Issues, Workarounds & Localization

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

SMAs not dropping ships, large objects no longer dropping as loot

First post First post First post
Author
C C P Alliance
#61 - 2013-06-27 19:11:35 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
Ager Agemo wrote:
so you are telling me if I blow up an industrial ship carrying something in a plastic wrap I cannot get it no matter what?


This issue only affects cargo containers, not wrecks. So if you loot before you salvage you're fine. it also only affects plastic wraps with a volume larger than 27k m3.

Obviously far from ideal but not as bad as not being able to get them no matter what.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Rote Kapelle
#62 - 2013-06-27 20:14:56 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I think I can clarify a few things.

When it changed to its current behavior that change was made intentionally for performance reasons. Therefore it is not a "bug", but that doesn't mean it will always stay the way it is now either.
When something is considered "working as intended" that doesn't mean we're happy with every aspect of the design, but it does mean that there is a reason for the status quo.

We are aware of the significant downsides to the current mechanic and we're not married to the current design for SMA destruction but we can't promise anything specific about it at this time.

The GMs were not mistaken in their communication on this issue.
Sorry, but this is a garbage answer on a change that panders to carebears living in wormholes. There's essentially no reason to conduct wormhole evictions or pos bash if its guaranteed to not drop anything of value. Absolute garbage, and the fact that it was intentional is a slap to the face.

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

#63 - 2013-06-27 20:16:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Terrorfrodo
Fozzie, many billions worth of loot are illegitimately destroyed each day by this "non-bug", arbitrarily withheld from the players who earned it by invading and laying siege to towers. That is totally unacceptable. This issue should be right at the top of things that need to be fixed ASAP.

.

C C P Alliance
#64 - 2013-06-27 20:29:58 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
Couple things to make clear:

Firstly: The change that caused this was an exploit prevention change, which we generally never go into details about in patch notes. It wasn't a casual change made on a whim. It was a significant "We have the choice of this problem or that problem, and need to decide the lesser of two evils" kind of change. We definitely should have found a way to express the other effects of the change in the patch notes though, that was a mistake on our part.

Secondly: Me not promising anything on an issue is not the same as me saying that it's not a priority or that we're not working on it. I'll only promise things when they are essentially done, because in game development it's really hard to predict anything with certainty.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Gallente Federation
#65 - 2013-06-27 20:35:00 UTC
Will continue to bash pos's regardless of loot dropped, unless CCP changes something where tears no longer drop as well.

Please understand, Fozzie, we the wormholers are just the Tea Party of Eve Online. The most vocal, yes, but the smallest and oft most unreasonable in our demands. We know you'll get around to it soon(tm.)

The guy that does all the videos

#66 - 2013-06-27 20:37:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Istyn
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Ager Agemo wrote:
so you are telling me if I blow up an industrial ship carrying something in a plastic wrap I cannot get it no matter what?


This issue only affects cargo containers, not wrecks. So if you loot before you salvage you're fine. it also only affects plastic wraps with a volume larger than 27k m3.

Obviously far from ideal but not as bad as not being able to get them no matter what.


The unfortunate thing is that in high sec there is obviously no reasonable way to stop people from salvaging, as it (correctly) doesn't cause any sort of flag. This makes it far more of a problem than it would be if the worry was only your own fleet salvaging by accident, or in low where you can just shoot people that try.

That said, if by any chance you haven't quite abandoned the thread just yet, thank you for providing updates and more information.

Edit: Just noticed the plastic wrap mention, we have actually had plastic wraps destroyed upon salvage when their size was only 500m3, as we specifically tested it.
#67 - 2013-06-27 20:49:18 UTC
So really what CCP is saying is in an attempt to fix one thing, they break something else. Because that makes sense.

I wish I could go to my job with half my work done and tell my boss I'll worry about it later.
Tactical Narcotics Team
#68 - 2013-06-27 20:51:50 UTC
Perhaps you can stop using the 11 year old 27.5k cargo container for loot drops and add a "Phat Lewt™" container that doesn't have a M3 limit and only allows take access.

I seem to remember some time ago that we got wrecks in the game that have "unlimited m3". do we still have those ? can we have sma and cha drop stuff in unsalvageable wrecks ?
Caldari State
#69 - 2013-06-27 20:57:22 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Ager Agemo wrote:
so you are telling me if I blow up an industrial ship carrying something in a plastic wrap I cannot get it no matter what?


This issue only affects cargo containers, not wrecks. So if you loot before you salvage you're fine. it also only affects plastic wraps with a volume larger than 27k m3.

Obviously far from ideal but not as bad as not being able to get them no matter what.

fair enough, hope it gets fixed soon, but really soon...
Arctic Light
#70 - 2013-06-27 21:01:37 UTC
This annoys me to no end. Pinatas were a fun part of living in W-space. I assumed this was a critical and known bug and would be fixed ASAP, so I have not been very loud in whining. If nothing changes, there will be tantrums and tears and maybe a little bit of howling. You know, the standard package.
#71 - 2013-06-27 21:15:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Fel Wrath
Sassums wrote:
So really what CCP is saying is in an attempt to fix one thing, they break something else. Because that makes sense.

I wish I could go to my job with half my work done and tell my boss I'll worry about it later.



Oh man try working as an enterprise level developer. It's an unavoidable consequence of maintaining large enterprise applications especially when those applications (or parts of ) are legacy or old as I'm sure some of eve's code base is.

Even though I (along with everyone else obv) hate the current mechanic, I understand the implications of having open exploits. Performance issues require lots of thought and when dealing with what might be ye old knapsack problem there is a huge amount of algorithmic analysis needed..maybe one approximation is deemed worthwhile..then you have to implement and test EVERYTHING cuz who know what breakage might have occurred as a result of the implementation fix. Then you go through test cycles and hopefully in the end everything LOOKS like it's working (which it won't obviously because enterprise level software maintenance is like trying to re-organize trees in a jungle).

I feel for you CCP...we don't have a forums where users can inundated us with their wrath!
Arctic Light
#72 - 2013-06-27 21:34:58 UTC
Fel Wrath wrote:
Sassums wrote:
So really what CCP is saying is in an attempt to fix one thing, they break something else. Because that makes sense.

I wish I could go to my job with half my work done and tell my boss I'll worry about it later.



Oh man try working as an enterprise level developer. It's an unavoidable consequence of maintaining large enterprise applications especially when those applications (or parts of ) are legacy or old as I'm sure some of eve's code base is.

Even though I (along with everyone else obv) hate the current mechanic, I understand the implications of having open exploits. Performance issues require lots of thought and when dealing with what might be ye old knapsack problem there is a huge amount of algorithmic analysis needed..maybe one approximation is deemed worthwhile..then you have to implement and test EVERYTHING cuz who know what breakage might have occurred as a result of the implementation fix. Then you go through test cycles and hopefully in the end everything LOOKS like it's working (which it won't obviously because enterprise level software maintenance is like trying to re-organize trees in a jungle).

I feel for you CCP...we don't have a forums where users can inundated us with their wrath!

And this gentlemen, is also why the main reason of death among programmers is poorly documented code, mediated by inevitable murder.

I once tried to maintain a patchwork FORTRAN code with modern and legacy components that had no relevant comments. Never again... at least not as an internship.
Pandemic Legion
#73 - 2013-06-27 21:37:12 UTC
while i understand the predicament from a programming POV...please consider making a workaround, or some other patchjob to remedy the situation (special can for SMA's or something)

and fixing it permanently later, since i can already see this one coming a mile off
not doing it that way will make it take a year or more
#74 - 2013-06-27 21:49:17 UTC
Sassums wrote:
So really what CCP is saying is in an attempt to fix one thing, they break something else. Because that makes sense.

I wish I could go to my job with half my work done and tell my boss I'll worry about it later.


Sounds more to me like CCP closed a damaged bridge to prevent it from collapsing. Sure, that means we can't drive on it until it gets repaired, forcing us to drive a ways out of our way to reach the next bridge, but it also means it doesn't collapse on and kill someone.
#75 - 2013-06-27 21:55:27 UTC
Sai Talos wrote:
Please understand, Fozzie, we the wormholers are just the Tea Party of Eve Online

I haven't been insulted like that in a long time Shocked

.

#76 - 2013-06-27 21:59:49 UTC
I don't know how withholding loot from players and breaking a game mechanic which has been in the game since the introduction of POSes can be working as intended.... It just seems to me as CCP does not dare to touch the POS code and doesn't care about people in wormholes.
#77 - 2013-06-27 22:01:50 UTC
This is clearly not working as intended and I think CCP should at least reimburse losses until they fix it and don't deny this issue... this is ridiculous.
Gallente Federation
#78 - 2013-06-27 23:31:38 UTC
ccp can make cans spew out of a relic site,but cant make cans drop out of a SMA.

#79 - 2013-06-28 02:25:05 UTC
Why not have wrecks for SMAs instead of cans?
#80 - 2013-06-28 04:13:18 UTC
Let's make it simple:

CCP loves when we blow stuff up. The more stuff blowing up is better.
Fixing loot dropping from SMA's would make more corps go for the pos-bash, especially in wormhole's.

So fixing SMA's loot drops is gonna directly increase the amount of stuff blowing up

Fixing SMA's is good for eve. More pvp, more explosions.

Fix this please? It's gonna make at least some of the abandoned towers disappear

Wormholer for life.

Forum Jump