Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 50 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Nolak Ataru
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
817
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 21:12:26 -
[1441] - Quote
2 things: 1) Garage Door Cynos are being or have been patched out. And I mentioned 50km or so from the *tower*, not the shield. 2) An anchor-type module that consumed no fuel coupled with a simple check every second / cycle would do it for the module. Hell, even every 5 seconds would be fine. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
1012
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 21:17:33 -
[1442] - Quote
The technique of using the forcefield like a door however (AFAIK) isn't being changed - which still allows that mechanism to be used for non cyno use to make things safe. |
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1679
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 21:29:24 -
[1443] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:2 things: 1) Garage Door Cynos are being or have been patched out. And I mentioned 50km or so from the *tower*, not the shield. 2) An anchor-type module that consumed no fuel coupled with a simple check every second / cycle would do it for the module. Hell, even every 5 seconds would be fine.
You can still garage door yourself if you are already inside where the shield will cover. If you can somehow be bumped after assisting the drones away, we sadly ahve to assume people will put in the effort.
Do we have any module that really anchor you? The only one I am used to is the Cyno and it's not an anchor. You can still be bumped in any direction. You would need to be anchored in space like a POS for example.
And all of that assume it's not 100% stupid to be able to apply damage while of grid too... |
Nolak Ataru
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
817
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 21:43:42 -
[1444] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Nolak Ataru wrote:2 things: 1) Garage Door Cynos are being or have been patched out. And I mentioned 50km or so from the *tower*, not the shield. 2) An anchor-type module that consumed no fuel coupled with a simple check every second / cycle would do it for the module. Hell, even every 5 seconds would be fine. You can still garage door yourself if you are already inside where the shield will cover. If you can somehow be bumped after assisting the drones away, we sadly ahve to assume people will put in the effort. Do we have any module that really anchor you? The only one I am used to is the Cyno and it's not an anchor. You can still be bumped in any direction. You would need to be anchored in space like a POS for example. And all of that assume it's not 100% stupid to be able to apply damage while of grid too...
Bastion, Siege, Triage, Industrial Core. Some fascinating properties occur when you turn those modules on. As I said, if you get closer than 50km or so to the control tower, not the shield, the fighters will return, however the module will not turn off. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
1012
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 22:23:15 -
[1445] - Quote
^^ Yup bumping a carrier in triage takes some effort - and really needs either out of control mass from another capital or something like a machariel with a good run up. Though if your sitting 1m from safety its doable - I've seen an archon in triage bumped before upto enough speed to reduce damage from citadel missiles. |
Nolak Ataru
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
817
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 22:28:26 -
[1446] - Quote
Rroff wrote:^^ Yup bumping a carrier in triage takes some effort - and really needs either out of control mass from another capital or something like a machariel with a good run up. Though if your sitting 1m from safety its doable - I've seen an archon in triage bumped before upto enough speed to reduce damage from citadel missiles.
Which is why I specifically stated that you wouldn't be able to assist or keep fighters assist within a certain distance that would be outside the bubble. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
2024
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 23:44:45 -
[1447] - Quote
The fact you have to make such a convoluted mechanic simply to even attempt to stop skynetting should be telling you things. Convoluted mechanics are bad. Mechanics that require being exactly x distance from things are also bad due to how fiddly they are, and the fact distance checks are not pretty on run time.
You also aren't considering the possibility that CCP wanted fighter assist for ratting to go as well. |
Nolak Ataru
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
818
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 12:23:25 -
[1448] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:The fact you have to make such a convoluted mechanic simply to even attempt to stop skynetting should be telling you things. Convoluted mechanics are bad. Mechanics that require being exactly x distance from things are also bad due to how fiddly they are, and the fact distance checks are not pretty on run time.
You also aren't considering the possibility that CCP wanted fighter assist for ratting to go as well.
They could just inhibit assisting fighters within 50km of the tower and call it a day, and that'd solve a lot of their problems.
Fighter assist on ratting one way to help new players earn some ISK. Assisted fighters do less damage than bonused drones on a drone boat, from my math. If CCP wants to let caps take acceleration gates, then I'd say it's a fair trade-off. But as it stands right now, CCP's cutting off their face to spite their nose. |
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1679
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 13:49:34 -
[1449] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote:The fact you have to make such a convoluted mechanic simply to even attempt to stop skynetting should be telling you things. Convoluted mechanics are bad. Mechanics that require being exactly x distance from things are also bad due to how fiddly they are, and the fact distance checks are not pretty on run time.
You also aren't considering the possibility that CCP wanted fighter assist for ratting to go as well. They could just inhibit assisting fighters within 50km of the tower and call it a day, and that'd solve a lot of their problems. Fighter assist on ratting one way to help new players earn some ISK. Assisted fighters do less damage than bonused drones on a drone boat, from my math. If CCP wants to let caps take acceleration gates, then I'd say it's a fair trade-off. But as it stands right now, CCP's cutting off their face to spite their nose.
What if caps were not intended to be used that way especially since they are about to be re-purposed according to CCP? What if CCP just though no matter how safe or not, you aren't supposed to off-load your damage potential to another ship from ouside the grid?
Want to use your cap, how about you bring it on the field instead of keeping it X AU away from what it's helping achieve? |
Nolak Ataru
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
818
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 16:14:13 -
[1450] - Quote
1) Off Grid Boosters. 2) If they were going to re-purpose them, they should have either a) given us some hint or b) held off until they were going to enact the actual change. |
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
215
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 16:27:06 -
[1451] - Quote
OGB is the same cancur that will be dealt with shortly.
There are/were no technical solutions for either of them.
Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept //
Make BS & BC Worth the Warp!
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Nolak Ataru
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
819
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 16:51:25 -
[1452] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:OGB is the same cancer that will be dealt with shortly. There are/were no technical solutions for either of them.
Wrong. Boosters are no longer unscannable, and can no longer boost from inside a shield. Just add in a limit to the distance from a POS and you're golden. |
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1681
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 17:29:20 -
[1453] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:1) Off Grid Boosters. 2) If they were going to re-purpose them, they should have either a) given us some hint or b) held off until they were going to enact the actual change.
They gave you a hint in the thread about the scan res on fighter and fighter bomber. They specifically said they were loking into making change to it but not in that particular release. It came pretty much right after. |
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1681
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 17:30:18 -
[1454] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:OGB is the same cancer that will be dealt with shortly. There are/were no technical solutions for either of them. Wrong. Boosters are no longer unscannable, and can no longer boost from inside a shield. Just add in a limit to the distance from a POS and you're golden.
THey already said the reason boost are not on grid yet is server load. It will come if they find a solution to that. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
1012
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 19:35:23 -
[1455] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:OGB is the same cancur that will be dealt with shortly. There are/were no technical solutions for either of them.
The cold hard truth is 90% of people complaining about off grid boosters are actually people who just want the results without having to put in the effort - once it goes they'll just move onto complaining about whatever else gives a prepared/competitive player/corp an edge.
There are some areas of eve that it does validly have an undesirable negative impact but generally in anything other than very small gang/"solo" action people tend to bring command ships with them on grid these days and/or when they don't its generally because they are flying a setup that doesn't have a suitable on grid command platform i.e. some smaller kiting setups and so resort to off grid boosting. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
221
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 19:36:45 -
[1456] - Quote
If the on-grid issue can't be resolved, unloading Armour/Skirmish/Shield links onto a structure could be an interesting option - same bonuses, but the source is now very scannable and is immobile, and depending on the anchoring delay - could be more of a defensive featurette.
Perhaps a concept for the new structure system that is in the works. Anchoring should require the same skills as with current links.
Rroff wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:OGB is the same cancur that will be dealt with shortly. There are/were no technical solutions for either of them. The cold hard truth is 90% of people complaining about off grid boosters are actually people who just want the results without having to put in the effort.
It is a cancerous mechanic requiring to dual box a booster in any size gangs by default.
Cancerous mechanic.
Full stop.
Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept //
Make BS & BC Worth the Warp!
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
1012
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 19:40:35 -
[1457] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:If the on-grid issue can't be resolved, unloading Armour/Skirmish/Shield links onto a structure could be an interesting concept - same bonuses, but the source is now very scannable and is immobile. Perhaps a concept for the new structure system that is in the works. Anchoring should require the same skills as with current links.
A bit off topic for this thread - but I'd have loved to see links made a bit more tactical with a little of the effectiveness reduced on the links themselves (not too much as that would make them less attractive to use on unbonused BCs, etc.) and more of the effect moved to a variety of mindlinks with various grades of penalties i.e. you could have really powerful links for certain areas but they'd come at the cost of for instance sensor strength with the most basic mindlink having no penalty at all like with drugs. A variation of it could also be used to keep off grid boosting useable for non PVP use while generally ineffective for PVP use, etc. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
1012
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 19:48:54 -
[1458] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:It is a cancerous mechanic requiring to dual box a booster in any size gangs by default. Cancerous mechanic. Full stop.
And always will do - while not really something I've done very prolifically - when roaming on one char and trundling a booster around with it if off grid wasn't possible it would be coming on grid in "buff bot" form - an eos with mostly hands free brick tank, remote reps + links, local/remote eccm'd to the max, etc. contributing some extra dps via drones assisted to the main character.
(I don't generally do much outside of small to medium fleet PVP however so most of the time we have on grid links anyhow).
If your wanting fair 1v1 you ain't gonna find it (for the most part) in eve. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
221
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 19:51:55 -
[1459] - Quote
It is the same as with trapping people in flying mothership coffins. Fun.
Used to be a time when they envisioned BCs and CS on grid heroically supporting the fleets.
Is cancer now.
Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept //
Make BS & BC Worth the Warp!
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Sep DeNau
Celestial Horizon Corp.
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.11 04:24:49 -
[1460] - Quote
When I open my client and see the 20,000 plus pilots online, that number is not necessarily the true number of "people" online. The game even advertises sidekick accounts to help with the tasking of your main account. Fighter assist was a feature I used to assist my main account in ratting, mining security, and defence of my system owned by my small corp. Lets face it, when it comes to combat, I am not going to go all in with all my accounts with my mediocre PC. I am going to use my strongest backed up by command bonuses off grid and now no longer fighter support. I guess there really is no room in EVE for little corps unless I give in and join the masses if i want to survive in null sec. cheers to the death of good tactics and great game features! |
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel The Kadeshi
1323
|
Posted - 2015.04.11 08:30:59 -
[1461] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:OGB is the same cancur that will be dealt with shortly. There are/were no technical solutions for either of them. No tactical solution against OGB? I wholeheartedly recommend ample use of combat probes with some player skills (be a capable prober both in terms of SP and knowledge), implants and proper ships. You can easily shut OGB off or scan and kill them when they dualbox and don't have their eyes on the booster all the time. Both things are very effective counters to OGB. Skynet also has a counter: it's called drive by doomsday or a couple of supers showing up to have their Maleuses say hello. However, it is admittedly a lot harder to pull off and a whole lot riskier than to combat probe a boosting T3 and not feasible for smaller groups.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
224
|
Posted - 2015.04.11 10:40:23 -
[1462] - Quote
Tech - ni - cal.
No technical solution of turning cancer OGB into GB.
Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept //
Make BS & BC Worth the Warp!
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
1012
|
Posted - 2015.04.11 12:33:25 -
[1463] - Quote
^^ You "could" driveby someone doing skynet if they were lazy/complacent but it generally meant they had to do it frequently from the same POS and allow someone the opportunity to get a character logged off in position to spring the ambush. Anyone half on the ball would be a lot less susceptible to a driveby - the revenant for instance logged in at a spot quite a way off the FF (probably the spot he'd cyno'd in at before logging out) leaving himself quite vulnerable. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
224
|
Posted - 2015.04.11 13:17:14 -
[1464] - Quote
Rroff wrote:^^ You "could" driveby someone doing skynet
Hafta agree that game is degenerating beyond repair, when such options, and such scenarios like DD drivebys become 1) necessary; 2) common place; 3) yet unsuccessful in the case of Skynet specifically.
Hence DEATH TO ALL CAPITALS!
Is gud they saw reason, and that Skynet is no more.
Gÿæ Skynet GÿÉ Non-Triage remote rep GÿÉ Cap transfers
Soem points to go, but gud start, gud start.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Tydil Flux
Demons of EVE. The Volition Cult
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.11 13:18:20 -
[1465] - Quote
Honestly just force a check on the size of ship that the drone/fighter is being assigned to. Assigning fighters to other carriers should be okay. Why is this such a hard concept??? |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
1012
|
Posted - 2015.04.11 13:44:22 -
[1466] - Quote
Tydil Flux wrote:Honestly just force a check on the size of ship that the drone/fighter is being assigned to. Assigning fighters to other carriers should be okay. Why is this such a hard concept???
I still say the best solution would have been to force apply sig/damage scaling on fighters - fighters are frig sized platforms but piloted by "regular" pilots so you wouldn't expect them to be as proficient as pod pilots with the same sized craft making them most effective against battleships and other capitals. Sure it would have had a bit of an impact on people ratting with skynet type fits but they could bring their ratting capabilities back upto par by investing a bit more ISK in the ship they had on grid so I don't have much sympathy in that regard (none the least coming from a C5 wormhole background there have been times when I've been multiboxing 8+bn worth of ships on grid running escalations in PVE). |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
224
|
Posted - 2015.04.11 14:42:10 -
[1467] - Quote
It's dead, Jim.
Ain't coming back.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Arctic Estidal
Harbingers of Chaos Inc Gentlemen's.Club
19
|
Posted - 2015.04.11 15:03:56 -
[1468] - Quote
The reason for its removal by CCP is due to the new node sov mechanic, which if allowed to continue would provide a significant defence strength to defenders as they would have a super on the system which an attacker would be trying to use an entosis link on and could kill the attackers without significant risk of assets.
I agree the mechanic is overpowered for the defender, or an attacker who drops a ninja pos, but there has to be significant bonuses to defenders who have upgraded their systems and actively use their space, when compared to non-active, non-upgraded systems.
I think this is an overpowered mechanic, but the question remains, what are you doing for super capital pilots that wants them to risk the isk, and secondly what are you doing to provide defence bonuses for heavily used systems so the staging systems of alliances cannot be headshot and the all their items and isk destroyed. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
1012
|
Posted - 2015.04.11 15:14:45 -
[1469] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:It's dead, Jim. Ain't coming back.
Yup :S - Rroff expires 12 April 2015 - 7:18 pm UTC (in 1 days) all my other accounts are down. So you won't have to put up with my posts in this thread much longer.
Arctic Estidal wrote:The reason for its removal by CCP is due to the new node sov mechanic, which if allowed to continue would provide a significant defence strength to defenders as they would have a super on the system which an attacker would be trying to use an entosis link on and could kill the attackers without significant risk of assets.
Hope that isn't the (real) reason... thats a very poor way to do game development. |
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1682
|
Posted - 2015.04.11 17:04:06 -
[1470] - Quote
Arctic Estidal wrote:The reason for its removal by CCP is due to the new node sov mechanic, which if allowed to continue would provide a significant defence strength to defenders as they would have a super on the system which an attacker would be trying to use an entosis link on and could kill the attackers without significant risk of assets.
I agree the mechanic is overpowered for the defender, or an attacker who drops a ninja pos, but there has to be significant bonuses to defenders who have upgraded their systems and actively use their space, when compared to non-active, non-upgraded systems.
I think this is an overpowered mechanic, but the question remains, what are you doing for super capital pilots that wants them to risk the isk, and secondly what are you doing to provide defence bonuses for heavily used systems so the staging systems of alliances cannot be headshot and the all their items and isk destroyed.
If your system is well used, the timers will take much longer letting you mount up an effective defense. You also probably ahve most if not all POS as friendly and possibly a station for re-shipping too.
What more do you need? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 50 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |