These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Odyssey Feedback Request] Team Super Friends - Probe Scanning and You

First post First post First post
Author
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#821 - 2013-05-13 13:47:25 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Was it intentional to make scanning so easy that there is no need to train anything beyond Astrometrics 3?
Wi you consider adjusting signature strengths to compensate for the new system and modules?


We probably will not touch existing signatures all that much, but with these changes we're opening up the possibility for new signatures in the future. We have some plans in this regard, maybe for winter (can't promise anything tough).

What is making scanning too easy is the 5% per level to scan time reduction, scan deviation reduction, and scan strength. It is too much, maybe 2% to all would be more in-line and then bump the support skills back up to 10% per level.
I can understand why you wanted to give the Astrometrics skill something as you can launch 8 probes by default, but 5% per level is just too much.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Terrorfrodo
Interbus Universal
#822 - 2013-05-13 13:50:23 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Regarding removing the DSP – the DSP basically allowed people to quickly get a picture of everything in the system (including ships), in a kind of a “cheating” way as it didn’t really use the probe scan system (no triangulation or anything). This and the heavy overlap with the Sensor Overlay system made us decide to remove them. There are other ways to find/track ships in systems; apart from the D-Scan, there are also the combat probes, which really are there to do what the DSP just did better.


This is a valid reason for removing them. You should have given that from the start instead of just asserting that they will be removed because they had become useless ;)

.

Space Wanderer
#823 - 2013-05-13 13:56:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Space Wanderer
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Well, if that was the case, we would only create a single method and prohibit all others, which we are not doing.


Well, during the fascist period in Italy, people were allowed to vote against the fascist party too. It's just that there were strong incentives not to do so. Smile Obviously CCP does not have anything to do with fascism, but I hope you understand my point, it's not enough to say "you are free to do as you wish" when you stack the deck heavily in your favor.

CCP SoniClover wrote:
Moving your probes into a formation of your own making should also in most cases be no harder or more time consuming than with the current system.


No argument there. On the other hand moving my probes into a formation of YOUR making will require no time at all. If you can't see the problem right there, I don't know what else to tell. If you DO see the problem, but you don't have the resources to tackle it, see below:

CCP SoniClover wrote:
We're not telling people they HAVE to scan in only one way. There is still plenty of wiggle room to improvise and do things your way. On the other hand, the lack of focus of the system is one of the major pain points people have in learning the system and providing them with easier way to learn it is very beneficial IMO. Also, we do plan to allow people to save their own formations at some point, we just don't have time to implement it for Odyssey, but its been in the design from the start. We aim to add it in a point release if time permits.


I think this is the issue. I can certainly understand that you don't have resources to implement formations right away, given the time constraints (I could argue that for this to be an exploration themed expansion CCP seems to have devoted a surprisingly small amount of resources to exploration, but I will not, in this postBig smile).

But if you don't want people like me going back to the jita monument, implementing customizable formations is something that should be top priority, and a commitment you should take with your playerbase and the (unconsulted) CSM even before odyssey release. A "we will do that when we have time" is likely to be implemented in a couple of years from now, and in the mean time all kind of damage will have already been done...
Rammix
TheMurk
#824 - 2013-05-13 13:59:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Rammix
Sugar Kyle wrote:
What about the magically reappearing probes when one jumps system? Forgetting probes caused all sorts of cascades from not being able to find targets due to derp to getting locked into wormholes and having to figure out ways to get out or be rescued.

-- THIS.
You took away a part of gameplay, which often was a source of some player interactions. Please give it back.

BTW, currently on SiSi if you manually call your probes back you have to wait before they return. But if you just leave the system, you get them back instantly. Very odd, if not more.

p.s. The same about probes' lifespan. They need to be mortal. By the same reasons.

OpenSUSE Leap 42.1, wine >1.9

Covert cyno in highsec: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=296129&find=unread

Space Wanderer
#825 - 2013-05-13 14:01:42 UTC
Rammix wrote:
At least without complete removal of Local everywhere in EVE.


Exactly my point. Big smile
Victors Clone
madmen of the skies
#826 - 2013-05-13 14:02:26 UTC
Could someone explain to me please all the angriness developed by the fact that the DSP's are beeing removed ? With the new System-Scanner-Thingy, it makes the PvE side of the DSP's obsolete and for their PvP function the Combat-Probes take their place. One solution in solving this redundancy issue could be a Buff for the Combat-Probes in radius (e.g. from MAX_RANGE = 64 to MAX_RANGE = 128). Big smile
Sipphakta en Gravonere
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#827 - 2013-05-13 14:03:38 UTC
Space Wanderer wrote:
No argument there. On the other hand moving my probes into a formation of YOUR making will require no time at all. If you can't see the problem right there, I don't know what else to tell


The basic probe pattern is, according to many experienced scanners, inferior to their advanced scanning techniques. Wouldn't it be dumbing down then if these advanced patterns are easily recalled?
Kitanga
Lowsec Border Marshals
#828 - 2013-05-13 14:05:22 UTC
there was a WHOLE WEEKEND of merited discussion about DSP and you (CCP SoniClover) dismiss it all with one paragraph?

i think that to compensate for the removal of DSP, that you should allow Combats to expand to 256au. this would be a fair substitute. (and at the same time refund us our SP invested to use DSP)

Sipphakta en Gravonere
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#829 - 2013-05-13 14:05:41 UTC
Space Wanderer wrote:
Rammix wrote:
At least without complete removal of Local everywhere in EVE.


Exactly my point. Big smile


Yes, if you add the option to hot drop anywhere in eve (well, outside HS obviously) and give easy to use route information to any target anywhere. Deal?
Space Wanderer
#830 - 2013-05-13 14:06:07 UTC
Sipphakta en Gravonere wrote:
The basic probe pattern is, according to many experienced scanners, inferior to their advanced scanning techniques. Wouldn't it be dumbing down then if these advanced patterns are easily recalled?


1/10
Sipphakta en Gravonere
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#831 - 2013-05-13 14:07:37 UTC
Kitanga wrote:
i think that to compensate for the removal of DSP, that you should allow Combats to expand to 256au. this would be a fair substitute. (and at the same time refund us our SP invested to use DSP)


Why would you get SP back? The skill isn't removed and still has valid uses. It would be unfair to refund SP every time a skill changes.
TZeer
BURN EDEN
No Therapy
#832 - 2013-05-13 14:08:59 UTC  |  Edited by: TZeer
Octoven wrote:
TZeer wrote:


Still no word about the actual scanning time with combat probes??

C'mon CCP, seriously?

You are about to release a completely redesigned line of battleships, and you haven't fixed the main reason for one of the races bonuses being of no use.

Wake up!



I am completely confused about this statement, are you talking about the new line of battleships or the scanning system??



CCP is redoing the battleships. Cool

CCP is "improving" the scanning/probing. Cool


Caldari as a race, has a range bonus on every T1 battleship they have.

Caldari Battleship Skill Bonuses:
+10% to large Hybrid Turret optimal range
+4% Shield resistances per level (-1% per level)


Caldari Battleship Skill Bonuses:
+5% bonus to Cruise and Torpedo Launcher rate of fire
+10% bonus to Cruise Missile Torpedo Velocity

Caldari Battleship Skill Bonuses:
15% bonus to ECM Target Jammer strength
25% bonus to ECM Target Jammer optimal and falloff range
25% bonus to ECM Burst range


The apoc of the Amarr also get's a bonus that greatly lean towards ranged combat.

Amarr Battleship Skill Bonuses:
+7.5% to Large Energy Turret optimal range
+7.5% Large Energy Turret tracking speed (replaced large energy turret cap use)


All this is nice and awesome etc.

But what is not cool, is that proper ranged combat is not, and has not been a viable tactic since the probing time got reduced to 5 sec.

Try and warp in a BS at range and see how fast it will take someone to get your position.

Your position is probed and scanned down before you have even aligned, locked or fired 1 shot.

And CCP just keeps ignoring the issue.
Olari Vanderfall
Perkone
Caldari State
#833 - 2013-05-13 14:11:48 UTC
Victors Clone wrote:
Could someone explain to me please all the angriness developed by the fact that the DSP's are beeing removed ? With the new System-Scanner-Thingy, it makes the PvE side of the DSP's obsolete and for their PvP function the Combat-Probes take their place. One solution in solving this redundancy issue could be a Buff for the Combat-Probes in radius (e.g. from MAX_RANGE = 64 to MAX_RANGE = 128). Big smile


Not everyone used the DSP in this way. I'm looking forward to trying out the changes.

My request is if I create a formation and set the probes at different sizes that it maintains that relationship even if I resize them. If Idrop 8 combats and have 4 at 8au, and the other 4 at 2au if I make them smaller as a group they will go to 4/1 or 2/0.5. Not at the computer to see if it's currently possible but that would offer options for those with Astrometrics 5 and using 8 probes.
Rammix
TheMurk
#834 - 2013-05-13 14:28:09 UTC
Sipphakta en Gravonere wrote:
Space Wanderer wrote:
Rammix wrote:
At least without complete removal of Local everywhere in EVE.


Exactly my point. Big smile


Yes, if you add the option to hot drop anywhere in eve (well, outside HS obviously) and give easy to use route information to any target anywhere. Deal?

Jumps and kills statistics refreshed every 10-15 minutes would or could solve the problem of finding targets.
In addition to the previous, increasing the D-scan range up to 28 a.u. would help, too.

Removal of local - sure is not a thing that can be done with just one functional change, but with the new overlay thingie it can be more real than before.

OpenSUSE Leap 42.1, wine >1.9

Covert cyno in highsec: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=296129&find=unread

Rammix
TheMurk
#835 - 2013-05-13 14:33:53 UTC
Olari Vanderfall wrote:
Victors Clone wrote:
Could someone explain to me please all the angriness developed by the fact that the DSP's are beeing removed ? With the new System-Scanner-Thingy, it makes the PvE side of the DSP's obsolete and for their PvP function the Combat-Probes take their place. One solution in solving this redundancy issue could be a Buff for the Combat-Probes in radius (e.g. from MAX_RANGE = 64 to MAX_RANGE = 128). Big smile


Not everyone used the DSP in this way. I'm looking forward to trying out the changes.

My request is if I create a formation and set the probes at different sizes that it maintains that relationship even if I resize them. If Idrop 8 combats and have 4 at 8au, and the other 4 at 2au if I make them smaller as a group they will go to 4/1 or 2/0.5. Not at the computer to see if it's currently possible but that would offer options for those with Astrometrics 5 and using 8 probes.

Ability to assign probes to 2 or more different groups controlled separately would be nice too.

OpenSUSE Leap 42.1, wine >1.9

Covert cyno in highsec: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=296129&find=unread

Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS
Shadow Cartel
#836 - 2013-05-13 14:41:48 UTC
All the cahnges are quite good, except the one that the probes reappear magically when u dock or jump out of system or a wh.
CCP this EVE, it is ok for people to loose isk by forgetting probes or get stuck in a WH.
Making magically appear probes in our cargo holdes IS DUMBING DOWN EVE. Rest is pretty fine.

BALEX, bringing piracy on a whole new level.

Derath Ellecon
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#837 - 2013-05-13 14:47:15 UTC
Victors Clone wrote:
Could someone explain to me please all the angriness developed by the fact that the DSP's are beeing removed ? With the new System-Scanner-Thingy, it makes the PvE side of the DSP's obsolete and for their PvP function the Combat-Probes take their place. One solution in solving this redundancy issue could be a Buff for the Combat-Probes in radius (e.g. from MAX_RANGE = 64 to MAX_RANGE = 128). Big smile



When the System-Scanner-Thingy can populate my scan results window with a list of sigs it found so I don't have to spin, mouseover, manually write down info, wash repeat, THEN it will replace my DSP's functionality for PVE.

Until then it is merely eye candy and barely useful as a substitute.
Haseo Antares
Production N Destruction INC.
F O R M I C I D A E
#838 - 2013-05-13 14:59:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Haseo Antares
CCP SoniClover,

Can we have the normal list? These bars are not cutting it...

We currently have the world's greatest linguists and scientists trying to decode what you just said.

Luminocity
The Dark Revenants
PLEASE NOT VIOLENCE OUR BOATS
#839 - 2013-05-13 15:12:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Luminocity
Hi,
I'd like to state that I fully agree with most (negative) criticism provided here towards the new scanning features (formations, system scanner, UI changes, etc.). Please don't fix something that is not broken by watering it down to not require any skill from the player whatsoever..

EVE IS HARD. As with most things it should be easy to get in to and difficult to master (as scanning is today). A player that isn't into exploration today will not be into exploration after these fluff changes either (at least not in the longer perspective) - however the players that find the challenging nature of it interesting now will likely find it trivial in the future..
Brainless Bimbo
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#840 - 2013-05-13 15:23:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Brainless Bimbo
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Hey guys, thanks for all the great feedback.
Regarding removing the DSP


I think the main gripe is not having it as a list in the scanner window as it operates now, and not having the functionality of the old list system in the new (resizing columns and sorting rows).

Also its the info overloads in some systems that will happen, the new brackets are TOO BIG, did you lot forget that they will all be on or very near the planetary plane so overlaps will happen that will make some unreadable due to planets being behind others from many spots in system.


Give us the list as well as the in space brackets, the info is already at the client from the Database so that is not an excuse, you only need one instance is not an excuse, brackets in space and the overview display the exact same info so its not a new or different concept.


Its called EASE OF USE, which CCP says it wants, i just don´t understand why you guys do not see it

already dead, just haven´t fallen over yet....