These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Loot Scattering removed from Exploration Sites

First post First post
Author
Loki Feiht
Pathfinders.
#81 - 2014-05-21 11:11:43 UTC
Loot spew graphically is really nice but the mechanic wasn't very good, I would think if they added the loot spew graphic to containers coming out of wrecks it would be a nice look as long as they didn't expire within 30 seconds lol (for anything that doesnt stay inside the wreck that is)

More NPC - Randomly Generated Modular Content thread https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=220858

Anita1
Meinungsfreiheit
#82 - 2014-05-21 11:32:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Anita1
good thing you are removing it, now remove the useless clicking game too and everything is perfect

the hacking game like it is, is just useless wasted time, you guys need to thing about a reason to do that, like if you are good you get more loot, if you fail you only get half of it, something which makes it worth to click around
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#83 - 2014-05-21 11:32:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Altrue
CCP Bayesian wrote:

I'm personally much more of a fan of making the reward you get out proportional to how well you complete the hack. The idea floated by someone earlier of having to find 'loot nodes' is along the same lines of future ideas for hacking (here and elsewhere) I have.


That would be awesome!

I'm entierly in favor of multiple loot nodes spread out on the "board" instead of one boss that you have to find. It would help ease the random (and unfair because you have zero way to avoid that with player skills/knowledge) side of having to find THE boss to get all the loot.

It happened to all of us I think to clear all the board but two or three nodes protected by firewalls... with the boss hiding behind one of these.

I'd suggest you remove the boss entierly and instead spread out multiple loot nodes on the hacking minigame. It would actually reward higher skills beucause you'd have an incentive to push the hacking at the limits of your virus to find as many loot nodes as possible. Way more interesting in my opinion. Of course you'd have a button available to disengage the hack as soon as you open at least one loot node. (or two or three... it could even be dependant on the T1/T2 module and/or an implant)

When you dissengage, you get a reward proportional to how many loot nodes you opened. Could I even dare to suggest that two unused bonuses could equal a bonus loot node?

On an not entierly related topic -but since we're talking about the hacking minigame lets push it forward to improve it :D- why not letting the player get a brief hint of the distance of the closest loot node every time he clears a node? (empty node or kill of an ennemy node). So, say, if I click a node, I'd get a floating "2" for only a second that would indicate that the closest loot node is two "jumps" away.
It would help add a slight element of player skill (here: deduction and memory) instead of just randomly clicking the damn thing...

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

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

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart

Edward Olmops
Gunboat Commando
#84 - 2014-05-21 11:57:47 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:

During the lowsec roundtable at Fanfest, we were discussing the merits of lowsec, and someone said "a great thing about lowsec is that it's one of the best-connected areas of space".


CCP Bayesian wrote:

I'm personally much more of a fan of making the reward you get out proportional to how well you complete the hack. The idea floated by someone earlier of having to find 'loot nodes' is along the same lines of future ideas for hacking (here and elsewhere) I have.


Somehow it seems like I am not very noticeable. Even the monocle didn't help. :-/
Maybe I should consider a career as a spy? Whatever.


Just had another idea regarding loot nodes:
It would be possible to preserve the interesting part of the current gameplay that favors smart players (cargo scanning before, cherry picking/decisions in limited time based on loot and can types).

When the hacking board appears, all nodes could belong to visibly different categories.
Simple example analogue to current loot spew:
There are data nodes (blue), material nodes (green), parts nodes (brown), Equipment nodes...

You can scan the cans before to know what is inside. The board gives you a rough idea what might be hidden where (through colours/symbols of the nodes), but no exact position (you are looking for a specific blueprint, but there are 10 data nodes on the board, the right loot node might be any of them.

Then it would also be possible to have different danger levels/hacking difficulties associated with the different node classes or even specific loot items!
Example: data nodes always have a higher chance to contain a Firewall.
Or: if there is a Faction POS module BPC under a data node, there will also always be 1-2 extra defensive nodes hidden under data nodes.

That would require players to make somewhat more complex decisions...
When you are on low health, will you risk unveiling more of the dangerous nodes to get the jackpot or avoid those and search for the exit first?
Guth'Alak
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#85 - 2014-05-21 12:19:46 UTC
another possibility would be to have the loot spew depending on your coherence %. if you finished the hack above 50% health, then you get direct access. if you finished under that then you get loot spew.
Owen Levanth
Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration
#86 - 2014-05-21 12:32:21 UTC
Guth'Alak wrote:
another possibility would be to have the loot spew depending on your coherence %. if you finished the hack above 50% health, then you get direct access. if you finished under that then you get loot spew.


I like this, it would give people more reason to use rigs and implants giving a bonus to coherence. Also it would make it possible for CCP to add rigs and implants giving a bonus to virus strength instead, since it wouldn't immediately obsolete coherence-bonuses anymore: You would have to decide what's more important: Faster hacking or more loot.
Orla- King-Griffin
#87 - 2014-05-21 12:40:47 UTC
Nicola Arman wrote:
It's very sad to see development time wasted with the removal of the spew...

Successful attempt = No spew, all loot earned
First Failure = Spew loot
2nd Failure = Explosions!

Ha!
That's fantastic!
Absolutely this+1 good sir.

Ah shite...

Guth'Alak
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#88 - 2014-05-21 12:56:09 UTC
i think its evident that many people actually want the loot spew to stay in the game but only as the result of a failure in some way. it only makes sense that success should result in the much preferred direct access, as with the current ghost sites.
CCP Bayesian
#89 - 2014-05-21 14:01:10 UTC
Could we move discussion of improvements to the Hacking mechanics elsewhere. This thread needs to stay on topic so we can collect feedback about the changes we're making right now.

EVE Software Engineer Team Space Glitter

BigWolfUK
Sons-of-Liberty
#90 - 2014-05-21 14:04:32 UTC
ShadowBlood Sentinel wrote:

P.S.

While CCP is working on these sites can they please reduce the m3 size of datacores from 1m3 each to .1m3 each? I not aware of any reason why they need to be this size. I find it slightly ridiculous that in some sites I would have to have a secondary character in a hauler just to carry around the total loot of just one site (this is just the profitable loot, not counting the rest).


Dropping datacore m3 would be nice :)
Mercer Nen
Summicron Holdings
#91 - 2014-05-21 15:25:37 UTC
CCP Bayesian wrote:
The problem with that idea is that it means there is an incentive for people who aren't interested in hacking or exploration as such to come in and fail in order to get the loot out. It's mitigatable but ultimately we'd be leaving a mechanic in that doesn't quite fit into EVE's interaction scheme.

I'm personally much more of a fan of making the reward you get out proportional to how well you complete the hack. The idea floated by someone earlier of having to find 'loot nodes' is along the same lines of future ideas for hacking (here and elsewhere) I have.


It's an interesting point about the interaction scheme. I've always felt that a missing element of EVE was interactions with the environment (with consequence). This is especially missing in PVE.

Although I found the loot spew to be frustrating, it was more to do with being forced to do a lot of double clicking as a reward for a successful hack. While I don't think the way it was implemented worked, it did seem like a further iteration of it could be quite interesting. Particularly if it placed more of an emphasis on skilfully manually piloting your ship. I had originally (and optimistically) assumed that the idea of using your ship to directly interact with the environment was part of the concept behind the loot spew.

The idea of there being multiple elements and interactions within exploration sites makes them immediately more interesting than the bulk of PVE currently available in EVE. Reducing the hacking sites to: hack -> reward, is in some ways an improvement, but also still seems a bit too simple. All that aside, I still look forward to seeing the hacking mini-game further iterated on.

[apologies if this is off topic]
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#92 - 2014-05-21 15:51:32 UTC
CCP Bayesian wrote:
Could we move discussion of improvements to the Hacking mechanics elsewhere. This thread needs to stay on topic so we can collect feedback about the changes we're making right now.


Sorry, my bad :D

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

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

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart

Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#93 - 2014-05-22 16:27:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
CCP Bayesian wrote:
Sisi should be updated today and I went and pulled the trigger to remove the loot scattering mechanic from the Exploration Sites. I've also reverted most of the doubled rewards. Some need to be done manually by our designers so consider what you're getting out of the sites as WIP. It works pretty much as before but with the Hacking mechanic remaining. Simply hack the site to gain access to the cargo hold of your target.

We've tested quite a lot internally but there are likely to be some rough edges somewhere. Any feedback you guys can give me is greatly appreciated.


Are there any plans to redesign how the hacking mini game works?

Currently it is just a click fest with no real skill or thought required. I can think of one simple change that would make it more engaging...

CCP Bayesian wrote:
Could we move discussion of improvements to the Hacking mechanics elsewhere. This thread needs to stay on topic so we can collect feedback about the changes we're making right now.


Sorry didn't see this...

Could you be so kind as to create a feedback thread for us to move the discussion to? After all, no one wants to give feedback if it's just going to be ignored.
Pertuabo Enkidgan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#94 - 2014-05-22 19:03:37 UTC
Thank you sweet Jesus
Myrthiis
Boon Odd Ducks Bath Toys
#95 - 2014-05-22 23:10:41 UTC
Now that loot spew has been removed it's far to easy to drop the valuable from the container ,people will just loot the expensives and let the crap behind them .
"Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you're gonna get" seems a good philosophy for this activity .Please make Relic and Data container immune to cargo scan Twisted.
It'll encourage explorer to clean the whole things before getting to next one .
CCP Bayesian
#96 - 2014-05-23 09:28:20 UTC
I've done some tidying up of the site completion mechanics that mean the exploration site gets pulled down and recreated elsewhere which should hopefully help with that problem. It should be live on Sisi after the next update.

We added some junk loot in as well, partly because it was in the scattered containers and partly because there are otherwise occasionally empty containers. We're concerned that it might just be annoying for people to have to jettison it all the time (using Loot All) or cherry pick out the good stuff from the inventory window. Any thoughts, preferably after trying it out on Sisi?

EVE Software Engineer Team Space Glitter

Jarnis McPieksu
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#97 - 2014-05-23 09:40:00 UTC
How does this work? Site stays up only X time after one of the cans has been touched, so it will respawn even if someone just cherry-picked the good stuff?

Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#98 - 2014-05-23 09:53:02 UTC
CCP Bayesian wrote:

We added some junk loot in as well, partly because it was in the scattered containers and partly because there are otherwise occasionally empty containers. We're concerned that it might just be annoying for people to have to jettison it all the time (using Loot All) or cherry pick out the good stuff from the inventory window. Any thoughts, preferably after trying it out on Sisi?

I'm going to break the rules as I am still at work.
In regards to junk loot and cherry picking; there will always be those who cherry pick the cans and regard anything but the best (overall or on a can by can basis) to be junk. Adding in junk will not affect these players.
The loot all crowd will usually end up jetting every now and then when getting non-desirable loot (pirate materials comes to mind here) adding junk loot will just be another thing to jettison.

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

CCP Bayesian
#99 - 2014-05-23 10:11:03 UTC
Jarnis McPieksu wrote:
How does this work? Site stays up only X time after one of the cans has been touched, so it will respawn even if someone just cherry-picked the good stuff?


Basically yes but with a few caveats to deal with edge cases (e.g. someone is still in the site). Things were already working this way previously but when I went through the code there were some cases that hadn't been covered so now it should be a bit more efficient. The knock on effect is that there will be more fresh sites to be found now (and thus more loot) without making it harder to catch and kill Explorers.

EVE Software Engineer Team Space Glitter

Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#100 - 2014-05-23 11:08:42 UTC
CCP Bayesian wrote:
I've done some tidying up of the site completion mechanics that mean the exploration site gets pulled down and recreated elsewhere which should hopefully help with that problem. It should be live on Sisi after the next update.

We added some junk loot in as well, partly because it was in the scattered containers and partly because there are otherwise occasionally empty containers. We're concerned that it might just be annoying for people to have to jettison it all the time (using Loot All) or cherry pick out the good stuff from the inventory window. Any thoughts, preferably after trying it out on Sisi?



Not tested it, but I always use a filter (value >100k) before hitting loot all. Then I check again for anything the client doesn't understand the value of.

So the junk loot would be totally ignored by me.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com