Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Corey Fumimasa
Kiith Paktu Curatores Veritatis Alliance
525
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 11:43:00 -
[1] - Quote
Eve has a lot of skills and mods and ammo that enhance DPS. ECM doesn't matter if you are dead in less than 10 seconds. Concord, repping, and speed are all mitigated by raw DPS. Frig fights often end so quickly that they are won or lost before the fight even starts.
Is DPS too easy to come by and too effective? Would the game be more interesting if reppers were more powerful and versatile. Or If EW locked faster and mitigated more damage. Perhaps if speed were an even greater factor.
I think one of the most interesting aspects of Eve is the combined arms fleet, people working together, each with a specific role rather than 1 specific type of ship needed 80% of the time and a few others to fill in the blanks. For myself I would like to see a game where DPS ships represent no more than 30% of the fleet.
Do you focus on DPS? Would you rather fly something else, but nothing seems as effective or fulfilling under the current mechanics? What is gaming when compared to rl? -á http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=V7-1ndsiVNA&feature=endscreen |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
24
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 12:04:00 -
[2] - Quote
Yeah CCP sort of ruined small scale fights in that respect. With gangs, fleets and blobs the abilty to add effective HP via cap, shield, armor transfers and gang bonuses makes them a lot hardier. Of course that was pointless because people willalways just add more ships and entirely mitigate those bonuses making you pop just as fast.
I think it would have been more inteliigent to balance combat on a ship vs ship basis rather than as an afterthought on a fleet vs fleet methodology.
Having said that some ships do really well, I jumped a rattlesnake once in a 1200 DPS mega. Sat there for a good few minutes trying to get him past his max passive recharge but just couldnt pull it off.
T3 and command ships and old drake were great in that respect. Sadly they "fixed the drake" rather than balanced out the other ships to be more survivable.
|
Galaxy Pig
New Order Logistics CODE.
780
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 15:07:00 -
[3] - Quote
Corey Fumimasa wrote: Concord, repping, and speed are all mitigated by raw DPS.
Stealth 'nerf suicide ganking' detected.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
14371
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 15:13:00 -
[4] - Quote
Nah. If anything, survivability has received far more and far greater buffs than damage potential. The only thing that might make damage output seem more important is that we can toss more people into a fight these days without the servers keeling over.
If it weren't for that, tanking could do with being scaled back a bit. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.-á |
Dyvim Slorm
Coven of the Morrigan
133
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 15:20:00 -
[5] - Quote
This has been an issue that CCP has tried to sort out over the years with various buffs and nerfs which in the early days of the game were effective as most fleets were small. Unfortunately now, it's pretty insoluble as fleets just get larger to make up for the dps differential.
Probably the only way to reduce the dps "arms race" would be to limit fleet sizes, but then you'd just get a lot of smaller fleets working together to get round it. |
Corey Fumimasa
Kiith Paktu Curatores Veritatis Alliance
525
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 15:37:00 -
[6] - Quote
Galaxy Pig wrote:Corey Fumimasa wrote: Concord, repping, and speed are all mitigated by raw DPS. Stealth 'nerf suicide ganking' detected. Not at all Pig, I think that a 6 toon, well tanked, mining fleet should consist of an Orca with tank links, a repper, an Ewar ship, and 3 Covetors... Or be gank bait.
The progression of Eve combat and interaction seems to be the direct correlation of DPS v tank. This is entirely too simple a balance for a professional grade game to maintain. I think that Eve would greatly benefit from a focus on supplementary roles, such as DPS amplification or mitigation.
Victory should go to the players who can maintain a more complex fleet rather than a more focused one. What is gaming when compared to rl? -á http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=V7-1ndsiVNA&feature=endscreen |
ElQuirko
Jester Syndicate S0UTHERN C0MF0RT
1339
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 16:32:00 -
[7] - Quote
Corey Fumimasa wrote: Victory should go to the players who can maintain a more complex fleet rather than a more focused one.
Wouldn't this get complicated? Soldiers are equipped with the same weapons for a reason; whilst it is true that combined arms will increase the effectiveness of a fighting force up to a point, once a fleet is varied enough it will simply become deficient at fighting. If you haven't got enough dps/neuts/ewar/tackle, then despite the fact you are applying all of these to some degree you just won't be able to break a target. Simple as. Save the Domi model! Spacewhales should be preserved. |
Mr LaboratoryRat
Confederation of DuckTape Lovers
20
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 16:33:00 -
[8] - Quote
Yes T3 battlecruisers need a nerf so they cant hit below battlecruiser size |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
26
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 16:40:00 -
[9] - Quote
Dyvim Slorm wrote:This has been an issue that CCP has tried to sort out over the years with various buffs and nerfs which in the early days of the game were effective as most fleets were small. Unfortunately now, it's pretty insoluble as fleets just get larger to make up for the dps differential.
Probably the only way to reduce the dps "arms race" would be to limit fleet sizes, but then you'd just get a lot of smaller fleets working together to get round it. limit # locks on targets would work but open to exploiting by friendly nuetral locks. |
Daimon Kaiera
Kraken.
294
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 16:59:00 -
[10] - Quote
Mr LaboratoryRat wrote:Yes T3 battlecruisers need a nerf so they cant hit below battlecruiser size
T3 Battlecruisers? WHERE!? .... . .-.. .--. / .. / .... .- ...- . / ..-. .- .-.. .-.. . -. / .- -. -.. / .. / -.-. .- -. -. --- - / --. . - / ..- .--. / ... - --- .--. - .... .. ... / ... .. --. -. .- - ..- .-. . / .. -.. . .- / .. ... / -. --- - / ... - --- .-.. . -. / ... - --- .--. |
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7996
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 17:02:00 -
[11] - Quote
Corey Fumimasa wrote:Victory should go to the players who can maintain a more complex fleet rather than a more focused one.
What?
An alphafleet, for example, has Maelstroms, Rokhs, Scimitars, Celestis, Huginns, Lachesis, Falcons, Blackbirds, interceptors, dictors, hictors, instacanes, assault frigates and command ships.
That's a pretty complex fleet. Twitter: @EVEAndski
TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest.-á |
Arronicus
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
651
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 18:00:00 -
[12] - Quote
As much as I might agree with some of the points you make, many people WANT to shoot stuff, many people WANT to see their guns making stuff explode. They don't want to be in logistics ships, or ewar, or boosters, they simply fill the roll because pilots are asked to do so. I think it would be nice if perhaps there was more diversity in roles, however, having dps not make up more than 30% of the fleet is beyond the point of being ridiculous. Nothing would ever die, with that little damage output, unless the fleets were massive, so you'd effectively be forcing blob warfare.
As it is, except in the cases of alpha fleets, a gang with a 30-40% logi composition will fairly easily trash fleets without a logistics backbone that are even double the size. |
Nexus Day
Lustrevik Trade and Travel Bureau
596
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 18:14:00 -
[13] - Quote
Flying ability matters so little in most battles, but then this isn't a space shooter. You can lose someone in a group of large collidable objects, but it sure as heck doesn't look or feel like Battlestar Gallatica.
As for breaking the blob, start adding risk to PvP and you will see PvPers leave. Give every ship a jump drive, get rid of gates, thereby adding PvP effort and risk and gate campers will leave. Normalize damage and bitter vets that like to alpha noobs will leave. Make FW objectives dynamic instead of static and some FW people would leave. Etc etc.
CCP treads a fine line of servicing the "harsh culture" of EvE will building the theme park that makes money. So far I think they have done a good job, but I would like to see more risk added to PvP. This thread has so much content it may be 'Thread of the Year' and it is only January.
|
Haulie Berry
762
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 18:16:00 -
[14] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote:
As for breaking the blob, start adding risk to PvP and you will see PvPers leave. Give every ship a jump drive, get rid of gates, thereby adding PvP effort and risk and gate campers will leave. Normalize damage and bitter vets that like to alpha noobs will leave. Make FW objectives dynamic instead of static and some FW people would leave. Etc etc.
Idiotic changes would cause people to leave?
Really? |
Corey Fumimasa
Kiith Paktu Curatores Veritatis Alliance
526
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 18:44:00 -
[15] - Quote
You both have squinty eyes. What is gaming when compared to rl? -á http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=V7-1ndsiVNA&feature=endscreen |
Merdaneth
Angel Wing.
226
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 19:32:00 -
[16] - Quote
DPS must be high enough on ships to push past typical tanks, or all fights must end in one side blobbing the other.
If you are able to kill something 1 vs 1, then obviously, it gets easier 2 vs 1. If you can't kill something 1 vs 1....
A combined arms fleet shouldn't be needed to kill stuff in EVE. And skilled combined arms fleets do have an advantage. It is only when numbers start to get really big, that this advantage is reduced again.
Big numbers are here because lack of nearly any tactical features for splitting up forces and achieve local superiority.
EVE would be more interesting with the space equivalent of terrain features, elevation, cover, night and day, weather etc. etc.
|
Iudicium Vastus
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
26
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 19:57:00 -
[17] - Quote
Merdaneth wrote:
EVE would be more interesting with the space equivalent of terrain features, elevation, cover, night and day, weather etc. etc.
I think so too. But we actually already have such a feature, it's just encountered in some WH's. Like blackholes and pulsars that have a system-wide effect.
But having that sort of thing in K-space wouldn't be so bad. Maybe some of those 'gas clouds' can be tweaked into small nebula remnants that have effect while battling inside the cloud. Like having an armor fleet lure a shield fleet into the area while the electromagnetic particles do damage over time to shields. We encounter that sort of thing with certain missions already. |
Lyris Nairn
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
10650
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 20:11:00 -
[18] - Quote
Andski wrote:Corey Fumimasa wrote:Victory should go to the players who can maintain a more complex fleet rather than a more focused one. What? An alphafleet, for example, has Maelstroms, Rokhs, Scimitars, Celestis, Huginns, Lachesis, Falcons, Blackbirds, interceptors, dictors, hictors, instacanes, assault frigates and command ships. That's a pretty complex fleet.
And also a gaggle of Rifters, and if it's a GSF fleet then also whatever someone else tagging along decided to bring. Sky Captain of Your Heart Vote Lyris Nairn for CSM8 |
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
647
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 20:33:00 -
[19] - Quote
If it weren't for damage you couldn't kill anything.
Go onto battleclinic and see who kills and who gets killed and tell me how important it is. From: Tommas De'Wins To: Cipher Jones Dude :) I got massives Basi hahahahahahaha |
Darvaleth Sigma
231
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 20:38:00 -
[20] - Quote
To be fair, if you dismantled the army of any modern country and said only 30% of them could hold a gun (the rest being medics and scientists etc.), your battles are going to look very strange... Give a man a match and you warm him for a day.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life! |
|
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
647
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 21:17:00 -
[21] - Quote
Darvaleth Sigma wrote:To be fair, if you dismantled the army of any modern country and said only 30% of them could hold a gun (the rest being medics and scientists etc.), your battles are going to look very strange...
Its already like that.
From: Tommas De'Wins To: Cipher Jones Dude :) I got massives Basi hahahahahahaha |
Ocih
Space Mermaids Somethin Awfull Forums
627
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 21:25:00 -
[22] - Quote
As was pointed out, there is no LoS or anything to make the battle realistic. It's 100% mathematical and the thing that makes it possible is the thing that makes it dull. No matter how 'complicated' you try and make the math, my computer can figure it out in seconds.
The battles are won and lost before they begin and you aren't going to beat me unless I let you. All you can really do is bully me out of content with better math that I can't control like moar people.. Knowing I can or can't win through an app or other, means I evac or send you packing. If I assume you have done the same math, the fight will have never happened to begin with if you couldn't win.
The thing that has kept EVE alive for 10 years are visuals and RP factors. The idea of flying a space ship in a giant universe. If we actually did the math, most of us would know we already 'lost' EVE and never stood a chance of 'winning' EVE. We are out manned, out gunned and out financed. We play for the fantasy. |
GreenSeed
329
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 21:36:00 -
[23] - Quote
i don't think the problem is in the damge, i think its in the resists.
the current high resist model makes RR way too effective, so the logic "solution" to ships tanking well over 20k, 30k dps when under triage reps, is to have enough alpha to take all the EHP of the target before reps can work. the result of having high resists is not longer fights, or more interesting ones, its just an alpha fest.
the exact same thing can be said about damage dealt. current nados alpha for around 9k in average, if they did half of that you just bring twice as many and you get the same result... with the added lag and logistical problems. plus, it favors established alliances that can bring those numbers.
i see two ways of changing this, first one is to make RR have diminishing returns. i don't like it.
a different approach would be to increase dramatically the health pools of at least battleships and capitals, while reducing resistances. a simple penalty to all resists modules and rigs would be enough, seeing as the natural resists ships have are fine, and add flavor.
the idea would be to create a real divide between subcaps (like frigates, cruisers and bcs) and battleships, caps and supers. currently both work exactly the same, high resists that can only be countered with high alpha. with low resists, ehp can safely be raised above the point where alpha = ehp can be achieved without making ships invulnerable. if the alpha cannot be realistically achieved, then its time to come up with something new. and fast, because ships on the field will otherwise slowly bleed out.
Darvaleth Sigma wrote:To be fair, if you dismantled the army of any modern country and said only 30% of them could hold a gun (the rest being medics and scientists etc.), your battles are going to look very strange...
then you'll be shocked to find that the ratio of combat troops on most modern armies is even lower than 30%. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |