These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Retribution 1.1] Black Ops Little Things - now with Covert Cyno update

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
Shadow Cartel
#21 - 2013-01-18 19:27:27 UTC
These quality of life buffs are excellent pain relievers till Black Ops take their turn in the larger ship balancing effort.

Thank you very much to CCP Fozzie and everyone who worked on Q+A on these much asked for and much appreciated tweaks.

Alek the Kidnapper, Hero of the CSM
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#22 - 2013-01-18 19:36:03 UTC
still ****
Rascal deJascal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2013-01-18 19:38:45 UTC
Haro is gonna love these changes.
Gah'Matar
Phoenix Naval Operations
Phoenix Naval Systems
#24 - 2013-01-18 19:39:39 UTC
Would prefer a bigger drop in isotopes. Even to the expense of a lesser gain in range.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2013-01-18 19:58:49 UTC
Well this is sooner than expected, but can't wait to see what else might be done with them ;)

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
GeeShizzle MacCloud
#26 - 2013-01-18 20:12:02 UTC
Heimdallofasgard wrote:

Two lines of black ops??

Hey Fozzie, care to elaborate?


:)

CSM CSM Meetings December 2012 wrote:

Ytterbium and Fozzie stated that their vision for a future BO revamp (after the initial jump range/fuel change) was that it would include two lines – a combat-oriented BO and a bridging/covert oriented one.
Heimdallofasgard
Ministry of Furious Retribution
Fraternity.
#27 - 2013-01-18 20:16:11 UTC
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:
Heimdallofasgard wrote:

Two lines of black ops??

Hey Fozzie, care to elaborate?


:)

CSM CSM Meetings December 2012 wrote:

Ytterbium and Fozzie stated that their vision for a future BO revamp (after the initial jump range/fuel change) was that it would include two lines – a combat-oriented BO and a bridging/covert oriented one.




I can see it now... lachesis scrams with a domi tank *swooooon*... or... or... Armageddon hull... with curse drones and neuts... jesus... this is gonna be a tough one to balance... Good luck with that Fozzmeister!
Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
#28 - 2013-01-18 20:18:04 UTC
Two step wrote:
Yay. I'd like to see the CPU use of the jump portal decreased as well, but this is a great start


this, please...

and it will be perfect until the summer expansion arrives

Unforgiven Storm for CSM 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13. (If I don't get in in the next 5 years I will quit trying) :-)
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#29 - 2013-01-18 20:20:48 UTC
So Fozzie, does this mean the test server will be up today?

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#30 - 2013-01-18 20:30:13 UTC
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:
good changes to start off with!

as i know you were looking into having 2 lines of Black ops BS's Fozzie, (one combat line another bridging line)

Having 2 lines might cause problems such as one will never be used, kinda like the ones we have right now.
The bridging line might look like what we have right now and you see the comments
TrouserDeagle wrote:

still ****

Temp McJitaTemp wrote:

without giving BLops a combat buff they'll still suck, but after those changes they'll suck a little less.

Vladimir Norkoff wrote:

So.... BLOps are still just over-glorified taxis? Albeit improved ones. Yay?

Seriously, should have just used haulers as the base model for these rather than Battleships.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
replicator 0001
Nullbear Tear Extractors
Hostile Intervention
#31 - 2013-01-18 20:38:52 UTC
This will be awesome for my 30x covops cynoing covops cloaking 10k ehp tackle bomber accounts that stay logged in 24/7

Nobody will be safe :)

Time to start work on another 32 accounts

muahahahahaha
Diometrius
TERRIBLE EMO ALTS REGIME
#32 - 2013-01-18 20:41:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Diometrius
Gonna C&P something I posted to Seleene's AMA on Reddit before this post was up. Its not directly related to Black Ops but appeared in that same section of the Minutes.

Something minor that jumped out at me was in the Ship Balancing section. Trebor asked about Covert Cynos being usable by T3 ships using the covert ops subsystem. Fozzie and Greyscale said its a technical limitation with the way the Covert Cyno is enabled for ships types and not the other way around. Immediately I asked myself why they didn't re-tool the fitting stats of the Covert Cyno to be like the Covert Ops cloak itself. Add a role bonus to all current Covert Cyno capable T2 ships to reduce say CPU usage by 99% while increasing the CPU fitting requirements on the Cyno to 5000. Then add the same 99% role bonus to only the covert subsystem while all other offensive subsystems remain the same. Top it off by adding Strategic Cruisers to the "can be fitted to" attributes on the Covert Cyno and the changes should be done.

A combination of the "can be fitted to" attribute and the fitting requirements should keep any nonsense like the officer co-proc fitted Covert Cloak Avatar from surfacing, and the change in fitting requirements via bonus from the subsystem will keep non-covert T3's from fitting the Cyno.
Heimdallofasgard
Ministry of Furious Retribution
Fraternity.
#33 - 2013-01-18 20:43:40 UTC
Vladimir Norkoff wrote:
So.... BLOps are still just over-glorified taxis? Albeit improved ones. Yay?

Seriously, should have just used haulers as the base model for these rather than Battleships.


Could repurpose one of the existing blockade runners into a black ops bridger/cov ops hauler, give it a jump drive... or make a new t2 hauler for it...

Then keep existing black ops battleships as they are, minus bridging, minus ability to jump to cynos, buff its tank, give it Ewar bonus similar to the covert recons?

This would mean instead of the Black Ops BS being a taxi, it'd provide lots of tank and a bit of utility and dps, and use the black ops hauler for bridging, jumping around, hauling loot.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#34 - 2013-01-18 20:50:32 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
Diometrius wrote:
Gonna C&P something I posted to Seleene's AMA on Reddit before this post was up. Its not directly related to Black Ops but appeared in that same section of the Minutes.

Something minor that jumped out at me was in the Ship Balancing section. Trebor asked about Covert Cynos being usable by T3 ships using the covert ops subsystem. Fozzie and Greyscale said its a technical limitation with the way the Covert Cyno is enabled for ships types and not the other way around. Immediately I asked myself why they didn't re-tool the fitting stats of the Covert Cyno to be like the Covert Ops cloak itself. Add a role bonus to all current Covert Cyno capable T2 ships to reduce say CPU usage by 99% while increasing the CPU fitting requirements on the Cyno to 5000. Then add the same 99% role bonus to only the covert subsystem while all other offensive subsystems remain the same. Top it off by adding Strategic Cruisers to the "can be fitted to" attributes on the Covert Cyno and the changes should be done.

A combination of the "can be fitted to" attribute and the fitting requirements should keep any nonsense like the officer co-proc fitted Covert Cloak Avatar from surfacing, and the change in fitting requirements via bonus from the subsystem will keep non-covert T3's from fitting the Cyno.


The 99% CPU reductions as a method of restricting what ships a module can be fitted to is a old and poor practice that has a number of problems, from confusing the process of fitting ships, to allowing weird edge cases (Test server Covops Avatar is one example). They also require those very hard to explain bonuses (97.5-100% reduction to cloak cpu per level? Virtually nobody understands that the first time they read it). You'll notice that all the newer modules that are restricted to certain shop types avoid the CPU method.

The good news is that I spent a good chunk of this week reauthoring the way all those legacy modules get restricted, and that should open up some very nice doors.


mynnna wrote:
So Fozzie, does this mean the test server will be up today?


That was the hope but it appears the client issues being faced earlier were unable to be fixed before the end of the day.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#35 - 2013-01-18 20:56:15 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:


The 99% CPU reductions as a method of restricting what ships a module can be fitted to is a old and poor practice that has a number of problems, from confusing the process of fitting ships, to allowing weird edge cases (Test server Covops Avatar is one example). They also require those very hard to explain bonuses (97.5-100% reduction to cloak cpu per level? Virtually nobody understands that the first time they read it). You'll notice that all the newer modules that are restricted to certain shop types avoid the CPU method.

The good news is that I spent a good chunk of this week reauthoring the way all those legacy modules get restricted, and that should open up some very nice doors.


Is this going to involve expanded probe launchers or not?
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#36 - 2013-01-18 20:57:10 UTC
The jump range and fuel bay are especially welcome and will make a reasonable starting point. I'm not as sold on the bridging mechanics, but that could just be because I dislike Black Ops being the glorified taxis they currently are. I'm interested to see if you'll continue iterating on them.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#37 - 2013-01-18 20:59:36 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:


The 99% CPU reductions as a method of restricting what ships a module can be fitted to is a old and poor practice that has a number of problems, from confusing the process of fitting ships, to allowing weird edge cases (Test server Covops Avatar is one example). They also require those very hard to explain bonuses (97.5-100% reduction to cloak cpu per level? Virtually nobody understands that the first time they read it). You'll notice that all the newer modules that are restricted to certain shop types avoid the CPU method.

The good news is that I spent a good chunk of this week reauthoring the way all those legacy modules get restricted, and that should open up some very nice doors.


Is this going to involve expanded probe launchers or not?


Covops cloaks and warfare links primarily.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
domino 8
League of Extraordinary Ratters
#38 - 2013-01-18 21:02:20 UTC
Awful idea, no use to anyone.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#39 - 2013-01-18 21:04:19 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
links


Better be accompanying a massive nerf, such as gutted effectiveness and a 40km or so range limit.
DNSBLACK
Dirt Nap Squad
#40 - 2013-01-18 21:09:48 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Diometrius wrote:
Gonna C&P something I posted to Seleene's AMA on Reddit before this post was up. Its not directly related to Black Ops but appeared in that same section of the Minutes.

Something minor that jumped out at me was in the Ship Balancing section. Trebor asked about Covert Cynos being usable by T3 ships using the covert ops subsystem. Fozzie and Greyscale said its a technical limitation with the way the Covert Cyno is enabled for ships types and not the other way around. Immediately I asked myself why they didn't re-tool the fitting stats of the Covert Cyno to be like the Covert Ops cloak itself. Add a role bonus to all current Covert Cyno capable T2 ships to reduce say CPU usage by 99% while increasing the CPU fitting requirements on the Cyno to 5000. Then add the same 99% role bonus to only the covert subsystem while all other offensive subsystems remain the same. Top it off by adding Strategic Cruisers to the "can be fitted to" attributes on the Covert Cyno and the changes should be done.

A combination of the "can be fitted to" attribute and the fitting requirements should keep any nonsense like the officer co-proc fitted Covert Cloak Avatar from surfacing, and the change in fitting requirements via bonus from the subsystem will keep non-covert T3's from fitting the Cyno.


The 99% CPU reductions as a method of restricting what ships a module can be fitted to is a old and poor practice that has a number of problems, from confusing the process of fitting ships, to allowing weird edge cases (Test server Covops Avatar is one example). They also require those very hard to explain bonuses (97.5-100% reduction to cloak cpu per level? Virtually nobody understands that the first time they read it). You'll notice that all the newer modules that are restricted to certain shop types avoid the CPU method.

The good news is that I spent a good chunk of this week reauthoring the way all those legacy modules get restricted, and that should open up some very nice doors.


mynnna wrote:
So Fozzie, does this mean the test server will be up today?


That was the hope but it appears the client issues being faced earlier were unable to be fixed before the end of the day.


Fozzy that is great news and glad to see you working quickly on the tech 3 cov cyno issue. As for the changes to BO, i cant thank you and unifex enough for a fast QA and finishing this up before Ret 1.1. Please keep up the good work and some day I will have to tell you my Augor story. I look forward to chatting with you and Yit at this years fanfest and if you can ninja a few more changes in before fanfest I will supply all jager bombs for the entire weekend to you and YIT and any other dev who helps. I can pour a mean bomb just ask Mittens.

On a side note maybe they should put you in charge of what to do in 0.0 cause after reading that section of the minutes it seems that they really dont know what to do.

Black