DUST Search - Dev Q&A IRC Postings 1st September 2012 now with post lunch questions included.

Iron Wolf Saber wrote:

Today CCP Wolfman and CCP CmndWang hot dropped into IRC and left us a few lines and answered a few questions. These are just generalized summaries and don't hold ccp to anything and this is not specific wording as I dont have the character limit to post all of it also understand that devlopment on the white board is subject to horribel erasing cancellations and sometimes newer shineier toys so you might as well take all of this as fuel for speculation and your magic crystal ball.

Also becuase copy/paste dont work on my cleint ><

Reasoning behind HP nerf
'We wanted to emphasize modules and skill training support skills on suits and not have HP as the advantage, There is discussion about reducing prices of higher end suits becuase of the recent changes.'

Immortal Tanks
'We are well aware of the issue and will be addressing it soon.'

Swarm Launcher Wonkiness
'*Looks into it 'its hard to tell because the numbers are looking right, warrents further investigation'

Tank Top Turret
'360 rotation fixed'

Hit Detection
'We have this new system that auto adjusts hit detection based on lag and it will be in the next patch/build we pretty happy about this system.'

LAV Turret Tracking While moving
'Nothing worked on but its planned to be fixed'

Skills
'Next build you should see a larger number of skills providing bonsues.'

Who boosts what in a Vehicle?
'The driver only atm, I'll get back to you on the passenger effective turret effectiveness since dev who works on that isnt here.'

Forge guns and AV
'We're going to increase forge gun range we are also looking at the numbers being generated during the 'nerfed' session before moving foward with buffs and/or ajdustments.'

Dropship Landing
'We're getting better landing gear for them'

Tank Culture
This was the longest discussion between multiple developers. IRCers expressed that most anti tank options currently are insufficent counters at similar cost ratios in both resources, options, isk and SP. Issues included tactics, remote repair, why HAV vs HAV doesnt happen and many more topics. CCP feels that additional options of next patch/build will address most concerns such as an AV statis webifier mine that would slow down a tank enough to OB to its death.

Newer Orbital Strikes
'These should severly damage/destroy even the best of tanks'

Lack of Communication over the (reason) of the AV nerf
"We posted the hotfix patches and we just tested how much further we can make live changes. Remember this is temporary."

Anti-Material Rifle
'Sniper Rifle but for headshotting Tanks is currently heavily bugged no plans in the short time.

Flux Grenades
'Shouldnt be able to kill butterflies its currently a bug infantry are dying to it...'

Multiple Grenade Slots
'We're working on it so hopefully more 'options' will open up by having more than one kind'

Contact Grenades
'Isk variants and others are being discussed now'

New Build
'later this month'

Corporate Battles
'There will be a winner, We are tracking victories for this event to the corp that won the most battles.'

Females
'Soon(without the tm)'

*CCP Staff breaks for Lunch
CCP Wolfman suggests he may be back to answer more post lunch.

Resumption after lunch.

Ladders
'We adding more! and fixing bugs associated with them.'

Racial Dropsuit Symetry
'On the roadmap in other words Soon(tm)'

Bugs
'We're fixing them.'

Moving/Operative Doors and Gates
'No plans atm'

Multiple Stage Maps/Game Modes
'Yes they're comming back but not skirmish mode the skirmish fell apart with the overly favoring the defenders.'

Weakspots on Buildings
'We wherent aware of it... we're going to look into it'

Heavy Machine Guns
'Have been retweaked to work albit differently, may require a nerf based on internal testing'

Mass Drivers
'also getting a tweak to increase damage radius slighlty.'

Swarm Launchers
'we're currently testing dumbfireless launchers thus lock ons required'

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Iron Wolf Saber BetaMax. 2867	Posted - 2012.09.01 06:54:00 - [31] - Quote Maximus Stryker wrote: Not sure if this has been answered before but I am curious if it has not been answered if you wants to ask a dev... Right now we currently have 4 drop suit classes and each class has a race associated with it. In th future (by full retail release) will each drop suit have a variant in multiple races with different perks/bonuses/draw-backs? Ie Caldari suits more shields, Gallente suits more armor etc. Thank you. CCP Wolfman > 'We're are looking to continue to expand racial choices. Hard to place a time table on this so Soon(tm)'
Iron Wolf Saber BetaMax. 2867	Posted - 2012.09.01 07:37:00 - [32] - Quote anyways more updates and chances are thats it becuas ccp wolfman began hunting down the swarm launcher misbehavior and we're trying to walk him step by step though replicating the misbehaving missile behavior.
Templar Two Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 459	Posted - 2012.09.01 08:05:00 - [33] - Quote Quote: Skills 'Next build you should see a larger number of skills providing bonsues.' Oh come'on! More bonuses for stats, why? Also skills give bonuses without trade-off: welcome cheapness. Really this is a FPS player's skills should be the only hings that matter in a FPS not in-game stats. Why newcomers must be disadvantaged so much simply because they are new and don't have access to the enough in-game skills.
Iron Wolf Saber BetaMax. 2867	Posted - 2012.09.01 08:08:00 - [34] - Quote Templar Two wrote: Quote: Skills 'Next build you should see a larger number of skills providing bonsues.' Oh come'on! More bonuses for stats, why? Also skills give bonuses without trade-off: welcome cheapness. Really this is a FPS player's skills should be the only hings that matter in a FPS not in-game stats. Why newcomers must be disadvantaged so much simply because they are new and don't have access to the enough in-game skills. The bottom line is that we got far to many skill books with things that do absotlutely nothing once you get the gear associated with it.
Templar Two Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 459	Posted - 2012.09.01 08:17:00 - [35] - Quote I am not talking about books that unlock gear, those are fine. I am talking bout skill that "give you BONUSES".
Skytt Syysch Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 235	Posted - 2012.09.01 08:20:00 - [36] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: For example I think the thing about a laser war hammer was a joke. They also said I would be getting an invincible tank and a BPO grenade that would kill everyone on the map by next week. I'm pretty sure they were serious about those, though. KingBlade82 wrote: i still see it as a special club and dont see why the players have to post it on here or wed never hear it from them (until official build notes that is) It really isn't. You're welcome to join. The thing is, it got overwhelming with just a small number of us asking questions to the point of the channel having to be muted so things could be more organized. We're also the people who frequent the forums, whether we contribute or not, we're collectively reading probably as much as the devs are, and know the questions everyone here is asking and can represent the concerns of everyone on the forums by using a few people. It'd just go to hell if they tried to do something similar here. There'd be way too much noise for them to be able to parse all the questions and they'd have no time to answer any of it. Evidence: It was getting that way with just 10-20 of us being active in IRC, imagine dozens more here. And, honestly, it's a more mature environment for the most part where people will take questions seriously and provide honest, thoughtful feedback, rather than a lot of the bickering and trolling you see here (that's not to say everyone acts that way here, but the obnoxious minority would clutter up a Q&A kind of thread and it'd get derailed with side discussions and repeated questions). It's not like this is an everyday thing, either. Just every once in a while they pile in at the same time to answer some questions when they can, see where the community stands on the more major issues, and we generally give the forum consensus and our personal opinions. A lot of times we're just reminding them of issues or pointing them to specific threads we want to keep their attention on.
Billi Gene Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic 130	Posted - 2012.09.01 08:22:00 - [37] - Quote [question] any chance of giving Mass Drivers a better aiming reticule?... like one that shows where the grenade will land +/-10%... something that moves along the ground like a small targeting square, that can follow terrain elevation, allowing for less "intuitive" use of the Mass Driver.
Jimbeezy Imperfects Negative-Feedback 219	Posted - 2012.09.01 08:24:00 - [38] - Quote Weakspots on buildings?
Templar Two Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 459	Posted - 2012.09.01 08:26:00 - [39] - Quote Listening/talking to 10-20 pole instead then 200 or 2k is the reason why the FPS players here all disappointed by Dust and why the gameplay/shooting is not good. What are we here for then? I was told that CCP was reading here but it's clear that IRC comes first.
Skytt Syysch Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 235	Posted - 2012.09.01 08:33:00 - [40] - Quote Jimbeezy wrote: Weakspots on buildings? I brought up that the CRU had areas of differing efficiency ratings for some reason, they're looking into it. Templar Two wrote: Listening/talking to 10-20 pole instead then 200 or 2k is the reason why the FPS players here all disappointed by Dust and why the gameplay/shooting is not good. What are we here for then? I was told that CCP was reading here but it's clear that IRC comes first. They're not only listening to us. Our voices aren't shaping how the game is getting designed any more than yours are. They read every post on the forums. But, we've been able to have the opportunity to get some direct answers and provide feedback. You would get the same result with creating your own bug or feedback thread, we just get human interaction and an opportunity to clarify right away if they go "wait, what?"

Billi Gene Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic 130	Posted - 2012.09.01 08:35:00 - [41] - Quote Templar Two wrote: Listening/talking to 10-20 pole instead then 200 or 2k is the reason why the FPS players here all disappointed by Dust and why the gameplay/shooting is not good. What are we here for then? I was told that CCP was reading here but it's clear that IRC comes first. data. if a games company based all its decisions on player opinion/feedback... games would be see-saws of continual over nerf/over buff cycles. by playing the game you are providing data from everything that you do, every shot fired, every shot missed, number of times killed by X weapon etc. CCP has a game plan, but they need to make sure that what they are trying to do will actually work. Sometimes that will mean buffing SP gains and dropping item costs so that they can get data on top end fittings and builds. Sometimes it means nerfing the hell out of something so that they can reach for a middle ground between something being OP and underpowered. The alternative is to shift numbers by tiny increments till you "think" you've reached a balance.
Leviticus Krauthammer Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 27	Posted - 2012.09.01 08:38:00 - [42] - Quote Jimbeezy wrote: Weakspots on buildings? I thought that sounded odd also.
Skytt Syysch Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 235	Posted - 2012.09.01 08:42:00 - [43] - Quote Leviticus Krauthammer wrote: Jimbeezy wrote: Weakspots on buildings? I thought that sounded odd also. Instead of editing my post for clarification, I'll just add it here. I targeted a CRU earlier with my large missile turret, and on the center body portion had 99% efficiency rating, and on the corner "legs" of it, it was saying 129% efficiency. That's what that question was about, they thought maybe it was assigned a different material or something for the different parts, or something else was wonky.
Templar Two Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 459	Posted - 2012.09.01 08:42:00 - [44] - Quote I proposed/asked CCP to make survey & polls to get specific feedback on a large scale. That, combined with the forums would have sufficed to get the feedback they needed. Yours are all excuses. Ways to get us all involved exist and are are far from chaotic.
Skytt Syysch Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 235	Posted - 2012.09.01 08:57:00 - [45] - Quote Templar Two wrote: I proposed/asked CCP to make survey & polls to get specific feedback on a large scale. That, combined with the forums would have sufficed to get the feedback they needed. Yours are all excuses. Ways to get us all involved exist and are are far from chaotic. Well, the forums don't support polls from what I can see, unless you want them to post em somewhere else (they emailed one out recently didn't they?). Either way, having to create polls per issue takes up resources. I think it's in one or many of their job descriptions to read every post on the forums, so they already get the feedback there. I'm not saying polls and surveys wouldn't work, I'm just saying they'd be additional work. They may also not be able to provide the kind of feedback they want on certain issues, and if you leave answers as open-ended fill-in text fields, that's more manual data crunching that has to be done. I would like to see surveys, don't get me wrong. But it's not like the discussion we had with them was us providing more than you can in the currently available means. It was much more asking questions and getting answers or clarification than giving feedback. Usually "feedback" was along the lines of "are we gonna get skills that do more things than simply unlock items?" yeah we should have some more of that in the next build "cool, I think something like this kind of skill bonus would be neat to see." It's not largely in-depth "you need to make X happen this way, and only listen to me and ignore the forums" kind of thing.
lordjnus 9	Posted - 2012.09.01 09:15:00 - [46] - Quote I just filled out a Survey that landed in my mail, regarding Dust 514.
Templar Two Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 459	Posted - 2012.09.01 09:17:00 - [47] - Quote Quote: The forums don't support polls. Well, then they should have made forums that does support polls. What stopped them, this are just temporary forums so they coudl have used the omnipresent vBulleting wich is super-cheap to license (less then 200$ I believe, CCP has 200$ to spare isn't it) Quote: It would have required additional work. Really. Guess what: when you make a big product, and an ambitious one such as Dust, begin stingy isn't going to help, especially on the feedback side. Those additional work/money would not have gone in vain I assure you. Quote: But it's not like the discussion we had with them was us providing more than you can in the currently available means. So why have IRC it in the first place if ti does nothing different. That is wasting money and time. We asked countless of time about a better communication, but nothing changed. We'll see if this will pay off. So far this only caused problems and discontent, and it's showing in the game.
Skihids Tritan-Industries Legacy Rising 969	Posted - 2012.09.01 12:28:00 - [48] - Quote Templar Two wrote: Quote: The forums don't support polls. Well, then they should have made forums that does support polls. What stopped them, this are just temporary forums so they coudl have used the omnipresent vBulleting wich is super-cheap to license (less then 200$ I believe, CCP has 200$ to spare isn't it) Quote: It would have required additional work. Really. Guess what: when you make a big product, and an ambitious one such as Dust, begin stingy isn't going to help, especially on the feedback side. Those additional work/money would not have gone in vain I assure you. Quote: But it's not like the discussion we had with them was us providing more than you can in the currently available means. So why have IRC it in the first place if ti does nothing different. That is wasting money and time. We asked countless of time about a better communication, but nothing changed. We'll see if this will pay off. So far this only caused problems and discontent, and it's showing in the game. IRC was set up by players for players. 99.9% of the chatter is squadding up, complaining about bugs, and talking about the last match. CCP drops in only occasionally and as was stated the folks in channel mainly press the forum points and ask for the answers you have been asking for.
Templar Two Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 459	Posted - 2012.09.01 12:34:00 - [49] - Quote I repeat: why don't use the forums directly. We asked CCP use them, we begged them to use the forums more and they din't. I was told that CCP was communicative with his fans/customers but here communication is appalling at best.
Titus Stryker Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 35	Posted - 2012.09.01 12:44:00 - [50] - Quote Templar Two wrote: I proposed/asked CCP to make survey & polls to get specific feedback on a large scale. That, combined with the forums would have sufficed to get the feedback they needed. Yours are all excuses. Ways to get us all involved exist and are are far from chaotic. What makes you think that a poll of the "community" is a good idea? Because people who play video games as a hobby 5-20 hours per week does not make their points on creating a video game valid, IMO. Does Roger Goodell (the commissioner of the NFL) take polls of everyone who attends a game or watches on TV...NO. Why, just because someone is a fan of football doesn't mean they know how to run a league or make it more competitive or know anything constructive about the professional football. Do NFL fans post on Internet forums and let their opinions be heard, yes. Do they let the NFL know what they think, yes. and if there is a large enough movement by fans, than the NFL can address it. Same goes here, popular posts and opinions get addressed by the devs regularly and they take feedback on theorems and t hen have to determine if they agree with opinion/complaint and then prioritize fixing it. Not every acehole with an opinion knows how to make a video game nor do they know what is required to fix, adjust, or create elements in a video game to "make it better"

Benjamin Hellios Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 259	Posted - 2012.09.01 13:20:00 - [51] - Quote Multiple Stage Maps/Game Modes 'Yes they're comming back but not skirmish mode the skirmish fell apart with the overly favoring the defenders.' What does this mean? They're not actually getting rid of skirmish are they or am I reading that wrong?
KingBlade82 Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 56	Posted - 2012.09.01 13:26:00 - [52] - Quote Titus Stryker wrote: Templar Two wrote: I proposed/asked CCP to make survey & polls to get specific feedback on a large scale. That, combined with the forums would have sufficed to get the feedback they needed. Yours are all excuses. Ways to get us all involved exist and are are far from chaotic. What makes you think that a poll of the "community" is a good idea? Because people who play video games as a hobby 5-20 hours per week does not make their points on creating a video game valid, IMO. Does Roger Goodell (the commissioner of the NFL) take polls of everyone who attends a game or watches on TV...NO. Why, just because someone is a fan of football doesn't mean they know how to run a league or make it more competitive or know anything constructive about the professional football. Do NFL fans post on Internet forums and let their opinions be heard, yes. Do they let the NFL know what they think, yes. and if there is a large enough movement by fans, than the NFL can address it. Same goes here, popular posts and opinions get addressed by the devs regularly and they take feedback on theorems and t hen have to determine if they agree with opinion/complaint and then prioritize fixing it. Not every acehole with an opinion knows how to make a video game nor do they know what is required to fix, adjust, or create elements in a video game to "make it better" Goodell doesnt know football he needs replaced......way off topic lol
KingBlade82 Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 56	Posted - 2012.09.01 13:29:00 - [53] - Quote Benjamin Hellios wrote: Multiple Stage Maps/Game Modes 'Yes they're comming back but not skirmish mode the skirmish fell apart with the overly favoring the defenders.' What does this mean? They're not actually getting rid of skirmish are they or am I reading that wrong? long,long ago in a land far away we used to have an old map that had staged objectives example capture A and B first then u could see C,D,E etc. it was different than the maps now
Templar Two Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 459	Posted - 2012.09.01 13:30:00 - [54] - Quote First I am talking about making specific polls/surveys, asking specific question on specific themes. Second: many FPS players know what they like and what makes a FPS feel good under the thumbs. Me and a lot of guys here have been saying from months that the gamepaly is poor and that needs to be improved completely. I personally gave feedback on everything gameplay related, form animations, to sounds, to stats, etc... Our opinions were discarded because, hell, we have not the right credentials: we are just a normal FPS players, some with decades of experience in FPS...we are not EVE players. CCP don't believe us, don't trust our judgment, so be it: it will have to face the consequences of this. Dust is getting a lot of bad publicity form PS+ players and journalist that say the same things we said for months: I see a link between this and CCP not listening to people that have played FPS for decades. We don't have credential but we know what we are talking about. Claiming we don't understand what a good FPS is about and ignore us already did a lot of damage. Do you want more?
JonnyAugust Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz RISE of LEGION 212	Posted - 2012.09.01 13:40:00 - [55] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Today CCP Wolfman and CCP CmndWang hot dropped into IRC and left us a few lines and answered a few questions. These are just generalized summaries and don't hold ccp to anything and this is not specific wording as I dont have the character limit to post all of it also understand that devlopment on the white board is subject to horribel erasing cancellations and sometimes newer shineier toys so you might as well take all of this as fuel for speculation and your magic crystal ball. Also becuase copy/paste dont work on my cleint >< Reasoning behind HP nerf 'We wanted to emphasize modules and skill training support skills on suits and not have HP as the advantage, There is discussion about reducing prices of higher end suits becuase of the recent changes.' Immortal Tanks 'We are well aware of the issue and will be addressing it soon.' Swarm Launcher Wonkiness 'Looks into it 'its hard to tell because the numbers are looking right, warrents further investigation' Tank Top Turret '360 rotation fixed' Hit Detection 'We have this new system that auto adjusts hit detection based on lag and it will be in the next patch/build we pretty happy about this system.' LAV Turret Tracking While moving 'Nothing worked on but its planned to be fixed' Skills 'Next build you should see a larger number of skills providing bonsues.' Who boosts what in a Vehicle? 'The driver only atm, I'll get back to you on the passenger effective turret effectiveness since dev who works on that isnt here.' Forge guns and AV 'We're going to increase forge gun range we are also looking at the numbers being generated during the 'nerfed' session before moving foward with buffs and/or ajdustments.' Dropship Landing 'We're getting better landing gear for them' Tank Culture This was the longest discussion between multiple developers. IRCers expressed that most anti tank options currently are insufficent counters at similar cost ratios in both resources, options, isk and SP. Issues included tactics, remote repair, why HAV vs HAV doesnt happen and many more topics. CCP feels that additional options of next patch/build will address most concerns such as an AV statis webifier mine that would slow down a tank enough to OB to its death. Newer Orbital Strikes 'These should severly damage/destroy even the best of tanks' Lack of Communication over the (reason) of the AV nerf "We posted the hotfix patches and we just tested how much further we can make live changes. Remember this is temporary." Anti-Material Rifle 'Sniper Rifle but for headshotting Tanks is currently heavily bugged no plans in the short time. Flux Grenades 'Shouldnt be able to kill butterflies its currently a bug infantry are dying to it...' Multiple Grenade Slots 'We're working on it so hopefully more 'options' will open up by having more than one kind' Contact Grenades 'Isk variants and others are being discussed now' New Build 'later this month' Corporate Battles 'There will be a winner, We are tracking victories for this event to the corp that won the most battles.' Females 'Soon(without the tm)' CCP Staff breaks for Lunch CCP Wolfman suggests he may be back to answer more post lunch. Resumption after lunch. Ladders 'We adding more! and fixing bugs associated with them.' Racial Dropsuit Symetry 'On the roadmap in other words Soon(tm)' Bugs 'We're fixing them.' Moving/Operative Doors and Gates 'No plans atm' Multiple Stage Maps/Game Modes 'Yes they're comming back but not skirmish mode the skirmish fell apart with the overly favoring the defenders.' Weakspots on Buildings 'We wherent aware of it... we're going to look into it' Heavy Machine Guns 'Have been retweaked to work albit differently, may require a nerf based on internal testing' Mass Drivers 'also getting a tweak to increase damage radius slighlty.' Swarm Launchers 'we're currently testing dumbfireless launchers thus lock ons required' This is a true testamenant to how out of touch the IRC channel truly is with what FPS gamers want. Not even a single mention of RBS, Recoil, Weapon Mechanics, or New Assault Rifles & Attachements. Fact is, the vast majority of PS3 players won't go near that channel b/c the fact you even have to memorize commands to log in is a wall no one wants to deal with.
Carilito Algintal Core Gallente Federation 345	Posted - 2012.09.01 13:50:00 - [56] - Quote If CCp put a stickied thread with all this info. this forum would be much more useful instead of the mindless rage being thrown about.
Octavian Vetiver Dog Nation United Relativity Alliance 152	Posted - 2012.09.01 13:57:00 - [57] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Emperor Gestahl wrote: i think they need to work on the store too seems like you can only look up items once or twice and then they just load forever This a dysncing issue I was told from previous QnAs I wasnt around for. Currently we are stressing Sisi beyond her nomral load I mean if you look at this page http://www.eve-offline.net/?server=singularity youll see pertty flat surface then MASSIVE spike being us. Dust is really stressing it, normally we'd have less then 300 on sisi......dust added another 2,500+ to it's normal numbers.
Gilbatron Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda 81	Posted - 2012.09.01 14:05:00 - [58] - Quote communication via IRC is cool, communication via the forums would be much much cooler
Darky SI 232	Posted - 2012.09.01 14:07:00 - [59] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Heavy Machine Guns 'Have been retweaked to work albit differently, may require a nerf based on internal testing' I don't like how this sounds the HMG is already messed up retweaking it and nerfing AGAIN!
Naturi Riclenore BetaMax. 120	Posted - 2012.09.01 14:19:00 - [60] - Quote Remember guys and gals, things are subject to change. I know many want to know why CCP doesn't have these things in forums, but as ironwolf said, forums tend to be "you said it so it is now written in stone" Everyone in beta is invited to the IRC, we have some very good conversations there (and some other convo's too :P ) From time to time CCP will poke their heads in and we get a chance to have some 1-on-1 with em. And then sometimes they want us to test some crazy idea... But tht's why we're here. IRC is VERY VERY VERY informal but it does give you a chance to sepak directly to CCP at times. I was the one who brought up the driver / passenger question. Again remember, things are subject to change.



Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page