These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

PIRATES: CCP LOVES YOU AND WANTS YOU TO STAY IN EVE (Revised Post)

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#141 - 2012-03-16 10:50:26 UTC
Hugh Knight wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:
Good morning angry pirates. I would like to confirm that the sec status not being shared issue is a defect, not a stealth nerf, and we are currently working on a fix.


and please could you tell us if the badger that i, being a pro pvp'er and all, solo killed in a gate in losec, found the wreck to be yellow, indicating it's not mine to loot. and also i got a second gcc hit when i popped the ugly yellow piece of scrap floating around the gate. dont we get to keep what we kill anymore? im not big on reading the update blogs but im sure this is a very recent change.


Please file a bug report if this is a recurring issue. It's not something that I am aware of or have reproduced.

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath
CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#142 - 2012-03-16 10:50:49 UTC
Psychotic Monk wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:
Good morning angry pirates. I would like to confirm that the sec status not being shared issue is a defect, not a stealth nerf, and we are currently working on a fix.


Can you comment on any of the other recent discoveries that may be either bugs or stealth nerfs?


Potentially, if you highlight specifics to me.

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath
Darius III
Interstellar eXodus
The Initiative.
#143 - 2012-03-16 12:03:04 UTC
[quote=CCP Goliath

Potentially, if you highlight specifics to me.[/quote]
One specific is not being allowed to board ships while GCC

Hmmm
CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#144 - 2012-03-16 13:51:14 UTC
Darius III wrote:

One specific is not being allowed to board ships while GCC


This was a fix to an exploit that ended up having wide-ranging consequences.

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath
Istyn
Freight Club
#145 - 2012-03-16 13:59:39 UTC
The concord warning also now defaults to 'No' instead of 'Yes' which makes it a bit of a faff when trying to liberate shinies from people on autopilot.

No idea if this was intended or not as it wasn't in patch notes. If it is intended, any chance we can get a checkbox so we never have to see it again, similar to the aggressive action pop-up?
Darius III
Interstellar eXodus
The Initiative.
#146 - 2012-03-16 14:10:26 UTC
Istyn wrote:
The concord warning also now defaults to 'No' instead of 'Yes' which makes it a bit of a faff when trying to liberate shinies from people on autopilot.

No idea if this was intended or not as it wasn't in patch notes. If it is intended, any chance we can get a checkbox so we never have to see it again, similar to the aggressive action pop-up?


This is minor issue with a workaround. Hit TAB then ENTER. We would like to see "Yes" being the default though, OR you could make the tick Box actually work that says "Turn off this warning".

Make new popup if yes selected with DIRE WARNING WOOP WOOP WOOP etc bad things can happen. It is redundant to have a warning box that you tick to ignore, never be ignored. I understand that it could cause a few problems, yes, but the Lowsec one works. Up to CCP to decide if the bad outwieghs the good on this one though.

One very serious issue with suicide gankers is the glitch with faction police that re-aggroes you sometimes long after the real warning is gone. I have seen this glitch persist for sometimes HOURS even after pilots dock, wait 30 minutes to undock and then get re-aggroed. This has been an issue for literally years, addressing that would make all suicide gankers very pleased.

Hmmm
Silus Morde
#147 - 2012-03-16 15:09:18 UTC
Darius III wrote:
Istyn wrote:
The concord warning also now defaults to 'No' instead of 'Yes' which makes it a bit of a faff when trying to liberate shinies from people on autopilot.

No idea if this was intended or not as it wasn't in patch notes. If it is intended, any chance we can get a checkbox so we never have to see it again, similar to the aggressive action pop-up?


This is minor issue with a workaround. Hit TAB then ENTER. We would like to see "Yes" being the default though, OR you could make the tick Box actually work that says "Turn off this warning".

Make new popup if yes selected with DIRE WARNING WOOP WOOP WOOP etc bad things can happen. It is redundant to have a warning box that you tick to ignore, never be ignored. I understand that it could cause a few problems, yes, but the Lowsec one works. Up to CCP to decide if the bad outwieghs the good on this one though.

One very serious issue with suicide gankers is the glitch with faction police that re-aggroes you sometimes long after the real warning is gone. I have seen this glitch persist for sometimes HOURS even after pilots dock, wait 30 minutes to undock and then get re-aggroed. This has been an issue for literally years, addressing that would make all suicide gankers very pleased.

Whereas not addressing it would make all miners pleased. Sorry - could not resist.

Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#148 - 2012-03-16 15:33:01 UTC
Darius III wrote:
This is minor issue with a workaround. Hit TAB then ENTER. We would like to see "Yes" being the default though, OR you could make the tick Box actually work that says "Turn off this warning".


I can see why defaulting to No makes sense. I'd rather they err on the side of caution...however, there's no reason why we shouldn't be able to press "Y" when that prompt comes up. It retains the single keystroke and just moves it to a key less easily tapped by mistake.

(I'm thinking of the enter key on the keypad, which is quite easy to bump if you're moving your mouse near your keyboard. Not that I've ever accidentally gone GCC, but it's a fair reason for this change)

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Bloodpetal
Tir Capital Management Group
#149 - 2012-03-16 15:48:41 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
Good morning angry pirates. I would like to confirm that the sec status not being shared issue is a defect, not a stealth nerf, and we are currently working on a fix.



HOLY F#@#@ING ****

Thank god!

/me BIG HUG

Pirate

Where I am.
Daemon Ceed
Ice Fire Warriors
#150 - 2012-03-16 17:17:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Daemon Ceed
Well thanks for letting us officially know it's a defect. Any ETA on when this will get fixed, because this sort of stuff is getting extremely annoying
Baaldor
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#151 - 2012-03-16 17:37:48 UTC
Bloodpetal wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:
Good morning angry pirates. I would like to confirm that the sec status not being shared issue is a defect, not a stealth nerf, and we are currently working on a fix.



HOLY F#@#@ING ****

Thank god!

/me BIG HUG

Pirate


Have no idea why you are so excited.

You realize that half the crap on the "Working on a fix" list from all the way back to Beta has never been fixed or has been anointed a feature?
Anja Talis
Sal's Waste Management and Pod Disposal
#152 - 2012-03-16 17:49:58 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
Good morning angry pirates. I would like to confirm that the sec status not being shared issue is a defect, not a stealth nerf, and we are currently working on a fix.


Yaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!

o/ o/


\o \o

\o/ /o\ \o/

\o\ /o\ /o/

Bear
Anja Talis
Sal's Waste Management and Pod Disposal
#153 - 2012-03-16 17:50:55 UTC
Baaldor wrote:
Bloodpetal wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:
Good morning angry pirates. I would like to confirm that the sec status not being shared issue is a defect, not a stealth nerf, and we are currently working on a fix.



HOLY F#@#@ING ****

Thank god!

/me BIG HUG

Pirate


Have no idea why you are so excited.

You realize that half the crap on the "Working on a fix" list from all the way back to Beta has never been fixed or has been anointed a feature?


Because it's finally been acknowledged as a bug, introduced in crucible. New debt is usually easier to fix than old debt, so it's probably likely to get looked at, especially while CCP are all with the little fixes stuff.
CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#154 - 2012-03-16 17:55:22 UTC
Daemon Ceed wrote:
Well thanks for letting us officially know it's a defect. Any ETA on when this will get fixed, because this sort of stuff is getting extremely annoying


I don't really like to give out specific dates for stuff like this because a) I'm not the guy making the fix and b) I don't like to make promises that aren't mine to keep. It's certainly not going to get benched, I'm confident enough to say that.

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath
Baaldor
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#155 - 2012-03-16 18:16:14 UTC
Anja Talis wrote:
Baaldor wrote:
Bloodpetal wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:
Good morning angry pirates. I would like to confirm that the sec status not being shared issue is a defect, not a stealth nerf, and we are currently working on a fix.



HOLY F#@#@ING ****

Thank god!

/me BIG HUG

Pirate


Have no idea why you are so excited.

You realize that half the crap on the "Working on a fix" list from all the way back to Beta has never been fixed or has been anointed a feature?


Because it's finally been acknowledged as a bug, introduced in crucible. New debt is usually easier to fix than old debt, so it's probably likely to get looked at, especially while CCP are all with the little fixes stuff.



Never stop believing.
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University
Ivy League
#156 - 2012-03-16 18:28:08 UTC
Anja Talis wrote:

Because it's finally been acknowledged as a bug, introduced in crucible. New debt is usually easier to fix than old debt, so it's probably likely to get looked at, especially while CCP are all with the little fixes stuff.


It's also easier to find in terms of figuring out what code change broke the item, because the change is still relatively fresh in the mind of whoever broke it. Rather then being due to some old crufty code that nobody has looked at in 3+ years and you'd have to spend a few hours trying to first understand the code before you can identify what is wrong or how to fix it.
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC
#157 - 2012-03-16 18:57:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Herr Wilkus
Actually, the Concord window was actually the biggest issue for me, personally - until a solution was found.
Though making it even harder to grind up sec status is clearly unwelcomed.....even if just a bug.

When ganking a single target with a Cat, doing a 'TAB-Enter' keyboard dance isn't a big deal.

But say, when trying to gank a string of Retrievers with 4 groups of 2x guns on a Tornado, you start to see the problem.

Target Retriever #1
*Are you sure?" Tab-Enter
Target Retriever #2
"Are you sure?" Tab-Enter
Target Reriever #3
"Are you sure?" Tab-Enter
Target Retriever #4
"Are you sure?" Tab-Enter

Reload guns, Target Mack #5 with 4x turrets
"Are you sure?" Tab-Enter
Target Mack #6 with 4x turrets
Are you sure? "Tab - damn, Concord got me.

See the problem? Hitting Enter over and over was bad enough, but forcing you to jump all over the keyboard while trying to target with the mouse, while under a very tight Concord time window is just stupid, throwing up artificial barriers to actions that should be very streamlined and effortless. Miners escaped death as a direct result of this.

An option to turn off the window entirely in highsec would be highly welcomed for my -10 Alt.
Barring this, disabling the pop-up for anyone who already HAS a GCC, as warning you about the GCC when Concord is already on the way is illogical and needless.
Anja Talis
Sal's Waste Management and Pod Disposal
#158 - 2012-03-16 20:33:05 UTC
Scrapyard Bob wrote:
Anja Talis wrote:

Because it's finally been acknowledged as a bug, introduced in crucible. New debt is usually easier to fix than old debt, so it's probably likely to get looked at, especially while CCP are all with the little fixes stuff.


It's also easier to find in terms of figuring out what code change broke the item, because the change is still relatively fresh in the mind of whoever broke it. Rather then being due to some old crufty code that nobody has looked at in 3+ years and you'd have to spend a few hours trying to first understand the code before you can identify what is wrong or how to fix it.


Exactly :D
Anja Talis
Sal's Waste Management and Pod Disposal
#159 - 2012-03-16 20:33:44 UTC
Baaldor wrote:

Never stop believing.


Glee fan huh?

Roll
Baaldor
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#160 - 2012-03-16 20:46:31 UTC
Anja Talis wrote:
Baaldor wrote:

Never stop believing.


Glee fan huh?

Roll



Nope, just bitter and jaded.