These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

"DSCAN DISRUPTOR" in patch Rubicon 1.1.

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
CCP Lebowski
C C P
C C P Alliance
#101 - 2013-12-17 18:34:19 UTC
Don't mind me, I'm just watching Twisted

http://i.imgur.com/9lqAICb.gif

CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0

@CCP_Lebowski

Da'iel Zehn
Evil Frosty's Premium Liqours and Fine Wines
#102 - 2013-12-17 18:50:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Da'iel Zehn
I like change... I like the hunt... I like being sneaky... I like hiding when I don't want to be found...

But I HATE the fact that it takes forever to find PvP and it is over in a minute or two. *sigh* And I can never find a good 1 v 1.

Combat simulator please...
Masao Kurata
Perkone
Caldari State
#103 - 2013-12-17 18:53:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Masao Kurata
Okay, I've reconsidered this and there is a way to make this hide fleet composition without making it too good for dodging pvp entirely: all d-scan disruptors in the system act as beacons and can be warped to from the overview. Also make them too expensive to litter everywhere casually.
Vicky Somers
Rusty Anchor
#104 - 2013-12-17 18:54:41 UTC
Da'iel Zehn wrote:
I like change... I like the hunt... I like being sneaky... I like hiding when I don't want to be found...

But I HATE the fact that it takes forever to find PvP and it is over in a minute or two. *sigh* And I can never find a good 1 v 1.



If you want to easily find a 1v1, join RvB. If you want to force people into a 1v1 then don't get mad when they use tactics that subvert your playstyle. Something about the hunt being more exciting than the kill maybe. Also, why is nearly every "source" to crazy rumors the mittani's personal blog of insanity? Cute how it's asking to add it to adblock's whitelist. Lol

inb4 damage control II
Da'iel Zehn
Evil Frosty's Premium Liqours and Fine Wines
#105 - 2013-12-17 18:58:56 UTC
Perhaps CCP likes Mitanni and leaks information to him. Then they can gauge player response on the forum to decide if they want to continue development of an idea.
Kate stark
#106 - 2013-12-17 18:59:53 UTC
mynnna wrote:
The duel state would always be initiated between the pilot who shot it and the pilot who dropped it, regardless of who owned the can.


that's either a crap explanation of what it does, or it's the most ******** deployable yet.

Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this.
Da'iel Zehn
Evil Frosty's Premium Liqours and Fine Wines
#107 - 2013-12-17 19:02:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Da'iel Zehn
Vicky Somers wrote:
If you want to easily find a 1v1, join RvB...

RvB?

Vicky Somers wrote:
If you want to force people into a 1v1 then don't get mad when they use tactics that subvert your playstyle.

You get mad when someone uses tactics to subvert your playstyle? That is a little silly.
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#108 - 2013-12-17 19:29:56 UTC
not sure if this is a joke or not. But why would you use yet another item to lock a container? Why not dropping locked container? if players break the lock they become suspect.

This sounds very boring and not well thought out. Just by doing simple things complicated you don't add more depth to a game.

but maybe i just misunderstood it or it really is a joke

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
Jayne Fillon
#109 - 2013-12-17 19:42:17 UTC
Da'iel Zehn wrote:
Perhaps CCP likes Mitanni and leaks information to him. Then they can gauge player response on the forum to decide if they want to continue development of an idea.


Because obviously that article was written by The Mittani himself, not an independent writer for the site.
Oh, and CCP gifted him that intel personally, no one happened to find it on Chaos and post it to eve-ru.

That would be crazy.

Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
Beekeeper Bob
Beekeepers Anonymous
#110 - 2013-12-17 19:43:17 UTC
0Lona 0ltor wrote:
This will be to off set some of the but hurt caused by the inevitable removal of local.



Remove local, game over.

We have far too many risk adverse gamers for this ever to become a reality. So good luck in wishing for something that will put the game out of business in a year or two.

Signature removed - CCP Eterne
Da'iel Zehn
Evil Frosty's Premium Liqours and Fine Wines
#111 - 2013-12-17 19:45:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Da'iel Zehn
Jayne Fillon wrote:
Because obviously that article was written by The Mittani himself, not an independent writer for the site.
Oh, and CCP gifted him that intel personally, no one happened to find it on Chaos and post it to eve-ru. That would be crazy.


I was responding to Vicky Somer's comment of, "Also, why is nearly every "source" to crazy rumors the mittani's personal blog of insanity? "

I was being sarcastic... lol
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#112 - 2013-12-17 21:20:24 UTC
Vicky Somers wrote:
Also, why is nearly every "source" to crazy rumors the mittani's personal blog of insanity? Cute how it's asking to add it to adblock's whitelist. Lol

i'm sure you can name a second 'crazy rumour' 'sourced' from tmc
Traedar
InterStellar Trading Syndicate
#113 - 2013-12-17 22:49:42 UTC

I hate to be a killjoy, but... I'm gonna. Right now I'm glad I plex my account and don't pay with a credit card. Which I haven't for a long time and won't ever, now.

I have a few questions for CCP about this line from Mittani's blog:

TheMittani.com wrote:
By gaining access the developer's test server, "Chaos," Tandi was able to


1) What is this developer's test server and what sort of access was given?
2) Does this server "chaos" have production- or production-like account information? Especially usernames, passwords, emails and credit card numbers? Even if they are scrambled.

Any answer would be appreciated.
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#114 - 2013-12-17 23:59:41 UTC
+1 For removing local, not that it'll ever happen.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#115 - 2013-12-18 01:17:42 UTC
Traedar wrote:

I hate to be a killjoy, but... I'm gonna. Right now I'm glad I plex my account and don't pay with a credit card. Which I haven't for a long time and won't ever, now.

I have a few questions for CCP about this line from Mittani's blog:

TheMittani.com wrote:
By gaining access the developer's test server, "Chaos," Tandi was able to


1) What is this developer's test server and what sort of access was given?
2) Does this server "chaos" have production- or production-like account information? Especially usernames, passwords, emails and credit card numbers? Even if they are scrambled.

Any answer would be appreciated.



Chaos is a server we use for some of our early testing. What Tandi has access to is the patches to update a client to the test builds. These patch files are on our public content delivery system and accessing them does not require any illegal actions.

Chaos does not share any account information with TQ. Also the client patches do not contain any account information anyways. No user data is in any way accessible via this method.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Jayne Fillon
#116 - 2013-12-18 06:18:08 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Traedar wrote:

I hate to be a killjoy, but... I'm gonna. Right now I'm glad I plex my account and don't pay with a credit card. Which I haven't for a long time and won't ever, now.

I have a few questions for CCP about this line from Mittani's blog:

TheMittani.com wrote:
By gaining access the developer's test server, "Chaos," Tandi was able to


1) What is this developer's test server and what sort of access was given?
2) Does this server "chaos" have production- or production-like account information? Especially usernames, passwords, emails and credit card numbers? Even if they are scrambled.

Any answer would be appreciated.



Chaos is a server we use for some of our early testing. What Tandi has access to is the patches to update a client to the test builds. These patch files are on our public content delivery system and accessing them does not require any illegal actions.

Chaos does not share any account information with TQ. Also the client patches do not contain any account information anyways. No user data is in any way accessible via this method.


As CCP Fozzie said, the process to get to Chaos is similar to how you change your client to Singularity instead of Tranquility. You are given a different patch, but the accounts details are not a part of that specific server so there is no security risk/breach.

It's only useful because it is used for "early testing," which can give some clues as to upcoming, unannounced features. However, as was the case with the Rapid Heavy Missile Launchers, it's always best to take these glimpses with a grain of salt - these features are being tested for a reason, and are likely if not certain to change before they hit Tranquility.

Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#117 - 2013-12-18 07:47:15 UTC
CCP Masterplan wrote:
You're all getting excited over a misquoted typo. This actually comes from the 4th entry in an alphabetized list of new modules:
Quote:
A: [REDACTED]
B: [REDACTED]
C: [REDACTED]
D: Can Disruptor - A module that can be activated on a wreck/can to prevent items being moved in or out of it


Awwww I was looking forward to having more huts to deploy before each anomoly.
Sarmatiko
#118 - 2013-12-18 08:53:42 UTC
Jayne Fillon wrote:
It's only useful because it is used for "early testing," which can give some clues as to upcoming, unannounced features. However, as was the case with the Rapid Heavy Missile Launchers, it's always best to take these glimpses with a grain of salt - these features are being tested for a reason, and are likely if not certain to change before they hit Tranquility.


Not to mention that majority of players never interested in anything that lies right under their nose. We have Rubicon installed on Tranquility for two weeks and no one noticed that file SoundbanksInfo.xml in production EVE client have stuff like records for pirate faction carriers, freighters and supercaps sounds. Time for another shocking article on TMC? Smile
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#119 - 2013-12-18 08:59:59 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I rarely deny things Twisted

I hear everyone loves the new rapid light missile launchers.

Incorrect.
There is an enormous number of people in the game that are either unwilling or unable to wrap their heads around how to use a powerful new mechanic to their advantage. Smile

Give it time, it won't be long before we start seeing threads about how, when properly leveraged, they are both overpowered. Blink



They are overpowered for the targets.. because the targets always win when you use those.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Nuela
WoT Misfits
#120 - 2013-12-18 20:31:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Nuela
Tauranon wrote:
the immediate up in arms won't be about blocking d-scan its about identifying for CCP that...

(a) nobody wants to press d-scan a thousand times for no enemy reported.
its a horrible way of telling the game that you are paying attention, and I would stop playing if that becomes required. I was on the d-scan for an hour on friday (due to my escalation resetting over DT), clearing an escalation, and I'm fine with doing that as it was a hostile system with a hostile present. I don't want to do it all day if there is nobody in system.

(b) nobody wants to be tackled whilst paying full attention. Evasion, even from a cloaked tackler has to remain a viable strategy, presuming one is careful about setup, avoids being held down by NPCs, and makes use of all available intel.

(c) there isn't a lot of point to alliance intel (in fact by and large the way my alliance coooperates cross corp), if we can't detect and report hostiles. Having to put alts on gates to do that sucks. That would require 60 alts to give us equivalent coverage, and making "2 accounts required" tasks has always been bad for EVEs reputation.



This goes back to a post I made awhile ago about whether a hunter (let's assume nullsec) should have a chance of nabbing a PvE player who is paying 100% attention and is employing 100% safeguards.

The answer many seem to be going to is "No, that PvE player should be safe with those assumptions...but let's make it near impossible and/or extremely tedious for that PvE player to do so..."

That, I don't think, is good gameplay. Trying to make a person vulnerable via tedium...

If you feel the need to go down that route then make it possible for a hunter to nab a PvE person who is 100% on the ball.

I could live with this...but I want turnabout fair play...I want to be able to hunt the hunter and, despite him being 100% careful and crafty in his hunting that I have a chance to nab HIM while he is doing so.