These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Ghastly Hotbed Of Spaceship Trauma - Ghost Sites in Rubicon

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#121 - 2013-11-04 20:36:43 UTC
Utremi Fasolasi wrote:
The previous hacking mechanic of press butan wait 5 mins staring at a spinning module for bacon is what was broken. Odyssey fixed that problem.

Let's get the facts right.

Odyssey fixed the stare and wait for bacon apart, but now you have to chase the bacon all over space after earning it.

Scrap the spew mechanic.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Orakkus
ImperiaI Federation
Goonswarm Federation
#122 - 2013-11-04 20:43:03 UTC
Mara Tessidar wrote:
"Hey guys we're adding ghost sites oh and also they're so easy to find you don't even need to scan them down"

So ghostly. Soooo ghostly.


I have to agree with Mara, I am a bit surprised they aren't something that needs to be probed down. Core Probe launchers were specifically made with very little fitting requirements so that all ships could use them. Seems a bit odd not to make Ghost Sites probeable only, particularly when the bar is relatively low.

He's not just famous, he's "IN" famous. - Ned Nederlander
Orakkus
ImperiaI Federation
Goonswarm Federation
#123 - 2013-11-04 20:44:39 UTC
Mioelnir wrote:
I don't have a problem if these implants turn out to be must have items. Because must haves are clearly broken and get fixed comparatively fast nowadays.

I am more worried about them becoming "should" instead of "could".


Fair enough argument.. though, I think at this point we might be hitting the server tick limit on things anyways.

He's not just famous, he's "IN" famous. - Ned Nederlander
Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#124 - 2013-11-04 20:51:28 UTC
A hacking site that blows up your ship if you don't hack it fast enough? Am I the only one that sees the skill related problem here? The gulf between T1 and T2 hacking modules is so great that these sites will either be trivially easy and risk free to those with V skills, or be completely suicidal for those that don't.
CCP Affinity
C C P
C C P Alliance
#125 - 2013-11-04 20:53:28 UTC
Turelus wrote:
I shan't derail the thread any more and thank you for the replies that were given. Even with the complaints I am looking forward to Ghost Sites and player made implants (I hope for more implants in the future).

It might be worth seeing if the iteration to the hacking game can be looked at for Rubicon 1.1 however as Ghost Site's wont give you that second chance when you meet one of the impossible games it will instead just be over.

In regards to those failures do these containers damage you when you fail, or only when the sites timer runs out? (sorry if this was already addressed). As it's going to be more frustrating if you start losing ships over it as well.


They damage you both when you fail and when the timer runs out :)

♥ CCP Affinity ♥

Follow me on Twitter

Game Designer for EVE Online

Team Astro Sparkle
CCP Affinity
C C P
C C P Alliance
#126 - 2013-11-04 20:54:53 UTC
Kip Troger wrote:
As a low sec dweller myself, I am usually poking around in a pvp fit vessel. Depending on how dangerous these sites end up being, it sounds like I will most likely not be able to do them if I happened to come across one.

It also sounds like the masses of herons and buzzards that come through fit for data/relic might also have some issues with the sites.

Which means, the most likely explorers to do these, will be the ones cruising around in the "do it all" cloaky tengus.

Currently, some sites do not allow tengus to enter the acceleration gates. Is there any restriction on what ship class can enter these sites? Will there be acceleration gates?


No acceleration gates or restrictions :) they can also be run in smaller ships if you are fast enough

♥ CCP Affinity ♥

Follow me on Twitter

Game Designer for EVE Online

Team Astro Sparkle
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#127 - 2013-11-04 20:57:17 UTC
Katarina Reid wrote:
The content looks good but those rewards look pointless. How much isk should you make from a site?


Yup, because an implant set that increases warp speed by ~50%, plus with warp speed rigs on an Interceptor so that it can cover 200 AU in 5 seconds are pointless.

Wow, now that I think about it that is going to give me whiplash... halp Shocked

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
CCP Affinity
C C P
C C P Alliance
#128 - 2013-11-04 21:00:21 UTC
Rio Bravo wrote:
Sounds really exciting, can't wait to see it first hand!

When I first heard ghost sites I thought you were actually talking about the introduction of ghosts. Glad it was just a name. Please, in the future, never introduce ghosts, magic, or even aliens into EvE. I like that EvE is human, industrial, scientific, and mathematical. We can always play World of Warcraft or Minecraft if we want monsters.



Ghost is also a military term :) CCP Abraxas picked it and I can't imagine us ever doing 'fantasy'esque expansions ;) would be crazy, in a bad way!

♥ CCP Affinity ♥

Follow me on Twitter

Game Designer for EVE Online

Team Astro Sparkle
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#129 - 2013-11-04 21:00:58 UTC
Orakkus wrote:
Mara Tessidar wrote:
"Hey guys we're adding ghost sites oh and also they're so easy to find you don't even need to scan them down"

So ghostly. Soooo ghostly.


I have to agree with Mara, I am a bit surprised they aren't something that needs to be probed down. Core Probe launchers were specifically made with very little fitting requirements so that all ships could use them. Seems a bit odd not to make Ghost Sites probeable only, particularly when the bar is relatively low.

Worried another player will be able to warp to the sight and you will have to throw down and battle over it?

Working as intended.
Ansylia
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#130 - 2013-11-04 21:02:30 UTC
Ansylia wrote:
Quote:
Your objective, if you wish to risk life and limb (well ... your crew's lives and limbs)

Crews? We have crews on our ships? I thought the purpose of Jovian Pod technology was to fully automate our ships?

Quote:
As I mentioned, these sites are related to dangerous experiments, and the pirates desperately do not want the capsuleers to steal the fruit of their labors

It makes very little sense to me that these are Anomalies, and not Signatures. These sites are supposed to be super-secret, with pirate guards that the authorities are unable to acknowledge - so how can it be rationalized that a basic scan reveals these sites?


I forgot to ask - the 'Yurt' and 'Wetu' Mobile Depots - what are those exactly? Are those supposed to be the meta versions of the Mobile Depots, or are they the *only* Depots available and also the only way we'll be able to get those BPC's?
CCP Affinity
C C P
C C P Alliance
#131 - 2013-11-04 21:02:47 UTC
Fergus Runkle wrote:
CCP Affinity wrote:

I fully intend these sites to be tough and for people to really feel at risk :) it's just about continuing to balance both pre and post release until we are at a good point.


You could start by making them signatures rather than anomalies. Yes I know you need to put stuff in so that all that time that went into the system scanner was not wasted. But what about all the time invested by the players in scanning skills.

I hate to use the words dumbing down but they are pretty much the way I feel about this stuff.


With this feature I decided the system scanner was best :) this doesn't mean next time I won't make signatures - not everything needs to be the same and different discovery methods suit different features.

♥ CCP Affinity ♥

Follow me on Twitter

Game Designer for EVE Online

Team Astro Sparkle
CCP Affinity
C C P
C C P Alliance
#132 - 2013-11-04 21:04:36 UTC
Kadm wrote:
Quote:
If you're successful in hacking, you'll be given loot (which won't be scattered), but if you take too long, the pirates will be alerted to your presence and will warp in to attack you.


So someone finally realized how awful this is? Why don't you guys go ahead and go back and change relic/hacking containers to not use it again, as well.

While you're at it, maybe you could severely reduce the number of cans in deep wormhole space to make it so you can't clear an entire system's anomalies in the time it takes a specialized ship to clear one data sites cans. Or look at the relative value of wormhole data sites in general. If a Talocan doesn't spawn, they're barely worth the time to hack.


I fully intend to look in to removing scattering from all sites, but that wasn't going to fit into this release as we also need to take a look at the loot tables for all exploration sites.

♥ CCP Affinity ♥

Follow me on Twitter

Game Designer for EVE Online

Team Astro Sparkle
CCP Affinity
C C P
C C P Alliance
#133 - 2013-11-04 21:11:44 UTC
Ansylia wrote:
Ansylia wrote:
Quote:
Your objective, if you wish to risk life and limb (well ... your crew's lives and limbs)

Crews? We have crews on our ships? I thought the purpose of Jovian Pod technology was to fully automate our ships?

Quote:
As I mentioned, these sites are related to dangerous experiments, and the pirates desperately do not want the capsuleers to steal the fruit of their labors

It makes very little sense to me that these are Anomalies, and not Signatures. These sites are supposed to be super-secret, with pirate guards that the authorities are unable to acknowledge - so how can it be rationalized that a basic scan reveals these sites?


I forgot to ask - the 'Yurt' and 'Wetu' Mobile Depots - what are those exactly? Are those supposed to be the meta versions of the Mobile Depots, or are they the *only* Depots available and also the only way we'll be able to get those BPC's?


They are meta versions - the standard version will be announced by five 0

♥ CCP Affinity ♥

Follow me on Twitter

Game Designer for EVE Online

Team Astro Sparkle
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#134 - 2013-11-04 21:15:20 UTC
Telling 80% of your customers that they don't deserve the nice toys for their money is going to take your new content quite far, CCP Affinity. Very far. Roll

Why should I bother myself with a chance to get low-grade trash, if i need a ship tanked as to run Lvl 3 missions to get it? My time is precious and limited. If I can do something better, I will. And being assured that no matter how I try, I will only get low grade feces is not exactly why I pay this game.

I wonder where in the subscription contract says that "you will pay 15 euros per month, and we will treat you like sh*t unless you do what we tell you"? What it takes so you start to bloody respect how we choose to play the game, you arrogant CCP developers?

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#135 - 2013-11-04 21:16:31 UTC
Contractia wrote:
Why is the most expensive module bpc only dropping in WH ?

Ascendancy Omega Blueprint Copy

Adding yet more income to the WH guys, vs those who provide all the content in 0.0 where isk vs reward is way out of balance as it stands.

I don't see a problem with the different bpc's in different area's, but putting the most valuable one into just WH's is simply bad.


Right, because nullsec is such a dangerous place that is hard to farm when contrasted with WHs.


Seamus Donohue wrote:
I'm a bit confused on the implant math. What are the multipliers to warp speed for the full Low-Grade set and for the full High-Grade set?


If my math is right, ~50% for HGs, ~33% for LGs

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Orakkus
ImperiaI Federation
Goonswarm Federation
#136 - 2013-11-04 21:17:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Orakkus
CCP Affinity wrote:

With this feature I decided the system scanner was best :) this doesn't mean next time I won't make signatures - not everything needs to be the same and different discovery methods suit different features.


Out of curiosity, can we ask the reasons and criteria for why you chose system scanners instead of probing? It would be nice if we might be able to have some foundation to which we can convincing you why it might be better to choose probes.

He's not just famous, he's "IN" famous. - Ned Nederlander
Orakkus
ImperiaI Federation
Goonswarm Federation
#137 - 2013-11-04 21:25:37 UTC
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Telling 80% of your customers that they don't deserve the nice toys for their money is going to take your new content quite far, CCP Affinity. Very far. Roll

Why should I bother myself with a chance to get low-grade trash, if i need a ship tanked as to run Lvl 3 missions to get it? My time is precious and limited. If I can do something better, I will. And being assured that no matter how I try, I will only get low grade ***** is not exactly why I pay this game.

I wonder where in the subscription contract says that "you will pay 15 euros per month, and we will treat you like sh*t unless you do what we tell you"? What it takes so you start to bloody respect how we choose to play the game, you arrogant CCP developers?


Glad they don't listen to people like you.

He's not just famous, he's "IN" famous. - Ned Nederlander
CCP Affinity
C C P
C C P Alliance
#138 - 2013-11-04 21:32:41 UTC
Orakkus wrote:
CCP Affinity wrote:

With this feature I decided the system scanner was best :) this doesn't mean next time I won't make signatures - not everything needs to be the same and different discovery methods suit different features.


Out of curiosity, can we ask the reasons and criteria for why you chose system scanners instead of probing? It would be nice if we might be able to have some foundation to which we can convincing you why it might be better to choose probes.



As the site is very rare and once inside, very difficult, I decided it would be best on the system scanner. Once released, if this turns out to be a bad call, I will re-evaluate :)

♥ CCP Affinity ♥

Follow me on Twitter

Game Designer for EVE Online

Team Astro Sparkle
Soleil Fournier
Fliet Pizza Delivery
Of Essence
#139 - 2013-11-04 21:34:08 UTC
Orakkus wrote:


Out of curiosity, can we ask the reasons and criteria for why you chose system scanners instead of probing? It would be nice if we might be able to have some foundation to which we can convincing you why it might be better to choose probes.



The term "Ghost" has an inherent mystery component and lends itself to be a site you have to work to find, not have it pop up on a general scanner. Also, pirates think these sites are hidden...wouldn't they have guards there 100% of the time if it was easily found by anyone?

So with that being said I do agree that there's inconsistency in the naming/lore of the sites and the actual gameplay, and would support moving these to signatures and not be anomalies.
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#140 - 2013-11-04 21:36:00 UTC
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Telling 80% of your customers that they don't deserve the nice toys for their money is going to take your new content quite far, CCP Affinity. Very far. Roll

Why should I bother myself with a chance to get low-grade trash, if i need a ship tanked as to run Lvl 3 missions to get it? My time is precious and limited. If I can do something better, I will. And being assured that no matter how I try, I will only get low grade ***** is not exactly why I pay this game.

I wonder where in the subscription contract says that "you will pay 15 euros per month, and we will treat you like sh*t unless you do what we tell you"? What it takes so you start to bloody respect how we choose to play the game, you arrogant CCP developers?


Dat sense of entitlement.

Ohnoes, new content doesn't fit perfectly into your play style, the end is nigh! Roll

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.