Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16290
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 15:59:02 -
[151] - Quote
Cypherous wrote:
Work out warptimes for a fleet that involves fast tackle and a carrier that doesn't involve you sititng on a gate waiting for ages for the carrier to be far enough away that the rest of the fleet doens't arrive a decade before it, because you'll be sitting there for a while if its a long warp and you might have to fight
Make the carrier warp at 3au. Problem solved.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16290
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 16:03:00 -
[152] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:
Which is part of the reason this change is bad - it is yet another Quality of Life non-improvement which will benefit the largest and most well-organized coalitions. They will find ways to overcome the tedium, those with worse out of game support structures will suffer.
Forgive me but, shouldn't that be the case? If you want to be good shouldn't you have to put in more effort?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Nanar DeNanardon
Babylon Knights DARKNESS.
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 16:04:16 -
[153] - Quote
If this change is done to limit big fleet, what about removing fleet and wing warp and not squad warp ?
This would have less impact to PVE and mining activity but would still nerf large alliance fight. |
Dermeisen
23
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 16:12:46 -
[154] - Quote
Corvonax wrote:-------------- IDEAS --------------
Opportunities were a good start. Keep working on those, they have helped my wife a lot as she's recently started playing with me. You may even consider covering more advanced game play etc.
Corvonax The Nobody.
Your wife is playing Eve, you are certainly not a nobody to somebody! No, kidding aside I very much enjoyed reading this cheers
Design based on the assumption of unrealised potential!
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
Dermeisen
23
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 16:15:12 -
[155] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Corvonax, if you want to take a more active role in fleet, take it. Nothing is stopping you. Fly a prober, tackler, logistics, etc. ships of the line take their place in the line of battle and shoot what they are told to shoot. Eve is naval warfare in space.
Lol suppression and repression at work my friends, someone has is a little no sense of irony
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
Lady Nadra
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 17:08:21 -
[156] - Quote
I really enjoyed reading your fleet ideas Corvonax. :)
MS paint in space part was my favorite. Reminds me of a football playbook with arrows and lines and stuff, too cool. |
Ima Spyalt
Republic University Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 17:27:06 -
[157] - Quote
Previous quotes are in italics due to formatting issues.
Reagalan wrote:Crossposting from reddit.
This whole blog screams "Let's miss the mark as hard as possible while remaining in the ballpark."
Following the changes, fleet warps will still be possible but will require greater participation by fleet members, such as getting a scout into position
We already know that this is untrue. Fleet Commanders routinely dualbox a scout alt for a laundry list of reasons. What has happened is now an FC will need to probe on the alt, warp the alt to the result at 10, and then fleetwarp to the alt at 10. Will it be slower? Yes. Will it increase "individual fleet member participation"? **** no. It raises the bar on FCs, making content creators' jobs harder.
The most common long range (defined as +150km) fleets seen in recent times are Slippery Petes. These are specialized Tengus that are fit with lots of ECCM, making them difficult to probe down
Probing Petes is not the issue. A single Virtue prober with a squad of interceptors effectively neuters them using squad warp. The reason Petes are the only workable sniper doctine is their bubble immunity. They are "slippery" because catching them is exceedingly hard. Any other sniper fleet is caught as soon as you land a dictor on them.
The combination of on-grid combat probing and fleet-warps have choked out most other long-range doctrines
On-grid probing is only one reason. Is it too strong? **** yes it is. but fleet warp was never the issue.
The main reason sniper fleets have disappeared is remote reps/Logistics ships. At longer ranges, turrets simply do less damage. Since Logistics ships can easily repair the damage of 3-8 hostile DPS (it varies widely due to resistances) ships at close range, moving to farther ranges just makes it worse. Take two fleets of oldschool battleship snipers and use modern Logi support and the fight would be as boring as ****. Nothing would die at sniper ranges one bit.
Tech 3 cruisers are another major culprit here, since they can easily sig-tank and resist-tank long-range turret fire, and the new meta of TD-covered Armor T3s has rendered all turret doctrines totally obsolete (though the mainstream capsuleer hasn't recognized this yet).
Sentry drones are the other major culprit since they deal a fixed damage amount (often equivalent to turret DPS at close ranges) but with a significantly greater optimal range, with better tracking, and are effectively immune to tracking disruptors.
The ease of performing bomb runs has stifled the use of battleships and battlecruisers in 0.0 space
Bombers are a major factor in the dismal performance of BS doctrines but only one of many, and since the bomb travel time changes, isn't actually the main reason anymore.
Bombers are not the main reason battlecruisers aren't used either. Ishtars are. The matchup is so one-sided it's comedy. Combat BCs have neither the range nor speed to catch Ishtars, and Attack BCs lose the tank/dps game since they have less of both. Sure the cost is different, but BCs are billed as "cruiser-killers" while being utterly ineffective at killing any kind of T2 cruiser that isn't explicitly fit for close-range.
..a group of dedicated and well-coordinated players can still decimate entire fleets
Of battleships. A small group still won't do **** to a modern Tech 3 doctrine, further discouraging BS use and encouraging T3 doctrines.
Look, the whole deal of encouraging sniper doctrines is something I'm very much behind. Variety is the spice of the game. I've lead hundreds of fleets in dozens of large (200+) battles and seen and fought almost everything. With the uttermost confidence I can assert, this fleetwarp change won't do jack ****. The Ishtar "nerf" as it is won't do jack ****.
If the goal really is to bring back the fleet variety that we saw back in the brief period just after the Odyssey and Retribution expansions then we sure as hell need bigger changes. If the goal is to bring snipers back, then remote-reps need a huge dicking. If the goal is to dethrone the Ishtar, then it needs to lose its ability to effectively use sentry drones. If the goal is to make combat battlecruisers useful, then they need a way to project damage farther. If the goal is to make bombers capable of changing the game with small numbers, then they need a fundamental design change to be more effective vs modern Tech 3 doctrines, and less effective vs battleships.
Finally, if the goal is to make fleet members "more responsible" for their ships, then make staying alive much harder to do. Dicking fleetwarp doesn't do this. Dicking keep-at-range or orbit would do it, but at the expense of all playability. Dicking remote reps would do this. Dicking remote reps would make snipers far more valuable. Dicking remote reps means staying alive is more than just flying the right ship and broadcasting for reps, but I don't think Eve is willing to swallow that pill.
For once I can agree with Goons and quoted for validity. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1156
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 17:28:18 -
[158] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:
Which is part of the reason this change is bad - it is yet another Quality of Life non-improvement which will benefit the largest and most well-organized coalitions. They will find ways to overcome the tedium, those with worse out of game support structures will suffer.
Forgive me but, shouldn't that be the case? If you want to be good shouldn't you have to put in more effort?
Eve should not require out of game tools to do basic things. Evemon, EFT, POS manager apps, PI apps, industry spreadsheets, WH reporting tools, etc. each of them is a monument to poor game design and a terrible interface. All that stuff should be built into the Eve client.
When you make changes to the game which are most easily overcome by large blocs, do not complain about large blocs controlling everything meaningful,
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
Shakaran
Disb4nd
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 17:49:40 -
[159] - Quote
And as a multibox miner I'm once more ******! The interceptor change was a big setback and now no fleet warps. I would have no problem to warp all my miners invidually, but if there is a interceptor coming or some other neut, I just don't have the time to warp all my miners out individually!
Yeah, make the miners life a bit harder again... |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16290
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 18:15:46 -
[160] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:baltec1 wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:
Which is part of the reason this change is bad - it is yet another Quality of Life non-improvement which will benefit the largest and most well-organized coalitions. They will find ways to overcome the tedium, those with worse out of game support structures will suffer.
Forgive me but, shouldn't that be the case? If you want to be good shouldn't you have to put in more effort? Eve should not require out of game tools to do basic things. Evemon, EFT, POS manager apps, PI apps, industry spreadsheets, WH reporting tools, etc. each of them is a monument to poor game design and a terrible interface. All that stuff should be built into the Eve client. When you make changes to the game which are most easily overcome by large blocs, do not complain about large blocs controlling everything meaningful,
Large, organised blocs adapt to every change better than the disorganized and solo/small. Making the game ever easier is not a good thing, if you want brainless gameplay there are countless other games out there. It about time CCP added more challenges rather than take them away.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
Denidil
Cascade Crest
643
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 18:19:28 -
[161] - Quote
Alexis Nightwish wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:Combat scanning is broken when your on-grid with your target. So disabling warping to a probe hit when you're within 500km of it never occurred to you?
^^^^ the solution we actually need
Tedium and difficulty are not the same thing, if you don't realize this then STFU about game design.
|
Corvonax
Void.Tech Get Off My Lawn
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 18:45:25 -
[162] - Quote
Truth be told I honestly don't think the warp changes go far enough. IMO fleet warp in general should simply be removed as a tactical tool. Otherwise your going to end up with exactly whats stated above. FC's will use an alt and then fleet warp to said alt.
I would even go as far as to agree with the anchor up option being removed. Let me explain further before you break out the lynch pins.
- Fleet warp
I understand "WHY" it was added back in the day as well as the role it currently fills.
It was added to allow for the delivery of multiple ships with various warp speeds to a target area at the same time. This prevented the Hodge podge landings that resulted in logi landing before battle ships etc. It also helps reduce the number of stragglers and helps herd the proverbial cats.
What needs to be addressed with these changes to not make every one hate you.
1) There needs to be a mechanism by which a fleets can decide the order they land on grid. There have been several subjection made but other options im sure are also out there.
2) There needs to be an allowance made for w space people (and general use) to group warp to Mission points / anoms / and other things that are used on a daily basis. We do not want to destroy the quality of life fleet warp offered in the non tactical sense.
3) The FCGÇÖs prober alt. While I understand a lot of FCGÇÖs will just pull out their 2nd probing character and you cant really stop them from doing it.. If they cant Fleet warp to a squad member then it becomes far less useful and still keeps the focus where they are trying to put it. FC's will still use their scouts etc to do scouting type stuff.
4) Fleet Mobility (and or ship mobility) needs reduced hard. If youGÇÖre going to reduce the ability of a fleet to traverse distances you also need to nerf the ability for fleets to stay immune to capture. There are Multiple extremely hard to catch fleet types that if left unchecked WILL dominate the meta.. ::glares at the Tengu::
A Possible solutions for these issues.
1) Special rounds? (web / scram / etc for blaster ships with substantial range for application?) Meh. ItGÇÖs a possibility but I think balance would be broken.
2) Boosting Point Ranged? Long points actually being GÇ£long?GÇ¥ 20k is not very long any more hell thatGÇÖs barley the edge of blaster range. Back in the day 20K was pretty decent. With the current GÇ£sniper rangesGÇ¥ and ships speeds your going to want like 40K + Hell look at how popular the pirate ships are with boosted point ranges.
3) S / M / L Webs / scrams / Points.
In theory we have a lot of different modules with various GÇÿsizesGÇÖ so this is not a new concept in eve. Why could space engineers not find a way to boost these e-war options to substantial ranges by simply over charging or building it bigger?
S / M / L webs GÇô range is increased based on ship size but effectiveness is reduced based on Size to sig. Want to web that cepter in your battle ship? S webs on a big boat etc.
A alternative would be to script webs for S / M / L making sig a factor but increasing range from the current module.
S / M / L Disruptors? GÇô I would probably leave the scrams in the realm of frigates but having a 40k or 60k disruptor as an option for your average line member would open up the field a bit. (H. Dictors are still a thing due to infinity point / bubble options and the specialized role they currently fill).
The concept behind this idea is frankly inspired by Star Wars and the capital class interdiction ships they used.
-Anchoring UP
It was mentioned earlier in this post that eve is basically naval warfare in space. After considering said point I have to agree with a few stipulations.
Naval warfare does not have 1 button to automatically keep all ships in the line in formation. Again this is another feature I think needs addressed but something needs done to assist those situations that GÇ£must have itGÇ¥ etc..
Orbiting a player is always useful in pvp be it for defensive or offense it has a lot of function. What became broken as the use of anchors to keep every one in a tight little group allowing for no separation etc and basically putting 1 person GÇ£drivingGÇ¥ the every one in circles.
There is one blaring case that needs addressed. (In my humble opinion)
Interceptors GÇ£needGÇ¥ this function. Orbit at 500 with ludicrous speed turned on is their primary defense mechanism. Possibly make this a function of the ship a special feature for them? Not even sure if thatGÇÖs possible but your going to really gimp your cepters if you remove that function.
-Eve GÇ£shouldGÇ¥ be about individual player skill and drive. Not what the FC can do with your toon when you press F1 for him. (^_^)
A few closings thoughts.
A) If on grid probing is "broken op" then simply remove the ability to initiate warp to something you probed out on the same grid. (500k was thrown around)
B) If fleet warping is the issue allowing the FC to warp to a squad member will just change "how" the Fc warps every one now that he can or cant do it any more.
C) If off grid probing is what you want. IE a scout sitting there feverishly trying to lock his probes onto moving targets then why not allow him to broadcast a "warpable" target to the fleet. Not a fleet warpable target.. but just a warpable target.. Either vie overview (the clean pretty way to do it) or vie fleet history.
D) The sniper T3's are going to be broken due to nullification and the inability to "catch them". If this is such an issue why not remove nullification form T3's and give it to shuttles. (this is a serious suggestion lulz)
Corvonax The Nobody. |
Midnight Hope
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
182
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 18:53:40 -
[163] - Quote
Since you ARE moving forward with these changes, it seems only logical that there should be a way to set the fleet's maximum warp speed (which would override the each individual ship warp speed in the fleet) or a way for each pilot to set their own warp speed instead of always defaulting to the ship's max (MOAR participation!!).
Please consider implementing something that would allow a fleet to land all around the same second or two. |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
915
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 19:12:59 -
[164] - Quote
Cleanse Serce wrote:In small gang fleets pilots are autonomous and generally good solo pilots they can take care of themselves and warp individually to broadcasted bms or their own ones.
You're right, it's good that we have a really streamlined and functional bookmark system to fall back on in this instance.
OH.
WAIT.
... |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16290
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 19:21:17 -
[165] - Quote
Midnight Hope wrote:Since you ARE moving forward with these changes, it seems only logical that there should be a way to set the fleet's maximum warp speed (which would override the each individual ship warp speed in the fleet) or a way for each pilot to set their own warp speed instead of always defaulting to the ship's max (MOAR participation!!).
Please consider implementing something that would allow a fleet to land all around the same second or two.
Fleet warp to a scout.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
jason hill
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
797
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 20:39:02 -
[166] - Quote
im sensing a disturbance in the force ! ........its as though a thousand neckbeards cried out in terror ... then were silenced !
lol ccp shoving it up our jackseyes one patch at a time |
Zappity
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
2270
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 20:42:16 -
[167] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:baltec1 wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:
Which is part of the reason this change is bad - it is yet another Quality of Life non-improvement which will benefit the largest and most well-organized coalitions. They will find ways to overcome the tedium, those with worse out of game support structures will suffer.
Forgive me but, shouldn't that be the case? If you want to be good shouldn't you have to put in more effort? Eve should not require out of game tools to do basic things. Evemon, EFT, POS manager apps, PI apps, industry spreadsheets, WH reporting tools, etc. each of them is a monument to poor game design and a terrible interface. All that stuff should be built into the Eve client. When you make changes to the game which are most easily overcome by large blocs, do not complain about large blocs controlling everything meaningful, Large, organised blocs adapt to every change better than the disorganized and solo/small. Making the game ever easier is not a good thing, if you want brainless gameplay there are countless other games out there. It about time CCP added more challenges rather than take them away. One of the stated design goals is to get pilots in large, well organised, fleets to use their brain more. This is not a problem for small fleets. Small gang and solo is already hard. If you don't use your brain you die.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Nuvia
Exit-Strategy Exit Strategy..
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 20:55:43 -
[168] - Quote
Hi CCP and fellow players - my 2c worth (cos its free)
You have 3 goals that you want to achieve - my feedback is that 2/3 are not needed and the last one I am confused about as its an about turn from the last set of changes.
Goal: Encourage individual fleet member participation
I argue you miss the point of an MMO it's for people to have fun with other people creating a bench mark where you have to be 'good' or 'participate' creates barriers to entry / limits enjoyment if people want to fly and operate F1 - let them.
FT Diomedes feed provided this response and it does speak for the bulk of eve players
GÇ£You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink. The people who simply want to join a fleet, be told where to go and what to do, are still Eve players. They still have subscriptions. They still provide content. There is ample opportunity for those people to volunteer for more active roles in fleets - in fact, every successful community encourages people to step up and be more active. Especially Imperium.
Making fleet operations take longer to get from Point A to Point B will not improve the game experience. Making each fleet member prepare more bookmarks ahead of a fight will not improve the game experience. Those things make Eve more tedious. More of a chore.
I do not want to be part of an Eve where there are 15K people online, but they are the most masochistic, bitter, and elitist pricks on the planet. I want to be part of an Eve where there are 50-100K people online, and they are fun-loving folks with whom I enjoy hanging out. Raising the barrier to fun will not accomplish this goal.
The challenges in Eve need to come primarily from the other players, secondarily from the complex and engaging environment, but NEVER from the interface and controls available to the player."
Reduce the ease of performing a bomb run without reducing their potential damage To test this I made the suggestion that you could implement a smart bomb that only damages bombs or a defender missile that shoots down incoming bombs. Both would fit in the spare highs within most BC/BS and provide fairly effective counter measures for bombs without applying the nerf bat to bombers. None of the feedback suggests to date suggests that fleets canGÇÖt counter bombers https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5844634#post5844634
Increase the time it takes for fleets to close ranges This confuses me a little you just nerfed the specialized Tengus to make them scanable and now they are scanable you want to implement difficulty in getting to them?
|
Leeluvv
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
31
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 21:30:45 -
[169] - Quote
If you, the pilot, want protection from being scanned down, do something about it. You know, that's why this game has options and consequences.
Eve has field mods that affect a ships ability to warp. Why not add a mod or script that effects the ability of a probe to function accurately. This won't stop the fleet warping to the scanned location, but it may be 100Km off the actual target. Now the FC needs the prober to be on grid, to confirm the accuracy of the scan result. Better yet, make a scan from a ship on-grid negate the accuracy effect, so you can still get a 100% hit, but it takes more effort. If you have fast moving inties, use the inaccurate result. If you don't, then I'm afraid you'll have to wait until the scout is closer.
Also, make the mod have fitting restrictions, or just make it another script for the HIC. If you want an unscannable T3, best have a HIC with you.
Problem solved and no need to f*&^ with fleet warps. |
helana Tsero
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
118
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 22:29:39 -
[170] - Quote
Denidil wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:Combat scanning is broken when your on-grid with your target. So disabling warping to a probe hit when you're within 500km of it never occurred to you? ^^^^ the solution we actually need
+1000 for this. Just do that. Disable warping to a probe hit within 500km.
Ongrid Probing issue solved . Stop using sledgehammers when a scalpel is needed.
Fine with the other fleet warp nerfs... but WH space needs the ability to squad warp a sabre on top of a probe result.. It takes a hours to hunt down kills in WH space... and when we find a target (that is dscaning for ships/combats) at a probable site we wont be able to do anything anything about it... cause we wont be able to get tackle before he warps.. using a tanked scan tengu is not a solution for getting tackle in a number of C5-C6 sites.. suicide sabre is the only option.
Dont be known as the Australian who caused subs to take a nose dive please.. We were all proud of having a Australian dev.. until now.
"... ppl need to get out of caves and they will see something new... thats where is eve placed... not in cave..."-á | zoonr-Korsairs |-á QFT !
|
|
Dominous Nolen
Powder and Ball Alchemists Union Mordus Angels
79
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 23:09:20 -
[171] - Quote
knobber Jobbler wrote:Dominous Nolen wrote:knobber Jobbler wrote:You could just solve the bombing problem by making them decloak each other again under 2k and put the actual skill back in being a bomber FC and pilot. It would remedy so many of the issues you're trying to solve. Oh please no... They brought this one to table 6 months+ ago and the decloak changes were to wide reaching outside of bombers. unless they put some way to see cloaked fleet members this would be utter chaos. You must be new, because its the way it used to work and never was a problem after practice and proper squad use.
Pretty sure I started playing well after the cloaking changes took place initially.
Either way I've been on enough clusterf**k bombing runs to see things go horrible when someone forgets how to warp cloaked to the rest of their squad/wing.. let alone keep at range of the fleet and hope they don't start a chain decloak on the fleet.
Like i said.. if there was a visual indicator then I'd have no problem if was ONLY affect bombers, but the changes discussed months ago were going to affect everything.
This is EVE, Not Hello Kitty: Island Adventure
===================================
Powder and Ball Alchemists Union - "Turning Lead into Gold since 2008"
|
Dictateur Imperator
Babylon Knights DARKNESS.
27
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 00:10:32 -
[172] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Dictateur Imperator wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:Minchurra wrote:1. Can I fleet warp my fleet to a fleet member as I can now, or does it require extra steps? (Right click watch list > Warp fleet to) 2. Can I fleet warp my fleet to a personal bookmark I made a couple years ago as I can now, or does it require extra steps? (Right click in space > Warp fleet to) 3. Can I fleet warp my fleet to a personal bookmark, or one belonging to somebody else once it has been broadcast? 1. You can fleet-warp to a fleet member as you can now. 2. You can not fleet-warp to a personal bookmark or probe result. Instead, you can broadcast that bookmark and fleet members can warp themselves. Or a fleet member can warp to the bookmark, then you can fleet-warp to the fleet member. 3. You can't fleet-warp to broadcast bookmarks. So you don't nerf only combat activity, you nerf all people who use multi account for other activity lie mining, like transport,ect... they must engage warp account per account to go to each point if it's not a celestial (like a ping a 200 KM from a gate to safe move in 0.0 or to avoid bubble, or just go to a BM to have a good place to mine in huge belt of 0.0). So maybe make something like that is better : BM les of 5 min can't be BM, and less of 15 min can't be fleet warpable. Other case it's not only pvp you will ill but a lot of economic activity. You want a proof of it ? Ok, imagine a 5 to 10 account miner: 1 rorqual/orca in pos 4-9 player in belt who dig : The player must mae 4-9 ALONE WARP to go on belt. But if neutral enter on system he can fleet warp to be safe. It's just a nerf of mining speed. So an other solution could be to allow the actual fleet warp mechanism for account on same IP/legal owner. Warp one miner to belt, fleet warp the rest to that miner.
So you agree: Nerf of mining income, you waste time to do this. More boring to mine and less rentable after change. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
376
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 00:55:03 -
[173] - Quote
Corvonax wrote: -Anchoring UP
It was mentioned earlier in this post that eve is basically naval warfare in space. After considering said point I have to agree with a few stipulations.
Naval warfare does not have 1 button to automatically keep all ships in the line in formation. Again this is another feature I think needs addressed but something needs done to assist those situations that GÇ£must have itGÇ¥ etc..
No, naval warfare has people dedicated to steering the ship, people dedicated to getting targeting data, people dedicated to proper weapons operation, etc etc. Naval warfare has you, as the captain, saying 'Helm, keep us in formation'. Doesn't even take a click of a mouse.
Now, I understand that as a line battleship pilot, you might not feel like you have a lot to do... but the logi does. When things get hairy and a dozen broadcasts for reps come in in a second - sustained over a good 10-12-second period because people don't understand they're not the primary, they just got hit by a single bomb... yeah, we've got a lot to sort out in order to make sure we're actually getting the primary target, not the guys in a panic because they're just regular line guys who aren't paying enough attention.
So if you want to take away the ability of the logistics to actually focus on their role in the fleet, then give me the 10-50 other brains that a cruiser in EVE, piloted by a capsuleer, is supposed to have as crew. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6719
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 02:01:16 -
[174] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Corvonax wrote: -Anchoring UP
It was mentioned earlier in this post that eve is basically naval warfare in space. After considering said point I have to agree with a few stipulations.
Naval warfare does not have 1 button to automatically keep all ships in the line in formation. Again this is another feature I think needs addressed but something needs done to assist those situations that GÇ£must have itGÇ¥ etc..
No, naval warfare has people dedicated to steering the ship, people dedicated to getting targeting data, people dedicated to proper weapons operation, etc etc. Naval warfare has you, as the captain, saying 'Helm, keep us in formation'. Doesn't even take a click of a mouse. Now, I understand that as a line battleship pilot, you might not feel like you have a lot to do... but the logi does. When things get hairy and a dozen broadcasts for reps come in in a second - sustained over a good 10-12-second period because people don't understand they're not the primary, they just got hit by a single bomb... yeah, we've got a lot to sort out in order to make sure we're actually getting the primary target, not the guys in a panic because they're just regular line guys who aren't paying enough attention. So if you want to take away the ability of the logistics to actually focus on their role in the fleet, then give me the 10-50 other brains that a cruiser in EVE, piloted by a capsuleer, is supposed to have as crew. Do people still do that, my goodness...
The one crewmember who has the emergency broadcast button should be fired
^^ 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
377
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 02:31:35 -
[175] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Do people still do that, my goodness...
The one crewmember who has the emergency broadcast button should be fired
constantly. And yes. Yes he/she should. |
Greygal
Redemption Road Affirmative.
460
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 02:49:21 -
[176] - Quote
Midnight Hope wrote:Since you ARE moving forward with these changes, it seems only logical that there should be a way to set the fleet's maximum warp speed (which would override the each individual ship warp speed in the fleet) or a way for each pilot to set their own warp speed instead of always defaulting to the ship's max (MOAR participation!!).
Please consider implementing something that would allow a fleet to land all around the same second or two.
This. +101.
Also, need to implement a way to optionally restrict broadcasting to only certain trusted person(s) or position(s), as in, say I only want two or three people doing the broadcasting to everyone. Otherwise, it's only a matter of time before public roams are flooded with troll broadcasting spais. Needs to be optional, though, like some kind of flag on the fleet manager window, "Allow anyone to broadcast," "Allow only [positions][pilots] to broadcast," something like that.
Holding additional comments for now, as I've exceeded my wall-of-text quota for the month already
What you do for yourself dies with you, what you do for others is immortal.
Free weekly public roams & monthly NewBro new player roams!
Visit Redemption Road or join mailing list REDEMPTION ROAMS for information
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
110
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 06:10:18 -
[177] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Large, organised blocs adapt to every change better than the disorganized and solo/small. Making the game ever easier is not a good thing, if you want brainless gameplay there are countless other games out there. It about time CCP added more challenges rather than take them away.
If organization allows disproportionate adaptation to change, shouldn't leveling the playing field then involve... less complexity? The more complex the game becomes, the more it is difficult for a small groups to survive.
So.. join the blocs.. or die? |
Kendarr
Zebra Corp The Bastion
50
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 08:17:31 -
[178] - Quote
Invisusira wrote:Honestly my main concern here is that it will now take over twice as long for massive TiDi fleet battles to warp from one side of the system to the other. And that's enough to turn me off of large fleet combat for life.
Large fleet battles are dead in fozzie sov anyway brother. They odd one or 2 will still happen but its all about small fleet warfair.
Zebra-Corp
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16296
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 08:22:20 -
[179] - Quote
Dictateur Imperator wrote:
So you agree: Nerf of mining income, you waste time to do this. More boring to mine and less rentable after change.
Oh no, CCP added a few more seconds on to my mining activities...
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16296
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 08:24:44 -
[180] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:
If organization allows disproportionate adaptation to change, shouldn't leveling the playing field then involve... less complexity? The more complex the game becomes, the more it is difficult for a small groups to survive.
So.. join the blocs.. or die?
No. A game should reward you for being smart of punish you for being dumb. Idiots should not be protected from their own actions.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |