These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Duality] Sovereignty Playtest Competition

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Viaharo Musa
Evian Industries
Reeloaded.
#281 - 2015-06-24 17:08:27 UTC
I would have loved to see a realistic test.
But sadly. Its been a shitshow from the beginning.
Reasons why:
Unrealistic ships and fittings due to no cost on the server. This lead to unrealistic fleets and tactics.

As a side effect, way to much clutter for even the most robust gaming system to have some lag due to so many wrecks / abandon'd drones (again prob due to no cost on the server)



All said i really like the new sov setup but just be aware, it will change nothing really in TQ due to the fact that capitals will still be blob'd to control the sub cap forces. Triage carriers will be a thing with probably triage supers.
In all my time playing eve, and all i have seen in null, i don't see this new sov iteration changing anything really in null.
Sure more small fights will happen, but big boys will still be using massive super blobs to rule the field.
This will turn in to the same as usual. Bigger critical mass blobs farming the little guys.

I see null becoming even more stagnant. Lets hope im wrong.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#282 - 2015-06-24 17:12:15 UTC
I want to make sure we're clear that this was never intended to be a test of fleet compositions and tactics. Unfortunately there was no way to make those aspects realistic on a test server.

This test is intended to help find bugs, to help us improve the UI and how the system is communicated in the client, and to allow players and alliances to try out the mechanical nuts and bolts and understand them better (which helps us get better feedback).

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Parley Queen
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#283 - 2015-06-24 17:27:02 UTC
Viaharo Musa wrote:
I would have loved to see a realistic test.
But sadly. Its been a shitshow from the beginning.
Reasons why:
Unrealistic ships and fittings due to no cost on the server. This lead to unrealistic fleets and tactics.

As a side effect, way to much clutter for even the most robust gaming system to have some lag due to so many wrecks / abandon'd drones (again prob due to no cost on the server)

Dude i am dualboxing on a freaking laptop and the performance is exactly the same as TQ no matter how cluttered a grid is. Please keep the excuses coming why this test is bad, the responses from brave and fcon so far have been pure gold. The simple fact that so many people are unable to adapt to two new things at once(market seed+new sov) and rather chose to quit is astonishing. What will the brave AT team say when they have to fight AT ships in the AT? 'Awh too bad, they had supers and the grid was cluttered and their AT ships are too OP for us, at least we salvaged one wreck'

also SFA is recruiting if you want to afk nodes and/or fight PL hopefully.
Lisselle Rotsuda
Alliance Navy N7 Program
Weaponised Anarchy
#284 - 2015-06-24 17:40:52 UTC
[/quote]
I assume you mean the strategic upgrades being reset? That happened when we switched around the back-end for it, and I'm gonna pass out some new strategic levels so people can test their ihub upgrades.[/quote]

Sorry... really didnt compute what you said with what was in system... :)
Ryno Caval
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#285 - 2015-06-24 18:31:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Ryno Caval
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I want to make sure we're clear that this was never intended to be a test of fleet compositions and tactics. Unfortunately there was no way to make those aspects realistic on a test server.

This test is intended to help find bugs, to help us improve the UI and how the system is communicated in the client, and to allow players and alliances to try out the mechanical nuts and bolts and understand them better (which helps us get better feedback).


The simple fact of the matter is you created something that defeats that purpose exactly, you should have not incorporated a competition into it, people are so diverted away from the actual purpose of playtesting that some bugs that are major enough to highly affect the effectiveness of the new system of SOV will be hidden away so that when this does go live people can exploit them as much as they did on the test server. When you only have 2 alliances left willing to participate that are "blue" with each other what makes you think that they will expose any bug that gives them a tactical advantage to exploit when this goes live. This is the fundamental flaw with calling this a Wargame there is no incentive to expose bugs that can be exploited if it gives you an advantage over your opponent. Not to mention the level of realism that a Wargaming implies.

I am not bashing on you at all CCP Fozzie I absolutely love the idea of FozzieSov and think it is a fresh new mechanic that will really improve player experience all together. In my opinion you could have gone about this differently and given a little better incentive to the participants as a whole not just the alliance naming rights of a module. Not everyone cares all that much about lore, and corporations come and go within alliances if the incentive was player focused like the free SP on sisi incentives I feel like there would have been a far better turnout than the current dismal number of people actually playtesting this.

I purpose better incentives such as a guaranteed spot in the alliance tournament next year for the top 4 alliances who have the most active participants. You want to get an effective play test when making it a wargame give us something more than a mod to name.

I am going to continue to try and get as many people to participate as possible just so the knowledge isn't focused to one individual or a select few individuals. The more people know what they are doing when taking SOV the better. This is so that the employment of tactics from the test server can be properly executed and disseminated to the lowest level FC's and leaders to prepare them for the upcoming changes rather than leave all of it reliant on a SOV team who has to coordinate so far ahead that they will not have the mobility to be successful in the new SOV system.

Just what insight I have. No hate, All love.
Ryno Caval
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#286 - 2015-06-24 18:46:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Ryno Caval
Parley Queen wrote:
Viaharo Musa wrote:
I would have loved to see a realistic test.
But sadly. Its been a shitshow from the beginning.
Reasons why:
Unrealistic ships and fittings due to no cost on the server. This lead to unrealistic fleets and tactics.

As a side effect, way to much clutter for even the most robust gaming system to have some lag due to so many wrecks / abandon'd drones (again prob due to no cost on the server)

Dude i am dualboxing on a freaking laptop and the performance is exactly the same as TQ no matter how cluttered a grid is. Please keep the excuses coming why this test is bad, the responses from brave and fcon so far have been pure gold. The simple fact that so many people are unable to adapt to two new things at once(market seed+new sov) and rather chose to quit is astonishing. What will the brave AT team say when they have to fight AT ships in the AT? 'Awh too bad, they had supers and the grid was cluttered and their AT ships are too OP for us, at least we salvaged one wreck'

also SFA is recruiting if you want to afk nodes and/or fight PL hopefully.


If the same thing were happening to you this would be the exact way you would respond. If FCON and Brave had the participation on the test server to outnumber what the participation of PL and SFA has been the exact complaints would be fielded by the opposite side and we would have the same response you are having.

If you cannot look at something like this from an unbiased perspective and imagine the situation reversed onto you, then you are failing to grasp the true complaint, which is people will not participate in a Wargame that has limited levels of realism or practical application. The value of this is simply who can get the most people to log onto a server where actions have zero effect on the live server and the incentive is not enough for enough people to care.

I'm not trying to call SFA/PL out or be salty, yes I am frustrated at the lack of participation but I am glad someone is participating I really wish our turnout was better for this. If it were we could have actually put up a fight. I just hope that something can be learned from this and it does at least the job of the playtesting and works out all the bugs and hiccups. When this goes live people will have no choice but to participate and I truly think it will be utterly chaotic, which, I am looking forward to
Elise Randolph
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#287 - 2015-06-24 19:35:31 UTC
Ryno Caval wrote:


The simple fact of the matter is you created something that defeats that purpose exactly, you should have not incorporated a competition into it, people are so diverted away from the actual purpose of playtesting that some bugs that are major enough to highly affect the effectiveness of the new system of SOV will be hidden away so that when this does go live people can exploit them as much as they did on the test server.



I'm just going to say this flat out, but if you don't report bugs that have to do with the sov system on Duality you're dumb as hell.

~
Ryno Caval
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#288 - 2015-06-24 19:49:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Ryno Caval
Elise Randolph wrote:
Ryno Caval wrote:


The simple fact of the matter is you created something that defeats that purpose exactly, you should have not incorporated a competition into it, people are so diverted away from the actual purpose of playtesting that some bugs that are major enough to highly affect the effectiveness of the new system of SOV will be hidden away so that when this does go live people can exploit them as much as they did on the test server.



I'm just going to say this flat out, but if you don't report bugs that have to do with the sov system on Duality you're dumb as hell.


Unfortunately not everyone is this "honorable" and will let some of the bugs slip through. Also there is no way of knowing if a bug is being reported or discovered by enough people for it to be reported for certain. I wish this were not the case but it's not just in EVE, this is a mentality that is ported from real life. Perhaps my faith in humanity if just non existent due to personal experiences but who knows.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#289 - 2015-06-24 20:18:34 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
Latest timers:
Exit Time    Solar System    Structure    Owning Alliance    Defense Multiplier
Ongoing    4B-NQN    TCU    Brave Collective    5.7
Ongoing    18XA-C    TCU    Pandemic Legion    2.2
2015.06.24 20:42    H9-J8N    Station    Pandemic Legion    5.2
2015.06.24 22:22    D-6WS1    Station Freeport    Freeport    1
2015.06.24 22:53    3GXF-U    Station Freeport    Freeport    1
2015.06.25 00:10    7MD-S1    Station Freeport    Freeport    1
2015.06.25 00:53    G-AOTH    Station    Pandemic Legion    1.6
2015.06.25 02:16    49GC-R    Station Freeport    Freeport    1.6
2015.06.25 03:40    YWS0-Z    IHub    Brave Collective    4.6
2015.06.25 04:29    3KB-J0    Station    I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth    5.3
2015.06.25 07:10    BK4-YC    Station Freeport    Freeport    5.2
2015.06.25 07:28    4B-NQN    Station Freeport    Freeport    4.8
2015.06.25 10:34    3D-CQU    Station    No Not Believing    2.7
2015.06.25 11:26    F-YH5B    Station Freeport    Freeport    5.2
2015.06.25 13:01    H-GKI6    Station Freeport    Freeport    3.4
2015.06.25 13:56    G-5EN2    Station Freeport    Freeport    3.4
2015.06.25 14:20    9-F0B2    Station Freeport    Freeport    2.2
2015.06.25 16:47    Shintaht    IHub    Fidelas Constans    3.5
2015.06.25 16:53    H6-CX8    Station    Fidelas Constans    5.6
2015.06.25 17:01    Y-MPWL    Station    Fidelas Constans    3.2
2015.06.25 17:08    Y-MPWL    TCU    Fidelas Constans    3.2
2015.06.25 17:09    VKI-T7    Station Freeport    Freeport    3.7
2015.06.25 17:14    H6-CX8    IHub    Fidelas Constans    5.6
2015.06.25 17:18    H6-CX8    TCU    Fidelas Constans    5.6
2015.06.25 17:35    Shintaht    TCU    Fidelas Constans    3.5
2015.06.25 17:37    Y-MPWL    IHub    Fidelas Constans    3.2
2015.06.25 17:39    SI-I89    Station    Fidelas Constans    4.8
2015.06.25 17:49    SI-I89    TCU    Fidelas Constans    4.8
2015.06.25 18:00    SI-I89    IHub    Fidelas Constans    4.8
2015.06.25 18:06    Shintaht    Station Freeport    Freeport    3.5
2015.06.25 18:15    E-YJ8G    Station Freeport    Freeport    4.4
2015.06.25 18:32    D61A-G    Station Freeport    Freeport    2
2015.06.25 19:37    VKI-T7    TCU    Pandemic Legion    3.7
2015.06.25 19:43    UL-7I8    Station    Praetorian Directorate    3.7
2015.06.25 19:50    F-YH5B    TCU    Suddenly Spaceships.    6
2015.06.25 20:00    7MD-S1    TCU    Praetorian Directorate    4.3
2015.06.25 20:02    UL-7I8    TCU    Praetorian Directorate    3.7
2015.06.25 20:03    ERVK-P    IHub    Praetorian Directorate    4.3

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Lisselle Rotsuda
Alliance Navy N7 Program
Weaponised Anarchy
#290 - 2015-06-24 21:43:18 UTC
@fozzie did you get a chance to reset the sov levels? we want to set up our JB network Cool
Elise Randolph
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#291 - 2015-06-24 22:04:51 UTC
Ryno Caval wrote:
Elise Randolph wrote:
Ryno Caval wrote:


The simple fact of the matter is you created something that defeats that purpose exactly, you should have not incorporated a competition into it, people are so diverted away from the actual purpose of playtesting that some bugs that are major enough to highly affect the effectiveness of the new system of SOV will be hidden away so that when this does go live people can exploit them as much as they did on the test server.



I'm just going to say this flat out, but if you don't report bugs that have to do with the sov system on Duality you're dumb as hell.


Unfortunately not everyone is this "honorable" and will let some of the bugs slip through. Also there is no way of knowing if a bug is being reported or discovered by enough people for it to be reported for certain. I wish this were not the case but it's not just in EVE, this is a mentality that is ported from real life. Perhaps my faith in humanity if just non existent due to personal experiences but who knows.


Are you just always high or something

~
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#292 - 2015-06-24 22:32:08 UTC
Lisselle Rotsuda wrote:
@fozzie did you get a chance to reset the sov levels? we want to set up our JB network Cool


You should be good to go now.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
JEFFRAIDER
THIGH GUYS
#293 - 2015-06-24 22:47:18 UTC  |  Edited by: JEFFRAIDER
Is this the appropriate thread to let CCP know what we would like our prize module to be named?

Pandemic Legion officially requests:

JEFFRAIDER's Modified Compact Entosis "SovSucker5000" Link

Thank you.

JEFFRAIDER
Official Pandemic Legion High King
Gabriel Karade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#294 - 2015-06-24 22:48:25 UTC
IHub's still seem to be bugged for installing upgrades.

War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#295 - 2015-06-24 23:29:23 UTC
Gabriel Karade wrote:
IHub's still seem to be bugged for installing upgrades.

Please send in a bug report with details. Thanks.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Elise Randolph
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#296 - 2015-06-24 23:36:01 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:

IMPORTANT NOTE: You should be receiving corporation bills for your IHubs now. At the moment those bills don't do anything when they expire, but we're going to change that at some point soon and that would mean structures exploding when bills aren't paid. The SCC does not **** around. Pay your bills folks.




Just a friendly reminder to dudes: if you had autopay turned on for all sovereignty bills that is NOT ENOUGH. The bills actually show up under a new category: http://i.imgur.com/gimLb8u.png

~
Langbaobao
Tr0pa de elite.
#297 - 2015-06-25 01:00:27 UTC
Ryno Caval wrote:
I'm not trying to call SFA/PL out or be salty


You sound pretty salty TBH. You should relax a bit and enjoy the ride.
Cannonfodder Ellecon
Tactically Insignificant
#298 - 2015-06-25 04:41:34 UTC
Fozzie


Can we please get Constellation "04-H4M" Strategic Index reset back to lvl 5 so we can do IHUB testing



Thankyou

Twitter: https://twitter.com/DarkCannon_EVE

EVE Down Under - a community for players in the AUTZ

Website: http://www.evedownunder.com

In-game channel: evedownunder

Twitter: https://twitter.com/EVEDownUnder
Warmeister
Tactical Farmers.
Pandemic Horde
#299 - 2015-06-25 09:20:21 UTC
One of the latest patches broke the freeport stations capture. The nodes now seem to take into account defense multipliers from the system, and take ages to capture instead of usual 12 minutes
CCP Lebowski
C C P
C C P Alliance
#300 - 2015-06-25 10:18:07 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Lebowski
Cannonfodder Ellecon wrote:
Fozzie


Can we please get Constellation "04-H4M" Strategic Index reset back to lvl 5 so we can do IHUB testing



Thankyou
Any system still owned by their original Alliance have had their levels reset to the level they were at at the start of the tournament (Note this was not level 5 for all systems). If your seeing issues with this could you tell us which systems exactly are incorrect?

EDIT: Looks like there is actually an issue with these not persisting, we're investigating now.

Warmeister wrote:
One of the latest patches broke the freeport stations capture. The nodes now seem to take into account defense multipliers from the system, and take ages to capture instead of usual 12 minutes
Yep, I've confirmed this issue this morning and we'll get a fix in asap, likely this evening. Any events still affected after the update will be fixed.

CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0

@CCP_Lebowski