| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Klarion Sythis
Bite Me inc
Elysian Empire
30
   |
Posted - 2012.08.13 15:28:00 -
[1] - Quote
Papiranti robcki wrote:Now that we know why FF's are being removed
That's highly presumptive. Your reasoning is plausible, but to take that as fact is silly.
@TwoStep: How set is CCP on getting rid of forcefields?
Do they want them gone to mesh with new features as Papiranti suggests? Do they want them gone because coding them is a nightmare? Or is there some technical reason that they have to go?
Bottom line, are forcefields realistically up for debate, or should we be focusing on ways to get what we want from a new system? |
Klarion Sythis
Bite Me inc
Elysian Empire
30
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 16:27:00 -
[2] - Quote
I'm not expecting an answer to the "why" question; I just want to know if, based on what TwoStep knows, forcefields are up for debate or not. If he already knows they have to go, then no sense pissing in the wind with complaints. Time for ideas to make the upcoming system work for us. |
Klarion Sythis
Bite Me inc
Elysian Empire
30
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 15:10:00 -
[3] - Quote
Two step: I asked about 5 pages back whether you thought (based on your NDA knowledge) forcefields had to go and received somewhat of a non-answer. I've read the minutes, your blog, this whole thread, etc. I know what's been said on the issue, so let me clarify:
There are some ideas that could allow these new POSes to keep most people happy, but it would involve a smaller version of the FF. Based on what you know about the "technical reasons", is there room for any type of FF mechanic, or do the technical reasons require that they be abolished in any form?
Rough idea: The new POSes are going to be an actual structure instead of a space stick. I'm ok with the docking environment, but not so much actual docking. Mooring is going in the right direction, but it needs to be expanded on. The POS should have places to moor all over it, but still limited, and expandable by expanding the structure. No docking module. Instead, when you moor, you get an option to enter the station environment (Captains Quarter's) but your ship stays moored to the outside of the POS and shows you are piloting it. This allows intel preservation for both the enemy, and you, when you exit the station environment, still moored.
The catch, is that to prevent you from unmooring into a kill zone, the entire POS still needs a reduced FF (preferably asymmetric per POS setup) that is big enough to allow you to fly near the POS and exit the FF where you need to. This retains the need to bubble a whole POS, and allows pilots to avoid kill zones. The FF needs to be small enough to let CCP do whatever they need, but large enough you won't fly into a satellite dish while POS hugging and get bumped out.
So...are FF mechanics still on the table in any form, or is this idea not feasible? If you don't know, that's fine, but in that case, please consider presenting this idea to find out.
Thanks. |
Klarion Sythis
Bite Me inc
Elysian Empire
30
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 15:57:00 -
[4] - Quote
Two step wrote:
I've asked for some clarity from CCP, especially public clarity on FFs. My feeling is that they are probably gone. I'm not sure what exactly would be different in your proposal than just having a spherical FF. Your request for showing the active ship someone is in when docked is *exactly* what I asked for in the minutes:
Two step pointed out that this system might be nice for docking as well, so that people can get some indication of how many people are active in a starbase, especially in w-space where there is no local chat.
The example I listed wasn't meant to be presented as an original idea, just an example to illustrate the kind of answer I was looking for on the FF issue and why knowing the answer would be helpful. The difference between the example I listed and how things work now is size. The description of the mooring idea in the minutes included a mini forcefield, so it seemed plausible size was the issue rather than the entire mechanic. Also, mini forcefields on mooring points still create kill zones versus a mini forcefield over the whole POS.
Hopefully CCP will listen to your request and provide some clarity on the issue so we're less in the dark on the possibilities. Thank you for re-answering my question. |
Klarion Sythis
Bite Me inc
Elysian Empire
30
|
Posted - 2012.08.16 19:10:00 -
[5] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Sinwalker wrote:
It is in fact terrible. Why would you want a hostile force to announce their presence? WH's are not intended to be carebearland where you are safe from all aggression because it's announced, you might as well put local back in if you want things to be "announced". It is far better to have dscan as a method of finding targets when possible. Cloak and dagger people. Go back to highsec if you want to live in safety.
Your argument fall apart when you consider that fights don't tend to happen at POS's. You will still be able to see ships in space doing sites, PI or whatever. But, it's just an idea and it's not even mine. 
Hunters spend a lot of time cloaked off a POS waiting for someone to fly out to do PI, sites, etc. rather than stumbling across them already doing it (exception for chain rolling). Therefore, if you need to probe down a POS, it gives away the hunter's element of surprise even if the fight itself doesn't happen at a POS. |
Klarion Sythis
Bite Me inc
Elysian Empire
30
|
Posted - 2012.08.16 20:49:00 -
[6] - Quote
I think Meytal nailed it. +1 |
Klarion Sythis
Bite Me inc
Elysian Empire
30
|
Posted - 2012.08.16 21:23:00 -
[7] - Quote
Kuning wrote:I don't know... I've gotten a lot of my PI kills by just seein a hauler on d-scan not at a POS and then warping myself to the system's plasma or storm planet. Like moths to a flame, really.
Sure, that happens all the time. I just wanted to point out that lurking at a POS does too, so having to probe a POS matters (unless you bookmark every POS out there  ). |
Klarion Sythis
Bite Me inc
Elysian Empire
30
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 16:39:00 -
[8] - Quote
The team that will work on POSes is currently working on Crimewatch, which may not even be released by Winter. We're 3-6 months away from any serious thought on the subject from CCP. Acknowledgement would be nice, but to be honest, we're all getting quite a bit ahead of ourselves on this. We've expressed our current concerns and beating the dead horse another 20 pages won't make time go faster. There's not much to be done until CCP finishes Crimewatch. |
Klarion Sythis
Bite Me inc
Elysian Empire
31
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 18:38:00 -
[9] - Quote
Meytal, you have to take my post in context of this entire thread. There are people calling for Dev blogs and Dev interaction and that's unrealistic; CCP isn't there yet. We also have people taking advantage of this thread to attack Two step for obviously unrelated agendas or troll the general community (Slaktoid, SpaceSavage, etc.) so this thread is pretty cluttered with junk posts and redundant 3 page opinion pieces.
Sure, this needs to be discussed, but let's do so under the appropriate context:
- CCP isn't designing this yet; it's all ideas thrown at a dart board.
- Two step probably won't even be on the CSM when the bulk of the design work is being done (unless he's reelected). Depending on how Crimewatch goes, he might not be there when they start asking questions at all.
We're also highly unlikely to get a consensus with so many opinions.
If most people legitimately think Two step is likely to voice his opinions over the community's, then take Two step's advice and elect someone else during the year the POS redesign actually happens. That means someone else capable of doing it needs to step up for the community, but please god, don't start that process in this thread.
Otherwise, keep up the constructive posts that are sprinkled in here. |
Klarion Sythis
Bite Me inc
Elysian Empire
36
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 01:34:00 -
[10] - Quote
Wolvun wrote:Bane Nucleus wrote: A lot of numbers Seems to be fairly even across the board for POS killing, what seems to be the reason for the nerf then?
I have no reason to weigh in on the low class wormhole issue, but by what metric could you possibly say they're "even across the board"? How are so many people reading these numbers in such bat **** crazy ways? |
Klarion Sythis
Bite Me inc
Elysian Empire
37
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 03:07:00 -
[11] - Quote
Wolvun wrote:Way to elaborate... 
In what way do I need to elaborate? "Across the board" the number of POSes killed varies significantly as does POSes killed per system. The only thing even close is the average number of people on each kill. So how are things fairly even across the board?
Another example?
Meytal wrote:
Wait, so what you're saying is that there are more POSes taken down in C1 systems than in C6 systems? But.. but.. you can't bring Dreads into a C1! You can't even bring Battleships into a C1! It just doesn't make sense!
It sounds like C1 w-space is more dangerous to live in than C6 w-space. Maybe C6 space should be nerfed, and support for large towers taken out, so that it's easier for smaller groups to siege C6 towers. It looks like small groups are already able to siege C1 towers just fine.
Meytal, who actually has some posts I like, is way off base here. There are considerably more C1's than C6's so this isn't an even comparison. Stats alone actually show C6's lose more POSes per system, not to mention the fact that C1's are more regularly populated than C6's (wouldn't be surprised if AHARM had stats to back this). I understand the argument not to nerf lower class wormholes with smaller POSes, but don't provide false arguments.
Bane Nucleus wrote:Considering the number of C2s and C5s are almost equal, I am surprised to see the number so close to even.
Win. This is the kind of specific statement that is correct and reasonable based on the information given.
Overall, these stats are still like every other stat in that they simply cannot show the total picture. How many C5's are actively populated vs the number of C2's actually populated? If different (it is) then that means that a particular group's odds of being evicted are higher in one class vs another. What about the average number of POSes destroyed per eviction? What if 5 POSes are destroyed per eviction in a C5 vs 2 in a C2?
Stats are fun to look at, but let's not pretend this is a winning argument. There are plenty of better things to base the 'equal treatment of wormholes' argument on.
|
| |
|