|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 28 post(s) |
Foolish Bob
The Dirty Rotten Scoundrels
In Tea We Trust
6
   |
Posted - 2012.11.07 12:09:00 -
[1] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:However, let's throw a brainstorming concept out here just for fun: What if gang links worked a lot like warp disruption spheres? 
So in each tick you want to select all ships on field belonging to a particular fleet, and then run a distance calculation from all boosters for every ship, and then repeat for all fleets.
Don't get me wrong I like the concept, but you're a braver man than I am...  |
Foolish Bob
The Dirty Rotten Scoundrels
In Tea We Trust
6
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 12:57:00 -
[2] - Quote
Quesa wrote:Foolish Bob wrote:It's bonuses. Please please stop saying that. Bonus is good person. Good thing would be bonum which as data is the plural noun to datum makes the plural bona but given it's all mangled (clearly) I think we're allowed to modernise in this case. Especially as I have to accept people using data as a singular noun despite having the opposite drilled into me, so you all get to accept that. Also fun fact: the plural of octopus should be octopodes because the -pus part is greek. Not that I say anything other than octopi but I just like the fact It's also the plural of Bonus although I'm not using the special character over the 'i' and you're right, the plural of octopus isn't octopi, it's octopodes but that is because it is, in fact, Greek and not Latin which traditionally swaps the -us for -i when plural. Additionally, it's a word I like.
so, like corporations, command ship / T3 bonuses are people too?  |
Foolish Bob
The Dirty Rotten Scoundrels
In Tea We Trust
6
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 14:40:00 -
[3] - Quote
Trash Ice wrote: [on why bs class turrets are better than torps] Can I kill frigate with it?
This right here is something that needs to change. Either torps should kill frigs or BS guns should be equally powerless against ships so small. I vote the latter, but I love frigates, so I'm biased. Other opinions are available, but whatever the design decision the weapons systems should be on an equal footing. I claim it would also make the re-balancing easier. |
Foolish Bob
The Dirty Rotten Scoundrels
In Tea We Trust
6
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 17:29:00 -
[4] - Quote
AMirrorDarkly wrote:
Are you not trying to encourage people to use these ships??
3% is still better than 0% so there's clearly an encouragement to use the ships. Survivability on grid might be a factor, but I remember in my youth long before tech 3 and wormholes command ships with the ehp of carriers roamed with fleets mocking the paltry damage that dared to think they could alpha them to oblivion. As long as care is taken there's no reason why this can't be again. |
Foolish Bob
The Dirty Rotten Scoundrels
In Tea We Trust
6
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 18:38:00 -
[5] - Quote
AMirrorDarkly wrote:Foolish Bob wrote:
3% is still better than 0% so there's clearly an encouragement to use the ships. Survivability on grid might be a factor, but I remember in my youth long before tech 3 and wormholes command ships with the ehp of carriers roamed with fleets mocking the paltry damage that dared to think they could alpha them to oblivion. As long as care is taken there's no reason why this can't be again.
With respect 0.1% is better than 0% My statement is to in regards to encourage use over and above what is in place currently, which given the fact they are used so in frequently shows the balance of risk reward is not correct. I don't think I've ever seen a Damnation (and by extension any) command ship with an EHP greater than 500k EHP and doing so compromises the ship in a large number of ways. The Alpha of today is far easier and greater with fleet sizes and Tier 3 BC's than of a few years ago also.
right, but 3% is hardly to be sniffed at, and this is eve; if there's an edge to be sought, then for sure people will do it. As long as your CS keeps up and stays alive for as long as possible then what more do you need from it? It also means that if you're in a fleet that can realistically project enough dps to alpha a fully tanked CS then you should start thinking about bait / backup cs to take over boosting as ships pop. Plus, if you've got enough dps to alpha a command ship (with the cs links up) then why as an FC do you care about them? There isn't a ship on the field that can stand your alpha, so you're far better off stripping off their ECM / dps / tacklers as fast as you can call the targets, in which case the CS are left till last (if it comes to that). All in all I think that they'll last a lot longer than you give them credit for.
Finally, to an extent your argument could be used to claim that the fact that you get large fleets with big alpha means that no-one will bring logi to a fight unless they can be allowed to operate off grid. After all, the loss of those ships from the fleet is arguably even more critical than the loss of the links, but logi wings function quite well on grid and in the face of having a lot less buffer than a tanked CS.
In conclusion there are clearly options for command ships on the field in large engagements (necessarily speaking only generally in the absence of detail of how this might manifest), and it'll just be up to the players to seek out the proper optimization strategy. I think that declaring the whole concept useless is rather premature. |
|
|
| |
|