Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Silver Fusion
|
Posted - 2006.09.05 09:43:00 -
[91]
the answer is easy, have a team of assasin devs in their jove ships......when the "blob detecor" is activated the all spawn next to the blob and WTFPWNBBQMOFO them all, not only would that add a really interesting and bizzare quirk to the game but the devs would have a barrel of laughs. and i'd be there with fraps running for your veiwing pleasure.
|
Nordvargr
GoonWaffe GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2006.09.05 10:59:00 -
[92]
Originally by: Prez21 The main problem is range. why would anyone want to fight close range when u can warp in at 200k and insta pop your chosen target.
Now imagine guns such as rails and artys have a range of say 20-60k but have lower fitting requirments so you can also fit a tank, this making them still ok for close range engagements.
Picture two 80 man fleets both close combat because long range weapons now only hit upto 60k, one fleet jumps into the other, FC cant call 1 primary because the fight is spread out ova 80k around the gate and blasterthrons and ac tempests and other close range BS arnt going to be able to hit the primary target if it isnt in range, so this would mean maybe breaking your gang into smaller groups each having there own wing commander leading them.
The range changes might not suit alot of ppl but at the min the range at which ppl are fighting with is too high
For some reason tux has it in his head that decreasing the size of the 'coconut of death' as he calls it will reduce the amount of concentrated fire. This is silly, people aren't going to get their cov-ops to find a warp-in at a range where they can't shoot, if range is cut in half people will engage closer and the concentrated fire will not change at all.
If range is cut in half it will only hurt those of us that prefer close range battleships because a cov-ops cannot get a warp-in on top of a fleet that's 125km away as you can't warp to someone that isn't 150+ km from you.
|
Patch86
|
Posted - 2006.09.05 11:21:00 -
[93]
Someone said this before, and I liked it:
AoE Energy Neutralzers.
You know you want to........
|
XGS Crimson
|
Posted - 2006.09.05 11:34:00 -
[94]
Originally by: Tasty Burger
Originally by: XGS Crimson give us grenade launchers with a choice of splash and concentrated damages... and the thing with concord... u could just say boohoo my smartbombs are hitting cans... they havent banned them yet, missiles are a main weapon for a race and everyone elses secondary so u cant do splash on them.
Grenade launchers= poor range, 2km splash radius.
Grenade launchers? WTF?
use ur brain u tard a grenade launcher... u knnow the thing that fires grenades... dumbass
|
XGS Crimson
|
Posted - 2006.09.05 11:36:00 -
[95]
Edited by: XGS Crimson on 05/09/2006 11:41:59 u cant make ships explode because that screwes drones and blaster users....
Also i noticed people are slowly sliding towards snipers... sniping is sniping not blobing, blobing is multiple ships attacking one.
They have already mentioned gang improvments such as a leadership system allowing maybe the people in a certain section of the gang rights to lock instantly without it showing up as a target. I think they may add a limiting target system as mentioned earyler in this thread.
|
Hugh Ruka
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.05 11:38:00 -
[96]
Originally by: Prez21 The main problem is range. why would anyone want to fight close range when u can warp in at 200k and insta pop your chosen target.
Now imagine guns such as rails and artys have a range of say 20-60k but have lower fitting requirments so you can also fit a tank, this making them still ok for close range engagements.
Picture two 80 man fleets both close combat because long range weapons now only hit upto 60k, one fleet jumps into the other, FC cant call 1 primary because the fight is spread out ova 80k around the gate and blasterthrons and ac tempests and other close range BS arnt going to be able to hit the primary target if it isnt in range, so this would mean maybe breaking your gang into smaller groups each having there own wing commander leading them.
The range changes might not suit alot of ppl but at the min the range at which ppl are fighting with is too high
focus fire does not depend on range. sniper setups just avoid taking fire while giving out some. it will be the same even if the fleet battle happens with all blater throns. just the range will be different.
the main problem is the warp in target. there is not much possibility for that today to organize a good fleet warp in ...
Originally by: JP Beauregard The experience with Exodus playtesting has scarred me for life. Those were bug-reports, not feature requests, you numbskulls....
|
Amy Wang
|
Posted - 2006.09.05 11:39:00 -
[97]
This has to be well thought through to say the least.
Well I dont like blobs of t2 snipers either, but if the change is done wrong it will mainly nerf short range combat groups and/or discourage gangs of smaller ships then BS which to a degree rely on superior numbers to compete or allow unintended exploits.
The Proposals and their flaws:
- reduced range will just mean focused fire on shorter ranges plus nerf short range groups unless you enable the warp to option at way less then 150km.
- defense systems against long range fire like forefields: hard to implement, unproportional nerf to snipers, will cater to short range gank fleet and eliminate felexibility
- weapons with ranged splash damage: unproportinal nerf to large groups of smaller ships and this weapons would be overpowered most likely
- limited numbers of ships targeting another ship: highly exploitable, a bit less exploitable if you rule out targeting by gang/corp/alliance mates, but still possible to create invulnerable key ships using neutrals out of gang in your force
- limited numbers of ships actually fireing at target ship: offensive modules without damage (like scram, ecm etc) should be left out to reduce exploiting chances as well as module use by corp/gang/alliance mates, exploit still possible using neutrals with low damage weapons
this one seems to me like the best working and less flawed possibility
|
XGS Crimson
|
Posted - 2006.09.05 11:47:00 -
[98]
Snipers sacrafice their tank to use their weapons effectivly. They also have difficulty tracking small ships such as mwd frigs and interceptors. Everything has its weakness, may it be speed, defence, or attack you cant have it all and if you go to the extremes you can get one huge advantage and one huge weakness
|
Cod Ball
Gallente Occassus Republica
|
Posted - 2006.09.05 12:41:00 -
[99]
TBH. Its not only the game that needs changing its also fleet commander attitudes. Damn near all FC's I know ALL want to snipe or go at long range. That makes the whole thing less fun and boringly simple. Whenever i lead a fleet im allways making sure everyone in the gang has short range setups and we allways go in right ontop of the enemy because it makes the whole thing more do or die and more intense. Ive won many fleet battles by doing that just because short range setups at 5-10km against even bigger numbers but with long range setups is a good fight and usually a nice win.
|
Tum II
|
Posted - 2006.09.05 12:50:00 -
[100]
anti-blob machine: stealth-bomber with device, who disable medium mobile warp disruptor at 30 sec. If blobbers have 5 mobile - anti blobbers need 5 stealts-bombers. Antistealth mashine - munin&eagle
|
|
Trev Kachanov
Sha Kharn Corp Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.09.05 12:52:00 -
[101]
Please CCP don't make a Eve version of the combat medic
|
Wilfan Ret'nub
Singularity.
|
Posted - 2006.09.05 16:40:00 -
[102]
Originally by: Trev Kachanov Please CCP don't make a Eve version of the combat medic
Ever heard of logistic cruiser? ------ No ISK, no fun |
XGS Crimson
|
Posted - 2006.09.05 16:42:00 -
[103]
Originally by: Wilfan Ret'nub
Originally by: Trev Kachanov Please CCP don't make a Eve version of the combat medic
Ever heard of logistic cruiser?
they suck
|
Gabriel Karade
Office linebackers Blood of the Innocents
|
Posted - 2006.09.05 17:03:00 -
[104]
Originally by: Slan Traveller Suggestion:
Combat performance of ships not under fire is normal, while ships under fire receive reduced DPS (being under pressure, targetting systems overloaded by impact).
Historically crew morale and focus on ships not under fire has prevented admirals from utterly focussing their gunnery from the age of Nelson up to Jutland.
Exactly.
Artificially nerfing focused fire is not what is needed, there has to be a sound reason to want to split fire, but at the same time there will be occasions where you would want to focus on one target e.g. capital-ship target shows up on the Battlefield.
----------
- Office Linebacker -
|
Minnow maught
Art of War Cult of War
|
Posted - 2006.09.05 17:07:00 -
[105]
AOE doesnt getrid of the blob .... it'll just make the blob use/rely on it more than the smaller blob.
In reality a large gang should be better than a small one, co-ordintaed and combined firepower should win other wise it is not really very realistic.
If aoe gets introduced, you'll still see the same size overall blobs, just perhaps setup in 4 gangs at 4 different locations to reduce the effects.
That said ... gang skills could hold part of the key here ... cap the size of gangs? make it skill dependant? reduce the effect of gang skills based on gang size? Introduce a damage based skill that is very effective with small gangs but not effective with large gangs as the co-ordination is too much for the gang leader? perhaps even make it detrimental to damage output to be running a gang which is too large for the skill base?
If you introduce a new weapon type / splash damage, it will be utilised just as much by the larger gang / blob and as they are bigger, they will still be more effective.
|
Zed Nash
|
Posted - 2006.09.05 23:46:00 -
[106]
Novel idea.......... add terrain.
Instead of the emptiness of space surrounding you, have a nebula close-by that interferes with targetting range, a debris field which absorbs or nullifies a certain amount of damage, a gas cloud which effects visibility, be creative.
Or add modules which act as terrain, a disruptor field which effects targeting range, a force field bubble which absorbs damage outside it's field of effect, again, be creative.
Just an idea.........
"Maya Rkell is my online stalker." |
Aegis Osiris
Gallente Demonic Retribution Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 02:44:00 -
[107]
This is a very complex problem, and no simple one-shot immunization is going to fix it. It will require an equally complex solution, with multiple parts acting together.
First, let me just apologize up front to anyone that has mentioned all or part of this before. I'm not trying to steal ideas, just condense them.
Second, any and all values suggested below are for the sole purpose of illustrating the concept. They would surely need to be tweaked by extensive testing.
The Problem 1. Massed fire tactics in large scale battles = Deep Fried ships, relatively simple, brute force tactics, and generally less fun.
2. Long range sniper fleets are a related, though slightly seperate, problem. Never the less, sniper fleets are the most obvious and egregious application of massed fire tactics.
The Proposal 1. Shockwave Effect: an exploding ship should impact objects nearby. While 'damage' is the obvious choice, it is too problematic and massively impacts close range ships. Instead, I suggest (as have others) a 'Shockwave Effect', with two parts.
a) EM pulse: the explosion of a ship's powercore generates a pulse equivalent, in some ways, to an ECM burst with a 100% effectiveness within its area. Any ship within the blast instantly loses lock on any and all targets. No modules go offline until they run thru their natural activation cycle (ie. jammers, weapons, etc.; sensor and tracking boosters would remain active).
b) Kinetic pulse: the detonation of the ship's powercore also throws out debris, from fast moving particles to chunks of hull. While it does no damage (could do minimal, unimportant really), it DOES nudge your ship. Not as much as a bump, but enough to throw off your alignment by a small degree. Example, your course changes to within a 15 degree cone of your present course.
2. Sensor booster change: split the bonus between two new modules: a Sensor Range Optimizer, and a Signature Analysis Processor. Long range targeting for sniper fleets is still viable, but lock time increases.
3. Tracking computer changes: add a small nerf to scan resolution when using a tracking computer or enhancer. Not large, and make the stacking nerf decrease the penalty for each additional unit (ex. 1 = 5% decrease to scan resolution, 2 = 7.5%, etc.).
4. Change gang warp: gang warp should no longer cause all ships to cluster tightly. Gang will warp in whatever spacing they were in when warp was initiated, from anywhere within the same grid.
Using these would NOT stop massed fire tactics, but it would complicate the tactical picture, providing more options for smart commanders. Massed fire in closely spaced gangs would now come with some costs, and sniper fleets, while still viable, would find it harder to operate without solid support, both offensive and defensive.
Please note, I have tried to avoid solutions that would place too much extra strain on the servers, as I fear the whole "limited locks per ship" solution might. I have also tried to take lag into account (ie. no modules get shut off that wouldnt be going off on their own anyway).
Remember, the point is not that any one of these changes alone has a big impact, but that they would ALL have an effect in the same situations.
I've given you a topic. Now discuss, as all this typing has made me all verklempt.... ________________________________________________ This thread does not exist
|
Glarion Garnier
Solar Wind
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 03:36:00 -
[108]
HOW ABOUT
The more ppl there is in a gang the less its members have targetting range. Thanks to overlapping targetting systems interfiering with each other.
So the penalty would start after 5 ppl in the same gang or something like that.
|
Oscar Clay
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 04:07:00 -
[109]
Solution to overpowered sniping gangs:
Sensor strength and resolution both scale inversely with range to target. A simple, completely realistic and easy to implement fix. At longer ranges it takes more time to lock on to a target, and your lock is weaker so it's easier to break with ECM.
|
Kelgen Thann
SUBLIME L.L.C. Prime Orbital Systems
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 04:55:00 -
[110]
The skills that increase the gang size before a damage reduction occurs only works when you're in close proximity to the gang. ie. In the fight. These characters are critical to a large blob to function effeciently.
The gang size skills could work by having one person have them and be in the same system as the fight. To prevent jumping from splitting the gang, have a count-down of say 2 mins. If the person that was safe spotted cannot keep up with the gang then the gang disbands into the smaller goups based on the next highest skill levels.
All this makes a hierarchy of ranks necessary. The ranks dictate what role you have. You get assigned Ranks by Ceo's or Executor's etc. You first have to qualify for the rank by having the necessary skills, then awarded the rank based on your achievements/clout.
Say the highest ranking officer is killed. and they had the bonus to prevent their gang of 70 from suffering a damage penalty, and the next highest position has skills sufficient to have no loss of damage up to 60 ships. The gang takes a hit because they lost their leader and don't have the depth to maintain their efficiency.
If you have a fleet that uses scan probes, and they locate the gang leader for the size of the gang and they warp to him and kill him, the main gang is suddenly disbanded into smaller gangs. If there isn't a skilled pilot to replace the pilot who died they could potententially be split many ways, making coordination a nightmare.
Thus, the fleet that kills the leaders, and uses scouting an dtactics to cut the head off of the beast will win.
It also introduces the possiblity of traitors in a blob. They give the location of a gang leader (group size) away and the enemy fleet can nerf their enemy quickly.
Changes similar to this will introduce a lot to fleet combat instead of my number is bigger than your number, and we insta-poped more than your fleet insta-poped
|
|
Kelgen Thann
SUBLIME L.L.C. Prime Orbital Systems
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 04:55:00 -
[111]
I would like to see a whoel set of leadership skills introduced into the game. These skills dictating how many people are allowed in a gang. each successive skill requiring level 5 in the previous.
The first skill would be rank 1 and each level allows 1 extra person in a gang. at no skill you can have 2 in a gang.
The second skill is a rank 2 skill and this allows an extra 3 people in the gang
The third skill is rank 4 and permits an additional 5 people in the gang per level.
The last skill is rank 8 and permits an additional 10 people in the gang per level.
The main point of thise is to stop the 300 person gangs, and the 200 person gangs.
It will limit a gang size for a single FC(or FC alt), there are work arounds with Teamspeak and the such, but it requires several Fleet commanders all coordinating and takes more skill. a Fleet commander with high leadership skills would be valuable as they could have close to 100 in a gang. I would also give Fleet command ships a bonus to this increasing the numbers in a gang by 20.
This also gives charisma a purpose other than mission running.
If the person withthe highest leadership skill gets killed, the head of the fleet has been cut off, and the next highest takes effect, and if necessary the fleet is split, the possible split can be arranged before hand, so a fleet can have a ranking system which is established before hand. To maximize fleet effectiveness it takes planning and coordination between leaders, and multiple gangs.
This can be taken further, and as you have more and more ships in a gang the overall damage output of ships decreases. There can be a set of skills that allow for the effective coordiation of ships in a fleet and their firing ability. Say as you pass a certain level of say 20 ships you suffer a small penalty to total damage out-put because more and more ships in a gang affect communication and effectiveness. Skills are there to add discipline to a fleet.
The discipline skills are leadership skills, and are a small series that restor most of the efficiency by raising the maximum number of pilots that can be in a gang without suffering the penalty.
Rank 1 skill +2 ships per level
Rank 3 skill +4 ships per level
Rank 6 skill + 5 ships per level
Rank 10 skill +10 ships per level
Set the base at say 20 ships.
This also adds value to the fleet commander, if he is killed and has high skills here the next commander may not be as effective, and the Fleet becomes less effective with the leaders death.
Command ships can also increase the level by say 20 again.
Small Gangs should also gain a bonus to damage to encourage small fleets and not blobs.
Introduce a skill that raises damge out-put of all small turrets/launchers, medium turrets and launchers, and large ones.
3 skills Rank 5 leadership category. Each level increases damge out-put by 5% per level.
Say the damage bonus completely dissapears after a gang goes greater than the size of 10 ships.
command ships increase this level by 5 ships - 50% Currently 40 ship fleet is as easy to controll as a 100 person fleet. that is wrong. People can argue that mroe can go wrong but everything is the same. You make the same calls for primary follow the same gang warping strategies. tactics change for the situation but the tactices and leader abilities are just as strained in a 40 person gang as in a 100. that is speaking from any experience I've had in gangs of differing sizes, and talking to FCs
I personally find blob wars pathetic and I didn't follow my old alliance in their move because those were the battles that occured. Fleet fighting should be tough. the larger the group the harder it should be.
If an invading force is forced to operate in 4 smaller blobs insteaed of 1 large blob I like that idea and would support any changes that encourage it.
|
LeEtCaNaDiAn
Minmatar Einherjar Rising Dusk and Dawn
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 05:17:00 -
[112]
What about a ranged interdictor weapon that would take up a ton of CPU and PG (and capacitor), but has a range of about 200k and a radius of around 30k? It could act as a "Burst" version of the Warp Disrupter/Scrambler, putting like 10 points of scram onto anything in the bubble for a minute or two. That should give the tacklers/fast, close-ranged ships enough time to get to the target and start shooting.
|
Ishquar Teh'Sainte
Euphoria Released Euphoria Unleashed
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 09:40:00 -
[113]
Originally by: Cod Ball TBH. Its not only the game that needs changing its also fleet commander attitudes. Damn near all FC's I know ALL want to snipe or go at long range. That makes the whole thing less fun and boringly simple. Whenever i lead a fleet im allways making sure everyone in the gang has short range setups and we allways go in right ontop of the enemy because it makes the whole thing more do or die and more intense. Ive won many fleet battles by doing that just because short range setups at 5-10km against even bigger numbers but with long range setups is a good fight and usually a nice win.
yep .. i think this gets close to the problem as it can get ... sniping has the advantage that you'll have less casualties and more flexibility in range ... closerange has the advantage higher damage potential and better tackling - more casualties on both sides ...
conclusion: sniping is more efficient ___________________
-Skellibjalla- Life is a garden of perceptions. Pick your fruit.
|
Ol' Delsai
Caldari Aeden
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 11:43:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Aegis Osiris
The Proposal 1. Shockwave Effect: an exploding ship should impact objects nearby. While 'damage' is the obvious choice, it is too problematic and massively impacts close range ships. Instead, I suggest (as have others) a 'Shockwave Effect', with two parts.
a) EM pulse: the explosion of a ship's powercore generates a pulse equivalent, in some ways, to an ECM burst with a 100% effectiveness within its area. Any ship within the blast instantly loses lock on any and all targets. No modules go offline until they run thru their natural activation cycle (ie. jammers, weapons, etc.; sensor and tracking boosters would remain active).
b) Kinetic pulse: the detonation of the ship's powercore also throws out debris, from fast moving particles to chunks of hull. While it does no damage (could do minimal, unimportant really), it DOES nudge your ship. Not as much as a bump, but enough to throw off your alignment by a small degree. Example, your course changes to within a 15 degree cone of your present course.
Actually, I really love these two ideas. They are simple yet very effective.
Moreover, they seem not too hard to implement and are clearly "scientific". They can lead to great strategies and make the fleet battles a lot more interesting. Finally, they are hardly exploitable and do not introduce some "overpowered" new weapon.
Hope we'll see something like this pretty soon ...
|
Ishquar Teh'Sainte
Euphoria Released Euphoria Unleashed
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 12:02:00 -
[115]
Edited by: Ishquar Teh''Sainte on 06/09/2006 12:03:14 problem is see with this whole AoE stuff - it makes it easier to defend a system as it allready is ...
let's assume the following ... the AoE effect has a range of 10k
fleet A camps the incoming gate of a system where for example a POS siege is running - dictor at the gate ... the snipers spread out all around the gate (covering the half of the sphere around the gate to their warpout spot) making the AoE effect useless fleet B jumps in - if it's laggy for both sides ... well ... it depends all on luck if you survive or not (just like now - attackers don't really know what's happening, campers won't be able to target/activate their guns on the ships ... but the campers can inflict more damage due to the AoE effect - remember if your gang is big enough it's likely that there are other ships 10k close to you) - if it's not laggy (or only for those who jump in) - then the AoE becomes a real killer .. ships in the dictor bubble at the gate get popped, cause damage/disadvantages to their neighbouring ships, which get easier popped due to this and so on .. while the campers might lose only the firepower of one ship when it gets popped, the attackers will loose more of their firepower (or atleast of their tankingability)
so those who are able to set-up a gatecamp where all ships are spread out has the advantage .. but setting up such a camp takes time ... but time is no problem when it comes to alliance warfare. so the whole stuff ends in the question "who can earlier blob after downtime to lockdown a system in a way that the AoE effect doesn't matter" ___________________
-Skellibjalla- Life is a garden of perceptions. Pick your fruit.
|
Korovyov
Caldari State War Academy
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 12:15:00 -
[116]
I can't be arsed to find the post, but Tux states in response to all the "AoE!!!" stuff that it was just a rant. His real intention is to nerf sniping. What that means specifically, I don't know. Maybe battleships will have a max range of 10km, cruisers 8km, and frigates 6km. In that case, I hope they add a serraded knife module.
***
|
Hugh Ruka
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 12:20:00 -
[117]
Originally by: Ol' Delsai
Originally by: Aegis Osiris
The Proposal 1. Shockwave Effect: an exploding ship should impact objects nearby. While 'damage' is the obvious choice, it is too problematic and massively impacts close range ships. Instead, I suggest (as have others) a 'Shockwave Effect', with two parts.
a) EM pulse: the explosion of a ship's powercore generates a pulse equivalent, in some ways, to an ECM burst with a 100% effectiveness within its area. Any ship within the blast instantly loses lock on any and all targets. No modules go offline until they run thru their natural activation cycle (ie. jammers, weapons, etc.; sensor and tracking boosters would remain active).
b) Kinetic pulse: the detonation of the ship's powercore also throws out debris, from fast moving particles to chunks of hull. While it does no damage (could do minimal, unimportant really), it DOES nudge your ship. Not as much as a bump, but enough to throw off your alignment by a small degree. Example, your course changes to within a 15 degree cone of your present course.
Actually, I really love these two ideas. They are simple yet very effective.
Moreover, they seem not too hard to implement and are clearly "scientific". They can lead to great strategies and make the fleet battles a lot more interesting. Finally, they are hardly exploitable and do not introduce some "overpowered" new weapon.
Hope we'll see something like this pretty soon ...
self destruct a bare ship in the middle of the enemy fleet ? you get all the benefit for no loss and then you have a free playground till they lock again ...
Originally by: JP Beauregard The experience with Exodus playtesting has scarred me for life. Those were bug-reports, not feature requests, you numbskulls....
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |