EVE Search - Battle Duration

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Battle Duration

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 3 post(s)
Sans Safebuster	Posted - 2006.03.18 06:08:00 - [1] /RANT ON The DEVs have stated many times they want battles to last longer. I simply dont see much improvement. This game is starting to feel like CounterStrike in space. The overview is not very responsive and with laggy systems, fighting can be a challenge. To make up for the poor Overview system and lack of flexible hot keys, I want LOOOOONG BATTLES. I want EPIC tales between Battleships. If it takes you days to build a battleship, it should take more than a few minutes to destroy one. The PVP aspect of this game doesnt match the pace of the rest of the game. In some cases, warping takes longer than battles. That is simply wrong and silly. This is the area that needs the most attention in the 1.5 years I have played the game. /RANT OFF
Yaro	Posted - 2006.03.18 11:48:00 - [2] I absolutely agree with u...after running around, buying modules for your ship it gets blown in 20 seconds...or u blown the opponent in 20 seconds
B0rn2KiLL	Posted - 2006.03.18 11:55:00 - [3] had a 20 vs 20 battlehip gate gank fest over in less than 10 minutes, it was god damn beautiful tho --- When It Absolutely Positively Has To Be Desotroyed.
IamBen	Posted - 2006.03.18 11:57:00 - [4] it seems a bit variable. Yesterday my destroyer got blown up in .2 secs by a domi with sentry drones. BUt some of the larger battleship fights see to be going on for longer amounts of times.
KilROCK	Posted - 2006.03.18 11:58:00 - [5] Nerf Battleships ability to fit large sized weaponry. Smartass
Ithaca	Posted - 2006.03.18 12:48:00 - [6] Its not something the devs can fix. Most fleet battle consist of two sides facing off against each other with each fleet commander calling primary and secondary targets. Unless they can make a BS take full dammage from 20+ BS's at once and survive, your always gonna get ships insta popped. But when you get into small gangs with AF, HACs and Inties, fights can last a bit longer cos to fly them in groups actually requires skill, not just DPS on target.
Gabriel Karade	Posted - 2006.03.18 13:26:00 - [7] You would have to make it desirable to assign multiple targets, rather than "everyone mug the primary!" The most realistic way of doing this is to introduce suppression/non lethal damage, i.e. if you put a ship under fire it becomes less effective, less accurate with its own weapons fire, reduced locking times e.t.c That way, having enemy ships totally unmolested and firing back at you would be a Bad thing... - Office Linebacker -
Gabriel Karade	Posted - 2006.03.18 13:26:00 - [8] You would have to make it desirable to assign multiple targets, rather than "everyone mug the primary!" The most realistic way of doing this is to introduce suppression/non lethal damage, i.e. if you put a ship under fire it becomes less effective, less accurate with its own weapons fire, reduced locking times e.t.c That way, having enemy ships totally unmolested and firing back at you would be a Bad thing... - Office Linebacker -
twit brent	Posted - 2006.03.18 14:24:00 - [9] I only fly gank now. I have given up on warp disruptors completely due to stabs.
Shin Ra	Posted - 2006.03.18 14:27:00 - [10] Make damage stack. More than 4 ships shooting a target has no effect. Also increase agression timer.

KilROCK	Posted - 2006.03.18 14:46:00 - [11] Originally by: Shin Ra Make damage stack. More than 4 ships shooting a target has no effect. Also increase agression timer. That would be lame, and unrealist. Originally by: Ithildin Q: Will the Gallente ship have lots of missiles? I think it's time. A: Die. You are not worthy of life.
Elenia Kheynes	Posted - 2006.03.18 14:52:00 - [12] Originally by: KilROCK Originally by: Shin Ra Make damage stack. More than 4 ships shooting a target has no effect. Also increase agression timer. That would be lame, and unrealist. Realism ? Eve is not anywhere close to realistic in the fist place. The 4 ships max shooting target would be interesting, making fleet battles much more complex and thus tactical. Plus you wouldn't get insta-ganked anymore when called primary. Things would get interesting for sure with this... Dear friendly customer... Can I have your money ?
Yarek Balear	Posted - 2006.03.18 14:55:00 - [13] Oh please god no - don't make it happen !!!
KilROCK	Posted - 2006.03.18 14:57:00 - [14] so no more ganking a bs with 10-15 frigs? lol, geez.... no fun. Originally by: Ithildin Q: Will the Gallente ship have lots of missiles? I think it's time. A: Die. You are not worthy of life.
Elenia Kheynes	Posted - 2006.03.18 15:01:00 - [15] Edited by: Elenia Kheynes on 18/03/2006 15:02:00 Originally by: Yarek Balear Oh please god no - don't make it happen !!! stop making nightmares, it won't happen anyway ^^ It's a good idea, still most people would get uber ***ed not to have their "1 shot, 1 kill" fleet gank anymore and would whine over it for 30 pages on forums Still, I maintain that on a fleet battle level, 4 ships shooting effectivly another one would be a huge positive change, forcing people to divide their fleets in several firing squads making things in the end extremly fun ^^ oh and I forgot: ccp wouldn't be able to implement it because it's simply too exploitable Dear friendly customer... Can I have your money ?*
wierchas noobhunter	Posted - 2006.03.18 15:08:00 - [16] Originally by: Shin Ra Make damage stack. More than 4 ships shooting a target has no effect. Also increase agression timer. hem good idea
Admiral IceBlock	Posted - 2006.03.18 15:09:00 - [17] Edited by: Admiral IceBlock on 18/03/2006 15:11:43 reduce damage mod AND rof of all weapons in EVE by 25 to 50 percent! "We brake for nobody"
KilROCK	Posted - 2006.03.18 15:11:00 - [18] Originally by: Admiral IceBlock reduce damage mod AND rof of all weapons in EVE by 25 to 50 percent! Yea right, 1vs1 that takes 30 minutes. Originally by: Ithildin Q: Will the Gallente ship have lots of missiles? I think it's time. A: Die. You are not worthy of life.
Gabriel Karade	Posted - 2006.03.18 15:11:00 - [19] I'd be totally against artificial limits. Make it more useful to target multiple vessels yes, but please... no cap on the amount of ships that can cause damage to a target - Office Linebacker -
Admiral IceBlock	Posted - 2006.03.18 15:12:00 - [20] OR remove the range on ammonution and make only one ammo, this way your forced to fight at a certain range which leads to deploying of forces more tactical, tachyon apocs behind the megapulses, and then you would actully have to move around the battlefield to get into range instead of sitting still and shoot everything that moves.. "We brake for nobody"

KilROCK	Posted - 2006.03.18 15:14:00 - [21] Edited by: KilROCK on 18/03/2006 15:14:30 Originally by: Admiral IceBlock OR remove the range on ammonution and make only one ammo, this way your forced to fight at a certain range which leads to deploying of forces more tactical, tachyon apocs behind the megapulses, and then you would actully have to move around the battlefield to get into range instead of sitting still and shoot everything that moves.. Just your posts makes me think V sucks ass. Why do you want eve to be so complicated. Originally by: Ithildin Q: Will the Gallente ship have lots of missiles? I think it's time. A: Die. You are not worthy of life.
Admiral IceBlock	Posted - 2006.03.18 15:16:00 - [22] Originally by: KilROCK Edited by: KilROCK on 18/03/2006 15:14:30 Originally by: Admiral IceBlock OR remove the range on ammonution and make only one ammo, this way your forced to fight at a certain range which leads to deploying of forces more tactical, tachyon apocs behind the megapulses, and then you would actully have to move around the battlefield to get into range instead of sitting still and shoot everything that moves.. Just your posts makes me think V sucks ass. Why do you want eve to be so complicated. moving around is very complicated indeed! do you have any good arguments why that idea wouldnt work? this would at least make eve more tactical, do you disagree, why? becouse it makes you move and think? oh noes.. "We brake for nobody"
Admiral IceBlock	Posted - 2006.03.18 15:16:00 - [23] Originally by: KilROCK Edited by: KilROCK on 18/03/2006 15:14:30 Originally by: Admiral IceBlock OR remove the range on ammonution and make only one ammo, this way your forced to fight at a certain range which leads to deploying of forces more tactical, tachyon apocs behind the megapulses, and then you would actully have to move around the battlefield to get into range instead of sitting still and shoot everything that moves.. Just your posts makes me think V sucks ass. Why do you want eve to be so complicated. moving around is very complicated indeed! do you have any good arguments why that idea wouldnt work? this would at least make eve more tactical, do you disagree, why? becouse it makes you move and think? oh noes.. "We brake for nobody"
KilROCK	Posted - 2006.03.18 15:19:00 - [24] Double posting 4tl. And i actually want the upcoming patch to come soon and not in 5 months because some ** want to see a whole bunch of people warp at range since they can't shoot anywhere else, then the other fleet has to warp closer because otherwise they can't hit crap and so on. Whole bunch of useless stuff are being brought to EVE when it's not really needed. Stop whining and enjoy eve before it gets all ** up by your whining. Originally by:** Ithildin Q: Will the Gallente ship have lots of missiles? I think it's time. A: Die. You are not worthy of life.
Cade Morrigan	Posted - 2006.03.18 15:19:00 - [25] Originally by: KilROCK Originally by: Admiral IceBlock reduce damage mod AND rof of all weapons in EVE by 25 to 50 percent! Yea right, 1vs1 that takes 30 minutes. A 25% to 50% damage reduction may make some tanks unbreakable so 30 minutes might be shooting low :) Shield and Armor points could be increased by 50% or so as well. You'd want shield recharge rate to drop in proportion with an increase in shield points. And how about giving ships about 10x the structure they currently have and make it so structural damage has chances to destroy fittings? Good fun!
Amerame	Posted - 2006.03.18 15:21:00 - [26] well some fleet battle can last 1 hour, i'm not sure what would happen in this case if the damage dealing was nerfed, would we spend 3hours fighting to kill 3 BS and a few support ? Most of the time engagement are fast but anyway decided at the moment you warp on your enemy, or maybe even at the moment you fitted your ship. Eve fighting is tactical, but most of it is before you actually fire your guns. Combat that last long just for the sake of lasting long is not really a good idea imo.
Admiral IceBlock	Posted - 2006.03.18 15:23:00 - [27] Originally by: KilROCK Double posting 4tl. And i actually want the upcoming patch to come soon and not in 5 months because some ** want to see a whole bunch of people warp at range since they can't shoot anywhere else, then the other fleet has to warp closer because otherwise they can't hit crap and so on. Whole bunch of useless stuff are being brought to EVE when it's not really needed. Stop whining and enjoy eve before it gets all **** up by your whining. yea stop whining "We brake for nobody"
Jenny Spitfire	Posted - 2006.03.18 16:58:00 - [28] Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 18/03/2006 17:00:30 Sighs. Almost every RL fights only last < 10 seconds. snip OK, I think I better dont PvP too much. I have becoming too ruthless. EDIT: Too much animated violence. ---------------- RecruitMe@NOINT!
Tiuwaz	Posted - 2006.03.18 17:04:00 - [29] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 18/03/2006 17:00:30 Sighs. Almost every RL fights only last < 10 seconds. snip OK, I think I better dont PvP too much. I have becoming too ruthless. EDIT: Too much animated violence. i roundhouse kick them in 3 secs Originally by: Oveur ****! Lets nerf it! To the nerfmobile!
Kye Kenshin	Posted - 2006.03.18 17:12:00 - [30] hmm im gonna actually disagree here with fleet battles lasting only 10 secs. The G/IRON/RAZOR/CELES Vs 5/F-E/KAOS/BMC fight in H-W the other night felt like it lasted as long as an hour. But then it was on a pretty massive scale.

Shin Ra	Posted - 2006.03.19 12:52:00 - [31] Ok how about more than 4 of the same class of ships has no effect. This means in fleet battles, you would have a lot more frigs, cruisers, bc and what not. Plus it would mean people wouldn't have to fight at 200km and could go back to have 40km engagements. People would need to be organised into smaller groups and instead of hoping the guy lags and doesnt warp, you would actually have to scramble the guy. It would also make close ranged ships such as raven dom and blasterthron a lot more viable. I realise they probably would implement this as public opinion is against it, but its an interesting idea ntl.
Nafri	Posted - 2006.03.19 12:57:00 - [32] Originally by: Kye Kenshin hmm im gonna actually disagree here with fleet battles lasting only 10 secs. The G/IRON/RAZOR/CELES Vs 5/F-E/KAOS/BMC fight in H-W the other night felt like it lasted as long as an hour. But then it was on a pretty massive scale. there died about 140-160 ships, so it had to take quite a while
Alpdruck	Posted - 2006.03.19 13:27:00 - [33] Originally by: Nafri make warping much slower and harder (about 2mins to align to warp for a BS, and maybe a warp generator has toload each time). You would need to re-work travel, too, because that would mess up travelling in a BS in a major way.
Dark Eulogy	Posted - 2006.03.19 13:28:00 - [34] Edited by: Dark Eulogy on 19/03/2006 13:29:23 They are fine now. The only thing that would improve PvP would be an added manual-aiming system that gave a boost to damage or something.
Krulla	Posted - 2006.03.19 13:42:00 - [35] Originally by: Admiral IceBlock OR remove the range on ammonution and make only one ammo, this way your forced to fight at a certain range which leads to deploying of forces more tactical, tachyon apocs behind the megapulses, and then you would actully have to move around the battlefield to get into range instead of sitting still and shoot everything that moves.. This would simply lead to fleets consisting entirely of one type of weapon. Which wouldn't change a damn thing. Respect the Domi. Or else. SIG HIJACK!!11 RAWRR!!1- IMMY
Valea Silpha	Posted - 2006.03.19 13:45:00 - [36] The reason why combat is so fast is becuase of support. Even with someone in the same sytem, currently its entirely possible to shred a target before ever inties arrive in support. If you slow down combat 1 vs 1 your looking down the barrle of having friends from 1 or 2 jumps out being able to come and help out in the original fight, not just avenge the guys death. As far as im concerned that sucks. Currently i mainly see 'oppertunistic' pvp .. ie i see a red guy and shoot at him and vice verce... but no war as such. This would be destroyed anytime that your not vastly outclassing the other guy, and in that context hes not going to engage anyway. Yes i would like to see my mighty battleship exchanging vollies with an enemy for more than a minute at a time, but thats a pipe dream and would destroy either BSs ability to really fight each otehr if you nerf their guns, or destroy smaller ships ability to attack them if you boost their tank or hp.
Bazman	Posted - 2006.03.19 14:19:00 - [37] tbh, it seems like you can shred BS's fast with loads of frigates because quite often the battleship you catch is either stabbed up or just doesn't have a tank on whatsoever. I recently died in a 2v11 fight (I was one of the two :P) It started off small but as the fight went on they called in more and more frigates and cruisers to fight us. I was happily tanking them until there were more than 5 ceptors/assault frigs shooting at me, along with a Raven that eventually showed up. Even so, my tank held up under the fire for like 45 seconds once the Ravens added firepower came in. It was approximately 3 and a half to 4 minutes into the fight that i went down. How much longer do fights need to be? If people would stop wasting slots to warp stabs and actually fitted out their ships to endure PVP fights with decent tanks, your fights would last longer and end up being more enjoyable because of it. I don't really have any problems with the lenghts of fights now. Small fleet actions tend to be over far too quick, but once or twice I've been in those 'epic' two hour long fleet battles, and they were fun :P p.s Close range ftw. ----- Hi TomB! All out Do or Die Blasterboat for tier 3 Gallente battleship please! Make it look cool too. Thanks.
Celador Nane	Posted - 2006.03.19 14:29:00 - [38] Originally by: Shin Ra Make damage stack. More than 4 ships shooting a target has no effect. Also increase agression timer. Wow, great idea, il get 4 noob accounts in ibis's to shoot my BS then i can be invincible!!!! (thinking outside the box 4tw!) Oh, and that idea blows....
Xanthous	Posted - 2006.03.19 14:33:00 - [39] Everyone fits to gank in pvp because the defensive modules are nowhere near as powerful as the offensive ones. Theres no way you can tank a guy that has a gank setup on because the amount of damage in eve is crazy. Best way is to load up with plates and pray you out last the other guy.
Admiral IceBlock	Posted - 2006.03.19 14:41:00 - [40] Originally by: Krulla Originally by: Admiral IceBlock OR remove the range on ammonution and make only one ammo, this way your forced to fight at a certain range which leads to deploying of forces more tactical, tachyon apocs behind the megapulses, and then you would actully have to move around the battlefield to get into range instead of sitting still and shoot everything that moves.. This would simply lead to fleets consisting entirely of one type of weapon. Which wouldn't change a damn thing. 10 versus 10, all use tachyons, you get a shorter range weapon and get close, now you can blast them becouse they are in your optimal and they are not... of course tracking has to be changed with it so that each weapon has its own purpose. we already have this balance when taking battleships versus other small ships, but not battleships versus other battleship guns. "We brake for nobody"

Rod Blaine	Posted - 2006.03.19 14:42:00 - [41] I've seen fleetbattles last longer then an hour and a half. More then once. Power to the players !
Cade Morrigan	Posted - 2006.03.19 15:27:00 - [42] I question whether the OP gave a hoot about big fleet battles, sounds more like small unit operations he's frustrated with. One thing I don't understand about recent changes to the game... The devs added more shield and armor to ships with the intent of making ships last longer in battle; not enough was added to help extend ship life in fleet battles but for smaller ops, great. But they also introduced T2 ammo which offers many new ways to increase a ship's DPS in a big way. Together those changes are counter-productive and don't seem well thought out at all.
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2006.03.19 15:53:00 - [43] Edited by: Maya Rkell on 19/03/2006 15:53:56 Originally by: Shin Ra Ok how about more than 4 of the same class of ships has no effect. This means in fleet battles, you would have a lot more frigs, cruisers, bc and what not. Plus it would mean people wouldn't have to fight at 200km and could go back to have 40km engagements. People would need to be organised into smaller groups and instead of hoping the guy lags and doesnt warp, you would actually have to scramble the guy. It would also make close ranged ships such as raven dom and blasterthron a lot more viable. I realise they probably would implement this as public opinion is against it, but its an interesting idea ntl. Again, impractical. Most fleet battles are at ranges which exclude anything except BS and a few HAC's with sniper setups from participating - and the sniper HAC's can get taken out by burst damage even from 4 BS very quickly, so they're an expensive loss in those situations. If you think people will magically start fighting at closer range, you're dreaming. Indeed, that encurages longer range fighting because people don't want to die. If you want to force closer range fighting, halve both bonuses on sensor boosters. Rod Blaine, me too. Just not recently. (And before anyone asks "when have you been in a fleet battle recently", I've watched some cloaked as an observer. Thanks) Digital Communist> The Jin-Mei are probably more profficient in training for Tofu and Noodles than Spaceship Command
Jerick Ludhowe	Posted - 2006.03.19 18:10:00 - [44] Edited by: Jerick Ludhowe on 19/03/2006 18:12:22 Wups. Shin Ra already posted what I was going to say. Way to not read the thread self
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2006.03.19 18:13:00 - [45] And how is this magic cap going to be explained? I really DON'T want to be going over gang member setups with a calculator before each trip to ensure that we had the magic damage which could overcome a tank...this suggestion would force me to do just that. Digital Communist> The Jin-Mei are probably more profficient in training for Tofu and Noodles than Spaceship Command
Jerick Ludhowe	Posted - 2006.03.19 18:14:00 - [46] Originally by: Maya Rkell And how is this magic cap going to be explained? I really DON'T want to be going over gang member setups with a calculator before each trip to ensure that we had the magic damage which could overcome a tank...this suggestion would force me to do just that. Whats wrong with running numbers before hand? The more tactics and planning involved the better imo.
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2006.03.19 18:22:00 - [47] No, that is not tactics. It is strategy. And we're not talking about anything like range, which is easy enough to mandate, we're talking about 30+ mins of calculation before I could take a gang out. Remembering the MAGIC of different ship types in a gang would throw everything off, and there would have to be a mandartory limit on damage below which you were a parasitic drain on the gang.. (excluding lower skilled players). Etc. It's really very complex and adds little beyond confusion. There are other mechanisms such as partial jams which should be explored first. Digital Communist> The Jin-Mei are probably more profficient in training for Tofu and Noodles than Spaceship Command
Sir Juri	Posted - 2006.03.19 18:25:00 - [48] Edited by: Sir Juri on 19/03/2006 18:25:42 wrong forum, for this thread... Im a noob, bear with me :P
Cmdr Patrick	Posted - 2006.03.19 18:28:00 - [49] Edited by: Cmdr Patrick on 19/03/2006 18:28:41 Originally by: Shin Ra Make damage stack. More than 4 ships shooting a target has no effect. Also increase agression timer. yes! increase aggro timer edit and bring back the old map routes for travel.
xaioguai	Posted - 2006.03.19 18:47:00 - [50] I think either reduce all range weapon by half or triple all ships's velocity + turret tracking, or maybe both. The fleet battles now are kind of boring, ppl shooting at each other 100km+ apart and you only get to kill someone or be killed due to lag, there is no tactic other than calling primary and secondary. there are no heavy calvery like AC tempest or blasterthrone in place of fleet battle. kind of miss the oversize AB rupture......

Jenny Spitfire	Posted - 2006.03.19 18:52:00 - [51] Originally by: xaioguai ... Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee*k!!! Xaio! Is that me in you siggy? ---------------- RecruitMe@NOINT!**
ActiveX	Posted - 2006.03.19 19:03:00 - [52] Edited by: ActiveX on 19/03/2006 19:05:17 Ive always been one for a damage model where if all ships target one ship and fire, it takes a few seconds for the ship to acctualy blow up. For example, 5 tempests target and fire on a Mega, the damage hits for full, but only so much damage is done to the target. I.E. if 40k points of damage are done on the target with 30k hitpoints (raw, no resists) it will take 12 seconds for the ship to explode.. (2.5k damage is rendered to the ship per second.) Now two things can happen. A friendly ship can target and remote boost shields or armor for a total of >10k hitpoints in those 12 seconds, the ship can boost its self in addition, or the ship warps out. If no assistance is given or the ship cannot warp the ship explodes. This would make all ships have much more survivability. Of course other than tanking mods the offensive systems on the ship are shut down, including targeting. All they can do is attempt to repair the damage. The idea needs to be toyed with, but if it is implimented correctly it could change the world of PVP in EVE. Fleet battles wouldnt last A hour, they would last 2, 3, 4 hours... enough time for fleets to call in reinforcements and change the tide of a battle that is lopsided at first. Edit: As a quick addition this would also make a small fleet with a carrier or mothership able to take on a large fleet. Especialy a well coordinated gang. This would make corps such as Burn Eden (who are good at what they do) more willing to pit their fleets against the inevitable blobs that alliances such as the one I belong would throw at them. Not because they want 200 pilots, but because thats how many people showed up. ____________ Sex / Rank 9 / SP: 1280 of 2304000
Kaiu	Posted - 2006.03.19 19:39:00 - [53] Originally by: Celador Nane Originally by: Shin Ra More than 4 ships shooting a target has no effect. Also increase agression timer. Oh, and that idea blows.... QFE Ridiculous ideas...i cannot come up with a better option at this time though
Slink Grinsdikild	Posted - 2006.03.19 19:50:00 - [54] Fights should be longer, but how long is long enough? I don't want to spend 10 minutes trying to wither someones tank down while in the mean time his corpmates arrive from 8 jumps away.
Kaiu	Posted - 2006.03.19 19:51:00 - [55] Apologies in advance for long ass post... Watching Episode of Battlestar Galactia Season 2 today... I watched as 3 Base Stars ambushed a Battlestar. The Basestars instantly let fly a couple of nukes each and blasted the living S**T out of the Battlestar. Thinking and relating back to EVE. I imagined 3 x T2 torp. ravens insta-popping a Mega...you get the idea However...the Battlestar 'survived' the encounter! It concentrated fire onto 1 of the 3 BaseStars and maneuvered towards it. Whilst Frigate support protected it from enemy Frigates. During these few minutes of battle it was fixing its FTL (jump drives) so it could 'warp' off. Certainly got me into the mood for EVE. However when i really thought about it, the scenario in EVE would have been more closely compared to 3 x dreads firing off volleys at a Carrier... Anyway, my point is...Battleships drop too easily imo. IMO there is too much of a gap between Battleships and Capital ships. For longer fleet battles, either a middleground ship needs to emerge... a 'Battlestar' type ship. Or, a complete reworking of combat/ship stat's/dmg's etc As for the latest changes to some weapon types that will increase dmg/dps...well not a move in the right direction towards longer lasting battles, but much needed balancing none the less.
Elenia Kheynes	Posted - 2006.03.19 19:53:00 - [56] Originally by: Rod Blaine I've seen fleetbattles last longer then an hour and a half. More then once. I've seen lag, more than once. Then I decided I wouldn't take part to more than 15 vs 15. Ok, server got upgraded since that time Dear friendly customer... Can I have your money ?
Wulfgard	Posted - 2006.03.19 19:54:00 - [57] Originally by: KilROCK Originally by: Shin Ra Make damage stack. More than 4 ships shooting a target has no effect. Also increase agression timer. That would be lame, and unrealist. Unrealist? Actually it wouldn't be if we compare it to surface fleet battles during the WW2, not all ships would target the same primary or they wouldnt be able to know which salvo from which gun or ship was in need of accuracy adjustment.
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2006.03.19 19:58:00 - [58] Yep. Now welcome to space. Distance scale is far larger, sensors are far better. Unrealistic dosn't say half of the limited fire suggestion. Digital Communist> The Jin-Mei are probably more profficient in training for Tofu and Noodles than Spaceship Command
Xanta	Posted - 2006.03.19 20:08:00 - [59] just make the scanner not show names just ships :} total chaos great fun
Kaiu	Posted - 2006.03.19 20:54:00 - [60] Originally by: Xanta just make the scanner not show names just ships :} total chaos great fun something similar...with longer times and/or more skills needed to determine ship types etc

Foulis	Posted - 2006.03.19 22:04:00 - [61] Originally by: Elenia Kheynes Originally by: KilROCK Originally by: Shin Ra Make damage stack. More than 4 ships shooting a target has no effect. Also increase agression timer. That would be lame, and unrealist. Realism ? Eve is not anywhere close to realistic in the fist place. The 4 ships max shooting target would be interesting, making fleet battles much more complex and thus tactical. Plus you wouldn't get insta-ganked anymore when called primary. Things would get interesting for sure with this... And wolfpacks would go right out the window. Nerfing a perfectly acceptable role. ---- I <3 Taranis Cake > Pie - Imaran Originally by: CCP Hammer Boobies
Commander Nikolas	Posted - 2006.03.20 18:21:00 - [62] Yeah it would be nice but CCP dosen't seem to take their statments seriously. In large fleet battles no matter how much HP you give to ships they will go down almost instantly so the main concern is smaller battles. CCP increased HP, Tanking, and nerfed DPS setups. Battles don't last longer, it just means that when your opponant realizes he is beaten he turns off weapons and slow boats to the stargate or station instead of staying and fighting. The only way to actually increase the length of battles is to make the changes to keep people in the fight. #1 Nerf WCS for PvP configs #2 Increase the jump/dock delay for agressive acts massivly #3 Logging off in space your ship should stay in space #4 Global criminal timer should stop you from docking/jumping totally. #5 Remove insta jumps completly (introduce new modules for the carebares so they have insta jumps everywhere with auto-pilot) The only really long battles I have ever had were either fighting really crazy odds or taking out battleships with only a couple of frigs. The most notable: 2 vs 6: Domi & Thorax vs Typhoon, Tempest, Vengance, Vagabond, Cyclone & Retribution That fight last 30 minutes + and the phoon managed to escape cause it was stabbed out. It was pre-rmr. 3 vs 1: Ishkur, Worm, Omen vs Raven This fight lasted 20 minutes +. Post rmr.
Hugh Ruka	Posted - 2006.03.20 18:35:00 - [63] well the solution is simple, we need to introduce a cleric/priest type ship class that is very effective in this. in all the MMORPGs I have played so far, a priest was unkillable in a normal battle (had to be targeted specificaly, disabled or driven away). however he traded his offensive capability for high survivability and boosting ability. logistic cruisers just don't survive once they are targeted, "logistic" battleships don't have the range and effectivity. ------------------------------ Removed due to offensive content - Laqum I realy liked my signature. Oh well ...
Manion Taleroth	Posted - 2006.03.20 18:42:00 - [64] I think they need to introduce a manner to pursuit. The initial part of a fight is short, then when everything goes to heck people retreat and regroup. The problem is that when they retreat, it's over, they can hide indefinitely. It's too difficult to pursuit. With a proper ability to pursuit, battle could stretch across systems.
Gabriel Karade	Posted - 2006.03.20 23:34:00 - [65] Originally by: Xanta just make the scanner not show names just ships :} total chaos great fun Genius idea - Office Linebacker -
Gabriel Karade	Posted - 2006.03.20 23:34:00 - [66] Originally by: Xanta just make the scanner not show names just ships :} total chaos great fun Genius idea - Office Linebacker -
MysticNZ	Posted - 2006.03.20 23:38:00 - [67] Try fighting stuff your own size. I do 1v1's alot and most of my battles last 1-2 minutes. Pick your targets wisely and you wont get 20 second poped. - EVE Online \| EVE Insider \| Forums
MysticNZ	Posted - 2006.03.20 23:38:00 - [68] Try fighting stuff your own size. I do 1v1's alot and most of my battles last 1-2 minutes. Pick your targets wisely and you wont get 20 second poped. - You got pwnd by us too :P - Wrangler lol - Imaran
Koori	Posted - 2006.03.21 00:49:00 - [69] Edited by: Koori on 21/03/2006 00:49:52 Probably most of you read "Ender's Game" by Orson Scott Card. One of the best ideas Ender had in his battles was dividing forces into small, autonomic units. He was able to communicate with his squad leaders and they wre communicating with field commanders in space. That was incredibly effective, and I think that would be as effective in EVE. Just imagine dividing 50 people fleet into 5 groups. That means 5 primary and 5 secondary tarets at every moment. Almost no ship can withstand concentrated fire from 10 ships for longer than 10-20 seconds. That would ultimately make whole battle slorter, but it would increase survivability of single vessel. I know that this thread is about making the battles longer not shorter, but please read on. Every commander beeing able to use above tactics would be extremely successful one but we are facing technological barrier here. EVE has no built-in voice communication. The most known voice communication applications (TeamSpeak and Ventrilo) allaws only communication in one channel. That means that all members of the group must be in one channel to hear orders. That implies that most effective tactic is calling one primary and hammering it to the dust in few seconds. There is no other option (or you will be facing chaotic fleet ops). Every commander is aiming at the top of his group effectiveness. Every nerf that will cause commander to change his tactics only because 4 BSs shooting one has bigger effect than 20 BSs shooting one is a bu*shi. Now we must wait for (or write it by ourselves) means of communication that allaws splitting large group to small squads. -------------------------------------------
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2006.03.21 00:50:00 - [70] TS has command channel for just this. Vent dosn't make the cut, I agree. Digital Communist> The Jin-Mei are probably more profficient in training for Tofu and Noodles than Spaceship Command



Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one 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.