| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
730
   |
Posted - 2012.08.02 21:03:00 -
[1] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium: GÇ¥Something I really don't like in Factional Warfare, is just the capital hot drop. To me it has nothing to do with what Factional Warfare is supposed to do.GÇ¥
Elise: GÇ£Well I don't know, triages are pretty cool small gang PvP thing.GÇ¥
I lol'ed. Hope you guys don't believe small-gang PvP can utilize carrier, otherwise it would be really ridiculous. At the very least it takes like 10 damage-dealers alone to counter a single triage carrier and defining a gang of 15 as small will show just how blobtarded eve has become.
You are definitely missing a true small-scale view on PvP, something between 1-5 man, where logistics are not used but constant communication is compulsory.
Btw, no one said anything about cyno mechanics? How does that make any sense 
14 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
730
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 21:21:00 -
[2] - Quote
Two step wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:CCP Ytterbium: GÇ¥Something I really don't like in Factional Warfare, is just the capital hot drop. To me it has nothing to do with what Factional Warfare is supposed to do.GÇ¥
Elise: GÇ£Well I don't know, triages are pretty cool small gang PvP thing.GÇ¥
I lol'ed. Hope you guys don't believe small-gang PvP can utilize carrier, otherwise it would be really ridiculous. At the very least it takes like 10 damage-dealers alone to counter a single triage carrier and defining a gang of 15 as small will show just how blobtarded eve has become.
You are definitely missing a true small-scale view on PvP, something between 1-5 man, where logistics are not used but constant communication is compulsory.
There are plenty of people out there that consider 10-15 people small gang PVP. Just because it doesn't fit into your master plan for how EVE PVP should work doesn't mean it is wrong. Perhaps you might spend a little more time outside of your bunker and see how the rest of us inferior people play the game.
Yeah. Everyone knows you 'are small gang compared to 0.0 guys' 
14 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
730
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 23:44:00 -
[3] - Quote
Typherian wrote:Completely agree with this. Thank you CCP for buffing the blob again. As it stands a triage carry is one of the only ways for a small group to fight a far larger group. Making gate guns a threat to the triage is simply ********. If this goes through its going to turn lowsec into the stupid blob fest that is 0.0 (or just make it even more empty)
What prevents a far larger group from using a triage carrier as well? I can't even be sure whether the latter one wasn't more common.
It's lame, you can replace a carrier with whatever else and it still would make as much sense - that is, none. Falcons allow to fight outnumbered, Anciliary shield boosters allow to fight outnumbered, nano allows to fight outnumbered etc.
What really promotes small groups is some sort of articulation on skill-demandant things, like current positioning/MWDing.
14 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
730
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 23:49:00 -
[4] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:*snip*
Cyno.
Where are the discussions?
Remember your words?
http://community.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1508537&page=1#29
Quote:>> Hot-drops are too easy - I think we're reaching a place where there's a broad consensus on this being not a cool outcome for everyone except the guy jumping in.
Posted - 2011.05.12 16:01:00
So?..
14 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
730
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 23:59:00 -
[5] - Quote
Capitol One wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:Typherian wrote:Completely agree with this. Thank you CCP for buffing the blob again. As it stands a triage carry is one of the only ways for a small group to fight a far larger group. Making gate guns a threat to the triage is simply ********. If this goes through its going to turn lowsec into the stupid blob fest that is 0.0 (or just make it even more empty) What prevents a far larger group from using a triage carrier as well? I can't even be sure whether the latter one wasn't more common. It's lame, you can replace a carrier with whatever else and it still would make as much sense - that is, none. Falcons allow to fight outnumbered, Anciliary shield boosters allow to fight outnumbered, nano allows to fight outnumbered etc. We've heard all of this. What really promotes small groups is emphasis on skill-demandant things, like current positioning/MWDing. Let's say you have a 10 man Pirate BS gang fighting on a gate. They can't in a Triage because "LOL GATEGUNS U DEAD", They bring in 10 pantheon carriers. Actually the battleships would probably die still, so they would just bring 30 pantheon carriers. As cool as carriers are, that would completely invalidate any other pirate engagement on a gate. I'm so sad panda 
I'm a firm believer that gankers always use maximum of resources they have at their hands.
I'm not saying flexible gate-guns are good or bad, just that mentioning carrier as a small-gang tool fighting a larger one is moot. It has nothing to do with that. Also, CCP has never actually stated they are up to promoting smaller groups over bigger ones. At least I can't recall anything of that sort.
14 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
731
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 12:48:00 -
[6] - Quote
Yeep wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:Quote:>> Hot-drops are too easy - I think we're reaching a place where there's a broad consensus on this being not a cool outcome for everyone except the guy jumping in.
Posted - 2011.05.12 16:01:00 So?.. As someone who was on both sides of a capital hot drop back when the capacitor penalty from jumping in actually meant something I'd be sad to see the element of suprise disappear. However I would agree that the pentalties for the aggressor need to be adjusted given the availability of T2 and the size of capital fleets.
You're talking about fleet warfare - I don't care about that all that much, as it's much more balanced at blob level. My point was in reducing the efficiency of spoiling small-scale PvP, where instantenious hot-drops of sub-capitals are extemely detrimental, and anyone who actually PvPs in this kind of environment knows it from his own experience.
Apparently, none of these people managed to make it into current CSM. How else can you explain the lack of such a vital issue in the minutes? Thus the agenda is defined by blob apologists alone, which is sad.
14 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
733
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 16:46:00 -
[7] - Quote
Ms Michigan wrote:Yeep wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:Quote:>> Hot-drops are too easy - I think we're reaching a place where there's a broad consensus on this being not a cool outcome for everyone except the guy jumping in.
Posted - 2011.05.12 16:01:00 So?.. As someone who was on both sides of a capital hot drop back when the capacitor penalty from jumping in actually meant something I'd be sad to see the element of suprise disappear. However I would agree that the pentalties for the aggressor need to be adjusted given the availability of T2 and the size of capital fleets. This is my whole thought as well. I have thought for a long time the problem isn't low sec gate camps so much as it is that fights are so short. Yeep references T2 and cap fleets. These are perfect examples to me of DPS being such that you just don't live long in a fight. All these ideas of escalating gate guns seem to me to be band-aids on DPS and the time fights last. Maybe there is a way to buff defense ACCROSS THE BOARD (or NERF DPS) so that fights just LAST LONGER IN GENERAL in every ship class. To me. PVP in EVE is getting to the point where (and is problematic BECAUSE) fights just go so damn fast. It is like playing a game of chess in 20 seconds. Whatever happened to the game taking a little bit longer and the tension building and giving people time to do more than die?
What the hell? Eve is already too overtanked, ships take a crapload of time to actually pop. It takes Mach well over a minute to kill a single fugly Drake. How is that short?
Nerfing DPS or boosting tank even more is one of the most detrimental things one can ever come up with.
It's extremely stupid to think prolonged fights would also give more 'tension'. I've been playing since late '05 where we had like 1/3 of current EHP and guess what? - the game was much better in terms of DPS/tank balance.
14 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
733
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 17:31:00 -
[8] - Quote
mini brutalis wrote:The state of EvE
Page 85
"Ytterbium wanted to hear some reasons why null sec was viewed as so dead."
I can say it pretty short: There is nothing at stake and there is nothing to hunt.
It is 50 people sitting on a Titan bridge with a bait ship running around.
Well said!
I wonder why CCP is absolutely silent when it comes to such an important issue.
14 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
734
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 19:44:00 -
[9] - Quote
Centurax wrote:
Almost never fly a Drake personally, but that wasn't my point, change the Drake, by why break (balance) what works, because a few people think they are overpowered. My point was the Drake is a good ship, the idea is that instead of making it something different, is make the other battlecruisers in line with it. Everyone complains that a ship is too powerful make it easier to kill, why cant we take the other approach, what makes that ship so good, how can we replicate that on the other ships.
Don't be a fool, Drake is 'working' only cause its counterparts are underpowered. Either way. boosting the others or nerfing the drake directly, it will cease 'working' after the fix. It will become a normal ship like, say, harbinger.
Boosting DPS output and tank of all ships by 10 will not suddenly make them 10 times better, just like printing more money and doubling everyone's salary won't make people twice as rich in real life. Is it really that hard to comprehend?
14 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
737
|
Posted - 2012.08.04 04:55:00 -
[10] - Quote
Tarryn Nightstorm wrote:Vera Algaert wrote:Centurax wrote: Almost never fly a Drake personally, but that wasn't my point, change the Drake, by why break (balance) what works, because a few people think they are overpowered. My point was the Drake is a good ship, the idea is that instead of making it something different, is make the other battlecruisers in line with it. Everyone complains that a ship is too powerful make it easier to kill, why cant we take the other approach, what makes that ship so good, how can we replicate that on the other ships. that approach to balancing inevitably ends in power creep Which I submit is going to happen, regardless. It's actually been fairly well-contained in EVE compared to other MMOs.
Bad thing about that is that it takes very long to address all the items one by one. Given how swift CCP is at balancing, making others BCs as OP as Drake will condemn HACs and CSs to a total misery for the next several years. But then they'll realise that battleships are in turn next to useless and should be buffed, too, which apparently will also require some time. I'd say just fixing Drake in several months is somewhat more in line with common sense, huh?
14 |
| |
|