|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.04 11:05:00 -
[1]
Introducing new Tactics into eve warfare.
I would love to see new tactics added into eve warfare
Such as flanking.
Currently eve is lacking the benefit of flanking in a tactical sense.
There is ZERO benefit to hitting an enemy ship from the front, side, top, bottom, or rear.
I would like to see this ability added to the game.
Simply make it so that with all solutions to the current damage calculation take into consideration from which direction the incoming damage came from.
My solution assume the following.
Damage hitting * the front of the ship takes a 1.0 multiplier * The top & bottom takes a 1.15 multiplier * The Sides of the ship takes a 1.1 multiplier * The aft/rear takes a 1.2 multiplier
The actual numbers would be apart of the ships description. And could be default for most ships, but some ships could have slight differences. Perhaps based on the ships race type? (Amarr/Gallente/Caldari/Minmatar)
So let's say your ship today gets hit from behind in the engines, for 100 damage. You would only take 100.
Now let's say these changes are implemented. and again you get shot at, from behind in the engines, for 100 damage. but now your enemy is rewarded for taking the time to flank you and hits you for 120.
*********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation
Military Tactics |
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.04 11:38:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Freyya plating on tanks for instance isn't the same on every front
Agreed on this point.
Originally by: Freyya it's kinda hard to implement. Shields engulf the ship completely on all sides for instance so that would make shield tanking a better one than armor tanking.
I disagree on this point.
Shields are based on shield emitters, which are apart of a ships construction. These will not always be necessarily evenly distributed. They may intentionally be slightly stronger forward by design, due to expecting the enemy being being ahead of you during your attack.
Originally by: Freyya tech science is used to make the plating on a ship equally strong no matter the thickness of the plating.
I disagree on this point
Some ships by design would have different armor setups based on who is designing the ship. For example lets say you are designing a sniper ship. That is the role it is specialized for you would naturally expect the target to be in one direction. It would make the ship less expensive to manufacture with armor/shield's from that direction, forward.
As opposed to making a ship heavier more expensive covering all angles.
Originally by: Freyya the ships are virtually always moving and turning such as when you're orbiting someone. The technical nature of how combat is handled makes it kinda useless and impossible to implement in any reasonable fasion.
This would be again apart of the design. Lets say you are designing an interceptor or an assault ship. Where the primary role involves orbiting than it would benefit you as a ship designer/manufacturer to set your defenses toward sides.
*********** Military Tactics Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.04 12:07:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Lear Hepburn This is an excellent idea and would add a tactical element to combat. This is similar to, but simpler than an idea I voiced before. My idea also included the possibility of a module to allow the player to adjust the modifier so they could surprise the enemy with unconventional shield/armour setups.
I think the advantages of this are enormous in terms of making battles tactical rather than simple blobfests where he with the most ships wins.
Interesting idea regarding RCS. Also Thank you for the positive comments.
*********** Military Tactics Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.04 12:11:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Bevil Smyth I also like the idea.
FC - right the enemy fleet is mostly composed of apocalypse class battleships which have weak armour on the underside i need a covops to get me a warpin point from the bottom of the gate.
Enemy FC on ambush - enemy below everyone align down and listen to the target caller.
It would make a tactical decision between surviving and slugging it out between fleets or staying aligned out and hoping you dont get bubbled for warpout if needed.
also closer range ships could get more viability in fleet engagements by being better able to cash in on enemy ships vulnerabilities, or by having massive armour on front and sides for their approach.
100% agree.
Another tactic would be to split up into 2 sniper blobs to attack an enemy sniper blob from 2 different directions. Forcing the enemy to choose which group to expose their rear, side, or belly too. *********** Military Tactics Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.04 14:17:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Valandril I suggest OP to read what flanking
I'm fully aware of what flanking is...
Actually I've done and still am doing my research on flanking for over a year. I have been writing about Military Tactics and have been putting together a eve wiki page on it.
Feel free to take a look.
Dasfry's guide to Military Tactics & Military Strategy
Also the whole point of flanking is to hit the weaker side of an enemy.
Currently eve does not receive a benefit from flanking. Yes, you can do the action of flanking, but theres no benefit. No reward. Its like going to work all week and not receiving a paycheck. There is no current incentive to tactically flank your opponent.
*********** Military Tactics Dasfry, CEO Demio's Corporation
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.04 14:22:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Valandril And there are already flanking manouvers in eve which give you advantage.
Can you explain?
I am most interested in adding these maneuvers to my tactics page. Because as of right now from my point of view, their pretty close to non existent. *********** Military Tactics Dasfry, CEO Demio's Corporation
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:33:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Valandril So because its not on some random wiki ... then there is no benefit from flanking ?
No, this is not reverse causality.
Eve lacks benefits to flanking. Where you actually pay attention to which direction the enemy is facing and take it into consideration when deciding how to approach your enemy.
Right now, when you go into a fight what do you pay attention to? If you look at this, you'll notice you are not paying attention to which direction they are facing or to where you are hitting your enemy. Forward/side/rear/top/bottom? What you do see is, Where are they and how far away they are.
Originally by: Valandril this page got more titles than conent which makes me lol
You are exaggerating, and the page setup is done by design. Only a paragraph or two is written in with a link to a full page article about the subject. For example with the sniper tactics section, only a quick summary of about a paragraph followed up with a link directly to the full page article. Otherwise the entire Military Tactics page would be over 10x larger than it is today.
Again it is by design.
Originally by: Valandril And flanking got nothing to do with hitting enemy from behind or side, none whatsoever.
I disagree, it has a lot to do with it.
Originally by: Valandril It's a manuver which goal is to engage side force of the opponent (which is ie. waiting as reinforcments) and reduce maneuverability of hostile. In eve it's very easly and commondly executed by dropping tackler forces (including short range fighters) on sides of hostile gang (+ bubbles) while rest is engaged in frontline sniperfire. Does sound like textbook definition of flanking to me, .
That is just maneuvering, not flanking.
What you described does not take into consideration which direction the approach is from. Your attacking force does not care which direction your enemy is facing. All that is of major importance to the snipers + tacklers + damage dealers, is range.
Just because you have 1 group attacking at sniper range and a second group attacking up close does not somehow turn it into flanking. *********** Military Tactics Dasfry, CEO Demio's Corporation
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:40:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Dasfry on 04/06/2009 15:40:48
Originally by: Lear Hepburn If you gain damage to the target by hitting it from the side then you will try to do so, surely? Therefore flanking has an advantage.
Exactly!
Another reason not to just blob up but to spread out. That gives you a reward to do so. *********** Military Tactics Dasfry, CEO Demio's Corporation
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:48:00 -
[9]
Originally by: McEivalley I think this idea will bring some realism to the game.
Agreed.
Originally by: McEivalley However, some ships seem to be more vulnerable from the front or one of its sides (consider caldari and minmatar ships, which have a lot of asymetric designs), or even from above or below rather than the rear.
Very true. Perhaps minmatar being fast ships, could benefit from having stronger side armor/shields than forward. *********** Military Tactics Dasfry, CEO Demio's Corporation
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:51:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Dasfry on 04/06/2009 15:51:20
Originally by: Washell Olivaw Not going to happen until there's spare CPU power on the node...
That's a different issue. *********** Military Tactics Dasfry, CEO Demio's Corporation
|
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.04 17:31:00 -
[11]
Originally by: McEivalley However, I'm not sure that it would make the game more fun.
True, just because something is more realistic does not mean it will be more fun.
However in this particular example, I believe it will make pvp more fun because battles will encourage players to do more than blob up and simply get with in attack range. *********** Military Tactics Dasfry, CEO Demio's Corporation
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.05 08:14:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Dasfry on 05/06/2009 08:15:46
Originally by: Inglix Redhammer
Originally by: Washell Olivaw Not going to happen until there's spare CPU power on the node during major fleet battles.
This is the real point. You'd also have to have better collision detection and much tighter control over where the server is recording people. While it's not haphazard now, the computational requirements would get staggering very quickly.
I hope you're not seriously suggesting the eve sever isn't capable of handling such a small addition to the damage caculation formula such as...
1.1(x) where x is the current damage calculation solution, and the 1.1 is derrived from the direction of the incoming fire.
Now lets compare that addition to what a missile damage calculation currently looks like.
As stated by Electrofreak on this thread...
Originally by: Electrofreak If Target Signature Radius >= Missile Explosion Radius, then ( Target Signature Radius / Missile Explosion Radius ) = 1.0
If Target Velocity <= Missile Explosion Velocity, then ( Target Velocity - Missile Explosion Velocity ) = 0.0
Missile Damage * (Target Signature Radius / Missile Explosion Radius) * e^( -1 * (Target Velocity - Missile Explosion Velocity )^2 / (1500^2) ) = Final Missile Damage
Inglix Redhammer, your telling me eve can handle all that math and more but i cannot handle the addition of a 1.1 multiplier added into the damage calculations, based on the direction of incoming fire?
*********** Military Tactics Dasfry, CEO Demio's Corporation
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.06 00:09:00 -
[13]
Originally by: something somethingdark if we get these damage zones i want fireing arcs on my guns aswell!!
Haha,
The firing arcs already exist... it just well they are all Omnidirectional. *********** Military Tactics Dasfry, CEO Demio's Corporation
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.06 18:43:00 -
[14]
Originally by: something somethingdark technicaly im all in favor...
Awesome! |
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.07 08:58:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Tavren Darknigh I agree this will make fleet battles quite a bit more interesting...
I agree also |
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.08 06:20:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Dasfry on 08/06/2009 06:20:54
Originally by: Merdaneth you haven't give any reason why flanking should be used, made no analysis of advantages or disadvantages, nor gave a working model of how you think it should be implemented.
Hence your post appears as nothing more than asking for a 'yes/no' opinion.
Let me ask you a few questions instead:
Why flanking, how would this make the game more fun? How would you players could control which flank they would shoot?
Flanking is tactic eve online is missing. It allows you and other players to actively attack an enemy in more ways than is currently possible.
The way players can control which flank they would shoot would be based on the direction their opponent's ship is facing vs. which direction the attackers guns are incoming from.
So if you approach from the side of an enemy ship you would get damage bonuses. Yielding yourself a reward for maneuvering in.
If you are able to engage in advanced maneuvers, would you be able to direct your enemy with deception tactics, such as a faint.
Where you have a small group approtch from your enemies 9 o'clock. Expecting your enemy to attempt to counter this tactic, by facing your small group. You have your 2nd group moments later enter at your enemies original 3 o'clock.
At this point no matter which direction your enemy faces you get a damage bonus. A Flanking tactic has been used and rewarded adding that much more pvp immersion to Eve online. *********** Military Tactics Dasfry, CEO Demio's Corporation
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.09 07:49:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Tavren Darknigh Though I disagree that "top and bottom" would be factored in, keep it simple with bow, aft, port, and starboard.
example: Stabber bow 25%sh 25%ar
port 25% sh 25%ar starboard 25%sh 25%ar
aft 25%sh 25%ar
change for fast tackle
bow 5%sh 35%ar
port 45% sh 15%ar starboard 45%sh 15%ar
aft 5%sh 35%ar
I don't understand what your saying with the percentages. Can you explain, What do they represent? *********** Military Tactics Dasfry, CEO Demio's Corporation
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.09 22:37:00 -
[18]
Lets take a look at the Armageddon for a moment.
Armageddon, Amarr battleship
The mighty Armageddon class is the main warship of the Amarr Empire. Its heavy armaments and strong front are specially designed to crash into any battle like a juggernaut and deliver swift justice in the name of the Emperor.
Just by looking at the thing it appears to be designed for head on engagement. Where most of its protection is meant to handle an incoming attack from the front.
*********** Military Tactics Dasfry, CEO Demio's Corporation
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.10 03:14:00 -
[19]
Originally by: skye orionis Which pretty much sums it up, it would add extra server load and therefore lag.
I can remember old tabletop wargames using pencils, papers and dice which modelled firing arcs and non-uniform armour, it's not a new idea, but when you get a major lag fest like the AAA vs CVA battle today the last thing that CCP developers are thinking is 'lets make the servers do more work'
I really hope this isn't going to be the all inclusive answer to shoot down all future ideas.
There must be a balance to getting more bang for our buck. *********** Military Tactics Dasfry, CEO Demio's Corporation
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.10 10:01:00 -
[20]
In clear skies 2, at the very end. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mii1jNL08VQ
In the story he attacks/rams/docks with the engines of the titan.
Which partly goes with this new tactic of, it SHOULD matter where you hit an enemy ship.
: )
*********** Military Tactics Dasfry, CEO Demio's Corporation
|
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.12 22:36:00 -
[21]
Originally by: skye orionis Which pretty much sums it up, it would add extra server load and therefore lag.
You can basicly say that about majority of all suggested updates to the game. The very presences of Tech III ships creates server load, yet they where added in.
Now lets figure out how much math would really be involved.
To figure out what direction the incoming fire is ... first distance between objects.
The distance between two points <Ax,Ay,Az> and <Bx,By,Bz>
dx = Ax-Bx dy = Ay-By dz = Az-Bz distance = sqrt(dx*dx + dy*dy + dz*dz) |
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.07.09 20:15:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Dasfry on 09/07/2009 20:16:42
Originally by: Space Pinata You can flank someone on two sides of a gate. You can flank someone by reducing their ability to maneuver to either side without coming too close to enemies.
You can attack a system from two (or more) directions, forcing an enemy to spread itself out to prevent you from entering.
These are flanking tactics.
Wrong, what you just mentioned is flanking strategy not flanking tactics. Yes there is a difference.
Originally by: Space Pinata For someone trying to speak for 'realistic military tactics', you sure have a WoW mindset in terms of flanking. No, flanking is not about stabbing someone in the back so you can do extra damage with your 'uber backstabs'.
I don't play wow.
Originally by: Space Pinata I challenge you to find a real life flanking example that is remotely similar to an arbitrary damage modifier
Easy, just think WW2 german tanks vs the allies.
The Germans had superior tanks, and the allies had to flank them in order to destroy them. The German tanks had the advantage over allied tanks.
They had to hit them from the side or rear.
*********** Military Tactics Dasfry, CEO Demio's Corporation
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.07.10 08:57:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Dasfry on 10/07/2009 09:00:47
Originally by: Ephemeron EVE used to have very effective speed tactics, that changed the combat dynamics quite significantly from simple tank & gank
But the carebears were upset that it made pvp too difficult. And CCP removed it from game. So if CCP is actively removing alternative tactics, I don't see why they'd ever consider doing the opposite. First try get speed back as viable option, then you can push for other alternatives.
I believe you are referring to nano speed tactics.
The problem with these tactics was a lack of a counter. Making it one sided.
However saying the counter to a nano tactic is to use a nano is a, silly Catch 22. *********** Military Tactics Dasfry, CEO Demio's Corporation
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.07.10 09:00:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Kail Storm
Originally by: Dasfry
Easy, just think WW2 german tanks vs the allies.
The Germans had superior tanks, and the allies had to flank them in order to destroy them. The German tanks had the advantage over allied tanks.
They had to hit them from the side or rear.
Read my reply it tells about tigers being flanked or ships of the line crossing the t....Yes there is flanking but first we need to esablish the definition and all agree on it...Daf youll get a better response that way
Kail Storm, That response was in reply to Space Pinata comments. I'll relook at your previous post about what you said Kail Storm, and reply. *********** Military Tactics Dasfry, CEO Demio's Corporation
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.07.10 20:53:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Kail Storm Actually there were reasons for coming along side enemys in real war....Tiger tank,Ships of the line etc The germans tiger would defend and deflect almost anything from the front and had multiple storys about 30-50 tank rounds hitting and that tank surviving so what did the tommys and GI`s do? They Flanked and attacked the treads and rear fuel tanks of the tigers.
This is a good example *********** Military Tactics Dasfry, CEO Demio's Corporation
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.07.11 09:19:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Zitus First thing I read on your wiki mate:
"Tactics are what a commander undertakes during battle"
Obvious statment is obvious... =P
As Opposed to what he undertakes during a campaign, which would be considered strategy. *********** Military Tactics Dasfry, CEO Demio's Corporation
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.07.11 09:27:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Ephemeron The argument you use can be turned around like this: in order to kill any ship, you need weapons. Ships can't kill each other without both of them having weapons. Catch 22.
What about ships that self destruct for insurance cash? Or are killed by concord/station turrets, or disconnected while mission running, or by admins using their admin abilities...
*********** Military Tactics Dasfry, CEO Demio's Corporation
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 06:38:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Max Hardcase A rear facing 60 degree cone where incoming attacks inflict more damage would be a nice buff to the short range people. They are setup to more easily take advantage of such oppertunities.
can your make a drawing or explain more of what you mean? *********** Military Tactics Dasfry, CEO Demio's Corporation
|
|
|
|