Forums » General
This is one of those threads that shouldn't be posted to unless you actually read the whole thing. And if that's "TL;DR" then just don't post at all.
I would argue that this fix is something that should not have been implemented until you can address the root problem without impacting gameplay.
Re-reading the problems (and please correct me if I missed any) I see two main problems:
1. Hated/KOS players can sit in a capship in a station sector and shoot other players from turrets with no repercussion.
2. Players can ride an NPC convoy and the border turrets will deshield the capship making it easier to hijack cargo.
The solution to problem #1 would be to increase the fire rate of station sector turrets to deshield a capship faster, eliminating the invulnerability of the trident.
The sulution to problem #2 could be the same as implemented, that the NPC captain would eject the hated/KOS player upon entering monitored space.
The above two solutions would have addressed the root problems without impacting legitimate gameplay.
Please don't misunderstand my criticism, I understand the desire to implement a fix quickly. The 2nd best solution today is often better than the best solution tomorrow. I am just offering my thoughts and concerns over the implementation. As with all feedback, you are free to disregard it, disagree with it, or take it in the spirit with which it is given. As a former subscriber and potential re-subscriber I am only trying to provide helpful feedback....though I do acknowledge that my initial criticisms were probably worded less constructively than they could have been.
I would argue that this fix is something that should not have been implemented until you can address the root problem without impacting gameplay.
Re-reading the problems (and please correct me if I missed any) I see two main problems:
1. Hated/KOS players can sit in a capship in a station sector and shoot other players from turrets with no repercussion.
2. Players can ride an NPC convoy and the border turrets will deshield the capship making it easier to hijack cargo.
The solution to problem #1 would be to increase the fire rate of station sector turrets to deshield a capship faster, eliminating the invulnerability of the trident.
The sulution to problem #2 could be the same as implemented, that the NPC captain would eject the hated/KOS player upon entering monitored space.
The above two solutions would have addressed the root problems without impacting legitimate gameplay.
Please don't misunderstand my criticism, I understand the desire to implement a fix quickly. The 2nd best solution today is often better than the best solution tomorrow. I am just offering my thoughts and concerns over the implementation. As with all feedback, you are free to disregard it, disagree with it, or take it in the spirit with which it is given. As a former subscriber and potential re-subscriber I am only trying to provide helpful feedback....though I do acknowledge that my initial criticisms were probably worded less constructively than they could have been.
The solution to problem #1 would be to increase the fire rate of station sector turrets to deshield a capship faster, eliminating the invulnerability of the trident.
No, the capships in question were UIT and in UIT-capitols, so FF prevented damage, allowing the passenger to stay there forever. Station-turret damage was irrelevant. We would have had to dive into the FF code and make it more complex (which I think is a dumb use of dev-time, when I'm moving towards eventually getting rid of FF).
That then raises a whole other discussion about FF that I am not having right now.
This change was done in part because of newbies getting detonated, and the impact that was having. I am making some moves that will, among other things, improve the safety of newbies in Nation Capitol systems.
This also resolves the inherent exploit in being able to dock with a random NPC and get it to be aggro'd by (whomever hated faction).
As far as I'm concerned, I did implement a solution that didn't impact most gameplay. The edge-case gameplay that was impacted (basically, player-smuggling), could wait a week for a secondary fix, which I've already explained is coming.
I have nothing to add, other than we're already improving things and making changes, so what's the point of further complaints? I mean, at this point the "feedback" is either borderline-incoherent, like Deranged, or it's kind of a vague historical "well, we wish you would have done it differently." Yes, that's nice, if wishes were ponies, I have a lot of freakin' ponies. I did what I did, because it was best option from where I'm sitting. It isn't that I didn't foresee the complaints of the veteran playerbase. It's that I did it anyway because I think it's best across the "big picture" (available dev time, different issue priorities, time until next patch, future goals, near-term game changes, and 50 other factors).
It's easy to criticize and say "oh, you should have waited until X and Y", but, for instance, I'm leaving for GDC in a couple of days and won't be around to directly oversee things. I wanted to put the first-round of changes into place while I was here, and then let Ray drop in the "improvements" while I'm gone. And that also worked with the other demands on our schedule..
I definitely do want further feedback (probably via Suggestions.. or Bugs if something is seriously wrong), once we've actually put some of the changes into place on Friday. But until then, this has mostly devolved into a lot of text with a poor signal-to-noise ratio?
No, the capships in question were UIT and in UIT-capitols, so FF prevented damage, allowing the passenger to stay there forever. Station-turret damage was irrelevant. We would have had to dive into the FF code and make it more complex (which I think is a dumb use of dev-time, when I'm moving towards eventually getting rid of FF).
That then raises a whole other discussion about FF that I am not having right now.
This change was done in part because of newbies getting detonated, and the impact that was having. I am making some moves that will, among other things, improve the safety of newbies in Nation Capitol systems.
This also resolves the inherent exploit in being able to dock with a random NPC and get it to be aggro'd by (whomever hated faction).
As far as I'm concerned, I did implement a solution that didn't impact most gameplay. The edge-case gameplay that was impacted (basically, player-smuggling), could wait a week for a secondary fix, which I've already explained is coming.
I have nothing to add, other than we're already improving things and making changes, so what's the point of further complaints? I mean, at this point the "feedback" is either borderline-incoherent, like Deranged, or it's kind of a vague historical "well, we wish you would have done it differently." Yes, that's nice, if wishes were ponies, I have a lot of freakin' ponies. I did what I did, because it was best option from where I'm sitting. It isn't that I didn't foresee the complaints of the veteran playerbase. It's that I did it anyway because I think it's best across the "big picture" (available dev time, different issue priorities, time until next patch, future goals, near-term game changes, and 50 other factors).
It's easy to criticize and say "oh, you should have waited until X and Y", but, for instance, I'm leaving for GDC in a couple of days and won't be around to directly oversee things. I wanted to put the first-round of changes into place while I was here, and then let Ray drop in the "improvements" while I'm gone. And that also worked with the other demands on our schedule..
I definitely do want further feedback (probably via Suggestions.. or Bugs if something is seriously wrong), once we've actually put some of the changes into place on Friday. But until then, this has mostly devolved into a lot of text with a poor signal-to-noise ratio?