You’re moving the goalposts. That’s not what I’m talking about, and I’ve never said that.
No, it’s not what you’re talking about, but it’s part of the issue with this change, man. It is part of why proposals that come close, but aren’t as effective, or require additional skill training, etc etc all get viewed as not good enough.
This problem isn’t of your making. Nobody here has any cause to think it is, or any cause to think you aren’t trying to do your best to make things right for the players who are impacted. But saying ‘well, you’re doing something that wasn’t intended’… that chafes, because it comes across as just as dismissive as the attitude CCP’s giving them.
I don’t think you mean it to be dismissive. I think you mean it to be a simple statement of ‘this behavior wasn’t intended, so I can’t guarantee I can convince them to preserve it’. But it’s politics, man. You know that people who are already angry about the issue will take any statement they think disagrees with or diminishes their position in the worst possible way.
2 Likes
People need to understand the context - that they are still doing something that wasn’t intended, even if it’s beneficial - because that has an impact on the decision-making process.
Sure, but they’re doing something they were specifically told would be protected. It may not have been originally intended, but these same people told them ‘this is totally cool with us’ earlier this year.
2 Likes
Yes, they relied on it, and that’s one of the biggest reasons I’m pushing for a fix as hard as I am.
And that’s why my ire is directed at CCP, not you. 
And again you don’t know what you are talking about.
A HIC being capable of jumping a frig WH is only one part to this story (and considered legit).
The other part consists again of an abuse of cycling / server tick mechanics. I don’t know if this bug has been fixed but it definetely was possible to make the game count the hot mass of a HIC towards the hole but only checking against it’s cold mass for the jump elegibility.
Here also the same tactics of “fixing the problem” applies. Not the problem itself (erratic behaviour of game mechanics code) is to be fixed, but meddling with other (more acccessible) parts of the game.
One can’t help to get the impression CCP has a serious lack of coders actually capable of working on a game of this enormous complexity and instead tries to resort to modders tactics (eg. we can’t / won’t touch the code, so let’s just play around with some more convenient xml files). If you do so as a modder, fine. If you do so as the game developer, you just shoot out to the world: “Our project is doomed.”
Yes, I do - I have talked to these people. The bottom line is that HICs were never intended to be used in this fashion - they weren’t designed this way. It’s a heavy interdictor cruiser. It’s designed to stop fleets from warping with a big bubble, and to be more survivable than a standard interdictor. They were introduced in Trinity, like 7 years before wormhole space even existed.
So don’t tell me this was an intended use. It wasn’t.
Nobody is arguing that it’s not considered legit. All I have said is that it wasn’t intended.
That’s not what’s happening. The mechanic that makes lurch HICs a bad thing is the same mechanic that makes rolling HICs a good thing. The easiest way to fix the bad thing results in breaking the good thing. That’s the entire point of this exercise.
CCP decided to fix the bad thing and say they will try to return the good thing in the future. WHers don’t want to hear that, they want to keep their good thing (and screw the folks who are harmed by the bad thing) and they’re justifiably upset about it. That’s why I’m trying to fight to get both the lurch HIC fix done as well as provide a solution that lets WHers keep using HICs to do what they’ve done before.
But they did exist, and they were being used to roll holes, when the frigate holes were introduced. Just a minor point there. I’m not saying that makes the behavior ‘intended’, mind you, just that it goes toward the ‘CCP doesn’t think about the cascading effects before they make a change’ issue at play.
No, no it’s not. That’s just it. The mechanic that makes the Lurches bad is the interaction of the modules. Neither module on its own produces the ‘bad thing’. CCP’s planned change is like treating a mild fever by immersing the patient in ice. Sure, it fixes the problem but not because it addresses the real cause, and it causes more problems for more people, along the way.
1 Like
I extensively explained above why it’s not the same mechanic.
Both problems stem from software bugs/glitches to which the mass reduction feature is just a prerequisite.
My point to this exercise is, to argue it’s a bad idea to “solve” the problem by taking away said prerequisite instead of addressing the real problems which are aforementioned glitches. It’s not one issue which needs to be “fixed” (mass reductions) but a threefold combination of game behavour and i just can’t grasp why you don’t want to admit, it might be the sound and professional undertaking, to address the mechanics bugs instead of addressing their (once? intentional) otherwise unrelated prerequisite.
As it currently seems the case, it is pretty hard to even get the most non-intrusive solution (the specialized script one imho) pushed forward. Nontheless i’m even willing to advocate this, although i consider addressing the root cause of the problems still superior for many reasons (healthier code base, less “special case” scenarios, etc.)
Addendum:
Before i forget, i of course would like to thank you for discussing the issue with the community and hopefully funneling the input up the line, as apparently no one else, especially not on the decision making level, has even bothered to, neither upfront nor now.
I get the distinct feeling that people here don’t understand the implications of working on 15 year old code. If you want a classic example of what can go wrong by changing too many things in old code at one time, just look at the TSB’s (UK bank) recent history. You change one thing at a time, evaluate the adverse effect, then respond to that when you’re happy the first thing you changed is stable. CCF have already said that they’ll try to reintroduce the desirable effects that were removed in due course, it seems to me that they’re going about it in exactly the right way.
1 Like
First of all they explicitly said they wouldn’t make this change until there was a solution in place for HIC rolling. Secondly the glib manner in which they wrote off wormholers as “unwilling collateral damage” and said they may introduce a solution and some undetermined time in the future has got people’s backs up and fills no one with confidence. They even added an extra kick in the teeth by acknowledging that we are often left holding the shitty end of the stick (ie “as they often are”).
How long are we to wait? Weeks? Months? Years? And we are expected to keep paying subs until then even though we are treated with such obvious disdain and disregard?
1 Like
Yes, that’s how you normally operate on any dynamic environment, so you have a control, and you can tell which changes produce which results. CCP has a long, long history of not doing this. Don’t expect them to now.
Also, this is not 15 year old code. This is, at most, 8 year old code. It’s also incredibly poorly-documented code, which is why so much of it has been replaced over the last 4 years.
No, they’ve said they may restore the desirable effects.
They also said they wouldn’t fix the problem in a way that disabled those effects. And they’d introduce shield slave implants, around 2014-15. And that they’d keep iterating on how the ADMs work and which activities contribute to the ADMs.
You might understand if people are skeptical of what CCP says they’ll do.
2 Likes
I’ve seen this before, and I always shake my head at it.
Do you play this game because you think the developers respect you, or do you play this game because it’s fun?
If you’re having fun, play. If you aren’t, don’t. I don’t get why you have to have the devs validate how you have fun for you to be willing to keep having fun.
1 Like
If the devs make the game less fun then why should I keep paying subs and, by extension, their wages? I’m really hoping that you aren’t advising the devs that the way they treat players doesn’t really matter.
The world of gaming is littered with the carcasses of dead games killed off by unresponsive devs making changes that ruin the experience for players.
As much as I love this game it’s not inevitable that I keep paying/playing.
i think the true anger that most of this is stemming from is the very obvious disregard to wormholers in the way that ccp backtracks and throws us under the bus with no explanation of why they need to push us into the road.
what we need is some communication from the devs on this decision
I’m advising you, right now, to play the game for fun and not take development decisions as some kind of personal affront.
2 Likes
I play this game because it’s fulfilling. It’s not “fun”. It’s pretty far from “fun”, especially in the aspect I’m playing. It’s a lot of not having anything to do until I have everything to do, and a lot of not being needed until everything’s going to hell and I’m part of the difference between success and failure on a massive scale.
That’s just EVE to me, man. If want to have ‘fun’, I’ll go and do something for some instant gratification. EVE is not something casual. It’s just not. It’s not built that way, even now. Even with Abyssal Deadspace in, it’s not built to be ‘casual’. EVE’s a thing you have to invest time into. It’s less a ‘game’ and more a ‘lifestyle choice’.
And I’m gonna tell you, right now, that EVE is a game… for the players. The players are not. No matter how seriously the players shouldn’t take the game, the developers should take their customers seriously. At least as seriously as any successful alliance’s leadership takes its members. And right now, the impression they’re giving is that they don’t.
2 Likes
Unfortunately, wormholers will be unwilling collateral damage, as they often are, due to the incredible usefulness of HICs for rolling holes. We may address this with a specific mass manipulation module at some point in the future but want to move forward on fixing this broken behavior as fast as possible.
Well excuse me if I take exception to being referred to as and treated like unwilling collateral damage.
They are basically saying “we know this decision will affect you guys negatively. We know we often make decisions that affect you guys negatively. We may fix it later but… meh!”
Find me a single wormholer who wasn’t pissed off by that statement. I actually pay money for this game. I don’t plex. Is it really asking too much that we are asking devs to not treat us like an afterthought when they make changes like this? Really??
Who do you represent on the CSM anyway? Players or devs?
1 Like
Which is a shame, because I don’t see it that way.
I agree that EVE’s a lifestyle, and we can debate whether it’s fun or fulfilling, but that sounds more like a “Taste Great/Less Filling” debate than a real difference on opinions.
But my point stands - it’s just absurd that folks seem to think that CCP is making development decisions designed specifically to disrespect certain players. They didn’t do that - they went out of their way to say they know that this would negatively impact one group (and yes, you can argue they were insensitive about it, but at some point folks need to stop leading with their chins and looking for insults where none were intended).
If you’ve got a dollar and two people begging for it, you’re not disrespecting the one you choose not to give the dollar to. Now, granted, I’m the guy behind you saying “here’s 4 quarters, give them both 50 cents” but that doesn’t mean you’re going to listen to me.