These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

EVE Online: Retribution 1.1 Feedback

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Da Dom
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#581 - 2013-03-05 13:09:28 UTC
It would be great to know what all these patches are updating

The links the OP gave us don't explain anything beyond Retribution 1.1

Update your links please

Because Far-que... That's why.
Roseline Penshar
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#582 - 2013-03-05 13:30:28 UTC
where is the 1.1.5 patch note?
Braxus Deninard
Hard Knocks Inc.
Hard Knocks Citizens
#583 - 2013-03-05 13:35:23 UTC
The links in the OP explain all patch notes, up to and including 1.1.5 - http://community.eveonline.com/updates/patchnotes.asp
Lightnin
DieHarder LiveLonger Corporation
#584 - 2013-03-05 13:58:48 UTC
just wondering if the target lines can be turnned off and on if needed?
on some of my ALTS I can not turn off the target lines

Go Far Go In or Don't Go
Commander A9
Aurora University
#585 - 2013-03-05 14:59:15 UTC
Have missions been fixed so that the AI no longer overzealously track-disrupts and neutralizes you? As it stands, you can be TDed and neuted by 6 targets in one room, but 1 TD, and you can't hit a thing...I'm wondering if this has been addressed since it was acknowledged that this was a bug...

Recommendations:

-enable ships wobbling in hangar view (pre-Captains Quarters)

-add more missions (NPC fleet vs. NPC fleets that actually shoot)

-STOP NERFING EVERYTHING!

Join Live Events!
Roseline Penshar
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#586 - 2013-03-05 15:03:13 UTC
Braxus Deninard wrote:
The links in the OP explain all patch notes, up to and including 1.1.5 - http://community.eveonline.com/updates/patchnotes.asp



lol, not pay attention to OP ty
Athena Maldoran
Doomheim
#587 - 2013-03-05 17:06:42 UTC
Dear CCP, I think you should consider the autopilot shown on the backdrop a good idea. Although I'd like some improvements. First i'd like to see wich one is the start and with one is the end. I'd like it to be more informative than having to look at the gate to figure out what way it points to see what system is next. I'd also want to see names on each of the systems when you hover over them. At the end I want to see the system, not have a line go invisible. Good job on getting autopilot settings out of the map. Now if you could add some options to change how the autopilot appears on screen, maybe a option to move it around abit. that would be even nicer.
Benedictus de Suede
Norsewing Naval Command
#588 - 2013-03-05 22:59:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Benedictus de Suede
Project 626 wrote:
My cam vibration when warping is some times working and others not. Bin the same sens the last two updates. And most of the time when warping my cam is tilting away and after a little wile it tilts back. It looks like the "camera man" is drunk.

Liked the Visual linking in space. Gave a more deepness in the game that things are hanging together.

And some thing out side the patches. The background is a joke! I haven't seen so few colors in a texture sens I played minecraft. Well in short. We can say this background is not HD ready .... XD

And the gas clouds are funny too. You never come close to the gas. But still you are in it... I guess it has to do with some strange 2d effect. And it also make the light effect jump around in gas clouds and acting up my fps pretty good some times.

And the most annoying thing of them all... You have worked on this game around 8 years. And still this game is suffering from invisible walls.. In some missions Iam thrown by A-gates in the snake asteroids. And then there are allot of invisible walls. It annoy´s the crap out of me =)

But not bad thing. Keep up developing the UI. It still is bad. But I see you are working on it. So keep up the good work =)

PS: dont forget the poorly made drone interface. =)


Agree..

I really like EVE but yes, I think there are a lot of little issues that is quite annoying. Especially after 10 years of development. First some comments about ship balancing.

If for example the Gallantes feels that their "battlecruisers" are inferior to the Caldarians the logical action must be for the Galante people to improve their own battlecruiser or perhaps develop a new one and not to ask the Caldarians to remove a missile launcher from theirs. For me this would feel more realistic. It´s the same principle that have worked throughout the history of warfare. It´s quite easy to estimate which ships,weapons and defence system people preferably use when it comes to PVP through a quick glance at the killboards. This type of information should indicate which of the systems who needs to evolve. Ships should be "upgraded" not "balanced". Let the the Principle of Darwin rule!

Secondly, yes somethings are annoying. Here are my wish list for improvments:
1. Alignment is, simply put it, awful. Should be smoother and in line with ship mass and size. A 1000m battleship that "quick rolls" (i.e 90 degree in under a second) dosen´t feel realistic. You get a feeling that it´s a fighter rather than a huge ship.

2. Big ships are basically big plattforms. It seems strange and again illogical that they can´t carry a additional range of smaller weapons to counter the threat of smaller ships. For example USS New Jersey had Cruise Missiles (Large), heavy artillery, Harpoons (Medium) and Gattling guns (small) for close defence. Battleships should have x large waepon slots + x medium weapon slots + x small weapon slots. ..or just let the Ships powercore and CPU determine the number and size of launchers, turrets etc.

3. Make a queuing system for undocking. Ships that undock in a "fused" lump looks ridiculous.

4. Missiles/shells that don´t travel through asteroid, buildings or your own hull. Think of how interesting and fun combat in an asteriodbelt could be if you could take cover and hide behind asteriods!

5. Make all "flight dynamics" feel more realistic i.e pitch, yaw and roll 360 degrees. Plz add the ability to use arrow-keys or joystick to control the movement. Thrust vectoring would be cool:)

6. Replace the static mission system with a dynamic one and make the outcome of missions flown impact the EVE universe. Add Combat Air Patrol, strike and recon missions etc. Digital Image Design made a really good dynamic mission generator in Total Air War in 1998. How hard could it be in 2013?

7. Add real support for multiple screens so we can put all the menus on the second monitor.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#589 - 2013-03-06 00:15:01 UTC
Benedictus de Suede wrote:
Project 626 wrote:
My cam vibration when warping is some times working and others not. Bin the same sens the last two updates. And most of the time when warping my cam is tilting away and after a little wile it tilts back. It looks like the "camera man" is drunk.

Liked the Visual linking in space. Gave a more deepness in the game that things are hanging together.

And some thing out side the patches. The background is a joke! I haven't seen so few colors in a texture sens I played minecraft. Well in short. We can say this background is not HD ready .... XD

And the gas clouds are funny too. You never come close to the gas. But still you are in it... I guess it has to do with some strange 2d effect. And it also make the light effect jump around in gas clouds and acting up my fps pretty good some times.

And the most annoying thing of them all... You have worked on this game around 8 years. And still this game is suffering from invisible walls.. In some missions Iam thrown by A-gates in the snake asteroids. And then there are allot of invisible walls. It annoy´s the crap out of me =)

But not bad thing. Keep up developing the UI. It still is bad. But I see you are working on it. So keep up the good work =)

PS: dont forget the poorly made drone interface. =)


Agree..

I really like EVE but yes, I think there are a lot of little issues that is quite annoying. Especially after 10 years of development. First some comments about ship balancing.

If for example the Gallantes feels that their "battlecruisers" are inferior to the Caldarians the logical action must be for the Galante people to improve their own battlecruiser or perhaps develop a new one and not to ask the Caldarians to remove a missile launcher from theirs. For me this would feel more realistic. It´s the same principle that have worked throughout the history of warfare. It´s quite easy to estimate which ships,weapons and defence system people preferably use when it comes to PVP through a quick glance at the killboards. This type of information should indicate which of the systems who needs to evolve. Ships should be "upgraded" not "balanced". Let the the Principle of Darwin rule!

Secondly, yes somethings are annoying. Here are my wish list for improvments:
1. Alignment is, simply put it, awful. Should be smoother and in line with ship mass and size. A 1000m battleship that "quick rolls" (i.e 90 degree in under a second) dosen´t feel realistic. You get a feeling that it´s a fighter rather than a huge ship.

2. Big ships are basically big plattforms. It seems strange and again illogical that they can´t carry a additional range of smaller weapons to counter the threat of smaller ships. For example USS New Jersey had Cruise Missiles (Large), heavy artillery, Harpoons (Medium) and Gattling guns (small) for close defence. Battleships should have x large waepon slots + x medium weapon slots + x small weapon slots. ..or just let the Ships powercore and CPU determine the number and size of launchers, turrets etc.

3. Make a queuing system for undocking. Ships that undock in a "fused" lump looks ridiculous.

4. Missiles/shells that don´t travel through asteroid, buildings or your own hull. Think of how interesting and fun combat in an asteriodbelt could be if you could take cover and hide behind asteriods!

5. Make all "flight dynamics" feel more realistic i.e pitch, yaw and roll 360 degrees. Plz add the ability to use arrow-keys or joystick to control the movement. Thrust vectoring would be cool:)

6. Replace the static mission system with a dynamic one and make the outcome of missions flown impact the EVE universe. Add Combat Air Patrol, strike and recon missions etc. Digital Image Design made a really good dynamic mission generator in Total Air War in 1998. How hard could it be in 2013?

7. Add real support for multiple screens so we can put all the menus on the second monitor.

The "Search Forums" feature is your friend.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Xan Xs
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#590 - 2013-03-06 05:40:33 UTC
-Warping needs better looking transition.
- I would like to see damage inflicted show up as it is done graphically.
-Their needs to be an "Open Cargo" shortcut. (PLEASE!!!!)
-Option to adjust default range and orbits in increments of hundreds.
-Or just provide more orbit options.

As a new player i would like to see these changes implemented. Please.

Thank you
Eloise Pasteur
Vinegar Flies
#591 - 2013-03-06 11:21:16 UTC
Little thing - can the MOTD please include a link to the patch notes again, as well as the feedback threads.
Benedictus de Suede
Norsewing Naval Command
#592 - 2013-03-06 12:39:29 UTC
[quote=Ranger 1....
The "Search Forums" feature is your friend.[/quote]

Sorry, I don´t understand how this comment relates to what I just wrote.
1. I´m playing EVE for the fun of it.
2. I think I´m doing quite well.
3. I think there are some issues that should be adressed.

That´s all.
Ares VII
Sarum Heavy Industries
#593 - 2013-03-06 14:51:58 UTC
"Going with the flow" is pretty much how I experience eve and dealing with change is no exception and, as you can clearly see, I typically don't have much to say regarding the direction of eve. Having said that, however, I've always wondered why you'd opt to over complicate an otherwise more player-driven situation by implementing such ever increasing rigidity when it would seem that simplicity would prevail in allowing new eden to unfold in absolute thrilling chaos.

At present, when I see a specific ship show up at a camp, I can know with a good measure of certainty how it's fitted and what it's capable of. For some, maybe that's a good thing. For me, it's a missed opportunity to surprise me with something I've not encountered before (i.e. the thrill of the kill). Ship rebalancing endeavors to micro-manage this trend and I can see generic fits robbing game play of all enjoyment.

T3 cruiser development was, imo, a great idea beyond the rigidity. There is far more flexibility and, unless you've literally studied the look of each particular fitting composition, you can only guess at what that proteus is about to unleash. That's exciting... as it should be for all engagements.

Why with all the over complications? Why not just dispose of ship bonuses, balance slots across the classes/races and allow ships to be fit according to skills, economics and player-driven purpose? Ya, sure, chaos would ensue and there would be no real balance to the universe. Who really wants that anyway? Who really wants cookie-cutter ship fits and predictable engagements? New Eden strives to exist apart from a particular realism that, imo, is a missed opportunity for something far more exciting overall IF players had the exclusive ability to fit their ships according to desired purpose, acquired SPs, available pg/cpu and economic means.

Aside from taking that opportunity, I have to admit that I'm enjoying much of the changes taking place. For whatever it's worth, at least there's change. That, alone, beats stagnancy.

~Ares "God of Death By NPC" VII
Ranzera Stez
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#594 - 2013-03-06 15:16:29 UTC
I want more Sansha's ships. That is all.
Lightnin
DieHarder LiveLonger Corporation
#595 - 2013-03-06 15:38:37 UTC
ship target lines, is there anyway of turnning them off?
my older carector has none but my later ALTS STILL HAVE THEM RUNNING AND I CAN NOT TURN THEM OFF

target lines are bothersome while in combat

Go Far Go In or Don't Go
Cedric deBouilard
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#596 - 2013-03-07 11:23:23 UTC
Benedictus de Suede wrote:
2. Big ships are basically big plattforms. It seems strange and again illogical that they can´t carry a additional range of smaller weapons to counter the threat of smaller ships. For example USS New Jersey had Cruise Missiles (Large), heavy artillery, Harpoons (Medium) and Gattling guns (small) for close defence. Battleships should have x large waepon slots + x medium weapon slots + x small weapon slots. ..or just let the Ships powercore and CPU determine the number and size of launchers, turrets etc.


you know there's nothing stopping you from fitting smaller guns on your bigger ships. it's funny as hell but the choice is there. try fitting medium guns on your battleship for a change. but if you want dedicated smaller hi-slots in addition to normal hi-slots so you don't lose efficiency is a bit... greedy, shall I say?

Benedictus de Suede wrote:
3. Make a queuing system for undocking. Ships that undock in a "fused" lump looks ridiculous.

4. Missiles/shells that don´t travel through asteroid, buildings or your own hull. Think of how interesting and fun combat in an asteriodbelt could be if you could take cover and hide behind asteriods!

6. Replace the static mission system with a dynamic one and make the outcome of missions flown impact the EVE universe. Add Combat Air Patrol, strike and recon missions etc. Digital Image Design made a really good dynamic mission generator in Total Air War in 1998. How hard could it be in 2013?

7. Add real support for multiple screens so we can put all the menus on the second monitor.


get these ideas to Ideas and Suggestions forums so someone Blue named will actually read them and take notes.
Ursala Oresmith
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#597 - 2013-03-08 18:41:34 UTC
Client crash's when you try to plot a route with too many waypoints:

http://grab.by/kuJm

http://grab.by/kuJg

As my CEO recently found out.
whaynethepain
#598 - 2013-03-14 14:54:03 UTC
I would like to take this opportunity to thank CCP and more so, the eve online peoples, for bringing Retribution1.

I had some time to skim through the thread and realised, what a diverse and reaching mix of intellects we bring together, in perfect harmony.

Nice one

Getting you on your feet.

So you've further to fall.
Oraac Ensor
#599 - 2013-03-17 10:02:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Oraac Ensor
Quote:
When running the Caldari military tutorial a Merlin will be awarded rather than a Condor.

Why?

The tutorial already awarded a Merlin in the final mission, why remove the Condor from Mission 2? The next mission awards two rocket launchers - to be fitted to what, the Merlin? I think not.

The original version with a Condor followed by two rocket launchers made perfect sense, but giving a Merlin + two launchers is totally illogical.

Also, the original version gave the newbie two different frigate types to experiment with - what's the point of giving two of the same type?

All the other races' military tutorials give the racial basic fast interception frigate in Mission 2 (Executioner, Atron, Slasher) and the tougher combat frigate in the final mission (Punisher, Tristan, Rifter) and Caldari previously followed the same pattern.

This change is nonsense.

Edit: It's not even consistent - the Jouvulen agent still gives a Condor.
Alexis Helix
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#600 - 2013-03-26 11:21:47 UTC
Banirtal Cadelanne wrote:
Cant update past 21.85MB. Tried on 4 different computers, I had the same problem with the last update, had to re-download the client manually and re-install. Loosing training time here! Last time lost 3 days, only received an apology. I have 15 accounts, if I loose time this time round I will cancel all accounts!

You have 15 accounts, you're not going to cancel them all. If you did, what else would you have to do with your life?