These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Dev Blog: Probe Scanning and other Goodies for Odyssey

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Fromil
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#321 - 2013-05-30 11:31:53 UTC
Our corporation lives in a WH. We have several casual players who prefer to mine roids than partake in the more lucrative aspects of WH life. That has always been fine with us, as we're more a social entity rather than a hardcore corp - so we take all comers who fit into our eclectic culture. This change to grav sites to regular anoms is going to make WH mining untenable as we do not have local to alert people mining to a possible threat - cloaky t3s (the mainstay of WH exploration) will be able to warp in and gank our miners without any realistic chance of detection. We will lose members and any chance of the industrial benefits they bring.

Yes, we can focus more on our WH specific operations, but losing the members we have counted amongst our friends is not something I can let pass without comment. It seems to me that in an effort to hurt mining botters you are also hurting the most hardcore, risk-taking miners in the game - this is a nerf to the high-end caliber miners and needs to be reconsidered.

Please reconsider making WH grav sites into anoms.
Strom Crendraven
The H8teful Eight
#322 - 2013-05-30 12:17:21 UTC
Octoven wrote:
A. This post will probably be cleaned up later for ranting, and B. In the future, could you please break your post into paragraphed points...no one likes reading a wall of text >.>


Fixed, happy? I have no problem reading a wall of text, its a forum not a college thesis. Then again i don't need text pauses to let my brain rest in between the words. You?
Maul555
Xen Investments
#323 - 2013-05-30 12:19:52 UTC
Strom Crendraven wrote:
Octoven wrote:
A. This post will probably be cleaned up later for ranting, and B. In the future, could you please break your post into paragraphed points...no one likes reading a wall of text >.>


Fixed, happy? I have no problem reading a wall of text, its a forum not a college thesis. Then again i don't need text pauses to let my brain rest in between the words. You?



I don't need an automobile, a roof over my head, or delicious food either... but they sure are nice
Strom Crendraven
The H8teful Eight
#324 - 2013-05-30 12:32:21 UTC
Maul555 wrote:
Strom Crendraven wrote:
Octoven wrote:
A. This post will probably be cleaned up later for ranting, and B. In the future, could you please break your post into paragraphed points...no one likes reading a wall of text >.>


Fixed, happy? I have no problem reading a wall of text, its a forum not a college thesis. Then again i don't need text pauses to let my brain rest in between the words. You?



I don't need an automobile, a roof over my head, or delicious food either... but they sure are nice


lol, good point sir I stand corrected.
Lexmana
#325 - 2013-05-30 12:53:27 UTC
Alexander the Great wrote:

Currently when I need to launch 1 probe I launch one probe. What you offer is "launch 8 probes then select 7 of them in the window, press right mouse button and recover them". Or I need to limit somehow the number of probes in the launcher, but of course there is no option "load X probes to the launcher". How does it make sense to you?

This one should be easy. Just unload the probes from your launcher and jettison all but one probe. Then reload the launcher and launch the single probe. And don't forget to loot the loot the can ...
CCP Orion
C C P
C C P Alliance
#326 - 2013-05-30 13:07:17 UTC
Lexmana wrote:
Alexander the Great wrote:

Currently when I need to launch 1 probe I launch one probe. What you offer is "launch 8 probes then select 7 of them in the window, press right mouse button and recover them". Or I need to limit somehow the number of probes in the launcher, but of course there is no option "load X probes to the launcher". How does it make sense to you?

This one should be easy. Just unload the probes from your launcher and jettison all but one probe. Then reload the launcher and launch the single probe. And don't forget to loot the loot the can ...

or you could shift drag one on the launcher... might be less wasteful.

Senior Programmer - Team Super Friends EVE Online, CCP Games
Maul555
Xen Investments
#327 - 2013-05-30 13:14:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Maul555
CCP Orion wrote:
Lexmana wrote:
Alexander the Great wrote:

Currently when I need to launch 1 probe I launch one probe. What you offer is "launch 8 probes then select 7 of them in the window, press right mouse button and recover them". Or I need to limit somehow the number of probes in the launcher, but of course there is no option "load X probes to the launcher". How does it make sense to you?

This one should be easy. Just unload the probes from your launcher and jettison all but one probe. Then reload the launcher and launch the single probe. And don't forget to loot the loot the can ...

or you could shift drag one on the launcher... might be less wasteful.



The problem with this is that you need to decloak to load/unload the launcher... So yeah... IF i know that I am about to need only 1 probe, then I can do this ahead of time... but then I still need to decloak and wait for the other 7 to reload to continue on with what I was most likely going to be doing just seconds and a short warp away (while cloaked)...

Yes, I was going to have to decloak at some time anyways, but you are fubaring what was a simple process... Add to the new complications that at some point i will have to enter map mode, and drag that probe to my current location, before I can warp off... This is going to get me killed. I dont always have the luxury of hanging around a wormhole I just passed through, in an unknown system, and then completely go full screen map mode, so I cant see the dangers... just to scan down the ID of this hole so I can move on...

The whole launching all the probes isn't really my big problem, unlike some other people... Its the probes not being where I dropped them that is the big killer...
Kitanga
Lowsec Border Marshals
#328 - 2013-05-30 13:27:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Kitanga
CCP Orion wrote:

or you could shift drag one on the launcher... might be less wasteful.



i think we are looking for a programmatic solution, not a current implementation workaround..

how about adding a right click (on the mod) option with a choice to launch 1? or ctrl+mod click launches 1? something like that...
Meytal
Doomheim
#329 - 2013-05-30 13:33:00 UTC
E'lyna Mis Dimaloun wrote:
Quote:
Actually it won't, because the placement at sun is exactly the same as if you'd dragged them there yourself: they don't actually warp there until you hit the scan button. When you launch the probes, they're still right by your ship.


Sounds an awfully lot like a bug that they couldn't fix and decided to leave in =P

Nah, sounds much more like catering to the Hisec guys who enter a system, drop a DSP, move it to the sun to scan, and warp off to the next system when they find nothing. Those guys have almost nothing in their daily experience that resembles the life of the WH dweller aside from dropping a probe and pushing scan.

[ Dear CCP, I whole heartedly recommend, even beg, that you have a couple of your guys look through the killboards, or your own stats, to find a few of the top PvP wormhole corps, the ones who lead the game in numbers of kills in wormhole space. Apply to and join those corps with unknown characters, and spend some time walking in our shoes. If you like hunting and stalking your prey, I think we would blow your minds. ]

If they really want to go through with the Probes-at-sun default placement, they should make a toggle. This is really trying to please two completely different sets of people, which is when you should introduce these kind of selectable options.

By default, let the toggle be "initial probe formation at sun" if you like. Let us then change that to "initial probe formation at ship". This should be a brain-dead easy option to implement, and will make a lot of people happy.
Meytal
Doomheim
#330 - 2013-05-30 14:02:08 UTC
Fromil wrote:
Our corporation lives in a WH. We have several casual players who prefer to mine roids than partake in the more lucrative aspects of WH life. That has always been fine with us, as we're more a social entity rather than a hardcore corp - so we take all comers who fit into our eclectic culture. This change to grav sites to regular anoms is going to make WH mining untenable as we do not have local to alert people mining to a possible threat - cloaky t3s (the mainstay of WH exploration) will be able to warp in and gank our miners without any realistic chance of detection. We will lose members and any chance of the industrial benefits they bring.

Yes, we can focus more on our WH specific operations, but losing the members we have counted amongst our friends is not something I can let pass without comment. It seems to me that in an effort to hurt mining botters you are also hurting the most hardcore, risk-taking miners in the game - this is a nerf to the high-end caliber miners and needs to be reconsidered.

Please reconsider making WH grav sites into anoms.

Taking this further, I would suggest/request that all non-Hisec Grav sites remain as cosmic signatures, and that only the Hisec Grav sites become cosmic anomalies. Even in Hisec, I still think Grav signatures would be useful for the rarer varieties: occasionally it is possible to find a lowsec-ore Grav site in Hisec. These should remain as cosmic signatures and be more difficult to locate.

I would even further suggest/request that more ice anomalies be added, but make all of them spawn in random systems, instead of restricting them to certain locations. A statement saying that this is the ultimate goal would suffice as well.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#331 - 2013-05-30 14:12:44 UTC
According to the test server thread, the reason for probe formations being initially placed at the sun is to prevent on-grid combat probing from becoming too fast.

Which is a case of poor design leading to workaround solutions.

I really wonder if the consequences of launching all probes immediately were considered. It reduces the exposure time of covert ops probers, making them even harder to detect or catch.

If the problem with probe launching was the need for repeated keypresses, why not simply make the module behave like every other module, and have a setting for auto-repeat? One keypress would then cycle until the launcher is empty, but without any side effects, and everyone would have the choice to launch individual probes.

.
Kitanga
Lowsec Border Marshals
#332 - 2013-05-30 14:29:37 UTC
Roime wrote:
According to the test server thread, the reason for probe formations being initially placed at the sun is to prevent on-grid combat probing from becoming too fast.

Which is a case of poor design leading to workaround solutions.

I really wonder if the consequences of launching all probes immediately were considered. It reduces the exposure time of covert ops probers, making them even harder to detect or catch.

If the problem with probe launching was the need for repeated keypresses, why not simply make the module behave like every other module, and have a setting for auto-repeat? One keypress would then cycle until the launcher is empty, but without any side effects, and everyone would have the choice to launch individual probes.



the approach to drop 8 probes at once should not have been coded, if it is deemed as game breaking due to the increased speed at launching probes in a combat situation (the cloaky ship isn't decloaked long enough).

so your workaround to the problem is to default to the sun. the problem is that this is not a decent/acceptable workaround.

as an alternative why not allow the launcher to still launch one at a time(as it is on TQ), but launch each probe in a defined direction leading to the formation of a chosen pattern, so that the end result is the same, you have your pattern, but the time to launch is unchanged from what is on TQ today..
E'lyna Mis Dimaloun
REUNI0N
Against ALL Authorities
#333 - 2013-05-30 14:48:31 UTC  |  Edited by: E'lyna Mis Dimaloun
Roime wrote:
According to the test server thread, the reason for probe formations being initially placed at the sun is to prevent on-grid combat probing from becoming too fast.


Current time to launch 5 probes needed to scan on-grid ship: 10 seconds
+ another 5 sec to position probes on grid
+ another 5 sec to scan (w/ level 5 acquisition)
~ =20 seconds

Odysey time to launch 5 probes: 0 seconds
+ another ~5 to move probes to grid
+ another 5 sec to scan (or less if you equipt the new med slot module)
~ <10 seconds

gg ccp
Maxwell Albritten
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#334 - 2013-05-30 15:43:42 UTC
Probes need to expire. Pilots need to be responsible for their stuff. I was on board with the changes until this step towards "Eve is Very Easy".

Nope.
Vince Snetterton
#335 - 2013-05-30 16:00:51 UTC
Fromil wrote:
Our corporation lives in a WH. We have several casual players who prefer to mine roids than partake in the more lucrative aspects of WH life. That has always been fine with us, as we're more a social entity rather than a hardcore corp - so we take all comers who fit into our eclectic culture. This change to grav sites to regular anoms is going to make WH mining untenable as we do not have local to alert people mining to a possible threat - cloaky t3s (the mainstay of WH exploration) will be able to warp in and gank our miners without any realistic chance of detection. We will lose members and any chance of the industrial benefits they bring.

Yes, we can focus more on our WH specific operations, but losing the members we have counted amongst our friends is not something I can let pass without comment. It seems to me that in an effort to hurt mining botters you are also hurting the most hardcore, risk-taking miners in the game - this is a nerf to the high-end caliber miners and needs to be reconsidered.

Please reconsider making WH grav sites into anoms.


I don't think you have read or followed many of the actions of CCP in the past.
They hate the fact that players set up shop in wh's, and care not one whit about any changes that affect wh players.

CCP's attitude is "Eve is a sandbox, you can play this game anyway you like, as long as it is null sec inside a large alliance."
None ofthe Above
#336 - 2013-05-30 16:38:09 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:


Edit: also, is anyone else worried that the reintroduction of faction towers means that the POS revamp is going to be delayed even further?


It was delayed indefinitely before the last CSM summit. How much more delayed can it be?

But you are right in a way, the more they do with the current POS the less likely they will actually be in a hurry to bear down and do the hard work of the POS revamp.

But given the trameframes talked about I don't know what else they can do. They need to find a way to make this work, develop it in tandem with maintain the current system.

IMHO, we need to keep up the feedback letting them know this revamped modular POS is something we want, and not fight the short term fixes for the existing POSes.

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
Meytal
Doomheim
#337 - 2013-05-30 17:27:00 UTC
None ofthe Above wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:


Edit: also, is anyone else worried that the reintroduction of faction towers means that the POS revamp is going to be delayed even further?


It was delayed indefinitely before the last CSM summit. How much more delayed can it be?

But you are right in a way, the more they do with the current POS the less likely they will actually be in a hurry to bear down and do the hard work of the POS revamp.

But given the trameframes talked about I don't know what else they can do. They need to find a way to make this work, develop it in tandem with maintain the current system.

IMHO, we need to keep up the feedback letting them know this revamped modular POS is something we want, and not fight the short term fixes for the existing POSes.

Also realize that they can begin laying the foundation for the new-POS while implementing the short-term extras. The objects in space are superficial; it doesn't matter what is there. Getting the code for personal storage, anywhere-access, real access controls, etc. is all vital, can be done in small pieces, and can be done using individual modules that might otherwise appear to be added hack-jobs. And it all builds on top of everything else. For example, when they get the personal storage stuff right, that enables the possibility for a market hub module that can be anchored at the system's primary tower, adding a market window and related interactions to that system.

Probably most of everything needed can be implemented now, and then a grand announcement of an update that looks like it ties together what was already tied together can be unveiled with the newly redesigned in-space object.

Personally, I would rather they delay the POS revamp to do it right and get the individual pieces working first, so we don't have another Unified Inventory or (now) Scanning frustration that takes months to get settled.
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#338 - 2013-05-30 17:32:26 UTC
E'lyna Mis Dimaloun wrote:
Roime wrote:
According to the test server thread, the reason for probe formations being initially placed at the sun is to prevent on-grid combat probing from becoming too fast.


Current time to launch 5 probes needed to scan on-grid ship: 10 seconds
+ another 5 sec to position probes on grid
+ another 5 sec to scan (w/ level 5 acquisition)
~ =20 seconds

Odysey time to launch 5 probes: 0 seconds
+ another ~5 to move probes to grid
+ another 5 sec to scan (or less if you equipt the new med slot module)
~ <10 seconds

gg ccp


I think they meant "too fast given the other changes we're making." So placing probes ready to warp to the sun means that on-grid probing takes 10 seconds instead of 5.

I suppose it was easier than recoding the auto-repeat to add a configurable "repeat n times" option, but it's still a hack. With an auto-repeat-n-times approach, there would still be a tradeoff between the number of probes you launch and the amount of time that you're uncloaked.

Then allow us to split probes into separate groups, the way we can with drones (but please please please not with the same interface) and you have something that's nearly ideal.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
Komen
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#339 - 2013-05-30 20:48:13 UTC
CCP Orion wrote:
Lexmana wrote:
Alexander the Great wrote:

Currently when I need to launch 1 probe I launch one probe. What you offer is "launch 8 probes then select 7 of them in the window, press right mouse button and recover them". Or I need to limit somehow the number of probes in the launcher, but of course there is no option "load X probes to the launcher". How does it make sense to you?

This one should be easy. Just unload the probes from your launcher and jettison all but one probe. Then reload the launcher and launch the single probe. And don't forget to loot the loot the can ...

or you could shift drag one on the launcher... might be less wasteful.


Or you guys could program a proper UI that asks how many probes we want to launch. Have a row of buttons labeled 1 through 8, and above it have a prompt like 'Select number of probes for deployment', and each button launches that many probes. Have this work with probes already in space, so if I drop one, and want to add 6, I can do that. And THEN have the total number of probes be able to snap into a formation, even though they're at different points in space.

****, I am a probe UI god. Hire me, jerks.
Zapa Cheenie
Alkaline Industrial Solutions
#340 - 2013-05-30 22:31:59 UTC
Well there goes any chance of mining Gravmetric sites in secrecy.... Being a miner just got hella more dangerous.