Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
87
|
Posted - 2014.09.16 17:50:00 -
[31] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
We are talking about the use of 20-50 logi and Boot fleets with 100-250. Its the high end where the issues are, the lower end of 1-10 are actually able to be countered by E-war and neuts effectively enough to make a difference.
Well if the stacking penalties only started for 15+ it would probably not affect PvE. The bigger question I have is why in the fleet battles you can't just primary the logi and knock them off the field. Is it that hard to get enough alpha damage to blow through a squishy logi? I realize they have speed tank, rep drones, etc.... but just get some frigs in to web em down, and focus the subcap fire on them one at a time. That's def what you see happening in small-medium gang PvP. |
FearlessLittleToaster
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2014.09.16 19:06:00 -
[32] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:baltec1 wrote:
We are talking about the use of 20-50 logi and Boot fleets with 100-250. Its the high end where the issues are, the lower end of 1-10 are actually able to be countered by E-war and neuts effectively enough to make a difference.
Well if the stacking penalties only started for 15+ it would probably not affect PvE. The bigger question I have is why in the fleet battles you can't just primary the logi and knock them off the field. Is it that hard to get enough alpha damage to blow through a squishy logi? I realize they have speed tank, rep drones, etc.... but just get some frigs in to web em down, and focus the subcap fire on them one at a time. That's def what you see happening in small-medium gang PvP.
A big part of it is that in large fights the logi hang well back and the DPS are usually fairly effectively fixed by bubbles. The DPS fleets will be maybe 40km apart and the logi will be 60km behind their respective damage blobs; fleet DPS ships are not very effective at that kind of range.
As for getting a bunch of frigates on top of the logi and killing them, the problem is all the logi. You have to have the DPS on hand to break the reps the logi are going to throw one another and that's very hard to do with small hulls. If those frigates just web the logi down it accomplishes nothing without a way to get damage on them; with the DPS stuck in bubbles and great big lumbering battleships thats often not possible.
Thats not to say that these things cant be done. It can, but the brutal evolutionary pressure of nullsec combat has shown that the best use for bodies is to stack more alpha and rep. The side that expends player effort (fleet numbers and isk) to try and be clever will on the average lose more often than the side that just just spams two ship roles. This hits smaller outfits who might be interested in Sov particularly hard because they have less player effort to throw at the problem in the first place.
Forcing logistics into closer proximity to the DPS they are supporting would make them much easier to kill and would definitely constitute a nerf by the way. |
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1251
|
Posted - 2014.09.16 19:38:00 -
[33] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:baltec1 wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:
Stacking penalties on logis would make incursions unplayable. There is too much incoming DPS to countenance penalized logis.
The OP's suggestion is interesting, but the chaos of large fleet fights would probably negate its effectiveness. Might be cleaner to just nerf the tank (mainly sig) of the logis, so its easier to alpha them off the field.
How many logi do you use? 7-10, mix of scimis and basis. Some of the sites can have nasty initial DPS. You would also need to think about other people who use logis...not sure if the WH folks use them in C5/C6 to run sites. Stacking penalties would be fine for PvP, when the expectation is that a lot of ships will be blowing up, but would cause a real problem for PvE activites (though I'm not sure exactly how many use multiple logis) where the current reward structure is not set up to account for a bunch of ships blowing up. We are talking about the use of 20-50 logi and Boot fleets with 100-250. Its the high end where the issues are, the lower end of 1-10 are actually able to be countered by E-war and neuts effectively enough to make a difference.
So it's alright if we implement stacking penalty starting from let's say over 10 ships to keep small combat as it is not since they already have know and workable counter while trying to put a limit to the broken factor larger fleet bring? |
FearlessLittleToaster
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2014.09.16 20:09:00 -
[34] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:baltec1 wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:baltec1 wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:
Stacking penalties on logis would make incursions unplayable. There is too much incoming DPS to countenance penalized logis.
The OP's suggestion is interesting, but the chaos of large fleet fights would probably negate its effectiveness. Might be cleaner to just nerf the tank (mainly sig) of the logis, so its easier to alpha them off the field.
How many logi do you use? 7-10, mix of scimis and basis. Some of the sites can have nasty initial DPS. You would also need to think about other people who use logis...not sure if the WH folks use them in C5/C6 to run sites. Stacking penalties would be fine for PvP, when the expectation is that a lot of ships will be blowing up, but would cause a real problem for PvE activites (though I'm not sure exactly how many use multiple logis) where the current reward structure is not set up to account for a bunch of ships blowing up. We are talking about the use of 20-50 logi and Boot fleets with 100-250. Its the high end where the issues are, the lower end of 1-10 are actually able to be countered by E-war and neuts effectively enough to make a difference. So it's alright if we implement stacking penalty starting from let's say over 10 ships to keep small combat as it is not since they already have know and workable counter while trying to put a limit to the broken factor larger fleet bring?
It could work, though it would still offer fewer interesting tactical choices than some kid of rep-reducer or resist reducer. Instead fights over a certain size would still just be DPS races between big ships blasting each other because big scale logisitcs would be much less useful.
If it can be avoided by a more counterable mechanic I don't see any reason to make big fleets not want to use logi; it just takes depth from gameplay. |
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
89
|
Posted - 2014.09.16 21:50:00 -
[35] - Quote
FearlessLittleToaster wrote:
It could work, though it would still offer fewer interesting tactical choices than some kid of rep-reducer or resist reducer. Instead fights over a certain size would still just be DPS races between big ships blasting each other because big scale logisitcs would be much less useful.
If it can be avoided by a more counterable mechanic I don't see any reason to make big fleets not want to use logi; it just takes depth from gameplay.
Another aspect of your original idea you would need to consider is the effect on suicide ganking. Specifically, if this logi-damping module is easy enough to fit and use, the people who gank freighters and try to gank incursions runners would probably fit these to negate the on field logi. I'm definitely in agreement that something needs to be done about the use of logi in big fleet fights, where an OP logi chain can mean that one fleet doesn't lose a single ship and massacres the other side, but I'm not seeing a need to make it a lot easier to suicide gank ships in highsec that have logi support. This might be another argument in favor of the 10+ or 15+ logi stacking penalties idea. My idea of making logi squisher so it's easier to snipe them could also help. |
Stephanie Rosefire
The Nicomachean Ethics
24
|
Posted - 2014.09.16 21:56:00 -
[36] - Quote
im going to like this because the Op's name is fricken hilarious |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
4129
|
Posted - 2014.09.16 22:20:00 -
[37] - Quote
Logistics very much destroy game play.
The only properly balanced logistic ship in this game is the triaged carrier. It gives awesome RR, but it cannot receive it and must commit to the battle for 5 minute intervals. Using RR should be a double edged sword. You save your buddy while putting yourself at risk.
All other logistics ships ultimately make larger fights futile and pointless. If I get together a fleet of 50, and run into a fleet of 100, quite often there is no point in engaging because we will wipe out while inflicting very little economic damage on that fleet of 100. Why fight?
There should be a middle ground, and while EWAR helps this enormously, it isn't enough. I'd support the Remote Logistics disruptor option!
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1540
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 02:18:00 -
[38] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:This is why I prefer the stacking penalty nerf to logi. In small gangs there is no difference but as you say, it is far far easier to get ECM to work in small gangs than in the big fleet fights but in the big fights it means a smaller force could actually kill things as opposed to todays "shoot me again I ain't dead yet" one sided fights vs a blob. So when does DPS get a stacking penalty as well? Otherwise we yet again get the situation where the large blob auto wins. If DPS scales without penalties, logi needs to as well.
If you want to 'solve' one, you need to solve the other, though obviously the scale doesn't have to be exactly the same cap, but restricting logi without restricting DPS doesn't open up game play. On the other hand, if you do stacking penalise DPS somehow, then you get your Wing Commanders & Squad commanders more involved in game play, since they would have to manage individual targeting while the FC calls general targeting patterns to avoid over stacking.
Which also incidentally removes the instant alpha off grid, meaning everyone gets chances to take part even if primaried, but avoids the infinite reps stalemate.
The Disruptor Idea or any of these thoughts would not give smaller groups a chance to fight larger groups, because the larger group uses the same tactic, in possibly greater numbers and clears the small group off the field that much faster as well. This is like the argument that links help a small fleet fight a large fleet because the large fleet obviously won't bring it's own links. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13231
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 08:22:00 -
[39] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote: So when does DPS get a stacking penalty as well?
Happened over a decade ago because of the 8 heatsink geddon abuse, they are also mitigated by resists to a great degree. RR is not mitigated by anything.
Nevyn Auscent wrote: Otherwise we yet again get the situation where the large blob auto wins.
As opposed to now where the large blob auto wins and takes no losses?
Nevyn Auscent wrote: The Disruptor Idea or any of these thoughts would not give smaller groups a chance to fight larger groups, because the larger group uses the same tactic, in possibly greater numbers and clears the small group off the field that much faster as well. This is like the argument that links help a small fleet fight a large fleet because the large fleet obviously won't bring it's own links.
Yet, in the past when logi was not a widely used as today smaller fleets often dunked larger fleets due to using better tactics and better counters. I'll take it being challenging to beat a much larger fleet over it being impossible. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1253
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 12:51:00 -
[40] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
Yet, in the past when logi was not a widely used as today smaller fleets often dunked larger fleets due to using better tactics and better counters. I'll take it being challenging to beat a much larger fleet over it being impossible.
Didn't those fight usually involve smaller group of T2 ships dumbstering T1 fleet because I remember seeing that a few time. Before logi got used as much as now also refer to before tiericide so T2 were at a bigger advantage over T1 than they are now.
I'm not saying skill was not part of the equation but there were also more factor into it than less logi. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13236
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 13:01:00 -
[41] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:baltec1 wrote:
Yet, in the past when logi was not a widely used as today smaller fleets often dunked larger fleets due to using better tactics and better counters. I'll take it being challenging to beat a much larger fleet over it being impossible.
Didn't those fight usually involve smaller group of T2 ships dumbstering T1 fleet because I remember seeing that a few time. Before logi got used as much as now also refer to before tiericide so T2 were at a bigger advantage over T1 than they are now. I'm not saying skill was not part of the equation but there were also more factor into it than less logi.
Today t1 hulls are more than able to compete with t2 so we have a lot more options than back then. So if anything, smaller forces would have an easier time today if we deal with logi making fleets effectively invincible. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Galmas
United System's Commonwealth
176
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 13:06:00 -
[42] - Quote
I just hope that any change to logis is not going to ruin them for small fleets cause in small fleets with a bunch of logis they are not broken at all, can be countered nicely and all that.
That some feel it is broken when you have 100 logis.... oh well. I am happy that they haven't shut down w-space yet. : ) |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13236
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 13:10:00 -
[43] - Quote
Galmas wrote:I just hope that any change to logis is not going to ruin them for small fleets cause in small fleets with a bunch of logis they are not broken at all, can be countered nicely and all that.
That some feel it is broken when you have 100 logis.... oh well. I am happy that they haven't shut down w-space yet. : )
Its just the high end that needs a nerf. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1253
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 13:25:00 -
[44] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:baltec1 wrote:
Yet, in the past when logi was not a widely used as today smaller fleets often dunked larger fleets due to using better tactics and better counters. I'll take it being challenging to beat a much larger fleet over it being impossible.
Didn't those fight usually involve smaller group of T2 ships dumbstering T1 fleet because I remember seeing that a few time. Before logi got used as much as now also refer to before tiericide so T2 were at a bigger advantage over T1 than they are now. I'm not saying skill was not part of the equation but there were also more factor into it than less logi. Today t1 hulls are more than able to compete with t2 so we have a lot more options than back then. So if anything, smaller forces would have an easier time today if we deal with logi making fleets effectively invincible.
I'm pretty sure it was the smaller side using T2 to dumbster the larger one who was fielding T1. T1 being closer to T2 remove that edge the smaller group had by investing in high SP hulls.
As for only the high end needing a nerf, we can't really go another route than stacking penalty after a treshold of reps is attained or we will impact smaller group which already have working counters.
GRRRGOONS your numbers break everything!!! :D |
FearlessLittleToaster
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
9
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 14:39:00 -
[45] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:baltec1 wrote:[quote=Frostys Virpio][quote=baltec1]
Yet, in the past when logi was not a widely used as today smaller fleets often dunked larger fleets due to using better tactics and better counters. I'll take it being challenging to beat a much larger fleet over it being impossible. Didn't those fight usually involve smaller group of T2 ships dumbstering T1 fleet because I remember seeing that a few time. Before logi got used as much as now also refer to before tiericide so T2 were at a bigger advantage over T1 than they are now. I'm not saying skill was not part of the equation but there were also more factor into it than less logi.
One of the big issues here is logi numbers, you are right that they aren't the only factor but they are certainly a big one.
Once upon a time a weaker entity could still cause a larger one to bleed for a timed objective. They might lose, but if they were good they could inflict losses far in excess of what they suffered. Having this happen repeatedly might make a bigger entity reconsider if they really wanted the objective all that badly, but now because of mass logi they don't have to make that choice.
Its basically impossible to break the reps of a major strategic fleet without bring your own strategic fleet. A R32 moon in Querious and Sov in YAO (the capital of the CFC) cost exactly the same for the CFC to defend (leaving out the ozone/fuel costs of moving the fleet) against any enemy but N3. Nothing.
|
Ghaustyl Kathix
Rising Thunder
30
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 16:04:00 -
[46] - Quote
FearlessLittleToaster wrote:- A logistics cruiser can out-repair the damage of three or more battleships Two battleships will out-DPS a Guardian's reps with fleet boosts.
Quote:- In large fights it is difficult to counter your opponents reps without being able to simply destroy their ships through alpha strike. EWar and cap warfare. Jams and and Armageddon's range-enhanced neuts work really well. Your argument in the Mittani articles you linked were "EWar should work against T1 and T2 logistics, but supercarriers are immune to EWar. That's why EWar doesn't work against T1 and T2 logistics." (I'm glad you didn't repeat it here). Also, in large fights, it's very difficult for the opposing logi to keep up, if you're switching targets. You can pretty easily easily pick off a few enemy logi like that.
Quote:Give smaller/lower SP/lower budget entities a way to inflict meaningful attrition on on more powerful opponents rather than just getting obliterated, and thereby encourage more instability in nullsec. You mean like logi accomplishes? Because the T1 logi are lower-SP/lower-budget and are still effective.
Anyway, a bigger reason for the null-sec stagnation is basically the two large power blocs that can move massive fleets around very easily, and people just don't have time right now to slog through massive structure grinds. |
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1254
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 17:17:00 -
[47] - Quote
FearlessLittleToaster wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:baltec1 wrote:[quote=Frostys Virpio][quote=baltec1]
Yet, in the past when logi was not a widely used as today smaller fleets often dunked larger fleets due to using better tactics and better counters. I'll take it being challenging to beat a much larger fleet over it being impossible. Didn't those fight usually involve smaller group of T2 ships dumbstering T1 fleet because I remember seeing that a few time. Before logi got used as much as now also refer to before tiericide so T2 were at a bigger advantage over T1 than they are now. I'm not saying skill was not part of the equation but there were also more factor into it than less logi. One of the big issues here is logi numbers, you are right that they aren't the only factor but they are certainly a big one. Once upon a time a weaker entity could still cause a larger one to bleed for a timed objective. They might lose, but if they were good they could inflict losses far in excess of what they suffered. Having this happen repeatedly might make a bigger entity reconsider if they really wanted the objective all that badly, but now because of mass logi they don't have to make that choice. Its basically impossible to break the reps of a major strategic fleet without bring your own strategic fleet. A R32 moon in Querious and Sov in YAO (the capital of the CFC) cost exactly the same for the CFC to defend (leaving out the ozone/fuel costs of moving the fleet) against any enemy but N3. Nothing.
Let's say we cap the number of ship which can rep a target to 10. You drop a boot fleet on a R32 for the timer. How many battleship do the smaller side has to bring to break through and land it's first kill?
I don't expect an exact number because there is obviously a few variable which could change the number but an informed guess from someone who would know better than me would probably shed some light on what type of numbers would start to feel balanced. |
Dr Cedric
Independent Miners Corporation Care Factor
74
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 20:20:00 -
[48] - Quote
What would happen if instead of a Logi being able to fit 3-5 large sized modules, it could only fit one? Similar to how there are certain modules which a ship can only fit one of, like triage or siege modules. Wouldn't this make it harder for Logi to manage multiple targets? And then, FC target calling/switching becomes that much more important.
So then you quadruple the cap usage / effectiveness of every remote cap/armor/shield module, quadruple the fitting cost (or not?) and your Logi is now dedicated to one target at a time. Could work for capitals too, double the fittings, cap cost and effectiveness, limit to one per ship.
One other option is to undo the "infinite" capacitor that a Logi chain can create. This adds another effective counter (neuts/NOS/cap bombs) to the Logi situation.
The two changes together could add some interesting changes to the current Logi/anti-Logi meta. Cedric
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13237
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 20:50:00 -
[49] - Quote
Ghaustyl Kathix wrote:Two battleships will out-DPS a Guardian's reps with fleet boosts.
A standard logi will out rep 3.5 "baltecs" at their optimal range.
Ghaustyl Kathix wrote: EWar and cap warfare. Jams and and Armageddon's range-enhanced neuts work really well. Your argument in the Mittani articles you linked were "EWar should work against T1 and T2 logistics, but supercarriers are immune to EWar. That's why EWar doesn't work against T1 and T2 logistics." (I'm glad you didn't repeat it here). Also, in large fights, it's very difficult for the opposing logi to keep up, if you're switching targets. You can pretty easily easily pick off a few enemy logi like that.
The only valid E-war in big fleet fights are damps that requires an entire secondary fleet to be dedicated to the task. Outside of the CFC you simply will not find enough pilots to field the ships needed to pull it off. ECM was retired from everyones fleets several years ago as it simply does not work and neuts also do not work in fights of this scale.
Ghaustyl Kathix wrote: You mean like logi accomplishes? Because the T1 logi are lower-SP/lower-budget and are still effective.
Anyway, a bigger reason for the null-sec stagnation is basically the two large power blocs that can move massive fleets around very easily, and people just don't have time right now to slog through massive structure grinds.
It doesn't matter how we deploy our fleets, the big issues is that nobody can kill them when they get there. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
819
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 21:37:00 -
[50] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:also do not work in fights of this scale.
Well there is your problem right there not logistics at all :S
|
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13237
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 21:55:00 -
[51] - Quote
Rroff wrote:baltec1 wrote:also do not work in fights of this scale. Well there is your problem right there not logistics at all :S
Its logistics that makes us unkillable so yea, its logi. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
FearlessLittleToaster
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
9
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 22:17:00 -
[52] - Quote
This board hates quotes for some reason so I bolded each point to respond instead.
A logistics cruiser can out-repair the damage of three or more battleships[/quote]Two battleships will out-DPS a Guardian's reps with fleet boosts.
Could you show your work for this? I ran the numbers using the CFC standard fleet battleships and a bonused guardian for this and it came out to more than three even before transversal and optimal range were factored in. If you don't work resists into the equasion what you say is correct though.
Or alternately are you using some kind of super short range high DPS fit? In theory those work but in practice that massive damage rarely gets applied because its so hard to get that close.
EWar and cap warfare. Jams and and Armageddon's range-enhanced neuts work really well. In large fights it is difficult to counter your opponents reps without being able to simply destroy their ships through alpha strike.
In large scale fights at least these don't work so hot. With the exception of damps, sometimes, usually when the fleet is already way over the numbers needed to alpha targets, simply piling on more DPS to blap enemies and render their reps irrelevant is a better use for those pilots.
Those Geddon neuts still only work out to the optimal range of a Baltec Megan so they have about the survivability of a gerbil in a blender. If geddons and falcons are such an effective counter why have the two massive coalitions with dedicated FC theorycraft teams, thousands of pilots, and massive war budgets not been bringing wings of these ships to major fights?
Your argument in the Mittani articles you linked were "EWar should work against T1 and T2 logistics, but supercarriers are immune to EWar. That's why EWar doesn't work against T1 and T2 logistics." (I'm glad you didn't repeat it here). Also, in large fights, it's very difficult for the opposing logi to keep up, if you're switching targets. You can pretty easily easily pick off a few enemy logi like that.
I'm not sure what you think I'm arguing. Ewar does work against T1 and T2 logistics, just not well enough to prevent the situation I am describing where it often makes it pointless to undock against a bigger opponent. Supercarriers and the wrecking ball are a whole different animal.
As for cycling targets, sure it works. Sometimes. Its what happens when you need to break hostile rep because its the only way to do it most of the time, because there is nothing else that messes with logi very effectively. And the bigger the fights the more this applies.
Give smaller/lower SP/lower budget entities a way to inflict meaningful attrition on on more powerful opponents rather than just getting obliterated, and thereby encourage more instability in nullsec. You mean like logi accomplishes? Because the T1 logi are lower-SP/lower-budget and are still effective.
Sure smaller entities can use T1 logistics but all that does is slightly extend the time it takes a bigger foe to obliterate them. The issue here is that the smaller guy can't scratch the bigger one. If the little guy brings all DPS, kills nothing, and gets wiped out in two minutes or brings some logi of his own, kills nothing, and gets wiped out in five minutes the end result is identical. Either way it would be dumb for him to even undock because he doesn't even have a ghost of a chance of winning.
Anyway, a bigger reason for the null-sec stagnation is basically the two large power blocs that can move massive fleets around very easily, and people just don't have time right now to slog through massive structure grinds.
Is the problem that they can move easily or that they are unbeatable anywhere they go? I agree if you mean the giant blobs of supers that define the game but subcap mobility would not be such an issue if they could be forced to take losses and bring in reinforcements. |
FearlessLittleToaster
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
9
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 22:28:00 -
[53] - Quote
Rroff wrote:baltec1 wrote:also do not work in fights of this scale. Well there is your problem right there not logistics at all :S
Keep in mind that everything I am arguing here comes down to a question of attrition or the lack thereof. Right now if you get enough high EHP ships with enough rep you enter a sort of fleet god-mode and take no damage unless the enemy brings some MASSIVE numbers in response.
The effects of this are subtle but extremely far reaching as people usually won't undock to die in a fire if they aren't going to take anything with them.
So really the chain of events comes down to this:
1. People hate losing stuff but like killing the enemy.
2. If you get more people, jack up the EHP on your ships, and field lots of logi, you can avoid losing stuff.
3. To kill stuff against an enemy who has done step two already you need lots of people so you can do step two even more.
4. Repeat steps two and three until you hit numbers that can just alpha everything, ever. Everyone is forced into larger and larger groups just to be competitive. Anyone who does not adapt becomes irrelevant to the timed fight/owning stuff game.
Sure people can be great lowsec pirates without numbers but the moment they dip their toes into any moon or sov gameply a bigger group is just going to drive 200 battleships and 50 logistics over them while laughing. And that's not even bringing supers into it. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1544
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 22:28:00 -
[54] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
Happened over a decade ago because of the 8 heatsink geddon abuse, they are also mitigated by resists to a great degree. RR is not mitigated by anything.
Uh, that is not a DPS stacking penalty. That is a fitting stacking penalty. If 2 Geddons shoot at me, I don't take less damage from the second Geddon, DPS scales linearly for the number of ships you have shooting. If Logi does not scale linearly, the blob simply overwhelms anyone smaller than them anyway, and they won't take losses like they do currently anyway, because of scale of DPS vs Logi will kill the small guy that much faster.
If you want to limit effective number of logi that can rep one pilot, you also have to limit effective number of DPS that can hurt one pilot to encourage wings & squads splitting targets rather than entire fleets still primarying a single target and that target dying in a fire even faster than it does currently.
The two are intrinsically linked. |
FearlessLittleToaster
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
9
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 22:30:00 -
[55] - Quote
Dr Cedric wrote:What would happen if instead of a Logi being able to fit 3-5 large sized modules, it could only fit one? Similar to how there are certain modules which a ship can only fit one of, like triage or siege modules. Wouldn't this make it harder for Logi to manage multiple targets? And then, FC target calling/switching becomes that much more important.
So then you quadruple the cap usage / effectiveness of every remote cap/armor/shield module, quadruple the fitting cost (or not?) and your Logi is now dedicated to one target at a time. Could work for capitals too, double the fittings, cap cost and effectiveness, limit to one per ship.
One other option is to undo the "infinite" capacitor that a Logi chain can create. This adds another effective counter (neuts/NOS/cap bombs) to the Logi situation.
The two changes together could add some interesting changes to the current Logi/anti-Logi meta.
Its an interesting idea but it would probably just make them pointless. Right now Logis don't split reps most of the time, they just have multiple targets locked and switch between them as damage comes in. Having a primary target means that for the most part only one guy is taking fire so only one guy needs reps.
As for neuts and nos, they would need to work from farther away to be viable more than anything. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13237
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 23:18:00 -
[56] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:baltec1 wrote:
Happened over a decade ago because of the 8 heatsink geddon abuse, they are also mitigated by resists to a great degree. RR is not mitigated by anything.
Uh, that is not a DPS stacking penalty. That is a fitting stacking penalty. If 2 Geddons shoot at me, I don't take less damage from the second Geddon, DPS scales linearly for the number of ships you have shooting. If Logi does not scale linearly, the blob simply overwhelms anyone smaller than them anyway, and they won't take losses like they do currently anyway, because of scale of DPS vs Logi will kill the small guy that much faster. If you want to limit effective number of logi that can rep one pilot, you also have to limit effective number of DPS that can hurt one pilot to encourage wings & squads splitting targets rather than entire fleets still primarying a single target and that target dying in a fire even faster than it does currently. The two are intrinsically linked.
They are not.
You cannot alpha something faster than we do now, the idea that taking away logi will mean we kill smaller fleets even faster is a myth. The only thing that would change is that the smaller fleet can kill us in return rather than just getting torn apart for no gain. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
819
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 01:11:00 -
[57] - Quote
FearlessLittleToaster wrote: Keep in mind that everything I am arguing here comes down to a question of attrition or the lack thereof. Right now if you get enough high EHP ships with enough rep you enter a sort of fleet god-mode and take no damage unless the enemy brings some MASSIVE numbers in response.
While my post was somewhat a mix of a bit of a dig and tongue in cheek - in smaller engagements in wormholes and lowsec often logistics are much more counterable and not unbalanced at all. I know its a bit of a different story in bigger engagements.
FearlessLittleToaster wrote: As for neuts and nos, they would need to work from farther away to be viable more than anything.
There is a way to undo guardian chains, etc. from ~100km (not using ecm or damps) which would be quite feasible for larger entities to do :D |
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1258
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 12:30:00 -
[58] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
A standard logi will out rep 3.5 "baltecs" at their optimal range.
So about 7 for a carrier? |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |