|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
291
   |
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:44:46 -
[1] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Rowells wrote:RIP Bomber wings You'll still be able to use them, but this will slow the speed at which they usually hit their targets. We consider that a very good outcome.
Clearly, this is all about bombers. Is it so hard to come up with another way of balancing them? This is just poor form ... |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
295
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:23:19 -
[2] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:+1 this is a excellent change that will help to open up combat/fleet tactics. I supported and pushed hard for this.
Opens up jack squat, just makes things more painful, so thanks for nothing Manfred.
F1 monkeys will always stay F1 monkeys as long as their is no intrinsic motivation to improve. If you / CCP actually believe forcing people to warp on their own will lead to a better gaming experience for anyone - short term or long term - you're extremely na+»ve. |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
295
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:32:35 -
[3] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Budrick3 wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:+1 this is a excellent change that will help to open up combat/fleet tactics. I supported and pushed hard for this. Good luck getting re-elected. I am not a politician. I am not here to kiss anyones ass. If I run and I don't get re-elected so be it. I support measures , mchanics , changes that will make eve more exciting more dynamic more balanced and more deadly. Destruction is the lifeblood of Eve. Nearly every profession and activity in Eve is fueled by things exploding. More explosions means people in space doing things playing the game. More interaction which is the foundation of a MMORPG. I'LL GIVE YOU DEATH AND YOU WILL LOVE ME FOR IT.
Bullshit, how does it make EvE more dangerous and deadly? Why would there be more killmails? If anything, this makes it harder for one group of ships to get on top of another (group of) ship(s). In fact, this is stated as a desired effect of these changes. Now, why would there be more explosions? More strugglers will be caught and picked off, but that's about it. |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
295
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:38:04 -
[4] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:
Bombers were retardedly op and combat probing was very op
Hey there is a fix for bombers. Reduce bomb damage by ~80% and make them apply equally across all ship classes / signatures ... you know, like smartbombs do.
You're welcome :) |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
295
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:39:17 -
[5] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Pyralissa wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:I am not a politician. I am not here to kiss anyones ass. If I run and I don't get re-elected so be it. I support measures , mchanics , changes that will make eve more exciting more dynamic more balanced and more deadly. Destruction is the lifeblood of Eve. Nearly every profession and activity in Eve is fueled by things exploding. More explosions means people in space doing things playing the game. More interaction which is the foundation of a MMORPG.
I'LL GIVE YOU DEATH AND YOU WILL LOVE ME FOR IT. You are not a politician, but you sure talk like one. You're asked to explain why you think this change is good for the game and you offer a bunch of nonsense platitudes by way of response. How does this lead to "more explosions"? It makes Slippery Petes, the most cowardly block-level doctrine in the game, almost impossible to engage. It reduces the power of bombers, literally the most 'explosive' ship in the game. It makes combat probing more difficult, meaning that kiting shoot-and-run tactics (Garmur and Orthrus pilots will love this change) even more powerful because they can obliterate tackle, roll safes and be assured that they'll never have to worry about being outnumbered when the counter-attack comes. And of course it makes life more tedious, boring and unnecessarily difficult for wormholers, explorers and mission runners. Who it will benefit, especially once alliance bookmarks are deployed, is tightly nit organizations composed of single alliances that frequently engage coalition fleets composed of multiple alliances, who will still have to come up with annoying work arounds. You've championed a change that benefits cowards, hinders literally every facet of the benefit of the game all for the benefit of making bombing slightly more difficult. Well done, you really should consider running for office. FWIW I am pushing to see unprobeableGäó ships destroyed as a thing forever. I have suggested to CCP that they limit 1 eccm per ship hull. But however allow people to fit as many remote eccm's as they want. That way you could still achieve really high sensor strength. However you would first have to land , lock , activate the module. During this time those ships are all very probeable.
Another quality proposal.
|
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
300
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:40:00 -
[6] - Quote
Cross-posting what I believe would be a good compromise in this matter
Basically, the idea is to introduce a delay or "spool up" (say 5-15 seconds or so) - similar to micro jump drives - to group warping depending on the size of the group (fleet warping takes comparatively long to squad and wing warps). Add to that, there would be a prominent visual effect in order to help opponents react to an imminent group warp.
Pros:
- Individual warping/piloting will be much faster and more effective, thus "more individual fleet member participation" would likely be achieved
- There would be very relevant downsides to group warps:
 The visual effect would warn a kiting / sniping fleet of an incoming fleet.
If a fleet was preparing to leave the scene via fleet warp, the opposing group could spread points and/or warp a dictor on top of them to keep them on the grid.
An FC couldn't just insta-save his entire fleet without other pilots' involvement
- Last, but not least, the gazillion other (legitimate) use cases for group warps wouldn't be completely screwed.
Questions:
- Would the visual effect show on a cloaked fleet?
- Would ships align during spool up or after?
Bombers, apparently one the primary reasons for the planned changes, would need a sensible rebalancing effort at the same time. This goes without saying, the details, however, belong in another discussion. |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
301
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:28:28 -
[7] - Quote
Ralen Zateki wrote:Ab'del Abu wrote:Cross-posting what I believe would be a good compromise in this matterBasically, the idea is to introduce a delay or "spool up" (say 5-15 seconds or so) - similar to micro jump drives - to group warping depending on the size of the group (fleet warping takes comparatively long to squad and wing warps). Add to that, there would be a prominent visual effect in order to help opponents react to an imminent group warp. It's already in. It's called 'aligning.' If I'm FC-ing a small gang I fleet warp fast. If I'm FC-ing a large/ heavier doctrine I have to wait longer for the lemmings to align. Ugh... the thing that bothers me the most about this is that it very much feels like an afterthought type change and we're going to have a bunch of people - including CCP - making judgments about the effect that haven't FC-ed a damn thing.
To some degree, you're right. But it is different in that it would take a fixed amount of time until a fleet could enter warp in a synchronized fashion regardless of them already being aligned or not.
|
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
303
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:19:45 -
[8] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:36 pages of tears... well done. My tear cup runneth over.
The fix is simple: have someone in a covops ships warp first, then FC (or individual members, or wing commanders) warps fleet to them. Fixed.
Meanwhile, covops gets decloacked and goes boom. For a large group with a big number of probers this is probably not a problem. But if you're only few people and fighting a bigger group, you can't afford to loose on prober after the other ...
|
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
303
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:21:53 -
[9] - Quote
Dentric Crendraven wrote:Quote:Bombing has been OP for such a long time, In what way? Yeah, its a hard counter to Battleships, yeah it allows a small group to do damage to a much larger fleet.. Why is this bad in any way?
bombs have to many damages, it is known |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
311
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 20:45:27 -
[10] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Hi Mates, The original post has been updated with a few more Q&A's answering some of your questions. We've got a lot of amazing feedback and we're going to go back to the CSM with some ideas. Expect an update next week. Have a great weekend!
Yo it's been a week now, wtb update pls. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|