Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Buildso
|
Posted - 2009.09.07 21:17:00 -
[1]
After years of playing Eve, this needs to be addressed, this game has been out long enough for this to be changed.
Recently we engaged a guy sitting outside a station, we got him down to almost no armor. 6 people from his corp joined the battle immediately after logging in. The reinforcements (instant logon fighters) saved the Raven by jamming our ships and forcing me and a friend to retreat. In eve the strategy is about assessing the situation to determine whether or not you can defeat the enemy with the given intel which the game provides. I determined that we could kill the Raven and i was correct, until his buddies logged on and joined in the battle and changed the entire situation. That is unrealistic and ill thought out.
To prevent this unrealistic strategy the following should be considered. Upon logging in there should be a stasis period for your ships targeting systems and weapons systems. A period of time which would prevent people from logging on and joining a battle. The people who are logged on are basing their judgment on the current situation, and deciding to engage on that information. Creating a stasis would prevent the log on fighters from manipulating the game. This is not part of the strategy the game was designed for.
Reinforcements: its understandable to expect reinforcements, but to have an army log on and instantly appear all around you and fighting you instantly makes no sense at all.
If anyone has any other helpful solutions please post them.
|
Nidhiesk
|
Posted - 2009.09.07 21:25:00 -
[2]
I can think of a fight or 2 if that was active then I would be able to kill that mofo. Yeah, I support it since it makes lots of sense to me anyway.
|
Tortugan
Internal Anarchy
|
Posted - 2009.09.07 21:28:00 -
[3]
While log-on traps are not a method I've used with any frequency, I see no reason why they shouldn't be a valid strategy. If someone really has the coordination to pull one off effectively, then good on them for working as a team. Part of Eve is knowing who you're fighting- and if they're the type to try a log-on trap, then you need to factor that into your strategy, and not just go in gung-ho and try to gank their ravens.
:D Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist |
Yarik Mendel
Amarr Privateers Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.07 21:47:00 -
[4]
No strategy is foolproof, and reinforcements is a valid tactic. There are no guarantees in Eve. Nothing says two battleships must defeat one, variables are what makes the game fun for long time players.
|
Buildso
|
Posted - 2009.09.07 21:47:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Tortugan While log-on traps are not a method I've used with any frequency, I see no reason why they shouldn't be a valid strategy. If someone really has the coordination to pull one off effectively, then good on them for working as a team. Part of Eve is knowing who you're fighting- and if they're the type to try a log-on trap, then you need to factor that into your strategy, and not just go in gung-ho and try to gank their ravens.
At this time it is a part of the game and any smart corp would keep that in consideration.
Log on traps are not realistic and manipulate the foundational strategy of the game. A stasis period would simply force battles to be more realistic and embrace the overall strategy aspects.
|
Buildso
|
Posted - 2009.09.07 21:53:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Yarik Mendel No strategy is foolproof, and reinforcements is a valid tactic. There are no guarantees in Eve. Nothing says two battleships must defeat one, variables are what makes the game fun for long time players.
Reinforcements are of course realistic and should be part of any game. perfection is a life long goal my friend and this is just one issue which would step Eve that much closer to a simulated battle which doesn't consist of log on instant reinforcements. Variables are welcomed in a battle, that is what the strategy plans are created for. You plan for contingencies. The issue here is when you create a plan of attack based on a current Intel and it is manipulated by ships being added instantly due to being able to jump into the game with no stasis.
Stasis period should be embraced to create a more realistic simulated experience.
|
Tortugan
Internal Anarchy
|
Posted - 2009.09.07 22:15:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Buildso
Originally by: Yarik Mendel No strategy is foolproof, and reinforcements is a valid tactic. There are no guarantees in Eve. Nothing says two battleships must defeat one, variables are what makes the game fun for long time players.
Reinforcements are of course realistic and should be part of any game. perfection is a life long goal my friend and this is just one issue which would step Eve that much closer to a simulated battle which doesn't consist of log on instant reinforcements. Variables are welcomed in a battle, that is what the strategy plans are created for. You plan for contingencies. The issue here is when you create a plan of attack based on a current Intel and it is manipulated by ships being added instantly due to being able to jump into the game with no stasis.
Stasis period should be embraced to create a more realistic simulated experience.
While we're at it, should we put RPGs on our ships and use steel armor? Eve isn't exactly based on reality. Again- if this was something that was legitimately broken about it, you'd have my interest- but the fact is it's a part of the game. If you get tricked by a log-in trap, then so be it- you lose a ship and buy a new one. I've come damn close to losing ships to log-in traps on multiple occasions- and you don't see me complaining.
:D Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist |
Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2009.09.07 22:20:00 -
[8]
It's odd, really. Most PvPers seem to be gung-ho about removing local, which would make traps of this nature far more common and far easier - you wouldn't even have to log off, just get off grid and align. For that matter, most PvPers fly in 0.0, where a single high slot on a frigate can spawn a couple hundred dreadnoughts, and frequently does. And yet, here we have a PvPer who claims that traps are unrealistic, immoral, and should be nerfbatted.
At the end of the day, traps will exist, and traps should exist. This particular mechanism for a trap is unrealistic, but plenty of realistic mechanisms for traps are impossible because of gameplay issues. Balance > realism, and given the limits of the tactic, I'd say it's pretty balanced. No support.
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2009.09.07 22:43:00 -
[9]
your suggestion wouldnt prevent this kind of traps. it would just delay them. and as herschel mentioned. with the wh style local you wouldnt even notice that.
|
Buildso
|
Posted - 2009.09.07 23:21:00 -
[10]
Originally by: darius mclever your suggestion wouldnt prevent this kind of traps. it would just delay them. and as herschel mentioned. with the wh style local you wouldnt even notice that.
That is the point. Instant log in trap is not supposed to be part of the game, it is something that people discovered and manipulate. Part of the game it is unfortunately, however, i dont think the dev's intended for it which deems not a function.
Pure and simple, a delay is exactly the point, a stasis period that creates a realistic combat scenario. Yes this is a game, and the goal is to simulate as close to reality as possible. I hope the dev's take a good look into this, that is the purpose of this post. A stasis delay would reinforce the strategy aspect of this game and allow the people who actually plan their attack based on the enemies who are logged in, not the hundreds of other people who "might" log in.
|
|
Nidhiesk
|
Posted - 2009.09.07 23:25:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto It's odd, really. Most PvPers seem to be gung-ho about removing local, which would make traps of this nature far more common and far easier - you wouldn't even have to log off, just get off grid and align. For that matter, most PvPers fly in 0.0, where a single high slot on a frigate can spawn a couple hundred dreadnoughts, and frequently does. And yet, here we have a PvPer who claims that traps are unrealistic, immoral, and should be nerfbatted.
At the end of the day, traps will exist, and traps should exist. This particular mechanism for a trap is unrealistic, but plenty of realistic mechanisms for traps are impossible because of gameplay issues. Balance > realism, and given the limits of the tactic, I'd say it's pretty balanced. No support.
You missed a point right there. When you remove local, you still see them in your address book and if your not sure where they are cause local is gone let say, they you still got the agent locator which should help you alot.
What he's asking for is a simple delay in loging on. I could say 30 seconds or so which could give time to "finish" what he was doing in the first place. This is just to give a "fair" balance. log on traps will always exists if you ask me.
Originally by: Darius Mclever your suggestion wouldnt prevent this kind of traps. it would just delay them. and as herschel mentioned. with the wh style local you wouldnt even notice that.
Again, read it one more time, he's not asking to prevent it. just delaying the log on. Which should in turn give a bit of a fair advantage. As some other said which I can't remember who.
Originally by: Tortugan blah blah blah ... I've come damn close to losing ships to log-in traps on multiple occasions- and you don't see me complaining.
It might be called complaining but its still argumentative for the simple fact that lots of battle could of been won or saved because of the log on trap.
In short, I find the log on trap unfair.
|
Tortugan
Internal Anarchy
|
Posted - 2009.09.08 00:53:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Nidhiesk
In short, I find the log on trap unfair.
Welcome to Eve :)
:D Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist |
Jade Veldspar
|
Posted - 2009.09.08 02:01:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Jade Veldspar on 08/09/2009 02:01:36 Think about it. The buddies who logged on he could have been in contact with the whole entire time. Via Vent or Cell Phone. And if you take into effect that if the game was real, his buddies are just sittin' in the station doing nothing (loged off). When he calls for help, the rush to their ships (log on) undock from the station and join the fray. Adding a delay to locking upon log on will cause more issues then not having it.
I'm sorry you didn't get the kill, but that's EVE.
Edit: Fixed to Think from Thank =P
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2009.09.08 02:13:00 -
[14]
yeah and even delaying is stupid.
want some tissues?
|
Drake Draconis
Minmatar Shadow Cadre
|
Posted - 2009.09.08 02:43:00 -
[15]
I'd never thought I'd see the day a PVP'er is ####ing about getting out-ganked by a bunch of clever pilots.
Hell they logged on... they didn't run.
And your throwing a damn fit?
Seriously... that's messed up.
I can get log off's... station camping games... but THAT?
This is normal for EVE.... don't like it? GB2WOW or something.
Not supporting yet an another whine thread.
PS: This is no different than pilots who are logged on and a system over. ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com ========================= |
Buildso
|
Posted - 2009.09.08 03:43:00 -
[16]
You guys do not value real strategy, its seems you value taking advantage of game mechanics so you can feel get off some cheap kills and then brag that you did it so well.
What would you all do if you couldnt sit at your computer at the log in screen waiting to attack...
perhaps you would have to fight toe to toe and figure out a real strategy.
I do not expect anyone to understand this except the dev's, which i hope take this to heart.
Yes, we have heard it all, crying, whining, that is nothing new for an insult. i have been playing since March 2004, so honestly tell me somethign I haven't heard, or better yet, DONT! This thread is meant to help the dev's realize that there might be something to fix.
Try not to cry on this thread and be helpful, or dont post.
|
Drake Draconis
Minmatar Shadow Cadre
|
Posted - 2009.09.08 06:15:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Buildso You guys do not value real strategy, its seems you value taking advantage of game mechanics so you can feel get off some cheap kills and then brag that you did it so well.
strategy |ˈstratəjē| noun ( pl. -gies) a plan of action or policy designed to achieve a major or overall aim : time to develop a coherent economic strategy | shifts in marketing strategy. ò the art of planning and directing overall military operations and movements in a war or battle. Often contrasted with tactics (see tactic ). ò a plan for such military operations and movements : nonprovocative defense strategies. ORIGIN early 19th cent.: from French stratTgie, from Greek stratēgia ægeneralship,Æ from stratēgos (see stratagem ).
For someone who is crying over losing a battle... you sure seem to contradict yourself.
It is COMMON SENSE to have a communications line to other members in the corporation seeking to set up an ambush.
They don't even need to be logged off! They can be 1 jump away from you.
I suggest you take a step back... or better yet... take a week off. ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com ========================= |
jemos
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.09.08 08:02:00 -
[18]
You can't change the "logon trap" without making some serious change to the game. Problem with statis is:
Pilot x logs in after an op deep into enemy territory. and suddently he's is a BLOB! He can't lock, he can't target back. The blob can *poff*. Or if the blob can't well, we have a serious issue of ships escaping situations they really shouldn't be able to escape.
Please, stop whining about a game attribute so widespread evryone should know how to use. Including you!
Originally by: FireT
If you have capitals..... well for the love of Raptor Pope, use them before they rust away.
|
Don Pellegrino
|
Posted - 2009.09.08 12:26:00 -
[19]
Buildso, let's put it another way.
You said "In eve the strategy is about assessing the situation to determine whether or not you can defeat the enemy with the given intel which the game provides" and I totally agree with you. Some people claim that eve is about numbers, it is not, it's all about intel. When you know they have more and that you can't engage, just don't engage.
In your case, you did the right thing considering there was only a single Raven. You also did the right thing by retreating when you realized they had more in system! If you knew that they had a lot of people in the station, would you have engaged? It seems like you didn't, so just consider it a lack of intel and next time be aware that they probably live in that station.
Basically, logging off is another tactic to hide numbers, just like waiting in a nearby system does. Player shouldn't be displayed in local anyway, so always be ready for that situation. As far as I know, it hasn't been considered as an exploit and obviously will never be, so get used to it, it's part of the game and it "makes sense" when we consider local not to make any sense.
|
Nidhiesk
|
Posted - 2009.09.08 12:51:00 -
[20]
its not the lack of intel which is the problem. Its just the fact that if you attack someone and then all of a sudden you get 3-5 or more guys coming online to help him. myself too find that....exploitative in some way. If they were online and waiting 2-3 jumps over I believe I wouldn't mind killing that Raven myself but log on and be ready right away. There just seems to be a problem with that.
So the point is not the fact the intel was missing its the fact that people can get online and be ready immediately.
|
|
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
|
Posted - 2009.09.08 14:46:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Nidhiesk its not the lack of intel which is the problem. Its just the fact that if you attack someone and then all of a sudden you get 3-5 or more guys coming online to help him. myself too find that....exploitative in some way. If they were online and waiting 2-3 jumps over I believe I wouldn't mind killing that Raven myself but log on and be ready right away. There just seems to be a problem with that.
So the point is not the fact the intel was missing its the fact that people can get online and be ready immediately.
Well this is a game, so some differences to real life are to be expected. The metagaming being something you just can't remove and any attempt to do so only shows the lack of thinking of the one who thinks it is possible. You are more likely to hurt the actual game then metagaming with changes, that are designed just to limit metagaming. It isn't that big of a deal once you adjust your thinking to consider it.
That said it is a lack of intel, since proper intelligence gathering would have aided and can help you defeat them. You just have to consider more then just the single situation when you consider intel and think as a gamer, not just as a character. If the one lonely raven sitting there was everything you knew, you would have no real intel, but only some situational awereness and possible capability to assess that ravens fighting capabilities.
One basic way to gain intel on hostile organisations is to engage them solely for the purpose of measuring their reaction. Attack a normal resource gathering site to see what their backup is, so when the real offensive begins you know to attack them too. Attack one of their ships and measure response time, ships used, tactics used(log-on traps belong here), active players vs those just logged on, ect. the list goes on.
The OP didn't have much intel. He just saw an opportunity and took it hoping for the best. It didn't work as planned, but the whole situation propably helped him to gain a lot of helpful intel on how that organisation operates. He can now avoid similar engagements with them or set a trap to counter their log-on trap, if he has the resources to manage that. The intel game is constant and can be turned to your advantage, if you put effort into it.
|
Dr BattleSmith
PAX Interstellar Services
|
Posted - 2009.09.08 14:54:00 -
[22]
This isn't an issue that is solved through a stasis period.
A stasis period just punishes people who were disconnected for whatever reason.
Instead this is part of the "remove local" argument.
Local is one of your only sources of intel. This is the source of this technique.
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.09.08 15:37:00 -
[23]
Not supported for all of the reasona already outlined. --Vel
|
Traidor Disloyal
Private Nuisance
|
Posted - 2009.09.08 15:57:00 -
[24]
That Raven sitting outside station had "TRAP" written all over it. Even a dumb grunt like me would have seen that. You should have brought more firepower to the party to take him down within seconds. And if you couldn't do that you should have waited outside system on a gate he would likely go through.
Remember now: When a WT is sitting outside station 9 times out of 10 it's a TRAP. ************************************************* I have three characters. One has Cov Ops V along with all the bells and whistles that goes with it. |
De'Veldrin
Minmatar Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.09.08 17:10:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Traidor Disloyal That Raven sitting outside station had "TRAP" written all over it. Even a dumb grunt like me would have seen that. You should have brought more firepower to the party to take him down within seconds. And if you couldn't do that you should have waited outside system on a gate he would likely go through.
Remember now: When a WT is sitting outside station 9 times out of 10 it's a TRAP.
And the other 1 out of 10 it will turn into a trap faster than you can say "It's a TRAP!" --Vel
|
AizenSousuke
Gallente STK Scientific The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.09.08 17:46:00 -
[26]
Edited by: AizenSousuke on 08/09/2009 17:47:04
Originally by: Buildso
Stasis period should be embraced to create a more realistic simulated experience.
Originally by: Nidhiesk
In short, I find the log on trap unfair.
Is it realistic for a pilot to have lag in a battle? Is making me have to wait 30 seconds after d/cing to continue a fight fair? Even when I d/c multiple times?
If you guys can complain about your problems, I'll complain about mine. I'm not blessed with 8 meg internet and no lag like you are. I lag, I d/c sometimes. With your idea, you have effectively crippled me as a PVPer. You get to gank that raven, and I'll never get to PVP ever again. I think THAT is unfair. I will gladly have my most expensive ship ganked by a logon trap and loose ALL of my wealth before I allow my ability to enjoy the game crippled.
If you want to make Eve more realistic, fix the problems of those who lag and make the game more realistic for them too. If I can adapt with my unrealistic problem and enjoy my game, then you can adapt too. Your proposal does not put in account everyone's situation and fails.
Not supported. --------------------------------------------------
|
Allen Ramses
Caldari Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.09 01:49:00 -
[27]
I despise everything about the login trap. It is by every definition an exploit.
As of now, we are limited to certain ways of collecting intel. Local is one, surrounding systems is another. We have no way of identifying which ships are waiting in space. Hell, we don't even know if they exist!
On the other side of the coin, the pilot who is not logged in uses out-of-game means to receive in-game intel from the battlefield, and make a decision to login (which is quite different from undocking or jumping in system) based upon this intel.
This exploit needs to be addressed. Whether it be a 5 minute login flag or a login delay, something needs to be done to fix it. ____________________ CCP: Catering to the cowards of a cold, harsh universe since November, 2006. |
Aethrwolf
Caldari Home for Wayward Gamers
|
Posted - 2009.09.09 04:00:00 -
[28]
Well, Eve IS a persistent Universe, after all.. logged off players arent really GONE, they've just shut their ships down to be off the neocom network. The time it takes to login is long enough, if they had timed it wrong, you still would have gotten the kill after all. Its just ppl sitting in hidden ambush positions waiting for a signal to light your ass up.
There, thats all the RP reason you need for the login trap.. sure most of us dont actively RP, but its still part and parcel of EVE. If it wasnt, then CCP wouldnt bother with all the Chronicals and such. Absolutely everything is subjective. |
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2009.09.09 04:45:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Allen Ramses I despise everything about the login trap. It is by every definition an exploit.
As of now, we are limited to certain ways of collecting intel. Local is one, surrounding systems is another. We have no way of identifying which ships are waiting in space. Hell, we don't even know if they exist!
On the other side of the coin, the pilot who is not logged in uses out-of-game means to receive in-game intel from the battlefield, and make a decision to login (which is quite different from undocking or jumping in system) based upon this intel.
This exploit needs to be addressed. Whether it be a 5 minute login flag or a login delay, something needs to be done to fix it.
since when does privateers accept such whiner? any kind of delay is just stupid. i would have lost multiple ships to FW lag if i had any kind of delay on logging back in.
someone has been smarter than you. cope with it.
|
Dr BattleSmith
PAX Interstellar Services
|
Posted - 2009.09.09 04:47:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Dr BattleSmith on 09/09/2009 04:47:22
Originally by: Aethrwolf Well, Eve IS a persistent Universe, after all.. logged off players arent really GONE
Maybe everyone should remain in-game regardless of login status.............
Sure it means a bunch of people in local who aren't online, but with local removed as it likely will be at some stage, that would no longer be an issue.
Ships could persist, you leave it in space, it's modules stay active, if you're not careful in where you leave your ship you may lose it.......
This would make Eve truely persistent on this level.
With improved scanning and intel systems besides local this could work well.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |