EVE Search - 1 simple, organic solution: lasers,RR blobs,shield transfers,logistics

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

1 simple, organic solution: lasers,RR blobs,shield transfers,logistics

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Mohenna	Posted - 2009.04.18 14:04:00 - [1] TL;DR version: nerf blobs through application of stack penalty rules to shield/energy/armor transfer, like everything else. Problem: Remote armor repper gangs are more and more common, to the point of being and causing FOTMs. I realized that several different recurrent whines are all actually different aspects of the same problem: RR gangs: too simple, require only a primary repair target, and force everybody to use armor rather than shields. Less diversity is bad. Shield transfer, lack of, in gangs. No stacking penalty=> it's easier and lazier and more effective, to make everybody do the same thing and simply call primary reppage on who's being primary-ed. Logistics. The same problem affects logistics: with stacking penalty it would be MUCH more useful to bring a logistics ship along, than it is now. Lasers. I'm caldari and couldn't care less if they nerf amarr, but tbh the lasers are ok (maybe blaster t2 ammo needs a little boost, that's it for balance) and their battleships are if anything underpowered (in terms of options) considering the silly bonus to capacitor use that makes them a one trick pony. The reality is that amarr are the best suited to armor RR with their cap bonus (what do you do of all that cap otherwise), and RR gangs are FOTM! It's laughable imho to complain about other lasers than large when the most frequent punisher fitting you find around is the bleeder AC... BUT this doesn't want to be an amarr discussion please don't derail my thread. The conclusion: stack penalize RR (and of course, energy and shield transfers)! So that: amarr won't be FOTM anymore RR gangs of at least medium size will vaibly be mixed shield and armor transfer this last point means that caldari would be more viable in pvp; logistics will be much more needed (the biggest bonus is the least stacking penalized one!); more diversity in tactics and less blobbage
Mohenna	Posted - 2009.04.18 14:06:00 - [2] Edited by: Mohenna on 18/04/2009 14:10:40 Possible roadblocks: it could be programmatically difficult to develop stacking penalizations on effects starting at different times But many other things start on different times and are stacking penalized (example: TPs). Just stacking-penalize the transfers that happen during the same period, defining a basic server period for example. Remote effects need a lock, and I'm pretty sure that the code that kickstarts stacking penalization calculations is started by the locking code. I'm sure that simple solutions can be found, once a problem is clearly defined. ... ...
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2009.04.18 15:55:00 - [3] Didnt take long for the whinebrigade to find its next target i see. And yea this is my sig. Real PVP'ers only use f1.
B'reanna	Posted - 2009.04.18 15:57:00 - [4] Originally by: Mohenna TL;DR version: nerf blobs through application of stack penalty rules to shield/energy/armor transfer, like everything else. Problem: Remote armor repper gangs are more and more common, to the point of being and causing FOTMs. I realized that several different recurrent whines are all actually different aspects of the same problem: RR gangs: too simple, require only a primary repair target, and force everybody to use armor rather than shields. Less diversity is bad. Shield transfer, lack of, in gangs. No stacking penalty=> it's easier and lazier and more effective, to make everybody do the same thing and simply call primary reppage on who's being primary-ed. Logistics. The same problem affects logistics: with stacking penalty it would be MUCH more useful to bring a logistics ship along, than it is now. Lasers. I'm caldari and couldn't care less if they nerf amarr, but tbh the lasers are ok (maybe blaster t2 ammo needs a little boost, that's it for balance) and their battleships are if anything underpowered (in terms of options) considering the silly bonus to capacitor use that makes them a one trick pony. The reality is that amarr are the best suited to armor RR with their cap bonus (what do you do of all that cap otherwise), and RR gangs are FOTM! It's laughable imho to complain about other lasers than large when the most frequent punisher fitting you find around is the bleeder AC... BUT this doesn't want to be an amarr discussion please don't derail my thread. The conclusion: stack penalize RR (and of course, energy and shield transfers)! So that: amarr won't be FOTM anymore RR gangs of at least medium size will vaibly be mixed shield and armor transfer this last point means that caldari would be more viable in pvp; logistics will be much more needed (the biggest bonus is the least stacking penalized one!); more diversity in tactics and less blobbage Where to begin... RR gangs are by far no where near FOTM. Ive been using this tactic for years, sometime it works somtimes it doesnt. And its not like you can get more then 1 or 2 RR on a bs without losing your DPS. There are plenty of shield tankers still flying, and plenty of shield Logistics to go along with them. My corp use em plenty. Amarr are usually MUCH MUCH more difficult to fit RR on. Their guns suck the Power Grid down to nothing, and most of the time I have to fit a Reactor Control or Power Diag just to get them on. Amarr cap bonus on the ships... is insugnificant to help with cap issues. I can suck my cap dry running the guns an nothing else on ALL of their ships. Kick in that MWD and youll quickly find yourself without cap. Careful what you wish for... Look at the ECM changes. They didnt really nerf the ECM ships at all. The Rook and Falcon can permajam any ship with Multispecs, and the Scorp is more suitable for sniper BS gate camps.
RedSplat Heretic Army	Posted - 2009.04.18 16:06:00 - [5] NERF RR AFK TRACKING DISRUPTING CLOAKING NEUT FALCONS Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting. Originally by: CCP Mitnal it does get progressively longer.
Abrazzar	Posted - 2009.04.18 16:15:00 - [6] I wonder, has anyone ever tried to break RR blobs with ECM Bursts? Preferably on a Scorpion. On paper it looks functional but I'd like to get someone's opinion from field experience. -------- Ideas for: Mining
CrestoftheStars Caldari Eternum Pariah	Posted - 2009.04.18 17:09:00 - [7] supported, and stacking penalty dmg too. so more isn't always better. ty ___________________________________________ Whoever appeals to the law against his fellow man is either a fool or a coward. Whoever cannot take care of himself without that law is both. For a wounded
Meiyang Lee Gallente Azteca Transportation Unlimited Gunboat Diplomacy	Posted - 2009.04.18 17:52:00 - [8] Also, to promote the use of Remote Shield Transporters, they might want to take a look at the CPU usage of the modules, they use rather ridiculous amounts of it at the moment.
Frances Ducoir Gallente GK inc.	Posted - 2009.04.18 22:15:00 - [9] Originally by: Abrazzar I wonder, has anyone ever tried to break RR blobs with ECM Bursts? Preferably on a Scorpion. On paper it looks functional but I'd like to get someone's opinion from field experience. eft says there can be only 1 ecm burst module active at a time. cycle time = 30 sec. if you warp several ECM burst scorps on the opponent RR blob, it could be quite effective. snip Signiture remoted because it contained profanity - hutch
Kateryne Minmatar Nisaba Syndicate	Posted - 2009.04.18 22:56:00 - [10] Screw Scorpion, use a stealthbomber - mix of ECM burst, ECM bombs and warp core stabs. Means you can screw with anyones lock, and then re-cloak and flee.
Roemy Schneider BINFORD	Posted - 2009.04.18 23:11:00 - [11] Originally by: Frances Ducoir Originally by: Abrazzar I wonder, has anyone ever tried to break RR blobs with ECM Bursts? Preferably on a Scorpion. On paper it looks functional but I'd like to get someone's opinion from field experience. eft says there can be only 1 ecm burst module active at a time. cycle time = 30 sec. if you warp several ECM burst scorps on the opponent RR blob, it could be quite effective. and it is, though i prefer (a horde of) alts in frigs. during all this becauwse-of-falcon menace i must admit i skilled some griffin alts -.- they still die a lot - but <2mil per death, so..... - putting the gist back into logistics
Abrazzar	Posted - 2009.04.18 23:43:00 - [12] Interesting. If ECM Bursts are effective, then this would put shield transfers at an advantage compared to remote armor repairers. Shield boosts first, then cycles, whereas remote armor first cycles and then boosts. Should the armor rep lose the lock anytime during the cycle, the boost is lost. I mentioned the Scorpion specifically as it gets the ship's bonus added on the ECM Burst. Considering the amount of mid-slots, a bunch of spider shield tanking scorpions could quite screw up a armor repping blob. Add smartbombs or FoF cruises to the lot and you'll get some 120k+ EHP annoyance right where it hurts. -------- Ideas for: Mining
Vladimir Norkoff Income Redistribution Service	Posted - 2009.04.19 00:51:00 - [13] Originally by: Abrazzar I mentioned the Scorpion specifically as it gets the ship's bonus added on the ECM Burst. Considering the amount of mid-slots, a bunch of spider shield tanking scorpions could quite screw up a armor repping blob. Add smartbombs or FoF cruises to the lot and you'll get some 120k+ EHP annoyance right where it hurts. Yes because ECM Burst + Smarties + Remote Repping each other is a real good idea. I can guarantee you that there will be annoyance and lots of hurt. Not quite in the way intended though. Taxman VII: Kingdom of Vlad
Captain Campion Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2009.04.19 09:10:00 - [14] Yeah I don't think the Remote Armor Repair module was designed for tanking - more for after-battle repair. Maybe increase the cycle time. To provide a balanced alternative, give the Logistics ships something.
Typhado3 Minmatar Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium Aeternus.	Posted - 2009.04.19 14:33:00 - [15] Edited by: Typhado3 on 19/04/2009 14:34:28 Originally by: Frances Ducoir Originally by: Abrazzar I wonder, has anyone ever tried to break RR blobs with ECM Bursts? Preferably on a Scorpion. On paper it looks functional but I'd like to get someone's opinion from field experience. eft says there can be only 1 ecm burst module active at a time. cycle time = 30 sec. if you warp several ECM burst scorps on the opponent RR blob, it could be quite effective. screw scorpians, just grab 3-5 typhoons load them up with the following: highs: 8 em smartbombs mid: 1 ecm burst, 3 L cap boosters with 800's lows: buffer tank / any fitting mods u need. also have 1/2 active em hardeners so friendly fire is reduced like to see a rr blob meet that ccp fix mining agent missions % pls
Mohenna	Posted - 2009.04.19 18:12:00 - [16] Originally by: Esmenet Didnt take long for the whinebrigade to find its next target i see. The whinebrigade already started its job against something different if you didn't notice; I'm trying to divert the attention on something more useful and imho beneficial for the game.
Beverly Sparks	Posted - 2009.04.19 19:21:00 - [17] Originally by: Mohenna Originally by: Esmenet Didnt take long for the whinebrigade to find its next target i see. The whinebrigade already started its job against something different if you didn't notice; I'm trying to divert the attention on something more useful and imho beneficial for the game. Woah Woah Woah, lets take care of Large Pulse lasers first, then we can move on.
Mohenna	Posted - 2009.04.20 09:36:00 - [18] Originally by: Beverly Sparks Woah Woah Woah, lets take care of [stuff written in the opening already]
Jarne Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations Vanguard.	Posted - 2009.04.20 10:59:00 - [19] The stacking penalty for projecting effects is not the problem, that is already working (target painters, tracking links etc.). The problem is another one: It is difficult to design a stacking pentalty for effects that "give" something, like cap, armor or shield. Or damage :). It won't happen. Also, consider this: If you introduce a stacking penalty for remote reps, there will be a hard cap on the amount of dps a ships can withstand. This in turn means that you only need enough ships and you can pop every ship, regardless of how the other gang is composed and coordinated. This will only result in more blobbing. Consider the opposite: A stacking penalty on damage. It's the same in principle. It will also set a hard limit on how much damage a ship will receive. It would create the possibility of fitting an invulnerable ship which can't be killed. To not be able to safe a ship with the remote rep from your gang is nearly as bad. - Success=Achievements/Expectations
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.04.20 11:25:00 - [20] Originally by: Mohenna Edited by: Mohenna on 18/04/2009 14:10:40 Possible roadblocks: it could be programmatically difficult to develop stacking penalizations on effects starting at different times But many other things start on different times and are stacking penalized (example: TPs). Just stacking-penalize the transfers that happen during the same period, defining a basic server period for example. Remote effects need a lock, and I'm pretty sure that the code that kickstarts stacking penalization calculations is started by the locking code. I'm sure that simple solutions can be found, once a problem is clearly defined. ... ... on EVERYTHIGN in game, stack penalizations only happen on PERCENTAGE effect modules. Reopairers and remote repairers are absolute values so they cannot be stack nerfed. Also RR won 't be nerfed, last time CCP said soemthign about it they were thinkign on BOOSTING IT! And i Agree! RR shoudl be boosted!! Up to the point that otherships not only Battleships can do it.
Mohenna	Posted - 2009.04.20 11:34:00 - [21] Jarne, thank you for writing the first good answer of almost 20 I respect your well formulated opinion. Bre'anna, I missed yours yesterday thank you too. Originally by: Jarne It is difficult to design a stacking pentalty for effects that "give" something, like cap, armor or shield. Or damage :). I know it'd be news, but I don't think it'd be a problem. The penalty would go to a variable instead than directly to a ship stat. The variable "quantity of hps repped at the end of the module cycle". There must be something like that already, to take into account the chance that the remote repper gets jammed. The only difference seems to be that the stacking penalty function gets called on that. It is a different case than dps, where you have to call that penalty on all the weapons / weapon groups. Another indication that they're different cases is given by the fact that reppers are not groupable afaik (c/d). Originally by: Jarne This in turn means that you only need enough ships and you can pop every ship, regardless of how the other gang is composed and coordinated. This will only result in more blobbing. I don't follow this passage. I would say that if you need only so much dps to beat a RR gang, you'd need less blobs in attack; and moreover, if your reppage is limited in defense, it would be more tactically effective to try different things like splitting fleet in defence. On your last point, I agree that a stacking penalty on damage would be wrong, but I mentioned why I think the two cases are different, so I don't think that this makes a counterpoint to my idea. Originally by: B'reanna RR gangs are by far no where near FOTM. [...] Amarr are usually MUCH MUCH more difficult to fit RR on. I beg to differ; surfing the killboards will give you plenty of indication that RR gangs are much more frequent than ST ones, increasing in frequency, and that amarr are seeing an increase in their numbers. An averagely skilled amarr player should be cap stable easily. There are some who take this as an indication that lasers are OP, but I don't think so. I think that the blobs could use a nerf, not the lasers. Originally by: B'reanna Amarr cap bonus on the ships... is insugnificant to help with cap issues. Eh eh. What is a bonus to cap use good for then? If you're right, then it is insignificant. Dot.
Mohenna	Posted - 2009.04.20 11:37:00 - [22] Originally by: Seishi Maru RR shoudl be boosted!! Up to the point that otherships not only Battleships can do it. I agree with this; it would be lovely to see all ship classes have their repper gang as a viable tactic. Stacking penalize and boost them at the same time: small numbers RR gangs would get a boost, while huge blobs would get a penalty.
Pvt Public7 Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.04.21 13:19:00 - [23] 'You cannot Remote Armor Repair the Ibis as it is already being Remote Armor Repaired by something else.' --- SWA was here IAC is a loser
Liang Nuren No Salvation PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.21 16:11:00 - [24] IMO this is a terrible idea and would have several drastic consequences. I'd enumerate some of them, but I'm tired. If the devs take the idea seriously and start a thread on it, I'll post them there. -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
Colonel Xaven Decadence. RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2009.04.21 18:11:00 - [25] Originally by: Mohenna Problem: Remote armor repper gangs are more and more common, to the point of being and causing FOTMs. I think a good teamplay tactic should have a good counter. You cannot make the "more numbers" tactic redundant by nerfing teamplay tactics. Btw: Amarr is going to be FOTM not because of lasers or RR, but because every other race has been kicked in the balls with the latest "balances". Making all races equal in damage, tanking abilities and ewar means no reason for crosstraining anymore. Proud member of RZR - Decadence.
Mohenna	Posted - 2009.04.22 11:41:00 - [26] Originally by: Colonel Xaven I think a good teamplay tactic should have a good counter. You cannot make the "more numbers" tactic redundant by nerfing teamplay tactics. True. Please note though, that applying stacking penalties to repping (shield/armor/energy) can be done together with a concurrent boost to transferred amounts. This makes it better for small gangs, and worse for blobs. Narf blobs! Originally by: Colonel Xaven Making all races equal in damage, tanking abilities and ewar means no reason for crosstraining anymore. Personally, I find this a horrible perspective About amarr - I'd rather ask the devs to boost blasters than to keep the neverending nerf cycle alive and well...

Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.