Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Mikhem
Taxisk Unlimited
162
|
Posted - 2014.07.31 19:39:00 -
[1] - Quote
There was interesting piece of news in themittani.com. One thing particularly focused my attention. It was remote repairers that ruin game because they are too powerful. I have here two possible solutions to fix remote repairers and remote capacitor transfer problem.
1. Remote repairers and capacitor transfer are limited to specialized ships that use them. Capital size modules could only be used by Rorqual and large modules by Orca. This way all ships doing remote repair or cap transfer are vulnerable to EWAR and there is no way of using combat ships to create network of remote repair. ECM is countermeasure for remote repair. Remote repair ships need to be able to lock targets to repair them. Repair drones can be destroyed by attack drones.
2. This is a bit more extreme: Deploydable that prevents use of remote repairs and cap transfers. This would make remote repair impossible in battles most of times.
Comments are welcome for my ideas.
Here is link to themittani.com news that brought my attention to this issue. http://themittani.com/features/rethinking-nullsec?page=0%2C0 Mikhem
Door is still closed. :(
|
Hakaari Inkuran
State War Academy Caldari State
158
|
Posted - 2014.07.31 20:03:00 -
[2] - Quote
You really should take anything from that site with a healthy grain of salt rather than as truth. |
Hopelesshobo
Red Dwarf Mining Corporation space weaponry and trade
279
|
Posted - 2014.07.31 20:11:00 -
[3] - Quote
The only issue with remote reps if you directly compare it to EWAR is how they both scale. Remote reps scale very well because someone broadcasts, and all the logis in that fleet know where the damage will be going. That being said, nobody else in your fleet can see what EWAR is being applied to the enemy, other then maybe, suddenly I'm not locked up by a dozen people in the 200 man fleet. Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012. |
Fer'isam K'ahn
None Of One
265
|
Posted - 2014.07.31 20:26:00 -
[4] - Quote
TheMittani page updates. loads of old suggestions get reposted, surprise-¦-¦
That being said, there have been better suggestions to remote reps, for instance, like stacking penalties or limits on the to-be-repped ship. Otherwise, work as intended. Basically with huge fleets it handles like most things, the ones bringing more bodies to the field .... same with alpha, reps, snipe... the problem is numbers mostly, not the modules or mechanics themselves.
Are you sure your issues aren't elsewhere ?! |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8349
|
Posted - 2014.07.31 22:52:00 -
[5] - Quote
The problem with reps is not that they can be used by other ships.
The problem with reps (and I have been saying this since 2010) is that they are infinitely scalable, and perfectly sustainable.
Both of those can be addressed with diminishing returns mechanics. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
WarFireV
Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion
366
|
Posted - 2014.07.31 23:55:00 -
[6] - Quote
What are you trying to create by nerfing remote reps. I feel like most of you have no idea what your intentions are.
Its not going to lead to some honor brawl type fighting where, its would lead to an extreme sniper meta again. And now that there are MJDs, it would be much harder to kill fleets. Good repping ability gives you more options for fleet types.
Now the idea of giving reps and optimal and falloff is something worth looking at. You could even add in another set of logi ships, one set with good range repping ability and another set that is tanker, but has much less range. |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
2851
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 00:27:00 -
[7] - Quote
Mikhem wrote:There was interesting piece of news in themittani.com. One thing particularly focused my attention. It was remote repairers that ruin game because they are too powerful. I have here two possible solutions to fix remote repairers and remote capacitor transfer problem. 1. Remote repairers and capacitor transfer are limited to specialized ships that use them. Capital size modules could only be used by Rorqual and large modules by Orca. This way all ships doing remote repair or cap transfer are vulnerable to EWAR and there is no way of using combat ships to create network of remote repair. ECM is countermeasure for remote repair. Remote repair ships need to be able to lock targets to repair them. Repair drones can be destroyed by attack drones. 2. This is a bit more extreme: Deploydable that prevents use of remote repairs and cap transfers. This would make remote repair impossible in battles most of times. Comments are welcome for my ideas. Here is link to themittani.com news that brought my attention to this issue. http://themittani.com/features/rethinking-nullsec?page=0%2C0
So, for the first one, you'll be completely refunding all SP anyone has in Triage, refunding the cost of the triage mods too, and introducing an entirely new way to repair structures, right? Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration V is upwards of 2 million SP after all, and you want the module removed outright.
And for the second, why should logi be a class of ships that it is never actually worth undocking in? |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
462
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 00:57:00 -
[8] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote: And for the second, why should logi be a class of ships that it is never actually worth undocking in?
because their fleets probably go all guns little to no support and die horribly to fleets that bother to mix in some support. Some just don't seem to grasp the whole mixed fleet composition idea.
In the case of caps they also don't grasp capping out either. Can hinder carriers like it shuts down dreads. But that again needs losing I bring lots of guns so we must win idea. |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2018
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 04:00:00 -
[9] - Quote
Mikhem wrote:There was interesting piece of news in themittani.com.
No there wasn't.
According to TMC, pretty much everything in the game is broken, with the sole exception of their 1000 man multi- fleets teleporting anyplace they want anytime they want. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
462
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 04:08:00 -
[10] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:Mikhem wrote:There was interesting piece of news in themittani.com. No there wasn't. According to TMC, pretty much everything in the game is broken, with the sole exception of their 1000 man fleets teleporting anyplace they want anytime they want.
Except for a few what I'd consider more objective writers like marlona sky....this basically. Most seems to be written up imo to get mittens hits to his site. Sensational "news" works well. |
|
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
148
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 04:24:00 -
[11] - Quote
Remote reps are working fine. Non-logi ships have no bonuses to repping and are just as vulnerable to ewar. logi ships can be jammed out or killed. Capital fights are another issue, but never take what you read about them at face value.
Perhaps you should ignore themittani dot com site? Or at least not refer to it and thus avoid appearing to cross post propaganda from goons. |
Barton Breau
University of Caille Gallente Federation
60
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 04:32:00 -
[12] - Quote
First world mmo problems come to mind "why are healers so hard and boring to level?" :) |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1454
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 08:32:00 -
[13] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:The problem with reps is not that they can be used by other ships.
The problem with reps (and I have been saying this since 2010) is that they are infinitely scalable, and perfectly sustainable.
Both of those can be addressed with diminishing returns mechanics. The problem with DPS is that it is infinitely scalable and perfectly sustainable.... Remote reps are also not infinitely scalable because you hit a point where the ship is instantly alpha'ed.
As long as DPS shoots straight through all friendly ships, hostile ships and structures, remote reps are fine in how they work. It's possible the numbers need tiny tweaks, but until the blob has downsides of friendly fire and blocked angles of fire, the current way remote reps works is needed. |
Mag's
the united
17703
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 09:51:00 -
[14] - Quote
Mikhem wrote: Comments are welcome for my ideas.
Here is link to themittani.com news that brought my attention to this issue.
They are bad ideas and I don't see an issue.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks The Volition Cult
819
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 10:46:00 -
[15] - Quote
It's interesting how an opinion story (because it's not news, really) gets posted on TMC and suddenly a load of people start posting different threads on the F&I forums parroting the *opinion*.
Taking a heavy handed approach to logi is just going to cause more problems than it addresses.
Having flown in fleets where both have sufficient logi to counter the other fleet I can tell you that they don't just pack up and go home. It becomes a competition as to who can break the other fleet's reps using whatever tools are available. Examples are, EWAR, broadcast flooding, picking off enemies that are too far out amongst others. The first two of those examples, when executed correctly, allows the destruction of some of the opposing logi which will then allow you more room for killing other ships. Logi aren't a problem, from my experience. They merely extend the length of a battle and allow more options in terms of tactics.
Sometimes you might hit a fleet with enough logi to stop you from killing anything but generally if the opposing fleet has enough logi to stop your entire fleet and you don't, you either have a bad fleet composition or you have a smaller fleet and the differing fleet sizes generally means that you'd still have lost even if all those logi pilots were in dps ships so the point is somewhat moot. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8356
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 11:03:00 -
[16] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote: The problem with DPS is that it is infinitely scalable and perfectly sustainable....
That's not a problem. Unlike reps, the dps output of a single given ship is vastly less than the repair output of a given comparable logistics ship.
1 logi > 1 dps for an infinite time period is a problem.
So we can either nerf their output, or their sustainability. I chose one, and suggested measures to that respect.
Would that screw up the way the game's PvE currently works? Probably. I also don't care, game balance cannot be held back for the sake of any particular niche, whether it's PL wanting pricetag to be superior to numbers, or PvE players who want to perma run reps all the time, or BPO owners with a monopoly on industry. If you are in the way of fixing the game, sucks to be you. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Aivlis Eldelbar
Ubuntu Inc. The Fourth District
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 11:25:00 -
[17] - Quote
Mikhem wrote:There was interesting piece of news in themittani.com
Not news, but an opinion piece, there is a difference. And you have already been pointed to the need to take it with a grain of salt. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
653
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 13:36:00 -
[18] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote: The problem with DPS is that it is infinitely scalable and perfectly sustainable....
That's not a problem. Unlike reps, the dps output of a single given ship is vastly less than the repair output of a given comparable logistics ship. 1 logi > 1 dps for an infinite time period is a problem. So we can either nerf their output, or their sustainability. I chose one, and suggested measures to that respect. Would that screw up the way the game's PvE currently works? Probably. I also don't care, game balance cannot be held back for the sake of any particular niche, whether it's PL wanting pricetag to be superior to numbers, or PvE players who want to perma run reps all the time, or BPO owners with a monopoly on industry. If you are in the way of fixing the game, sucks to be you.
Or PVPers wanting to have fun on the back of others without changing their habits and attitude towards the game. |
WarFireV
Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion
366
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 13:51:00 -
[19] - Quote
And nerfing reps fixes the game how?
You have to think about the reaction that will happen when you want to change something. Are you left with something better then before?
Do you want fleets to have less logi and more DPS ships or do you want to force people to have to bring more logi ships? Do you want people to not bring logi ships at all? |
Tabyll Altol
CTRL-Q Iron Oxide.
7
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 14:07:00 -
[20] - Quote
I disagree with the OP Remote reps are just fine. I have flown T1/T2 cruiser remote reps and liked it the way it was.
Every Logi can be taken out at multiple ways:
- Jamming - Dampning - NOITS
So please explain it to me why they are overpowerd with reasons not because some aug/guardian helped you target that it survived while your ship exploded. |
|
Daoden
The Scope Gallente Federation
81
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 14:10:00 -
[21] - Quote
they are overpowered because OP has no friends to rep him. |
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1172
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 14:15:00 -
[22] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote: The problem with DPS is that it is infinitely scalable and perfectly sustainable....
That's not a problem. Unlike reps, the dps output of a single given ship is vastly less than the repair output of a given comparable logistics ship. 1 logi > 1 dps for an infinite time period is a problem. So we can either nerf their output, or their sustainability. I chose one, and suggested measures to that respect. Would that screw up the way the game's PvE currently works? Probably. I also don't care, game balance cannot be held back for the sake of any particular niche, whether it's PL wanting pricetag to be superior to numbers, or PvE players who want to perma run reps all the time, or BPO owners with a monopoly on industry. If you are in the way of fixing the game, sucks to be you.
If the rep amount of a logi was under a dps ship, why the hell would you bring them at all when you can do more with a dps ship on field? The only use would be to cut your losses if you know you already have enough firepower to win without them so bringning more DPS is only overkill. |
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
341
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 16:03:00 -
[23] - Quote
Make remote reps suffer from sig penalties. A capital repper could have a sig of 3000 or whatever ergo qhen used on a friendly proteus with a sig of 150 it loses like 80% of its effectiveness. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
WarFireV
Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion
366
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 16:05:00 -
[24] - Quote
So you want to nerf triage carriers for some reason? |
TheMercenaryKing
StarFleet Enterprises Intrepid Crossing
253
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 16:25:00 -
[25] - Quote
I would propose the income remote reps are reduced by your resist mods. But that's only if CCP thinks repping is OP. |
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
55
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 16:37:00 -
[26] - Quote
The issue is much more that capital reps, when used in spider tanking doctrines are overpowered. A better solution is to rebalance the capital reps such that they aren't able to be used indefinitely without otherwise gimping carriers/supers. Even forcing archons into larger numbers of cap xfers to keep the chains up helps somewhat with how hard it is to kill anything in a capital engagement.
A small nerf to large reps is also probably in line, and the deadspace remotes could use the same rebalance DS and faction got for local boosters. That crazy bag FC with the silly things on the hull that shouldn't but just did. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
695
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 16:51:00 -
[27] - Quote
Yeah, this is not a ruined game issue, this is a null blob issue.
The exact same time thing gets done at smaller ships sizes, though range makes it more problematic. We need less special snowflake modules, not more. |
Xequecal
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
253
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 17:09:00 -
[28] - Quote
While I risk getting crucified for using a WoW analogy, every other MMO in existence with PvP in it has a "mortal strike" mechanic for a very good reason.
I propose a new ammo type for all guns. It does less damage than regular ammo, but "sets the target's hull on fire" or some other suitable fluff, causing remote reps targeted on the ship to start heating the logi's high slots. They're just as effective as they are now at saving ships from alpha strike, but they would not be able to save a ship from sustained DPS over a long period. The target would have to warp off and well-place tackle or bubbles could then guarantee kills. |
Liam Inkuras
Top Belt Heroes Black Rise Police Department
1232
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 17:40:00 -
[29] - Quote
Just give RR optimal and falloff, with varying degrees of effectiveness at varying ranges. I wear my goggles at night.
Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone |
|
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
3302
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 18:07:00 -
[30] - Quote
Quote:16. Redundant and re-posted threads will be locked.
As a courtesy to other forum users, please search to see if there is a thread already open on the topic you wish to discuss. If so, please place your comments there instead. Multiple threads on the same subject clutter up the forums needlessly, causing good feedback and ideas to be lost. Please keep discussions regarding a topic to a single thread. Thread closed. ISD Dorrim Barstorlode Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |