These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

CCP road to nerfdom continues

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
seth Hendar
I love you miners
#81 - 2014-01-28 10:39:50 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:
I am really getting disgusted with this water-torture drip of hisec nerfs that keep coming and make it abundantly clear CCP has lost the plot. With each one of these it becomes clear they care more about aquiring WoW reject subs, than retaining mine.


Can you describe the scenarios that existed before the MTU was introduced that enabled you to trick aggressive drones into shooting you without the operator's direct instructions to do so?

As a comparison, can you describe a scenario in which you can trick a mission runner's turret or missile systems to shooting you without the operator's direct instructions to do so?

I'm just trying to educate myself on this topic. Thanks for your help!

yes, and it still exist, activate a killright on him, then shoot him, you won't take concord, and his drone WILL agress you, even if his safety is green.....
Karak Bol
Low-Sec Survival Ltd.
#82 - 2014-01-28 10:44:40 UTC
KnowUsByTheDead wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
KnowUsByTheDead wrote:
because both you and I know that the loot fairy sucks at times, and we know why that is. Isk sink, plain and simple.


I guess it's safe to assume that the rest of your post is inaccurate.


Why's that? Because you believe it is safe to assume that a random dice roll to see whether you get loot, is not a mechanic put into place to specifically remove isk from the game? Hence, Isk sink.

C'mon, huh.

Roll


Thats not an ISK sink, thats more of a mineral/module sink. (except wormhole Blueloot and similar "sell to NPC" stuff) Please stop making a fool of yourself.
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#83 - 2014-01-28 10:44:58 UTC
Kimmi Chan wrote:
Janeway84 wrote:
Can't you still can flip wrecks in the mission to get the mission runners attention? P
Im a bit sad i never got around to trying mission bait myself since i heard it was so easy with the MTU Sad


Yes you can still can flip to bait mission runners.

The OP is pissed off because after the patch the drones won't automatically begin the LE - allowing the mission runner to make the choice- take the bait or, you know, not.



The exploit was a bit too easy.

- work out who is running missions that have NPCs using ECM/track disrupt (easy enough as every mission has "signature" LCOs and specific NPC deployment patterns)
- wait till the relevant NPCs are close enough to disrupt tracking and shoot the MTU
Bertrand Butler
Cras es Noster
#84 - 2014-01-28 10:47:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Bertrand Butler
First of all, reverse tears are always delicious.

Having said that, I will have to agree with what Riot Girl said here. I have not witnessed the mechanic myself, but I remember reading an article by Marlona Sky some days ago, and agreeing with its conclusion.

The MTU+drone thing added a good chunk of player generated content and interaction, while also giving the opportunity for some very nice possibilities for PvP if it persisted - like pirate baiting for example. It also helped missioners become more engaged and conscious of their surroundings, using their drones actively instead of ascribing to a semi-passive farming mentality.

Its a mechanic that will be missed.
Billy McCandless
Zacharia Explorations Group
#85 - 2014-01-28 10:50:34 UTC
Hmm

Why cant guns be set to aggressive and autoshoot any suspects near me?

Oh wait, because that would be bot aspirant behaviour

Hmm

I wonder if I can have my cake AND eat it?

"Thread locked for being deemed a total loss." - ISD Ezwal
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#86 - 2014-01-28 10:52:34 UTC
Billy McCandless wrote:
Hmm

Why cant guns be set to aggressive and autoshoot any suspects near me?

Oh wait, because that would be bot aspirant behaviour

Hmm

I wonder if I can have my cake AND eat it?


Hey Billy, how long before Ramona is unbanneded?
Si1viu
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#87 - 2014-01-28 10:55:32 UTC
Tears from high sec griefers? That worth all money. CCP cleaned many of his sins with this Big smile
Billy McCandless
Zacharia Explorations Group
#88 - 2014-01-28 10:55:49 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:


Hey Billy, how long before Ramona is unbanneded?


Unrelated Quiz

How LONG can a woodchuck chuck for if woodchucking is chucking brilliantt?

a) Two weeks

b) 3 Months

c) Permanently

d) I'm not aspposed to talk about Banclub

"Thread locked for being deemed a total loss." - ISD Ezwal
Christine Peeveepeeski
Low Sec Concepts
#89 - 2014-01-28 10:56:06 UTC
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:
Well its clear CCP has given up the ghost on the HTFU core that made EvE great, as well as documented in detail here they are now doubling-down on Disneyland with the next patch that has a little more nerfing for the little carebears of hisec buried in the patch notes...

Evidently shooting at mobile tractor units owned by a bear with drones out in aggressive mode will *no longer* cause his drones to attack the agressor.

" Drones that are set to aggressive will no longer perform automatic actions against a target if those actions would trigger a new Limited Engagement, unless explicitly instructed to engage that target."

Why?

Because gosh no you cant expect the little bears to use their brains and the right drone setting, they must be bubble wrapped to prevent an inventive pirate from getting a limited agression on them while they are farming mission sites.

I am really getting disgusted with this water-torture drip of hisec nerfs that keep coming and make it abundantly clear CCP has lost the plot. With each one of these it becomes clear they care more about aquiring WoW reject subs, than retaining mine.

F


What, you mean fixing the drone weapon system so it acted like the safety settings mentioned is something you didn't expect to happen?

See this is why you get your kicks shooting people that never realised the safety setting didn't extend to agressive setting drones. Hell, I didn't till I heard of a lolgangk and I've been playing for a while now.

the mechanic was funny but unintended. Get over it and move on to your next low risk pvp escapade.
Kimmi Chan
Tastes Like Purple
#90 - 2014-01-28 10:58:30 UTC
KnowUsByTheDead wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
KnowUsByTheDead wrote:
because both you and I know that the loot fairy sucks at times, and we know why that is. Isk sink, plain and simple.


I guess it's safe to assume that the rest of your post is inaccurate.


Why's that? Because you believe it is safe to assume that a random dice roll to see whether you get loot, is not a mechanic put into place to specifically remove isk from the game? Hence, Isk sink.

C'mon, huh.

Roll


Sorry brother loot is not an ISK faucet. You either sell the loot for ISK already in the economy or reprocess it and sell the minerals for ISK already in the economy. As it is not a faucet a lack of it can not be a sink.

"Grr Kimmi  Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide

www.eve-radio.com  Join Eve Radio channel in game!
Billy McCandless
Zacharia Explorations Group
#91 - 2014-01-28 11:03:53 UTC
Christine Peeveepeeski wrote:

What, you mean fixing the drone weapon system so it acted like the safety settings mentioned is something you didn't expect to happen?


+1.

Christine Peeveepeeski wrote:
See this is why you get your kicks shooting people that never realised the safety setting didn't extend to agressive setting drones. .


-1. Safety should be green if you are following all required Standards and Practices for safe mining

Christine Peeveepeeski wrote:
Get over it and move on to your next low risk pvp escapade.


-/+ D6. If the "defenseless" gankees operated in accordance with the afore mentioned Standards and Practices then the pvp escapades would become higher risk. Would the gankers be expected to move on then?

"Thread locked for being deemed a total loss." - ISD Ezwal
KnowUsByTheDead
Sunlight...Through The Blight.
#92 - 2014-01-28 11:07:00 UTC
Kimmi Chan wrote:
KnowUsByTheDead wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
KnowUsByTheDead wrote:
because both you and I know that the loot fairy sucks at times, and we know why that is. Isk sink, plain and simple.


I guess it's safe to assume that the rest of your post is inaccurate.


Why's that? Because you believe it is safe to assume that a random dice roll to see whether you get loot, is not a mechanic put into place to specifically remove isk from the game? Hence, Isk sink.

C'mon, huh.

Roll


Sorry brother loot is not an ISK faucet. You either sell the loot for ISK already in the economy or reprocess it and sell the minerals for ISK already in the economy. As it is not a faucet a lack of it can not be a sink.


Fair enough. I will admit when I am wrong. Also a little inebriated, lol.

That is the problem when people selective quote, though. However, the question remains the same.

When does the nerfing stop?

Does it stop with completely safe-sec?

Or does it just balance itself over time?

All MTU crap aside. Because aside from the market, I am not sure I have even seen one of those things. Like ever. Big smile

Once you realize what a joke everything is, being the comedian is the only thing that makes sense.
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#93 - 2014-01-28 11:07:52 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:


If they didn't want drones to behave that way, they should of just removed the aggressive setting of drones.


Drones shouldn't be agressive by default, and passive setting should persist if you select it.
I agree that they could have kept the mechanic by changed the default settings and their persistance.

Still, it was exploiting poorly designed game mechanics so I understand why they did that. You have to admit that for the average Eve player (carebear or not), a deployable structure is not a part of your ship, and drones shouldn't consider it so. Just like they wouldn't react to a jetisson or something like that.

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart
Helia Tranquilis
Confused Bunnies Inc
#94 - 2014-01-28 11:09:30 UTC
Griefer tears - best tears Twisted

How about you hisec heroes HTFU and go back to manual baiting.
Seven Koskanaiken
Shadow Legions.
Insidious.
#95 - 2014-01-28 11:09:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Seven Koskanaiken
I've lost a few ships to this when planing to jump a gate and GTFO after getting aggroed, and found the weapons timer on because my drones were still out.
Esha Ditrix
#96 - 2014-01-28 11:14:53 UTC
the funny thing about this is that the drones actualy are dooing what they are supposed to do under the current crimewatch and drone mechanics, and people still call it exploiting...

i guess they understand game mechanics just as well as the wouldbe targets do...

Its not an exploit, if the game lets you do it...
Kimmi Chan
Tastes Like Purple
#97 - 2014-01-28 11:15:32 UTC
KnowUsByTheDead wrote:
Fair enough. I will admit when I am wrong. Also a little inebriated, lol.

That is the problem when people selective quote, though. However, the question remains the same.

When does the nerfing stop?

Does it stop with completely safe-sec?

Or does it just balance itself over time?

All MTU crap aside. Because aside from the market, I am not sure I have even seen one of those things. Like ever. Big smile



I have no idea. Never use the things because my ship has engines and I can scoop up loot and salvage myself without dropping a stupid vacuum cleaner in space. I also do not have drones set to aggressive because I don't trust drones any more than I trust the Gallente.

As far as this particular "nerf". it was initially a buff to HS PvP by enabling PvP enthusiasts to force a limited engagement on mission runners dumber than me (which is a lot). So I really don't see it as a nerf as much as a return to how things were pre-Rubicon but with a stupid "vacuum cleaner in space".

I do, however, agree with this:

Bertrand Butler wrote:
First of all, reverse tears are always delicious.

Having said that, I will have to agree with what Riot Girl said here. I have not witnessed the mechanic myself, but I remember reading an article by Marlona Sky some days ago, and agreeing with its conclusion.

The MTU+drone thing added a good chunk of player generated content and interaction, while also giving the opportunity for some very nice possibilities for PvP if it persisted - like pirate baiting for example. It also helped missioners become more engaged and conscious of their surroundings, using their drones actively instead of ascribing to a semi-passive farming mentality.

Its a mechanic that will be missed.


I think there does need to be more player interaction in HS. I also like the idea of using the device to bait the baiters and surprising the **** out of them. But again it was a buff to PvP before it was nerfed so zero sum etc.

"Grr Kimmi  Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide

www.eve-radio.com  Join Eve Radio channel in game!
Nick Starkey
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#98 - 2014-01-28 11:17:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Nick Starkey
Why can't the HTFU mentality apply to gankers as well? Also, it doesn't make any sense for drone settings not to extend to MTUs. CCP wants actual pvp to happen (or at least coordinated ganks), not people getting baited by obscure mechanics that don't make any sense.

You could also say everytime you use a stargate causing a ship to explode with a 2% chance would be a great content creator. I'm sure it would, but the question is: does it make for a better game, and does it make any consistent sense according to other game mechanics ? No. Same thing applies here.

I've made a signature. I hope you're enjoying it. www.evetrademaster.com - web based asset manager & profit tracker
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#99 - 2014-01-28 11:17:41 UTC
Billy McCandless wrote:
Hmm

Why cant guns be set to aggressive and autoshoot any suspects near me?

Oh wait, because that would be bot aspirant behaviour

Hmm

I wonder if I can have my cake AND eat it?



FoF missiles would have done the same thing, it is just they are rarely used unless you are disrupted.

I suspect the auto-targeting module would have locked the suspect as well, just not fired your turrets till you hit F1. Have not tested that out though.
Christine Peeveepeeski
Low Sec Concepts
#100 - 2014-01-28 11:27:46 UTC
Billy McCandless wrote:
Christine Peeveepeeski wrote:

What, you mean fixing the drone weapon system so it acted like the safety settings mentioned is something you didn't expect to happen?


+1.

Christine Peeveepeeski wrote:
See this is why you get your kicks shooting people that never realised the safety setting didn't extend to agressive setting drones. .


-1. Safety should be green if you are following all required Standards and Practices for safe mining

Christine Peeveepeeski wrote:
Get over it and move on to your next low risk pvp escapade.


-/+ D6. If the "defenseless" gankees operated in accordance with the afore mentioned Standards and Practices then the pvp escapades would become higher risk. Would the gankers be expected to move on then?


I love the quote thing with scores and stuff. Just rolled an imaginary dice and scored a number, w00t came out positive :D

In answer to your question, I expect high sec gankers to do 2 things.

1: If they gank for no risk pvp lolz/tears then they'll rage on forums if the targets get assistance with anything. In fact I reckon if their was a tutorial to show n00bs how not to be ganked I think someone would still moan about it.

2: If they gank for profit they'll move on when it's no longer profitable and whine on the forums.

There is a pattern.

On a side note, I do not support the expectation complex many players have in high sec. I do however understand the irony that most of the people attacking that complex in fact have their own.