These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

What happened to the removal of off grid boosters?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Gunship
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1 - 2013-05-19 00:24:47 UTC
Sofia Wolf
Ubuntu Inc.
The Fourth District
#2 - 2013-05-19 20:05:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Sofia Wolf
Last I heard about it was comment by Fozz that it waits for CCP Veritas to concoct some sot of coding voodoo necessary to make it work.

Jessica Danikov > EVE is your real life. the rest is fantasy. caught in a corporation. no escape from banality. open up yours eyes, peer through pod good and seeeeeee. I'm just a poor pilot, I need no sympathy. because I'm easy scam, easy go, little isk, little know. anyway the solar wind blows...
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
#3 - 2013-05-19 21:38:41 UTC
Why on Earth did you open this thread in AH and not General, Warfare or F&I? Smile
Sofia Wolf wrote:
Last I hear about it was comment by Fozz that it waits for CCP Veritas to concoct some sot of coding voodoo necessary to make it work.

Aye, last word was that there was a problem with applying stuff to grid only as opposed to system, suppose they could get around it by making grids instances in their own right but that probably creates a whole new set of issues.
Curious as to how the AoE DDD worked back in the day, that was grid based I believe even if effectively merely a giant smartbomb .. can a smartbomb set off next to a grid boundary effect stuff within range but off-grid?
Jonas Sukarala
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#4 - 2013-05-20 15:24:51 UTC
I'm curious too .. surely if they set a range to it say 30km that would remove the grid issue ..

'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium Nerf missile range into place where is the TD missile change?  ..projectiles should use capacitor. ABC's should be T2 HABC and nerf web strength its still too high

Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
#5 - 2013-05-20 17:44:33 UTC
Jonas Sukarala wrote:
I'm curious too .. surely if they set a range to it say 30km that would remove the grid issue ..

Or one could just say "if you can lock it, you can boost it", increase base lock range enough to make it viable (think Combat Recon ranges) .. doubles as a massive boost to damps as well which should make even the permanently grumpy Gallente aficionados happy .. hell, might even make Info links desirable for the first time since Failcon nerf.

Could spawn a Recon/Command vs. Recon/Command sub-fight while vanilla fatties punch each other in the face around them.
Chitsa Jason
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#6 - 2013-05-27 22:09:17 UTC
I have asked CCP for update on that

Burn the land and boil the sea You can't take the sky from me
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#7 - 2013-05-28 19:59:11 UTC
The answer is the same as it has been for a while unfortunately. It's a performance issue that will be solved when a very large (and currently ongoing) behind the scenes code re-factoring project is completed sometime in the future.

A bunch of you are going to to respond to this with some variation of "Why not do _________, wouldn't that work?" and I'll go ahead and preemptively let you know that the answer to is "Our code can't do that with acceptable performance right now, but will be able to in the future".

So it will happen, but as always I cannot give an ETA.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#8 - 2013-05-28 20:16:29 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
The answer is the same as it has been for a while unfortunately. It's a performance issue that will be solved when a very large (and currently ongoing) behind the scenes code re-factoring project is completed sometime in the future.

A bunch of you are going to to respond to this with some variation of "Why not do _________, wouldn't that work?" and I'll go ahead and preemptively let you know that the answer to is "Our code can't do that with acceptable performance right now, but will be able to in the future".

So it will happen, but as always I cannot give an ETA.


all old code must be updated first! then we can play around with improvemtns...

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Nicen Jehr
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2013-05-28 21:54:31 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
It's a performance issue that will be solved when a very large (and currently ongoing) behind the scenes code re-factoring project is completed sometime in the future.
Hey Fozzie, out of curiousity, might this refactor make it possible to display bookmarks on overview and/or brackets?

Little Things to improve ≡⋁≡ | My Little Things posts
Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#10 - 2013-05-28 22:29:48 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
The answer is the same as it has been for a while unfortunately. It's a performance issue that will be solved when a very large (and currently ongoing) behind the scenes code re-factoring project is completed sometime in the future.

A bunch of you are going to to respond to this with some variation of "Why not do _________, wouldn't that work?" and I'll go ahead and preemptively let you know that the answer to is "Our code can't do that with acceptable performance right now, but will be able to in the future".

So it will happen, but as always I cannot give an ETA.
Times, Fozzie! Times! Nah, just kidding man. You guys bust your butt every day to make this game better. Props to you, man.

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

Gallia14
Pirates of the Caribbean.
Phantom Horde
#11 - 2013-05-29 00:45:16 UTC
Some day in the future a dev sifting though the Coding will find that one line and then BOOYA, he/she will yell! and the world will change!
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#12 - 2013-05-29 01:36:59 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
The answer is the same as it has been for a while unfortunately. It's a performance issue that will be solved when a very large (and currently ongoing) behind the scenes code re-factoring project is completed sometime in the future.

A bunch of you are going to to respond to this with some variation of "Why not do _________, wouldn't that work?" and I'll go ahead and preemptively let you know that the answer to is "Our code can't do that with acceptable performance right now, but will be able to in the future".

So it will happen, but as always I cannot give an ETA.


Ok thats all understandable.. But that really does not mean you cannot do anything about links right now...

How about going ahead with other parts of the inevitable nerf?

Here is a list of things you could do (And imo SHOULD do right away) to make links less ridiculous for now.


  1. Reduce the effectiveness of links by a decent portion (at least 33% imo, preferably more like 50-60%)
  2. Make activating links turn on your weapons timer (And preferably some sort of aggression, maybe the npc kind?)
  3. Make links not work in pos's.
  4. Make intrediction nullifiers incompatable with links
  5. Make links give you a sig bloom (You can remove this again once they come on grid)


There is a ton of things you can do that won't break the server that would do a lot make general gameplay around links better.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Lykouleon
Noble Sentiments
Second Empire.
#13 - 2013-05-29 03:29:09 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
The answer is the same as it has been for a while unfortunately. It's a performance issue that will be solved when a very large (and currently ongoing) behind the scenes code re-factoring project is completed sometime in the future.

A bunch of you are going to to respond to this with some variation of "Why not do _________, wouldn't that work?" and I'll go ahead and preemptively let you know that the answer to is "Our code can't do that with acceptable performance right now, but will be able to in the future".

So it will happen, but as always I cannot give an ETA.

That isn't the correct answer. The correct answer is


CCP Fozzie wrote:
Soon™

Lykouleon > CYNO ME CLOSER so I can hit them with my sword
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#14 - 2013-05-29 21:39:17 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
The answer is the same as it has been for a while unfortunately. It's a performance issue that will be solved when a very large (and currently ongoing) behind the scenes code re-factoring project is completed sometime in the future.

A bunch of you are going to to respond to this with some variation of "Why not do _________, wouldn't that work?" and I'll go ahead and preemptively let you know that the answer to is "Our code can't do that with acceptable performance right now, but will be able to in the future".

So it will happen, but as always I cannot give an ETA.



Reducing effectiveness is something you could do in about 5 minutes and deploy tomorrow.
Mocam
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2013-05-31 06:36:00 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
The answer is the same as it has been for a while unfortunately. It's a performance issue that will be solved when a very large (and currently ongoing) behind the scenes code re-factoring project is completed sometime in the future.

A bunch of you are going to to respond to this with some variation of "Why not do _________, wouldn't that work?" and I'll go ahead and preemptively let you know that the answer to is "Our code can't do that with acceptable performance right now, but will be able to in the future".

So it will happen, but as always I cannot give an ETA.



Just 1 question:

Is it or will it be possible to include such boosters on lossmails?

Having direct modifications to combat capabilities that are not listed as part of the cause of a ship's loss.. While fixing the rest of the stuff, can you see about making this possible?
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#16 - 2013-06-04 15:10:22 UTC
Mocam wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
The answer is the same as it has been for a while unfortunately. It's a performance issue that will be solved when a very large (and currently ongoing) behind the scenes code re-factoring project is completed sometime in the future.

A bunch of you are going to to respond to this with some variation of "Why not do _________, wouldn't that work?" and I'll go ahead and preemptively let you know that the answer to is "Our code can't do that with acceptable performance right now, but will be able to in the future".

So it will happen, but as always I cannot give an ETA.



Just 1 question:

Is it or will it be possible to include such boosters on lossmails?

Having direct modifications to combat capabilities that are not listed as part of the cause of a ship's loss.. While fixing the rest of the stuff, can you see about making this possible?



It would be great if this could be done, to at least make the killmails accurate. It should be done even when they are moved on grid anyway. This wouldn't cause a performance issue would it?

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Kade Jeekin
Masuat'aa Matari
Ushra'Khan
#17 - 2013-06-05 13:11:01 UTC
Removing the Command Processor module would reduce the effectiveness of OGB alts