These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Retribution 1.1 Feedback

First post
Author
Nova Oden
The Meridian.
#521 - 2013-02-27 16:16:36 UTC
Hrothgar Nilsson wrote:
Umm... quick question...

CCP Phantom wrote:
EVE Online: Retribution 1.1 has been successfully deployed on February 19, 2013.
EVE Online: Retribution 1.1.1 has been deployed on February 20, 2013.
EVE Online: Retribution 1.1.2 has been deployed on February 21, 2013.
EVE Online: Retribution 1.1.3 has been deployed on February 27, 2013.


Why do these not link to the patch notes? It's just the same identical link to http://www.eveonline.com/retribution .


this is an exelent question was wondering this my self
The-Lone-wolf
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#522 - 2013-02-27 16:18:18 UTC
Leave it to CCP to keep fracking up stuff that dose not need to be fixed. WTF is wrong with you guys CCP keeps doing more harm then good...
Atal'ama
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#523 - 2013-02-27 16:46:30 UTC
Kal'Han
Kador Trade Company
#524 - 2013-02-27 17:06:45 UTC
Jerrick Chase wrote:
Kal'Han wrote:
when using core scanner probe and multi-resizing them with shift+drag on the bubble, graphically all probe are resized except some times :
the scan range number is not changing for all the probes, and when hitting the scan button, the probe are resized on the screen with the value from the scanner windows.
(ie: in the scanner windows, 1 probe is at 1AU and 3 at 2AU, the one at 1 AU being the one I was resizing)


This has been an issue for me while scanning as well. Even before the patches.


you may be right, I didn't play a lot between 1.0 and 1.1, did you have have this before 1.0 too?
FleetAdmiralHarper
NexaVast VoidWorks
#525 - 2013-02-27 17:55:49 UTC  |  Edited by: FleetAdmiralHarper
you want feed back in your feed back thread?
ok...
i fully expect to get banned for this because thats how you Russians, and FM's operate.

you broke the ferox and a number of other ships, shield taking is worse now. and its been weaker then armor and unbalanced for awhile now, they have 2x the number of hp given from their extenders, and they generally have better resists.. cut the asb reload time to 45 seconds, or give it back 1 or 2 more space for cap charges.

listening to a miss guided or PMSing few on the forums has been a lot of games downfalls, and when the changes hit the game, and the normal players see what just happened, they get pissed and leave.

i dont speak for everyone, but i do speak for some.

give the ferox its missiles back,
add 5% damage and 7.5% range back to heavy missiles. (by default.) its pathetic that a Rapid light missile drake can out damage a heavy missile drake.
give torpedoes a 25% over all range increase (by default.) battleships are large slow targets, the range on torps is so pore its a joke, infact increase all of the short range weapons.

speaking of range, whats up with this 100 km sniping range nonsense???
ive played games where the CWIS and Point defense guns, the point blank weapons, begin interception fire at 36 Km... most heavy weapons engaged at 800-1150 km, and very long range weapons could reach out to 1,600-2,400 km.
now that may be extreme for this game, but do you see the point im trying to make?

double the damage of rail guns or give caldari ships a rate of fire or damage bonus, because they are a JOKE. their is a reason hardly anyone uses them. throw those USELESS range bonuses out the window. they are WAY to slow to keep and hold range, so that TOTALLY negates any kind of advantage range bonuses could of offered.. if you want to "bring missiles in line" and "balance the weapons", THEN BUFF THE WEAK / BROKEN ONES!!!! UH DUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

add mine layers and mines back into the game.
it will have a ripple effect, on the economy, and in game politics/combat, it also adds a strategic layer back into the game that it lost. and will make combat more fun.

let carriers use warp gates in level 5 missions.

make battleships and battle cruisers 2x and 1.5x (respectively) as effective as they are now against smaller vessels, its ridiculous that you get punished for advancing in ship class, theirs little to NO incentive to move out of anything larger then a cruiser or battlecruiser.

make frigates ACTUALLY FRIGATES, and not fighters. which is what they are now....
and a piloting a fighter/fighter bomber might not be a bad idea.

add PDS, CWIS, AoE, anti shield and anti hull weapons to the game. TOTALLY rework the combat aspect of the game to reflect an actual navy game. use [nexus the Jupiter incident] as a model for this, and a proper navy space game.. eve is a really, really, bad and sad joke in my books.

give caldari ships slightly larger drone bays, give the standard stabber its drone bay back.

speaking of drone bays, the larger the ship, the larger the bay. makes sense doesn't it? DO IT.
1 kilometer long battleship, drone bay of 50m3.... 60 meter long frigate, with a 50m3 or higher drone bay, or 200-300 meter long cruiser with a 200m3 or 300 m3 bay.... WHAT???? ^.0??

if you want to mess with battlecruisers, add faction Bcs. ied love to see a gurista ferox or rokh, with missiles as its weapons and swarms of drones. ied cream my self.

your game has been on a decline for a long time now eve, and their are many reasons for that, so go ahead ban me or what ever, i barely touched the surface, but theirs your feedback, for the off and improbable chance some of what i said actually helps better the game..

i dont really care what you do, because i quit this game. its gotten extremely boring and im done with it. if things improve and some one tells me, i might come back.

oh and UBER long training times to do ANYTHING remotely new or fun dont help either, but their are far more important things to worry about, like a decent combat system,.
Mikkael Ethys
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#526 - 2013-02-27 20:06:58 UTC
Thanks for all the bugfixes, opening ore holds seems to have been fixed
Hrothgar Nilsson
#527 - 2013-02-27 20:07:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Hrothgar Nilsson
Atal'ama wrote:

As a matter of fact, I have.

But it's kind of like if Microsoft did this:

Details about Security Update KB4847289 for Windows 8

Not sure what the point is of having links that appear to lead to pages with info about 1.1, 1.1.1, 1.1.2, 1.1.3 that all just lead to the same general promotional page.
Celly Smunt
Neutin Local LLC
#528 - 2013-02-27 20:29:38 UTC
MainDrain wrote:
Izun wrote:
Nadzieijko Andrastile wrote:


I'm not following them in anyway, nothing is labelled (thank god), they link to other stars, but nothing links to the stargate I'm hitting. It's basically a map overlay on my screen. When I close my map, it's because I don't want to see it. Still looking for the option to turn this route map off as well.



Would be nice in a future patch to change the alignment of the stargates to connect them to the star we're warping to, that would add lot more reality to those (nice) lines on the screen, atm they're nothing else that something added to the backgroung (imho)


This was done a couple of expansions ago. If you look at the star gate you should see the autopilot line going straight to the target star.

Edit: - was beaten to the answer


actually, I haven't seen that and I've looked at the gates many times to try to find out which end of the maze i was going to.

a setting i might have missed somewhere? because I have circled the stargate and not seen it

o/
Celly

Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator.

ZZWolf47
#529 - 2013-02-27 21:32:36 UTC  |  Edited by: ZZWolf47
Hail L, Hail M, and Hail S still has the following:

Note: Hail ammunition can only be used by small tech level II Autocannons.

??? I SEE TYPO... LOL
8087
#530 - 2013-02-27 22:17:13 UTC
ZZWolf47 wrote:
Hail L, Hail M, and Hail S still has the following:

Note: Hail ammunition can only be used by small tech level II Autocannons.

??? I SEE TYPO... LOL


Thank you for your bugreport titled: Hail Ammo
We are already aware of this problem, and have added your bugreport to the existing issue in our defect tracking system.
Chris Daugherty Daugherty
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#531 - 2013-02-27 23:02:57 UTC
Hey EVE team I have a suggestion based on a very annoying occurrence. I think players should not be allowed to dock when engaging in duels. All to frequently I will accept a duel blow past the targets shield only to have them run inside the station and come up with full shields again or worse an entirely different ship that is then used to blow me out of space. This does not seem fair and makes it very annoying for the pilot trying to have a honorable duel. Thanks for your time
MainDrain
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#532 - 2013-02-27 23:38:38 UTC
Chris Daugherty Daugherty wrote:
Hey EVE team I have a suggestion based on a very annoying occurrence. I think players should not be allowed to dock when engaging in duels. All to frequently I will accept a duel blow past the targets shield only to have them run inside the station and come up with full shields again or worse an entirely different ship that is then used to blow me out of space. This does not seem fair and makes it very annoying for the pilot trying to have a honorable duel. Thanks for your time


Wait ... are you not the guy that got killed in Amarr a couple of hours ago? Ive got your corpse somewhere!

IIRC you get a weapons timer in a duel, that prevents you from docking for 1 minute, if they survive that long then lucky them.

If you want to be safe do it at a planet or belt etc
Bubbleboylol
Militia Federation
#533 - 2013-02-27 23:51:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Bubbleboylol
Is it just me or does is anyone else getting this problem>?

When pinning a window you can still move it.? I used to not be able to move it as i thought before it was just to keep it on the screen... maybe it is working right now? lol

Asking to have more then one ( Option From CCP is like asking a chicken to cook it-self. )

Roseline Penshar
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#534 - 2013-02-28 00:10:10 UTC
search at general setting the option to lock it
Decimus Hemah
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#535 - 2013-02-28 00:17:24 UTC
Im disappointed that the jukebox is gone.

What if I want to change the music?
Bubbleboylol
Militia Federation
#536 - 2013-02-28 00:46:32 UTC
Roseline Penshar wrote:
search at general setting the option to lock it





ty. Just noticed that. Has been so long since i re-installed eve that i forgot what options there was. 0.o

Asking to have more then one ( Option From CCP is like asking a chicken to cook it-self. )

Scuzzy Logic
Space Spuds
#537 - 2013-02-28 01:52:16 UTC
Knowledgeminer wrote:
First off, I'm mostly interested in PvE, not really interested in (and don't have time for) PvP at the moment. I usually do L4 missions, but also like to do L3 missions from time to time for a change and to try ships.

Missiles were my first weapon of choice, mainly for the theoretical ability to choose damage type. It was frustrating to realize all (Caldari) missile boats except the Raven had a bonus for kinetic damage only, effectively defeating the very reason I wanted to fly those ships and use that weapon.

I've been flying mostly ships with projectile weapons for a long time now. True damage type selection and better DPS than missiles. This (that in practice one had to use projectile weapons to have true damage type selection and would get better base DPS in return) never made sense to me, but it's how things are, so that's what I fly most of the time.

I'm glad the Caracal has a ROF bonus now. Haven't tried it since cruisers were rebalanced but looks good on paper, certainly much better than it was before. The fact that there is no battlecruiser that can do better DPS with missiles for all damage types than the Caracal, however, is plain wrong IMO. The Drake does actually less DPS than the Caracal for all non-kinetic damage types, and that's not even taking into consideration that the Caracal can project that DPS at a 50% greater range. I think there should be at least one battlecruiser capable of dealing more DPS with missiles than the Caracal for all damage types, at the cost of shorter range, less mobility and whatnot if you want...

Not that it matters much to me, I'd like to fly missile boats but will simply adapt and fly something else if there is no good missile boat for my purposes. I can only imagine, however, that the current situation must be quite frustrating for any low skilled pilot that has focused on missiles and cannot effectively use anything else...


People who keep complaining about the drake should really take a look at the minmatar BCs before they open their trap. The fact the skills are still merged makes it even more inexcusable.
Hakaru Ishiwara
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#538 - 2013-02-28 02:39:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Hakaru Ishiwara
Chris Daugherty Daugherty wrote:
Hey EVE team I have a suggestion based on a very annoying occurrence. I think players should not be allowed to dock when engaging in duels. All to frequently I will accept a duel blow past the targets shield only to have them run inside the station and come up with full shields again or worse an entirely different ship that is then used to blow me out of space. This does not seem fair and makes it very annoying for the pilot trying to have a honorable duel. Thanks for your time
Hahahaha. Lol

You came to EVE looking for an honourable duel?

In all seriousness, lol.

+++++++ I have never shed a tear for a fellow EVE player until now. Mark “Seleene” Heard's Blog Honoring Sean "Vile Rat" Smith.

Actros617
Falcon Logistics
#539 - 2013-02-28 02:58:30 UTC
Please give us an option to get rid of the aggression buzzer noise, it gets very annoying when your having to shoot multiple ships and have that darn thing go off every 30 secs, its like playing an athletic (whistle blowing) type game! Please do this on the next update!!!

jimbolina
Doomheim
#540 - 2013-02-28 11:15:04 UTC
1.1.3 and 1.1.4. are the same patch notes Shocked