world/new Eden for everyone



You might want to actually examine the test feedback thread in question before acting like a fanboi and flinging fecal matter at people like me who are calling CCP on this mess.

Precisely, how many people today have posted ANY feedback in the current AI thread?

BTW, from what I am seeing, the complete thrust of this particular test is broken, because one of the key features is broken.
Guess what? From my testing, HEAVY DRONES ARE IGNORED BY THE AI.

Small issue there....really easy to miss in all that coding.

My small drones were getting insta popped, my sentries were getting aggro almost instantly, but my Heavies completely ignored.
And before you start spouting off "RNG gods", consider the fact that while I am typing this, I am effectively running Sansha Recon, Level 4, GASP...AFK!!!!

I have now run 5 missions, and had Heavies out for hours of gametime, against frigs, cruisers, and BS's, for Rogue Drones, Mercs's, and Sanshas. Not once, in who knows how many AI cycles, have my heavies been damaged.

Part of the AI is working, otherwise my lights and Sentries would not get insta aggro.
But since my heavies get no aggro, the entire concept of testing the AI is thrown out the window.


This is not a testcase. "My heavy drones are ignored" is not a test result without posting more info. What ship were you flying? How many NPC's were on grid and shooting you? What ship class were the NPC's?(you answered that tho) Did you use guns and ewar on your target to generate a lot of agro? What happened when (if) you ONLY used heavy drones vs your targets?

For all you know, heavies are not generating a lot of agro because they are slow, and simply using your guns will "out-agro" them. Light drones are fast and apply full damage to targets really fast, hence the fast agro on them

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#98 - 2012-10-20 23:21:02 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
Hannott Thanos wrote:
More people should learn programming. Especially you people shitposting all the time. It takes a lot of time and effort to make new features work properly, and yelling at the ones making the features does you no good. We like to get our code reviewed and features tested, and I personally will happily ignore people who have no constructive feedback other than rants, even if there are some good point in between. Go test, follow the testcases and post back what happened, and what you expected to happen and if something happened that you felt was not natural or felt like a bug. A better world/new Eden for everyone


umm what not sure if you meant to post with this char ccp facepalm?

i bolded the parts that made me think you are a dev


He's talking about programming and programmers in general I believe.

Yup. I make software for general practitioners, indirectly saving lives by helping them not screw up medications and stuff for patients :) :feelsgoodman:

I also like game programming as a hobby

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#99 - 2012-10-20 23:29:20 UTC
Hannott Thanos wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Hannott Thanos wrote:
More people should learn programming. Especially you people shitposting all the time. It takes a lot of time and effort to make new features work properly, and yelling at the ones making the features does you no good. We like to get our code reviewed and features tested, and I personally will happily ignore people who have no constructive feedback other than rants, even if there are some good point in between. Go test, follow the testcases and post back what happened, and what you expected to happen and if something happened that you felt was not natural or felt like a bug. A better world/new Eden for everyone



You might want to actually examine the test feedback thread in question before acting like a fanboi and flinging fecal matter at people like me who are calling CCP on this mess.

Precisely, how many people today have posted ANY feedback in the current AI thread?

BTW, from what I am seeing, the complete thrust of this particular test is broken, because one of the key features is broken.
Guess what? From my testing, HEAVY DRONES ARE IGNORED BY THE AI.

Small issue there....really easy to miss in all that coding.

My small drones were getting insta popped, my sentries were getting aggro almost instantly, but my Heavies completely ignored.
And before you start spouting off "RNG gods", consider the fact that while I am typing this, I am effectively running Sansha Recon, Level 4, GASP...AFK!!!!

I have now run 5 missions, and had Heavies out for hours of gametime, against frigs, cruisers, and BS's, for Rogue Drones, Mercs's, and Sanshas. Not once, in who knows how many AI cycles, have my heavies been damaged.

Part of the AI is working, otherwise my lights and Sentries would not get insta aggro.
But since my heavies get no aggro, the entire concept of testing the AI is thrown out the window.


This is not a testcase. "My heavy drones are ignored" is not a test result without posting more info. What ship were you flying? How many NPC's were on grid and shooting you? What ship class were the NPC's?(you answered that tho) Did you use guns and ewar on your target to generate a lot of agro? What happened when (if) you ONLY used heavy drones vs your targets?

For all you know, heavies are not generating a lot of agro because they are slow, and simply using your guns will "out-agro" them. Light drones are fast and apply full damage to targets really fast, hence the fast agro on them


How about you read the actual AI feedback thread where all afternoon and evening I posted up precisely the info you described.
Z1gy
Vindicator Corporation
#100 - 2012-10-20 23:34:34 UTC
Duality feel a bit slow/sluggish - will this affect us doing mission running?