Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Mr Mieyli
Hedion University Amarr Empire
21
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 23:15:45 -
[1] - Quote
Many eve players complain about remote reps making fights into battles where one side loses next to nothing and the other loses everything, but is nerfing remote reps the best solution? Remote reps already have a built in weakness in that they can only repair one target at a time; the problem is that this isn't actually a handicap as damage is normally applied to one ship at a time.
Fleet comps are built around having enough logi to counter incoming damage (and remember this is applied to one ship at a time making the calcs easier) and enough buffer to last until reps land. This directly leads to N+1 being the best offensive and defensive tactic for larger fights. This is also the reason for the archon blob being so powerful; the archon hull has high native buffer and en-masse can provide enough reps even out of triage to cope with almost anything that can be thrown at it. (Can be fixed by making capital remote reps no better than large without triage)
I would propose a new AoE weapon line be introduced or perhaps missiles repurposed for the role. The weapons would fire on a target and upon landing would detonate similar to a smart bomb damaging all ships in an area (dictated by size of turret/launcher) including the target. These weapons would have much lower paper dps than the current focused weapons we have now so as not to obsolete single target weapons. Damage would need to be low enough so not to allow for a "remote pipe bomb" of sorts i.e not close to competing with bombers.
The effect I see this having is fleets could choose to fit for AoE damage forcing primaried targets to either notice their allies are being ground down by the AoE damage and fly out of the blob or allow an attacker to overcome reps by spreading damage. Skilled piloting does mitigate the effects of these weapons however I believe counter-play is important. Equally, skilled target selection allows an attacker to keep damage on a group of enemies by switching targets. |
Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
252
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 23:44:38 -
[2] - Quote
Mr Mieyli wrote:Many eve players complain about remote reps making fights into battles where one side loses next to nothing and the other loses everything, but is nerfing remote reps the best solution? Yes, it is. |
Celthric Kanerian
Ascendance Of New Eden Workers Trade Federation
398
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 23:52:02 -
[3] - Quote
Sounds like bombers to me... |
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3737
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 00:16:28 -
[4] - Quote
But if your damage is so much lower than the other side's, you're going to drop below critical mass well before they do... |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
739
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 01:18:14 -
[5] - Quote
Celthric Kanerian wrote:Sounds like bombers to me...
It more than sounding like lol.....
They are trying to avoid bombers can be squishy. They are kind of copycatting the recent page 1 post of the anti-capital BS bomber. Just in this case its not spelled out as clear....only archon mentioned briefly. And is aiming for smaller logi as well.
They want something bigger and tankier I would gather. Since bombers either die if fast locked and engaged fast as hell or spend a fair amount of time if they clear warping out to realign to come back in.
Which is kind of the intended tradeoff really. can put out some pain, but if it hangs around too long it will go boom.
Their new slant also seems to be damage based by hardpoint mount size. Probably to avoid the issue I brought up in that other thread of how to make this AOE not wipe everything op style. However the solution is an overcomplicated mess really.
It be either be 4 new types of ammo that magically work the same across all weapons sizes. Want to smash the frigate roam with frigate logi my say scorpion would have a large launcher that fires, with no penalty, the small bomb to smash it.
Or we get N+1 again. As you have to bring the frigates fit with this to deal with frigs, the cruiser with medium "bombs", the bs' with large. and hell....caps for x-large.
Or....you could just bring some damn bombers now lol. |
Cristl
248
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 01:41:26 -
[6] - Quote
The hamsters would veto it. AOE weapons are bad for server calculations apparently. |
SomethingIs InMyButt
LowSec Holdings Shards Of New Eden
9
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 03:52:32 -
[7] - Quote
Cristl wrote:The hamsters would veto it. AOE weapons are bad for server calculations apparently. CCP doesn't know how to optimize square root and sin/cos functions properly. :-( |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2574
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 07:25:28 -
[8] - Quote
Rawketsled wrote:Mr Mieyli wrote:Many eve players complain about remote reps making fights into battles where one side loses next to nothing and the other loses everything, but is nerfing remote reps the best solution? Yes, it is. A Guardian can repair faster than an Oracle can damage. A lot faster, in fact, especially if the involved third party has high resists.
Remote reps could be nerfed down to one quarter strength and they'd still be a valuable addition to fleets, but would be less to prevent anyone from being shot down and more to fix them quickly after a rough fight. They would assist with keeping everyone up against small fleet encounters, enable recoveries from bombing runs, make primaried pilots last longer which buys time, or mitigate external damage effects like gate guns, POS guns, or NPC pirates.
That's reps at one quarter strength.
I think cutting them in half is more than reasonable. Even at half power, they will still be used the same way they are now: to prevent fleet members from being destroyed while sustaining heavy fire. But cutting them in half will make onboard reps more important, and allow them to stack better against remote reps.
edit: here are the attributes: Oracle with max skills, T2 Tachs, IN Multi, and 3x T2 Heat Sink deals 865.7 DPS Guardian with max skills and 4x T2 large RR repairs 341.3 HP per second * With 61% average resists on target, the Guardian repairs 100% as fast as the Oracle damages. * With 70% average resists on target, the Guardian repairs 31% faster than the Oracle damages. * With 75% average resists on target, the Guardian repairs 58% faster than the Oracle damages. * With 80% average resists on target, the Guardian repairs 97% faster than the Oracle damages. That's with four RRs. What about a Guardian with five? What about if the Guardian has Remote Repair Augmentor rigs?
Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom
Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm
The Succubus looks meaner
But the Revenant cleaner
Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm
|
Mr Mieyli
Hedion University Amarr Empire
21
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 08:31:46 -
[9] - Quote
Zan Shiro wrote:Celthric Kanerian wrote:Sounds like bombers to me... It more than sounding like lol..... They are trying to avoid bombers can be squishy. They are kind of copycatting the recent page 1 post of the anti-capital BS bomber. Just in this case its not spelled out as clear....only archon mentioned briefly. And is aiming for smaller logi as well. They want something bigger and tankier I would gather. Since bombers either die if fast locked and engaged fast as hell or spend a fair amount of time if they clear warping out to realign to come back in. Which is kind of the intended tradeoff really. can put out some pain, but if it hangs around too long it will go boom. Their new slant also seems to be damage based by hardpoint mount size. Probably to avoid the issue I brought up in that other thread of how to make this AOE not wipe everything op style. However the solution is an overcomplicated mess really. It be either be 4 new types of ammo that magically work the same across all weapons sizes. Want to smash the frigate roam with frigate logi my say scorpion would have a large launcher that fires, with no penalty, the small bomb to smash it. Or we get N+1 again. As you have to bring the frigates fit with this to deal with frigs, the cruiser with medium "bombs", the bs' with large. and hell....caps for x-large. Or....you could just bring some damn bombers now lol.
I am not part of a "they" and I am not trying to propose an anti capital bomber hence why I suggested the damage be so much lower than existing bombers so not to replace them. My biggest concern with the idea is that after a point one side could have enough AoE to alpha a group of ships before they can react but by fiddling the numbers I think it could be doable.
I'd also like to clarify how I picture the way these weapons will work. You first choose a new AoE-weapon sized suitably for your ship. You select your target, fire the weapons, and on a successful hit he and everything within X metres takes damage . The main target takes the brunt of the damage (say 60%) and enemies around him receive the rest. I hadn't considered battleship sized weapons being able to AoE down small ships but this could be resolved by comparing the AoE'd ships sig to the targeted ships sig.
I picture this giving attackers a way to either force a target to peel off from the group or to spread damage over several targets and overwhelm reps. |
Mr Mieyli
Hedion University Amarr Empire
21
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 08:41:29 -
[10] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:But if your damage is so much lower than the other side's, you're going to drop below critical mass well before they do...
What if your side's reps are holding? The side with AoE damage can grind down ships while the single target side can only focus on one target at a time. Exact numbers haven't been decided but it needs to be low enough alpha that a group of ships fitted this way cannot act in the same role as bombers. |
|
Sigras
Conglomo
1055
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 08:58:00 -
[11] - Quote
RTS players understand that AOE is the best way to counter blobs. For as smart as Eve players usually are, why do you people continue to have such problems understanding this?
I dont mean wild, haphazard, bring-back-the-old-DD, grid-clearing AOE; bombs are great. They take skill and they work perfectly at countering battleship blobs. In fact, bombs are one of the reasons that people dont use battleships in large fleets anymore. Apparently it's easier to switch ship doctrines than it is to teach fleet members to do something other than "orbit anchor at optimal"
Bombs are great at countering battleship blobs... now if only we could come up with something to counter cruiser blobs and cap ship blobs... then maybe people would be forced to split their fleets up into smaller groups flying around independently instead of mindlessly orbiting anchor and spamming F1
|
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3737
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 09:11:58 -
[12] - Quote
Mr Mieyli wrote:Danika Princip wrote:But if your damage is so much lower than the other side's, you're going to drop below critical mass well before they do... What if your side's reps are holding? The side with AoE damage can grind down ships while the single target side can only focus on one target at a time. Exact numbers haven't been decided but it needs to be low enough alpha that a group of ships fitted this way cannot act in the same role as bombers.
Then you'd probably have them outnumbered, outgunned or out-logid enough to win the fight with conventional weapons anyway? |
Mr Mieyli
Hedion University Amarr Empire
22
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 11:05:17 -
[13] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Mr Mieyli wrote:Danika Princip wrote:But if your damage is so much lower than the other side's, you're going to drop below critical mass well before they do... What if your side's reps are holding? The side with AoE damage can grind down ships while the single target side can only focus on one target at a time. Exact numbers haven't been decided but it needs to be low enough alpha that a group of ships fitted this way cannot act in the same role as bombers. Then you'd probably have them outnumbered, outgunned or out-logid enough to win the fight with conventional weapons anyway?
My thinking is that conventional weapons and logi in it's current form work fine for small scale fights, only on large scale does the ability to stack as many logi as needed on a single ship cause problems. It causes problems because weapons in eve only apply damage to a single target and therefore all a ship needs to survive N enemies is enough buffer to last until reps land and enough logi to counter N players. This leads to fights being binary and this is not very interesting gameplay.
As Sigras points out AoE is used as an anti-blob weapon to great success in many other RTS games and I believe it is only due to the poor past implementations of AoE in eve that people don't like it. Let's try using some numbers, pulled from where the sun don't shine, as an example:
Team A is a group of 150 single target fit cruisers and 30 logi Team B is a group of 100 AoE fit cruisers and 50 logi
Team B has less dps on grid due to lower numbers of damage dealers and due to AoE weapons having less raw damage. However, team B brought enough logi to keep ships up through team A's single target damage. Team A picks a primary and applies all dps to it, either it has enough buffer and catches reps or it doesn't and dies. Team B picks a target in the centre of A's blob and even though the target will be easily reppable for team A, nearby targets are also taking damage and team A's logi is struggling to spread reps as needed. Either the target notices he is getting his friends killed and moves out of the blob exposing himself or he stays in and team A begins losing ships.
I don't see these weapons as a replacement to single target weapons or a replacement for bombs but an extra strategic tool to allow for more interesting fights. |
Isajah
Industrial Command Lux Aetherna
3
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 11:15:56 -
[14] - Quote
SomethingIs InMyButt wrote:Cristl wrote:The hamsters would veto it. AOE weapons are bad for server calculations apparently. CCP doesn't know how to optimize square root and sin/cos functions properly. :-(
Offtopic: I programmed an Arduino Uno to fadein and out LEDs for a christmas arrangement. linear fading looked stupid so I used sin() to let the fade look smoother. out of pure lazyness I had a sin() for every LED and just entered random numbers for speed and offset. the UNO was running at its limits and every time the DINT Timer was counted into overflow, all LEDs glitched. now I let the setupphase calculate a complete fadein/fadeout into arrays and cylce them through...
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2113
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 13:03:08 -
[15] - Quote
SomethingIs InMyButt wrote:Cristl wrote:The hamsters would veto it. AOE weapons are bad for server calculations apparently. CCP doesn't know how to optimize square root and sin/cos functions properly. :-(
They could make the damage flat across the entire AoE and it would still be terrible to work with for the server just because of the sheer amount of damage events being generated. |
Lim Hiaret
Hiaret Family
31
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:29:30 -
[16] - Quote
I would love to see anaconda and python mines return to the game.
|
DrysonBennington
Aliastra Gallente Federation
228
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:44:26 -
[17] - Quote
Lim Hiaret wrote:I would love to see anaconda and python mines return to the game.
Mines would be interesting seeing as how you would need a minesweeper class of ship to clear them unless you want to use your ship instead.
NPC's should also have the ability to lay mines as well as clear mines laid, lets say for example in an asteroid belt, by a Capsuleer. |
Mr Mieyli
Hedion University Amarr Empire
22
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:02:22 -
[18] - Quote
Rawketsled wrote:Mr Mieyli wrote:Many eve players complain about remote reps making fights into battles where one side loses next to nothing and the other loses everything, but is nerfing remote reps the best solution? Yes, it is.
Let's say remote reps are nerfed to 1/4 of their current strength, this is a massive nerf in power and not likely something CCP would actually do. Now what would happen as a result? Would anything change? No. Fleet comps would simply adjust to include more logi ships and we are back to square one, I believe something more is needed. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2115
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:11:06 -
[19] - Quote
Mr Mieyli wrote:Rawketsled wrote:Mr Mieyli wrote:Many eve players complain about remote reps making fights into battles where one side loses next to nothing and the other loses everything, but is nerfing remote reps the best solution? Yes, it is. Let's say remote reps are nerfed to 1/4 of their current strength, this is a massive nerf in power and not likely something CCP would actually do. Now what would happen as a result? Would anything change? No. Fleet comps would simply adjust to include more logi ships and we are back to square one, I believe something more is needed.
Any large fight already has a chance of being throttled down by the server because it has trouble keeping up and you want to add a large number of calculation on top of it? |
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots Black Legion.
353
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:22:38 -
[20] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Rawketsled wrote:Mr Mieyli wrote:Many eve players complain about remote reps making fights into battles where one side loses next to nothing and the other loses everything, but is nerfing remote reps the best solution? Yes, it is. A Guardian can repair faster than an Oracle can damage. A lot faster, in fact, especially if the involved third party has high resists. Remote reps could be nerfed down to one quarter strength and they'd still be a valuable addition to fleets, but would be less to prevent anyone from being shot down and more to fix them quickly after a rough fight. They would assist with keeping everyone up against small fleet encounters, enable recoveries from bombing runs, make primaried pilots last longer which buys time, or mitigate external damage effects like gate guns, POS guns, or NPC pirates. That's reps at one quarter strength. I think cutting them in half is more than reasonable. Even at half power, they will still be used the same way they are now: to prevent fleet members from being destroyed while sustaining heavy fire. But cutting them in half will make onboard reps more important, and allow them to stack better against remote reps. edit: here are the attributes: Oracle with max skills, T2 Tachs, IN Multi, and 3x T2 Heat Sink deals 865.7 DPS Guardian with max skills and 4x T2 large RR repairs 341.3 HP per second* With 61% average resists on target, the Guardian repairs 100% as fast as the Oracle damages. * With 70% average resists on target, the Guardian repairs 31% faster than the Oracle damages. * With 75% average resists on target, the Guardian repairs 58% faster than the Oracle damages. * With 80% average resists on target, the Guardian repairs 97% faster than the Oracle damages. That's with four RRs. What about a Guardian with five? What about if the Guardian has Remote Repair Augmentor rigs?
Because I'm truly evil and love to see explosions (and would love to see battles where two sides smash into eachother and one side does not just walk away unscathed), I'm all for even more extreme measures. Don't just drop remote reps to 1/4 effectiveness, lets also add diminishing returns to prevent people from just trying to compensate with 4x logi.
It would be awesome if we actually had to start using local active repping in fights, and not just depend on buffer and logi. The long standing meta of everyone focusing fire on a single target in hopes of overcoming incoming reps is, while tactically sound, boring. |
|
Mr Mieyli
Hedion University Amarr Empire
22
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:23:48 -
[21] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Mr Mieyli wrote:Rawketsled wrote:Mr Mieyli wrote:Many eve players complain about remote reps making fights into battles where one side loses next to nothing and the other loses everything, but is nerfing remote reps the best solution? Yes, it is. Let's say remote reps are nerfed to 1/4 of their current strength, this is a massive nerf in power and not likely something CCP would actually do. Now what would happen as a result? Would anything change? No. Fleet comps would simply adjust to include more logi ships and we are back to square one, I believe something more is needed. Any large fight already has a chance of being throttled down by the server because it has trouble keeping up and you want to add a large number of calculation on top of it?
Other games manage to include AoE without melting, and computers love calculations so I'm not convinced by the "think of the servers" argument. When CCP decide something is good for the game they find a way to make it work. How about the server keeps track of how much damage is applied to the target from AoE weapons over a server tick and then a fraction of that is applied to ships in AoE range (similar to a smart bomb) over the next tick. |
Yun Kuai
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
266
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:27:03 -
[22] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Rawketsled wrote:Mr Mieyli wrote:Many eve players complain about remote reps making fights into battles where one side loses next to nothing and the other loses everything, but is nerfing remote reps the best solution? Yes, it is. I think cutting them in half is more than reasonable. Even at half power, they will still be used the same way they are now: to prevent fleet members from being destroyed while sustaining heavy fire. But cutting them in half will make onboard reps more important, and allow them to stack better against remote reps. [/i]
Your logi is so backwardly flawed I don't even know where to start. Let's begin with the current meta from a lot of so called "elite" pirate groups. Their elite fleet comps tend to favor a 50% DPS, 45% Logi, 5% Tackle. If you cut down the effectiveness of logi by half, you will either a) force players to bring 50% more logi to make up for the reduced effectivenss or b) if they can't bring more people, they will take much less fights for fear of *gasp* losing a ship in a PvP game. Either way, people will still do everything they can to get the same "epeen pvp where they don't lose a ship in a fight" feeling.
If it's a matter of capital reps being too strong out of triage, then a) increase the cycle of capital remote reps to 15secs (3x slower than currently) and b) limit links to only affect sub-cap remote reps. The combination of both would make triage much more attractive, which means groups have a better chance to out DPS/Neut a single carrier that can't be helped by outside forces.
As for the OP's post: AOE weapons would be fun (excpet if you're in FW because F-U CCP), except they're really not needed. Nullsec/WH space have bombers and mutliple types of different bombs to deal massive amounts of AOE damage. Lowsec doesn't have options except smartbombs, which is a good thing because it gives different flavors of combat in different areas.
However, if we were going to introduce AOE weapons, I would rather see AOE defensive systems. ECM that only effects drones (would be epic for logi because ec-300s too strong). AOE Remote Sensor/ECCM boosters that work at a drastically lower efficiency, but would affect everyone within x KMs.
--------------------------------------------------------::::::::::::--:::-----:::---::::::::::::--------------:::----------:::----:::---:::----------------------:::::::-------:::---:::----::::::-------------------:::-----------:::--:::----:::---------------------::::::::::::----:::::::----:::::::::::::-------
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2115
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:34:25 -
[23] - Quote
Mr Mieyli wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Mr Mieyli wrote:Rawketsled wrote:Mr Mieyli wrote:Many eve players complain about remote reps making fights into battles where one side loses next to nothing and the other loses everything, but is nerfing remote reps the best solution? Yes, it is. Let's say remote reps are nerfed to 1/4 of their current strength, this is a massive nerf in power and not likely something CCP would actually do. Now what would happen as a result? Would anything change? No. Fleet comps would simply adjust to include more logi ships and we are back to square one, I believe something more is needed. Any large fight already has a chance of being throttled down by the server because it has trouble keeping up and you want to add a large number of calculation on top of it? Other games manage to include AoE without melting, and computers love calculations so I'm not convinced by the "think of the servers" argument. When CCP decide something is good for the game they find a way to make it work. How about the server keeps track of how much damage is applied to the target from AoE weapons over a server tick and then a fraction of that is applied to ships in AoE range (similar to a smart bomb) over the next tick.
Name other games where engagement size is unlimited and don't have a problem with AoE fest. Remember, I can bring 500 of those AoE weapon to the same fight and the targets might be a stack of 300 ships without the server being able to do anything about it beside going in TiDi mode.
As for your different calculation method, the server still have to make all those new calculation of who is in range of the central AoE point and how much damage each of them take based on the base damage and affected by resist. This is multiplied by how many ship you had using the AoE weapon on the same tick. The damage being applied on this tick or the next does not change much since on the next tick, there is probably another wave of new AoE to calculate because some people in the AoE fleet fired 1 second late... |
Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
464
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 16:22:59 -
[24] - Quote
Instead of direct AoE which has technical issues, perhaps something more like Chain Lightning would punish blobs without being so taxing on the servers.
It could jump from target to target, though determining what should get hit might be hard.
Another option is perhaps a feedback beam. When you shoot a ship with it, other ships repping it or boosting it, or vice versa, also get hit. It is much more controlled and directed, no distance calcs needed.
You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2118
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:06:18 -
[25] - Quote
Chance Ravinne wrote:Instead of direct AoE which has technical issues, perhaps something more like Chain Lightning would punish blobs without being so taxing on the servers.
It could jump from target to target, though determining what should get hit might be hard.
Another option is perhaps a feedback beam. When you shoot a ship with it, other ships repping it or boosting it, or vice versa, also get hit. It is much more controlled and directed, no distance calcs needed.
Chain lightning only gets easier on the server if the number of affected target is limited, if not, good luck not crushing the server with calculation of which ship get hit in what order.
Feedback beam just become another "must have" in any fleet comp. You then either get alpha'd off the field or the other side just warp away because they can't rep against a feedback beam. |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1326
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:33:14 -
[26] - Quote
This whole thread is du..... not smart. Eve doesn't need AoE or chain lightning (???) weapons. CCP should (and I think is) make reasons to not blob up to add depth and interest to the game. Adding effects and/or mechanics to punish folks for blobbing up is negative programming and not moving the game forward.
Don't push CCP to add things that punish blobs. Push CCP to add things that are more interesting and better than being in a blob.
I'm not sure how entosis will work out, but it's positive programming and adding something new and interesting to the game to move it forward.
I'm just like most other folks - I don't like blobs, lag or getting alpha'd either. I also don't like negative programming / game design.
Chain lightning..... really?? |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2118
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:50:00 -
[27] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Chain lightning..... really??
Critical plasma explosion pattern.
It's a little bit like a shaped charge but it tracks gravity/magnetic anomaly caused by other ships around to direct a plasma flow causing damage.
It's also a stupid idea but vOv |
Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
464
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 18:19:00 -
[28] - Quote
In other games and IRL, the reasons for not blobbing are line of sight, line of fire, friendly fire, and AOE.
Eve doesn't have #1 or #2 which is why aoe seems like a reasonable suggestion.
You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2121
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 18:32:05 -
[29] - Quote
Chance Ravinne wrote:In other games and IRL, the reasons for not blobbing are line of sight, line of fire, friendly fire, and AOE.
Eve doesn't have #1 or #2 which is why aoe seems like a reasonable suggestion.
And unlike all those other games, EVE also does not prevent you from taking 1000 of your friends each with their own 5 drones with you for the ride this multiplying every AoE calculation by thousands.
Is there any game beside FPS that really somehow reduce the effectiveness of blobbing? |
Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
464
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 20:13:06 -
[30] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Chance Ravinne wrote:In other games and IRL, the reasons for not blobbing are line of sight, line of fire, friendly fire, and AOE.
Eve doesn't have #1 or #2 which is why aoe seems like a reasonable suggestion. And unlike all those other games, EVE also does not prevent you from taking 1000 of your friends each with their own 5 drones with you for the ride this multiplying every AoE calculation by thousands. Is there any game beside FPS that really somehow reduce the effectiveness of blobbing?
As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, RTS games like Starcraft, Homeworld, Age of Empires, etc. do.
Some of these games have hundreds of units on field at a time. And the main things that control blobs are terrain (doesn't exist in space) and splash damage.
And no, you don't win rts games with n+1 splash damage. Aoe tends to be much lower dps than normal attacks, and the units that fire aoe tend to be either very slow or very fragile.
For instance instead of doing 500 dps to one target you would do 75 dps to multiple targets. A fleet composed of the splash damage ships will be murdered by brawling ships or well spaced sniping ships.
You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |