Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tsukino Stareine
The Red Circle Inc.
436
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 17:20:00 -
[31] - Quote
Ciyrine wrote:If i assign my sentries to someone with fast lock time can thr drones fire at targets that are outside my targeting range?
as long as theyre within drone control range you're fine. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
10514
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 17:25:00 -
[32] - Quote
Sofia Wolf wrote:During las1t year we see increasing proliferation of sentry based fleet doctrines ranging in size form Vexors all the way up to slowcat blobs....
You'll perhaps be pleased to know that the CSM discussed this exact topic with CCP today.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
10514
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 17:26:00 -
[33] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:A few bombers make the mean sentries go away.
Not really; sentries can be pulled instantly, and carriers can have unfeasible quantities of them in their drone bays
1 Kings 12:11
|
Tinu Moorhsum
Random Events
245
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 17:43:00 -
[34] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:A few bombers make the mean sentries go away.
Not easily. Most of the sentry fleets will starburst and drop. They're actually quite robust around bombers.
Their really big weakness is intel and mobility. If you know who has control then they are easily taken off the field (if not you should run anyway) at which point you have a 15-20 second window where the enemy fleet isn't shooting at all while they get reorganized. If you also know who their secondary FC is then you really only have to kill 2 or 3 people in their fleet to throw the whole doctrine into chaos. Even though a lot of people CAN FC a fleet if they want to they won't step up in a fleet where the FC, the secondary and the tertiary callers have all been taken down early.... Few people suddenly grow a pair when that's happening.
The other weakness is mobility. They're vulnerable for hit and run tactics becasue they can't follow. In that sense bombers do make sense. Even if they aren't the answer to sentries if the fleet is properly run, they are good hit and run weapons. Alpha snipers also do well as do any sniper ships that can kite out of the 100km range. Basically sentry doctrine is akin to trench warfare so as long as you don't join thyem in the trenches you can work around it.
|
Whitehound
1500
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 17:45:00 -
[35] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:You'll perhaps be pleased to know that the CSM discussed this exact topic with CCP today. If you want to please your voters will you have to get results and not only show that you were trying. Any news on the outcome would be interesting. If it was only for the discussion could one pick up the phone, dial C-C-P and have a dog breath into the phone.
Anything more specific than "we talked" would be nice. Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |
Sofia Wolf
Ubuntu Inc. The Fourth District
227
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 17:52:00 -
[36] - Quote
Thanks for the feedback Malcanis. I'm glad IGÇÖm not the only one that thinks drone assistance mechanic deserves some attention.
At this point I myself am not sure what change, if any, should be made but I definitely think this mechanic deserves some open debate, so I started this thread. Sadly most of the responses were either trolling or misguided mockery. Jessica Danikov > EVE is your real life. the rest is fantasy. caught in a corporation. no escape from banality. open up yours eyes, peer through pod good and seeeeeee. I'm just a poor pilot, I need no sympathy. because I'm easy scam, easy go, little isk, little know. anyway the solar wind blows... |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
10514
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 18:01:00 -
[37] - Quote
Whitehound wrote:Malcanis wrote:You'll perhaps be pleased to know that the CSM discussed this exact topic with CCP today. If you want to please your voters will you have to get results and not only show that you were trying. Any news on the outcome would be interesting. If it was only for the discussion could one pick up the phone, dial C-C-P and have a dog breath into the phone. Anything more specific than "we talked" would be nice.
Dude you know we can't say "we discussed hurbleburbles with CCP and the devs agreed that they're grossly under/overpowered and are gonna be fixed next month"
All we can do is represent issues to CCP, advocate a position as best we can, and wait for the results to be announced.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
10514
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 18:02:00 -
[38] - Quote
Sofia Wolf wrote:Thanks for the feedback Malcanis. I'm glad IGÇÖm not the only one that thinks drone assistance mechanic deserves some attention. At this point I myself am not sure what change, if any, should be made but I definitely think this mechanic deserves some open debate, so I started this thread. Sadly most of the responses were either trolling or misguided mockery.
Actually Mynnna raised the topic.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Whitehound
1500
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 18:10:00 -
[39] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Dude you know we can't say "we discussed hurbleburbles with CCP and the devs agreed that they're grossly under/overpowered and are gonna be fixed next month" Why not? Did they not say anything to you in return? Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |
Sofia Wolf
Ubuntu Inc. The Fourth District
227
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 18:15:00 -
[40] - Quote
Whitehound wrote:Malcanis wrote:Dude you know we can't say "we discussed hurbleburbles with CCP and the devs agreed that they're grossly under/overpowered and are gonna be fixed next month" Why not? Did they not say anything to you in return?
Ever head of NDA? Jessica Danikov > EVE is your real life. the rest is fantasy. caught in a corporation. no escape from banality. open up yours eyes, peer through pod good and seeeeeee. I'm just a poor pilot, I need no sympathy. because I'm easy scam, easy go, little isk, little know. anyway the solar wind blows... |
|
Tinu Moorhsum
Random Events
246
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 18:18:00 -
[41] - Quote
Whitehound wrote:Malcanis wrote:Dude you know we can't say "we discussed hurbleburbles with CCP and the devs agreed that they're grossly under/overpowered and are gonna be fixed next month" Why not? Did they not say anything to you in return?
Well it should be obvious. Every second EVE online player has asperger syndrome and if there is one thing you need to do with aspergers is manage expectations.
|
Whitehound
1500
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 19:47:00 -
[42] - Quote
Sofia Wolf wrote:Whitehound wrote:Malcanis wrote:Dude you know we can't say "we discussed hurbleburbles with CCP and the devs agreed that they're grossly under/overpowered and are gonna be fixed next month" Why not? Did they not say anything to you in return? Ever head of NDA? It is not the point. One can say more than just "we talked." but give an indication such as "We talk about XY and how it is bad, and it went surprisingly good." Or one can say "..., and found resistance."
Let me remind you that the discussion is with people who not only make the game, but who know the game, who love it and play it or have been playing it, and it should be pretty easy to get their position on a topic without making it into a poker table.
If this is not within the powers of the CSM then the CSM is not more than a human teleprompter who is reading the forums to CCP. And frankly would this have little to do with an actual discussion.
So, a little bit more than "we discussed it" would be nice. It is not like Slowcats were invented just yesterday and CCP did not know about it already. Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
10517
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 20:22:00 -
[43] - Quote
I don't care to try IAs patience by trying to devise hints.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Whitehound
1500
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 20:27:00 -
[44] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:I don't care to try IAs patience by trying to devise hints. Then I just thank you for reading the forums to CCP. A job well done! We are proud of you. Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |
Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
237
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 21:38:00 -
[45] - Quote
Hit sentries with a 50% tracking nerf only while assigned. Call it latency. Problem solved. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
10522
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 09:31:00 -
[46] - Quote
Ciyrine wrote:If i assign my sentries to someone with fast lock time can thr drones fire at targets that are outside my targeting range?
yes, providing that it's inside your drone control range (and inside the range of the drones themselves, of course)
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
10522
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 09:33:00 -
[47] - Quote
Whitehound wrote:Malcanis wrote:I don't care to try IAs patience by trying to devise hints. Then I just thank you for reading the forums to CCP. A job well done! We are proud of you.
Your problem is not with me but with your misconception about what the CSM does.
If you think all the CSM does is link forum posts to CCP, then by all means run for election next year and find out for yourself.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Chi'Nane T'Kal
Interminatus Aeterna Anima
102
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 09:51:00 -
[48] - Quote
Tinu Moorhsum wrote: Alpha snipers also do well
Not with TSB's running.
Did you even look at the latest incarnation of N3 domis? |
Caitlyn Tufy
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
348
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 10:06:00 -
[49] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Actually Mynnna raised the topic.
Why am I not surprised?
Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote:Did you even look at the latest incarnation of N3 domis?
These? |
Chi'Nane T'Kal
Interminatus Aeterna Anima
102
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 10:08:00 -
[50] - Quote
Freighdee Katt wrote:Hit sentries with a 50% tracking nerf only while assigned. Call it latency. Problem solved.
Other problems generated. A few drones on assist (we should avoid assign, as that is used for fighters and completely different) is working as intended, specifically in a game that promotes multiaccounting.
1000 sentries on assist are a problem.
So if you'd introduce a penalty, it should be stacked, for example 1% optimal/tracking/speed penalty for every X drones that assist the target caller.
A fix to the target spectrum breaker advantage on drone boats could be, if it auto-abandons drones whenever it successfully breaks a lock on your ship. At least that way some action (reconnect to lost drones) would be required by the pilot now and then.
|
|
Chi'Nane T'Kal
Interminatus Aeterna Anima
102
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 10:10:00 -
[51] - Quote
Exactly.
No alpha sniping involved in those kills :). |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
10522
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 10:28:00 -
[52] - Quote
The CSM's favoured change to assigning drones is to limit assigning to squad members.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Whitehound
1502
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 10:31:00 -
[53] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:If you think all the CSM does is link forum posts to CCP, then by all means run for election next year and find out for yourself. I did not say you linked them - I said you read them to CCP!
Do you misquote a lot?? Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
118
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 10:41:00 -
[54] - Quote
I always thought the issue was the slowcat itself, and that it cannot be easily overwhelmed by dps alone.
About sentries in general: The assignment of drones to a targetcaller really solves a lot of organization-issues right away :) I only correct my own spelling. |
Roime
Ten Thousand Years Shinjiketo
3080
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 10:42:00 -
[55] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:The CSM's favoured change to assigning drones is to limit assigning to squad members.
Very sensible suggestion.
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
10523
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 10:52:00 -
[56] - Quote
Whitehound wrote:Malcanis wrote:If you think all the CSM does is link forum posts to CCP, then by all means run for election next year and find out for yourself. I did not say you linked them - I said you read them to CCP! Do you misquote a lot??
So your mental image of what we do is literally reading out loud forum posts to CCP over VOIP?
When we say "we're talking to CCP" we mean "we're in a chat channel with CCP staff". If we want to call attention to forum discussions, a link is how we do it.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Whitehound
1502
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 11:00:00 -
[57] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:So your mental image of what we do is literally reading out loud forum posts to CCP over VOIP? When we say "we're talking to CCP" we mean "we're in a chat channel with CCP staff". If we want to call attention to forum discussions, a link is how we do it. Pretty much, yes. I imagined that you would have occasional face-to-face meetings with them, which I believe you do. But reading forums to CCP over VOIP makes a lot of sense considering how bad fanfest can smell. They would want a bit of distance.
Anyhow, do you have anything you can tell us how your proposal was received? Or is it just a "thank you" that you get for reading the information to them? Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
724
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 12:21:00 -
[58] - Quote
Sounds like a perfect way for FC's to get ahead of that which plagues fleets the most: Minions inability to follow primary calls.
About time some more varied chips were thrown on the table though, was getting a bit boring reading about the incessant artillery alpha crap.
As for CSM - CPP comms, who cares when it has no effect? It took more than two years for CCP to realise that Winmatar was broken, it took them five years to realise that FW was broken and so on .. all cases where CSM were specifically asked to present verifiable facts handed to them on a silver platter .. so is the comms broken, CSM lying through their teeth or CCP more inept than even I give them credit for? Personally hope it is the former as the alternatives are too horrendous to contemplate
PS: I am assuming that drones get their attributes from their owner even when assigned, ie. that the assignee does not influence anything in the way of range, damage, tracking etc. .. that his only contribution is a pointing finger? If not then holy hell, nerf that **** into the ground! |
Chi'Nane T'Kal
Interminatus Aeterna Anima
102
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 12:36:00 -
[59] - Quote
Again, drones are NOT assigned. Fighters are assigned, which gives a lot more control over them than just target selection.
Drones ASSIST and as such keep all of their attributes as if their owner controlled them (which he still DOES, btw. except for selecting targets). Only the targeting control is indirectly given to the assisted pilot, the drones will attack whichever target he last activated an offensive modul on.
It gets a bit more complicated with aggressive drone behaviour, but that's it in a nutshell. |
Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
241
|
Posted - 2013.07.04 23:29:00 -
[60] - Quote
Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote:Freighdee Katt wrote:Hit sentries with a 50% tracking nerf only while assigned. Call it latency. Problem solved. Other problems generated. It doesn't need to apply to flying drones, only sentries. Drone bunnies still work as intended.
There are good reasons to assign flying drones to another ship, so that DPS can focus on DPS and the drone bunny can put all the drones where they need to be. There are no good reasons for farming out sentries from a drone boat, unless you're going AFK. And that's the problem. It's like letting missile boats assign their launchers.
If you wants to shoot, you pushes the button. Or, if you must farm your sentries out, then you take a big hit in combat effectiveness. All they have to do is make that hit just big enough to keep drone boat captains at the wheel. Problem solved. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |