These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Feedback for Hacking/Archaeology feature from 27/5/13 onward

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
#301 - 2013-05-30 17:04:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Rob Crowley
While I generally agree with T2 being stronger than T3 in this special case I think the +10 T3 bonus is okay for 2 reasons:
1. Covert Ops frigs are very cheap for T2 ships. If there were a T2 exploration cruiser or BC with a price tag of 100+m I would absolutely agree that it should be stronger than T3, but as it is using a T3 is massively more risky than a T2 frig because of the price difference, so making the T3 equally strong is okay in my book.
2. I don't really see a good way to make the T3 bonus more all-round than the T2 bonus with the current simple form of the minigame. This might very well change when it gets fleshed out a bit more in the future.

Edit: A slight compromise might be making it 2 per level instead of plain 10, so it would practically end up 8-10 depending on skill investment.
CCP Bayesian
#302 - 2013-05-30 17:10:35 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Bayesian
Changes should be on Sisi everyday. As well as the balancing that RedDawn and Soundwave have been doing we've squashed a whole bunch of defects and added in some more audio cues.

Prime is currently making some changes so the stuff is scattered in a more sensible manner so that it limits the bad cases where you are screwed over by collision issues. He has also tweaked the lifecycle calculation so that it works better.

We'll be making further changes to everything after release to improve the mechanics involved and the general usability.

We'll also both be on the Live Stream this evening to talk about the feature.

EVE Software Engineer Team Space Glitter
Euripides Salamanca
Disco Volante Inc.
#303 - 2013-05-30 17:55:43 UTC
While not being much of a forum warrior and rather new to EVE (although I kept reading posts here and on various other EVE related sites long before even starting to play) I strongly feel that constructive feedback in this case, from as many players as possible, is crucial in convincing both CCP and our CSM representatives that - what they conceived and approved as improvement - is not going to work in current shape.

Many posters above already nailed it on the head. Rob Crowley, Naomi Hale, Kel Hound, Von Keigai and excellent summary post by Andreus Ixiris express what my thoughts are on the subject - so excuse me for creating yet another wall of text.

I'll try to keep it as concise as possible. I'd also like to point out that it feels universal for both solo and group play as well as stays outside of the ISK/hour or "balancing amount of loot" discussion.


  1. "Loot pinata" idea is contrary to design objectives for EVE presented by CCP during Fan Fest 2013

    2. Those were: accessibility improvement for new players, getting rid of elements which are unnecessary, and apply thoughtful streamlining to create "involving and easier to get into, but still complex and hard to master" environment.

    I'm relatively new player and it's hard to accuse me of being either bound to the "good old ways" or having 10 years trained "muscle memory" - and still "loot pinata" feels like exactly opposite of "accessible" . I know at least few people who are under 5mil SP or don't play longer than, say, 6 months, who had similar impressions after either trying this feature on SiSi or from watching this feature on stream.

  2. New players also don't feel comfortable with "loot pinata" - it feels awkward, confusing and inconsistent compared to everything else they start to learn about interaction with objects in EVE world.

    3. Assuming that it's good and fun design which will be loved by new players and easy to get used to for those who agree to adapt only because new players don't complain (as opposed to "stagnant veterans" voiced concerns) is invalid.
    Because, lets face it, how many new players bother to check new features on SiSi, post outside of New Citizen Q&A forum or even watch FanFest or developers streams?

  3. The way how player interact with the game world and how objects interact with each other makes it impossible to rely solely on "twitch" skills even for very agile players.

    4. When I'm being faced with challenge where scale of my (or team I belong to) success depends on my actual agility, I expect to get most precise tools to achieve that goal. Which basically means as close 1:1 translation of movement between my hand and its "extension" in the game world - my avatar. In shooter or simulator it's input latency reduction for example.

    EVE plays like RTS rather than flight simulator, though. We can only decide where we want our ship to go but how fast and what route it will take to get there is decided by two main factors: ship stats and pathfinding. And we know both factors are far from being consistent:
    - big and heavy vessels with otherwise slow turn rate can do instant 180 degree spin when bumped by much smaller ships or when colliding with nearby objects;
    - collision boxes on collidable objects don't match up exactly with shape we see in game (which leads to either being bumped in random direction or ship taking different path than we would expect it to);
    - while our ship can clip through some massive objects it can also get randomly stuck on tiny debris and slow to a crawl;
    - instead of free 360 degree camera its jaw axis movement is restricted to some arbitrary invisible "horizon plane".
    While all those issues have small impact on "normal" EVE activities (either PvP or PvE) they often happen to be a deciding factor in high precision minigame, creating - instead of challenge to test reaction and ability to cooperate - frustrating struggle.

  4. Only EVE activity where unexpected technical issues lead to complete failure If connection to server is lost ship automatically warp out if ability to warp was possible. Very often if connection is established soon enough even disabled ship can survive to finish its task - is it mining, PvP or PvE combat ship can come back to the site and still collect reward, salvage or loot. Not after successful hacking attempt though. Site cleared, containers disappeared. Nothing.

  5. Feature discouraging multi-boxing but provoking other even more unwanted activities instead?
    6. While I'm one of those anti-alt purists applauding every change leading to reduction and viability of multiboxing I don't buy that argument. Apart from surprising sudden twist from actively promoting multi accounts (Power of Two campaign etc) it seems bringing alt instead of friend will be common practice - because hacking minigame makes other person obsolete and alt can act as "scout" good enough.
    Real issue here, though is that "loot pinata" looks like activity which just waits for automation by some 3rd party "utility".
    If there are bots able to recognise which asteroid to mine and docking and undocking multiple ships then writing script simulating left clicks on screen position if pixel changes colour from yellow to green sounds like exercise from "C++ for Dummies "


I even had some ideas to post, to make it look less moan and groan. Imagine how one tiny feature can spoil the day if you care, and leave you with only 44 remaining characters...

Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the Universe, are challenged by this point of pale light... Carl Sagan - Pale Blue Dot
Nam Dnilb
Universal Frog
#304 - 2013-05-30 18:25:43 UTC
oh another thread, x-poasting:
Quote:
Hello CCP,

still there's no adjustable columns on the results window.

I have a hunch people with not so much excess screen real estate will want that badly.
Just think of all the forum whining you could avoid with this simple change. Thank you in advance.
Andreus Ixiris
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#305 - 2013-05-30 18:54:45 UTC
Euripides Salamanca, your post is awesome. You are a true EVEbro.

Andreus Ixiris > A Civire without a chin is barely a Civire at all.

Pieter Tuulinen > He'd be Civirely disadvantaged, Andreus.

Andreus Ixiris > ...

Andreus Ixiris > This is why we're at war.
Kahns
Ixion Defence Systems
#306 - 2013-05-30 19:35:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Kahns
CCP Prime wrote:
So for the scattering mechanism we've reduced the speed that the cans eject out at.
It'll make chasing them almost unneeded.


Thanks for listening to us guys! I really think this will fix a vast number of the things I was complaining about. Group hug yo!

(I still think the loot pinata is a bad mixed metaphor and all that, but if we can at least avoid chasing cans into walls it won't feel so.... broken.)
Kahns
Ixion Defence Systems
#307 - 2013-05-30 19:48:17 UTC
Sheena Tzash wrote:
The troll:

Sit near a hacking site cloaked and wait for someone to hack the site for you. At the loot is released, uncloak and click away.
Since you don't need to lock the container to loot it you don't need to worry about the lock delay.
.


OK, maybe I was wrong and this new mechanic is so, so very much Eve like :D . Screw waiting for the loot to spew, kill the explorer... there's no NPC's to gum up the works.
Yuki Kasumi
Some names are just stupid
#308 - 2013-05-30 20:07:02 UTC
I tried this feature out only 2 hours or so ago. So I assume I played the latest build available

Distribution of sites, I went through 45 systems (half empire and other half null/low) looking for exploration sites. I found 3 (1 empire and 2 in null), is this consistent with the rarity of these or was I just unlucky?

Expected return. Having done some mags and radars sites in the past I often got around 20-40m average per site unless I was a bit unlucky. Total look value for the three sites I was able to do (according to inventory) 52m isk, averaging 17.3m per site. That is hardly excellent income for 45 jumps and 1-2h of playing paying attention. Again is this consistent, with your wanted income for this profession?

I realize that 3 sites is hardly statistically significant to draw much if any conclusions from, but I would strongly urge you to consider the fact that hacking before was mostly a passive activity (sitting at the can and waiting). Now it requires constant attention (hacking minigame) at greater risk (due to easier scanning), not to mention that it has become a somewhat more involved activity. Personally at this rate even as a part time / just for fun explorer I find this level of income not to be worthwhile for anything else than occasional recreation. For reference two hours of mining would yield the same amount of isk approximately.

I do hope I was just unlucky...
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#309 - 2013-05-30 20:09:13 UTC
Yuki Kasumi wrote:
I tried this feature out only 2 hours or so ago. So I assume I played the latest build available

Distribution of sites, I went through 45 systems (half empire and other half null/low) looking for exploration sites. I found 3 (1 empire and 2 in null), is this consistent with the rarity of these or was I just unlucky?

Expected return. Having done some mags and radars sites in the past I often got around 20-40m average per site unless I was a bit unlucky. Total look value for the three sites I was able to do (according to inventory) 52m isk, averaging 17.3m per site. That is hardly excellent income for 45 jumps and 1-2h of playing paying attention. Again is this consistent, with your wanted income for this profession?

I realize that 3 sites is hardly statistically significant to draw much if any conclusions from, but I would strongly urge you to consider the fact that hacking before was mostly a passive activity (sitting at the can and waiting). Now it requires constant attention (hacking minigame) at greater risk (due to easier scanning), not to mention that it has become a somewhat more involved activity. Personally at this rate even as a part time / just for fun explorer I find this level of income not to be worthwhile for anything else than occasional recreation. For reference two hours of mining would yield the same amount of isk approximately.

I do hope I was just unlucky...

Because there are fewer players on the test server the sites tend to clump up in systems less traveled.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Tim Ryder
Flippin DaBird Corporation 2
#310 - 2013-05-30 20:47:41 UTC
For me, being visually impaired, what's not on the overview doesn't exist.

The containers supposed to be analyzed doesn't appear on the overview using Load Default -> All, only Load Default -> General shows them.

The spawn containers doesn't appear on the overview even with that setting, so they're bugged even worse.
blink alt
Doomheim
#311 - 2013-05-30 20:48:37 UTC  |  Edited by: blink alt
I am loving the items being mapped to specific cans now. One small complaint would be the speed to the cans now. Dare I say it but now the cans seem I bit too slow. Since the items are now mapped it creates this situation where during say about the first 3-6 seconds of the jettison all the cans are stacked on eachother in a way where you can not pick a specific can. I suppose it is not too big of a deal having the first pick or two outside your control but just a thought.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#312 - 2013-05-30 20:54:48 UTC
Kahns wrote:
Sheena Tzash wrote:
The troll:

Sit near a hacking site cloaked and wait for someone to hack the site for you. At the loot is released, uncloak and click away.
Since you don't need to lock the container to loot it you don't need to worry about the lock delay.
.


OK, maybe I was wrong and this new mechanic is so, so very much Eve like :D . Screw waiting for the loot to spew, kill the explorer... there's no NPC's to gum up the works.

I would feel it to be more entertaining to wait for the spew to occur then smart bomb right next to it.Twisted

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Raven Solaris
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#313 - 2013-05-30 21:01:44 UTC
Tim Ryder wrote:
For me, being visually impaired, what's not on the overview doesn't exist.

The containers supposed to be analyzed doesn't appear on the overview using Load Default -> All, only Load Default -> General shows them.

The spawn containers doesn't appear on the overview even with that setting, so they're bugged even worse.


Intentional, they want to experiment with forcing people to use the space scape instead of the overview.

My condolences.
Tim Ryder
Flippin DaBird Corporation 2
#314 - 2013-05-30 21:11:29 UTC
Raven Solaris wrote:
Tim Ryder wrote:
For me, being visually impaired, what's not on the overview doesn't exist.

The containers supposed to be analyzed doesn't appear on the overview using Load Default -> All, only Load Default -> General shows them.

The spawn containers doesn't appear on the overview even with that setting, so they're bugged even worse.


Intentional, they want to experiment with forcing people to use the space scape instead of the overview.

My condolences.


Pity that doesn't work - at all - for all of us.
CCP Bayesian
#315 - 2013-05-30 21:14:33 UTC
Tim Ryder, we'd like to try to make it work for everyone so if you could suggest some changes that might improve your ability to see these things well enough to interact with them we'll definitely try to improve things.

EVE Software Engineer Team Space Glitter
Tim Ryder
Flippin DaBird Corporation 2
#316 - 2013-05-30 21:19:20 UTC
CCP Bayesian wrote:
Tim Ryder, we'd like to try to make it work for everyone so if you could suggest some changes that might improve your ability to see these things well enough to interact with them we'll definitely try to improve things.


The single most important thing then - beyond anything else - is contrast. If you can, make them react to their background in some way so they're always clearly distinguished. That'd help everyone.

After that, size is important. Trying to have them roughly the size of things on the overview would help a lot.
Liltha
Lost My Way Enterprises
#317 - 2013-05-30 21:31:00 UTC
If you are going to make the sites better with multiple people why not actually make them better with multiple people? Instead of that second person waiting around just to get cans let him add his hacking ability to the object as well, either by having the second person's virus strength get added to first or even better by having both hack the board at the same time with failure only happening if both fail.
Liltha
Lost My Way Enterprises
#318 - 2013-05-30 21:42:43 UTC
On another note, it feels as if the high sec sites might be a tad too difficult for low skilled entry players to be able to hack the items in two runs. In part because the virus strength is only dependent on ship type and hacking module with the only way to get the better hacking module is to train hacking to 5 and the only way to get a better ship bonus by training to covert ops ships. With 20 virus strength it was taking at least 3 clicks per firewall to get past them and with only 2 tries luck is a bit against you if you don't also have the higher cohesion of trained skills.

I'd suggest adding skills that can raise virus strength or maybe weaken defenses on the site, or possibly other modules to do the same. Additionally there seems to be a useless implant that lowers cycle time on hacking and archeology modules that could be repurposed into a virus strength implant.
CCP Prime
C C P
C C P Alliance
#319 - 2013-05-30 21:58:26 UTC
Tim Ryder wrote:
CCP Bayesian wrote:
Tim Ryder, we'd like to try to make it work for everyone so if you could suggest some changes that might improve your ability to see these things well enough to interact with them we'll definitely try to improve things.


The single most important thing then - beyond anything else - is contrast. If you can, make them react to their background in some way so they're always clearly distinguished. That'd help everyone.

After that, size is important. Trying to have them roughly the size of things on the overview would help a lot.


Thanks for that constructive feedback. I really want to improve on the brackets so they are usable for all. This kind of feedback helps to make that case.

Software Engineer Team Prototyping Rocks 2 3 5 7 11 13 17 19 23 29 31 37 41 43 47 53 59 61 67 71 ...
kyofu
Praetorian Black Guard
#320 - 2013-05-30 22:18:48 UTC
Tim Ryder wrote:
CCP Bayesian wrote:
Tim Ryder, we'd like to try to make it work for everyone so if you could suggest some changes that might improve your ability to see these things well enough to interact with them we'll definitely try to improve things.


The single most important thing then - beyond anything else - is contrast. If you can, make them react to their background in some way so they're always clearly distinguished. That'd help everyone.

After that, size is important. Trying to have them roughly the size of things on the overview would help a lot.


This would also help the eye strain issue I complained of earlier. My eyesight is fine, but trying to distinguish those silly little cross hairs ends up giving me a headache. Larger sized icons, or a working overview would also help significantly with the carpal tunnel issue. Preferably a working overview.