Missions & Complexes

Sargeant Hellian, no, I said we use AI for testing, I didn't say that was the only testing we do and it isn't. It's just a massive help for volume in a quantitative sense. We still do a bunch of manual qualitative testing.

Jeremiah Saken, no real plans for expanding it elsewhere but many ideas floated. Most of these sorts of things require more art, audio and basically more people working on it for a feature that needs it. This is a small project I'm working on reasonably slowly in the scheme of things but the codebase is good so additions are pretty easy.

DeMichael Crimson, thanks for the suggestions. I think there is a video of an early version of the Avatar prototype that was shown at a Russian player meet floating around if you want to have a little more evidence to help that belief.

A loot revamp primarily looking at the imbalance between Data and Relic sites is planned in the not too distant future by the other guys on Space Glitter.

I found something like this:
Avatar gameplay
I thought it was urban legend with this whole style of playing Ah bar fights with avatars, would be something


I think relics are in good state. Cans have random values from trash to 40mil+. You never know what you expect from hardest cans, yet whole sites are still worth something despite low ruins drops. Will data rebalance have something to do with parts for player build gates, or there won't be ties to exploration? Will rebalance affect current loot (like volume) or changing items completely?

Lastly, how do you distribute tasks beetwen ppl in teams? You are working on hacking, someone else on loot tables etc. Wouldn't be good to assign ppl to specific works and keep them there when in need? Like, you've done hacking, project closed, now someone else want to do some tweaks, for example Fozzie, without knowledge about hacking, and messes with your vision and aproach to part of exploration by puting space invaders in it. Or it's just whole Space Glitter working and brainstorming on task? Sometimes it feels like some devs being punished and being assigned to ungrateful works.

It's fair for the "Hazards" to be randomly generated (as it would be boring to have identical instances every time you hack something of a certain type), but the mechanism for the user to avoid "hazards" should be refined in order to allow for a user's skill to increase the ability to mitigate hacking issues.

I sort of favor the idea of a more real-time approach. Say the faster a hacker breaks into the system, the less protection is generated. It should be less guess-work for a hacker to determine the optimal path and more skill-based.

Perhaps there could be separate areas the hacker could hack into, each requiring different approaches and yielding different types of loot (for example, trash compactor control system -> hack into that = salvage loot, or ship R&D database -> blueprints/modules loot)

I really dont have an issue with the hacking mini-game, it's much better than the old twiddle your thumbs while watching your modules pulse way. Sure, sometimes you get RNG'ed and have to deal with a ton of healing/half damage nodes but that's how luck works. The chance of failure, as small as it is with a max skilled covops and the skills at V, makes succeeding feel more meaningful too. Believe me, it's even more boring when you have 100% chance at success every time.

Auto-complete will just lower your income even more if you are a half-decent exploration pilot, because whether you agree or not there is some modicum of skill in the hacking minigame and moving to a system where the computer does all the work for you just means even more loot volume to saturate the market. Rewarding intelligent gameplay and high skills is always a plus in my book.

The "number of nodes until completion" feature that was talked about earlier would be nice though, on some of the harder ones you can start to feel quite lost sometimes.

Racing is not really compatible with informed decision making.

What I like about the "loot nodes" idea, is that it allows for a more granular hack victory. In a sense, it also reduces the chances to completely fail a hack, which is a good thing for begginer explorer's morale.

Right now the hack is binary : You fail, or you succeed. If the loot was to be split between loot nodes (and the maximum loot obtainable increased accordingly), it would greatly encourage the use of rigs, higher skills, and the like, because you could find that extra loot node that the other explorers wont, because you had that extra health, before dying. And, as a begginer explorer, you can expect to get some loot, because technically as you as you complete at least one loot node, you "win" the hack, instead of none.

Can we get some new stuff ? That will ruin some people - FULL STAB - fits ? This is nonsense.

What i propose :
- move scanning upgrades to low slots.
- create codebraker and analyzer upgrades that will boost attack and defence - and also put them to low.
- create script injectors , also low slots , that will allow you to inject some beneficial stuff while hacking a site

Just make people want to remove 1 or 2 stabs for this stuff.
You can also add to each stab -5 to attack power

I like the mini-game.

Its certainly a step in the right direction from the original concept of activate module and wait. I do see it as a starting point rather than an end game, and am encouraged by the feedback from CCP in this thread.

The existing method forces the player to concentrate on accessing the container, whilst remaining aware of their surroundings, which is a skill in itself. Some will find this easier than others, and that's fine. The optimal way of successfully opening a container is also a skill. People need to remember that a players ability to manage logic problems (no matter how simple they may appear to you) will vary considerably.

I also believe it represents an interesting way for new players to explore new content, and make rewards accessible to them if they are willing to fly into low/null sec. Its logistically easy to manage, requires an element of learning (challenge) to understand, as well as eve learning, and the rewards scale nicely depending on the risk you are prepared to take. And proportionately so high sec versus null sec.

A nice touch will be to see more complex problem solving be rewarded with the chance of better loot.

For example, auto completion is possible, and you get a basic level of loot drop. Current (or similar) technique offers same or slightly less than current drop. A more advanced problem solved sees the chance of a higher value loot drop or faction drop...or perhaps escalation of some nature. Again, focused on a combination of eve skill and player skill being utilised.

So far this all sounds like luxury problems to me.
been jumping around for 2 hrs straight and havent found a single thing to hack.

Get out of hisec. If you gonna try lowsec get out of caldari space.


They are using them and still get killed. It's not gank proof module.

I've been thinking about this for quite a while now.

First let me state I would much rather do the Mini-Hacking game once per site, not once per Container.

I like the idea of having multiple Cores available in the Mini-Hacking game but having them unlock explicit bits of loot within the Container? For some reason that doesn't bode well with me.

How about having those multiple Cores in the Mini-Hacking game represent each Container at the site. If there's 3 Containers at the site then the Mini-Hacking game would have 3 Cores hidden in it. If there's 4 Containers, then the Mini-Hacking game would have 4 Cores, etc.

A successful Hack done to one of the Cores within the Mini-Hacking game would then unlock one of the Containers at the site. Each Core would progressively get tougher to Hack. If 2 out of 3 Cores were successfully Hacked, then 2 of the 3 Containers at the site would be unlocked. The only question the player needs to ask themselves is which 2 of the 3 Containers should be opened?

I don't like the game mechanic of being able to view contents of Containers with a Cargo Scanner module. That makes it too easy for players to cherry pick through the loot, allowing them to pass up 'Bad' loot and only get 'Good' loot. I think each Container should be Scan-Proof and players take their chances with the RNG dice roll.

Anyway, I'm sure you get the idea, just some food for thought.


DMC