EVE Search - FW Plex button change

All Channels

Warfare & Tactics

FW Plex button change

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
2manno Asp The Imperial Fedaykin 22	Posted - 2012.11.30 15:30:00 - [1] - Quote I'm having 2nd thoughts about the warp-in change, where the plex button will be moved to 10km off the warp-in point, and would like help reconciling them. Moving it closer because people are too lazy to burn out 80km obviously isn't a good reason to change it, and after some thought I don't believe it will increase PVP either: Here's how i see it: As it stands now, you've got a better than even shot that someone in the plex is not on the warp-in. Especially if they are offensive plexing. Even defensive plexers are often orbiting the plex button. It's much less likely they are sitting @ the entrance beacon (sitting @ zero). The new change allows a player to sit both on the plex button and @ zero. So the odds indicating where they will within the plex be have also changed. Consider the following bit of game theory, where you warp to the plex gate and scan someone inside. You are in a brawler: there are a 2 scenarios: He is @ zero. Assuming roughly equal frigs and skills, you have a 50% shot at winning. (unless he's in a DD, no one would be stupid enough to warp into a DD sitting @ zero). Or he's ranged, in which case you'll probably either lose, or have to warp out. Given the above scenario, if you warped in 100 times, I'd expect you to win about 35 of them (and that's generous). That's a meager 35% chance of winning. You are range fit: there are a 2 scenarios: He is @ zero. Assuming roughly equal frigs and skills, you will likely get wtfpwnzoredbbqstlye (especially if he's in a DD, and you're stupid enough to warp into a DD sitting @ zero). Let's call that a 10% chance of winning. Or he's ranged, Assuming roughly equal frigs and skills, let's give you a even chance shot at winning. 50%.If you warped in 100 times given this scenario, I'd expect you to win about 30 times. 30% chance of winning. Hmmm... it's a choice between a 35% chance of winning and a 30% chance of winning. The player in the plex has too much of an informational advantage. He knows how he is fit, and will always be able to engage at his range. This advantage amounts to the "House edge". A "House edge" doesn't increase gambling, it serves to cull the population to those that are either addicted, or can afford to lose, and eventually burns everyone. Therefore, I don't believe moving the plex button closer will increase PVP, rather I predict it will decrease PVP. Warping into an occupant is now a a sucker's bet, relegated to those that aren't educated enough, yet, to know not to do it. Based on that I would argue the plex beacon should have been moved a bit further out, left as-is, or somehow made so that a player outside on the gate may scan in to determine how far off the warp-in the occupant is. Now, never let it be said I can't be sold the right idea. Am I thinking about this all wrong? I don't see me warping into defend or attack occupied plexes with the current set up. Any smart player would be wise to avoid them as well. Far too little upside as I see it. Especially if there's a DD in that "novice" plex (lol of the week), they seem pretty much immune to threats unless its unfair numbers.
Princess Nexxala Quantum Cats Syndicate Drunk 'n' Disorderly 182	Posted - 2012.11.30 15:46:00 - [2] - Quote I expect 100% of the time I warp into plex the guy will be on(or close to) the warp in if he wants a fight. If not he is going to warp off anyways. Now that being said, moving forward everyone will be close to the warp in, including da bears. What this does is give the guy coming a tad better chance at catching the bear, thus creating PvP that would not of been created under the old system However where your point does come into play is if trying to engage multiple targets by warping into a plex. Typical scenario for me is I am in a thrasher and run across two wt dessies in a plex. Under the current system i would simply rush the plex with the knowledge that more than likely at least one of the guys inside is going to be orbiting the button 50+km away from the warp in. This gives me time to gank the guy on the warp in just as his buddy comes into scram range and then I gank him. Unfortunately that tactic will be rendered somewhat invalid with the changes. That makes me sad :( QCATs is recruiting https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=146180
Cearain Imperial Outlaws 679	Posted - 2012.11.30 16:04:00 - [3] - Quote You will also likely have to spam the the dscan more often to avoid getting ganked, by larger numbers or an outclassed ship. It used to be when you were running a plex and saw 2 or 3 ships on short dscan you could see how many come in at once. If only one came in and burned at you you might have been able to align away from the warp in and pull him far enough away from it so you could try getting a kill before his buddies jumped in. Now that will be harder to do. Maybe not impossible but harder. In sum, It's a good change for ganks but its a bad change for good fights. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Meditril T.R.I.A.D 160	Posted - 2012.11.30 16:06:00 - [4] - Quote This change will definately boost brawling setups while kiting nano setup will get less frequent. Speed was very important in the past if you wanted to catch someone running the button. Now kiting will get hard, since it will get hard to get out of range of the brawler before he scram + webs you. At the moment I am not sure if this will be a good or a bad development. Lets wait and see.
2manno Asp The Imperial Fedaykin 22	Posted - 2012.11.30 16:21:00 - [5] - Quote Cearain wrote: In sum, It's a good change for ganks but its a bad change for good fights. in short less good fights = less fights and more bitching about bad ones. not a good change.
chatgris Quantum Cats Syndicate Drunk 'n' Disorderly 256	Posted - 2012.11.30 16:23:00 - [6] - Quote Meditril wrote: This change will definately boost brawling setups while kiting nano setup will get less frequent. Speed was very important in the past if you wanted to catch someone running the button. Now kiting will get hard, since it will get hard to get out of range of the brawler before he scram + webs you. At the moment I am not sure if this will be a good or a bad development. Lets wait and see. It will definitely boost brawler ships that want to simultaneously run the button and camp the warpin. It won't do much to sniper snips already in the plex though - 10km from button + 30km capture range is 40km. That's plenty far enough for a nano ship to start off at.
Cearain Imperial Outlaws 679	Posted - 2012.11.30 16:31:00 - [7] - Quote Meditril wrote: This change will definately boost brawling setups while kiting nano setup will get less frequent. Speed was very important in the past if you wanted to catch someone running the button. Now kiting will get hard, since it will get hard to get out of range of the brawler before he scram + webs you. At the moment I am not sure if this will be a good or a bad development. Lets wait and see. It will just make it more of an advantage to be in the plex first. Under the new system you will still be able to go with a kiting set up and run the button. Just be 25k or whatever from the warpin. The range of the orbit around the button will still allow that. It will actually be easier to fly kiting ships because you will no longer have to worry about screwing up your approach. With this change when you find a plex with an enemy in it you can almost be assured that you will be starting the fight at their optimal range. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
2manno Asp The Imperial Fedaykin 24	Posted - 2012.11.30 16:47:00 - [8] - Quote Meditril wrote: This change will definately boost brawling setups while kiting nano setup will get less frequent. Speed was very important in the past if you wanted to catch someone running the button. Now kiting will get hard, since it will get hard to get out of range of the brawler before he scram + webs you. At the moment I am not sure if this will be a good or a bad development. Lets wait and see. well kiting fits within the plex seem just as viable as before. you can still sit 40km off the warp-in and be on the button if you want. or you can still sit 100km off the warp-in (or outside gate) if you want, if you just want to harras would be plexers. it's kiting fits that go into an occupied plex to attack the occupant or defend the plex that become much riskier. i think waiting and seeing is a bad idea. it looks like it would take ~6 months for CCP to make a change again. i'd rather leave well enough alone
2manno Asp The Imperial Fedaykin 25	Posted - 2012.11.30 16:57:00 - [9] - Quote 2manno Asp wrote: [quote=Meditril]This change will definately boost brawling setups while kiting nano setup will get less frequent. Speed was very important in the past if you wanted to catch someone running the button. Now kiting will get hard, since it will get hard to get out of range of the brawler before he scram + webs you. At the moment I am not sure if this will be a good or a bad development. Lets wait and see. well kiting fits within the plex seem just as viable as before. you can still sit 40km off the warp-in and be on the button if you want. or you can still sit 100km off the warp-in (or outside gate) if you want, if you just want to harras would be plexers. it's kiting fits that go into an occupied plex to attack the occupant or defend the plex that become much riskier. or brawler fits doing the same, as you don't know how your opponent is fit. he could be ranged. i think waiting and seeing is a bad idea. it looks like it would take ~6 months for CCP to make a change again. i'd rather have well enough left alone and see how all the other changes work out first, before throwing this one in with the rest of them.
X Gallentius Justified Chaos 640	Posted - 2012.11.30 18:25:00 - [10] - Quote 2manno Asp wrote: it's kiting fits that go into an occupied plex to attack the occupant or defend the plex that become much riskier. or brawler fits doing the same, as you don't know how your opponent is fit. he could be ranged. The good fighters with close range fits burned to the warp in when a potential target was on short scan anyways. The "rabbits", and the ones unsure about how many opponents will blob them will be on the other side of the timer as far away from the warp in as possible.
Cearain Imperial Outlaws 681	Posted - 2012.11.30 18:31:00 - [11] - Quote X Gallentius wrote: 2manno Asp wrote: it's kiting fits that go into an occupied plex to attack the occupant or defend the plex that become much riskier. or brawler fits doing the same, as you don't know how your opponent is fit. he could be ranged. The good fighters with close range fits burned to the warp in when a potential target was on short scan anyways. The "rabbits", and the ones unsure about how many opponents will blob them will be on the other side of the timer as far away from the warp in as possible. Not always. It takes a while when you are ab fit. Most times the ships won't enter the plex anyway. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
2manno Asp The Imperial Fedaykin 26	Posted - 2012.11.30 18:37:00 - [12] - Quote X Gallentius wrote: 2manno Asp wrote: it's kiting fits that go into an occupied plex to attack the occupant or defend the plex that become much riskier. or brawler fits doing the same, as you don't know how your opponent is fit. he could be ranged. The good fighters with close range fits burned to the warp in when a potential target was on short scan anyways. The "rabbits", and the ones unsure about how many opponents will blob them will be on the other side of the timer as far away from the warp in as possible. well this has not been my experience. normally, you've scanned the plex before warping to it, or while in warp, and have decided if you're going in or not. thus, you jump in right away if you've made the decision to. almost everytime, you'll catch them on the plex button, if running the timer is what they were doing. now if someone is the type of player that sits on the gate and has an internal debate about what to do, or you spend a few minutes checking up your opponents possible fittings before going in, or in some other way spend time sitting on the gate so as to be sure to get scanned, then ofc. you run the risk they'll be at their optimal when you go in... if you go in. but that's why i don't do those things. giving the enemy thier optimal never seemed like a good idea to me. this new change will pretty much guarantee they'll have thier optimal no matter what you do.
Schalac Apocalypse Reign 165	Posted - 2012.11.30 19:02:00 - [13] - Quote So get there first then.
2manno Asp The Imperial Fedaykin 27	Posted - 2012.11.30 19:07:00 - [14] - Quote Schalac wrote: So get there first then. that's so obtuse i almost ignored it, *as this whole post* is about the guy that gets there 2nd... but i'll bite anyway.. what do you tell the guy that gets there 2nd? go plex somewhere else? isn't that exactly what we're trying to avoid?
Super Chair Project Cerberus Caldari State Capturing 352	Posted - 2012.11.30 19:47:00 - [15] - Quote chatgris wrote: Meditril wrote: This change will definately boost brawling setups while kiting nano setup will get less frequent. Speed was very important in the past if you wanted to catch someone running the button. Now kiting will get hard, since it will get hard to get out of range of the brawler before he scram + webs you. At the moment I am not sure if this will be a good or a bad development. Lets wait and see. It will definitely boost brawler ships that want to simultaneously run the button and camp the warpin. It won't do much to sniper snips already in the plex though - 10km from button + 30km capture range is 40km. That's plenty far enough for a nano ship to start off at. HOW DID YOU FIGURE OUT OUR NEW STRATEGEM SO EASILY YOU SPY
X Gallentius Justified Chaos 640	Posted - 2012.11.30 20:16:00 - [16] - Quote 2manno Asp wrote: [quote=Schalac]what do you tell the guy that gets there 2nd? go plex somewhere else? Bring a bait ship and call for friends? Do that enough times and the guy camping the warp in may have second thoughts.
2manno Asp The Imperial Fedaykin 27	Posted - 2012.11.30 20:20:00 - [17] - Quote X Gallentius wrote: 2manno Asp wrote: [quote=Schalac]what do you tell the guy that gets there 2nd? go plex somewhere else? Bring a bait ship and call for friends? Do that enough times and the guy camping the warp in may have second thoughts. and to that i say what has already been said: "In sum, It's a good change for ganks but its a bad change for good fights. in short less good fights = less fights and more bitching about bad ones. not a good change."
X Gallentius Justified Chaos 642	Posted - 2012.11.30 21:49:00 - [18] - Quote By your own calculation, all you are doing is giving the same "home field" advantage to short range guys as has already been given to long range guys. Just sayin'
IbanezLaney The Church of Awesome Caldari State Capturing 78	Posted - 2012.11.30 23:19:00 - [19] - Quote I think this is a good change. You can still snipe as long as you get there 1st and blasters will now have a use. Looking forward to it. Fix this **** See Sea Pea.
2manno Asp The Imperial Fedaykin 28	Posted - 2012.12.01 05:20:00 - [20] - Quote IbanezLaney wrote: I think this is a good change. You can still snipe as long as you get there 1st and blasters will now have a use. Looking forward to it. so... you're saying if there's someone in there, you're warping in?
2manno Asp The Imperial Fedaykin 30	Posted - 2012.12.01 05:30:00 - [21] - Quote X Gallentius wrote: By your own calculation, all you are doing is giving the same "home field" advantage to short range guys as has already been given to long range guys. Just sayin' obviously, that's part of the whole point. oh... and i'm not giving anyone anything.
Cromwell Savage Quantum Cats Syndicate Drunk 'n' Disorderly 91	Posted - 2012.12.01 07:27:00 - [22] - Quote As long as there are plexes....I will dislike them regardless of any and all changes. Worst....mechanic....ever.... ......well, now only second to the utterly stupid docking rights.....
Schalac Apocalypse Reign 165	Posted - 2012.12.01 08:08:00 - [23] - Quote 2manno Asp wrote: Schalac wrote: So get there first then. that's so obtuse i almost ignored it, *as this whole thread* is about the guy that gets there 2nd... but i'll bite anyway.. what do you tell the guy that gets there 2nd? go plex somewhere else? isn't that exactly what we're trying to avoid? I would tell the guy that gets there second to HTFU.
Veshta Yoshida PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 397	Posted - 2012.12.01 12:58:00 - [24] - Quote X Gallentius wrote: By your own calculation, all you are doing is giving the same "home field" advantage to short range guys as has already been given to long range guys. Just sayin' Technically correct, but only if you think that brawler fits should not be required to move .. ever. Current distances are a bit excessive in minors and to a lesser extent mediums while largely OK in majors (BC up weapon ranges). The "solution" that is being pushed does indeed sort out the excessive distances involved, but it does so by homogenizing competitive plexing fleets as you will be hard pressed to find anyone willing to go long due to it being suicidal except in cases where you are guaranteed to be 1st. What they should have done was keep the plex differentiation to keep plexing 'fresh' (long term), that is done by keeping the current capture ranges and moving buttons closer to entry point based on something like 1.5-2.0x average range of expected/anticipated weapons .. So a minor would probably be around 20'ish km (10km capture range which is well within reach of even the laziest brawler pilots). Medium would be closer to 30-35km (15km ca.. see above). Majors would be the current 40km+. It is quite frankly a bad move that will do a lot more harm than good .. but it was likely chosen because it was easiest to do .. same button range, same capture range .. expect CCP to get a cease and desist from layers of the term "dumbing down" as they are walking all over its copyrights/trademark.
Schalac Apocalypse Reign 166	Posted - 2012.12.01 13:14:00 - [25] - Quote Veshta Yoshida wrote: I fly kitey OGB ships and don't like the change because I will have to learn how to fight in scram range. I can't wait to see your post about when your booster ships no longer get into novice small and med plexes and they need to be on grid to have an effect on you.
Veshta Yoshida PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 397	Posted - 2012.12.01 13:54:00 - [26] - Quote Schalac wrote: Veshta Yoshida wrote: I fly kitey OGB ships and don't like the change because I will have to learn how to fight in scram range. I can't wait to see your post about when your booster ships no longer get into novice small and med plexes and they need to be on grid to have an effect on you. Huh?! .. your lips are moving but only nonsense comes out. Always flown brawler (w. active TANK! because I am cool) and commonly refuse fleets with boosters because double standards are, contrary to popular opinion, not twice as good. What topic of which you have no clue would you like to discuss next, I am sure the list of viable topics is extensive.
X Gallentius Justified Chaos 642	Posted - 2012.12.01 16:21:00 - [27] - Quote Veshta Yoshida wrote: X Gallentius wrote: By your own calculation, all you are doing is giving the same "home field" advantage to short range guys as has already been given to long range guys. Just sayin' Technically correct, but only if you think that brawler fits should not be required to move .. ever. It's still correct even if I think brawlers should be required to move ... in many cases.
2manno Asp The Imperial Fedaykin 30	Posted - 2012.12.01 16:22:00 - [28] - Quote Veshta Yoshida wrote: Current distances are a bit excessive in minors and to a lesser extent mediums while largely OK in majors (BC up weapon ranges). The "solution" that is being pushed does indeed sort out the excessive distances involved, but it does so by homogenizing competitive plexing fleets as you will be hard pressed to find anyone willing to go long due to it being suicidal except in cases where you are guaranteed to be 1st. What they should have done was keep the plex differentiation to keep plexing 'fresh' (long term), that is done by keeping the current capture ranges and moving buttons closer to entry point based on something like 1.5-2.0x average range of expected/anticipated weapons .. So a minor would probably be around 20'ish km (10km capture range which is well within reach of even the laziest brawler pilots). Medium would be closer to 30-35km (15km ca.. see above). Majors would be the current 40km+. It is quite frankly a bad move that will do a lot more harm than good .. but it was likely chosen because it was easiest to do .. same button range, same capture range .. expect CCP to get a cease and desist from layers of the term "dumbing down" as they are walking all over its copyrights/trademark. i like your idea on dynamic ranges for different plexes, and also agree how frustrating it is that CCP continues to demonstrate brilliance often, and then makes a seemingly half-baked, catch-all change like this that really affect the core of a very simple mechanic. plexing is to increase PVP. this is immutable: it takes 2 to pew pew. this change seems to reward 1 player for getting a defensive spot in a plex, and punish any would be challenger for stepping up. idk if i agree that the minor distances are really excessive. the distance allows a ship time to see a player enter the plex if he missed scanning him at the gate, and warp out if so inclined, or get to range if he wanted a fight. CCP might consider dropping it to 40km-50km, but much more is an almost guaranteed scram for a brawler, unless he's asleep at the wheel. i mean, it's 80km right now, not 800km. let's get real CCP.
Veshta Yoshida PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 398	Posted - 2012.12.01 17:50:00 - [29] - Quote 2manno Asp wrote: i like your idea on dynamic ranges for different plexes, and also agree how frustrating it is that CCP continues to demonstrate brilliance often, and then makes a seemingly half-baked, catch-all change like this that really affect the core of a very simple mechanic. plexing is to increase PVP.... It is not my idea, but CCP's .. think about it, it is what we have now: variable capture ranges as well as variable button distances. Unfortunately it is, I think, using the original exploration code when it comes to ranges involved or at least it seems like it to me .. all I am really suggesting is tweaks to that in a way that makes sense and lets plexes retain their (or most of their) size differentiation. To sum: Buttons are generally too far from warp-in and should be moved closer to a degree that reflects the size of the plex in question.
Christine Peeveepeeski The Imperial Fedaykin 163	Posted - 2012.12.01 18:55:00 - [30] - Quote Can't wait to try my propless fits out in an environment that is pants on head ********.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.