Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 76 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6602
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 06:11:03 -
[1201] - Quote
Oh I was just commenting on the fact when the sov structures got their ehp nerfed, towers are now the big hard targets (especially Large ones with tons of hardeners, etc)
It is rather appropriate since they are in many cases the moneymakers (ie: money moons). Also, you can siphon them of course
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Dras Malar
Cloak and Daggers Fidelas Constans
7
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 06:18:38 -
[1202] - Quote
This update does the opposite of what nullsec needs.
Having an arbitrarily defined alliance-wide primetime does not incentivize diversity.
The real problem is that there's no longer any risk-reward calculation in this system. By turning sov into a game of laser tag there's no use at all for dreadnoughts anymore. There's no reason to risk anything valuable on the field when you're only trying to aim a laser at a thing until the other guy leaves grid; you can do that with moderately priced cruisers. The likely scenario is that we'll just be able to drag out fights past the end of the window and force a stalemate at long range without any meaningful fights happening.
It's like CCP wants nullsec to just not exist. They seem to hate everything about large alliances and coalitions even though that's what makes this game unique, so they're trying to force our gameplay to change in a way they like better without understanding what we already have or what the changes would actually mean for us. |
knobber Jobbler
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
526
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 06:20:01 -
[1203] - Quote
Acuma wrote:knobber Jobbler wrote:Acuma wrote:Seems mostly that only the goonies are afraid of trollceptors.......even with their "superior numbers" and their "we'll burn null sec to the ground if this is allowed." Wonder why that is? Too much space? To many renters? Afraid of spread out fights instead of blobs? All it takes is a tanked out maller alt sitting on a structure......ya'll don't have alts? Do you like the idea of the 1000 Goon sov laser raid on all and sundry? Because it will happen and it will be funny. Also, stop being bitter because we're right, just like the tech nerf, just like the sentry nerf. I cherish the idea. You waste a ton of time and are countered by a single person with a few minutes? How long can you keep that up? That's just to RF a structure.....you actually have to come back LOL.
You either don't get it or you're trying to be funny and score internet points rather unsuccessfully. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6602
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 06:25:24 -
[1204] - Quote
Dras Malar wrote:It's like CCP wants nullsec to just not exist. They seem to hate everything about large alliances and coalitions even though that's what makes this game unique, so they're trying to force our gameplay to change in a way they like better without understanding what we already have or what the changes would actually mean for us. Between our 0.0 dreams and their 0.0 vision, it's obvious who can force the other to submit.
We're not going to win here, it's time to just give in and check out. Maybe fweddit will lead a new coalition to take over factional sovereignty and we can be their pets
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Sigras
Conglomo
1014
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 06:39:01 -
[1205] - Quote
Sibyyl wrote:Promiscuous Female wrote:interceptor sees combat probes, then disengages No. CCP Fozzie wrote:You can't cancel an entosis link until the end of the cycle. Source. Are you saying you can't kill an interceptor that can't warp out? Can we all drop this tired argument? that doesnt mean you cant fly out of range... My Malediction does 3.5 km/s combat fit without links implants or heat.
In the 15 seconds from the time i see you on d-scan to the time you can lock me I can be out of your range.
IMHO skirmish ships do not constitute "effective military control" of a grid if they constantly have to run away... For that reason I feel that the entosis link should disable propulsion mods the same way the HIC bubble does. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6602
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 06:47:10 -
[1206] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Sibyyl wrote:Promiscuous Female wrote:interceptor sees combat probes, then disengages No. CCP Fozzie wrote:You can't cancel an entosis link until the end of the cycle. Source. Are you saying you can't kill an interceptor that can't warp out? Can we all drop this tired argument? that doesnt mean you cant fly out of range... My Malediction does 3.5 km/s combat fit without links implants or heat. In the 15 seconds from the time i see you on d-scan to the time you can lock me I can be out of your range. IMHO skirmish ships do not constitute "effective military control" of a grid if they constantly have to run away... For that reason I feel that the entosis link should disable propulsion mods the same way the HIC bubble does. Who knows... there's been all kinds of ridiculous arguments about what "effective military control" is even supposed to mean.
It basically means "whatever satisfies ccp's 0.0 vision of a fight" even if apparently it's 1 interceptor lasering a structure, or 1 ship chasing a 1 ceptor, or perhaps 1 ship being unable to chase 1 ceptor (does it have a laser as well?)
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
317
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 06:48:39 -
[1207] - Quote
Sigras wrote:For that reason I feel that the entosis link should disable propulsion mods the same way the HIC bubble does.
Would they also lose 80% of their mass like a HIC bubble, so a friend in another interceptor can do a high-speed bump and send it flying? |
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
23783
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 07:00:46 -
[1208] - Quote
Sigras wrote:that doesnt mean you cant fly out of range... My Malediction does 3.5 km/s combat fit without links implants or heat.
In the 15 seconds from the time i see you on d-scan to the time you can lock me I can be out of your range.
IMHO skirmish ships do not constitute "effective military control" of a grid if they constantly have to run away... For that reason I feel that the entosis link should disable propulsion mods the same way the HIC bubble does.
I made my edit 2 hours before you hit post 2 pages later (my edit came before the post right under mine). You really should check it before responding.
Sibyyl at 2015.03.10 04:40 wrote: Edit: reading comprehension fail on my part.
gf baltec
Friendship is the best ship
Sabriz for CSM go go go
|
Carniflex
StarHunt Mordus Angels
323
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 07:47:21 -
[1209] - Quote
Ranafal wrote:OMFG, 40 pages and still no solution for trollceptor?
1) Just allow to anchor one (only one) sentry gun near every object which can be "reinforced".
2) This sentry gun should be extremely simple, and very similar to gate ones - it just applies 100% of its damage at distance up to 250km and ignores completely target's speed, transversal, signature etc.
3) This sentry gun should do LOW dps, probably about 100-200 dps and have about 1000 EHP, so 1-2 ceptors and 1-2 logsits should be able to kill it easily in several minutes (or just ignore its dps). Of course it can be killed without any reinforce - just as a usual ship in space.
4) But it will still not allow a _single_ trollceptor to get his entosis link start capture because 2 minutes mean that trollceptor will get several thousands of damage before capture will start - and this damage and dps will not depend on trollceptor speed, signature, distance etc.
5) You can also add some reasonable conditions for anchoring this sentry gun - say, Anchoring 5lvl, and strategic index >=2. You can also require to own TCU in the given system to be able to anchor such sentry near every reinforceabe object. This will make sense in having TCU, strategic index, skills.
There has been posted quite a number of ways to counter a trollceptor over these 40 pages actually.
Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK!
GOT the bastard.
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
92
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 08:03:37 -
[1210] - Quote
I guess I will post it again and maybe it won't be drowned out in tears and rage:
In regards to the Entosis Link using fuel:
I think this is a good idea. Using one Strontium every time you turn the module on would do a few good things.
- As Mike pointed out earlier along with the original people I'm sure; it would mean there is some form of logistics taking place to contest these systems. Especially when it comes to the outer lying systems.
- Smaller ships, such as interceptors *hint hint*, will have to be somewhat selective on what systems to contest and how many times they are willing to try to contest it. If they find themselves dealing with actual defenders active in the system and negating their Entosis Link with their own, they will have wasted time and will need to move on.
- Even if super zippy, untouchable (allegedly... ) ships do their thing, they can only do it so long before they run out of fuel.
- The defenders have the luxary of nearby stations and POS's that are common for alliances that own sov to resupply their Entosis Links.
- Overdrive Injectors, which is used to gain fast speed, have a penalty to cargo space. Food for thought.
- If players do not like the idea of having to resupply so often with small fast ships, they can use larger ships with bigger cargo bays. These larger ships tend to be much, much slower than tiny fast frigates. Getting the picture now?
What the over all effect is it still means abandoned systems can still be captured just as easy as this new sov system wants, without having to subject itself to the mythical Trollceptors that terrorize the dreams of certain groups.
What are your thoughts? |
|
Aiyshimin
Fistful of Finns Triumvirate.
449
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 08:08:43 -
[1211] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:I guess I will post it again and maybe it won't be drowned out in tears and rage: In regards to the Entosis Link using fuel:I think this is a good idea. Using one Strontium every time you turn the module on would do a few good things.
- As Mike pointed out earlier along with the original people I'm sure; it would mean there is some form of logistics taking place to contest these systems. Especially when it comes to the outer lying systems.
- Smaller ships, such as interceptors *hint hint*, will have to be somewhat selective on what systems to contest and how many times they are willing to try to contest it. If they find themselves dealing with actual defenders active in the system and negating their Entosis Link with their own, they will have wasted time and will need to move on.
- Even if super zippy, untouchable (allegedly... ) ships do their thing, they can only do it so long before they run out of fuel.
- The defenders have the luxary of nearby stations and POS's that are common for alliances that own sov to resupply their Entosis Links.
- Overdrive Injectors, which is used to gain fast speed, have a penalty to cargo space. Food for thought.
- If players do not like the idea of having to resupply so often with small fast ships, they can use larger ships with bigger cargo bays. These larger ships tend to be much, much slower than tiny fast frigates. Getting the picture now?
What the over all effect is it still means abandoned systems can still be captured just as easy as this new sov system wants, without having to subject itself to the mythical Trollceptors that terrorize the dreams of certain groups. What are your thoughts?
Entosis fuel is a good idea. +1 |
Wanda Fayne
Gurlz with Gunz
55
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 08:12:10 -
[1212] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:I guess I will post it again and maybe it won't be drowned out in tears and rage: In regards to the Entosis Link using fuel:I think this is a good idea. Using one Strontium every time you turn the module on would do a few good things.
- As Mike pointed out earlier along with the original people I'm sure; it would mean there is some form of logistics taking place to contest these systems. Especially when it comes to the outer lying systems.
- Smaller ships, such as interceptors *hint hint*, will have to be somewhat selective on what systems to contest and how many times they are willing to try to contest it. If they find themselves dealing with actual defenders active in the system and negating their Entosis Link with their own, they will have wasted time and will need to move on.
- Even if super zippy, untouchable (allegedly... ) ships do their thing, they can only do it so long before they run out of fuel.
- The defenders have the luxary of nearby stations and POS's that are common for alliances that own sov to resupply their Entosis Links.
- Overdrive Injectors, which is used to gain fast speed, have a penalty to cargo space. Food for thought.
- If players do not like the idea of having to resupply so often with small fast ships, they can use larger ships with bigger cargo bays. These larger ships tend to be much, much slower than tiny fast frigates. Getting the picture now?
What the over all effect is it still means abandoned systems can still be captured just as easy as this new sov system wants, without having to subject itself to the mythical Trollceptors that terrorize the dreams of certain groups. What are your thoughts?
Agreed +1 |
Xavier Azabu
Fluid Motion Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
15
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 08:18:16 -
[1213] - Quote
I think that this is all getting overly complicated.
The Entosis Links system doesn't seem like a bad mechanic. But I'd simply restrict them to Cruiser-sized hulls and above. Adding more resources etc., doesn't sound like a fix.
I love the idea of Command Nodes and spreading out the fight. But that is where the main issue with the interceptors is.
The main reason to me is the warp speed differences between hulls. Simply put, Frigates and Destroyers are too fast and will be used too often to capture the command nodes. Alliances will use smaller hulls to more quickly take over the Command Nodes. Larger hulls will become more obsolete for sov-fights and will have very little use. Alliances with more members will have a huge advantage at quickly capturing command nodes without as much thought being put into fleet composition and tactics.
Create a hull size requirement for Entosis Links and suddenly your fleet cannot instawarp past gatecamps or bubbled gates. You have to either fight through or bridge past somehow. There would be more reason to use titan-bridges or jump bridges to move defensive fleets into position over nodes.
Yes, interceptors could be killed on grid with all sorts of light missile / fast tracking ships like Talwars, Muninns or even Algoses but you don't want the whole meta to be revolved around countering travel 'ceptors with Entosis Links. |
Sigras
Conglomo
1014
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 08:22:22 -
[1214] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Sigras wrote:IMHO skirmish ships do not constitute "effective military control" of a grid if they constantly have to run away... For that reason I feel that the entosis link should disable propulsion mods the same way the HIC bubble does. Would they also lose 80% of their mass like a HIC bubble, so a friend in another interceptor can do a high-speed bump and send it flying? Im not really sure why the HIC bubble reduces mass like that, but that isnt what I meant...
No prop mod, no remote assistance |
Dave Stark
7429
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 08:32:54 -
[1215] - Quote
ok.
just ******* scrap the entowhatsit link entirely.
if you are on grid, within x distance of the capture node and uncloaked - the node behaves like you have a link active on it under the proposed system.
last man standing on the grid gets to start capturing the node. this reflects the "who has control of the grid" malarky. not actually having to fit anything extra to ships means there's literally 0 affect on what ships to pick or how to fit them other than whatever the fotm is. it's easy to understand - if you (or your alliance) are the last and only men standing on the grid you start capturing the node. simplicity in itself.
essentially, it's just king of the hill but i don't really see a problem with that. |
Jori McKie
TURN LEFT The Camel Empire
218
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 08:40:42 -
[1216] - Quote
Many have already mentioned it, there should be a balance in effort for both Attacker/Defender.
Suggestion: The entosis link needs cap booster charges to run. (like the ASB)
You have several options to balance this. - Activating the Entosis link consumes 1x charge and runs forever until it is deactivated or interrupted. Or make it time based, e.g. 1x charge is good for x minutes. - The charge size matters, e.g. only 400 cap booster can be used for an Entosis link. That means Ceptors have only x attempts to use an Entosis link before they have to get more cap booster from a cloak hauler/whatever.
You can't run amok with like 500 Ceptors for an unlimited amount time but you could if you put a lot of effort into it. Roaming fleets in bigger ships won't have a problem and undefended systems will still be rather easy to conquer. On the other hand defender will have an easier time to deflect any not so serious attempts on their sov.
"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."
--áAbrazzar
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
913
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 08:44:02 -
[1217] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:I guess I will post it again and maybe it won't be drowned out in tears and rage: In regards to the Entosis Link using fuel:I think this is a good idea. Using one Strontium every time you turn the module on would do a few good things.
- As Mike pointed out earlier along with the original people I'm sure; it would mean there is some form of logistics taking place to contest these systems. Especially when it comes to the outer lying systems.
- Smaller ships, such as interceptors *hint hint*, will have to be somewhat selective on what systems to contest and how many times they are willing to try to contest it. If they find themselves dealing with actual defenders active in the system and negating their Entosis Link with their own, they will have wasted time and will need to move on.
- Even if super zippy, untouchable (allegedly... ) ships do their thing, they can only do it so long before they run out of fuel.
- The defenders have the luxary of nearby stations and POS's that are common for alliances that own sov to resupply their Entosis Links.
- Overdrive Injectors, which is used to gain fast speed, have a penalty to cargo space. Food for thought.
- If players do not like the idea of having to resupply so often with small fast ships, they can use larger ships with bigger cargo bays. These larger ships tend to be much, much slower than tiny fast frigates. Getting the picture now?
What the over all effect is it still means abandoned systems can still be captured just as easy as this new sov system wants, without having to subject itself to the mythical Trollceptors that terrorize the dreams of certain groups. What are your thoughts? Entosis fuel is a good idea. +1
No, but that is because of the 4 hour stalemate which can occur. Nothing will have fuel for that, thus making it an n+1 proposition again.
UNLESS it is fuel to activate ONLY and it doesnt burn for the duration of the laser. |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
96
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 08:50:28 -
[1218] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Aiyshimin wrote:Entosis fuel is a good idea. +1 No, but that is because of the 4 hour stalemate which can occur. Nothing will have fuel for that, thus making it an n+1 proposition again. UNLESS it is fuel to activate ONLY and it doesnt burn for the duration of the laser. It could be just one unit to activate it and then it lasts until you no longer are on grid/dead/win/lose lock. Then it would last the whole four hours.
Then again, maybe it shouldn't last the whole four hours and clearing the grid of hostiles before you go activating the Entosis Link is the way to go. Which I think is the better solution. |
Sigras
Conglomo
1014
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 08:50:32 -
[1219] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:ok.
just ******* scrap the entowhatsit link entirely.
if you are on grid, within x distance of the capture node and uncloaked - the node behaves like you have a link active on it under the proposed system.
last man standing on the grid gets to start capturing the node. this reflects the "who has control of the grid" malarky. not actually having to fit anything extra to ships means there's literally 0 affect on what ships to pick or how to fit them other than whatever the fotm is. it's easy to understand - if you (or your alliance) are the last and only men standing on the grid you start capturing the node. simplicity in itself.
essentially, it's just king of the hill but i don't really see a problem with that. yeah because THAT will fix the troll interceptor problem...
I like the idea because it also provides so many more ways that CCP can balance and control the situation as well... /sarcasm |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
96
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 08:55:08 -
[1220] - Quote
Jori McKie wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:I guess I will post it again and maybe it won't be drowned out in tears and rage: In regards to the Entosis Link using fuel:I think this is a good idea. Using one Strontium every time you turn the module on would do a few good things.
- As Mike pointed out earlier along with the original people I'm sure; it would mean there is some form of logistics taking place to contest these systems. Especially when it comes to the outer lying systems.
- Smaller ships, such as interceptors *hint hint*, will have to be somewhat selective on what systems to contest and how many times they are willing to try to contest it. If they find themselves dealing with actual defenders active in the system and negating their Entosis Link with their own, they will have wasted time and will need to move on.
- Even if super zippy, untouchable (allegedly... ) ships do their thing, they can only do it so long before they run out of fuel.
- The defenders have the luxary of nearby stations and POS's that are common for alliances that own sov to resupply their Entosis Links.
- Overdrive Injectors, which is used to gain fast speed, have a penalty to cargo space. Food for thought.
- If players do not like the idea of having to resupply so often with small fast ships, they can use larger ships with bigger cargo bays. These larger ships tend to be much, much slower than tiny fast frigates. Getting the picture now?
What the over all effect is it still means abandoned systems can still be captured just as easy as this new sov system wants, without having to subject itself to the mythical Trollceptors that terrorize the dreams of certain groups. What are your thoughts? Damn had the same idea just with cap booster. In the end it doesn't matter what kind of fuel is used as the mechanics behind it are important. And it makes it easy to balance without artificial restrictions to ships or speed. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5568781#post5568781 I saw that and smiled.
I hate to sound bias, but I think I like strontium better. Less likely to get mixed up with cap boosters needed for PvP related modules like injectors and ASB. And with boosters we would have to decide what size booster and consider navy versions...
Either way, a fuel source feels like it is the right way to go and addresses some of the issues people are having. I do need to bail out of this thread for the night, but feel free to carry the 'it needs a fuel source to work' torch while I am gone. |
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
914
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 08:59:24 -
[1221] - Quote
Sigras wrote:IMHO skirmish ships do not constitute "effective military control" of a grid if they constantly have to run away... For that reason I feel that the entosis link should disable propulsion mods the same way the HIC bubble does.
People keep saying this....but if the ship flies off, it loses control of the grid and the structure is not RF'd.
If they are allowed to remain uncontested, then yes....even a noob ship is controlling the grid by virtue of nothing else being there.
Intys are countered and sov defended by a single ship on grid. Apparently though, this is :effort: that is somehow unfair and everyone should neatly line up to die in camp duck shoots instead.
Other common facets are "we'll send 500 people in!!!" well....those 500 would rip stuff up today, too. Those 500 would rip stuff up tomorrow even if inties COULDN'T fit the link.
The whole thing is hyperbolic melodrama that will settle down within a few weeks of the changes going live. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
914
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 09:01:14 -
[1222] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:afkalt wrote:Aiyshimin wrote:Entosis fuel is a good idea. +1 No, but that is because of the 4 hour stalemate which can occur. Nothing will have fuel for that, thus making it an n+1 proposition again. UNLESS it is fuel to activate ONLY and it doesnt burn for the duration of the laser. It could be just one unit to activate it and then it lasts until you no longer are on grid/dead/win/lose lock. Then it would last the whole four hours. Then again, maybe it shouldn't last the whole four hours and clearing the grid of hostiles before you go activating the Entosis Link is the way to go. Which I think is the better solution.
It kinda has to, otherwise the defenders can keep rolling the timer back if the attackers are under fuel pressure. Fuel badger DoctrineGäó shouldn't be a thing (for this). |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
97
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 09:03:36 -
[1223] - Quote
afkalt wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:afkalt wrote:Aiyshimin wrote:Entosis fuel is a good idea. +1 No, but that is because of the 4 hour stalemate which can occur. Nothing will have fuel for that, thus making it an n+1 proposition again. UNLESS it is fuel to activate ONLY and it doesnt burn for the duration of the laser. It could be just one unit to activate it and then it lasts until you no longer are on grid/dead/win/lose lock. Then it would last the whole four hours. Then again, maybe it shouldn't last the whole four hours and clearing the grid of hostiles before you go activating the Entosis Link is the way to go. Which I think is the better solution. It kinda has to, otherwise the defenders can keep rolling the timer back if the attackers are under fuel pressure. Fuel badger DoctrineGäó shouldn't be a thing (for this). Battle Entosis Fuel Bader is a GO! |
Jori McKie
TURN LEFT The Camel Empire
218
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 09:05:52 -
[1224] - Quote
afkalt wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:afkalt wrote:Aiyshimin wrote:Entosis fuel is a good idea. +1 No, but that is because of the 4 hour stalemate which can occur. Nothing will have fuel for that, thus making it an n+1 proposition again. UNLESS it is fuel to activate ONLY and it doesnt burn for the duration of the laser. It could be just one unit to activate it and then it lasts until you no longer are on grid/dead/win/lose lock. Then it would last the whole four hours. Then again, maybe it shouldn't last the whole four hours and clearing the grid of hostiles before you go activating the Entosis Link is the way to go. Which I think is the better solution. It kinda has to, otherwise the defenders can keep rolling the timer back if the attackers are under fuel pressure. Fuel badger DoctrineGäó shouldn't be a thing (for this).
That is the idea, fuel pressure. You can still troll a little in a Ceptor as long as no one shows up. Roaming fleets and serious attempts on sov won't have a problem with fuel.
"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."
--áAbrazzar
|
Dave Stark
7429
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 09:06:00 -
[1225] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Dave Stark wrote:ok.
just ******* scrap the entowhatsit link entirely.
if you are on grid, within x distance of the capture node and uncloaked - the node behaves like you have a link active on it under the proposed system.
last man standing on the grid gets to start capturing the node. this reflects the "who has control of the grid" malarky. not actually having to fit anything extra to ships means there's literally 0 affect on what ships to pick or how to fit them other than whatever the fotm is. it's easy to understand - if you (or your alliance) are the last and only men standing on the grid you start capturing the node. simplicity in itself.
essentially, it's just king of the hill but i don't really see a problem with that. yeah because THAT will fix the troll interceptor problem... I like the idea because it also provides so many more ways that CCP can balance and control the situation as well... /sarcasm
the problem with trollceptors is that it's just going to be ******* broing - pretending it's a game balance issue is laughable at best. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
12101
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 09:10:00 -
[1226] - Quote
afkalt wrote: Intys are countered and sov defended by a single ship on grid. Apparently though, this is :effort: that is somehow unfair and everyone should neatly line up to die in camp duck shoots instead.
Your dogged insistence on misconstruing other people's arguments aside, you're still totally wrong.
People feel like it's unacceptable that a single "can't touch me!" interceptor ship can force them to have to remain on grid with every structure in their alliance four hours per day.
That's not a fun mechanic, it's not using the sov you live in, and it's not promoting conflict.
It's just babysitting.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Aiyshimin
Fistful of Finns Triumvirate.
450
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 09:15:33 -
[1227] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Aiyshimin wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:I guess I will post it again and maybe it won't be drowned out in tears and rage: In regards to the Entosis Link using fuel:I think this is a good idea. Using one Strontium every time you turn the module on would do a few good things.
- As Mike pointed out earlier along with the original people I'm sure; it would mean there is some form of logistics taking place to contest these systems. Especially when it comes to the outer lying systems.
- Smaller ships, such as interceptors *hint hint*, will have to be somewhat selective on what systems to contest and how many times they are willing to try to contest it. If they find themselves dealing with actual defenders active in the system and negating their Entosis Link with their own, they will have wasted time and will need to move on.
- Even if super zippy, untouchable (allegedly... ) ships do their thing, they can only do it so long before they run out of fuel.
- The defenders have the luxary of nearby stations and POS's that are common for alliances that own sov to resupply their Entosis Links.
- Overdrive Injectors, which is used to gain fast speed, have a penalty to cargo space. Food for thought.
- If players do not like the idea of having to resupply so often with small fast ships, they can use larger ships with bigger cargo bays. These larger ships tend to be much, much slower than tiny fast frigates. Getting the picture now?
What the over all effect is it still means abandoned systems can still be captured just as easy as this new sov system wants, without having to subject itself to the mythical Trollceptors that terrorize the dreams of certain groups. What are your thoughts? Entosis fuel is a good idea. +1 No, but that is because of the 4 hour stalemate which can occur. Nothing will have fuel for that, thus making it an n+1 proposition again. UNLESS it is fuel to activate ONLY and it doesnt burn for the duration of the laser.
Wait what, a solo ship will keep the sov beam running for 4 hours in what scenario?
I don't see fleetmates bringing you fuel as any kind of n+1 issue, as much as I love solo PVP, sov warfare is not the arena for that.
|
Chanina
ASGARD HEAVY INDUSTRIES Kadeshians
52
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 09:22:01 -
[1228] - Quote
Adding some fuel requirement like strontium sounds like a good plan. You have to decide where to use it on and you need a place to replenish.
Why not putting the entosi link into the gang link category? It would boost the hulls of BC and there is a good variation of them to fit in almost any doctrine. For ishtars, take some myrmidons or prophecies. It would also counter a fast moving frigate gang that's just generating as much timers as possible due to high mobility. I think to limit entosi links to bigger hulls wouldn't hurt the meta game, as claiming a system should need some decent commitment. And the frigate gang of the attacker would still be viable of driving of the lonely defender.
And if your doctrine needs to be faster than battle cruiser there is still the option of gang link T3 cruisers. It even would be a first incentive to place boosting ships on grid.
An alternative would be throwing a simple speed restriction on it, you can't light a cyno if moving too fast, so applying this to the link might help too, but how often would it check that speed? every cycle might be too slow. Artificially slowing the ship down could help.
Easy way: bigger ship restriction lead to higher commitment. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
914
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 09:22:44 -
[1229] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:afkalt wrote:Aiyshimin wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:I guess I will post it again and maybe it won't be drowned out in tears and rage: In regards to the Entosis Link using fuel:I think this is a good idea. Using one Strontium every time you turn the module on would do a few good things.
- As Mike pointed out earlier along with the original people I'm sure; it would mean there is some form of logistics taking place to contest these systems. Especially when it comes to the outer lying systems.
- Smaller ships, such as interceptors *hint hint*, will have to be somewhat selective on what systems to contest and how many times they are willing to try to contest it. If they find themselves dealing with actual defenders active in the system and negating their Entosis Link with their own, they will have wasted time and will need to move on.
- Even if super zippy, untouchable (allegedly... ) ships do their thing, they can only do it so long before they run out of fuel.
- The defenders have the luxary of nearby stations and POS's that are common for alliances that own sov to resupply their Entosis Links.
- Overdrive Injectors, which is used to gain fast speed, have a penalty to cargo space. Food for thought.
- If players do not like the idea of having to resupply so often with small fast ships, they can use larger ships with bigger cargo bays. These larger ships tend to be much, much slower than tiny fast frigates. Getting the picture now?
What the over all effect is it still means abandoned systems can still be captured just as easy as this new sov system wants, without having to subject itself to the mythical Trollceptors that terrorize the dreams of certain groups. What are your thoughts? Entosis fuel is a good idea. +1 No, but that is because of the 4 hour stalemate which can occur. Nothing will have fuel for that, thus making it an n+1 proposition again. UNLESS it is fuel to activate ONLY and it doesnt burn for the duration of the laser. Wait what, a solo ship will keep the sov beam running for 4 hours in what scenario? I don't see fleetmates bringing you fuel as any kind of n+1 issue, as much as I love solo PVP, sov warfare is not the arena for that.
In an actual contested scenario - links from each side force a tie - then it comes down to who brought most fuel. I don't think that is the way to go.
So you have two fleets duking it out with links rolling - this can go on some hours at times. It could easily come down to who has more fuel, which will probably be the defenders.
An ACTIVATION only cost would mitigate this, just don't think it should burn fuel from initiation UNTIL module deactiviation given the indeterminate time it might be active for. |
Inquisitor Kitchner
The Executives Executive Outcomes
1111
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 09:24:57 -
[1230] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hello folks. I'm making this discussion thread to give you all a closer look at our design philosophy for the Entosis Link mechanics and the way we plan to balance the module.
We've been seeing quite a bit of concern from parts of the community that the Entosis Link mechanics will push people to pure evasion fits, the so called trollceptors. It goes without saying that we do not want the sov war meta turn into nothing but sensor boosting Interceptors, but we have plenty of time and tools to help ensure that scenario doesn't occur.
To explain our current approach and help focus the feedback, I want to discuss some of our specific goals for the Entosis Link mechanic itself.
As much as possible, the Entosis Link capture progress should reflect which group has effective military control of the grid.
At its core, the Entosis Link mechanic is a way for the server to tell who won (or is winning) a fight in a specific location. This is a surprisingly tough thing for the server to determine. The best way to win a structure or command node with the Entosis Link should be to gain effective control of the grid. This means that there will always be an intermediate state where the grid is "contested" and neither side is making significant progress until the fight is resolved.
The optimal strategy for fighting over a location with the Entosis Link should be to gain effective control of the grid.
This is the other side of the coin. In practice it means that we should discourage mechanics that lead to indefinite stalemates over a structure or command node. This is the reason for the "no remote reps" condition on active Links. This is also the goal that trollceptors would contradict if they were to become dominant.
The Entosis Link itself should have the minimum possible effect on what ships and tactics players can choose.
Entosis Links will always have some effect on the types of ships and tactics people find viable for Sov warfare, but we should strive to keep those effects to a minimum. As much as possible, we should work towards a meta where whatever fleet concept would win the fight and control the grid would also be viable for using the Entosis Links. This also means that we don't want to be using the Entosis Links to intentionally manipulate ship use. We've seen some people suggesting that we restrict Entosis Links to battleships, command ships or capital ships in order to buff those classes. Using the Entosis Link mechanics to artificially skew the meta in that way is not something we are interested in doing. This goal is why we intend to use the lightest touch possible when working towards the first two goals. It would be easy to overreact to potentially unwanted uses of the Entosis Link by placing extremely harsh restrictions on the module, but we believe that by looking at the situation in a calm and measured manner we can find a good balance.
The restrictions and penalties on the Entosis Link should be as simple and understandable as possible.
This is a fairly obvious goal but I do think it's worth stating explicitly. If we can achieve similar results with two different sets of restrictions and penalties, we'll generally prefer to use the simpler and more understandable set. This also means that we'd generally prefer to use pre-existing mechanics that players will already be familiar with, rather than using completely new mechanics.
All in all, I want to make it very clear that we are going to make adjustments to the Entosis Link in order to get the best possible gameplay and to match these goals as well as possible. If we clearly see a situation emerging where any pure evasion tactics are going to become dominant, we will make changes to the Entosis Link to bring the gameplay back into balance. We expect that there will be many changes and tweaks to the Entosis Link module before launch, and more tweaks made after launch as needed. We have all of the numerous tools of EVE module balance at our disposal and everything is on the table. We can use everything from module price, range, fittings, cap use, mass penalties, ship restrictions, speed limits and many many more. We intend to use as few of these dials as possible and use the lightest touch possible, but we do have the tools we need to reach these goals.
We would like this thread to become a place of discussion around the Entosis Link mechanics, the ships that you expect to use them on, and the tactics you foresee becoming popular. What issues do you foresee popping up? How do you think these goals should be adjusted or refocused? Which of the many module balance dials do you think would be the most intuitive?
Please keep discussion calm and reasonable. Remember that even though we're not making knee-jerk reactions, we are definitely listening and working to get this balance right.
Thanks -Fozzie
Please don't sign your posts Fozzie. Your post isn't so long that half way through I will forget who wrote what I was reading, and even if I did I could just look up and to the left.
How can I trust Sov decisions to a man who needlessly signs his posts?
"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 76 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |