Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 61 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
|
CCP Larrikin
C C P C C P Alliance
83
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:07:07 -
[1] - Quote
Hi Gentle Space Foke,
As announced on the o7 show we are making some changes to fleet warp. Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders & Squad Commanders will no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own. This includes GÇô
- Probe Results
- Bookmarks
- Any private deadspace item (missions, etc.)
Commanders will still be able to warp their fleet to other fleet members, and all other GÇÿpublicGÇÖ objects. The goal of these changes is to encourage more individual fleet member participation and reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets (e.g bombers).
Q&As Q: When is this being implemented? A: Aegis (July)
Q: What if every member of the fleet has the bookmark? A: Nope, sorry, no go.
Q: Can I still fleet warp to planets/moons/stations/cynos/anoms? A: Yes!
Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members.
Q: CCP, will there be more fleet warp changes in the future? A: Probably, yes.
Dev Note: Its late in Reykjavik so you may not see a Dev response until tomorrow. However we want to give plenty of time for feedback and we will be watching this thread closely. |
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2479
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:09:39 -
[2] - Quote
RIP: Bomber wings Slippery petes Off-gate ganking (More to follow)
So, if I have this right, basically warp-tos for all non-public entities is a no-go? |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12926
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:10:48 -
[3] - Quote
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.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Hopelesshobo
Tactical Nuclear Penguin's
484
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:13:05 -
[4] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: As announced on the o7 show we are making some changes to fleet warp. [b]Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders & Squad Commanders will no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own. This includes GÇô
Bookmarks
Does this include corporation bookmarks that the person in the same corp could warp to?
Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
|
BadAssMcKill
ElitistOps
987
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:13:39 -
[5] - Quote
Have you considered making the game more fun for a change |
Faren Shalni
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
135
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:14:55 -
[6] - Quote
RIP Wspace
So Much Space
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12926
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:14:58 -
[7] - Quote
Hopelesshobo wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote: As announced on the o7 show we are making some changes to fleet warp. Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders & Squad Commanders will no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own. This includes GÇô
Bookmarks Does this include corporation bookmarks that the person in the same corp could warp to?
Yes. You can only fleet warp to things that any member of your fleet could warp to, no matter what corp or alliances they are a part of.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Propolis
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
49
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:15:00 -
[8] - Quote
You're literally ******** - This change is abysmal, seriously... |
McReaction
Spiritus Draconis Spaceship Bebop
8
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:15:33 -
[9] - Quote
This is a terrible april fools..... oh wait, it's not the 1st of April?
uhhh..... |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2479
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:15:46 -
[10] - 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. Oh, I'm not complaining...too much.
However I wonder if axing all the potential warp-ins is necessary? Could the broadcast 'warp-to' be extended to allow members to warp themselves to specific targets that were warp able before? |
|
Dunk Dinkle
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
81
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:16:00 -
[11] - Quote
It appears that to nerf bombers, you are nerfing all fleets. |
utec asmo
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:16:15 -
[12] - Quote
How dare you change the mechanics of the game??? Do you even EVE, bro? |
Sparrow Creature
V.O.I.D. Shadow Cartel
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:16:37 -
[13] - Quote
this change will kill wormhole just saying.. |
ArmEagle Kusoni
Knights of Nii The 20 Minuters
36
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:16:45 -
[14] - Quote
So, to run anoms (in w-space) we can't easily warp there all together anymore. Everyone will need the probe scanner window open/have bookmarks or have to wait for one player to have landed. Alliance bookmarks would only make that slightly less of an issue.
That's just one example of how people will become unnecessarily more vulnarable, or things taking more time. |
Jeremiah Cole
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
17
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:17:30 -
[15] - Quote
I'm glad we're seeing changes that were thought through with all sects of EVE warfare in mind. |
Reyko DU93
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:18:42 -
[16] - 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.
Just as I started flying bombers |
Seven Koskanaiken
FinFleet Northern Coalition.
1530
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:18:45 -
[17] - Quote
BadAssMcKill wrote:Have you considered making the game more fun for a change
|
HiddenPorpoise
Expendable Miscreants
355
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:18:46 -
[18] - Quote
Does this mean I can't herd noobs into 4s in a fleet? That's dumb. |
Ele Rebellion
Dead Star Syndicate
38
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:19:03 -
[19] - Quote
Concern about this is WH space.
We don't have gates we can warp to and have to rely on the Bookmarks of the wormhole.
Edit: What I mean is if we have non-corp members that we are trying to move through a chain to a target, it will slow the entire fleet by 100% since a fleet member will have to warp ahead and then the entire fleet will have to warp to that fleet member. |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1798
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:19:16 -
[20] - Quote
Doing this without implementing alliance bookmarks first is a huge mistake. I beg you to reconsider.
Signature Tanking Best Tanking
Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
|
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
5339
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:19:26 -
[21] - Quote
ArmEagle Kusoni wrote:So, to run anoms (in w-space) we can't easily warp there all together anymore. Everyone will need the probe scanner window open/have bookmarks or have to wait for one player to have landed. Alliance bookmarks would only make that slightly less of an issue.
That's just one example of how people will become unnecessarily more vulnarable, or things taking more time.
Anoms yes, Sigs no.
Woo! CSM X!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Steven Hackett
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
144
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:19:55 -
[22] - Quote
Bookmarks and scan results is (almost) everything we ever use fleet warp for in W-space.
Why not remove it all together and be done with it? |
Teebeutel
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:19:57 -
[23] - Quote
I dont see the problem that a lot of people seem to see for wormhole fleets, using corp bookmarks and having fleet members warp to those individually should do just fine. |
Steven Hackett
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
144
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:20:56 -
[24] - Quote
Teebeutel wrote:I dont see the problem that a lot of people seem to see for wormhole fleets, using corp bookmarks and having fleet members warp to those individually should do just fine. Only if they are propagated for all client, which due to ****** CCP code, can take up towards 10 minuts. |
luredivino
Star Frontiers Test Alliance Please Ignore
55
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:20:59 -
[25] - Quote
Because running missions together in groups is killing this game |
Patriarch Zeal
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:21:38 -
[26] - Quote
HOPE YOU GUYS HAVE GOOD INTY PILOTS THAT NEVER DIE |
Hiram Alexander
State Reprisal
365
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:22:26 -
[27] - Quote
The game is about to get a whole lot more interesting... Do people like change? No, not usually...
This is not the end of the world. It doesn't kill WH PvP, it changes it... |
Jayne Fillon
710
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:23:09 -
[28] - Quote
ArmEagle Kusoni wrote:So, to run anoms (in w-space) we can't easily warp there all together anymore. Everyone will need the probe scanner window open/have bookmarks or have to wait for one player to have landed. Alliance bookmarks would only make that slightly less of an issue.
That's just one example of how people will become unnecessarily more vulnarable, or things taking more time.
While true, this change hurts missions moreso than anoms. The character that actually pulled the mission will have to physically be on grid before the rest of the fleet can start warping to the site.
Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
|
Rena Senn
Middle-aged pony tail
145
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:23:26 -
[29] - Quote
Dunk Dinkle wrote:It appears that to nerf bombers, you are nerfing all fleets. Pretty much standard for CCP at this point. Medium rails are broken on range bonused ships? Nerf rails for everything! Capships spawn too close to wormholes? All ships spawn farther away! Bombers are too strong? Remove fleet warps for everyone!
I look forward to CCP's impending removal of all other ship classes in their effort to rebalance battlecruisers. |
Hong Hu
EVE University Ivy League
23
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:24:09 -
[30] - Quote
Well, to compensate for individual responsibility for warping (in Stealth Bombers) maybe we can change back to a 10 second flight time for the actual bombs? The change makes the setup for launch more challenging. But the end game of the bomb launch shouldn't also suffer. Back to 10 seconds, please. |
|
Teebeutel
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:24:11 -
[31] - Quote
Steven Hackett wrote:Teebeutel wrote:I dont see the problem that a lot of people seem to see for wormhole fleets, using corp bookmarks and having fleet members warp to those individually should do just fine. Only if they are propagated for all client, which due to ****** CCP code, can take up towards 10 minuts. Wasn't there something about creating a private bookmark refreshing corp bookmarks locally or something silly like that? |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2877
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:24:26 -
[32] - Quote
This seems counter intuitive and promotes more anti-social play.
-1 from me.
Roleplaying Trinkets for Explorers and Collectors
|
Ele Rebellion
Dead Star Syndicate
38
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:25:03 -
[33] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hopelesshobo wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote: As announced on the o7 show we are making some changes to fleet warp. Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders & Squad Commanders will no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own. This includes GÇô
Bookmarks Does this include corporation bookmarks that the person in the same corp could warp to? Yes. You can only fleet warp to things that any member of your fleet could warp to, no matter what corp or alliances they are a part of.
Wouldn't reducing the resistance of bombs to the point that they could only tank 4 or 5 bombs be a more effective solution? Launch too many bombs at once, the first few destroy the rest of them. |
zazbar
Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:25:56 -
[34] - Quote
good, this is everything i wanted in a patch. |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
230
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:26:30 -
[35] - Quote
So |
Daide Vondrichnov
SnaiLs aNd FroGs Drama Sutra
36
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:26:45 -
[36] - Quote
Forum is pretty salty eh.
People should stop complaining, it's not that bad, just have to be used to then it will be ok like many other things.
Thanks to this sniper fleet will be a thing again, thx ccp. |
Reppyk
The Black Shell
769
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:26:55 -
[37] - Quote
Looks good to me. People will have to play the game a bit more, not relying 90% on their FC.
I AM SPACE CAPTAIN REPPYK. BEWARE.
Proud co-admin of frugu.net, a French fansite about EVE !
|
Syco Saisima
V.O.I.D. Shadow Cartel
19
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:26:57 -
[38] - Quote
I usually try and come up with a good reason why something is good or bad but, honestly CCP if you are so bad at developing this game nowadays and can't see for yourself how bad this change is, especially for nullsec and wormhole space then i am really glad i stopped giving you my personal money a long time ago because quite frankly...this change is **** |
Kip Redrum
Concordiat Test Alliance Please Ignore
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:27:10 -
[39] - Quote
I feel this has a very good chance of accomplishing it's goal, which is transferring responsibility for a fleet from 1 strat FC multiboxing 4 accounts to fleet member participation.
It's a great goal, hope this change goes through. |
Makkari Kock
Delusions of Adequacy Get Off My Lawn
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:27:43 -
[40] - Quote
So a significant advantage is now awarded to the FC that brings his cov-ops alt to a fight/trip. We should keep making mechanics that offers advantages to fcs that multiboxes more and more accounts, because that doesn't burn them out.
When you are at it make it a requirement for one ship to sit in a safe spot while doing nothing to provide essential boosts to the fleet, and for another character to press one button and then do nothing else for 10 minutes so the big ships can come as well. |
|
Frenjo Borkstar
Borkstar Laboratories
72
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:28:26 -
[41] - Quote
In my opinion, this is a very bad thing to be doing.
It seems like an honestly, pointless change which is making more people angry than happy...
Dr. Frenjo Borkstar,
Project Lead for Arek'Jaalan's Project Salus.
|
Steven Hackett
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
144
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:28:40 -
[42] - Quote
Teebeutel wrote:Steven Hackett wrote:Teebeutel wrote:I dont see the problem that a lot of people seem to see for wormhole fleets, using corp bookmarks and having fleet members warp to those individually should do just fine. Only if they are propagated for all client, which due to ****** CCP code, can take up towards 10 minuts. Wasn't there something about creating a private bookmark refreshing corp bookmarks locally or something silly like that? Just tested it, doesn't look like it. |
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
97
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:29:47 -
[43] - Quote
BEST CHANGE EVERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
HAHAHA THANKS CCP GATEJUMPS AND CCP TALL SMILEY PERSION
I need to get my tear jars out of storage... |
Teebeutel
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:31:02 -
[44] - Quote
Steven Hackett wrote:Teebeutel wrote:Steven Hackett wrote:Teebeutel wrote:I dont see the problem that a lot of people seem to see for wormhole fleets, using corp bookmarks and having fleet members warp to those individually should do just fine. Only if they are propagated for all client, which due to ****** CCP code, can take up towards 10 minuts. Wasn't there something about creating a private bookmark refreshing corp bookmarks locally or something silly like that? Just tested it, doesn't look like it. In that case I shall take my statement back, this is gonna make wormhole fleets kindof annoying. |
Ele Rebellion
Dead Star Syndicate
38
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:32:08 -
[45] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:ArmEagle Kusoni wrote:So, to run anoms (in w-space) we can't easily warp there all together anymore. Everyone will need the probe scanner window open/have bookmarks or have to wait for one player to have landed. Alliance bookmarks would only make that slightly less of an issue.
That's just one example of how people will become unnecessarily more vulnarable, or things taking more time. Anoms yes, Sigs no.
I believe you are mistaken. Signatures Yes, Anoms no. (Anoms are the green sites you can warp to without scanning down. We should still be able to fleet warp to those) |
Aebe Amraen
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
124
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:32:24 -
[46] - Quote
I have two concerns with this change:
1. On a broad level, the stated intent of this change in the o7 show was to make specialized fleet roles like probing and tackling more important:
Quote:The big goal is that we want fleet combat to be more involved. we really want players to be able to shine and show off their skills, and we think this change gives a bigger opportunity for specialized fleet members who specialize in tackling, probing, cloaky movement around the grid, setting up warp locations, and scouts can really enhance fleet combat as a whole and you'll have to be a little bit more than just sort of nod off while the FC tells you what to F1 on.
Probing and tackling are already important roles in any fleet; what this change actually does is gets rid of the notion of a prober as a stand-alone role. The prober must also be a tackler, with all the risk that entails.
Instead of enriching fleet roles, we're collapsing them.
2. My second concern is about a very particular, but rather common, scenario: trying to catch cloaky, nullified, nearly-unscannable off-grid T3 links ships. In some configurations these can perma-AB at over 1km/s, aligned out to another safespot. The current best practice is to get a prober with perfect skills, a bonused ship, and virtue probes and have him warp a squad of fast tackle (T1 frigates/interceptors or specialized tackle bombers) on top of the boosting ship, hoping that one of them will be able to catch him before he reacts and warps away.
Catching these ships is already extremely difficult, and will be nearly impossible under the proposed changes. No bonused scanning ship will be able to tackle them, as they have at a minimum 5s lock delay after decloaking. No unbonused ship will be able to scan them down. In the time it takes for the prober to warp to the target and then have the tackle squad warp to him the 1km/s probing ship will be out of range.
I have interests on both sides of this scenario, having hunted PL off-grid boosters with my perfect scanning alt during the recent Catch wars and with two of my own perfect combat boosting alts. I guess I won't mind having my boosting alts be effectively invulnerable for a while, but it does seem like poor balance. |
Seven Koskanaiken
FinFleet Northern Coalition.
1530
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:33:37 -
[47] - Quote
Dunk Dinkle wrote:It appears that to nerf bombers, you are nerfing all fleets.
It barely touches bombers. In fact on a sliding scale of "things this deserves to affect" to "things that didn't deserve it at all", it's the former that gets off most lightly and the latter that will feel the pain and tedium.
Anyway, its' going to be implemented regardless of "feedback" so there;s really no point to this thread at all, is there. |
Joran Jackson
The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
132
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:34:18 -
[48] - Quote
I think this is a fantastic change for wormholes. Anything that makes it harder for 50 man WH fleets to function gets a thumbs up from me.
I think this change is more about encouraging the small gang playstyle. I just love the new direction of all these balances, from the sov changes to this, to half a dozen other things that have been switched up, I think you are making the game more exciting for the average player. Don't let the salt get you down, Larrakin, the direction Eve is moving is a good one, and I think people will realize it eventually. |
Rena Senn
Middle-aged pony tail
145
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:34:36 -
[49] - Quote
Makkari Kock wrote:So a significant advantage is now awarded to the FC that brings his cov-ops alt to a fight/trip. We should keep making mechanics that offers advantages to fcs that multiboxes more and more accounts, because that doesn't burn them out.
When you are at it make it a requirement for one ship to sit in a safe spot while doing nothing to provide essential boosts to the fleet, and for another character to press one button and then do nothing else for 10 minutes so the big ships can come as well. What an ingenious way to transfer more success from the members to the FCs. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1356
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:35:38 -
[50] - Quote
This is an appalling idea. Truly terrible.
I've no idea what you're trying to "fix" here, but it's like an atom bomb to kill a bug. Seriously.
The mind literally boggles. |
|
Sten Taxi
13. Enigma Project
16
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:36:35 -
[51] - Quote
Wormholers getting the short end of the stick again when making changes to null. |
Lurch Aldent
Demon-War-Lords Circle-Of-Two
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:36:38 -
[52] - Quote
Multiboxing miners just got tougher, particularly warping out of belt when neut enters system :-s |
Sten Taxi
13. Enigma Project
16
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:38:21 -
[53] - Quote
Lurch Aldent wrote:Multiboxing miners just got tougher, particularly warping out of belt when neut enters system :-s Stations (and other celestials) are still warpable, this only affects poses |
Thom Mangum
Oruze Cruise
40
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:38:43 -
[54] - Quote
No thanks |
Jezza McWaffle
Grumpy Bastards No Response
214
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:38:49 -
[55] - Quote
So you will now implement automatic bookmarking at a corporation and alliance level yes? Or is this just another way to **** up wormholers now. Since WE WILL have to wait for the bookmarks to propagate (up to 5-10 mins) unless we have to have a scout at the exact warp in at every single fight.
Example if you have a group consisting of more than just 1 corp.
Group A wants to fight Group B Group A consists of multiple corps Currently Group A can fleet warp onto the enemy fleet or wormhole without everyone involved having a propagated bookmark. However after this change if the group does not have the bookmark then they have no way of getting into the fight at the same time as the rest of the fleet. So all fights will be delayed until everyone has the bookmarks <10 mins.
Good job CCP...
C6 Wormhole blog
http://holelotofwaffle.wordpress.com/
|
Lurch Aldent
Demon-War-Lords Circle-Of-Two
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:40:42 -
[56] - Quote
Sten Taxi wrote:Lurch Aldent wrote:Multiboxing miners just got tougher, particularly warping out of belt when neut enters system :-s Stations (and other celestials) are still warpable, this only affects poses
Don't want to warp to station or a planet when neuts roll through chap. |
DaReaper
Net 7
2198
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:41:07 -
[57] - Quote
Just a note:
as i skimmed the htread i saw comments like "omg this terrible" or "this will kill xxx" you do know that none of this will make them change anything as that type of feed back is not very constructive. If you really want them to take notice, your best bet is to explain, in a calm manner and with as much detail as possible, why this will hurt XXX. you will have a higher chance of ccp going 'oh.. we did not think of that, right lets modify this' then just whining.
Personally, i can see what they are doing with having it so a scout will need to be in place for the others to warp to. and as i actually used to do things this way for years it does;t bother me (for some odd reason i would always forget fleet warp with my atls)
One thing that will be slightly annoying, is the lack of ability to fleet warp to corp book marks. As every member of the corp can see these, and as they can then warp to them on there, this sounds a bit counter intuitive to the 'everyone in the fleet must be able to warp to it on there own to use it' It would make better sense that if you are in a corp and have corp bm's you can fleet warp to it. outside of the corp you can't. Besides that, this will make a scout actually useful.
i'm good with this.
OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
5339
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:42:58 -
[58] - Quote
Ele Rebellion wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:ArmEagle Kusoni wrote:So, to run anoms (in w-space) we can't easily warp there all together anymore. Everyone will need the probe scanner window open/have bookmarks or have to wait for one player to have landed. Alliance bookmarks would only make that slightly less of an issue.
That's just one example of how people will become unnecessarily more vulnarable, or things taking more time. Anoms yes, Sigs no. I believe you are mistaken. Signatures Yes, Anoms no. (Anoms are the green sites you can warp to without scanning down. We should still be able to fleet warp to those)
Heh. I didn't word that clearly. Brevity was not my friend.
Yes, you'll be able to fleet warp to Anoms. No, you won't be able to fleet warp to sigs.
Woo! CSM X!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Ele Rebellion
Dead Star Syndicate
38
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:43:02 -
[59] - Quote
Aebe Amraen wrote:I have two concerns with this change: 1. On a broad level, the stated intent of this change in the o7 show was to make specialized fleet roles like probing and tackling more important: Quote:The big goal is that we want fleet combat to be more involved. we really want players to be able to shine and show off their skills, and we think this change gives a bigger opportunity for specialized fleet members who specialize in tackling, probing, cloaky movement around the grid, setting up warp locations, and scouts can really enhance fleet combat as a whole and you'll have to be a little bit more than just sort of nod off while the FC tells you what to F1 on. Probing and tackling are already important roles in any fleet; what this change actually does is gets rid of the notion of a prober as a stand-alone role. The prober must also be a tackler, with all the risk that entails. Instead of enriching fleet roles, we're collapsing them.2. My second concern is about a very particular, but rather common, scenario: trying to catch cloaky, nullified, nearly-unscannable off-grid T3 links ships. In some configurations these can perma-AB at over 1km/s, aligned out to another safespot. The current best practice is to get a prober with perfect skills, a bonused ship, and virtue probes and have him warp a squad of fast tackle (T1 frigates/interceptors or specialized tackle bombers) on top of the boosting ship, hoping that one of them will be able to catch him before he reacts and warps away. Catching these ships is already extremely difficult, and will be nearly impossible under the proposed changes. No bonused scanning ship will be able to tackle them, as they have at a minimum 5s lock delay after decloaking. No unbonused ship will be able to scan them down. In the time it takes for the prober to warp to the target and then have the tackle squad warp to him the 1km/s probing ship will be out of range. I have interests on both sides of this scenario, having hunted PL off-grid boosters with my perfect scanning alt during the recent Catch wars and with two of my own perfect combat boosting alts. I guess I won't mind having my boosting alts be effectively invulnerable for a while, but it does seem like poor balance.
Also have to take into consideration that the clones of the probing frigates often cost 3 or 4x that of the T3 Link ship. Risk not worth the reward in killing probers anymore. |
DaReaper
Net 7
2198
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:44:32 -
[60] - Quote
Jezza McWaffle wrote:So you will now implement automatic bookmarking at a corporation and alliance level yes? Or is this just another way to **** up wormholers now. Since WE WILL have to wait for the bookmarks to propagate (up to 5-10 mins) unless we have to have a scout at the exact warp in at every single fight. Example if you have a group consisting of more than just 1 corp. Group A wants to fight Group B Group A consists of multiple corps Currently Group A can fleet warp onto the enemy fleet or wormhole without everyone involved having a propagated bookmark. However after this change if the group does not have the bookmark then they have no way of getting into the fight at the same time as the rest of the fleet. So all fights will be delayed until everyone has the bookmarks <10 mins. Good job CCP...
not big on wh pvp' its been a few years, so if my meta on this is wrong, then my bad.
don;t you have a scout already getitng tackle for a fight? Usually when i go pop in whs its cause i did not see the scout on directional and i get caught before the fleet comes in to mop up. The time si get away is when idiots jump in the fleet to try and land on me without a point already sitting there getting the lock. So you just have to have your probe BM, then have your tackle come in and get tackle. but as i said, i'm out dated on wh pvp tactics.
OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!
|
|
Quiggle Queue
POS Party Low-Class
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:44:36 -
[61] - Quote
What if null-sec fleets could no longer fleet warp to stargates? The scattered arrival on gates would really hurt the gameplay of fleets navigating systems. It would be silly to do that right?
Thats what you are doing to do to wormholers if we cannot warp to a bookmarked wormhole.
Even if you exclude everything else from fleet warp,.... please allow fleet warps to wormholes. |
Ele Rebellion
Dead Star Syndicate
38
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:45:33 -
[62] - Quote
Lurch Aldent wrote:Sten Taxi wrote:Lurch Aldent wrote:Multiboxing miners just got tougher, particularly warping out of belt when neut enters system :-s Stations (and other celestials) are still warpable, this only affects poses Don't want to warp to station or a planet when neuts roll through chap.
Just warp to the moon that the POS is on. (still be under the protection of the guns) |
Peter Moonlight
Lazerhawks
160
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:45:46 -
[63] - Quote
Fozzie, you should just do what you are trying to do for a long time, remove w-space totally because every patch didn't go without a single nerf/bug in wspace or a ninja change.
RIP killing ventures,miners, siterunners (hey guys I'm next to them.. oh **** I'm decloaked they all run away) etc.. |
Prince Golem
Perkone Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:46:22 -
[64] - Quote
This affects a lot of people. If you go ahead with this change please enable people that would normally warp the Fleet/wing/squad to warp to a broadcasted place in space e.g. bookmark/probe result. Thereby allowing the fleet to warp to these places. Sounds like a good compromise, I hope. |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
3327
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:47:55 -
[65] - Quote
Altrue wrote:Doing this without implementing alliance bookmarks first is a huge mistake. I beg you to reconsider. how would that help? you can't warp a fleet of corpmates to corp bookmarks either after the change. You have to send a scout first.
how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
|
dexter xio
TURN LEFT
99
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:48:09 -
[66] - Quote
thanks fozzie
NOFUN Diplomat xd
|
Aebe Amraen
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
125
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:48:28 -
[67] - Quote
Lurch Aldent wrote:Sten Taxi wrote:Lurch Aldent wrote:Multiboxing miners just got tougher, particularly warping out of belt when neut enters system :-s Stations (and other celestials) are still warpable, this only affects poses Don't want to warp to station or a planet when neuts roll through chap.
If you have a booster (Orca or Rorq) sitting in POS you can warp to them. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1356
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:49:20 -
[68] - Quote
DaReaper wrote:Just a note:
as i skimmed the htread i saw comments like "omg this terrible" or "this will kill xxx" you do know that none of this will make them change anything as that type of feed back is not very constructive. If you really want them to take notice, your best bet is to explain, in a calm manner and with as much detail as possible, why this will hurt XXX. you will have a higher chance of ccp going 'oh.. we did not think of that, right lets modify this' then just whining.
Personally, i can see what they are doing with having it so a scout will need to be in place for the others to warp to. and as i actually used to do things this way for years it does;t bother me (for some odd reason i would always forget fleet warp with my atls)
One thing that will be slightly annoying, is the lack of ability to fleet warp to corp book marks. As every member of the corp can see these, and as they can then warp to them on there, this sounds a bit counter intuitive to the 'everyone in the fleet must be able to warp to it on there own to use it' It would make better sense that if you are in a corp and have corp bm's you can fleet warp to it. outside of the corp you can't. Besides that, this will make a scout actually useful.
i'm good with this.
>It craps all over WHers. >it makes probers LESS relevant because they are now less useful >I suppose it does crap up multi box missioners. They were a true scourge. >see comments about getting booters.
This runs a train over a great deal, the 'gain' is wishywashy at best and the 'problem' being fixed is unclear and unstated. |
Kismeteer
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
805
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:49:53 -
[69] - Quote
tldr: hope you like doing things with alts or solo
Here is my list of things you can no longer warp to in a fleet without a scout in position. This is just one more account to run by FCs, who alternately have to be SURE they are reliable and are actually there every time. So scout ahead to see enemies coming, and scout JUST ahead of the fleet, WAITING for people to actually warp to him. usually at the wrong range.
I think it's terrible because telling a newbie how to warp to a person is painful. And getting him to pick the right range is even worse if it's not at zero. It encourages scouts, yes, but it also just slows down and makes game play more complicated.
Due to bookmarks: - perches - Pipe bombing just got easier as perches get used less. - insta-docking locations - For those vulnerable dread fleets who bump when landing - POS shields - either edge or inside, everyone could warp to the moon instead but just longer they are on field - Jump bridges - - Wormholes home - Miners going to the same place in a belt - Multibox miners warping OUT of the belt unless going to a station (who does that?!)
Due to probing: - Bomb targets (RIP Bombing without a wreck target or near a celestial) - Attack sites done as a group - Relic hunting as a group - Anyone with two warp core stabs not near an object (unless dictor probing) - Pretty much everything in wormholes. - Snipers - Petes - Boosters
Deadspace items - Escalation sites that don't have a warp gate - Mission running as a group unless they can tank initial aggro for a minute - salvage spots for newbies, unless you drop a bookmark in a can.
Hooray CCP, let's make our already difficult game more difficult for newbies! I mean, that's been the problem all along, eve is too easy. |
DaReaper
Net 7
2198
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:49:58 -
[70] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:Altrue wrote:Doing this without implementing alliance bookmarks first is a huge mistake. I beg you to reconsider. how would that help? you can't warp a fleet of corpmates to corp bookmarks either after the change. You have to send a scout first.
Yes thats the part i don't like. if the corp has the bm you shoudl eb able to fleet warp your corp mates. if they are out of corp, copy the bm or send a scout
OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!
|
|
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3468
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:50:15 -
[71] - Quote
Are we really going to have change after change after change that do nothing but make the game a little bit more irritating to play? |
knobber Jobbler
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
545
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:50:38 -
[72] - Quote
The removal of warping to probes is daft. It removes a dynamic in fleet combat.
Please give the small/micro gang elite pvp jerks their arena to go fight in and stop buggering up strategic fleet warfare. While your at it, put decloaking back on bombers. Would solve most of the problems you're trying to solve by removing useful/interesting mechanics. |
Quiggle Queue
POS Party Low-Class
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:51:04 -
[73] - Quote
I'm getting ready to macro a teamspeak recording of a voice saying.... THREE, TWO, ONE.... WARP! |
Teebeutel
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:51:30 -
[74] - Quote
Aebe Amraen wrote:Lurch Aldent wrote:Sten Taxi wrote:Lurch Aldent wrote:Multiboxing miners just got tougher, particularly warping out of belt when neut enters system :-s Stations (and other celestials) are still warpable, this only affects poses Don't want to warp to station or a planet when neuts roll through chap. If you have a booster (Orca or Rorq) sitting in POS you can warp to them. The booster would be on the outside of the POS shield though, so it would be kindof dangerous to warp your no-propmod mining ships there. Unless your POS has teeth that is, in which case it's less dangerous but still a risk. |
Forlorn Wongraven
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
154
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:51:44 -
[75] - Quote
Thanks, looking forward to this change.
ATXI winner, 3rd place ATXII - follow me on twitter: @ForlornW
|
Lt Shard
Team Pizza Good at this Game
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:52:33 -
[76] - Quote
Terrible change.
Would easily cut a huge chunk of fights out of wormholes. Large majority of fights and catching people with their pants down.
Lets say you see a golem with wrecks on d-scan, but after d-scanning a bit, you determine he is in a relic or data. You have to drop probes and combat him down, so they they are on HIS d-scan for at a minimum of about 10 seconds. This is usually followed by slinging fast tackle like a sabre ontop of him. Removing this leaves two options, try and take tackle with your covert op and pray you don't get volleyed by sleepers or him, or try and take tackle in a scan/tackle heavy t3. While the t3 can hold it, it warps considerable slower than the sabre or covops and the target can easily be out by then if he was looking at his d-scan. Plus, with the introduction to those frigate holes, frigate sized scanners are way more commonplace.
By the time you have additional tackle on grid you've already expended a whole minute of warping and the target is gone. Time is absolutely imporntant here.
Then there is bookmarks.
If you are trying to get your battleships to land on grid with your cruisers now, even triage, good luck and have fun having the enemy pick stragglers off.
Oh, and good luck catching any kite fleet ever. |
Streya Jormagdnir
Alexylva Paradox Low-Class
354
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:52:46 -
[77] - Quote
This is quite honestly a pretty negative change that will severely impact fleet coordination. As part of a wormhole PvP alliance (which relies solely on bookmarks to navigate to wormholes, which is where most fights happen), this is going to require another alt or tie up one more fleet member to be warp-to. Don't get me wrong, this is just more job security for me as an over caffeinated inty pilot. Siterunners won't be able to rely on their FC to warp them to safety at the first sign of danger and will have to warp themselves, which might add to the burnout factor given how excruciatingly boring most PvE is IMHO. I can't really comment on the impact it will have on kspace since I haven't really participated in kspace pvp for the past two years, but as others have noted bomber wings will also suffer.
I see more cons than pros. My corp probably won't suffer too badly given that we typically field small squads where we warp to each other anyway, but I can't help but wonder what impact this will have on the wider EVE community. I suspect if the proposed changes go through we'll see fleets organized a bit more organically, with a "target calling FC" and "navigation FC", etc.
I am also a human, straggling between the present world... and our future. I am a regulator, a coordinator, one who is meant to guide the way.
Destination Unreachable: the worst Wspace blog ever
|
Quiggle Queue
POS Party Low-Class
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:53:54 -
[78] - Quote
Even if we all have a known corp bookmark populated, we cannot throttle our warp-speed to match our fleet mates, even if we all manually warp ourselves. |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1801
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:54:36 -
[79] - Quote
Alright so, since we will now have to have someone warp to something he combat probes before the fleet can warp on top of that someone, I hereby request a new probe button:
Center probes on self
After all, combat probing is taking a huge nerf so this wouldn't be OP at all, and it would definitely remove some of the frustration about probing.
Pretty please?
EDIT: Don't forget to implement alliance bookmarks in Aegis, I never hurts to repeat it, there is no reason why corporations fleeting together should be penalizde.
And a short refresh / cache delay about corp bookmarks would be appreciated, as well as some consistency in the way the information is spread out (some people have their bookmarks refreshed earlier than others depending off their last right clic, that is stupid)
I would also appreciate a confirmation warning if some members of a fleet are unable to follow the fleet warp I am about to initiate.
Signature Tanking Best Tanking
Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
|
Kazi Kugisa
EVE University Ivy League
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:54:53 -
[80] - Quote
This is a hell of a nerf to more than a few NPSI fleet battles. Corp bookmarks aren't even an option there. Puts them at a big disadvantage at times.
Not really anything I personally like about this. Speaking for myself only and not my corp in any way, this makes teaching newbies much more difficult than it should be. This change isn't well thought out for the growth of the game. |
|
Quiggle Queue
POS Party Low-Class
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:55:28 -
[81] - Quote
DaReaper wrote:Bienator II wrote:Altrue wrote:Doing this without implementing alliance bookmarks first is a huge mistake. I beg you to reconsider. how would that help? you can't warp a fleet of corpmates to corp bookmarks either after the change. You have to send a scout first. Yes thats the part i don't like. if the corp has the bm you shoudl eb able to fleet warp your corp mates. if they are out of corp, copy the bm or send a scout
The delay in the corp bookmark populating should be a fair waiting period to quality for fleet warps. This way we can still warp to our wormholes we have pre-bookmarked, just like null-sec people warp to gates together. |
Elona Solette
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
15
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:55:34 -
[82] - Quote
I can understand that this nerfs bombers a bit, whatever .... meh
But, making it more difficult for non-cloaked fleets to find a fleet in system and get on top if it appears counter productive.
I'm not sure how gameplay is made more immersive by making things like being able to probe a fleet down and get your fleet engaged way way more tedious.
Really does feel like in an attempt to making bombing harder (probably not a bad thing) that stuff that is already a bit tricky has become much more painful. |
Iyokus Patrouette
Sudden Buggery Prolapse.
503
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:55:43 -
[83] - Quote
Combining this change with the warp speed changes i think the amount of frigates and destroyers landing and getting blapped while Logistics and other heavier assets are still dreaming about landing on grid is going to be terrible. . unless i am doing the blapping then it might be highly amusing.
---- Advocate for the initiation of purple coloured wormholes----
|
Quiggle Queue
POS Party Low-Class
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:56:25 -
[84] - Quote
Iyokus Patrouette wrote:Combining this change with the warp speed changes i think the amount of frigates and destroyers landing and getting blapped while Logistics and other heavier assets are still dreaming about landing on grid is going to be terrible. . unless i am doing the blapping then it might be highly amusing.
Agreed, even the most diligent timed warp, will fail unless everyone has the same size engine :( |
Syndra Silverwolf
Isogen 5
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:57:02 -
[85] - Quote
Teebeutel wrote:I dont see the problem that a lot of people seem to see for wormhole fleets, using corp bookmarks and having fleet members warp to those individually should do just fine.
Not only do you have to hope all the BMS propagated for your members, but also have fun warping to a hostile hole piecemeal in a 10-20man t3 fleet and then waiting another 30+ seconds for your triage to land. |
Chessur
Mining Industry Exile Foundation Warlords of the Deep
545
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:57:24 -
[86] - Quote
CCP I love you. This change is so elegant, and wonderful at fixing so many problems. As a small gang pilot, and PvPer I could not be happier! Its going to be so much more interesting now fighting a blob that no longer has the ability to drop all of their ships on me (at zero) over and over again.
Thank you for bringing piloting, actual skill and situational awareness back into the game.
For those of you that are complaining, I only have this to say: Spend less time whining on the forums, and perhaps learn how to actually PvP and fly your ships?
These changes (Along with the HML and BC stuff) made my entire week.
Made props CCP- its incredible. I am so excited for this, along with fozzie sov! |
Aebe Amraen
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
125
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:58:39 -
[87] - Quote
Teebeutel wrote:Aebe Amraen wrote:Lurch Aldent wrote:Sten Taxi wrote:Lurch Aldent wrote:Multiboxing miners just got tougher, particularly warping out of belt when neut enters system :-s Stations (and other celestials) are still warpable, this only affects poses Don't want to warp to station or a planet when neuts roll through chap. If you have a booster (Orca or Rorq) sitting in POS you can warp to them. The booster would be on the outside of the POS shield though, so it would be kindof dangerous to warp your no-propmod mining ships there. Unless your POS has teeth that is, in which case it's less dangerous but still a risk.
Mining boosts can be (and are) run from inside POSes. Rorquals and Orcas don't sit outside the POS shields to boost. |
islador
Antigen.
37
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:58:55 -
[88] - Quote
From the perspective of a small to mid-size gang FC, this change will have a single effect on my tactics: Roughly an 100% increase in the amount of time it takes me to offensively re-position my fleet.
That is because instead of scanning a target and using my alt to warp the fleet to that target, I will instead warp my alt to the target and then warp the fleet to my alt, thus paying the warp time cost twice.
Tacticals and other common bookmark warp tos will receive a lesser penalty since I can order a ceptor to warp or burn there and warp the fleet to that ceptor. Where as combat scanning requires the longevity and surprise of a cloaked vessel to often be viable.
At the end of the day, I won't be having my pilots warp themselves to someone or something more often than I already do. I'll simply be taking longer to warp the fleet to a target. The primary reason for that is it is tactically unwise to have your fleet land in any manner other than perfectly together. So I am willing to be slower to avoid arriving piece-meal in most situations.
In short; this change will make the FC work harder to mitigate game mechanics while failing to accomplish the stated goal of getting line members more involved. Shoveling more load onto the FCs, the dominant content creators in the game, is a bad move in my opinion.
If CCP wants to see line members doing more of their own warping, then CCP needs to find a way to make individual warps better than fleet warps. This could be accomplished in a number of ways;
- Slow down fleet warps dramatically. Such that using a fleet warp will almost always result in the position being worthless upon arrival.
- Make fleet warps consume capacitor in excess of the amount when solo. Perhaps such that small gangs could fleet warp and retain combat effectiveness but large gangs/fleets cannot.
- Make individual warps impart speed on exit, such that small ships exit warp at 'combat velocity'
- Make ships warping individually no longer appear on dscan
Do be aware that many of these ideas are terrible. |
Quiggle Queue
POS Party Low-Class
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:59:08 -
[89] - Quote
Syndra Silverwolf wrote:Teebeutel wrote:I dont see the problem that a lot of people seem to see for wormhole fleets, using corp bookmarks and having fleet members warp to those individually should do just fine. Not only do you have to hope all the BMS propagated for your members, but also have fun warping to a hostile hole piecemeal in a 10-20man t3 fleet and then waiting another 30+ seconds for your triage to land.
All the tackle will be destroyed, since they warp too fast.
I guess we will need a hyperspacial velocity de-optimizer, to slow our frigates down! |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
231
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 22:59:18 -
[90] - Quote
Aebe Amraen wrote:Lurch Aldent wrote:Sten Taxi wrote:Lurch Aldent wrote:Multiboxing miners just got tougher, particularly warping out of belt when neut enters system :-s Stations (and other celestials) are still warpable, this only affects poses Don't want to warp to station or a planet when neuts roll through chap. If you have a booster (Orca or Rorq) sitting in POS you can warp to them.
Dammit, it would have taken them 4 more days to figure that out....thanks for screwing it up for everyone :) |
|
Araneatrox
Sanctuary of Shadows Triumvirate.
54
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:01:18 -
[91] - Quote
Chessur wrote:CCP I love you. This change is so elegant, and wonderful at fixing so many problems. As a small gang pilot, and PvPer I could not be happier! Its going to be so much more interesting now fighting a blob that no longer has the ability to drop all of their ships on me (at zero) over and over again.
Thank you for bringing piloting, actual skill and situational awareness back into the game.
For those of you that are complaining, I only have this to say: Spend less time whining on the forums, and perhaps learn how to actually PvP and fly your ships?
These changes (Along with the HML and BC stuff) made my entire week.
Made props CCP- its incredible. I am so excited for this, along with fozzie sov!
******* that...
Take some Responsibility for your PVP/Fleet gameplay. Get better at the game or explode. You can no longer rely on a single FC to warp you everywhere, to hand hold you to every F1 opportunity.
Pay Attention, and be better at Eve. |
Lurch Aldent
Demon-War-Lords Circle-Of-Two
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:01:48 -
[92] - Quote
Kenneth Feld wrote:Aebe Amraen wrote:Lurch Aldent wrote:Sten Taxi wrote:Lurch Aldent wrote:Multiboxing miners just got tougher, particularly warping out of belt when neut enters system :-s Stations (and other celestials) are still warpable, this only affects poses Don't want to warp to station or a planet when neuts roll through chap. If you have a booster (Orca or Rorq) sitting in POS you can warp to them. Dammit, it would have taken them 4 more days to figure that out....thanks for screwing it up for everyone :)
From what I have heard boosts, inc mining, will soon be on-grid, no? |
A Trill Bitch
State War Academy Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:02:21 -
[93] - Quote
literally kill yourselves for thinking this is a good idea |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
231
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:03:14 -
[94] - Quote
Teebeutel wrote:Aebe Amraen wrote:Lurch Aldent wrote:Sten Taxi wrote:Lurch Aldent wrote:Multiboxing miners just got tougher, particularly warping out of belt when neut enters system :-s Stations (and other celestials) are still warpable, this only affects poses Don't want to warp to station or a planet when neuts roll through chap. If you have a booster (Orca or Rorq) sitting in POS you can warp to them. The booster would be on the outside of the POS shield though, so it would be kindof dangerous to warp your no-propmod mining ships there. Unless your POS has teeth that is, in which case it's less dangerous but still a risk.
Orca or Rorqual can boost IN the shields |
Teebeutel
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:03:37 -
[95] - Quote
Aebe Amraen wrote:Mining boosts can be (and are) run from inside POSes. Rorquals and Orcas don't sit outside the POS shields to boost. I thought links could not be run from inside POS shields, seems I was wrong. Nevermind then. |
Lurch Aldent
Demon-War-Lords Circle-Of-Two
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:04:45 -
[96] - Quote
Kenneth Feld wrote:Orca or Rorqual can boost IN the shields
At the moment.... |
marine rosger
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:05:07 -
[97] - Quote
How to kill a game 101 with CCP. |
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS Shadow Cartel
679
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:05:10 -
[98] - Quote
Jezza McWaffle wrote:So you will now implement automatic bookmarking at a corporation and alliance level yes? Or is this just another way to **** up wormholers now. Since WE WILL have to wait for the bookmarks to propagate (up to 5-10 mins) unless we have to have a scout at the exact warp in at every single fight. Example if you have a group consisting of more than just 1 corp. Group A wants to fight Group B Group A consists of multiple corps Currently Group A can fleet warp onto the enemy fleet or wormhole without everyone involved having a propagated bookmark. However after this change if the group does not have the bookmark then they have no way of getting into the fight at the same time as the rest of the fleet. So all fights will be delayed until everyone has the bookmarks <10 mins. Good job CCP...
And there is no chance you might have a prober/scout in the fleet to warp on top of it?
BALEX, bringing piracy on a whole new level.
|
Meliiza Proudmore
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:05:31 -
[99] - Quote
OMG these threads are so salty. Train dedicated probers not F1 monkeys.
HTFU. EvE is dynamic game. Evolve or die. |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
231
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:05:34 -
[100] - Quote
Lurch Aldent wrote:Kenneth Feld wrote:Aebe Amraen wrote:Lurch Aldent wrote:Lurch Aldent wrote:Multiboxing miners just got tougher, particularly warping out of belt when neut enters system :-s Don't want to warp to station or a planet when neuts roll through chap. If you have a booster (Orca or Rorq) sitting in POS you can warp to them. Dammit, it would have taken them 4 more days to figure that out....thanks for screwing it up for everyone :) From what I have heard boosts, inc mining, will soon be on-grid, no?
Fozzie has said since EvE Vegas 2012 that the Rorwual and Orca are broken and mining boosts wouldn't change until they have both had a balance pass and a significant update FWIW |
|
Louanne Barros
Hole Violence Whole Squid
41
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:06:00 -
[101] - Quote
So, while I don't agree with any of your goals, and urge you to reconsider..
If the goal is to slow down bombers/fleets in their arrival on grid, why does this involve bookmarks? Bookmarks must be traded/contracted, or take 5 or more minutes to propagate to the rest of the corporation. They are not part of the 'insta-probe wing-warp' mechanic at all, and are utterly crucial in wormhole space.
If you do go forward with this, please consider doing it to probe results first, and moving forward incrementally. |
nahjustwarpin
SUPER DUPER SPACE TRUCKS
161
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:06:25 -
[102] - Quote
Araneatrox wrote:Chessur wrote:CCP I love you. This change is so elegant, and wonderful at fixing so many problems. As a small gang pilot, and PvPer I could not be happier! Its going to be so much more interesting now fighting a blob that no longer has the ability to drop all of their ships on me (at zero) over and over again.
Thank you for bringing piloting, actual skill and situational awareness back into the game.
For those of you that are complaining, I only have this to say: Spend less time whining on the forums, and perhaps learn how to actually PvP and fly your ships?
These changes (Along with the HML and BC stuff) made my entire week.
Made props CCP- its incredible. I am so excited for this, along with fozzie sov! ******* that... Take some Responsibility for your PVP/Fleet gameplay. Get better at the game or explode. You can no longer rely on a single FC to warp you everywhere, to hand hold you to every F1 opportunity. Pay Attention, and be better at Eve.
This isn't even a solution to slippery petes. Once they'll get to 150k off your fleet, they can stay there and snipe you all they want, and you'll have even less chance to catch one after the patch. |
Andrew Charante
Isogen 5
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:07:15 -
[103] - Quote
This is a terrible idea, you want a fleet to all land at once on a wormhole with different warp speeds, thats no longer possible. 0/10
|
Scott Ormands
The Desolate Order Brave Collective
30
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:08:59 -
[104] - Quote
Jezza McWaffle wrote:So you will now implement automatic bookmarking at a corporation and alliance level yes? Or is this just another way to **** up wormholers now. Since WE WILL have to wait for the bookmarks to propagate (up to 5-10 mins) unless we have to have a scout at the exact warp in at every single fight. Example if you have a group consisting of more than just 1 corp. Group A wants to fight Group B Group A consists of multiple corps Currently Group A can fleet warp onto the enemy fleet or wormhole without everyone involved having a propagated bookmark. However after this change if the group does not have the bookmark then they have no way of getting into the fight at the same time as the rest of the fleet. So all fights will be delayed until everyone has the bookmarks <10 mins. Good job CCP...
+1
I can no longer warp my entire fleet to the hole and expect them to land in a cohesive group, first my T3's land and get primaried then a minute later my Bhaals land and then 2 minutes later my triage lands by that time we are all dead. And that's assuming all of us have the BM which can take quite a long time to happen. CCP i am adamantly against this change. Please reconsider.
|
gr ant
Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion
51
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:09:19 -
[105] - Quote
I get that you guys wants to change a lot of aspects of the game, but you guys need to slow down a bit. If anything shows us how unorganized and scatter brained you guys are at CCP it's your balancing team. Nerfing ships you literally just came out with just shows the lack of forethought and lack of understanding of your own games mechanics and meta.
I recommend you focus on the new SOV mechanics and fixing and balancing that before you decide to change more aspects of your games mechanics, slow down a bit and think things through a bit, because it just seems like you are a bunch of kids who implement whatever sounds cool at the moment.
I appreciate you guys wanting to work hard and change a lot of flawed aspects, but good things take time, and real change should come slowly.
Worry about Fozziesov first |
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS Shadow Cartel
680
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:09:55 -
[106] - Quote
Andrew Charante wrote:This is a terrible idea, you want a fleet to all land at once on a wormhole with different warp speeds, thats no longer possible. 0/10
You are a bit silly. Just put few thoughts on it and you ll find few ways. ccc
BALEX, bringing piracy on a whole new level.
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
285
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:10:00 -
[107] - Quote
A Trill ***** wrote:literally kill yourselves for thinking this is a good idea *bathes in the delicious tears*
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
|
CCP Larrikin
C C P C C P Alliance
87
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:11:56 -
[108] - Quote
Ele Rebellion wrote:Anoms are the green sites you can warp to without scanning down. We should still be able to fleet warp to those Thats correct.
Aebe Amraen wrote:Probing and tackling are already important roles in any fleet; what this change actually does is gets rid of the notion of a prober as a stand-alone role. The prober must also be a tackler, with all the risk that entails. A cloaky prober can't get into position so the FC can fleet warp to him/her?
Aebe Amraen wrote:2. My second concern is about a very particular, but rather common, scenario: trying to catch cloaky, nullified, nearly-unscannable off-grid T3 links ships. In some configurations these can perma-AB at over 1km/s, aligned out to another safespot. The current best practice is to get a prober with perfect skills, a bonused ship, and virtue probes and have him warp a squad of fast tackle (T1 frigates/interceptors or specialized tackle bombers) on top of the boosting ship, hoping that one of them will be able to catch him before he reacts and warps away.
Catching these ships is already extremely difficult, and will be nearly impossible under the proposed changes. No bonused scanning ship will be able to tackle them, as they have at a minimum 5s lock delay after decloaking. No unbonused ship will be able to scan them down. In the time it takes for the prober to warp to the target and then have the tackle squad warp to him the 1km/s probing ship will be out of range.
I have interests on both sides of this scenario, having hunted PL off-grid boosters with my perfect scanning alt during the recent Catch wars and with two of my own perfect combat boosting alts. I guess I won't mind having my boosting alts be effectively invulnerable for a while, but it does seem like poor balance. This is a really good point. Awesome post in general. I don't have an answer for you just yet, but we're working on it.
ArmEagle Kusoni wrote:So, to run sites (in w-space) we can't easily warp there all together anymore. Everyone will need the bookmarks or have to wait for one player to have landed. Alliance bookmarks would only make that slightly less of an issue.
That's just one example of how people will become unnecessarily more vulnarable, or things taking more time. and below...
Ele Rebellion wrote:Concern about this is WH space.
We don't have gates we can warp to and have to rely on the Bookmarks of the wormhole.
Edit: What I mean is if we have non-corp members that we are trying to move through a chain to a target, it will slow the entire fleet by 100% since a fleet member will have to warp ahead and then the entire fleet will have to warp to that fleet member. Both of these points are solid. Corbexx brought these up while we where talking to the CSM about the change. Regarding slowing down the speed of sites, given the potential profitability of wormhole space, we don't consider this a major negative. Regarding movement fleets though WH space, we have something we're working on for this. That said some of the feedback we've received is mixed. Reducing power projection though WH space (for both WH residence & passes though) not seen as all bad.
Hong Hu wrote:Well, to compensate for individual responsibility for warping (in Stealth Bombers) maybe we can change back to a 10 second flight time for the actual bombs? The change makes the setup for launch more challenging. But the end game of the bomb launch shouldn't also suffer. Back to 10 seconds, please. You can still squad warp bombers, you'll just need somone in position on the enemy fleet first. I don't want to rule your suggestion out, its a good one. We'll be monitoring the effect this change has on bombers closely =) |
|
Black Canary Jnr
Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk Amarr branch. Sev3rance
138
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:13:18 -
[109] - Quote
Much moaning, most of it not justified, lacking real criticism, and can be solved by using a cloaky scanner alt as the warpin.
This should make fights more interesting and emphasis fleet members controlling more of their own actions or risk being caught out. Looking forward to it. |
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
21829
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:14:41 -
[110] - Quote
If we got a desalination company involved with this thread, we could probably help ease California's water issues.
Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?
|
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
285
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:15:00 -
[111] - Quote
Black Canary Jnr wrote:Much moaning, most of it not justified, lacking real criticism, and can be solved by using a cloaky scanner alt as the warpin.
This should make fights more interesting and emphasis fleet members controlling more of their own actions or risk being caught out. Looking forward to it. Get out of here with your dirty logic!
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Joran Jackson
The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
132
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:15:20 -
[112] - Quote
Scott Ormands wrote:Jezza McWaffle wrote:So you will now implement automatic bookmarking at a corporation and alliance level yes? Or is this just another way to **** up wormholers now. Since WE WILL have to wait for the bookmarks to propagate (up to 5-10 mins) unless we have to have a scout at the exact warp in at every single fight. Example if you have a group consisting of more than just 1 corp. Group A wants to fight Group B Group A consists of multiple corps Currently Group A can fleet warp onto the enemy fleet or wormhole without everyone involved having a propagated bookmark. However after this change if the group does not have the bookmark then they have no way of getting into the fight at the same time as the rest of the fleet. So all fights will be delayed until everyone has the bookmarks <10 mins. Good job CCP... +1 I can no longer warp my entire fleet to the hole and expect them to land in a cohesive group, first my T3's land and get primaried then a minute later my Bhaals land and then 2 minutes later my triage lands by that time we are all dead. And that's assuming all of us have the BM which can take quite a long time to happen. CCP i am adamantly against this change. Please reconsider.
There is so much wrong with this post it makes me want to cry that your opinion might be considered somehow relevant.
In no situation would this ever be a problem for people who know what they're doing. If you are caught literally with your pants down, then I still have 0 sympathy because the other guys won with scouting. |
Winter Archipelago
Furtherance.
374
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:16:56 -
[113] - Quote
Aebe Amraen wrote:Probing and tackling are already important roles in any fleet; what this change actually does is gets rid of the notion of a prober as a stand-alone role. The prober must also be a tackler, with all the risk that entails. A cloaky prober can't get into position so the FC can fleet warp to him/her?
Drop a small bubble, abandon a mess of drones around its perimeter, laugh as the cloaky scout gets decloaked on the warp-in and insta-blapped. Even tanked, scout ships are still easily alphaed.
Planning a trip to Thera? Check out http://eve-scout.com/ for a list of the current connections.
Once you've made your choice, join the channels EVE-Scout or Furtherance Public and request a scout to make sure your connection is clear!
|
Papa Sotken
Zebra Corp The Bastion
2055
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:17:48 -
[114] - 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. Bombers problem is not how fast they get on grid. Every other ship can do so just as fast/faster with a great scanner.
I feel you've hit an issue that a small group have screamed for.
But come on.
This hits bombers...and everything else.
Can we not just fix bombs?
Zebra Corp Recruiting
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=387232
|
Papa Sotken
Zebra Corp The Bastion
2055
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:20:07 -
[115] - Quote
Double Delete.
Zebra Corp Recruiting
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=387232
|
Ubeleins
EVE Protection Agency Bloodline.
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:20:52 -
[116] - Quote
Black Canary Jnr wrote: This should make fights more interesting and emphasis fleet members controlling more of their own actions or risk being caught out. Looking forward to it.
Except that it won't. It will make FC's warp their probing alt in first, and then fleet warp their entire fleet to said alt. All it does is put the prober at a slightly higher risk of getting decloaked & killed. Nothing for the line member changes.
But hey, while we're removing features of the game that can be easily worked around, let's just go way back & take out 'warp to zero' for gates... |
Villa Deaver
The Desolate Order Brave Collective
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:22:46 -
[117] - Quote
Here's the basic problem.
This is a change that lets you do all the things you used to be able to do, just with more tedium and less fun.
I'm generally very sympathetic to CCP's changes to the game, but if there's a change whose sole purpose is to make the game less fun, it might be time to step back and look at a different solution to whatever problem you're trying to solve.
This won't actually change anything, at least with regard to bomber fleets. Waffles and CFC and the rest will just invest the suddenly-necessary time into copying 10 bookmarks at a time and trading them to everyone in their fleets, because they play the game in a goal-oriented way no matter the cost. More casual and less organized bomber fleets, who aren't willing to invest so much time into un-fun, will be the ones who suffer.
I understand the sentiment, but purposely making your game less fun is not the way to go. |
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
239
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:23:41 -
[118] - Quote
This is unnecessarily problematic for warping a fleet onto a target who is on a station, and thus you cannot get a covops remotely near without decloaking him. I think you've only considered a narrow range of fleet warp scenarios and are making people that are already very safe even safer. |
Louanne Barros
Hole Violence Whole Squid
41
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:24:03 -
[119] - Quote
Also, you'll need to go back and re-film all the 'Trailer EVE" stuff, since they prominently feature warping to bookmarks. I guess maybe there was a nearby covops in this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SI1CB4rcf8 |
Sven Viko VIkolander
Friends and Feminists
351
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:24:34 -
[120] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Hi Gentle Space Foke, As announced on the o7 show we are making some changes to fleet warp. Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders & Squad Commanders will no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own. This includes GÇô
- Probe Results
- Bookmarks
- Any private deadspace item (missions, etc.)
Commanders will still be able to warp their fleet to other fleet members, and all other GÇÿpublicGÇÖ objects.The goal of these changes is to encourage more individual fleet member participation and reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets (e.g bombers).
This is an absolutely fantastic change. I've been campaigning for reductions in the ease of mobility of fleets--primarily via fleet warp--for years now, and this is a great change that certainly puts more responsibility on fleet members for mobility and scouts who can get into position for fleets.
Now for an even better change, remove fleet warp altogether. |
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
25602
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:25:02 -
[121] - Quote
1. Allow broadcast of a location, giving fleet members an option to warp to location 2. Allow locations to be linked in chat
.. both with a slight delay (the delay suggestion came from Mr. Fozzie)
This would meet your requirement of nerfing automation without making fleet warfare UI a tedious thing.
Lights will guide you home
And ignite your bones
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
2230
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:25:05 -
[122] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Aebe Amraen wrote:Probing and tackling are already important roles in any fleet; what this change actually does is gets rid of the notion of a prober as a stand-alone role. The prober must also be a tackler, with all the risk that entails. A cloaky prober can't get into position so the FC can fleet warp to him/her? The problem with this response is you are basically telling us 'You must use a T3 Cruiser for probing' now. Since they are the only Cov Ops & Probe capable ships with a chance of surviving any kind of combat. Combat probing already was relegated to T3's and Alts because it required too many sacrifices to make sense putting a ship on grid if it wasn't a T3.
Can I suggest as an alternative that a probe ship can broadcast a 'warp to' on a probe results that INDIVIDUAL FLEET MEMBERS can use to warp to. Bolded for emphasis as I'm not suggesting that fleet warp still be capable, but that say I was the prober, I could broadcast a warp to and this would allow anyone to use that probe result individually.
This could also be extended to bookmarks, sigs etc. People would still have to warp themselves achieving greater hands on play for individual fleet members, but without doubling the time required to do anything and forcing certain fits on the initial warp in pilots. I.E. I have a personal bookmark to my POS. I am in a NPSI fleet, and I've given them today's password. I broadcast a 'warp to' on the bookmark, and the fleet then warps there one by one. This allows one guy to stuff up, only press align and the cloaky shadowing our fleet jumps him as he's left alone on grid since the FC can't just warp everyone with one button.
But your current system of requiring one person to warp first then the fleet can follow is overly cumbersome, and if Fleet Warp ability is to be nerfed, you need to give something back to make up for that. |
Jack Hayson
Atztech Inc. Ixtab.
176
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:25:20 -
[123] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members. Then why allow fleet warps to other fleet members? That makes no sense in this context. It just means that the FC needs to position his alt before warping the fleet. |
Vala Ancalagon
The Order of Thelemic Ascension Novus Dominatum
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:25:31 -
[124] - Quote
This is going to be pretty negative in wormholes, as it takes quite a while for corp bookmarks to propagate. This won't affect low/null sec gate movements at all, which is where I suspect a majority of the action takes place anyway. What will it achieve?
For a corp, the bookmarks are essentially public locations, especially in wormholes. |
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS Shadow Cartel
680
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:25:32 -
[125] - Quote
This will bring another role for the scouts in the fleets and it will differentiate good from the bad ones. Interceptors, cloaky probers will have a much more important role in fights. the more variables are in the fight the better gameplay is.
Fleets require more skill. To warp on a certain spot when told...ohhh so hard!
Will slow down and make harder bomber runs (positive)
Will slow down (a bit) projection in WHs. Probe > warp > fleet warp instead of probe > fleet warp. It will add some 30 sec more which is not really that bad for all the other gains
Only negative thing i heard is it will be almost impossible catching boosting alts. But i think capsuleers will find a way to fit a ship that will be able to do it. also i can live with it especially if CCP plans to remove offgrid boosting.
Name any negative point of this change.
BALEX, bringing piracy on a whole new level.
|
Daugan
SUPERFLUOUS WANDERLUST Gentlemen's.Club
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:26:45 -
[126] - Quote
Maybe the massive mob with torches and pitch forks should give you pause... |
Joran Jackson
The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
133
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:26:54 -
[127] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Both of these points are solid. Corbexx brought these up while we where talking to the CSM about the change. Regarding slowing down the speed of sites, given the potential profitability of wormhole space, we don't consider this a major negative. Regarding movement fleets though WH space, we have something we're working on for this. That said some of the feedback we've received is mixed. Reducing power projection though WH space (for both WH residence & passes though) not seen as all bad.
It would suck if you fix this change so the 50 man fleets of bad are happy.
If you are interested in changing things so that people fly their individual ships, then change it so people fly individual ships. In wormholes this means something different than k-space. Just like we don't have local, we also warp between sigs. Does that make fleets harder? Sure, but that's wormhole space.
This is the one good thing you've done for wormholes in a long time. Please don't blow it by "fixing" it.
|
Quiggle Queue
POS Party Low-Class
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:27:11 -
[128] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: Both of these points are solid. Corbexx brought these up while we where talking to the CSM about the change. Regarding slowing down the speed of sites, given the potential profitability of wormhole space, we don't consider this a major negative. Regarding movement fleets though WH space, we have something we're working on for this. That said some of the feedback we've received is mixed. Reducing power projection though WH space (for both WH residence & passes though) not seen as all bad.
Is it really "power projection", just to be able to warp as a group to a "stargate"? That seems pretty much standard travel outside of wormholes. |
Joran Jackson
The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
133
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:28:12 -
[129] - Quote
Quiggle Queue wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote: Both of these points are solid. Corbexx brought these up while we where talking to the CSM about the change. Regarding slowing down the speed of sites, given the potential profitability of wormhole space, we don't consider this a major negative. Regarding movement fleets though WH space, we have something we're working on for this. That said some of the feedback we've received is mixed. Reducing power projection though WH space (for both WH residence & passes though) not seen as all bad.
Is it really "power projection", just to be able to warp as a group to a "stargate"? That seems pretty much standard travel outside of wormholes.
Local is standard outside of wormholes. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
13381
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:28:58 -
[130] - Quote
If you want to nerf bombs, nerf bombs. Don't wreck a whole bunch of other things in the process.
I cannot overstress my disagreement with this change.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
|
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
239
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:30:51 -
[131] - Quote
Fleet warping to pings before warping to a scout is also a necessary mechanic for many fleets. You can argue that it's not strictly necessary in null, but consider -10 and to a lesser degree invading fw fleets in highsec who by mechanical necessity have to warp more than once per minute or the fleet gets wiped or in the case of fw at least damaged. Having the pilots independently warp around the system isn't good enough and you know full well what the result will be: FCs will be required to have another covops alt who warps ahead of the fleet to the next ping. We don't need more alts online. |
Lt Shard
Team Pizza Good at this Game
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:31:38 -
[132] - Quote
Joran Jackson wrote:Local is standard outside of wormholes.
Shouldn't be, but that's another issue! |
Scott Ormands
The Desolate Order Brave Collective
31
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:33:03 -
[133] - Quote
Joran Jackson wrote: There is so much wrong with this post it makes me want to cry that your opinion might be considered somehow relevant.
In no situation would this ever be a problem for people who know what they're doing. If you are caught literally with your pants down, then I still have 0 sympathy because the other guys won with scouting.
Of course there are ways around it, warp my carrier first then warp everyone else right? well yeah but why do I keep needing to come up with workarounds that only add needless complexity. Is it really that bad that I want to be able to warp my fleet as a whole to a WH. I want us to all land at the same time and not give them time to know what we are doing before hand and start neuting and shooting my triage. This is especially important if I'm taking A fight against someone with a dread |
Malakai Asamov
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
35
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:34:19 -
[134] - Quote
Do you think if an FC trys to fleet-warp to something that the rest of the fleet can't he should still warp on his own?
Some sort of message should be posted to the fleet when this happens "You failed to follow {insert fc name} in warp."
Thoughts? |
M1k3y Koontz
Respawn Disabled Initiative Mercenaries
757
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:34:36 -
[135] - Quote
Ele Rebellion wrote: Also have to take into consideration that the clones of the probing frigates often cost 3 or 4x that of the T3 Link ship. Risk not worth the reward in killing probers anymore.
Why do your scouts all have full Virtue sets? You really don't need them unless you're hunting T3 boosters. Also jumpclones are a thing, so cloaky alts really can substitute for bookmarks.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
Mostlyharmlesss
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
161
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:34:37 -
[136] - Quote
Make anomaly warp-in's disappear after the anomaly has been started. This will be a content trigger just like ESS'. That means both sides will have to have a fleet to A: Safe the person running the anomaly and B: The hostile fleet will need to have at least one person on grid before the engagement will start, giving the ratter's friends a chance to prepare for the incoming battle.
Obviously prepared fleets will use cloaky ships, but the probes will be visible for the ratter giving a ratter paying attention to dscan a small chance to warp up but at the same time, give a competent scanner a big chance of getting a kill.
With the current system, you just jump into the system and shotgun to the nearest anomaly.
I know this might not be on the scope of fleet warps entire, but it will tie in nicely with this change.
Follow me on Twitter for the latest regarding GoonSwarm Federation and our recruitment drives!
|
Janeway84
Def Squadron Pride Before Fall
168
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:35:45 -
[137] - Quote
Im not sure im liking the nerf to fleet warp at all and I usually since its gonna take a big dump on wh people. All the other stuff in the 07 show was very nice to hear about, though Im wondering does the ishtar really need to be nerfed even more? |
Tatsuj Khan
Team Pizza Good at this Game
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:36:14 -
[138] - Quote
Devs:
Many comments above described how pilots in w-space uses wormholes to move from system to system, and corporate WH BMs are what fleets use to move from system to system. Corp BMs allow wormhole fleets to move similar to, of course, fleets in normal space where they use "public" gates to travel from system to system. The proposed changes will take away that ability from w-space.
Suggestion: Make corporate wormhole BMs "public" just as gates are, and allow fleets to warp from WH to WH in a coherent group. Otherwise as the Dev proposal stands now, the fleet can't work together as they land because ships are strung out throughout the system. This allows the enemy to pick off small faster ships first as the landing fleet straggles in.
If wormhole BMs are made "public", it should significantly lessen the damage this nerf does to WH corp membership and fleet ops. I recall somewhere in the sov changes thread, devs stated that changes should enhance game play rather than add unnecessary difficulties and tedium.
As Sarg wrote in a comment above to other w-spacers: "If you are trying to get your battleships to land on grid with your cruisers now, even triage, good luck and have fun having the enemy pick stragglers off." |
Kaeda Maxwell
Screaming Hayabusa Neo-Bushido Movement
347
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:36:20 -
[139] - Quote
So my main concern here is that this is a stealth buff to off grid boosters (OGB).
Many tech 3 off grid boosters are fitted both to be extremely hard to scan down and have a 100mn afterburner to bur around on the grid. Further more they often sit in deepsafes (long warps).
Currently the best way to kill an OGB is to scan it down (which needs to be done fast or they cloak) fleet warp a lachesis or a tackle bomber to them (dscan invisibility).
After this change in order to kill a OGB you'll need to put a cloaky scout on grid with the OGB so you can warp to that. This causes a few issues, often OGB's are only decloaked for a limited amount of time, so the extra delay reduces the cahnces of catching it. Furthermore if it's in a deepsafe and burning with a 100mn 2 long warps instead of one makes it highly likely that it will now be out of tackle range completely by the time you get there.
Fitting tackle to the prober isn't that realistic a solution either since you need highly specialized fits to even be able to scan most tech 3 OGB's down in the first place. And many of the command ship variants that are hard to probe also carry a flight of ECM drones which puts further restraints on the fits of viable tackle ship.
So I worry that this change makes a class of ships that is already incredibly hard to kill even harder to kill.
Having corp bookmarks update instantaneously might be a viable work around, that way you still remove the automation but at least it doesn't hurt things like OGB hunting then. |
Dirk Morbho
Mindstar Technology Get Off My Lawn
47
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:38:05 -
[140] - Quote
CCP,
I will make this very simple for you. If I cannot squad warp my in-corp money making alts to a corp bookmark when a neutral comes into local, then those accounts will be unsubbed.
Please tell me this is not what's going on with these changes. It seems like that's exactly what's happening. And if so, It's a rather stupid change.
|
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
285
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:38:56 -
[141] - Quote
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:If we got a desalination company involved with this thread, we could probably help ease California's water issues.
As a Californian, yes please!
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Quiggle Queue
POS Party Low-Class
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:38:57 -
[142] - Quote
Tatsuj Khan wrote:Devs:
Many comments above described how pilots in w-space uses wormholes to move from system to system, and corporate WH BMs are what fleets use to move from system to system. Corp BMs allow wormhole fleets to move similar to, of course, fleets in normal space where they use "public" gates to travel from system to system. The proposed changes will take away that ability from w-space.
Suggestion: Make corporate wormhole BMs "public" just as gates are, and allow fleets to warp from WH to WH in a coherent group. Otherwise as the Dev proposal stands now, the fleet can't work together as they land because ships are strung out throughout the system. This allows the enemy to pick off small faster ships first as the landing fleet straggles in.
If wormhole BMs are made "public", it should significantly lessen the damage this nerf does to WH corp membership and fleet ops. I recall somewhere in the sov changes thread, devs stated that changes should enhance game play rather than add unnecessary difficulties and tedium.
As Sarg wrote in a comment above to other w-spacers: "If you are trying to get your battleships to land on grid with your cruisers now, even triage, good luck and have fun having the enemy pick stragglers off."
Yes +1 |
Sugar Kyle
Snuff Box Snuffed Out
1003
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:40:26 -
[143] - Quote
Kaeda Maxwell wrote:So my main concern here is that this is a stealth buff to off grid boosters (OGB).
Many tech 3 off grid boosters are fitted both to be extremely hard to scan down and have a 100mn afterburner to burn around on the grid. Furthermore they often sit in deep safes (long warps).
Currently the best way to kill an OGB is to scan it down (which needs to be done fast or they cloak) fleet warp a lachesis or a tackle bomber to them (dscan invisibility).
After this change in order to kill a OGB you'll need to put a cloaky scout on grid with the OGB so you can warp to that. This causes a few issues, often OGB's are only decloaked for a limited amount of time, so the extra delay reduces the chances of catching it. Furthermore if it's in a deepsafe and burning with a 100mn 2 long warps instead of one makes it highly likely that it will now be out of tackle range completely by the time you get there.
Fitting tackle to the prober isn't that realistic a solution either since you need highly specialized fits to even be able to scan most tech 3 OGB's down in the first place. And many of the command ship variants that are hard to probe also carry a flight of ECM drones which puts further restraints on the fits of viable tackle ship.
So I worry that this change makes a class of ships that is already incredibly hard to kill even harder to kill.
Having corp bookmarks update instantaneously might be a viable work around, that way you still remove the automation but at least it doesn't hurt things like OGB hunting then.
It is a very good point. Thank you.
Member of CSMX - CSM9 Weekly Updates
Member of CSM9
Low Sec Lifestyle - An Eve Blog
@Sugar_Kyle
|
Tyr Dolorem
Snuff Box Snuffed Out
135
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:42:40 -
[144] - Quote
i¦¦s¦¦h¦¦t¦¦a¦¦r¦¦ peteonline |
Berial Inglebard
Collapsed Out Pandemic Legion
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:42:47 -
[145] - Quote
To everyone complaining that "this kills x".
You choose to die instead of adapt. I will play the tiniest violin for you. |
Quiggle Queue
POS Party Low-Class
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:44:35 -
[146] - Quote
We could return to the game as it was prior to "Warp to Zero" too, but that would be a step backwards, so is this. |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
291
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:44:46 -
[147] - 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 ... |
M1k3y Koontz
Respawn Disabled Initiative Mercenaries
757
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:44:48 -
[148] - Quote
knobber Jobbler wrote:The removal of warping to probes is daft. It removes a dynamic in fleet combat. At least allow probed locations to be broadcast so fleets can warp too them rather than warping to a freindly ship at that location. It's that or even less fights.
Please give the small/micro gang elite pvp jerks their arena to go fight in and stop buggering up strategic fleet warfare. While your at it, put decloaking back on bombers. Would solve most of the problems you're trying to solve by removing useful/interesting mechanics.
This raises a good question: if someone broadcasts "Warp to:" for a probe result, will fleetwarps be available?
At the very least everyone in fleet could warp to it and it would reduce the headache of warping to a scout and having someone warp at 0 and decloak it.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
90
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:48:50 -
[149] - Quote
Scott Ormands wrote:Jezza McWaffle wrote:So you will now implement automatic bookmarking at a corporation and alliance level yes? Or is this just another way to **** up wormholers now. Since WE WILL have to wait for the bookmarks to propagate (up to 5-10 mins) unless we have to have a scout at the exact warp in at every single fight. Example if you have a group consisting of more than just 1 corp. Group A wants to fight Group B Group A consists of multiple corps Currently Group A can fleet warp onto the enemy fleet or wormhole without everyone involved having a propagated bookmark. However after this change if the group does not have the bookmark then they have no way of getting into the fight at the same time as the rest of the fleet. So all fights will be delayed until everyone has the bookmarks <10 mins. Good job CCP... +1 I can no longer warp my entire fleet to the hole and expect them to land in a cohesive group, first my T3's land and get primaried then a minute later my Bhaals land and then 2 minutes later my triage lands by that time we are all dead. And that's assuming all of us have the BM which can take quite a long time to happen. CCP i am adamantly against this change. Please reconsider.
1. warp scout in at range X. 2. fleet warp to scout. 3. profit...? |
|
CCP Larrikin
C C P C C P Alliance
89
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:50:56 -
[150] - Quote
Andrew Charante wrote:This is a terrible idea, you want a fleet to all land at once on a wormhole with different warp speeds, thats no longer possible. 0/10 You can fleet warp to a fleet member already at the wormhole.
Kismeteer wrote:Here is my list of things you can no longer warp to in a fleet without a scout in position. This is just one more account to run by FCs, who alternately have to be SURE they are reliable and are actually there every time. Thats the goal of the change. We want more fleet member participation. Fleets that have motivated and trusted probers will do a lot better than fleets that have the FC trying to do everything.
Kismeteer wrote:So scout ahead to see enemies coming, and scout JUST ahead of the fleet, WAITING for people to actually warp to him. usually at the wrong range.
I think it's terrible because telling a newbie how to warp to a person is painful. And getting him to pick the right range is even worse if it's not at zero. It encourages scouts, yes, but it also just slows down and makes game play more complicated. The FC can still fleet warp to that scout. Additionally teaching that newbie how to warp himself at the right range, while hard is going to be much better for that newbie long term.
Masao Kurata wrote:This is unnecessarily problematic for warping a fleet onto a target who is on a station, and thus you cannot get a covops remotely near without decloaking him. I think you've only considered a narrow range of fleet warp scenarios and are making people that are already very safe even safer. Somone who is on a station (stations can be fleet warped to) is already safe?
Tatsuj Khan wrote:Suggestion: Make corporate wormhole BMs "public" just as gates are, and allow fleets to warp from WH to WH in a coherent group. Otherwise as the Dev proposal stands now, the fleet can't work together as they land because ships are strung out throughout the system. This allows the enemy to pick off small faster ships first as the landing fleet straggles in.
If wormhole BMs are made "public", it should significantly lessen the damage this nerf does to WH corp membership and fleet ops. I recall somewhere in the sov changes thread, devs stated that changes should enhance game play rather than add unnecessary difficulties and tedium. This is a great suggestion. Building on it - allowing fleet warping to WH probe results could also work. There are a couple of questions we'd like to thrash out and get more feedback on relating to power projection in WH space before we make a change like this.
Quiggle Queue wrote:[Is it really "power projection", just to be able to warp as a group to a "stargate"? That seems pretty much standard travel outside of wormholes. You still can fleet warp a group to a stargate =) |
|
|
Makkari Kock
Delusions of Adequacy Get Off My Lawn
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:51:51 -
[151] - Quote
Black Canary Jnr wrote:Much moaning, most of it not justified, lacking real criticism, and can be solved by using a cloaky scanner alt as the warpin.
This should make fights more interesting and emphasis fleet members controlling more of their own actions or risk being caught out. Looking forward to it. How is the fc using a scanner alt as you yourself suggest making anything more interesting? It's just adding more headache, which seems to be easily mistaken for content and fun nowadays. |
Makkari Kock
Delusions of Adequacy Get Off My Lawn
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:54:20 -
[152] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Thats the goal of the change. We want more fleet member participation. Fleets that have motivated and trusted probers will do a lot better than fleets that have the FC trying to do everything. Do you know how hard it is to get people to actually do these annoying unrewarding roles in the fleets? It's not hard work, and it's very unrewarding and completely transparent to most members, just like boosting. People do them because you force someone to do it or you won't undock, what people really WANT to do is blow stuff up, not warp around cloaked telling the fc in command that the fleet can warp to him. |
Lt Shard
Team Pizza Good at this Game
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:54:36 -
[153] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: You can fleet warp to a fleet member already at the wormhole.
All this does it make things slower, and eve is a slow game as is.
Adding tedium is a terrible idea. |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
285
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:55:28 -
[154] - Quote
Sugar Kyle wrote:Kaeda Maxwell wrote:So my main concern here is that this is a stealth buff to off grid boosters (OGB).
Many tech 3 off grid boosters are fitted both to be extremely hard to scan down and have a 100mn afterburner to burn around on the grid. Furthermore they often sit in deep safes (long warps).
Currently the best way to kill an OGB is to scan it down (which needs to be done fast or they cloak) fleet warp a lachesis or a tackle bomber to them (dscan invisibility).
After this change in order to kill a OGB you'll need to put a cloaky scout on grid with the OGB so you can warp to that. This causes a few issues, often OGB's are only decloaked for a limited amount of time, so the extra delay reduces the chances of catching it. Furthermore if it's in a deepsafe and burning with a 100mn 2 long warps instead of one makes it highly likely that it will now be out of tackle range completely by the time you get there.
Fitting tackle to the prober isn't that realistic a solution either since you need highly specialized fits to even be able to scan most tech 3 OGB's down in the first place. And many of the command ship variants that are hard to probe also carry a flight of ECM drones which puts further restraints on the fits of viable tackle ship.
So I worry that this change makes a class of ships that is already incredibly hard to kill even harder to kill.
Having corp bookmarks update instantaneously might be a viable work around, that way you still remove the automation but at least it doesn't hurt things like OGB hunting then. It is a very good point. Thank you. They can always do some module restrictions. Don't allow gang links and ECCM modules to be fit at the same time. Maybe even address the over sized ab mod too.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16127
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:56:45 -
[155] - Quote
Bat Country are in agreement with this change. Next step you should nerf repair broadcasts to squad only.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Tyr Dolorem
Snuff Box Snuffed Out
136
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:57:45 -
[156] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: The FC can still fleet warp to that scout.
"We want people to be more involved in the fleet, but it's k there's an ez pz workaround so you can still fleetwarp to where you wanna go it just requires the fc to have an alt warp there first, leaving the "fleet participation" unchanged and FC workload increased."
CCP Larrikin wrote: power projection in WH space
r u srs? |
Quiggle Queue
POS Party Low-Class
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:58:01 -
[157] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: This is a great suggestion. Building on it - allowing fleet warping to WH probe results could also work. There are a couple of questions we'd like to thrash out and get more feedback on relating to power projection in WH space before we make a change like this.
So isn't this reversing everything you have previously stated? Probe results, combat probe results, etc?
And that "stargate" was in quotations, because in a J-space, the wormholes are our gates :P |
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
90
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:58:11 -
[158] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:They can always do some module restrictions. Don't allow gang links and ECCM modules to be fit at the same time. Maybe even address the over sized ab mod too.
Not everyone running a gang link and ECCM is sitting in a safespot. in small gang pvp people might actually have a single link on their BC and a ECCM if they expect ECM to be fielded.
|
Malakai Asamov
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
35
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:58:33 -
[159] - Quote
Increasing warp to range to 250km or 500km would maintain a lot of benefits while decreasing some of the downsides bought up with this change, was that considered as an alternate fix? |
Kaliba Mort
Patriotic Tendencies Executive Outcomes
13
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:59:14 -
[160] - Quote
You know, back in the day, there weren't even probes and fleet warps. People had to warp to Ws in fleet. And then there were cloaky scouts getting a warp in on stuff. And stuff died.
So I think it is a good change. FC is not suppose to be probing anyway. There are suppose to be probers in any decent fleet to find perfect warp-ins on target. Those can do a much better job than someone trying to do 10 things at once.
|
|
Kenrailae
Fallen Reich
350
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:59:24 -
[161] - Quote
Fozzie, can you stahp? Focus on the real problems, not the circumstantial annoyances? You know, like those drones? I know losing is fun and everything come on.....
The Law is a point of View
|
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
239
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:59:45 -
[162] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Masao Kurata wrote:This is unnecessarily problematic for warping a fleet onto a target who is on a station, and thus you cannot get a covops remotely near without decloaking him. I think you've only considered a narrow range of fleet warp scenarios and are making people that are already very safe even safer. Somone who is on a station (stations can be fleet warped to) is already safe?
Stations are pretty big you know, especially caldari administrative stations (100km across!), warping to the station is very different from warping on top of a ship. Warping to zero on top of a target who has just acquired a weapons timer in order to apply high dps during this very short timer is a strong counter to station games. |
Angelicous Prada
University of Caille Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:00:30 -
[163] - Quote
Been playing in some large fleets lately. I noticed the fc would drop his combat probes and fleet warp to the targets maneuvering 200k away. I thought that was too much a one man show. Rather I see a skilled pilot get a warp in by piloting.
|
Elenahina
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
737
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:03:16 -
[164] - Quote
Was that the sound of snipers becoming useful again?
Agony Unleashed is Recruiting - Small Gang PvP in Null Sec
|
Makkari Kock
Delusions of Adequacy Get Off My Lawn
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:04:19 -
[165] - Quote
Angelicous Prada wrote:Been playing in some large fleets lately. I noticed the fc would drop his combat probes and fleet warp to the targets maneuvering 200k away. I thought that was too much a one man show. Rather I see a skilled pilot get a warp in by piloting.
You really do mistake clicking scan for skill. No one will want that role, they want in on them killmails instead of doing a task your 5-year old son could do.
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1360
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:05:23 -
[166] - Quote
Or you can just cut 99% of the bull out of it and restrict all bookmark and probing fleet warps to just the Squad Commander.
Want to warp the fleet, the squad commander in charge of the 10 people can do it. The wing commander and the fleet commander cannot warp the group in whole.
You move the leadership role of getting tacticals and flying to the leader of the squad, reducing the blob down to at most, 10 pilots, vs the 100+ null runs into.
You now create a new leadership dynamic, and permit new people to have a stepping stone to becoming a fc.
Squad Leaders gain power, and have a relevant role (vs just being a booster).
I'd start with baby steps first, commonly known as "A Iteration" (Thanks Rise).
Remove the ability for fleet commanders and wing commanders from warping entire groups to bookmarks and scan probes, and reduce it down to the squad level.
Try that first. See how it actually works.
Yaay!!!!
|
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
149
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:05:34 -
[167] - Quote
I'm tentatively in favor of this change. |
Scott Ormands
The Desolate Order Brave Collective
31
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:05:55 -
[168] - Quote
Airi Cho wrote:Scott Ormands wrote:Jezza McWaffle wrote:So you will now implement automatic bookmarking at a corporation and alliance level yes? Or is this just another way to **** up wormholers now. Since WE WILL have to wait for the bookmarks to propagate (up to 5-10 mins) unless we have to have a scout at the exact warp in at every single fight. Example if you have a group consisting of more than just 1 corp. Group A wants to fight Group B Group A consists of multiple corps Currently Group A can fleet warp onto the enemy fleet or wormhole without everyone involved having a propagated bookmark. However after this change if the group does not have the bookmark then they have no way of getting into the fight at the same time as the rest of the fleet. So all fights will be delayed until everyone has the bookmarks <10 mins. Good job CCP... +1 I can no longer warp my entire fleet to the hole and expect them to land in a cohesive group, first my T3's land and get primaried then a minute later my Bhaals land and then 2 minutes later my triage lands by that time we are all dead. And that's assuming all of us have the BM which can take quite a long time to happen. CCP i am adamantly against this change. Please reconsider. 1. warp scout in at range X. 2. fleet warp to scout. 3. profit...?
There HAS to be a solution that isn't more alts.
|
ISD Decoy
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
553
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:07:53 -
[169] - Quote
Quote:2. Be respectful toward others at all times.
The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others.
3. Ranting is prohibited.
A rant is a post that is often filled with angry and counterproductive comments. A free exchange of ideas is essential to building a strong sense of community and is helpful in development of the game and community. Rants are disruptive, and incite flaming and trolling. Please post your thoughts in a concise and clear manner while avoiding going off on rambling tangents.
8. Use of profanity is prohibited.
The use of profanity is prohibited on the EVE Online forums. This includes the partial masking of letters using numbers or alternate symbols, and any attempts at bypassing the profanity filter.
23. Post constructively.
Negative feedback can be very useful to further improve EVE Online provided that it is presented in a civil and factual manner. All users are encouraged to honestly express their feelings regarding EVE Online and how it can be improved. Posts that are non-constructive, insulting or in breach of the rules will be deleted regardless of how valid the ideas behind them may be. Users are also reminded that posting with a lack of content also constitutes non-constructive posting. I have removed a couple posts and those quoting them. Please stay on topic. It is OK to discuss the merit of an idea or change, but it is NOT OK to break our rules.
ISD Decoy
Commander
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Kenrailae
Fallen Reich
350
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:08:12 -
[170] - Quote
Angelicous Prada wrote:Been playing in some large fleets lately. I noticed the fc would drop his combat probes and fleet warp to the targets maneuvering 200k away. I thought that was too much a one man show. Rather I see a skilled pilot get a warp in by piloting.
THIS is a problem that needs to be looked at, being able to warp a fleet to a previously bookmarked location is not. It's in your ships nav computer, why can't you share that nav data with your fleet warp? Strategic bookmarks are a huge aspect of Eve combat..... Otherwise what's the actual advantage of home field advantage or going in and scouting/preparing a site for combat?
The Law is a point of View
|
|
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
91
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:08:51 -
[171] - Quote
Scott Ormands wrote:There HAS to be a solution that isn't more alts.
They are called other players doing that role.
|
Tim Nering
R3d Fire
82
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:09:01 -
[172] - Quote
fleet warps arent harming anything. does life have to get harder?
as someone who multi boxxes.......UGH. |
Ransu Asanari
Powder and Ball Alchemists Union Mordus Angels
243
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:09:34 -
[173] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:Or you can just cut 99% of the bull out of it and restrict all bookmark and probing fleet warps to just the Squad Commander.
Want to warp the fleet, the squad commander in charge of the 10 people can do it. The wing commander and the fleet commander cannot warp the group in whole.
You move the leadership role of getting tacticals and flying to the leader of the squad, reducing the blob down to at most, 10 pilots, vs the 100+ null runs into.
You now create a new leadership dynamic, and permit new people to have a stepping stone to becoming a fc.
Squad Leaders gain power, and have a relevant role (vs just being a booster).
I like Phoenix's idea. It gives Squad Commanders more ability to be functional in a fleet, rather than just having enough Leadership skills to pass along boosts.
This would be similar to the Drone Assist change, where the number of drones was limited to 50. Setting your assists to specific members in fleet (like squad commanders), and having more of those members act as triggers gave more hierarchy and involvement in fleet combat.
Powder and Ball Alchemists Union - "Turning Lead into Gold since 2008"
|
Shadowforge Dawkins
Catastrophic Overview Failure Brave Collective
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:10:34 -
[174] - Quote
AAR; Venture kill- yes I know who cares, but the process on this I find important, Because without the fleet warp, If this was a guy in a Relic/data site, he would have been done and gone by the time bookmarks popped. and as for the gas, gas clouds decloak you. so getting a warp in to a person can be very difficult. as this tale shall show.
So after hopping on and seeing our scanned down Chain, I decided to jump into my prospect, time to get that shiny new toy after getting some gas to sell. Before leaving I check the Holes I will be huffing in... Regular hole, not a wolf-rayet so no sig tanking. I dump the tank equip and dual scram, toss on some stabilizers and microwarp drive. Off I go into the C5 static, and on down the chain, spamming D-scan. Arriving in the C2 I hit D-scan. Ventue.... POS.... same stuff as last time. bleh no fight this time. reduce D-scan to 10AU... Venture, sun, POS... Reduce to 5AU... Sun, Venture, nothing.... he's out gassing? perfect time to kill him and take the gas. what gas sites we got? gotta be quick on this- Barren and Ordinary... 1 venture. He is ninja'ing the barren go figure. I warp to the barren-sleepers? missed him? no he is in the other. ah he cleared it.... but that gas is worth way less than C-50? meh kill him anyways the guys need some content. So off I warp to the ord... He is sitting still in the center of the C-72. that's my baiting spot, but he is sitting still, not aligned, on the center of the gas cloud..... don't think its bait... take the bait hope for a big fight? do it.
So I call in the guys and they bring a Jackdaw with dual scram and a few other ships. Becuase he is in the center of the cloud I cannot provide warp-in as I will be de-cloaked and he will see me and run off. can't warp to old sig bookmark as it is 43 KM away. So I click his ship and hit "look at ship", then look around seeing the gas cloud mark is 1 KM away. I bookmark our warp-in point. we don't have fleet warp. well, the guys on home computers got the bookmarks to propagate very quickly, but the 2 on laptops... we tried a few things. My personal favorite for fixing this is what I call Forcing the BM's= Hit "add location" make a bookmark, then delete it. This often causes the bookmarks to propagate, except laptops. then you are not so fortunate, sorry sabre guy. Rather than fleet warping we wait for bookmarks. this guy can leave anytime... so glad I'm not in a Relic site doing this. Then the warp in, scram the venture, kill it. pod got away, fine we got the ship. and his gas=BONUS.
So how is this bad at relic/data sites? cloaked ships don't move fast, cans are often 15-30 KM apart sometimes 50 KM apart. we bookmark the next can he will hit as we are.... 40KM away and target is using a micro warp drive to get there. fleet warp to this location allows a drop on target where as waiting on bookmarks he will be long gone. And I've scrammed a Stratios while flying an Astero... it doesn't go very well for the tackle. |
Seven Koskanaiken
FinFleet Northern Coalition.
1534
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:10:40 -
[175] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Fleets that have motivated and trusted probers will do a lot better than fleets that have the FC trying to do everything.
The reason FCs multibox is because that's what works, they don't do it for their health. If something else worked, it would already be happening. |
handige harrie
Hedion University Amarr Empire
309
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:11:26 -
[176] - Quote
I like the change, one man FC shows where getting too much. Now to rework combat scanning to something that requires a bit more skill to keep things interesting for the person who has the job to scan down the enemy and provide warpins... even my badly skilled alt was able to combat scan a solo frigate with ease using the default probe formation and sister combat probes.
Baddest poster ever
|
Ubeleins
EVE Protection Agency Bloodline.
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:11:33 -
[177] - Quote
Villa Deaver wrote: This won't actually change anything, at least with regard to bomber fleets. Waffles and CFC and the rest will just invest the suddenly-necessary time into copying 10 bookmarks at a time and trading them to everyone in their fleets, because they play the game in a goal-oriented way no matter the cost. More casual and less organized bomber fleets, who aren't willing to invest so much time into un-fun, will be the ones who suffer.
Hanging out decloaked & trading bookmarks in space = getting probed down and killed (depending on the size of the system of course, in a really large system you could probably get away with doing something this stupid.)
As I (and many others) have already pointed out, the FC simply warps his/her probing alt into range, then fleet warps the fleet to his/her alt. All this will do is put their prober at slightly more risk of being decloaked & killed, and it will slightly delay how fast the line members get to land on grid. So I guess this will change average line member's gameplay experience... slightly... they'll be sitting there doing nothing for a few more seconds (or minutes if max tidi) before taking the fleet warp. Mission accomplished?
P.S. Speaking of breaking things that are working fine, can we un-break probes with this change finally? Before Odyssey when you launched probes and opened your map, your probes were at least where you launched them. Ever since Odyssey when you open the map they usually start at the sun, but randomly they'll be off in the middle of nowhere deadspace, but never where they actually are in space (well, I suppose if you warped to the sun before launching them, then they would at least have a chance to start off on the map where they are in space, if it's not one of those random deadspace spawns, but that's besides the point.) I want to be able to jump through a gate, launch combat probes, hit scan, and get results from where I launched them. Having to find them on the map, and move them back to where they actually are in space doesn't make any sense (I can see them on grid, they're right next to me ffs!) And it used to work just fine. It was also really nice for wormhole probing, being able to near instantly ping & eliminate your in-bound sig right after you jump in. And the reason I bring this up in this thread, is that it directly relates to combat probing / fleet warping. If the point of breaking probes in Odyssey was to slow down fleet movement while the FC (or prober) plays "let's find where the map put my probes this time" (which I think is just silly, non-immersive, & counter intuitive) would the change of having to warp his/her prober alt in first be enough of a delay that we could revert the broken probe behavior at least? |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2480
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:11:47 -
[178] - Quote
Could we look into more ships getting fitting bonuses for probe launchers, or reducing the needs altogether? The smaller the fleet gets the more important every member becomes, and either switching a man (or two) out for probers or gimping fits so they can fit the launchers, becomes a bigger issue. It still definitley falls within the more people involvement idea, but less of a cost at doing so. |
Chase Hakoke
Dixon Cox Butte Preservation Society Black Legion.
22
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:14:31 -
[179] - Quote
How to fix eve in 4 simple steps (don't do this fleet warp change):
Nerf Bomb Damage to larger ships like BCs and BSs Remove jump range nerf OR remove fatigue (not both). Increase starting SP so new pilots can have fun non day 1. Make Sov actually valuable to an alliance with income that comes from things other than moons
|
Ohh Yeah
SniggWaffe WAFFLES.
266
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:14:35 -
[180] - Quote
you know im usually the first to make fun of people for being butthurt and I am having a good time watching people be butthurt
BUT
CCP if you keep "fixing" things in a way that isn't fun then even if you are making a more mechanically/conceptually sound game people will play it less because it's not fun
this issue doesn't affect me because I mostly fly solo but I can see how what you're trying to do technically works but it's just not fun for a lot of people and having a fun game is important |
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31713
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:15:36 -
[181] - Quote
The probe bonus to Tactical Destroyers that always seemed out of place finally makes sense.
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
|
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
239
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:16:12 -
[182] - Quote
Hey remember the last time you tried to "fix" bombers and proposed a change to break all cloaky gameplay entirely which had to be abandoned? If bombers are so broken that you need to break other things to fix them, remove bomb launchers. Entirely. |
Jeremiah Cole
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
20
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:16:18 -
[183] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: Regarding movement fleets though WH space, we have something we're working on for this. That said some of the feedback we've received is mixed. Reducing power projection though WH space (for both WH residence & passes though) not seen as all bad.
I fail to see how power projection through WH space needs to be reduced at all. When you take into consideration the fact that wormholes aren't always going to go where you want and that due to mass constraints you can't just warp six dreads to a hole and jump someone, our ability to project power is already hindered in comparison to that of other capital weilding k-space entities.
Our only advantage is being able to take a capital from one region in New Eden and move it across space with only a fraction of the time and fatigue, and even then we are (once again) constrained my wormhole mass. There are A LOT of wormholes that can only be used by certain sizes of ship, and depending on the mass of said ships, very low Before engaging we have to stop and consider what we're willing to commit to a fight because there's only so much we can. We have to take into consideration the locals and their ability to project defensive capitals and fleets, and if that's worth the risk.
Null sec entities using wormholes to move around? Imagine that, wormholes actually getting used in a way they're meant to. Null sec entities can also use wormholes to move capitals around, but even then they can bring (at most) 3 capitals through a wormhole before it closes. And no, supers can't fit.
As far as subcapital fleets go, you (once again), have to be worried about the mass you'll be using to traverse wormholes with whatever fleet you have. A fleet of 20-50 pilots traversing wormholes can significantly affect the mass of the wormhole, so when in a fleet you're limited in what you can bring and how much of what you can bring. I can't tell you how many times we've had to tell people to actually STAY HOME instead of come out and PVP with us because a wormhole went Critical when we could have benefited from their presence in fleet.
Did I mention polarity, which prevents pilots from crashing back to a wormhole constantly in an effort to survive a gate camp? You don't have that with gates.
There is already a severe lack of content in wormhole space, and this change only works to drive out smaller entities and those looking to establish a foothold in W-Space. |
Valterra Craven
572
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:19:53 -
[184] - Quote
This seems like a rather silly change just to nerf bombers.
You're hurting people in WH, Highsec, and lowsec just so the fleet bombers get on grid 10-30 seconds slower than before.
I don't understand why everyone must suffer when the desired outcome won't be all that much to begin with. You still have bomber fleets, you still have all of the problems with bomber fleets, with just a medicore delay to target?
I have two accounts with which I use to run missions in highsec, a tanky bs for killing big targets, and high dps quick shooting bc/bs to kill things like frigs and cruisers more quickly. Yet I now have to suffer so that in the end you achieve barely noticeable changes to fleet bombers?
I really think you need to come up with a way not to throw the baby out with the bath water. Not everybody plays in large groups of fleet metas that unbalance the game. |
Alundil
Isogen 5
980
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:21:16 -
[185] - Quote
Black Canary Jnr wrote:Much moaning, most of it not justified, lacking real criticism, and can be solved by using a cloaky scanner alt as the warpin. Alts Online..... intensifies
I'm right behind you
|
VENUS XY
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:22:43 -
[186] - Quote
IMO this will lead to mainly 2 things, unkillable ogb t3's and FC's continuing to run a "1 man show". No one will want to fly a useless probing ship and not get on any killmails, you are just making the FC run one more account. Small gang pvp takes a hit as well as you are just reducing the amount of fights that can be forced, and you need to force fights in this game. This change directly reduces content for a significant playerbase while further aggravating other issues in the game. -1 |
Syrias Bizniz
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
404
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:22:46 -
[187] - Quote
This will not change much. The list of people carrying responsibility in a Fleet will rise from 2 (FC + Scout) to 4: FC, Scout, and 2 moving perches in ceptors, repositioning themselves on grid as needed and functioning as a warpable beacon moving at 6km/s.
|
Harkin Issier
Sleeper Slumber Party Test Alliance Please Ignore
27
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:24:43 -
[188] - Quote
CCP tell me, what is the lifeblood of group PVP?
It's the FCs.
Now, what is the position in all of EVE most prone to burnout?
FCing.
Now, why would you ever think that making an FC's life harder as an (ineffective) side-swipe at nerfing bomber pilots would be a good idea? |
Villa Deaver
The Desolate Order Brave Collective
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:25:10 -
[189] - Quote
Airi Cho wrote:Scott Ormands wrote:There HAS to be a solution that isn't more alts. They are called other players doing that role.
That's a tiny, tiny bit optimistic. Chances that it's going to be another player doing that and not an alt of a player that really wants to be doing something other than being the "warpin guy" are about 0%. |
Two FistTom
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:26:33 -
[190] - Quote
Here is an idea CCP:
Stop wasting time coming up with dumb "little" changes like this that will take away game play and focus on things that are far more important like new "good" content. Taking a knife to fleet warping is not good content. If you are trying to make the underdog have a chance in large bulb fights there are several more logical methods. All I see this doing is making playings go inactive for the summer until you guys also realize this idea is dumb. |
|
Elenahina
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
737
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:26:39 -
[191] - Quote
Tim Nering wrote:fleet warps arent harming anything. does life have to get harder?
as someone who multi boxxes.......UGH.
Op success.
Agony Unleashed is Recruiting - Small Gang PvP in Null Sec
|
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort DARKNESS.
86
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:27:00 -
[192] - Quote
What the serious 'F'? What part of the game play tied to this felt so stagnating that it deserved such a nerf?
I hate bomber wings as much as the next man, but this literally changes nothing! Even for brawler fleets this changes NOTHING!!!!
Bomber wing: 1) FC gets a hit, warps in @30/40 and swings to proper position for wing. 2) Wing then warps to him, cloaks don't break cloaks so element of surprise remains, just slows down each wave until they get some practice then nothing changes. 3) Bomb and warp off like normal.
Brawler (EVERY OTHER) fleet: 1) Prober gets a hit, warps in ~0-30 depending on angle. Will likely be on grid just like they are now - cloaked- to see angle of approach to direction of enemy fleet movement. 2) Wing is already aligned to hostile fleet. Prober lands, fleet warp to cloaked member. Prober quickly warps back to ping to avoid decloak. 3) Engage as per the norm.
Even for PLEXes, player with journal entry/probe hit goes in first, other warp to him. Exactly as we do now.
So I ask again, why are you wasting our dev's time with these worthless side projects? Whatever team you had working on this could have easily been working on something more valuable than this. Such as: - Interactive mining system - keep us awake! - Anom/plex overhaul - give us something new! - True sec balance/removal/rework - fozzie, your sov mechanics makes this a must... - Anything from THIS thread. - Making coffee |
Winter Archipelago
Furtherance.
374
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:28:04 -
[193] - Quote
So, two serious questions as I'm thinking more about this:
First, this is an absolutely massive buff to the defenders. Having to essentially sit and wait compared to having to coordinate warps to land at the same time is such a different beast that it's not even fair trying to compare them. Is this an intended outcome despite the past changes that were more oriented towards /weakening/ defenders?
Secondly, how much speculation has been put into how this will affect mixed-size fleets? Battleships and Battlecruisers were already seeing significantly less use, but with their slow warp speed, they'll be landing a significant amount of time after the faster ships. Even if everyone is just off-grid from the intended warp-to and is already aligned, the slower start-up and slow-down that larger ships have mean that frigs and cruisers will have been on-grid and vulnerable for a fair amount of time. Combined with latency issues and missed voice commands, I'm concerned that a change like this will end up homogenizing fleets even more than they already are.
Planning a trip to Thera? Check out http://eve-scout.com/ for a list of the current connections.
Once you've made your choice, join the channels EVE-Scout or Furtherance Public and request a scout to make sure your connection is clear!
|
Scott Ormands
The Desolate Order Brave Collective
33
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:29:38 -
[194] - Quote
Airi Cho wrote:Scott Ormands wrote:There HAS to be a solution that isn't more alts. They are called other players doing that role.
As far as I can tell you've never lived in a WH (quick corp history and KB check) we generally don't have spare corp members that I can just leave sitting cloaked watching, I need them in their best ship ready to fly.
|
Ransu Asanari
Powder and Ball Alchemists Union Mordus Angels
243
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:30:12 -
[195] - Quote
I appreciate the goals this change is trying to accomplish - reducing the effectiveness of mass bomber wings, making sniping fleets a bit more effective, and making fleet combat more interactive and dynamic on the part of the individual pilots. All good things. Making your T1 Tackle Frigate, or Interceptor feel as important as in the "I Was There" video is a good thing.
I'm glad to see some of the concerns already acknowledged - catching and holding Slippery Petes and Off Grid Boosters. The Tactical Destroyers having the ability to fit Expanded Probe Launchers helps a bit with this, as they can tank much better than a Covops Frigate. Scanning down a Pete should be possible with a T3 Destroyer - if you have to use a Covops frigate with Virtues, it will just get melted, or they'll move before you can land on grid and provide a warp-in.
My main concern is with high-end wormhole sites. You absolutely have to warp your entire fleet in together, because you need to put up cap chain and get logistics up as fast as possible, or you'll lose ships. This is the same as with some missions and Incursions, but in most of those cases there are acceleration gates you can all warp to and prepare to take the gate together. This isn't the case in W-Space - even with the scanned sites, frequently we have to make warp-in bookmarks closer to the Sleepers to warp the fleet to.
Because of the current POS mechanics, in W-Space, it is beneficial to have multiple smaller corps to restrict access to assets. This change will hurt them more, as well as NPSI groups.
Sharing corp bookmarks is already incredibly painful - copying them from corp to personal, then dragging them a few at a time into vouchers and storing in a can is horrible busywork.
Instead, I would suggest the following:
- As listed above by Phoenix Jones, rather than the proposed changes, instead limit fleet warps to Squad Leaders.
- Give us a way to manually sync corp bookmarks - currently it takes up to 5 minutes and/or a session change to update. Give us a "Sync" button so we can speed this up.
- Give us Alliance and/or Fleet bookmarks - we can create a folder, and designate it to share to an entire fleet. Even if pilots have to manually warp to the bookmarks (they will be more engaged), it won't slow down combat as much.
- Make it MUCH easier to share bookmarks - currently pulling a few bookmarks out of 25,000 manually is incredibly painful.
Powder and Ball Alchemists Union - "Turning Lead into Gold since 2008"
|
Lt Shard
Team Pizza Good at this Game
8
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:31:28 -
[196] - Quote
Krops Vont wrote:Please run with this idea. No one liked wormhole changes but they came and came hard. W-space is still teaming with life. EVE always needs change no matter how much players grog about it.
The wormhole changes added content and I have thoroughly enjoyed catching rolling capitals because of it. Sparks fights.
I cant see what this change adds. It only takes away. Someone please tell me. |
Long Muppet
Lazerhawks
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:31:37 -
[197] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Tatsuj Khan wrote:Suggestion: Make corporate wormhole BMs "public" just as gates are, and allow fleets to warp from WH to WH in a coherent group. Otherwise as the Dev proposal stands now, the fleet can't work together as they land because ships are strung out throughout the system. This allows the enemy to pick off small faster ships first as the landing fleet straggles in.
If wormhole BMs are made "public", it should significantly lessen the damage this nerf does to WH corp membership and fleet ops. I recall somewhere in the sov changes thread, devs stated that changes should enhance game play rather than add unnecessary difficulties and tedium. This is a great suggestion. Building on it - allowing fleet warping to WH probe results could also work. There are a couple of questions we'd like to thrash out and get more feedback on relating to power projection in WH space before we make a change like this.
Maybe you should get more feedback relating to power projection in WH space before you make the fleet warp changes? K-Space residents have the benefit of fleet warping cohesively to gates, WH residents do not.
CCP Larrikin wrote:Quiggle Queue wrote:[Is it really "power projection", just to be able to warp as a group to a "stargate"? That seems pretty much standard travel outside of wormholes. You still can fleet warp a group to a stargate =)
This is the point Quiggle was trying to make. Is it really considered WH "power projection" if K-space residents can do the same thing with stargates.
Ultimately I feel like this is yet another idea which only negatively impacts small gang PVP, but does nothing to impact super large fleets. Large coalition fleets will have no problem dedicating a scout 1 of their 255 to be a scout. To those of us who fly with 4 or 5 people .. that's a large sacrifice. |
Syrias Bizniz
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
404
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:32:16 -
[198] - Quote
Winter Archipelago wrote:So, two serious questions as I'm thinking more about this:
First, this is an absolutely massive buff to the defenders. Having to essentially sit and wait compared to having to coordinate warps to land at the same time is such a different beast that it's not even fair trying to compare them. Is this an intended outcome despite the past changes that were more oriented towards /weakening/ defenders?
Secondly, how much speculation has been put into how this will affect mixed-size fleets? Battleships and Battlecruisers were already seeing significantly less use, but with their slow warp speed, they'll be landing a significant amount of time after the faster ships. Even if everyone is just off-grid from the intended warp-to and is already aligned, the slower start-up and slow-down that larger ships have mean that frigs and cruisers will have been on-grid and vulnerable for a fair amount of time. Combined with latency issues and missed voice commands, I'm concerned that a change like this will end up homogenizing fleets even more than they already are.
No idea why your fleet would get seperated, tbh, since you can still Fleetwarp them. You just need 1 (one) other fleetmember as your warpin first. Or warp to celestials. |
Darth Bex
Sudden Buggery Prolapse.
25
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:32:40 -
[199] - Quote
From a purely selfish wormholer perspective, this change is just going to double my travel time while I wait for alliance members to warp to me, bookmark, repeat.
If we had Alliance bookmarks, however...
Disciple of Bob
|
Tyr Dolorem
Snuff Box Snuffed Out
139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:33:47 -
[200] - Quote
Jeremiah Cole wrote:
There is already a severe lack of content in wormhole space, and this change only works to drive out smaller entities and those looking to establish a foothold in W-Space.
There might be more if you hadn't blued everyone lol. |
|
Valterra Craven
572
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:34:24 -
[201] - Quote
I just had a thought. If this whole change is really to nerf time on grid for bombers, why don't you ya know do something slightly simpler like nerfing their warp accl and speed? |
Teeva Nakisti
In Your Base Killin Your Doods Waterboard Comedy Tour
8
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:34:36 -
[202] - Quote
CCP, this change is bad and you should feel bad.
I regularly use fleet warps to bookmarks(I always bookmark probe results before warping), to get in and out of wormholes. I am not warping a fleet of people around, only my own alts. You are removing the ability for me to effectively move myself around in non-combat situations.
Players use fleet warps to bookmarks and probe results for all sorts of reasons, not simply to engage in pvp combat.
And as far as pvp goes, this change goes against the idea of doctrine, where all players in the same class of ship, with the same fittings, who have trained the same skills in order to fly, all must warp and land at the same time at a specific range from the enemy.
If you want to look at a mechanic that is garbage and needs changing or removing, take a hard look at the Regroup command that FCs have. And if this change you are making is to work, hot drops must also be nerfed, or that will become the preferred method of engaging an enemy.
Stop nerfing mechanics that are only 'related' to the problems you face. If you have a problem with bomber fleets, then MAN UP and nerf specifically the bomber class of ships, not game mechanics that everyone uses for purposes far broader than you can see(your own dev responses in this thread show this to be a fact).
As a final note, since you(CCP) seem to have the ideal way to play the game already in your mind, can you enlighten us with your vision of what eve should be? Because it certainly seems, as of late, that you are specifically forcing changes(nerfs) on us that the broad community isn't asking for. Also, stop listening to the ideas of a single CSM member, if the majority of the CSM doesn't champion an idea, then the idea is not worthy. |
Digiblast
The Collective B O R G
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:34:48 -
[203] - Quote
Can we protest this change?
Atleast part of it..
Can we ask the president of Iceland to give us the option to vote on this???
|
Long Muppet
Lazerhawks
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:34:51 -
[204] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:The change restriction is too high and affects too many areas of life in Eve, from Kspace, to Null, to Wspace. I would propose a smaller iteration to address the concerns of how fleet warp mechanics now work.
- Permit Squad Commanders in a fleet to fleet-warp their squad to bookmarks and probed sigs.
Essentially you move the capabilities of the overall fleet and wing commander down to the squad level. You remove the big flying balls of hurt down to decisions made by the squad commander, permitting them to decide on tactical warp ins, locations and fleet warps for their squad. You restrict fleet warps down to a 10 man team, with a individual per 10 man team making individual decisions for that 10 man team, to support the fleet efforts. Fleet and Wing commanders would lose this ability to warp entire armada's to bookmarks and scanned sigs, but permit smaller skirmish groups/squads to warp their small group to them. You move the leadership role of getting tacticals and flying to the leader of the squad, reducing the blob down to at most, 10 pilots, vs the 100+ null runs into. You now create a new leadership dynamic, and permit new people to have a stepping stone to becoming a Fleet Commander. Squad Leaders gain power, and have a relevant role verses just being a booster for their fleetmates. I'd start with baby steps first, commonly known as "A Iteration" (Thanks for that CCP Rise). Remove the ability for fleet commanders and wing commanders from warping entire groups to bookmarks and scan probes, and reduce it down to the squad level. Try that first. See how it actually works.
This is a beautiful suggestion for an alternative. I hope it receives the attention it deserves.
|
Syrias Bizniz
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
404
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:35:35 -
[205] - Quote
Darth Bex wrote:From a purely selfish wormholer perspective, this change is just going to double my travel time while I wait for alliance members to warp to me, bookmark, repeat.
If we had Alliance bookmarks, however...
Covops with warpspeed rigs maybe? As a +1? No? No scouting? Just blind warps around space? Cool. |
Lucius Kalari
Limited Power Inc It Must Be Jelly Cause Jam Don't Shake
9
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:36:47 -
[206] - Quote
I get the feeling that this is going to be another "Hyperion" issue where the community tell CCP that what they're proposing is stupid, but they ignore us all and go ahead with what they proposing.
FC doesn't do everything, members of the fleet are doing things as well, so I don't really know where that has come from.
Phoenix Jones wrote:Or you can just cut 99% of the bull out of it and restrict all bookmark and probing fleet warps to just the Squad Commander.
Want to warp the fleet, the squad commander in charge of the 10 people can do it. The wing commander and the fleet commander cannot warp the group in whole.
You move the leadership role of getting tacticals and flying to the leader of the squad, reducing the blob down to at most, 10 pilots, vs the 100+ null runs into.
You now create a new leadership dynamic, and permit new people to have a stepping stone to becoming a fc.
Squad Leaders gain power, and have a relevant role (vs just being a booster).
I'd start with baby steps first, commonly known as "A Iteration" (Thanks for that CCP Rise).
Remove the ability for fleet commanders and wing commanders from warping entire groups to bookmarks and scan probes, and reduce it down to the squad level.
Try that first. See how it actually works.
Yes this sounds like a great idea, and would be great for your "need more people in fleet to do more things" argument.
As for not being able to warp to bookmarks if you don't have it, how about making them instantly available for corp then? I think up to a minute is acceptable for bookmark to sync up, but realistically that wouldn't happen because of latency issues. However for alliances, maybe it's about time for alliance bookmarks? You'd need multiple scouts from each corp in the alliance to scan down the exact same thing the other scout is scanning, which seems like wasted time. So rather than not being able to fleet warp to bookmarks, why not take Phoenix Jones' idea and make squad leaders warp the squads in instead? Change is always good, but half the time what is proposed is infuriating. Why not just ask for feedback about things? The blunt approach of "We're changing stuff just coz" is so annoying because I love EVE and it's an amazing game, but why can't you look at things in the game that need fixing that is way higher up on the priority list? Because I really don't think fleet warping is that much of an issue.
Hi, I'm Lucius Kalari and I'm .LIMP
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
11348
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:38:32 -
[207] - Quote
Dunk Dinkle wrote:It appears that to nerf bombers, you are nerfing all fleets.
CCP applying a sledgehammer to something that could have used a scalpel? Wish I could say this is a 1st. |
Alundil
Isogen 5
981
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:39:24 -
[208] - Quote
Krops Vont wrote:Please run with this idea. No one liked wormhole changes but they came and came hard. W-space is still teaming with escalation farmers. EVE always needs change no matter how much players grog about it. Fixed that for you
I'm right behind you
|
Steven Hackett
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
146
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:40:32 -
[209] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: Both of these points are solid. Corbexx brought these up while we where talking to the CSM about the change. Regarding slowing down the speed of sites, given the potential profitability of wormhole space, we don't consider this a major negative. Regarding movement fleets though WH space, we have something we're working on for this. That said some of the feedback we've received is mixed. Reducing power projection though WH space (for both WH residence & passes though) not seen as all bad.
The speed of the fleet will, if these changes goes trough, be dependent on how fast the corp bookmark propagates. Imo. that is a horrible design goal and I hope you agree? Please don't make us dependent on the worst parts of your game.
Now, we can use fleetwarp to put outrfleet at that BM our scout just made for us. With these changes, our fleet will have to sit there and wait for 10-15 minuts until CCP decided that the last fleet member could get the bookmark. Your bad code/lack of processing power/whatever it is, will become the important factor of the engagement instead of the pilots skills to quickly formup, get in position etc.
We are already working against the time here due to those horrible changes you did to how WHs spawn and how the scanner automatically warns the people about new signatures. These changes would make those horrible changes even worse. |
Sasha Sen
Hull Zero Two Reckoning Star Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:42:08 -
[210] - Quote
Shadowforge Dawkins wrote:AAR; Venture kill- yes I know who cares, but the process on this I find important, Because without the fleet warp, If this was a guy in a Relic/data site, he would have been done and gone by the time bookmarks popped. and as for the gas, gas clouds decloak you. so getting a warp in to a person can be very difficult. as this tale shall show.
So I call in the guys and they bring a Jackdaw with dual scram and a few other ships. Becuase he is in the center of the cloud I cannot provide warp-in as I will be de-cloaked and he will see me and run off.
So you cant manually pilot your 500 m/s cloaked prospect around the cloud and line up his ship between you and the wh your gang is popping out of? |
|
spaceking7591
Collapsed Out Pandemic Legion
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:42:13 -
[211] - Quote
i don't see the reason that you can't warp fleet members to missions. |
Oracle of Machina
The Scope Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:43:12 -
[212] - Quote
This fixes a problem that isn't a problem. |
Outlaw46
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Circle-Of-Two
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:43:39 -
[213] - Quote
Why do you think making the job of content creators harder is a good way to help a game in which most of your loyal customers for years think you are slowly killing this game like aids. |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
276
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:45:26 -
[214] - Quote
Hero Tackling-« just got heroer . . . |
Thirdsin
Intergalactic Fight Club Gentlemen's.Club
9
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:45:51 -
[215] - Quote
Long Muppet wrote:Phoenix Jones wrote:The change restriction is too high and affects too many areas of life in Eve, from Kspace, to Null, to Wspace. I would propose a smaller iteration to address the concerns of how fleet warp mechanics now work.
- Permit Squad Commanders in a fleet to fleet-warp their squad to bookmarks and probed sigs.
Essentially you move the capabilities of the overall fleet and wing commander down to the squad level. You remove the big flying balls of hurt down to decisions made by the squad commander, permitting them to decide on tactical warp ins, locations and fleet warps for their squad. You restrict fleet warps down to a 10 man team, with a individual per 10 man team making individual decisions for that 10 man team, to support the fleet efforts. Fleet and Wing commanders would lose this ability to warp entire armada's to bookmarks and scanned sigs, but permit smaller skirmish groups/squads to warp their small group to them. You move the leadership role of getting tacticals and flying to the leader of the squad, reducing the blob down to at most, 10 pilots, vs the 100+ null runs into. You now create a new leadership dynamic, and permit new people to have a stepping stone to becoming a Fleet Commander. Squad Leaders gain power, and have a relevant role verses just being a booster for their fleetmates. I'd start with baby steps first, commonly known as "A Iteration" (Thanks for that CCP Rise). Remove the ability for fleet commanders and wing commanders from warping entire groups to bookmarks and scan probes, and reduce it down to the squad level. Try that first. See how it actually works. This is a beautiful suggestion for an alternative. I hope it receives the attention it deserves.
signed
|
Shadowforge Dawkins
Catastrophic Overview Failure Brave Collective
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:49:13 -
[216] - Quote
Sasha Sen wrote:Shadowforge Dawkins wrote:AAR; Venture kill- yes I know who cares, but the process on this I find important, Because without the fleet warp, If this was a guy in a Relic/data site, he would have been done and gone by the time bookmarks popped. and as for the gas, gas clouds decloak you. so getting a warp in to a person can be very difficult. as this tale shall show.
So I call in the guys and they bring a Jackdaw with dual scram and a few other ships. Becuase he is in the center of the cloud I cannot provide warp-in as I will be de-cloaked and he will see me and run off.
So you cant manually pilot your 500 m/s cloaked prospect around the cloud and line up his ship between you and the wh your gang is popping out of?
As you probably know, some gas clouds are very large, sitting inside the center of a cloud puts you between 3-10 kilometers from the edge of the cloud. what side of the cloud you are on is irrelevant. It is a bait technique I use in wolf rayets using my prospect. because I can see them coming.
Remember, decloak range is 2.5 KM where as the gas cloud gets you at 3-10 KM. not gonna work.
Having a Sync button for bookmarks would make this problem lesser allowing us to warp to the center of the cloud. |
Winter Archipelago
Furtherance.
374
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:52:00 -
[217] - Quote
Syrias Bizniz wrote: No idea why your fleet would get seperated, tbh, since you can still Fleetwarp them. You just need 1 (one) other fleetmember as your warpin first. Or warp to celestials.
Not all groups can afford to spare the extra member to function as a scout, and even if you're bouncing to a nearby celestial first, you're still stuck trying to stagger your warps so that your slower ships get in at the same time as your faster ships.
As I said above, latency and misheard / missed commands are going to become an even bigger threat to a smaller group.
Planning a trip to Thera? Check out http://eve-scout.com/ for a list of the current connections.
Once you've made your choice, join the channels EVE-Scout or Furtherance Public and request a scout to make sure your connection is clear!
|
T'aun
47th Space Militia
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:55:26 -
[218] - Quote
This is a terrible idea.
At least leave the ability to squad warp members to a bookmark/probe results or enable the bookmarks/probe results to be broadcast-able to those on grid to warp themselves to. |
ManGiNa1
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:55:52 -
[219] - Quote
[quote=CCP Larrikin]Hi Gentle Space Foke,
There was no need to call the player base @#$%'s
FOKE isn't a very nice word http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Foke
yep... seems the player base of "Foke/s" aren't happy and i'm drowning in the flool of Tears
thanks FOLKS |
Vala Ancalagon
The Order of Thelemic Ascension Novus Dominatum
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:58:01 -
[220] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:The change restriction is too high and affects too many areas of life in Eve, from Kspace, to Null, to Wspace. I would propose a smaller iteration to address the concerns of how fleet warp mechanics now work.
- Permit Squad Commanders in a fleet to fleet-warp their squad to bookmarks and probed sigs.
Essentially you move the capabilities of the overall fleet and wing commander down to the squad level. You remove the big flying balls of hurt down to decisions made by the squad commander, permitting them to decide on tactical warp ins, locations and fleet warps for their squad. You restrict fleet warps down to a 10 man team, with a individual per 10 man team making individual decisions for that 10 man team, to support the fleet efforts. Fleet and Wing commanders would lose this ability to warp entire armada's to bookmarks and scanned sigs, but permit smaller skirmish groups/squads to warp their small group to them. You move the leadership role of getting tacticals and flying to the leader of the squad, reducing the blob down to at most, 10 pilots, vs the 100+ null runs into. You now create a new leadership dynamic, and permit new people to have a stepping stone to becoming a Fleet Commander. Squad Leaders gain power, and have a relevant role verses just being a booster for their fleetmates. I'd start with baby steps first, commonly known as "A Iteration" (Thanks for that CCP Rise). Remove the ability for fleet commanders and wing commanders from warping entire groups to bookmarks and scan probes, and reduce it down to the squad level. Try that first. See how it actually works.
Sounds much better, and actually will create a need for 2nd tier leaders who will have to pay attention in fleets! |
|
Shadowforge Dawkins
Catastrophic Overview Failure Brave Collective
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:59:16 -
[221] - Quote
So a couple of things to fix for the Bookmarks considering the loss of our fleet warping capabilities in WH space. Please at least add the ability to -Sync button for our bookmark files -possibly as noted by Tatsuj Khan- make a public BM convention -Increase the number of Bookmarks allowed in a Corp. 500 is a burden to large wh corps with 5-8 people scouting |
Arbitos
GamCorp Almost Broken
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 00:59:52 -
[222] - Quote
Going to go back to the beginning of this thread and start reading it again, for some reason I read it as fleet warping is being removed ?! |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2480
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:00:43 -
[223] - Quote
Arbitos wrote:Going to go back to the beginning of this thread and start reading it again, for some reason I read it as fleet warping is being removed ?! no, just restricted |
BobFromMarketing
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
76
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:02:51 -
[224] - Quote
This makes me so hard |
Arbitos
GamCorp Almost Broken
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:09:43 -
[225] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Arbitos wrote:Going to go back to the beginning of this thread and start reading it again, for some reason I read it as fleet warping is being removed ?! no, just the useful parts.
Fixed it for you :p |
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
261
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:11:51 -
[226] - Quote
I remember when we could not warp to zero... BMs were eveywhere then CCP fixed that issue.
Now people will remember when we cannot fleet warp to locations they do not have marked... meaning there will be a duplication and expansion of BMs in many cases. This seems a step backwards. How retro are the navigation systems in our ships that we cannot warp to a location the fleet commander effectively broadcasts to us?
If I can get the warp co-ordinates to warp to a fleet member, why am I unable to obtain the warp co-ordinates to warp to a location specified by the commander? From a science fiction and technical point of view, your change is not making a lot of sense.
What issue are you really trying to solve, and are you really certain that this really the best way to solve it? |
Wedge Rancer
Grimm Hounds SONS of BANE
37
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:13:49 -
[227] - Quote
No, just no. This would almost destroy places like bombers bar |
Midnight Hope
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
178
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:16:33 -
[228] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hopelesshobo wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote: As announced on the o7 show we are making some changes to fleet warp. Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders & Squad Commanders will no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own. This includes GÇô
Bookmarks Does this include corporation bookmarks that the person in the same corp could warp to? Yes. You can only fleet warp to things that any member of your fleet could warp to, no matter what corp or alliances they are a part of.
This means the dead of ganks in WH space. No more have the scout combat probe a ship, have the fleet jump in and fleet warp them to it.
Thanks for the nerf to WH space Fozzie. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2513
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:17:48 -
[229] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members. I don't know if making something like navigating a fleet more annoying and inconvenient is the best way to accomplish that.
I don't think it's possible to make the game fun by nerfing stuff and removing features. |
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots Black Legion.
306
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:18:12 -
[230] - Quote
Wheat +1 Chaff -1 |
|
Dorothy Bockhop
Dead Space Investments. Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:19:23 -
[231] - Quote
I feel in the age of spaceships we would have a navigation computer that would be capable of warping to a set of coordinates or maybe that's the toaster I can't tell.
You are trying to fix a problem by imposing artificial limits on the sandbox not only is this bad game design it limits what small groups can and can't do. This is just a long line of poorly thought out game design decisions that only hurt smaller groups with little to no effect on large blobs.
If you think bombers are a sever enough issue maybe you should look at changing the way bombers work. If you think instawarp t3's are a problem maybe you should look at ways to fix the t3's (maybe interdiction nullification wan't such a good idea after all).
CCP, please fix the problems in a considerate manner not in a blanket game design change that will make everyone's life that much more miserable. |
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
1162
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:21:26 -
[232] - Quote
+1 this is a excellent change that will help to open up combat/fleet tactics. I supported and pushed hard for this.
@EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny
|
Lt Shard
Team Pizza Good at this Game
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:23:43 -
[233] - 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.
You seem to have forgotten wormholes m8.
Also explains why every pl poster here is for it. |
Bristoll2
Infinite Point Nulli Secunda
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:26:47 -
[234] - Quote
stupid changed |
MrBrookes
Umbrella C0rp Whatever.
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:28:33 -
[235] - Quote
Ok so what about the person who has multi accounts in this game.....................
did u ever think of them??? We rely on the fleet warp to get us from point A to B.
Everyone in this game HAS A ALT and enjoys the fleet warp option to help move things around. It just makes the gaming that much easier and once again U SCREW IT ALL UP all because you are thinking of one group and forgetting the rest of us.
|
Shadowforge Dawkins
Catastrophic Overview Failure Brave Collective
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:31:46 -
[236] - 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.
If by excellent you meant having 'squads' warping to bookmarks... ok. that is more responsibility. completely nullifying our ability to move as a unit? large AND small? no, terrible idea.
Remember, 'ops' can be squads of 4-10. in wormhole space, that is a normal group size. what you did to fix a known space problem is now slapping everyone in the face. All the way to the smallest groups living in wormhole space where many don't dare tread.
Sure these massive corps in Null sec may be bitter, but where you are forcing actual game play for the blop groups. you are doing 10 times the damage to the small units that are actually looking for a fight, not outright slaughter. such as wormhole space. |
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
132
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:34:59 -
[237] - Quote
The nerf bat swingeth and much was hurt, in a messy collateral damage way that was so very bad.
Ok, lets talk about the elephant sized goon in the room. A change which appears to be mostly aimed at nerfing bombers is really a massive nerf to large null sec fleets composed of players from multiple alliances banding together for mutual benefit, cooperation etc. Those in support of these changes are two groups from what I can see. 1 is the stereotypical low sec pvp king, the type who roles around solo pvping in a very blingy ship (with an off grid booster, cyno/jam falcon alt and back up triage) who inhabit the EN24 comments and can't make a post without saying "grr goons" and Pandemic Legion. Both groups are generally very high sp players who would benefit from not being blobbed by a thousand rifters or 250 Celestis.
Many others have identified that the law of unintended consequences is running rampant here, I have no need to add to them beyond saying why does CCP promote a change that is disproportionately hard on allowing new players to group pvp? Many groupd make a fetish of praising the newbie hero tackling without a care for their survival. They are too new to have the montjs worth of trying to be a pro prober and warping to fleet members isnt that easy at first.
To be bluntly honest, this thread is a disappointing distraction after CCP backtracked on giving us variable timers on fozziesov, which was a massive fuxk you to us AUTZ. So get to work fixing that, before you break the game further with this poorly planned change with far reaching un fun tedium inducing consequences. Dumbing everything down to low sec FW pvp is not what I want to play. If i did, I would have a FW alt.
Disclaimer: no you can't have my stuff. No tears, my tears cure cancer and I don't want to put all the oncologist out of work.
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
Kenrailae
Fallen Reich
353
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:36:12 -
[238] - 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.
That would be an opinion, one that doesn't seem to be very well supported. Killing strategic bookmarking, hurting wormholes and high sec PVE, and throwing it behind a veil of 'supposed better tactics(which killing defenders strategic bookmarking doesn't do) and 'nerfing bombers' is not an acceptable price for it.
The Law is a point of View
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
286
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:40:03 -
[239] - 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. Pushing for this change is racist against F1. Bow your head in shame!
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
2511
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:40:31 -
[240] - Quote
So a mixed fleet will have to make sure they have an extra guy on grid if they want the entire fleet to land together??
Annoying but ok...
What about a button that allows us to warp at the same speed as the slowest squad member?
EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
|
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31715
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:42:44 -
[241] - Quote
This changes very little for me. What was the theorycrafting behind this change, what is it supposed to do? With the exception of solo players and multiboxers, it feels like a nerf to everyone else... and not even bombers in particular.
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
|
Budrick3
POS Party Low-Class
81
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:42:46 -
[242] - Quote
Quote:You can fleet warp to a fleet member already at the wormhole.
CCP Larrikin
What is the difference between having someone in place to warp to and just warping to a bookmark other than making it a pain in the butt for smaller corps that may not have the man power?
Typical Theoretical wormhole Scenario :
Wormhole group A wants to fight WH Group B
Group A FC orders fleet to Jump in with Bubble up., and is now sitting in Group B's home.
Group B has limited numbers and can not spare anyone in utility ships but wants to take the fight. Group B will be using a carrier due to lack of numbers with t3 cruiser support and a few t3 desi sprinkled in for tackle. Group B FC with new mechanic says fleet align..... warp in 3,2,1, warp. Fleet warps and t3 desi land first and get wrecked off the field, cruisers land about 15 seconds later, and broadcasts for armor are flying in, but there is no one to answer because the carrier is still in warp and will land in about 30 seconds. Mean while, the fleet is disorganized, FC is dead, and many sacrifices are made to Bob because CCP removed the ability to Fleet warp to a bookmark.
Scenario 2 :
Alliance calls for back up on a capital escalation fleet, and they have to move quickly because there is only one more site left. The entire fleet makes it to high sec connecting K space connection. The fleet running capital escalations are 5 wh deep in, but because of the new mechanic, the single alliance scout that used to just fleet warp everyone to the next connection has to pause at every intersection because of these new changes. As a result of the new mechanic, and the year after year of broken promises regarding alliance bookmarks, it causes a missed opportunity.
The suggested change does more harm than good, and is almost grounds for another jita monument burn. |
MekaJonna
Nehalem Inc.
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:47:08 -
[243] - Quote
I don't think this is the right direction. This is going to hurt W-Space
|
Unezka Turigahl
Det Som Engang Var
775
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:52:07 -
[244] - Quote
Well this is going to be annoying.
Occasionally I'll fleet up with a noob and take them around to hisec combat sites. Having to now warp in first, then tell them they are clear to warp to me, then wait for them to land... May not seem like a big deal. But the extra process and wait for every single site is probably enough of an annoyance to make me just not bother anymore.
Also, running missions occasionally for standings was already making me want to shoot myself. Now having to wait for alts to land, or just single-boxing them... ehhhh to hell with it. |
MrBrookes
Umbrella C0rp Whatever.
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:54:27 -
[245] - Quote
How bout squad warp, let us have squad warp, atleast then the multi's of the game can have fun as usual. |
Budrick3
POS Party Low-Class
81
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 01:58:08 -
[246] - 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.
Good luck getting re-elected. |
Beidorion eldwardan
Corporation Danmark Tactical Narcotics Team
39
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:01:02 -
[247] - Quote
i was going to make a post trying to reason with you but after having read the general attitude of your posts i will do as you want me to
sit back and decide if i want to " be a good costomer and pay my subs and shut up when fozzie ( would have called him what we normally do but you are somewhat sensitive about that ) or if i will start scaling down on how many chars i will keep.
|
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
231
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:01:37 -
[248] - Quote
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 think he will do OK :) |
Kazaheid Zaknafein
Mara's Hounds
28
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:01:50 -
[249] - Quote
And thus ends the days of shepherding noobs in fleets around eve. |
KanmanDS
Sanguine Penguin Rote Kapelle
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:04:06 -
[250] - Quote
Everyone else has already clearly illustrated the grossly negative impact this change will have on nearly all aspects of game play. This is so clearly the worst decision CCP has made in years, that is all boils down to this single sentence:
If you make this change, I will unsubscribe, because you are no longer selling a product I am interested in purchasing. |
|
Gyges Skyeye
Delusions of Adequacy Get Off My Lawn
21
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:06:52 -
[251] - Quote
This restriction will need to be taken outside behind the barn and shot for things that are on grid. Otherwise it becomes a huge nerf to brawling when you have to first warp one person onto the enemy fleet then warp the rest of the fleet to them. Given the tendency for kitey, damage projecting ships (including sentry drones) to run this current meta, I don't think that brawling builds need this kick in the nuts to their power level right now.
This is the only real flaw I see to this change from a combat perspective. _____
From an out of combat perspective,
As has been stated above I echo in vernacular "Dude, why the f-ck are you adding all these unnecessary steps to warping a newbro to a site, or doing an escalation with a friend. People carpool for a reason in the real world. Don't make us take our own damn vehicle each time." |
kingtuttut Badasaz
Cherry-Poppers -affliction-
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:09:25 -
[252] - Quote
Didn't really mind the jump fatigue changes. The icons got me a little mad but these new changes are hands down the worst EVE update/patch I've ever seen |
Aniya Blaze
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Shadow of xXDEATHXx
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:13:09 -
[253] - Quote
RIP good Fc's. Eve's a hard enough game to get into as it is and here you are making it more difficult CCP. |
Crazy Candy
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
12
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:14:13 -
[254] - Quote
Probably the dumbest thing I've ever heard of tbh
If you wanna nerf bombers, go ahead. Maybe make it so these changes only affect cloaked ships or whatever. But flat out expecting FCs to manage 200+ man fleets with these changes is one of the most absurd things I have heard of. |
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
1163
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:15:09 -
[255] - Quote
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.
@EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny
|
Kenrailae
Fallen Reich
355
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:17:29 -
[256] - Quote
Kenneth Feld 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 think he will do OK :)
This message brought to you by Alts: Online.
The Law is a point of View
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1054
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:19:26 -
[257] - Quote
Making Eve more tedious to play is not a step in the right direction. There is a saying about throwing the baby out with the bathwater... That is what you have done here.
As someone who has been multiboxing for years, you have been making it harder and harder for me to justify keeping multiple accounts. I know some will cheer for this, since they think multiboxing is cancer for Eve, but the reality is that it is Eve's life support. As it currently stands, let's say I am moving three battleships and a scout through 0.0. I move the scout as plus 1. The other three get squad warped from gate to a bookmark ping. I don't warp gate-to-gate because a lot can happen when you warp slowly across a 50 AU system, so gate-to-gate warping is not an option. So, now, to move, instead of squad warping my alts, I have to manually warp each one to a saved bookmark - or have another alt waiting on each out gate ping so I can warp to him. You are just making a slow and tedious game more tedious.
Not to mention that it will make being an FC even less fun and more tedious. Way to get rid of content creators and leaders...
I have already cut from seven accounts to six. Cutting from six to two would be easier on my wallet and less tedious. The only thing that has kept me from that is that I have eight years invested in my team and I'm pretty attached to them. It might be easier to just move on altogether.
I don't know what your actual goal is with this game. It seems to me that announcing WHY is a good idea.
PS - no, you cannot have my stuff. And I am sure my tears are delicious.
The Greatest Ship Ever. Credit to Shahfluffers.
|
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
132
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:19:34 -
[258] - 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.
So by making life much harder for fcs, especially newer FCs and new bros in general. More stuff will explode?
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
Mandrid X
Section 8. Tactical Narcotics Team
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:20:25 -
[259] - Quote
KanmanDS wrote:Everyone else has already clearly illustrated the grossly negative impact this change will have on nearly all aspects of game play. This is so clearly the worst decision CCP has made in years, that it all boils down to this single sentence:
If you make this change, I will unsubscribe, because you are no longer selling a product I am interested in purchasing.
Well all I can think of is angry stressed FC's going off on comms during an op. When the fleet arrives sporadically, people haven't warped. Losses flow in and the guys handling SRP tears the balls off the FC.
People who get into that state aren't going to want to FC for long. People in fleets with FC's yelling at them won't want to be in fleet.
I resubbed my EVE account mainly for fleet roams. And now I'm thinking its not going to be fun to go on fleet roams... and maybe if that happens... I will unsub again. |
Pyralissa
Kite Co. Space Trucking
12
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:21:12 -
[260] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: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.
If the goal was to curtail the power of bombers, there was a million different routes to take beyond removing features. This change is especially bizarre in light of the recent trend of making EVE a more streamlined experience.
Here's a question I want answered in regards to this change; who does this benefit? If it's meant to balance bombers, it does so at the expense of making several other 0.0 annoyances more difficult to counter (off-grid boosting and Slipper Petes). So far bombers and "making fleets more engaging" have been the only two reasons I've seen given, and so the logical course to take to improve these two aspects of the game is to make a dramatic change to stellar navigation that will change literally every facet of gameplay (0.0, lowsec, wormholes, hisec, PVP, PVE, exploration)?
Insane. |
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2483
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:21:15 -
[261] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote: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. So by making life much harder for fcs, especially newer FCs and new bros in general. More stuff will explode? There's a word in FC, starts with a 'C'. And it happens to deal A LOT with delegation and control, not 'micromanagement'. |
Offgrid Booster
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:21:31 -
[262] - Quote
CCP I think you posted this in the wrong sections of the forums. Should be listed in Crime and Punishment cause who ever thought this was a good update for EVE should be punished severely. |
Crazy Candy
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
13
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:22:00 -
[263] - 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.
have fun when major FCs quit because the dont want to juggle more accounts than they already do
or when aspiring FCs don't want to try because they aren't space rich to own multiple accounts
good **** dude |
Lt Shard
Team Pizza Good at this Game
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:26:08 -
[264] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote: I support measures , mchanics , changes that will make eve more exciting more dynamic more balanced and more deadly.
Maybe in null. But its a whole layer of bullshit in other parts of space.
Who is the w-space csm member now that corbex no longer lives in w-space? Who do you talk to about it? |
Kujun Nashja
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
18
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:26:42 -
[265] - Quote
It-¦s a step in the right direction.
Might promote roles of fleet probers/scouts/inties for giving warpins. Also there would be additional room for people to screw up if they don-¦t pay attention (which is a good thing).
Combat probing isn-¦t as ridiculously oversimplified anymore. Also an indirect nerf to badly executed and Isboxer bomb runs. The only issues is see are actually WH related.
Now remove anchoring, fleet warps in general and drone assist an we are golden. |
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
1167
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:29:40 -
[266] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote: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. So by making life much harder for fcs, especially newer FCs and new bros in general. More stuff will explode?
Bombers were retardedly op and combat probing was very op. They strangled tactics and doctrines. Ideally id like to see those things nerfed or rebalanced but this change has the effect that it hits both of those things at the same. To put this into context drone assign was largely removed as we know it. CCP said that they think it is bad when other people play the game for you. Fleet Warping falls under the same rationale. This change will actually help FC's as they will have more choices on tactics and viable doctrines to put to the field. Currently everything has to be low/sig & bomb proof . This is why you don't see many shield tanked BS doctrines or more kiting or sniping doctrines. This change will help open up the battlefield to something more than Eagles , Tengus , Ishtars and Domis.
@EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny
|
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
133
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:29:52 -
[267] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Miner Hottie wrote: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. So by making life much harder for fcs, especially newer FCs and new bros in general. More stuff will explode? There's a word in FC, starts with a 'C'. And it happens to deal A LOT with delegation and control, not 'micromanagement'.
I had the emphasis on new players and FCs for a reason. But sure, making the game harder and more boring is an improvement correct?
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
Pyralissa
Kite Co. Space Trucking
13
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:30:23 -
[268] - Quote
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. |
Aussitot Apres
Never Turn
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:30:30 -
[269] - Quote
What a Stupid Changen+ü You should make EVE more and more coollllllll !!! not more and more stupid !!!
I will unsubscribe if you make this change happen Because you are no longer selling a product I am interested in purchasing.
|
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
149
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:31:01 -
[270] - Quote
Kujun Nashja wrote:Now remove anchoring, fleet warps in general and drone assist an we are golden.
Oh god the chaos of large fleet battles with everyone piloting instead of anchoring. I love it.
|
|
Texty
State War Academy Caldari State
102
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:31:14 -
[271] - Quote
VENUS XY wrote: No one will want to fly a useless probing ship and not get on any killmails,
You're right. Kill mails must die.
|
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
1167
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:33:46 -
[272] - Quote
Crazy Candy wrote: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. have fun when major FCs quit because the dont want to juggle more accounts than they already do or when aspiring FCs don't want to try because they aren't space rich to own multiple accounts good **** dude
Maybe just maybe you can get dudes in your alliance to help scout and probe instead of doing it all yourself. Crazy Idea I know ( using teamwork and all that crazy whippity dippity stuff).
@EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny
|
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
1167
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:37:45 -
[273] - Quote
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.
@EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny
|
Lyra Gerie
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
49
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:38:57 -
[274] - Quote
I like this change as much as I hate it. I love the idea of individuals being more responsible, but it KILLS quality of living at the same time. Unfortunately the two are fairly closely linked.
This issue goes double in wormholes where bookmarks are used almost more often for logistics than killing or fleet fights.
Perhaps a new deployable anchors and or anchor probes?
An anchor probe would show up on D-scan when launched at a 100% signal before showing on grid. They would have a warp of 4.5 AU/s and EHP around 10-25k depending on meta level and balance. After landing on grid it would auto deploy over 5-15 seconds again based on meta level and balance.
The attackers can now still warp to a target however it gives the target fair warning and time to destroy the probe before the scouts fleet can warp in.
As for deployable anchors they would stay in space for a certain amount of time or require some kind of fuel to stay anchored. There could be those that are short term used in single battles, or long term/more global anchors.
|
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
1167
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:39:16 -
[275] - Quote
Xavier Thorm wrote:Kujun Nashja wrote:Now remove anchoring, fleet warps in general and drone assist an we are golden. Oh god the chaos of large fleet battles with everyone piloting instead of anchoring. I love it.
IKR
@EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2483
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:40:03 -
[276] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote: I had the emphasis on new players and FCs for a reason. But sure, making the game harder and more boring is an improvement correct?
Emphasis on newer FC's for what reason? You say it makes it harder for them, when in reality it's a false requirement you are imagining.
And you may say 'hard' and 'boring', where someone else might say 'interesting' and 'fun'. Who needs good pilots in ships putting their skills on the line when you have an FC with probes and an F1 button? |
Moac Tor
Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation
87
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:40:18 -
[277] - Quote
I'm not really sure what the intended consequences of this change are meant to be. If it is to hurt bomber wings, then I don't really see it achieving that, as bomber wings can still just warp individually to a corp bookmark.
If the effect is to make probers have more to do, then I guess it will achieve that, as they will have to warp to the target which they just probed down, whereas before they could just fleet warp the squad. So in effect this is a nerf to combat probing; I didn't realise that was required.
Other than annoying mission runners and wormholers, I'm not sure what else this will practically achieve, although it is pretty late so hopefully the wisdom of this decision will become apparent tomorrow morning. *chuckles* |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
288
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:40:56 -
[278] - Quote
I'll vote for you Manny. GÖÑ
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
149
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:41:06 -
[279] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Xavier Thorm wrote:Kujun Nashja wrote:Now remove anchoring, fleet warps in general and drone assist an we are golden. Oh god the chaos of large fleet battles with everyone piloting instead of anchoring. I love it. IKR
Then we'd just need collision damage . |
Winter Archipelago
Furtherance.
374
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:41:31 -
[280] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote: Maybe just maybe you can get dudes in your alliance to help scout and probe instead of doing it all yourself. Crazy Idea I know ( using teamwork and all that crazy whippity dippity stuff).
What about smaller groups? Groups that don't have thousands of people? Who don't even have hundreds? What about when you're in fleets of 6-8 people (and fewer)? Do we have to now dedicate someone to probing? Are we to be limited to D3's and T3's so each person can fit both a probe launcher and their combat fit? Does the answer once again become "use an alt?"
Large nullsec groups aren't the only players out there, and not everybody wants to be just another F1-pusher, or just another number in a TIDI slug-fest. This change affects everybody, but it doesn't affect everybody equally.
Planning a trip to Thera? Check out http://eve-scout.com/ for a list of the current connections.
Once you've made your choice, join the channels EVE-Scout or Furtherance Public and request a scout to make sure your connection is clear!
|
|
Foodpimp
xHELLonEARTHx Against ALL Authorities
190
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:41:54 -
[281] - Quote
Well....I am displeased.... |
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
1167
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:41:57 -
[282] - Quote
Lyra Gerie wrote:I like this change as much as I hate it. I love the idea of individuals being more responsible, but it KILLS quality of living at the same time. Unfortunately the two are fairly closely linked.
This issue goes double in wormholes where bookmarks are used almost more often for logistics than killing or fleet fights.
Perhaps a new deployable anchors and or anchor probes?
An anchor probe would show up on D-scan when launched at a 100% signal before showing on grid. They would have a warp of 4.5 AU/s and EHP around 10-25k depending on meta level and balance. After landing on grid it would auto deploy over 5-15 seconds again based on meta level and balance.
The attackers can now still warp to a target however it gives the target fair warning and time to destroy the probe before the scouts fleet can warp in.
As for deployable anchors they would stay in space for a certain amount of time or require some kind of fuel to stay anchored. There could be those that are short term used in single battles, or long term/more global anchors.
So the guy in the wormhole warps to the bookmark and WWWWWW's up. Then everyone gets fleet warped OMG THE TRAVESTY THAT THOSE EXTRA FEW SECONDS WILL CREATE. THINK OF ALL THE BELLY LENT YOU COULD HAVE PICKED IN THOSE FEW PRECIOUS SECONDS. DAMN YOU CCP DAMN YOU!!!!!!!111ON1E
@EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny
|
Angelic Tallbrooke
Redemption Road Affirmative.
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:43:18 -
[283] - 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.
I have a feeling that this is going to get a lot of criticism because it changes the major game mechanics that we have all grown to love. Could be interesting.
I also have a feeling that this is going to make FC'ing for public fleets (which is what groups like Bomber's Bar, Redemption Road, Spectre Fleet, and pretty much any NPSI group) an absolute pain in the rear end as far as maneuverability goes. Fleet warping across already-scouted systems will be easy, since nothing is going to change, but it's really going to make running from other fleets a lot harder when you have stuff in front of you. And disabling scouts by forcing them to sit at tacticals for people to warp to/for the FC to warp to.
Example: Say you have a group of 30 T1 & T2 frigates/dessies roaming Curse/Catch/Provi. At any given time, your scouts could report that there's a drag bubble on a gate. Previously, you could warp the entire fleet to a ping off the gate. Now, you either have to get a "public warpin" that may or may not be aligned with the bubble, your scout has to do more work (and thus giving your fleet less information) in finding a "publicly-available" un-aligned celestial body OR sitting there for the whole fleet to individually warp to. That's easily fixed by the players.
But let's say, the same fleet gets intel from a +1 scout that an enemy gang of 50 T3 cruisers just jumped into system and is warping to the other side of the gate that you're sitting on. In the current system, an FC would simply warp their fleet up to a tactical and wait out the gang. In the proposed fleet warping situation, either we need more scouts (which are spread out farther, for a better information network) or we sit at tacticals all the time. Then, each fleet member needs to individually warp up to a "tactical holder" player. I know under the current system, as a new FC, I've been able to save fleets from a firey death at the hands of a PL T3 gang by simply fleet warping everyone up to a tactical seconds before a bubble managed to go up on the gate by a sabre.
It's much more complicated, and it makes a coordinated FC agressor able to take out unprepared fleet members. I kind of like it because the entire fleet needs to pay attention, not just the FC, but it does raise some questions about the new player experience and how "fast" a newbro can actually get into fleet battles. This encourages every member of a fleet to be on their toes, paying attention to recon, and I like that idea. But with extended ops, I feel like this might prove a hassle. Guess we'll just have to see where the meta of fleets swing with this new change. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:43:37 -
[284] - Quote
i think CCP should implement this change slightly differently. instead of not allowing fleet warp at all, they should make sure that only those who can warp to the particular object themselves, will enter warp, the rest of the fleet stays.
so with corp bookmarks - only members of the corp would warp, with scan results - only the prober etc. this would make for far more interesting game play, although i suspect will be much harder on resources to determine who can and cannot warp. |
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
1167
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:43:45 -
[285] - Quote
Winter Archipelago wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote: Maybe just maybe you can get dudes in your alliance to help scout and probe instead of doing it all yourself. Crazy Idea I know ( using teamwork and all that crazy whippity dippity stuff).
What about smaller groups? Groups that don't have thousands of people? Who don't even have hundreds? What about when you're in fleets of 6-8 people (and fewer)? Do we have to now dedicate someone to probing? Are we to be limited to D3's and T3's so each person can fit both a probe launcher and their combat fit? Does the answer once again become "use an alt?" Large nullsec groups aren't the only players out there, and not everybody wants to be just another F1-pusher, or just another number in a TIDI slug-fest. This change affects everybody, but it doesn't affect everybody equally.
T3 destroyers have a slot for a probe launcher last I checked they are very popular ships in small gangs HTH.
@EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny
|
Clasina
Top Hat Innovations
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:45:12 -
[286] - Quote
BobFromMarketing wrote:This makes me so hard
The last words some people ever hear. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31715
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:46:00 -
[287] - Quote
I haven't been this amused by what's happening to EVE since jump fatigue.
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
|
Klarion Sythis
Lazerhawks
326
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:47:40 -
[288] - Quote
This feels like a change aimed at a few particular aspects that comes with a ton of collateral damage. This does not make the game more fun for me. |
Angelic Tallbrooke
Redemption Road Affirmative.
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:49:00 -
[289] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:i think CCP should implement this change slightly differently. instead of not allowing fleet warp at all, they should make sure that only those who can warp to the particular object themselves, will enter warp, the rest of the fleet stays.
so with corp bookmarks - only members of the corp would warp, with scan results - only the prober etc. this would make for far more interesting game play, although i suspect will be much harder on resources to determine who can and cannot warp.
Brain in a Box would probably fix those issues, but I feel as though CCP needs to get alliance bookmarks into play before making a "yes, you can warp to this bookmark"/"no, you cannot warp to this bookmark" system in place. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:50:43 -
[290] - Quote
Good changes -- I'm mostly in favor of them. I am concerned about the knock-on effects regarding un-probe-able ships, however. How concerned about them I am depends on whether or not a Rokh can hit a tengu, which is something I'm too lazy to check right now. :V
Offgrid boosters that can't be probed down except by heavily bonused and implanted covops ships are also a problem, but it is common knowledge that this won't be handled until the Destiny rewrite is finished, so I guess we have to suffer with it for now.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:52:51 -
[291] - Quote
Angelic Tallbrooke wrote: Brain in a Box would probably fix those issues, but I feel as though CCP needs to get alliance bookmarks into play before making a "yes, you can warp to this bookmark"/"no, you cannot warp to this bookmark" system in place.
alliance bookmarks will take away all the fun from this change. |
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
133
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:54:07 -
[292] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Miner Hottie wrote: I had the emphasis on new players and FCs for a reason. But sure, making the game harder and more boring is an improvement correct?
Emphasis on newer FC's for what reason? You say it makes it harder for them, when in reality it's a false requirement you are imagining. And you may say 'hard' and 'boring', where someone else might say 'interesting' and 'fun'. Who needs good pilots in ships putting their skills on the line when you have an FC with probes and an F1 button? Are you being deliberately obtuse? Learning to command and lead takes time, knowledge and experience. Delegation is part of it. As a leader myself I know that to delegate a task, the person delegated must be able to do it. Hence newbros are mostly out of frame foe these tasks. Learning when and what to delegate is harder than it seems as well. A PL fc with a gang of bitter vets will not suffer under these changes. A gang of 1 week old BNIs had a chance before if their fc could lead them well. That just evaporated unless the FC has a core of vets to assist them.
This change is a massive restriction to content enablers. Something CCP in the past has acknowledged they have done in the past is make things hard for these people. So why this change? Apart from it giving Manny a throbbing CSMrection, it has already made life a prospective hell for wormholes and Malcannis Law doesn't apply at all as this clearly isn't intended to help newbies. In a game in which social interaction is key, a change aimed squarely at emphasising small gang, elite gameplay shouldn't be championed by the CSM or the devs at all.
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
Luft Reich
No Vacancies
87
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:55:07 -
[293] - Quote
I see our wormhole CSM is valiantly defending the life style of people in wormhole space....
Yeah, it might be good for nullsec but have you really thought about the effects on wormhole space? Clearly not.
ISD Cyberdyne liked your forum post
|
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
241
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:57:56 -
[294] - Quote
The thing about this change is that so many kills would never have happened with these mechanics, and I don't mean bombing runs. Bombing runs should be addressed directly, stop trying to kid yourself that they're the result of anything except a class of ships which can fit covops cloaks and launch area of effect weapons with a timed fuse. If you don't like the extremely asymmetric pvp that creates, change bomb launchers, the hull or both, not a crucial mechanic for every FC in all space, even where bomb launchers can't be activated. |
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
1170
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:59:30 -
[295] - Quote
Luft Reich wrote:I see our wormhole CSM is valiantly defending the life style of people in wormhole space.... Yeah, it might be good for nullsec but have you really thought about the effects on wormhole space? Clearly not.
Warping yourself or warping to Wwwww's in fleet Zomgz life is over .
@EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny
|
Pyralissa
Kite Co. Space Trucking
14
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 02:59:32 -
[296] - Quote
Querns wrote:Offgrid boosters that can't be probed down except by heavily bonused and implanted covops ships are also a problem, but it is common knowledge that this won't be handled until the Destiny rewrite is finished, so I guess we have to suffer with it for now.
Or, you know, we don't and instead wait for other changes to occur first before throwing the most core aspect of EVE's gameplay (travel) into the blender for the benefit of making bombing more difficult and making pilots "more engaged" in fleets.
|
Winter Archipelago
Furtherance.
374
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:00:01 -
[297] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote: T3 destroyers have a slot for a probe launcher last I checked they are very popular ships in small gangs HTH.
As I asked, are our options to be so limited? Must we take out T3 destroyers or cruisers and nothing else? It's enough already to gimp a fit of a Thorax or a Caracal or another cruiser to get an expanded probe launcher on them, but at least they could still participate in the fight.
Must our options be limited to dedicated cloaky scanners, alts, or the two T3 groups?
Planning a trip to Thera? Check out http://eve-scout.com/ for a list of the current connections.
Once you've made your choice, join the channels EVE-Scout or Furtherance Public and request a scout to make sure your connection is clear!
|
Louanne Barros
Hole Violence Whole Squid
43
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:01:59 -
[298] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Luft Reich wrote:I see our wormhole CSM is valiantly defending the life style of people in wormhole space.... Yeah, it might be good for nullsec but have you really thought about the effects on wormhole space? Clearly not. Warping yourself or warping to Wwwww's in fleet Zomgz life is over .
Are you familiar with the fact that different ships warp at different speeds? |
mbass
Sanguine Penguin Rote Kapelle
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:02:25 -
[299] - Quote
How could a squad commander possibly command a squad with this broken suggestion? No! This will brake Eve! No! |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:02:25 -
[300] - Quote
Random unsolicited, unread probing suggestion:
Make how hard a thing is to probe a function of strictly signature radius. Use sensor strength to affect how long it takes to actually act upon the results.
This would turn probing into a two-pass process: the initial probe scan would reveal the targets. However, for 100% results, the result would not be immediately actionable. For 100% results, a timer bar would automatically tick down a delay based on the ratio of sensor strength to signature radius of the target. Once the timer bar elapsed, the probe result would be eligible for warping.
(This could be implemented by sending a timestamp along with the probe results, describing the earliest time the 100% result was actionable. UI fanciness could dress this up with the delay bar/etc.)
The idea here is to make ECCM still affect how difficult it is to be probed, without turning it into an essentially binary toggle on whether one can feasibly probe you down or not.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
Long Muppet
Lazerhawks
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:05:00 -
[301] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote: To put this into context drone assign was largely removed as we know it. CCP said that they think it is bad when other people play the game for you.
This is a great point Manny! Maybe, just like with drone assign we should allow squad commanders to fleet warp their 10 people. This ensures you are still taking a nerfbat to the ridiculously huge nullsec fleets while not simultaneously killing small gangs.
I get that having a scout in a large fleet isn't a big deal as they generally have many of them, but requiring a small gang to now dedicate one of their pilots as scout is unnecessary and ruins game play. Finding a middle ground (just as we did we drone assign) is the best option. |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
289
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:05:43 -
[302] - Quote
Louanne Barros wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:Luft Reich wrote:I see our wormhole CSM is valiantly defending the life style of people in wormhole space.... Yeah, it might be good for nullsec but have you really thought about the effects on wormhole space? Clearly not. Warping yourself or warping to Wwwww's in fleet Zomgz life is over . Are you familiar with the fact that different ships warp at different speeds? Your point?
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2484
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:07:35 -
[303] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote:Are you being deliberately obtuse? Learning to command and lead takes time, knowledge and experience. Delegation is part of it. As a leader myself I know that to delegate a task, the person delegated must be able to do it. Hence newbros are mostly out of frame foe these tasks. Learning when and what to delegate is harder than it seems as well. A PL fc with a gang of bitter vets will not suffer under these changes. A gang of 1 week old BNIs had a chance before if their fc could lead them well. That just evaporated unless the FC has a core of vets to assist them. Obtuse? who knows. I'm still stuck on trying to figure out how you are getting an aspiring FC without skill who is supposed to also be the same guy that would help BNI stand a chance against biitervets like PL. Simply because he was allowed to warp a fleet to a sig. Doesn't really matter what changes you make in any direction. Seems the issue there isnt the FC probing, but the massive skill disparity.
Miner Hottie wrote:This change is a massive restriction to content enablers. Something CCP in the past has acknowledged they have done in the past is make things hard for these people. So why this change? Apart from it giving Manny a throbbing CSMrection, it has already made life a prospective hell for wormholes and Malcannis Law doesn't apply at all as this clearly isn't intended to help newbies. In a game in which social interaction is key, a change aimed squarely at emphasising small gang, elite gameplay shouldn't be championed by the CSM or the devs at all. Restricition to content enablers? plenty of fleet jobs just opened up and you're going to tell me thats not content? You have to look at it from both directions. Just because there isnt an easy way to get on top of someone, doesnt mean that the other guys wont see an opportunity here.
And it's funny you mention social interaction as being key, seeing as one man doing the work and flying your ship bypasses that oh so important interaction. |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
5341
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:09:52 -
[304] - Quote
Luft Reich wrote:I see our wormhole CSM is valiantly defending the life style of people in wormhole space.... Yeah, it might be good for nullsec but have you really thought about the effects on wormhole space? Clearly not.
To be fair to him, the discussions were far from one sided, and got heated at times. Corbexx was active on this, in the way i think you'd have wanted. Didn't win doesn't mean didn't argue.
Woo! CSM X!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
1170
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:10:28 -
[305] - Quote
Long Muppet wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote: To put this into context drone assign was largely removed as we know it. CCP said that they think it is bad when other people play the game for you.
This is a great point Manny! Maybe, just like with drone assign we should allow squad commanders to fleet warp their 10 people. This ensures you are still taking a nerfbat to the ridiculously huge nullsec fleets while not simultaneously killing small gangs. I get that having a scout in a large fleet isn't a big deal as they generally have many of them, but requiring a small gang to now dedicate one of their pilots as scout is unnecessary and ruins game play. Finding a middle ground (just as we did we drone assign) is the best option.
Good suggestion and this is the exact reason CCP asks for feedback in these threads
@EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny
|
Davis TetrisKing
The Vendunari End of Life
84
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:11:08 -
[306] - Quote
Would be nice if we had more options than Covops, T3 cruisers or T3 destroyers to combat scan with if it's going to become such a major role in fleets. In small gangs (5-6 people) dropping 1 person for covops is a huge hit. T3 cruisers are way out of my budget as hero scan/tackle and so that leaves me with T3 destroyers.
Don't get me wrong, I love T3 destroyers, but surely we could have some other options.
Edit: Spelling etc. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2484
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:12:40 -
[307] - Quote
Davis TetrisKing wrote:Would be nice if we had more options than Covops, T3 cruisers or T3 destroyers to combat scan with if it's going to become such a major role in fleets. In small gangs (5-6 people) dropping 1 person for covops is a huge hit. T3 cruisers are way out of my budget as hero scan/tackle and so that leaves me with T3 destroyers.
Don't get me wrong, I love T3 destroyers, but surely we could have some other options.
Edit: Spelling etc. ^^^^^^ |
Maxxor Brutor
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
85
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:17:25 -
[308] - Quote
This is genius, now it doesn't matter if you add Alliance bookmarks any more :D
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:18:00 -
[309] - Quote
Scott Ormands wrote:Jezza McWaffle wrote:So you will now implement automatic bookmarking at a corporation and alliance level yes? Or is this just another way to **** up wormholers now. Since WE WILL have to wait for the bookmarks to propagate (up to 5-10 mins) unless we have to have a scout at the exact warp in at every single fight. Example if you have a group consisting of more than just 1 corp. Group A wants to fight Group B Group A consists of multiple corps Currently Group A can fleet warp onto the enemy fleet or wormhole without everyone involved having a propagated bookmark. However after this change if the group does not have the bookmark then they have no way of getting into the fight at the same time as the rest of the fleet. So all fights will be delayed until everyone has the bookmarks <10 mins. Good job CCP... +1 I can no longer warp my entire fleet to the hole and expect them to land in a cohesive group, first my T3's land and get primaried then a minute later my Bhaals land and then 2 minutes later my triage lands by that time we are all dead. And that's assuming all of us have the BM which can take quite a long time to happen. CCP i am adamantly against this change. Please reconsider.
I have a revolting solution for you: WARP IN TURNS. Warp your triage first, wait, warp your Bhaals, wait, warp your T3s. Properly timed, you arrive at the same time and it actually rewards you for being GUD at calculating warp timing. Your drop time would be the same as if you were in a fleet warp, and as a bonus, your fleet will not appear on dscan all at once.
Otherwise - goons are overheating rapid tear launcher on this, means the change is great, this is the best change'o'meter I know. |
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
135
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:19:28 -
[310] - Quote
Rowells wrote:[qunderstand Hottie]Are you being deliberately obtuse? Learning to command and lead takes time, knowledge and experience. Delegation is part of it. As a leader myself I know that to delegate a task, the person delegated must be able to do it. Hence newbros are mostly out of frame foe these tasks. Learning when and what to delegate is harder than it seems as well. A PL fc with a gang of bitter vets will not suffer under these changes. A gang of 1 week old BNIs had a chance before if their fc could lead them well. That just evaporated unless the FC has a core of vets to assist them. Obtuse? who knows. I'm still stuck on trying to figure out how you are getting an aspiring FC without skill who is supposed to also be the same guy that would help BNI stand a chance against biitervets like PL. Simply because he was allowed to warp a fleet to a sig. Doesn't really matter what changes you make in any direction. Seems the issue there isnt the FC probing, but the massive skill disparity.
Miner Hottie wrote:This change is a massive restriction to content enablers. Something CCP in the past has acknowledged they have done in the past is make things hard for these people. So why this change? Apart from it giving Manny a throbbing CSMrection, it has already made life a prospective hell for wormholes and Malcannis Law doesn't apply at all as this clearly isn't intended to help newbies. In a game in which social interaction is key, a change aimed squarely at emphasising small gang, elite gameplay shouldn't be championed by the CSM or the devs at all. Restricition to content enablers? plenty of fleet jobs just opened up and you're going to tell me thats not content? You have to look at it from both directions. Just because there isnt an easy way to get on top of someone, doesnt mean that the other guys wont see an opportunity here.
And it's funny you mention social interaction as being key, seeing as one man doing the work and flying your ship bypasses that oh so important interaction.[/quote]
Learn 2 read and understand. I said content enablers. Not participants. Taking a role in fleet isn't enabling content anymore than the monkey hitting F1, the person who sets the objective for the fleet and draws people together is the content enabler, the leader. But whatever you seem intent on misunderstanding me, as a fleet is never one persons work anyway. All the people that came together to make that fleet happened worked to be there. From making the ships and mods, moving them, grinding the isk to buy the ship to learning how the doctrine works to being available at the right time. The FC leads that. But according to you they do all the work.
I don't think I can change your mind and nothing you have identified will alter my reasons for seeing this change as a red headed pants on head set on fire level bad.
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2485
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:22:14 -
[311] - Quote
So, what happens if i warp to a corp bookmark, but i have alliance members also in my warp? Does warp not work for everyone or do they sit there wondering where everyone went? |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
751
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:22:15 -
[312] - Quote
How about providing a way to launch beacons that become visible on the overview to any bookmark you have. You could let them be destructible, maybe set who they become visible to off grid in a similar fashion as assigning contracts (everyone, specific Corp, specific person, etc.)
|
Laura Agathon
Nothing on Dscan
16
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:22:18 -
[313] - Quote
Thanks CCP, yet again pulling the rug out from under Wspace dwellers.
This together with the changes in warp times make coordinating mixed fleet warping horrendous now. |
Luft Reich
No Vacancies
89
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:23:34 -
[314] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Luft Reich wrote:I see our wormhole CSM is valiantly defending the life style of people in wormhole space.... Yeah, it might be good for nullsec but have you really thought about the effects on wormhole space? Clearly not. Warping yourself or warping to Wwwww's in fleet Zomgz life is over .
Dearest F1 pusher,
I have jumped through a wormhole and there are krabs (carebears) running sites. To find these krabs running sites launch combat probes and tell Sabres to jump, I then punt them to these krabs whether it be capitals or otherwise, to get initial tackle because krabs get very scared by the new signiture they see, or if they are just in the chain, the combat probes.
With the proposed changes I must combat probe them down, warp on grid, hope I don't get decloacked by a random object, sleeper, or player and then have the fleet warp in. And all the while krabs see the signiture and are able to scuttle away.
"You are so dumb luft we are just nerfing power projection in wh space" as Ccp has said. Well let us look at what they mean by that. Basically that means that krabs will be safer because that is who we as a community are projecting on. And two, that only large groups such as LZHX, HK, QEX, etc are doing this ganking and if you are attempting to slow them done from ganking carebears to keep wormhole space dangerous than that defeats the whole purpose of wormhole space.
Also beyond killing krabs there is warping a fleet to a hole with various classes of ships, triage, guardians, T3s, etc.
But I don't expect you to understand the magnitude of these changes to wormhole space life style, but I sure hope the two "wormhole csm" do.
Excuse typos its 4:20 am (lol) and I wrote this on my phone.
ISD Cyberdyne liked your forum post
|
Aebe Amraen
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
128
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:23:55 -
[315] - Quote
Rowells wrote:So, what happens if i warp to a corp bookmark, but i have alliance members also in my warp? Does warp not work for everyone or do they sit there wondering where everyone went?
You can't warp to bookmarks at all. Doesn't matter if it's a corp bookmark and everyone in fleet is in the same corp. |
Azarah Aubaris
The Irukandji The Irukandji.
37
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:27:17 -
[316] - Quote
-1
this is a very very bad idea
Fleet warping is a essential part of any FC role. Fleet commanders have a very tough job in the game. Coordinating big groups of people and positioning them all where they need to be is not an easy task, which is why fleet warps are so important to and medium/large fleet PvP. In many large scale fights the Fleet Commanders typically carry combat probes and have many bookmarks saved for moving the fleet around the field quickly and effectively. The combat scanners are also very important to reposition fleets if need be. Its and elegant dance that FC's preform on the battlefield, warping to pings, and warping back into probe results for another exchange of fire. Removing BM warps and Probe warps would take this elegant dance and turn it into a cluster ****.
from reading between the lines of this post and from some of Fozzie's posts, im assuming the real key reason for this change is to nerf bombers. if you want to nerf bombers...nerf bombers, not fleet warping.
also many WH players rely on fleet warps to BM's for PvP. so removing BM warping is a bad idea if you want WH PvP to still be fun for wormholers.
|
Obil Que
Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance
323
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:27:24 -
[317] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:So the guy in the wormhole warps to the bookmark and WWWWWW's up. Then everyone gets fleet warped OMG THE TRAVESTY THAT THOSE EXTRA FEW SECONDS WILL CREATE. THINK OF ALL THE BELLY LENT YOU COULD HAVE PICKED IN THOSE FEW PRECIOUS SECONDS. DAMN YOU CCP DAMN YOU!!!!!!!111ON1E
You should be ashamed to have written this. I expect more from CSM representatives than trolling comments on an issue that is obviously one that, much like the decloaking bomber change, has a ripple effect that is unnecessary and unwarrented given the intended goals of the change.
Any scout warping into an enemy fleet to provide a warp-in anything close to as valuable as can be done with bookmarks will likely be a dead scout while they wait for their fleet to warp. And because fleet warp isn't being removed, only inconvenienced, all you have added to the EVE experience of that scout is an out of pod one. Any FC worth their weight will simply sacrifice a worthless alt to provide the fleet warp target. This is the sum total effect of this change on the intended audience. Meanwhile, many other aspects of EVE are directly affected with no positive benefit. The only positive argument I can make for restricting fleet warp targets while leaving the feature in the game is to make the life of a mutliboxer harder.
If you can get past your sarcastic and trolling responses, I would hope all even-tempered people here could get behind the very astute suggestion to limit fleet warp, not by restricting targets, but by limiting the impact exactly like drone assist was limited. Make it a squad level function. On top of that, I'd hope CCP would seriously look at the actual issue of how bomb damage is applied and focus their efforts on fixing the actual issue.
Barring that, I would simply suggest that CCP go all in and remove fleet warp entirely. Leaving it half in only makes people find the least painful workaround to achieve the exact same result. Fun is not created.
|
Kniht
Origin. Black Legion.
73
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:30:02 -
[318] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote: Anoms yes, Sigs no.
Edit:
Yes, you'll be able to fleet warp to anoms. No, you won't be able to fleet warp to signatures.
Just for clarity (which was obviously lacking)
Find people running sites in a c5, warp my scout at range after combat scanning the capitals. BM a wreck. Tell entire fleet to log off and back on so they can see the BM. Or we land 65k away because everyone has to warp to the anom instead of the hostiles, if they are even at an anom.
Either way, we're warping into a hostile fleet individually piecemeal, instead of as a fleet.
Well done CCP.
o/ fly crazy
|
Luft Reich
No Vacancies
93
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:30:25 -
[319] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Long Muppet wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote: To put this into context drone assign was largely removed as we know it. CCP said that they think it is bad when other people play the game for you.
This is a great point Manny! Maybe, just like with drone assign we should allow squad commanders to fleet warp their 10 people. This ensures you are still taking a nerfbat to the ridiculously huge nullsec fleets while not simultaneously killing small gangs. I get that having a scout in a large fleet isn't a big deal as they generally have many of them, but requiring a small gang to now dedicate one of their pilots as scout is unnecessary and ruins game play. Finding a middle ground (just as we did we drone assign) is the best option. Good suggestion and this is the exact reason CCP asks for feedback in these threads
Darn you Muppet and your reasoning!
Also to Steve, totally forgot about Corbexx being a wormhole csm, so good on him.
ISD Cyberdyne liked your forum post
|
Sienna Vanjarc
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:31:57 -
[320] - Quote
Don't create boring space jobs (warpin providers), more kiting and don't make it easier just to farm kills (more stragglers, more fail warps).
Encourage brawling and hull trading, make the game more fun for everyone, not just the perfect organized, perfect skilled players. |
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31718
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:32:19 -
[321] - Quote
Why not remove fleet warp altogether, serious question.
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
|
Vala Ancalagon
The Order of Thelemic Ascension Novus Dominatum
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:33:24 -
[322] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Lyra Gerie wrote:I like this change as much as I hate it. I love the idea of individuals being more responsible, but it KILLS quality of living at the same time. Unfortunately the two are fairly closely linked.
This issue goes double in wormholes where bookmarks are used almost more often for logistics than killing or fleet fights.
Perhaps a new deployable anchors and or anchor probes?
An anchor probe would show up on D-scan when launched at a 100% signal before showing on grid. They would have a warp of 4.5 AU/s and EHP around 10-25k depending on meta level and balance. After landing on grid it would auto deploy over 5-15 seconds again based on meta level and balance.
The attackers can now still warp to a target however it gives the target fair warning and time to destroy the probe before the scouts fleet can warp in.
As for deployable anchors they would stay in space for a certain amount of time or require some kind of fuel to stay anchored. There could be those that are short term used in single battles, or long term/more global anchors.
So the guy in the wormhole warps to the bookmark and WWWWWW's up. Then everyone gets fleet warped OMG THE TRAVESTY THAT THOSE EXTRA FEW SECONDS WILL CREATE. THINK OF ALL THE BELLY LENT YOU COULD HAVE PICKED IN THOSE FEW PRECIOUS SECONDS. DAMN YOU CCP DAMN YOU!!!!!!!111ON1E
This is the type of mature representation the CSM provides. Really, there are plenty of well-reasoned arguments against this change, and a few decent alternatives that would achieve the "stated goals" of this. There is no need to mock opposing views even if you don't agree with them. |
HiddenPorpoise
Expendable Miscreants
356
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:34:06 -
[323] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Restricition to content enablers? plenty of fleet jobs just opened up and you're going to tell me thats not content? You have to look at it from both directions. Just because there isnt an easy way to get on top of someone, doesnt mean that the other guys wont see an opportunity here.
And it's funny you mention social interaction as being key, seeing as one man doing the work and flying your ship bypasses that oh so important interaction. It's been a long time since I've flown in a fleet that was just carting us around, but for the kind of fleets I'm usually in a prober and a swarm of tacklers just got replaced with D3s. That's on top of losing unified panic warps, having one person know where something is on the far end of a system, carting noobs around level 4 missions so that they can make money fast enough to do things with the rest us, and various nice moments. And there is still the slowing down of everything when people can't group warp to sigs, particularly in WH space.
I don't like D3s and I don't like that QoL is being weakened to push them. |
Rei Amani
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:34:21 -
[324] - Quote
horrible idea
this will just make PvP even more unenjoyable |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2485
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:37:01 -
[325] - Quote
Aebe Amraen wrote:Rowells wrote:So, what happens if i warp to a corp bookmark, but i have alliance members also in my warp? Does warp not work for everyone or do they sit there wondering where everyone went? You can't warp to bookmarks at all. Doesn't matter if it's a corp bookmark and everyone in fleet is in the same corp. hm. Geuss it was someone else's post I read. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1056
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:37:12 -
[326] - Quote
Long Muppet wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote: To put this into context drone assign was largely removed as we know it. CCP said that they think it is bad when other people play the game for you.
This is a great point Manny! Maybe, just like with drone assign we should allow squad commanders to fleet warp their 10 people. This ensures you are still taking a nerfbat to the ridiculously huge nullsec fleets while not simultaneously killing small gangs. I get that having a scout in a large fleet isn't a big deal as they generally have many of them, but requiring a small gang to now dedicate one of their pilots as scout is unnecessary and ruins game play. Finding a middle ground (just as we did we drone assign) is the best option.
I totally support this - having squad leader mean something is a good thing.
The Greatest Ship Ever. Credit to Shahfluffers.
|
Caldari 5
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F. S.A.S Affirmative.
417
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:38:22 -
[327] - Quote
This change hurts small gang, more than it does large gang/fleet, mostly due to the number of bodies available to try and get warp ins with.
When you only have a fleet of 10 or so guys having 3 or more guys trying to get warp-ins is large percentage of your potential DPS doing nothing. Yet if you have a fleet of 50 or more guys, having 4 or more guys trying to get warp-ins it is much less of an issue. |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:38:28 -
[328] - Quote
Luft Reich wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:Luft Reich wrote:I see our wormhole CSM is valiantly defending the life style of people in wormhole space.... Yeah, it might be good for nullsec but have you really thought about the effects on wormhole space? Clearly not. Warping yourself or warping to Wwwww's in fleet Zomgz life is over . Dearest nullsec CSM, I have jumped through a wormhole and there are krabs (carebears) running sites. To find these krabs running sites launch combat probes and tell Sabres to jump, I then punt them to these krabs whether it be capitals or otherwise, to get initial tackle because krabs get very scared by the new signiture they see, or if they are just in the chain, the combat probes. With the proposed changes I must combat probe them down, warp on grid, hope I don't get decloacked by a random object, sleeper, or player and then have the fleet warp in. And all the while krabs see the signiture and are able to scuttle away. "You are so dumb luft we are just nerfing power projection in wh space" as Ccp has said. Well let us look at what they mean by that. Basically that means that krabs will be safer because that is who we as a community are projecting on. And two, that only large groups such as LZHX, HK, QEX, etc are doing this ganking and if you are attempting to slow them down from ganking carebears to keep wormhole space dangerous than that defeats the whole purpose of wormhole space. Also beyond killing krabs there is warping a fleet to a hole with various classes of ships, triage, guardians, T3s, etc. But I don't expect you to understand the magnitude of these changes to wormhole space life style, but I sure hope the two "wormhole csm" do. Excuse typos its 4:20 am (lol) and I wrote this on my phone.
1) Any changes that makes ganks require more skill (than 0 it requires now) are good. 2) Manfred is not a null CSM, he's a blue donut CSM. 3) wormhole has no CSM, the only wormhole CSM you had has defected to blue donut.
You know it really shows who you are when people are concerned about content quality and you just cry "mah free krabs are getting away!". |
Long Muppet
Lazerhawks
9
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:38:28 -
[329] - Quote
Luft Reich wrote: Darn you Muppet and your reasoning!
I knew you'd go all Deadliest Catch (tm) on us, so I figured no need for me to to beat a dead krab. |
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
1173
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:38:59 -
[330] - Quote
Vala Ancalagon wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:Lyra Gerie wrote:I like this change as much as I hate it. I love the idea of individuals being more responsible, but it KILLS quality of living at the same time. Unfortunately the two are fairly closely linked.
This issue goes double in wormholes where bookmarks are used almost more often for logistics than killing or fleet fights.
Perhaps a new deployable anchors and or anchor probes?
An anchor probe would show up on D-scan when launched at a 100% signal before showing on grid. They would have a warp of 4.5 AU/s and EHP around 10-25k depending on meta level and balance. After landing on grid it would auto deploy over 5-15 seconds again based on meta level and balance.
The attackers can now still warp to a target however it gives the target fair warning and time to destroy the probe before the scouts fleet can warp in.
As for deployable anchors they would stay in space for a certain amount of time or require some kind of fuel to stay anchored. There could be those that are short term used in single battles, or long term/more global anchors.
So the guy in the wormhole warps to the bookmark and WWWWWW's up. Then everyone gets fleet warped OMG THE TRAVESTY THAT THOSE EXTRA FEW SECONDS WILL CREATE. THINK OF ALL THE BELLY LENT YOU COULD HAVE PICKED IN THOSE FEW PRECIOUS SECONDS. DAMN YOU CCP DAMN YOU!!!!!!!111ON1E This is the type of mature representation the CSM provides. Really, there are plenty of well-reasoned arguments against this change, and a few decent alternatives that would achieve the "stated goals" of this. There is no need to mock opposing views even if you don't agree with them.
Calm down , forgive me for having a little fun. The CSM are players who volunteer our time out of love for the game. I am not professional and will not be professional or political. I give feedback and suggest things to improve eve thats it. I was takin the **** because a large portion of the replies to this change are people going batshit crazy over having to warp themselves in just a few instances. I was poking fun at it. Fun in a video game discussion CRAZY I KNOW!
@EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny
|
|
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
826
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:40:07 -
[331] - Quote
Question. So let's say my alt is a mission puller and I want to squad warp the combat toon to the mission at the same time. With these changes will we need to wait for the actual toon with the mission to land in the site before manually warping the combat character?
You said peronal as in dead space items etc. Just want some clarification.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Winter Archipelago
Furtherance.
374
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:40:47 -
[332] - Quote
I'll echo the sentiment that having Squad-level warps available would be a positive middle-ground. I could accept that change.
Planning a trip to Thera? Check out http://eve-scout.com/ for a list of the current connections.
Once you've made your choice, join the channels EVE-Scout or Furtherance Public and request a scout to make sure your connection is clear!
|
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
1173
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:41:08 -
[333] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:Luft Reich wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:Luft Reich wrote:I see our wormhole CSM is valiantly defending the life style of people in wormhole space.... Yeah, it might be good for nullsec but have you really thought about the effects on wormhole space? Clearly not. Warping yourself or warping to Wwwww's in fleet Zomgz life is over . Dearest nullsec CSM, I have jumped through a wormhole and there are krabs (carebears) running sites. To find these krabs running sites launch combat probes and tell Sabres to jump, I then punt them to these krabs whether it be capitals or otherwise, to get initial tackle because krabs get very scared by the new signiture they see, or if they are just in the chain, the combat probes. With the proposed changes I must combat probe them down, warp on grid, hope I don't get decloacked by a random object, sleeper, or player and then have the fleet warp in. And all the while krabs see the signiture and are able to scuttle away. "You are so dumb luft we are just nerfing power projection in wh space" as Ccp has said. Well let us look at what they mean by that. Basically that means that krabs will be safer because that is who we as a community are projecting on. And two, that only large groups such as LZHX, HK, QEX, etc are doing this ganking and if you are attempting to slow them down from ganking carebears to keep wormhole space dangerous than that defeats the whole purpose of wormhole space. Also beyond killing krabs there is warping a fleet to a hole with various classes of ships, triage, guardians, T3s, etc. But I don't expect you to understand the magnitude of these changes to wormhole space life style, but I sure hope the two "wormhole csm" do. Excuse typos its 4:20 am (lol) and I wrote this on my phone. 1) Any changes that makes ganks require more skill (than 0 it requires now) are good. 2) Manfred is not a null CSM, he's a blue donut CSM. 3) wormhole has no CSM, the only wormhole CSM you had has defected to blue donut. You know it really shows who you are when people are concerned about content quality and you just cry "mah free krabs are getting away!".
I hate blues blues should all die. You don't know me , who I am or what or what I don't support. Check yourself.
@EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny
|
Kazami Gouda
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:41:31 -
[334] - Quote
players still have autonomy in fleets even if they dont warp them selves in fleet fights. Fleet warping is just a mechanic that FC's need to position people as quickly and efficiently as possible
-1
bad idea |
Davis TetrisKing
The Vendunari End of Life
86
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:42:50 -
[335] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote:How about providing a way to launch beacons that become visible on the overview to any bookmark you have. You could let them be destructible, maybe set who they become visible to off grid in a similar fashion as assigning contracts (everyone, specific Corp, specific person, etc.)
Interesting idea. Would be nice in a covops to go somewhere, drop a beacon and move on to the next thing. It would allow you to drop temporary warp to spots around a system, temp warp ins and safes etc that the fleet can use without having to have another character just to sit at that spot. Spose they'd have to be destructible, but it makes me think of a mini cyno. |
Melody Madeveda
Republic University Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:43:57 -
[336] - Quote
Heh hope solo and small gang pvpers like flying in d3... |
Vala Ancalagon
The Order of Thelemic Ascension Novus Dominatum
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:45:01 -
[337] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Vala Ancalagon wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:Lyra Gerie wrote:I like this change as much as I hate it. I love the idea of individuals being more responsible, but it KILLS quality of living at the same time. Unfortunately the two are fairly closely linked.
This issue goes double in wormholes where bookmarks are used almost more often for logistics than killing or fleet fights.
Perhaps a new deployable anchors and or anchor probes?
An anchor probe would show up on D-scan when launched at a 100% signal before showing on grid. They would have a warp of 4.5 AU/s and EHP around 10-25k depending on meta level and balance. After landing on grid it would auto deploy over 5-15 seconds again based on meta level and balance.
The attackers can now still warp to a target however it gives the target fair warning and time to destroy the probe before the scouts fleet can warp in.
As for deployable anchors they would stay in space for a certain amount of time or require some kind of fuel to stay anchored. There could be those that are short term used in single battles, or long term/more global anchors.
So the guy in the wormhole warps to the bookmark and WWWWWW's up. Then everyone gets fleet warped OMG THE TRAVESTY THAT THOSE EXTRA FEW SECONDS WILL CREATE. THINK OF ALL THE BELLY LENT YOU COULD HAVE PICKED IN THOSE FEW PRECIOUS SECONDS. DAMN YOU CCP DAMN YOU!!!!!!!111ON1E This is the type of mature representation the CSM provides. Really, there are plenty of well-reasoned arguments against this change, and a few decent alternatives that would achieve the "stated goals" of this. There is no need to mock opposing views even if you don't agree with them. Calm down , forgive me for having a little fun. The CSM are players who volunteer our time out of love for the game. I am not professional and will not be professional or political. I give feedback and suggest things to improve eve thats it. I was takin the **** because a large portion of the replies to this change are people going batshit crazy over having to warp themselves in just a few instances. I was poking fun at it. Fun in a video game discussion CRAZY I KNOW!
I'm not uncalm, I just expect more from the CSM if they are going to represent the interests of players. I wouldn't expect Sugar to write something like you did in a millions years, that's the kind of thing I'm talking about. You were elected to a position that affords you being able to travel around the world to meet directly with devs and talk about the game. You should be above posts that approach trolling. |
Luft Reich
No Vacancies
93
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:45:43 -
[338] - Quote
[/quote]
1) Any changes that makes ganks require more skill (than 0 it requires now) are good. 2) Manfred is not a null CSM, he's a blue donut CSM. 3) wormhole has no CSM, the only wormhole CSM you had has defected to blue donut.
You know it really shows who you are when people are concerned about content quality and you just cry "mah free krabs are getting away!".[/quote]
Scared Krab uses npc alt. And last time I checked giving a little pinch to krabs is content and I think it's pretty quality.
ISD Cyberdyne liked your forum post
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16131
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:50:16 -
[339] - Quote
Kazami Gouda wrote:players still have autonomy in fleets even if they dont warp them selves in fleet fights. Fleet warping is just a mechanic that FC's need to position people as quickly and efficiently as possible
-1
bad idea
All a fleet member does these days is anchor on target, lock the broadcast and press F1. They do very little, its the FC who does all of the flying. This is but one step to returning us to what it used to be like when a pilot actually flew their ship in a fight. I hope their next move is to restrict broadcasts for repairs to squad only.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:50:28 -
[340] - Quote
Vala Ancalagon wrote:I'm not uncalm, I just expect more from the CSM if they are going to represent the interests of players. I wouldn't expect Sugar to write something like you did in a millions years, that's the kind of thing I'm talking about. You were elected to a position that affords you being able to travel around the world to meet directly with devs and talk about the game. You should be above posts that approach trolling. Blue donut CSM represent the interests of blue donut holders, so it really is no surprise... ...that said, I agree with every troll word he spoke. The change is good, and even with the worst look at it, not the end of the world, which you seem to be sure of. |
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
289
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:51:12 -
[341] - Quote
Sienna Vanjarc wrote:Don't create boring space jobs (warpin providers), more kiting and don't make it easier just to farm kills (more stragglers, more fail warps).
Encourage brawling and hull trading, make the game more fun for everyone, not just the perfect organized, perfect skilled players. But I like warping around cloaked sneaking up on people, providing warp ins for my bros and zipping around in a frigate tackling stranglers and dealing with the enemy fleet frigates. It is really fun.
I guess I'm playing the game wrong.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Long Muppet
Lazerhawks
9
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:52:54 -
[342] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote: 1) Any changes that makes ganks require more skill (than 0 it requires now) are good.
This isn't the least bit true. Ganks require a lot of skill and coordination.
Wormhole site running, done properly, is nearly risk-free. CCP has stated several times they want risk to be involved, even going so far as to suggest the might delay sigs popping up on scanner to add some risk. With the ability to close off all connections, the only way to catch these guys is to roll into them. The moment you do they notice and have the ability to warp off.
The only way to catch them is to have combat probes pre-loaded and a sabre to be "punted" to the site runners. Even when done perfectly site runners are still able to get out before your sabre lands. By adding the need to warp your scout to the site runners, we are adding precious seconds to the process, which (not even exaggerating) will likely decrease their risk further by upwards of 50%. |
Cmore Hanaya
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:53:39 -
[343] - Quote
So if i understand this right. A ship or fleet has twice the amount of time to escape from probes being on scan and also It encourages sniping and kiting fleets and removes brawling fleets |
Steven Hackett
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
151
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:54:16 -
[344] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Luft Reich wrote:I see our wormhole CSM is valiantly defending the life style of people in wormhole space.... Yeah, it might be good for nullsec but have you really thought about the effects on wormhole space? Clearly not. Warping yourself or warping to Wwwww's in fleet Zomgz life is over . Hey Manny... Go bother CCP to fix their code so we can get instant bookmarks.. Also, remove titan bridges and nerf supers.. k thx..
Manfred Sideous wrote:Calm down , forgive me for having a little fun. The CSM are players who volunteer our time out of love for the game. I am not professional and will not be professional or political. Feel free to do us all a favor.. and quit.. thx.. |
Vala Ancalagon
The Order of Thelemic Ascension Novus Dominatum
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:54:23 -
[345] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:Vala Ancalagon wrote:I'm not uncalm, I just expect more from the CSM if they are going to represent the interests of players. I wouldn't expect Sugar to write something like you did in a millions years, that's the kind of thing I'm talking about. You were elected to a position that affords you being able to travel around the world to meet directly with devs and talk about the game. You should be above posts that approach trolling. Blue donut CSM represent the interests of blue donut holders, so it really is no surprise... ...that said, I agree with every troll word he spoke. The change is good, and even with the worst look at it, not the end of the world, which you seem to be sure of.
I don't think it's the end of the world, adjustments will be made if the changes go through. That doesn't mean I can't voice my opinion on the matter. I'll agree there are some end of the world posts by others, there are always doomsdayers! I respect your viewpoint. |
Luft Reich
No Vacancies
93
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:56:49 -
[346] - Quote
Long Muppet wrote:Luft Reich wrote: Darn you Muppet and your reasoning!
I knew you'd go all Deadliest Catch (tm) on us, so I figured no need for me to to beat a dead krab.
Brb apologizing to the hotel for waking people up from laughing.
ISD Cyberdyne liked your forum post
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31718
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:57:53 -
[347] - Quote
I'd like to see multiboxing disallowed. Then you can have fleet roles filled by different players, and the sense of accomplishment and teamwork that comes with it. Until then, you're going to have changes like this one that are made for convoluted and obscure reasons.
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
|
Davis TetrisKing
The Vendunari End of Life
86
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 03:59:38 -
[348] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Sienna Vanjarc wrote:Don't create boring space jobs (warpin providers), more kiting and don't make it easier just to farm kills (more stragglers, more fail warps).
Encourage brawling and hull trading, make the game more fun for everyone, not just the perfect organized, perfect skilled players. But I like warping around cloaked sneaking up on people, providing warp ins for my bros and zipping around in a frigate tackling stranglers and dealing with the enemy fleet frigates. It is really fun. I guess I'm playing the game wrong.
Please share your fit! I would like to warp around cloaked, provide warps in, be able to tackle stragglers and deal with the enemy fleet frigates! Just not sure what ship will do all of this... |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31718
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:00:51 -
[349] - Quote
Cloaky Proteus.
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16132
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:02:07 -
[350] - Quote
Davis TetrisKing wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Sienna Vanjarc wrote:Don't create boring space jobs (warpin providers), more kiting and don't make it easier just to farm kills (more stragglers, more fail warps).
Encourage brawling and hull trading, make the game more fun for everyone, not just the perfect organized, perfect skilled players. But I like warping around cloaked sneaking up on people, providing warp ins for my bros and zipping around in a frigate tackling stranglers and dealing with the enemy fleet frigates. It is really fun. I guess I'm playing the game wrong. Please share your fit! I would like to warp around cloaked, provide warps in, be able to tackle stragglers and deal with the enemy fleet frigates! Just not sure what ship will do all of this...
Pilgrim, t3, combat fitted cov-ops with balls of steel.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
Davis TetrisKing
The Vendunari End of Life
86
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:03:02 -
[351] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:Cloaky Proteus.
I knew it. Sadface. Damn T3s. |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:04:53 -
[352] - Quote
Long Muppet wrote:This isn't the least bit true. Ganks require a lot of skill and coordination. Ganks require skill? Maybe pressing F1 is considered a skill nowadays too?
Long Muppet wrote:Wormhole site running, done properly, is nearly risk-free. CCP has stated several times they want risk to be involved, even going so far as to suggest the might delay sigs popping up on scanner to add some risk. With the ability to close off all connections, the only way to catch these guys is to roll into them. The moment you do they notice and have the ability to warp off. There are more ways to add risk than making an already dumbed down ganking thing even easier(hard but possible). Ganking desperately needs a skill component to it compensating for the infinite reward it offers. I admit I'm not up to date with the new wormhole stuff, but tell me, are frig holes easy to close? That's the example of added risk.
Long Muppet wrote:The only way to catch them is to have combat probes pre-loaded and a sabre to be "punted" to the site runners. Even when done perfectly site runners are still able to get out before your sabre lands. By adding the need to warp your scout to the site runners, we are adding precious seconds to the process, which (not even exaggerating) will likely decrease their risk further by upwards of 50%. And, in your opinion, they shouldn't be able to get out? Just because your highness has dedicated 10 seconds of his time to multibox-punt a sabre to them? You see, the thing about ganking is that it wins even if you do nothing. They warped out - you won, they lose. But for some people winning is just not enough I see, they want not just to cause people to bleed playtime, they want to get free stuff from them, because they took that oh-so-skilled effort to get a sabre and a scanner together and oh-so-skillfully pressed that scan button with combat probes out. Being an autowin already, it desperately needs some skill component, but, as much as I don't like it, this change is doing it unintended. |
Inslander Wessette
Killers of Paranoid Souls Universal Paranoia Alliance
21
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:07:26 -
[353] - Quote
@CCP Fozzie/Larrkin
As hunting site runner goes . Most of the time a cloaky cannot warp to the target as usually the sites are gated . warping a buzzard to get a warpin the buzzard will decloak and target runs off . For this reason we fleet warp Combat recons or interceptors using the scout .
This mechanism hampers catching site runners off guard . There may be a million of work around for this . But in the end it will come down to harder probing and the target getting away . |
Grinder2210
Most Unknown
36
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:08:59 -
[354] - Quote
ArmEagle Kusoni wrote:So, to run sites (in w-space) we can't easily warp there all together anymore. Everyone will need the bookmarks or have to wait for one player to have landed. Alliance bookmarks would only make that slightly less of an issue.
That's just one example of how people will become unnecessarily more vulnarable, or things taking more time.
Send one of you cloaked eyes to said site ... fleet warps to cloaked alt ... do site as normal ...
That was hard .. just sayin |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2486
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:10:09 -
[355] - Quote
Davis TetrisKing wrote:Rain6637 wrote:Cloaky Proteus. I knew it. Sadface. Damn T3s. theres always those alliance tournament ships. If you're willing to lose the cloak, some more options open up.
I geuss a cloaky interdictor kinda does that without the benefits of covops cloak. Still a blast to fly though. |
Canon Makanen
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:10:23 -
[356] - Quote
this is the most disappointed change EVER, This is a Big change and you never inform us before, very disappointed, |
Scott Ormands
The Desolate Order Brave Collective
35
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:12:57 -
[357] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:Scott Ormands wrote:Jezza McWaffle wrote:So you will now implement automatic bookmarking at a corporation and alliance level yes? Or is this just another way to **** up wormholers now. Since WE WILL have to wait for the bookmarks to propagate (up to 5-10 mins) unless we have to have a scout at the exact warp in at every single fight. Example if you have a group consisting of more than just 1 corp. Group A wants to fight Group B Group A consists of multiple corps Currently Group A can fleet warp onto the enemy fleet or wormhole without everyone involved having a propagated bookmark. However after this change if the group does not have the bookmark then they have no way of getting into the fight at the same time as the rest of the fleet. So all fights will be delayed until everyone has the bookmarks <10 mins. Good job CCP... +1 I can no longer warp my entire fleet to the hole and expect them to land in a cohesive group, first my T3's land and get primaried then a minute later my Bhaals land and then 2 minutes later my triage lands by that time we are all dead. And that's assuming all of us have the BM which can take quite a long time to happen. CCP i am adamantly against this change. Please reconsider. I have a revolting solution for you: WARP IN TURNS. Warp your triage first, wait, warp your Bhaals, wait, warp your T3s. Properly timed, you arrive at the same time and it actually rewards you for being GUD at calculating warp timing. Your drop time would be the same as if you were in a fleet warp, and as a bonus, your fleet will not appear on dscan all at once. Otherwise - goons are overheating rapid tear launcher on this, means the change is great, this is the best change'o'meter I know.
Sure I absolutely want to have to mental math the right time to warp my individual fleet members across my 80+AU systems so they all land in the same place at the same time. What if I dont want them to know what I'm dropping piece meal, what if I'm small gang roaming across multiple corps, more alts is not an answer. Myself and other FC's already triple box, dont make it even more complicated when it doesn't have to be. Just because there is a way around it doesn't mean they should have to be used |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2486
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:13:39 -
[358] - Quote
Canon Makanen wrote:this is the most disappointed change EVER, This is a Big change and you never inform us before, very disappointed, actually he, mentioned it a few months back at eve down under. They surely didnt publiscize it everywhere, but thats what this thread is supposed to be for. |
Budrick3
POS Party Low-Class
88
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:14:48 -
[359] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Vala Ancalagon wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:Lyra Gerie wrote:I like this change as much as I hate it. I love the idea of individuals being more responsible, but it KILLS quality of living at the same time. Unfortunately the two are fairly closely linked.
This issue goes double in wormholes where bookmarks are used almost more often for logistics than killing or fleet fights.
Perhaps a new deployable anchors and or anchor probes?
An anchor probe would show up on D-scan when launched at a 100% signal before showing on grid. They would have a warp of 4.5 AU/s and EHP around 10-25k depending on meta level and balance. After landing on grid it would auto deploy over 5-15 seconds again based on meta level and balance.
The attackers can now still warp to a target however it gives the target fair warning and time to destroy the probe before the scouts fleet can warp in.
As for deployable anchors they would stay in space for a certain amount of time or require some kind of fuel to stay anchored. There could be those that are short term used in single battles, or long term/more global anchors.
So the guy in the wormhole warps to the bookmark and WWWWWW's up. Then everyone gets fleet warped OMG THE TRAVESTY THAT THOSE EXTRA FEW SECONDS WILL CREATE. THINK OF ALL THE BELLY LENT YOU COULD HAVE PICKED IN THOSE FEW PRECIOUS SECONDS. DAMN YOU CCP DAMN YOU!!!!!!!111ON1E This is the type of mature representation the CSM provides. Really, there are plenty of well-reasoned arguments against this change, and a few decent alternatives that would achieve the "stated goals" of this. There is no need to mock opposing views even if you don't agree with them. Calm down , forgive me for having a little fun. The CSM are players who volunteer our time out of love for the game. I am not professional and will not be professional or political. I give feedback and suggest things to improve eve thats it. I was takin the **** because a large portion of the replies to this change are people going batshit crazy over having to warp themselves in just a few instances. I was poking fun at it. Fun in a video game discussion CRAZY I KNOW!
Poor attempt at saving face.
Rule of all holes, stop digging when you are in one.
Your embarrassing your alliance, the people that put faith in voting for you, and most of all, your embarrassing yourself.
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2170
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:16:06 -
[360] - Quote
I'd prefer if small groups could still be fleet warped as usual. The prober shouldn't have to be a tackler too. At least make T3s easier to probe down (and give links a weapons timer while you're at it).
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16133
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:19:33 -
[361] - Quote
Budrick3 wrote:
Poor attempt at saving face.
Rule of all holes, stop digging when you are in one.
Your embarrassing your alliance, the people that put faith in voting for you, and most of all, your embarrassing yourself.
The only embarrassing thing here is you going out of your way to be offended at nothing.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Klyith
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
170
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:20:06 -
[362] - Quote
Since this is a nerf to the power of probing (though not a direct nerf to probes themselves), lets address the un-probable garbage in this release as well.
Metacide the ECCM modules
ECM has been nerfed multiple times over the years. I get it, ECM is kinda sucky to be on the receiving end and OP when the chance to succeed is too high. However, sensor strengths have gone up and up. Hulls with more base strength, skills to improve it, and ECCM mods that have remained just as powerful as were when ECCM was supposedly the counter to ECM. Now nobody fits ECCM as a counter because it's hardly necessary, instead it's become a counter to probing.
Sensor Backup Arrays - Change these to a flat bonus rather than the current (weak) bonus. A flat +8 to +10 would be great for small ships concerned about ECM such as T1 logi frigs. Midslot ECCM - Lower the bonus substantially, say +66% from the current +98%. Make their overheat +50% rather than the current +30%. As a ECM counter they'd be good to run continuously, and when directly targeted by ECM ships you hit the overload for improved resistance. |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:22:31 -
[363] - Quote
Scott Ormands wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Scott Ormands wrote:Jezza McWaffle wrote:So you will now implement automatic bookmarking at a corporation and alliance level yes? Or is this just another way to **** up wormholers now. Since WE WILL have to wait for the bookmarks to propagate (up to 5-10 mins) unless we have to have a scout at the exact warp in at every single fight. Example if you have a group consisting of more than just 1 corp. Group A wants to fight Group B Group A consists of multiple corps Currently Group A can fleet warp onto the enemy fleet or wormhole without everyone involved having a propagated bookmark. However after this change if the group does not have the bookmark then they have no way of getting into the fight at the same time as the rest of the fleet. So all fights will be delayed until everyone has the bookmarks <10 mins. Good job CCP... +1 I can no longer warp my entire fleet to the hole and expect them to land in a cohesive group, first my T3's land and get primaried then a minute later my Bhaals land and then 2 minutes later my triage lands by that time we are all dead. And that's assuming all of us have the BM which can take quite a long time to happen. CCP i am adamantly against this change. Please reconsider. I have a revolting solution for you: WARP IN TURNS. Warp your triage first, wait, warp your Bhaals, wait, warp your T3s. Properly timed, you arrive at the same time and it actually rewards you for being GUD at calculating warp timing. Your drop time would be the same as if you were in a fleet warp, and as a bonus, your fleet will not appear on dscan all at once. Otherwise - goons are overheating rapid tear launcher on this, means the change is great, this is the best change'o'meter I know. Sure I absolutely want to have to mental math the right time to warp my individual fleet members across my 80+AU systems so they all land in the same place at the same time. What if I dont want them to know what I'm dropping piece meal, what if I'm small gang roaming across multiple corps, more alts is not an answer. Myself and other FC's already triple box, dont make it even more complicated when it doesn't have to be. Just because there is a way around it doesn't mean they should have to be used
I have a revolting solution for you: DELEGATE. Have a designated fleet nerd call warps while you do whatever it is you do. |
Heinrich Rotwang
Zentralrat deutscher Fliesentischbesitzer e.V.
82
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:27:23 -
[364] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: A cloaky prober can't get into position so the FC can fleet warp to him/her?
There are 100MN reasons saying "HAHAHAHA - no!"
|
Naglerr
Sanguine Penguin Rote Kapelle
34
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:33:54 -
[365] - Quote
KanmanDS wrote:Everyone else has already clearly illustrated the grossly negative impact this change will have on nearly all aspects of game play. This is so clearly the worst decision CCP has made in years, that it all boils down to this single sentence:
If you make this change, I will unsubscribe, because you are no longer selling a product I am interested in purchasing.
I can understand what motivated this proposed change, but let me explain what this proposed change does to my regular gameplay:
The fleet I am typically a part of consists of between 3 and 10 combat ships and 2 to 4 scouts. Typically all of our scouts have probes deployed. The number of actual people in these fleets is between 3 and 9 and exist in 2 different alliances. So roughly half of our fleet is actively working to get us the warp in on whatever bad that is existing in space so we can make them explode, not your typical FC does all the work fleet.
By constructing our fleet in a particular way and actively swapping fleet leadership roles when needed we can manage to achieve warpins on nearly all targets we want to engage. We heavily make use of fleet warps to bookmarks and probe returns as a method of pvp engagement generation. With the proposed changes our method of combat becomes completely not possible. Yes it is true that we can warp the scout on grid with the target, but that only doubles the time required to perform the same action that was previously possible with a reasonable level of efficiency and at greatly increased risk to our scanners. This will result in missed opportunities on targets for no observable gain in mechanics.
TLDR: We aren't a pile of F1 jockeys and we are being significantly adversely affected by this change. I doubt that the activities I routinely participate in are the ones that CCP is trying to nerf, and yet the change all but destroys our current tactics.
If this change goes live it will only reinforce the fact that CCP does not care about feedback from their customers. We're at 18 pages of no and I've not seen even one comment to suggest this change is being reconsidered.
If CCP turns this product into one that I no longer want, then I will not hesitate to discontinue paying for it. |
Vanilla Mooses
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
14
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:35:54 -
[366] - Quote
Dearest CCP:
You have 18 pages of (with very few exceptions) players from all walks of EVE telling you this is a awful idea.
I understand why you want to make these changes - to encourage fleet members to have to take a more active role during fleets, versus just sitting there and having their FC or WC or SC do all the warping for them. Sure, I can I see that. I can even get behind that. But this approach is not the way.
Here's a simple solution: Allow someone using probes (be they combat or core probes!) to broadcast: warp to (a ship or a probed result). The same for bookmarks that a individual player has, allow that player to broadcast it, and members of the fleet may now warp to the broadcast.
This accomplishes your goal of forcing fleet members to have to take a more active role without adding a whole new layer of frustration and tedium to EVE. When players head out on a fleet, they want to be doing the stuff they see in your trailers, they don't want to be delegated to serving as a suicide "warp to me" beacon in space. Think about it, does that sound like a fun role to have?
Also, and I would love a serious answer from a Dev on this one (if possible?) ... was any time spent thinking about the logic of this change? We live in a universe that has developed technology that is amazingly advanced, developed true FTL travel, bridged the massive gaps between star systems, yet somehow a probing ship that is in communication with it's probes cannot relay that data to the rest of their fleet to take action on? When you say it out loud, it makes such little sense. Again, I understand taking the ability for the FC to simply warp the blob to those results away (even if I think it is a bad idea!) but not allowing individual members to warp to a broadcast makes very little sense and in my opinion is a very silly change.
Please slow down and focus on what you have already started. Fozziesov has been delayed, many capital ships are still in dire need of balancing, risk vs. reward is woefully broken in many areas, jump fatigue needs a good looking over as almost every single person I know feels that it is way too harsh and limiting, obnoxious bugs exist that have gone on for a long time without a fix (grouping guns in station and only having one of them fire out of the entire group, anyone?), corp management/roles/titles are beyond a pain to configure and use, the new icons are still unreadable @ 90% UI scaling, and this is just the issues I have noticed in under a year of playing. I am confident that players older then me can add to this list, and these are all things that you have started to work on and simply stopped.
In closing, I highly recommend that you listen to your players, as they are trying to tell you something here. Also, perhaps now is a good time to focus on finishing the work you have already started and making "quality of life" improvements before making massive changes to game mechanics that quite frankly make very little sense and feel very much like a "nuke it from orbit" approach to a goal that could be achieved without quite as much collateral damage and wide spread effects to so many aspects of game play.
Thanks for the time and your ear! |
Youmu Konbaku
Archangels Inc. End of Natural Lifetime
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:35:54 -
[367] - Quote
This changed is the most stupid ideapÇé If you make this change, I will unsubscribe, because you are no longer selling a product I am interested in purchasing. |
Kalel Nimrott
Henthell Corporation
1149
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:38:34 -
[368] - Quote
Explain to me, like if I was a little kid, how on earth would removing fleet warps to bookmarks or sigs would improve the individual participation of the members of a fleet? If you can explain that, then you have my permission.
Henthell Corporation
ESD Director.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:40:29 -
[369] - Quote
Naglerr wrote: By constructing our fleet in a particular way and actively swapping fleet leadership roles when needed we can manage to achieve warpins on nearly all targets we want to engage. We heavily make use of fleet warps to bookmarks and probe returns as a method of pvp engagement generation. With the proposed changes our method of combat becomes completely not possible. Yes it is true that we can warp the scout on grid with the target, but that only doubles the time required to perform the same action that was previously possible with a reasonable level of efficiency and at greatly increased risk to our scanners. This will result in missed opportunities on targets for no observable gain in mechanics.
Adapt.
Kills are not a commodity that you are owed -- they are a reward. If they become more difficult to acquire, the reward should be sweeter.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:41:25 -
[370] - Quote
Vanilla Mooses wrote:Dearest CCP:
You have 18 pages of (with very few exceptions) players from all walks of EVE telling you this is a awful idea.
So?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:43:19 -
[371] - Quote
Youmu Konbaku wrote:This changed is the most stupid ideapÇé If you make this change, I will unsubscribe, because you are no longer selling a product I am interested in purchasing. This is a poor way to influence game design decisions. Holding your subscription hostage has, historically, never produced results.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
826
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:45:12 -
[372] - Quote
Personally I feel no justification for these changes as stated by others. Fleet warping is a mechanic designated to help members get on grid with targets quicker and to now deal with the cohesion of different ships warping at different speeds. While I think the thought is there I think in practice and applicability creates more headaches for content creators than CCP would like to admit.
Also in junction with probes, squad warps, etc this makes catching Supers in low sec nigh impossible with landing on grid, within point range, being able to catch one as it comes out of warp, moves through systems at very quick align speeds etc. All in all I seriously think these changes are terrible utterly disastrous when it comes to fleet positioning too.
If your warp in dies then it's pretty much akin to being off balance in a fight before it even begins and missed opportunities to capture or pounce upon targets unawares. And let's be frank here.
This is JUST another way for CCP to make competitive groups make more alts and accounts which means more profit for them. It also placea the burden upon FC's and content creators squarely on their shoulders again by making them multi box more accounts and do more things.
This isn't about having anoher player doing something useful. It's about another guy plexing or paying another 15 USD a month to cover another botched half baked idea at the behest of a few people who want this under the guise of "content". If anything this will stop people from wanting to even play with grid issues, fleet placement, establishing tackle, etc.
All in all CCP are shooting themselves in the foot. And let's not even start on the WH issues that CCP have pigeonholed groups into using since phoebe to traverse space.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Carrey Young
Eye Of Insight SpaceMonkey's Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:47:05 -
[373] - Quote
This changed is the most stupid idea. The real world become more and more reasonable and automatic,but in EVE become degeneration. And last we can tell people ,who will play EVE,: Wellcome to 'Middle Ages of EVE ' |
Louanne Barros
Hole Violence Whole Squid
43
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:47:12 -
[374] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote: Your point?
My point is that "Warping yourself or warping to Wwwww's in fleet" is not a replacement for fleet warp, as it does not synchronize the arrival of your ships. It's so unhelpful for the task that I'm grinning at the absurdity of him suggesting it.
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2487
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:48:20 -
[375] - Quote
Kalel Nimrott wrote:Explain to me, like if I was a little kid, how on earth would removing fleet warps to bookmarks or sigs would improve the individual participation of the members of a fleet? If you can explain that, then you have my permission. All of the work and background alt work done by an FC is now to be done by a fleet member if you wish to remain as probe-mobile as possible. And in the event of probes not being an option, tackle ships (or anyone for that matter) now become potential and interdict-able warp ins for a fleet. For a fleet to be as mobile as possible (very important for some doctrines) the FC will need to delegate to members and have backups if necessary.
More people hunting and moving around in essence. Not just the fleet as a whole.
You're typical ship of the line won't have to do much more than warp himself if a ship is in position. However, your supporting scouts will be needed for more pings and killing of possible pings. Which is also why I believe ships capable (without axing their fleet contribution elsewhere) for scouting and probing need to be expanded a bit. |
Jack Miton
WeebleCORP
4491
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:48:52 -
[376] - Quote
Long Muppet wrote:Orca Platypus wrote: 1) Any changes that makes ganks require more skill (than 0 it requires now) are good.
This isn't the least bit true. Ganks require a lot of skill and coordination. haha! oh wait, you're being serious... BAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
There is no Bob.
Stuck In Here With Me: http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/
Down the Pipe: http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout
|
Naglerr
Sanguine Penguin Rote Kapelle
35
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:50:47 -
[377] - Quote
Querns wrote:Naglerr wrote: By constructing our fleet in a particular way and actively swapping fleet leadership roles when needed we can manage to achieve warpins on nearly all targets we want to engage. We heavily make use of fleet warps to bookmarks and probe returns as a method of pvp engagement generation. With the proposed changes our method of combat becomes completely not possible. Yes it is true that we can warp the scout on grid with the target, but that only doubles the time required to perform the same action that was previously possible with a reasonable level of efficiency and at greatly increased risk to our scanners. This will result in missed opportunities on targets for no observable gain in mechanics.
Adapt. Kills are not a commodity that you are owed -- they are a reward. If they become more difficult to acquire, the reward should be sweeter.
I would be perfectly happy to adapt to a mechanic that has at least some positive impact. This change is one that simply makes more burdensome the same tasks I've previously had to complete in order to earn kills. I guess I'm just not understanding how literally removing functionality from a product is supposed to make it more appealing to the customers of said product. Can you explain that one to me Querns? |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
289
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:51:25 -
[378] - Quote
Querns wrote:Youmu Konbaku wrote:This changed is the most stupid ideapÇé If you make this change, I will unsubscribe, because you are no longer selling a product I am interested in purchasing. This is a poor way to influence game design decisions. Holding your subscription hostage has, historically, never produced results. It worked for Incarnagate. That said, this change is for the best.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:51:36 -
[379] - Quote
Louanne Barros wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote: Your point?
My point is that "Warping yourself or warping to Wwwww's in fleet" is not a replacement for fleet warp, as it does not synchronize the arrival of your ships. It's so unhelpful for the task that I'm grinning at the absurdity of him suggesting it. It appears you'll simply have to work around the fact that ships warp at different speeds.
Also, remember that warp speed is a ship stat that can be modified. I, personally, enjoy having it as high as is practical.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Potamus Jenkins
eXceed Inc.
157
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:53:13 -
[380] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Ele Rebellion wrote:Anoms are the green sites you can warp to without scanning down. We should still be able to fleet warp to those Thats correct. Aebe Amraen wrote:Probing and tackling are already important roles in any fleet; what this change actually does is gets rid of the notion of a prober as a stand-alone role. The prober must also be a tackler, with all the risk that entails. A cloaky prober can't get into position so the FC can fleet warp to him/her? Aebe Amraen wrote:2. My second concern is about a very particular, but rather common, scenario: trying to catch cloaky, nullified, nearly-unscannable off-grid T3 links ships. In some configurations these can perma-AB at over 1km/s, aligned out to another safespot. The current best practice is to get a prober with perfect skills, a bonused ship, and virtue probes and have him warp a squad of fast tackle (T1 frigates/interceptors or specialized tackle bombers) on top of the boosting ship, hoping that one of them will be able to catch him before he reacts and warps away.
Catching these ships is already extremely difficult, and will be nearly impossible under the proposed changes. No bonused scanning ship will be able to tackle them, as they have at a minimum 5s lock delay after decloaking. No unbonused ship will be able to scan them down. In the time it takes for the prober to warp to the target and then have the tackle squad warp to him the 1km/s probing ship will be out of range.
I have interests on both sides of this scenario, having hunted PL off-grid boosters with my perfect scanning alt during the recent Catch wars and with two of my own perfect combat boosting alts. I guess I won't mind having my boosting alts be effectively invulnerable for a while, but it does seem like poor balance. This is a really good point. Awesome post in general. I don't have an answer for you just yet, but we're working on it.
"you cannot activate your propulsion module while running command links" |
|
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
826
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:53:51 -
[381] - Quote
Querns wrote:Naglerr wrote: By constructing our fleet in a particular way and actively swapping fleet leadership roles when needed we can manage to achieve warpins on nearly all targets we want to engage. We heavily make use of fleet warps to bookmarks and probe returns as a method of pvp engagement generation. With the proposed changes our method of combat becomes completely not possible. Yes it is true that we can warp the scout on grid with the target, but that only doubles the time required to perform the same action that was previously possible with a reasonable level of efficiency and at greatly increased risk to our scanners. This will result in missed opportunities on targets for no observable gain in mechanics.
Adapt. Kills are not a commodity that you are owed -- they are a reward. If they become more difficult to acquire, the reward should be sweeter.
Oh shut up. This is a line of utter BS and you know it. People shouldn't be punished for CCP's constant grid issues. There's been dozens of times where you land off grid, out of place, out of position from a target. Mere seconds are what count in these types of positioning and execution.
As any FC worth their salt. It's yet again another account some poor bastard has to log in just to try and maintain some sort of fleet cohesion with constant grid issues. There's no "Grandmaster" difficultly level for putting up with terrible game mechanics and half baked ideas.
Go tout more H1Z1 advertising and leave Eve to the rest of us who give a ****.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:56:24 -
[382] - Quote
Naglerr wrote:Querns wrote:Naglerr wrote: By constructing our fleet in a particular way and actively swapping fleet leadership roles when needed we can manage to achieve warpins on nearly all targets we want to engage. We heavily make use of fleet warps to bookmarks and probe returns as a method of pvp engagement generation. With the proposed changes our method of combat becomes completely not possible. Yes it is true that we can warp the scout on grid with the target, but that only doubles the time required to perform the same action that was previously possible with a reasonable level of efficiency and at greatly increased risk to our scanners. This will result in missed opportunities on targets for no observable gain in mechanics.
Adapt. Kills are not a commodity that you are owed -- they are a reward. If they become more difficult to acquire, the reward should be sweeter. I would be perfectly happy to adapt to a mechanic that has at least some positive impact. This change is one that simply makes more burdensome the same tasks I've previously had to complete in order to earn kills. I guess I'm just not understanding how literally removing functionality from a product is supposed to make it more appealing to the customers of said product. Can you explain that one to me Querns? This change has plenty of positive impact -- it severely diminishes the efficacy of bombers, whose omnipresence choked off available fleet comps to those that could either not be caught, or had small enough signature radii to shrug off bombing runs. Assuming workarounds are not found, we could see the resurgence of shield doctrines for subcaps. This returns a whole host of ships to combat effectiveness, which, to me, is a win.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2487
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:57:04 -
[383] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Querns wrote:Youmu Konbaku wrote:This changed is the most stupid ideapÇé If you make this change, I will unsubscribe, because you are no longer selling a product I am interested in purchasing. This is a poor way to influence game design decisions. Holding your subscription hostage has, historically, never produced results. It worked for Incarnagate. That said, this change is for the best. If a patch goes by without someone threatening to unsub, I almost feel as if there was nothing of value in the patch. Not really, but you get my point. |
kelmiler delbone
Group 2 Holdings
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:58:55 -
[384] - Quote
We've always been able to warp fleets to bookmarks, this change is apparently aimed at bomber wings, which make runs in 8's....
Sounds like someone's been disturbing CCP's little friends blobs and they aren't having that! (again) |
Canon Makanen
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 04:59:07 -
[385] - Quote
CCP, let's say in this way, FC create content, i mean most of the fleet need an FC to lead the fleet. Now you are nerfing the FC role, nerfing the experience of themn+îyou are actually nerfing everyone, just ruin the game. The icons are really bad, but this does not affect the mechanic and we will get used to it, but for this one, you are forcing people to quit. |
Destoya
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
421
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:00:34 -
[386] - Quote
I do really like the squad warp idea.
Go with that, see how people react and adapt and go from there. Squad leadership mechanics have been almost completely ignored over the course of eve's history so it's an interesting idea from that aspect too.
Nothing stopping you guys from making another pass in six months or so once the sodium levels have dropped a bit. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:03:12 -
[387] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Querns wrote:Naglerr wrote: By constructing our fleet in a particular way and actively swapping fleet leadership roles when needed we can manage to achieve warpins on nearly all targets we want to engage. We heavily make use of fleet warps to bookmarks and probe returns as a method of pvp engagement generation. With the proposed changes our method of combat becomes completely not possible. Yes it is true that we can warp the scout on grid with the target, but that only doubles the time required to perform the same action that was previously possible with a reasonable level of efficiency and at greatly increased risk to our scanners. This will result in missed opportunities on targets for no observable gain in mechanics.
Adapt. Kills are not a commodity that you are owed -- they are a reward. If they become more difficult to acquire, the reward should be sweeter. Oh shut up. This is a line of utter BS and you know it. People shouldn't be punished for CCP's constant grid issues. There's been dozens of times where you land off grid, out of place, out of position from a target. Mere seconds are what count in these types of positioning and execution. As any FC worth their salt. It's yet again another account some poor bastard has to log in just to try and maintain some sort of fleet cohesion with constant grid issues. There's no "Grandmaster" difficultly level for putting up with terrible game mechanics and half baked ideas. Go tout more H1Z1 advertising and leave Eve to the rest of us who give a ****. Nice, a pithy throwaway line at the end. This is sure to increase the level of discourse!
It's a little amusing to me that you see the change and immediately think, "aw man, now the FC has to multibox MORE accounts!" Did you consider delegating tasks to others? The FC doesn't have to be the only decision maker in the fleet.
Also, if we're going to sink to the level of dragging in the alliance membership into the conversation -- consider that my alliance is generally considered to have the lowest skill level possible, when considering line members of fleets. As such, we can be said to rely on the FC far more than any other group in the game. Yet, all of the thought leaders of Goonswarm Federation are unilaterally in support of the change. Curious...
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Naglerr
Sanguine Penguin Rote Kapelle
35
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:07:04 -
[388] - Quote
Querns wrote:Naglerr wrote:Querns wrote:Naglerr wrote: By constructing our fleet in a particular way and actively swapping fleet leadership roles when needed we can manage to achieve warpins on nearly all targets we want to engage. We heavily make use of fleet warps to bookmarks and probe returns as a method of pvp engagement generation. With the proposed changes our method of combat becomes completely not possible. Yes it is true that we can warp the scout on grid with the target, but that only doubles the time required to perform the same action that was previously possible with a reasonable level of efficiency and at greatly increased risk to our scanners. This will result in missed opportunities on targets for no observable gain in mechanics.
Adapt. Kills are not a commodity that you are owed -- they are a reward. If they become more difficult to acquire, the reward should be sweeter. I would be perfectly happy to adapt to a mechanic that has at least some positive impact. This change is one that simply makes more burdensome the same tasks I've previously had to complete in order to earn kills. I guess I'm just not understanding how literally removing functionality from a product is supposed to make it more appealing to the customers of said product. Can you explain that one to me Querns? This change has plenty of positive impact -- it severely diminishes the efficacy of bombers, whose omnipresence choked off available fleet comps to those that could either not be caught, or had small enough signature radii to shrug off bombing runs. Assuming workarounds are not found, we could see the resurgence of shield doctrines for subcaps. This returns a whole host of ships to combat effectiveness, which, to me, is a win.
So you're telling me that the only way to nerf bombers is to nerf everything? I mean, why would you start with the hull bonuses on bombers? Or possibly adjusting the stats of bomb launchers? It's clearly a much better answer to mess with the mechanics that everyone uses than simply nerf the thing that is the target of a nerf. |
Agama Tissant
Gladius Veritatis Fidelas Constans
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:07:23 -
[389] - Quote
Started with jump fatigue, then fozziesov, now ... no more fleet warps. Updating EVE is a good thing, but radically changing the way we play within our fleets is very WRONG!
Quote: Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members.
Actually it's more than just changing the way we play, is just about FORCING us to play as you developers want to ... in a sandbox game!
I'll unsubscribe 3 accounts if this gets implemented, this is way too much ! |
Enzaki
S0utherN Comfort DARKNESS.
19
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:07:49 -
[390] - Quote
ccp WTF !!! kick that fozzi out of ccp NOW HE is ******* the game up ....... |
|
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
826
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:08:00 -
[391] - Quote
Maybe this is a bit of reflection but am I right in thinking that CCP have no clue what direction they want to take things in? It just seems to me from these terrible icons and "UI" changes without really any sort of trial and error (just dumping these in our laps as mini changes in small patches), to now these unwarranted grid and warping mechanics.
Why? I seriously fail to see the explicit reason why these things are paramount. I fail to see why CCP nerfs weapons platforms already niche instead of the ships themselves. And worst yet these changes are still implemented without any real sort of constructive changes.
What's the point? Are fleet mechanics broken? Is there a need to changes icons that have been around 11 years? Maybe CCP need to stop focusing on 20 dollar ship skins and making us purchase more accounts to circumvent terrible mechanics ideas. Hate to say it but there is no way on God's green earth I'm making a seventh account which I pay all for with money.
Maybe CCP needs to fix it's financial house instead of pigeonholing players and FC's into forcing us to continually multi box for stupid reasons. There's already people in my Alliance that have 4 or 5 accounts running doing multiple things. Adding another headache to people is just not worth it.
And NO CCP you won't get an actual separate player filling this role. Because no FC is stupid enough to trust another player to notch crucial fleet positioning or target tackle. Period.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:08:30 -
[392] - Quote
Naglerr wrote: So you're telling me that the only way to nerf bombers is to nerf everything?
No.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:09:22 -
[393] - Quote
Agama Tissant wrote:Started with jump fatigue, then fozziesov, now ... no more fleet warps. Updating EVE is a good thing, but radically changing the way we play within our fleets is very WRONG! Quote: Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members.
Actually it's more than just changing the way we play, is just about FORCING us to play as you developers want to ... in a sandbox game! I'll unsubscribe 3 accounts if this gets implemented, this is way too much ! "Sandbox" does not mean the thing you think it means.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2488
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:09:32 -
[394] - Quote
I think its funny how larkin puts up the thread and answers the questions and fozzie is still getting railed for it.
I know that pain. |
Naglerr
Sanguine Penguin Rote Kapelle
35
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:11:30 -
[395] - Quote
Querns wrote:Naglerr wrote: So you're telling me that the only way to nerf bombers is to nerf everything?
No.
Please elaborate. If I were assigned to nerf bombers I would start with a hull bonus: Can not receive fleet warps. Please explain how this is a worse idea than removing fleet warps from all ships. |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
289
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:11:49 -
[396] - Quote
Agama Tissant wrote:Started with jump fatigue, then fozziesov, now ... no more fleet warps. Updating EVE is a good thing, but radically changing the way we play within our fleets is very WRONG! Quote: Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members.
Actually it's more than just changing the way we play, is just about FORCING us to play as you developers want to ... in a sandbox game! I'll unsubscribe 3 accounts if this gets implemented, this is way too much ! You're going to unsubscribe because you have to pilot your own ship now?
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Vanilla Mooses
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
15
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:12:02 -
[397] - Quote
Querns wrote:Vanilla Mooses wrote:Dearest CCP:
You have 18 pages of (with very few exceptions) players from all walks of EVE telling you this is a awful idea.
So?
I believe I answered your question in the rest of my post. You should try reading it. |
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
826
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:14:41 -
[398] - Quote
Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote:Querns wrote:Naglerr wrote: By constructing our fleet in a particular way and actively swapping fleet leadership roles when needed we can manage to achieve warpins on nearly all targets we want to engage. We heavily make use of fleet warps to bookmarks and probe returns as a method of pvp engagement generation. With the proposed changes our method of combat becomes completely not possible. Yes it is true that we can warp the scout on grid with the target, but that only doubles the time required to perform the same action that was previously possible with a reasonable level of efficiency and at greatly increased risk to our scanners. This will result in missed opportunities on targets for no observable gain in mechanics.
Adapt. Kills are not a commodity that you are owed -- they are a reward. If they become more difficult to acquire, the reward should be sweeter. Oh shut up. This is a line of utter BS and you know it. People shouldn't be punished for CCP's constant grid issues. There's been dozens of times where you land off grid, out of place, out of position from a target. Mere seconds are what count in these types of positioning and execution. As any FC worth their salt. It's yet again another account some poor bastard has to log in just to try and maintain some sort of fleet cohesion with constant grid issues. There's no "Grandmaster" difficultly level for putting up with terrible game mechanics and half baked ideas. Go tout more H1Z1 advertising and leave Eve to the rest of us who give a ****. Nice, a pithy throwaway line at the end. This is sure to increase the level of discourse! It's a little amusing to me that you see the change and immediately think, "aw man, now the FC has to multibox MORE accounts!" Did you consider delegating tasks to others? The FC doesn't have to be the only decision maker in the fleet. Also, if we're going to sink to the level of dragging in the alliance membership into the conversation -- consider that my alliance is generally considered to have the lowest skill level possible, when considering line members of fleets. As such, we can be said to rely on the FC far more than any other group in the game. Yet, all of the thought leaders of Goonswarm Federation are unilaterally in support of the change. Curious...
There's a difference between having 10000 F1 monkeys and a delegated few in small gang pvp to take on roles. The application of these ideas is foolish. It's another burden on small gang and core content creators. So again I call utter BS. Funny how you say "adapt" yet tout that the role can easily be passed on to other players.
Are you going to fill that role? Are you going to step up and be designated tackle *****? And when you fail and when you screw up a fleet position due to grid issues what then? I seriously doubt you'd fill this role. But for sake of argument I'll entertain the thought of some poor sap getting his ass chewed on TS for screwing the pooch due to these changes.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
shenzhen
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:14:43 -
[399] - Quote
This changed is the most stupid ideapÇé If you make this change, I will unsubscribe, because you are no longer selling a product I am interested in purchasing |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:15:56 -
[400] - Quote
Naglerr wrote:Querns wrote:Naglerr wrote: So you're telling me that the only way to nerf bombers is to nerf everything?
No. Please elaborate. If I were assigned to nerf bombers I would start with a hull bonus: Can not receive fleet warps. Please explain how this is a worse idea than removing fleet warps from all ships. Nah. You asked for a positive aspect to the fleet warp change, and I supplied it.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
Vanilla Mooses
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
15
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:17:15 -
[401] - Quote
shenzhen wrote:This changed is the most stupid ideapÇé If you make this change, I will unsubscribe, because you are no longer selling a product I am interested in purchasing
You see, this does not work and seems rather silly.
Why don't you take the time to discuss why you think this is a bad idea, how it would effect your gameplay, and offer suggestions or alternatives to the proposed changes that still achieve the desired goal?
Simply saying "I don't like it and I will just quit if I don't get my way" really does not help. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:17:39 -
[402] - Quote
Vanilla Mooses wrote:Querns wrote:Vanilla Mooses wrote:Dearest CCP:
You have 18 pages of (with very few exceptions) players from all walks of EVE telling you this is a awful idea.
So? I believe I answered your question in the rest of my post. You should try reading it. I don't need to -- this line invalidates any potential point you could have made by dint of it being a completely specious argument towards reversing a change.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
blue coeur
Anomalous Existence Low-Class
19
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:18:26 -
[403] - Quote
I'm having a hard time putting words to how I feel about these changes.
I suppose the first thing that should be mentioned is that I'm a wormhole citizen. So all my opinions are all based in the context of living and working in Wormhole space.
Fleet members in WH corporations already work very hard... Wormhole space is hard, I like it that way. My corp effectively spends hundreds of hours every week scanning for content and when content is found, our scouts bookmark routes and any celestials or wrecks near that content.
With your proposed changes, this will have very little affect on our day to day operations. But it's just another nuisance that we will add to the list.
Will your changes fix the current issue of Bookmarks taking up to several minutes to populate? Currently when we share bookmarks with other corporations, we effectively still have to fleet warp because waiting for bookmarks to populate can be the death of us or whoever we are trying to help.
Lastly I already pay way too much for this game then I care to admit, but the changes you "CCP" are proposing makes it feel like not much thought has been given to Wormhole life.
Seriously, I challenge you to live in a Wormhole for a month. |
Naglerr
Sanguine Penguin Rote Kapelle
35
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:20:05 -
[404] - Quote
Querns wrote:Naglerr wrote:Querns wrote:Naglerr wrote: So you're telling me that the only way to nerf bombers is to nerf everything?
No. Please elaborate. If I were assigned to nerf bombers I would start with a hull bonus: Can not receive fleet warps. Please explain how this is a worse idea than removing fleet warps from all ships. Nah. You asked for a positive aspect to the fleet warp change, and I supplied it.
So now that I ask a question that you don't have an answer to that suits your narrative you decide to bow out? Thank you for reinforcing my point that this change is a very poor way of achieving the desired effect, both in end result effect to bombers and to end result effect to all other ship types this nerf was apparently not intended for.
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2488
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:20:31 -
[405] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:There's a difference between having 10000 F1 monkeys and a delegated few in small gang pvp to take on roles. The application of these ideas is foolish. It's another burden on small gang and core content creators. So again I call utter BS. Funny how you say "adapt" yet tout that the role can easily be passed on to other players.
Are you going to fill that role? Are you going to step up and be designated tackle *****? And when you fail and when you screw up a fleet position due to grid issues what then? I seriously doubt you'd fill this role. But for sake of argument I'll entertain the thought of some poor sap getting his ass chewed on TS for screwing the pooch due to these changes. seems like that is an issue with your leadership, and i highly recommend you get away from that. however from the looks of it, you fit in well. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:22:23 -
[406] - Quote
Tara Read wrote: There's a difference between having 10000 F1 monkeys and a delegated few in small gang pvp to take on roles. The application of these ideas is foolish. It's another burden on small gang and core content creators. So again I call utter BS. Funny how you say "adapt" yet tout that the role can easily be passed on to other players.
Are you going to fill that role? Are you going to step up and be designated tackle *****? And when you fail and when you screw up a fleet position due to grid issues what then? I seriously doubt you'd fill this role. But for sake of argument I'll entertain the thought of some poor sap getting his ass chewed on TS for screwing the pooch due to these changes.
Don't use the word "content" in this way when referring to Eve. It's a terrible mental shortcut that strips entire layers of player interaction away, leaving behind a pile of monkey filth.
Adaptation to the change can mean learning to delegate tasks. Passing the role to another player does not somehow castrate the meaning of the term.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2488
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:22:53 -
[407] - Quote
Naglerr wrote:Querns wrote:Naglerr wrote:Querns wrote:Naglerr wrote: So you're telling me that the only way to nerf bombers is to nerf everything?
No. Please elaborate. If I were assigned to nerf bombers I would start with a hull bonus: Can not receive fleet warps. Please explain how this is a worse idea than removing fleet warps from all ships. Nah. You asked for a positive aspect to the fleet warp change, and I supplied it. So now that I ask a question that you don't have an answer to that suits your narrative you decide to bow out? Thank you for reinforcing my point that this change is a very poor way of achieving the desired effect, both in end result effect to bombers and to end result effect to all other ship types this nerf was apparently not intended for. How do you elaborate on words someone else put in your mouth? |
Vanilla Mooses
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
15
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:23:20 -
[408] - Quote
Querns wrote:Vanilla Mooses wrote:Querns wrote:Vanilla Mooses wrote:Dearest CCP:
You have 18 pages of (with very few exceptions) players from all walks of EVE telling you this is a awful idea.
So? I believe I answered your question in the rest of my post. You should try reading it. I don't need to -- this line invalidates any potential point you could have made by dint of it being a completely specious argument towards reversing a change.
When a overwhelming majority of people using a product feel that a proposed change may not be a good idea, it's quite valid to cite popular opinion as a reason to further evaluate the proposed change. However, if you are going to simply ignore my entire post as you disagree with one of many points that I brought up, I really feel no need to discuss it with you further.
It seems rather childish to hear someone open up a discussion with one single point you disagree with, and to simply shut your brain down and declare that you "don't need to" hear anything else. However, since you have admitted you will not take the time to read my OP in the first place, there's very little to discuss with you and I will avoid making the mistake of communicating with you in the future. |
Phaade
Perimeter Defense Systems
356
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:23:54 -
[409] - Quote
Chessur wrote:CCP I love you. This change is so elegant, and wonderful at fixing so many problems. As a small gang pilot, and PvPer I could not be happier! Its going to be so much more interesting now fighting a blob that no longer has the ability to drop all of their ships on me (at zero) over and over again.
Thank you for bringing piloting, actual skill and situational awareness back into the game.
For those of you that are complaining, I only have this to say: Spend less time whining on the forums, and perhaps learn how to actually PvP and fly your ships?
These changes (Along with the HML and BC stuff) made my entire week.
Made props CCP- its incredible. I am so excited for this, along with fozzie sov!
Couldn't agree more.
Quit your bitching you f1 monkeys. Flying your ship might a actually require you to use your pea sized brains.
Now, how about those ishtars? |
Tarus Echerie
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:24:54 -
[410] - Quote
While I understand the reasoning that is used to limit the abilities of bombers; I am not a supporter of this change.
As a member of a small NPSI group, we run roams ever so often into null sec with new bros. The only way to ensure everyone gets where we are going sometimes involves fleet warps to bookmarks (instant undocks new bros don't have yet; tacs/perches to introduce what bubbles are and how to recon, etc.) Furthermore, most of our fleets are small and the few extra seconds we have to try and grab a target of opportunity with a fleet warp can mean catching a ship or not. Extending the time to have get an alt or a scout to this position can mean losing a target.
Moving on, to echo what many of the WH crew have said, removing fleet warp for bookmarks makes life in a WH more difficult, especially for those of us that may not all be in the same corp. While I know CCP frowns upon my choice to stay in a starter NPC, further penalizing the ability to work with fellow players (in an NPSI fleet) seems counter to the idea of sandbox. I spent time living in a WH with some folks in multiple different corps; when we wanted to all land at a site together fleet warp meant that we weren't separated some landing early/late etc. Even with shared bookmarks, we can't always "perfectly" time a warp.
To expand on this last point. this also can be applied to groups of mission runners that are NPSI; increasing the time to get everyone a bookmark for a site decreases ISK/hr and thus new bros don't get as much isk. While a few Million isk an hour may not be a lot of the vets, for the few days or weeks old dudes, they feel rich when they get their first 10-20 mil; why make organizing the/coordinating a fleet of new chars more difficult?
Random Idea just thought of: Allow us to share a bookmark in a fleet chat window? That way you can give a count down and tell everyone to warp. |
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
171
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:25:02 -
[411] - Quote
Could we tripple or quadruple all probes scan strength so that there is an actual possibility of having a scout on grid to warp to before every one escapes?
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:25:38 -
[412] - Quote
Naglerr wrote:Querns wrote:Naglerr wrote:Querns wrote:Naglerr wrote: So you're telling me that the only way to nerf bombers is to nerf everything?
No. Please elaborate. If I were assigned to nerf bombers I would start with a hull bonus: Can not receive fleet warps. Please explain how this is a worse idea than removing fleet warps from all ships. Nah. You asked for a positive aspect to the fleet warp change, and I supplied it. So now that I ask a question that you don't have an answer to that suits your narrative you decide to bow out? Thank you for reinforcing my point that this change is a very poor way of achieving the desired effect, both in end result effect to bombers and to end result effect to all other ship types this nerf was apparently not intended for. I have an answer -- a good way to nerf bombers is to remove fleet warp to bookmarks and probe results. If you don't agree, that is fine, but I'm not going to entertain your tangent when there's no point to doing so.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Cynthia Aishai
Strategic Operations Inc.
15
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:25:43 -
[413] - Quote
This change is the most stupid idea ever |
Sbrodor
Oscura Simmetria Yulai Federation
104
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:25:43 -
[414] - 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.
Fozzi please don't forget the 12 sec flying time (more than unskilled mjd, and more than align time of a bc), the huge smart bomb vulnerability, the huge damage of void bomb to damage bomb, the useless focused void, the useless lockbraker that don't jam...
for 10 bomber bar i know before thins grind only 1-2 are left other switched to casual bombing.
it's clear the point to nerf bomber again , but when all bomber bar are died this game will only be a mass clash of f1...who bring more unskilled meat shield f1 will win.
|
Naglerr
Sanguine Penguin Rote Kapelle
35
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:28:16 -
[415] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Naglerr wrote:Querns wrote:Naglerr wrote:Please elaborate. If I were assigned to nerf bombers I would start with a hull bonus: Can not receive fleet warps. Please explain how this is a worse idea than removing fleet warps from all ships. Nah. You asked for a positive aspect to the fleet warp change, and I supplied it. So now that I ask a question that you don't have an answer to that suits your narrative you decide to bow out? Thank you for reinforcing my point that this change is a very poor way of achieving the desired effect, both in end result effect to bombers and to end result effect to all other ship types this nerf was apparently not intended for. How do you elaborate on words someone else put in your mouth?
So this reply chain got a bit specific on the disagreement Querns and I seem to have about this change. I'd like to bring it back to the topic at hand:
Is this change for sure directed specifically at bombers? I didn't watch the o7 youtube video people are mentioning that they claim say this. If the nerf is indeed directed at bombers, then why not simply apply a hull bonus to bombers: Can not receive fleet warps?
|
Vanilla Mooses
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
16
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:28:17 -
[416] - Quote
Tarus Echerie wrote:
Random Idea just thought of: Allow us to share a bookmark in a fleet chat window? That way you can give a count down and tell everyone to warp.
Many of us (myself included) have suggested the same idea in this thread: allow a fleet member to broadcast a bookmark or a probe result and force fleet members to manually warp to it, versus relying on the FC to provide the warp.
Seems like a good idea that still achieves the goal that CCP is looking for. I hope that CCP considers this. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:28:47 -
[417] - Quote
Vanilla Mooses wrote:Querns wrote:Vanilla Mooses wrote:Querns wrote:Vanilla Mooses wrote:Dearest CCP:
You have 18 pages of (with very few exceptions) players from all walks of EVE telling you this is a awful idea.
So? I believe I answered your question in the rest of my post. You should try reading it. I don't need to -- this line invalidates any potential point you could have made by dint of it being a completely specious argument towards reversing a change. When a overwhelming majority of people using a product feel that a proposed change may not be a good idea, it's quite valid to cite popular opinion as a reason to further evaluate the proposed change. Therein lies the problem -- this forum is frequented by a vast, vast, vast minority of the player base. Measuring popularity by forum posts is extremely incorrect, in the most basic way possible. You are citing popular opinion when none actually exists. It's the bulwark of your entire argument and it isn't even right.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox Low-Class
7631
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:33:12 -
[418] - Quote
blue coeur wrote:I'm having a hard time putting words to how I feel about these changes.
I suppose the first thing that should be mentioned is that I'm a wormhole citizen. So all my opinions are all based in the context of living and working in Wormhole space.
Fleet members in WH corporations already work very hard... Wormhole space is hard, I like it that way. My corp effectively spends hundreds of hours every week scanning for content and when content is found, our scouts bookmark routes and any celestials or wrecks near that content.
With your proposed changes, this will have very little affect on our day to day operations. But it's just another nuisance that we will add to the list.
Will your changes fix the current issue of Bookmarks taking up to several minutes to populate? Currently when we share bookmarks with other corporations, we effectively still have to fleet warp because waiting for bookmarks to populate can be the death of us or whoever we are trying to help.
Lastly I already pay way too much for this game then I care to admit, but the changes you "CCP" are proposing makes it feel like not much thought has been given to Wormhole life.
Seriously, I challenge you to live in a Wormhole for a month.
All of this. Also record all of it and show it afterwards. Authentic month long dev wormhole experience.
Fear and Loathing in Internet Spaceships
|
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
827
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:34:08 -
[419] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Tara Read wrote:There's a difference between having 10000 F1 monkeys and a delegated few in small gang pvp to take on roles. The application of these ideas is foolish. It's another burden on small gang and core content creators. So again I call utter BS. Funny how you say "adapt" yet tout that the role can easily be passed on to other players.
Are you going to fill that role? Are you going to step up and be designated tackle *****? And when you fail and when you screw up a fleet position due to grid issues what then? I seriously doubt you'd fill this role. But for sake of argument I'll entertain the thought of some poor sap getting his ass chewed on TS for screwing the pooch due to these changes. seems like that is an issue with your leadership, and i highly recommend you get away from that. however from the looks of it, you fit in well.
Thanks for the compliment even if you meant it as an off the cuff insult. But see here's the disconnect. The reality is people fill many facets and roles in Alliances. In smaller Alliances these roles pass down to a few select people. Placing more burden on these people creates burn out and headaches that in turn create problems.
Every Alliance faces these things small gang not withstanding. But this isn't even really about small gang or low sec. If it were I'm certain yourself or a few select other personalities here wouldn't grace us with such estute opinions. At any rate, my opinion is very strong on these issues because it is but a small piece in the preverbial **** pie CCP is continually forcing down our throats rolling out baseless changes without any forethought or after sight.
I've heard not ONE person praise the icon changes. I've heard not one person like the UI changes. We've endured them because CCP throws them out in patches. And we've continually seen even at the begging of players to give us freedom with ship looks due to the skin bug that CCP is tight fisted as ever clutching every dammed penny since Incarna.
These changes are vieled nerfs to bombing runs that kick everyone else in the balls and their hidden profit generation. CCP isn't stupid. They know FC'a wil make designated grid alts due to these changes. They know they have to for fleets to even get into proper position.
It's all utterly rediculous. But thank you for such a thought-provoking post. I'll make sure to meditate and chew on each letter.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
137
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:34:11 -
[420] - Quote
Phaade wrote:Chessur wrote:CCP I love you. This change is so elegant, and wonderful at fixing so many problems. As a small gang pilot, and PvPer I could not be happier! Its going to be so much more interesting now fighting a blob that no longer has the ability to drop all of their ships on me (at zero) over and over again.
Thank you for bringing piloting, actual skill and situational awareness back into the game.
For those of you that are complaining, I only have this to say: Spend less time whining on the forums, and perhaps learn how to actually PvP and fly your ships?
These changes (Along with the HML and BC stuff) made my entire week.
Made props CCP- its incredible. I am so excited for this, along with fozzie sov! Couldn't agree more. Quit your bitching you f1 monkeys. Flying your ship might a actually require you to use your pea sized brains. Now, how about those ishtars? The irony of this post is that a drone boat like the ishtar doesn't need the mashing of F1 to engage drones, rather you hit the 'f' key. Unless you fit a gun in the high slots mashing F1 will result the client telling you are activating a passive module, if that. Tell me more about those pea brained skill less f1 mashers again?
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
|
Vanilla Mooses
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
16
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:36:08 -
[421] - Quote
Querns wrote: Therein lies the problem -- this forum is frequented by a vast, vast, vast minority of the player base. Measuring popularity by forum posts is extremely incorrect, in the most basic way possible. You are citing popular opinion when none actually exists. It's the bulwark of your entire argument and it isn't even right.
Fair enough. However, it is far from the focus of my argument and is simply one point of many that I brought up. The bulwark of my argument is that this change is a rather hamfisted way of going about it.
If the goal is to limit the effectiveness of bombers (something I fully support!) and require fleet members to have to take more manual action vs. relying on a FC to warp them around (which I also support!), I simply feel this can be accomplished in a much more precise and logical way. The proposed change feels like using a sledgehammer to pound in a nail. Sure, it will work, but it is going to cause some unexpected damage to other things. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:38:16 -
[422] - Quote
Tara Read wrote: I've heard not ONE person praise the icon changes. I've heard not one person like the UI changes. We've endured them because CCP throws them out in patches. And we've continually seen even at the begging of players to give us freedom with ship looks due to the skin bug that CCP is tight fisted as ever clutching every dammed penny since Incarna.
I think the icon changes were alright. They suffer a bit when you do UI scaling, but that can be fixed. Combat roles of ships are pretty easy to tell apart at a glance, and the icon for a cyno is the All-Seeing Eye, which is great.
Throwing out absolutes is a pretty bad way of arguing.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
TarPalantir I
Evolution Northern Coalition.
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:39:14 -
[423] - Quote
Manfred Sideous 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. {snip} Bombers were retardedly op and combat probing was very op. They strangled tactics and doctrines. Ideally id like to see those things nerfed or rebalanced but this change has the effect that it hits both of those things at the same. To put this into context drone assign was largely removed as we know it. CCP said that they think it is bad when other people play the game for you. Fleet Warping falls under the same rationale. This change will actually help FC's as they will have more choices on tactics and viable doctrines to put to the field. Currently everything has to be low/sig & bomb proof . This is why you don't see many shield tanked BS doctrines or more kiting or sniping doctrines. This change will help open up the battlefield to something more than Eagles , Tengus , Ishtars and Domis.
Tar-Palantir isn't opposed to this change because of the harm that may or may not happen. Rather, he thinks it may be a bit misguided depending on what the goals/outcome of the changes are. Tar-Palantir would argue that fleet warping - which has been around since Fleets were introduced - isn't really the cause of major problems in the game. Not upset about people having to warp themselves, but don't really think the whole fleet warp thing causes our problems. You seem to be alluding to that in your comments.
Rapid/near instant probing of targets that are at known celestials/grids seems to be the core problem with fleet warps just being a way to make use of them. However, the rapid/instant probing still exists and can still be used to get warp-ins on hostile fleets of all sizes. It now means you have to wait for the cloaked prober to warp to the location and X up in some channel, but that doesn't fundementally change the problems. It slows the process down by X seconds and introduces more risk to the prober. However, they can still be cloaked, still provide a warp-in for a fleet warp, and still warp out. Bit more dangerous because of bubbles, but still quite doable. A greater than 150 km range snipe fleet could hold its position for 20-40 more seconds maybe against a competent foe with decent cloaked probers. That isn't going to change the outcome against a short range damage fleet unless you are talking very small, very rapid engagements.
Changing other mechanics to try and mask the root problem usually doesn't work well. Sometimes you have no choice because fixing the root problem is out of reach (TiDi comes to mind here). In the case of probing, that doesn't seem the likely cause. More likely it is that the probing system works very well for what it was designed for - finding hidden objects like Signature sites/WH/safed up ships. The work is in the finding where in the system the thing is. It works horribly for fleets (of any size from 5 to 2000) because you already know where it is so all you have to do is click the scan button after launching your probes. No real challenge, no real game play, no particularly practical counters that aren't very specific/niche, just results.
While Tar-Palantir does understand the idea of getting more people involved in fleets (scouts are a good thing - something that people should actively be doing/playing rather than being provided scout functionality via game mechanics) and making fleet members control their own ships rather than have others control them, Tar-Palantir would urge CCP to work on the core problem - instant probing - rather than the in game mechanisms that people use to make use of instant probing. Sounds like Manfred is already pushing that for which Tar-Palantir is grateful. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2488
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:41:23 -
[424] - Quote
Naglerr wrote:So this reply chain got a bit specific on the disagreement Querns and I seem to have about this change. I'd like to bring it back to the topic at hand:
Is this change for sure directed specifically at bombers? I didn't watch the o7 youtube video people are mentioning that they claim say this. If the nerf is indeed directed at bombers, then why not simply apply a hull bonus to bombers: Can not receive fleet warps?
specifically directed? There is no absolute indication it was the only or main intention, no. It has been mentioned plenty of ties by players and fozzie did say it was a positive outcome, but aside from that it would be a speculation of intentions.
Bombers were only mentioned once and given as an example alongside brawling doctrines as needing good on grid warp ins.
It mostly sounded as the OP is worded, more fleet member involvement and importance of roles like tackle and scouting. |
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
827
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:41:33 -
[425] - Quote
Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote: There's a difference between having 10000 F1 monkeys and a delegated few in small gang pvp to take on roles. The application of these ideas is foolish. It's another burden on small gang and core content creators. So again I call utter BS. Funny how you say "adapt" yet tout that the role can easily be passed on to other players.
Are you going to fill that role? Are you going to step up and be designated tackle *****? And when you fail and when you screw up a fleet position due to grid issues what then? I seriously doubt you'd fill this role. But for sake of argument I'll entertain the thought of some poor sap getting his ass chewed on TS for screwing the pooch due to these changes.
Don't use the word "content" in this way when referring to Eve. It's a terrible mental shortcut that strips entire layers of player interaction away, leaving behind a pile of monkey filth. Adaptation to the change can mean learning to delegate tasks. Passing the role to another player does not somehow castrate the meaning of the term.
Delegate how? Please enlighten us on HOW delegating an unbroken mechanic is a GOOD thing. Please show us ALL why these changes are positive. All you are saying is that for the sake of increased effort and annoyance these changes are positive. That's your entire argument.
I've given context to several points that are true and backed by CCP's track record. Not to mention the aforementioned negative these changes create toward players wallets, player time, FC time delegation, fleet positioning, target elusion including low sec targets.
It's all there! But please show us on your MLP figurine where the bombing run touched you. I'm generally curious.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Asuka Solo
Knights of Azrael Circle-Of-Two
2963
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:41:41 -
[426] - Quote
Delicious predominantly sub cap tears.
yum.
+1
Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!
|
Ikaika Wahine Khashour
Black Scorpions Inc Fidelas Constans
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:43:04 -
[427] - Quote
I'm really starting to worry you are starting to make this game to safe for people. A lot of changes have take some of the more fun mechanics of the game. I mean agree with a lot of them like the removal of Skynet and using multi-command programs. However Pulling of power out of an FCs hands... I dunno personally, I guess for me it's a wait and see.. much like Fozzie sov. |
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
827
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:43:40 -
[428] - Quote
Asuka Solo wrote:Delicious predominantly sub cap tears.
yum.
+1
As a Super and Cap pilot/owner I find this post stupid and insulting.
- Sincerely every other capital pilot in New Eden.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:48:37 -
[429] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote: There's a difference between having 10000 F1 monkeys and a delegated few in small gang pvp to take on roles. The application of these ideas is foolish. It's another burden on small gang and core content creators. So again I call utter BS. Funny how you say "adapt" yet tout that the role can easily be passed on to other players.
Are you going to fill that role? Are you going to step up and be designated tackle *****? And when you fail and when you screw up a fleet position due to grid issues what then? I seriously doubt you'd fill this role. But for sake of argument I'll entertain the thought of some poor sap getting his ass chewed on TS for screwing the pooch due to these changes.
Don't use the word "content" in this way when referring to Eve. It's a terrible mental shortcut that strips entire layers of player interaction away, leaving behind a pile of monkey filth. Adaptation to the change can mean learning to delegate tasks. Passing the role to another player does not somehow castrate the meaning of the term. Delegate how? Please enlighten us on HOW delegating an unbroken mechanic is a GOOD thing. Please show us ALL why these changes are positive. All you are saying is that for the sake of increased effort and annoyance these changes are positive. That's your entire argument. I've given context to several points that are true and backed by CCP's track record. Not to mention the aforementioned negative these changes create toward players wallets, player time, FC time delegation, fleet positioning, target elusion including low sec targets. You delegate the task of creating warp-ins to players in covops or interceptors. See the "I Was There" trailer for a fairly decent dramatization of this oddly foreign concept: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSxSyv4LC1c
The changes may be annoying to you and the crutches upon which you rely to play eve, but they're positive for the game as a whole. Adapt.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
TarPalantir I
Evolution Northern Coalition.
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 05:56:29 -
[430] - Quote
{big snip}
Querns wrote:You delegate the task of creating warp-ins to players in covops or interceptors. See the "I Was There" trailer for a fairly decent dramatization of this oddly foreign concept: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSxSyv4LC1c The changes may be annoying to you and the crutches upon which you rely to play eve, but they're positive for the game as a whole. Adapt.
There was a time, before instant probing (December 2009) when the "I was There" trailer was part of most fleet fights. For years, small fast ships burned across the open spaces between fleets, trying to get their light tackle, dictors and their short range DPS ships warp-ins on the hostile fleet. In the mean time, webbers, Destroyers, HACs, and BC tried to kill all this incoming tackle and pop their wrecks to prevent such warp-ins. Game play. It seemed to keep us oldies entertained for the 6-7 years before we figured out instant-probing after the Dominion patch. |
|
MekaJonna
Nehalem Inc.
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:00:08 -
[431] - Quote
For those of you who still think this is a good idea, I'll describe in detail how this completely breaks w-space.
My underlying concern here is that these changes will create a close to uncatchable ratting meta.
When rolling your w-space static, It is already hard enough to catch people ratting. When ratters see new sigs on their probe scanner they leave the sites they are in to PoS up until the sigs are scanned down. This means smart active pilots are already difficult to catch. However not all pilots keep their probe scanner open, but most watch d-scan and keep alts cloaked off known wormhole connections.
Currently d-scan is not too big a issue for hunters who connect to new holes as ratters will almost always be at a site still on the anomaly list. This gives us a chance to catch them with off-d-scan tackle(cloaky or recon) as the rest of the fleet waits for initial tackle. However if they are on the last wave of a site, combat probes are needed which are very obvious on d-scan. This is still not an issue currently as a fleet warp can get fast tackle to the target, giving the fleet a chance of catching the prey.
Now lets imagine things with the new system in place. Its will still be very possible to catch ratters in anomaly on scan. But in the second situation, the combat scanning ship is the only ship that can attempt to tackle the ratter (in a reasonable amount of time before the ratter notices the new sig on scan/ or combat probes). Naturally this would make T3's the only capable ship of probing cloaking and tackling ratters in. Unfortunately the current meta is to rat while sitting on a mobile depot with a full rack of stabs in your cargo bay. With only 1 ship being able to land during the first critical minute of opening a hole, it makes ratting battleship in the last wave of a site near impossible to catch.
Well at least we can still catch the majority of the ratters who are still in anomaly on scan right? Wrong! If this change goes through pilots are just going to pop all the wave triggers as soon as they get into the site and bam, they are off the anomaly list, and can feel safe knowing they have a chance to see probes on d-scan and have at least an additional 30 seconds to notice the new sigs on their probe scanners before having a fleet land on top of them. |
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
827
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:02:47 -
[432] - Quote
Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote:Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote: There's a difference between having 10000 F1 monkeys and a delegated few in small gang pvp to take on roles. The application of these ideas is foolish. It's another burden on small gang and core content creators. So again I call utter BS. Funny how you say "adapt" yet tout that the role can easily be passed on to other players.
Are you going to fill that role? Are you going to step up and be designated tackle *****? And when you fail and when you screw up a fleet position due to grid issues what then? I seriously doubt you'd fill this role. But for sake of argument I'll entertain the thought of some poor sap getting his ass chewed on TS for screwing the pooch due to these changes.
Don't use the word "content" in this way when referring to Eve. It's a terrible mental shortcut that strips entire layers of player interaction away, leaving behind a pile of monkey filth. Adaptation to the change can mean learning to delegate tasks. Passing the role to another player does not somehow castrate the meaning of the term. Delegate how? Please enlighten us on HOW delegating an unbroken mechanic is a GOOD thing. Please show us ALL why these changes are positive. All you are saying is that for the sake of increased effort and annoyance these changes are positive. That's your entire argument. I've given context to several points that are true and backed by CCP's track record. Not to mention the aforementioned negative these changes create toward players wallets, player time, FC time delegation, fleet positioning, target elusion including low sec targets. You delegate the task of creating warp-ins to players in covops or interceptors. See the "I Was There" trailer for a fairly decent dramatization of this oddly foreign concept: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSxSyv4LC1c The changes may be annoying to you and the crutches upon which you rely to play eve, but they're positive for the game as a whole. Adapt.
How exactly is a fleet warp a crutch? Are you saying I am incapable of right clicking a name on my watch list and warping to them at a designated range? Because people do this already. You fail to see the stupidity in these changes because you cannot see the context of the problems they create which are many.
Also, if I may I play Eve in many different ways and many different situations. The battlefield and the tactics and strategies therein are fluid and constantly in motion. That's what makes Eve unique and sadly maybe it's only redeeming quality if this trend continues. The unknown. The enigma. The what "if". Every action has a reaction in Eve.
Every command, target, fitting, ship, strategy, convo, every detail can have a shift in the outcome of everything from battles to Alliances and Coalitions. Your very own Coalition owes it's successes and rise to power by the actions of one person. So please as someone who has played this game since 2004 do not sit here and lecture me on the virtues and reasons to "adapt." I've been doing it in this game for a long time.
You still have failed to give me a reason as to WHY these changes are positive. If you feel another role for a player to field is a potential good thing then come at it from that angle! And while the intention MAY be good. The execution so far has been terrible. IF anything this diminishes a players role: the FC. Or even worse creates an even greater difficulty for FC'a and content creators.
The negative implications out weight the good intentions these changes try to instill. That you cannot argue against and that is what over 20 pages of a majority of people here agree upon.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Onslaughtor
Occult National Security Phoenix Naval Systems
147
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:03:08 -
[433] - Quote
So I haven't really been able to play recently. :( so I cant really test this. But can you warp to missions at range without useing a fleetwarp? I am recalling you can't.
|
ArmEagle Kusoni
Knights of Nii The 20 Minuters
37
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:05:05 -
[434] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:ArmEagle Kusoni wrote:So, to run sites (in w-space) we can't easily warp there all together anymore. Everyone will need the bookmarks or have to wait for one player to have landed. Alliance bookmarks would only make that slightly less of an issue.
That's just one example of how people will become unnecessarily more vulnarable, or things taking more time. and below... Ele Rebellion wrote:Concern about this is WH space.
We don't have gates we can warp to and have to rely on the Bookmarks of the wormhole.
Edit: What I mean is if we have non-corp members that we are trying to move through a chain to a target, it will slow the entire fleet by 100% since a fleet member will have to warp ahead and then the entire fleet will have to warp to that fleet member. Both of these points are solid. Corbexx brought these up while we where talking to the CSM about the change. Regarding slowing down the speed of sites, given the potential profitability of wormhole space, we don't consider this a major negative. Regarding movement fleets though WH space, we have something we're working on for this. That said some of the feedback we've received is mixed. Reducing power projection though WH space (for both WH residence & passes though) not seen as all bad.
Thanks. I'm very interested to see what that mechanic will be. Can't give further feedback (on power projection/speed) until that is made known. To be honest, if Corbexx brought it up, it should have been part of the publication of the change. |
Rn Bonnet
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
21
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:05:09 -
[435] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Querns wrote:[quote=Tara Read] There's a difference between having 10000 F1 monkeys and a delegated few in small gang pvp to take on roles. The application of these ideas is foolish. It's another burden on small gang and core content creators. So again I call utter BS. Funny how you say "adapt" yet tout that the role can easily be passed on to other players.
Are you going to fill that role? Are you going to step up and be designated tackle *****? And when you fail and when you screw up a fleet position due to grid issues what then? I seriously doubt you'd fill this role. But for sake of argument I'll entertain the thought of some poor sap getting his ass chewed on TS for screwing the pooch due to these changes. Don't use the word "content" in this way when referring to Eve. It's a terrible mental shortcut that strips entire layers of player interaction away, leaving behind a pile of monkey filth.
Before the probing buff years ago all of eve was played this way. It was for more entertaining and things like sniper hacs and hit and run fleets actually worked because 50 inteceptors wouldn't be on you in 10s.
|
Ryno Caval
House of Praetor Fidelas Constans
28
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:05:16 -
[436] - Quote
You know what I've got a bright idea rather than totally remove it make it so much more complicated by only allowing squad leaders to warp their squads, that'll teach us to rely on one person to lead a fleet as a "FLEET COMMANDER", delegate that **** down to the lowest level but add this twist, in order for the squad to warp the wing commander has to get the request and send it up to the fleet commander and fleet commander has to give approval through an in game prompt, we can make EVE more like the real annoying functions of real life war than anything any of us want to play. I mean there will still be fleet warps but it will be a long and absurd process. That'll teach us to question a change that no one asked for. |
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
827
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:05:26 -
[437] - Quote
Onslaughtor wrote:So I haven't really been able to play recently. :( so I cant really test this. But can you warp to missions at range without useing a fleetwarp? I am recalling you can't.
No you cannot. And that's another stickler. Not being able to warp at range risks you getting stuck on a beacon and killed. That's why squad warps by alts are essential. I've seen people die first hand getting stuck on a mission beacon.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2489
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:05:27 -
[438] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Thanks for the compliment even if you meant it as an off the cuff insult. But see here's the disconnect. The reality is people fill many facets and roles in Alliances. In smaller Alliances these roles pass down to a few select people. Placing more burden on these people creates burn out and headaches that in turn create problems. The problem may then lie in the 'few select people' issue. No gameplay mechanic forces that. And certainly an FC telling his interceptor to move for a warp in isnt adding any more stress than having to run it himself. In a small alliance and even a corp, sometimes its best to trust some basic tasks to others.Heck, they could do that now and would be the better for it in terms of pressure. However, I see fairly little what this has to do with alliance leadership and roles. Unless your few FCs double double as officers and directors.
Tara Read wrote:Every Alliance faces these things small gang not withstanding. But this isn't even really about small gang or low sec. If it were I'm certain yourself or a few select other personalities here wouldn't grace us with such estute opinions. At any rate, my opinion is very strong on these issues because it is but a small piece in the preverbial **** pie CCP is continually forcing down our throats rolling out baseless changes without any forethought or after sight. sure.
Tara Read wrote:I've heard not ONE person praise the icon changes. I've heard not one person like the UI changes. We've endured them because CCP throws them out in patches. And we've continually seen even at the begging of players to give us freedom with ship looks due to the skin bug that CCP is tight fisted as ever clutching every dammed penny since Incarna. I dont know where youve been reading or who've you been listening to, but jus reading comments and reading alliance chat i've seen those who see its benefits and improvements.
Tara Read wrote:These changes are vieled nerfs to bombing runs that kick everyone else in the balls and their hidden profit generation. CCP isn't stupid. They know FC'a wil make designated grid alts due to these changes. They know they have to for fleets to even get into proper position. I mean, If you want to speculate, I won't try to stop you.
ITara Read wrote:t's all utterly rediculous. But thank you for such a thought-provoking post. I'll make sure to meditate and chew on each letter. No problem, don't strain yourself.
|
Claud Tiberius
Caldari State
118
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:06:03 -
[439] - Quote
Mixed feelings:
More participation by individuals in fleets is always good. One day we might even see the last of: "Everyone fire at single target" tactics, to something that's more strategic and fair.
But removal of bookmarks/scans/sites with fleet warps seems like a step backwards. Can't fleet members just continue to use corporation bookmarks? Thus bypassing the need to use fleet-warp.
Regardless, I think the concept of "bookmarks" is an old idea that I would prefer to be removed. I don't mind players saving names, stats and general locations of an area. But a specific pin-point spot is OP.
I would prefer a totally new system of warping to areas, one that comes with a lot more freedom for pilots - but also new risks.
Once upon a time the Golem had a Raven hull and it looked good. Then it transformed into a plataduck. The end.
|
Sollana
FireStar Inc Evictus.
245
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:09:43 -
[440] - Quote
so now the scanning ship has to warp in first for the rest of the fleet to warp to them........about bloody time...
heavy tackle time has returned, in a way this could be a recon buff.. hint hint |
|
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
827
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:13:18 -
[441] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Tara Read wrote:Thanks for the compliment even if you meant it as an off the cuff insult. But see here's the disconnect. The reality is people fill many facets and roles in Alliances. In smaller Alliances these roles pass down to a few select people. Placing more burden on these people creates burn out and headaches that in turn create problems. The problem may then lie in the 'few select people' issue. No gameplay mechanic forces that. And certainly an FC telling his interceptor to move for a warp in isnt adding any more stress than having to run it himself. In a small alliance and even a corp, sometimes its best to trust some basic tasks to others.Heck, they could do that now and would be the better for it in terms of pressure. However, I see fairly little what this has to do with alliance leadership and roles. Unless your few FCs double double as officers and directors.
You still fail to give any of us here a positive answer why these changes are GOOD. Picking apart my posts is fine, but trying to tear at my argument from one angle isn't going to get you anywhere. There's also the issue of grid placement, targets getting away, fleet separation due to warp speed variations, survivability of the on grid warp in, landing on different grids due to mechanic issues, fleet movement during travel, squad warping at missions at range due to beacon issues, probing and tackle becoming nigh impossible for hunting low sec supers, designated "tackle" and possible fleet warp in DC'ing in Tidi leading to a fleet spread and out of place etc etc.
I can go on and keep giving reasons and possible issues with just one facet of these changes. But please go on about how it's clearly my misunderstanding or "lack of game skills" or my "alliances leadership" as your means for justification as to why your argument is valid.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
1177
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:14:20 -
[442] - Quote
Budrick3 wrote:
Poor attempt at saving face.
Rule of all holes, stop digging when you are in one.
Your embarrassing your alliance, the people that put faith in voting for you, and most of all, your embarrassing yourself.
Does this mean I am not gonna win a popularity contest ? Aww shucks im gutted really.
@EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny
|
killerlman
BURN EDEN Northern Coalition.
16
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:14:41 -
[443] - Quote
Is this broken? Why have you changing the fleet warps mechanic? Sigh,its total hit for my probe launcher. Know what,make the ****** new map mandatory instead of killing fleet warps. That one i can handle with some pain. |
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
827
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:23:01 -
[444] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Budrick3 wrote:
Poor attempt at saving face.
Rule of all holes, stop digging when you are in one.
Your embarrassing your alliance, the people that put faith in voting for you, and most of all, your embarrassing yourself.
Does this mean I am not gonna win a popularity contest ? Aww shucks im gutted really.
Weren't you elected to instill positive changes for a majority of the Eve Community? Or am I just being fickle thinking the CSM is supposed to do that.... I mean honestly. Didn't you guys take into consideration the myriad of problems this creates for people? Even if the intentions were good, the execution is utterly terrible. I mean really terrible.
Can't you guys come up with something better than this? I mean besides terrible icons and super skins for only half the titans at 35 USD a pop....
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
2232
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:23:49 -
[445] - Quote
Sollana wrote:so now the scanning ship has to warp in first for the rest of the fleet to warp to them........about bloody time...
heavy tackle time has returned, in a way this could be a recon buff.. hint hint Except it isn't. Because recons have no bonus to probes of any sort, meaning to fit combat probes recons are so gimped in their fitting that they aren't going to be effective as heavy tackle. The only viable probe ship now for this has become a T3 Cruiser. T3 destroyers not being covert cloakable. |
NoobMan
Hard Knocks Inc. Hard Knocks Citizens
173
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:24:27 -
[446] - Quote
Quote:Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members.
Dark Razer Please!
So you realize the FC is just going to have to login another client to fly a specific ship to constantly make warp ins so he can fleet warp his fleet. If the actual outcome you were hoping for was to slow fleet movement down across the board then you have succeeded.
Wormhole standpoint: This a huge quality of life hit. This will affect us wormholes every single day in every fleet. What is the benefits to this game mechanic? What is the game design change or reason this is a good idea for wormholers?
A few activities in wormholes this is going to negatively affect.
- Chain Static Collapsing (Rage Rolling) will be slower.
- Jumping into a new wormhole that has capitals running sites, the prober is going to have to combat the caps then warp to them, then have the dictor wait and warp to the prober. Its unnecessary amount of extra time that the hostile caps have that they can escape.
- Safe fleet movement through wormhole chains is going to be slower. You're going to need to have a worthless interceptor moving in front of you so the FC can fleet warp to that pilot to safely move and not leave straglers. That inty pilot could be in a useful ship. What is more likely going to happen is the FC is going to be dual boxing that second client himself to insure the validity of the warpin, and increase the speed of the warp in so he doesn't have to waste time confirming the warpin is ready
There are so many combat situations I can think of where this is just going to be annoying and slow down gameplay. Did you think about that? Increasing the time of doing boring things like waiting for a warpin?
If you want a useful "fleet warp" game design change I've got one for you: allow the fleet FC to flag a fleet member with the ability to fleet warp, so I don't have to drag my links out of Wing to move myself into Wing then warp, then move the pilots back.
Operations Director of Hard K(n)ocks Inc.
|
knobber Jobbler
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
550
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:24:58 -
[447] - Quote
blue coeur wrote:
Seriously, I challenge you to live in a Wormhole for a month.
Wormholes are next for the chop. It's not part of Fozzie and Rise's plan to force everyone to pretend to be micro gang elite pvp jerkoffs. |
Kendarr
Zebra Corp The Bastion
46
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:25:58 -
[448] - Quote
I do not mind the fleet warps changes to public items but not being able to fleet what to probe results is a nightmare for me. Its slowing fleets down to much. Its hard enough alot of the time to probe something down in system then to try and warp to it with one ship for the fleet to follow. You are never going to beable to catch that fleet rolling safes ever again. which means there's less pvp going on.
I understand the need to slow bomber wings down / get people more interactive in fleets but come on CCP you can do much better then this... like by restricting ship types fleet warping to probe results?
Zebra-Corp
|
knobber Jobbler
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
550
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:26:29 -
[449] - Quote
This whole problem could be solved easily if the person probing could broadcast their probe results and allow people to warp to those. Add that feature in and removing fleet warp to probes is moot. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:27:33 -
[450] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Querns wrote:You delegate the task of creating warp-ins to players in covops or interceptors. See the "I Was There" trailer for a fairly decent dramatization of this oddly foreign concept: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSxSyv4LC1c The changes may be annoying to you and the crutches upon which you rely to play eve, but they're positive for the game as a whole. Adapt. How exactly is a fleet warp a crutch? Are you saying I am incapable of right clicking a name on my watch list and warping to them at a designated range? Because people do this already. You fail to see the stupidity in these changes because you cannot see the context of the problems they create which are many. Also, if I may I play Eve in many different ways and many different situations. The battlefield and the tactics and strategies therein are fluid and constantly in motion. That's what makes Eve unique and sadly maybe it's only redeeming quality if this trend continues. The unknown. The enigma. The what "if". Every action has a reaction in Eve. Every command, target, fitting, ship, strategy, convo, every detail can have a shift in the outcome of everything from battles to Alliances and Coalitions. Your very own Coalition owes it's successes and rise to power by the actions of one person. So please as someone who has played this game since 2004 do not sit here and lecture me on the virtues and reasons to "adapt." I've been doing it in this game for a long time. You still have failed to give me a reason as to WHY these changes are positive. If you feel another role for a player to field is a potential good thing then come at it from that angle! And while the intention MAY be good. The execution so far has been terrible. IF anything this diminishes a players role: the FC. Or even worse creates an even greater difficulty for FC'a and content creators. The negative implications out weight the good intentions these changes try to instill. That you cannot argue against and that is what over 20 pages of a majority of people here agree upon. There we go with the "majority" thing again. Length of forum thread does not dictate popularity due to the low patronage of the forums. This argument cheapens the position of anyone using it. You've also used the "content" word again, which is another loaded phrase. Thinking of Eve in terms of "content" puts blinkers on your ability to converse.
I've given plenty of positive effects associated with this change -- the castration of the bomber meta, the potential revitalization of shield ships, increased effectiveness of travel interdiction, increased fleet roles for interceptors/covops, a higher skill ceiling for eve. If you don't like any of these, that's fine, but I find them to be overwhelmingly positive.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:28:55 -
[451] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:Budrick3 wrote:
Poor attempt at saving face.
Rule of all holes, stop digging when you are in one.
Your embarrassing your alliance, the people that put faith in voting for you, and most of all, your embarrassing yourself.
Does this mean I am not gonna win a popularity contest ? Aww shucks im gutted really. Weren't you elected to instill positive changes for a majority of the Eve Community? Or am I just being fickle thinking the CSM is supposed to do that.... I mean honestly. Didn't you guys take into consideration the myriad of problems this creates for people? Even if the intentions were good, the execution is utterly terrible. I mean really terrible. Can't you guys come up with something better than this? I mean besides terrible icons and super skins for only half the titans at 35 USD a pop.... Your mistake was assuming that the CSM is a widespread popularity contest. Virtually no-one in Eve likes Goonswarm Federation, yet we consistently elect 2 candidates to the CSM. A CSM member who owes his spot to his confederates has little incentive to represent the player base as a whole.
Don't like it? Vote next time.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
154
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:29:11 -
[452] - Quote
Joran Jackson wrote:I think this is a fantastic change for wormholes. Anything that makes it harder for 50 man WH fleets to function gets a thumbs up from me.
You do realize this does nothing to those fleets but hurts the smaller ones way more? Starting with the fact that the almost all big groups are in one corp only and will have access to corpbookmarks from the initial scout.
What this change does is it kills NPSI fleets., esp in wormholespace. Have fun giving everyone in fleet the bookmarks beforehand. Multiple people from the same corp in fleet might help not a bit since they need to have corproles for bookmarks. This is especially true in wormholespace where you need a ****-ton of bookmarks just of the holes. Flying through a big system or even thera? "FC, call me in 5 minutes when you land so we can warp too" Forgot to copy one of the bookmarks? well, sucks to be you. Someone went the wrong way? You are stranded alone until someone comes back to get you. OFC that will polarize this person and force it to do nothing for 5 minutes and be left behind. Corpbookmarks haven-¦t updated yet? Well, see you in 5 minutes. You found someone in a sig you do not have a bookmark for? Combatprobe him down and hope he is still in there not just by the time you warp there, but everybody warps to you too. You better scanned in a tanky T3 and not came through one of these great only-the-smallest-of-ships wormholes. Also huge boost to WCS, everybody love those.
As enough people have stated it also really hurts group PvE that isn-¦t anomrunning. Bestcase it double the traveltime (superfun with the most popular PvE ships being BS sized), worstcase "have fun tanking the site alone for 30 sec until our RR gets here too".
For PvP this is a huge boost to kiting. You get a cloakyprober next to a kitingfleet, by the time your buddies land near you the kiters have made at least another 10km and are out of webrange. You use a noncloaky to keep up with them, free killmail thanks to the addition of RLMLs.
Things will never warp at the same speed, tackle lands and gets faceraped, logi lands and looks stupid, mainfleet lands and is in exactly the same position as pre-warp. And then land the capitals and ask themselves why te grid is empty. Unless you are flying ishtars, T3s or mordus-¦ ships, because all of those are so little used anyways compared to BCs and BS who get shafted again. Oh, and you better hope everybody has all lvl5 navigationskills, if you FC some new players you will be out of warp long before they are.
It takes away the homefield advantage of FCs with 20+ tacticals around every gate in the homeregion. Good and bad at the same time but again a huge boost to kiting.
Again, this change only supports blobbing and excessive use of multiboxing, like so many other changes we have seen lately.
CCP Larrikin wrote:Both of these points are solid. Corbexx brought these up while we where talking to the CSM about the change. Regarding slowing down the speed of sites, given the potential profitability of wormhole space, we don't consider this a major negative. Regarding movement fleets though WH space, we have something we're working on for this. That said some of the feedback we've received is mixed. Reducing power projection though WH space (for both WH residence & passes though) not seen as all bad.
And again, lowend residents get the shaft because C5/6s. "Potential profitability" with nanoribbons creeping around 2M a piece... Warping to fleetmembers 0 on a hole needs them to be decloaked, let-¦s also anounce it in local, just in case they do not have a scout out. Sneaking up on someone in a site only works if it is not littered with asteroids, LCOs, huge gasclouds or just sleepers spawning and burning around. This change effects 5 man escalationfarmers NOT AT ALL, it is even a boost for their security. |
wazp1
Limited Power Inc It Must Be Jelly Cause Jam Don't Shake
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:30:45 -
[453] - Quote
I have not seen the o7 show yet but: I dont see any point doing this, must be one of the most stupid changes in Eve. As if you are doing that change are you then doing:
Alliance Bookmarks Increase corp bookmarks Increase update freq on corp and now the New alliance bookmarks that make sure everyone in Corp/alliance have that bookmark as when in mostly whs not everyone can see the bookmark before its to late and therefor fleet /Winge / squad warp
#where is the Wh Csm on this?
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:33:20 -
[454] - Quote
Shilalasar wrote:And then land the capitals and ask themselves why te grid is empty. Your capitals, maybe. Mine warp faster than cruisers.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Kendarr
Zebra Corp The Bastion
46
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:34:55 -
[455] - Quote
Also if you want to nerf the speed of bombers bombing, why not just put a huge timers on the bomb launchers or reload time? like 10 mins or something.
Zebra-Corp
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:36:52 -
[456] - Quote
Kendarr wrote:Also if you want to nerf the speed of bombers bombing, why not just put a huge timers on the bomb launchers or reload time? like 10 mins or something. Bombers are too inexpensive for this to be viable. Use a bomber, then warp to a pos or a cloaked carrier to swap out your bomber for one lacking the reload/activation timer.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
827
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:37:11 -
[457] - Quote
Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote:Querns wrote:You delegate the task of creating warp-ins to players in covops or interceptors. See the "I Was There" trailer for a fairly decent dramatization of this oddly foreign concept: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSxSyv4LC1c The changes may be annoying to you and the crutches upon which you rely to play eve, but they're positive for the game as a whole. Adapt. How exactly is a fleet warp a crutch? Are you saying I am incapable of right clicking a name on my watch list and warping to them at a designated range? Because people do this already. You fail to see the stupidity in these changes because you cannot see the context of the problems they create which are many. Also, if I may I play Eve in many different ways and many different situations. The battlefield and the tactics and strategies therein are fluid and constantly in motion. That's what makes Eve unique and sadly maybe it's only redeeming quality if this trend continues. The unknown. The enigma. The what "if". Every action has a reaction in Eve. Every command, target, fitting, ship, strategy, convo, every detail can have a shift in the outcome of everything from battles to Alliances and Coalitions. Your very own Coalition owes it's successes and rise to power by the actions of one person. So please as someone who has played this game since 2004 do not sit here and lecture me on the virtues and reasons to "adapt." I've been doing it in this game for a long time. You still have failed to give me a reason as to WHY these changes are positive. If you feel another role for a player to field is a potential good thing then come at it from that angle! And while the intention MAY be good. The execution so far has been terrible. IF anything this diminishes a players role: the FC. Or even worse creates an even greater difficulty for FC'a and content creators. The negative implications out weight the good intentions these changes try to instill. That you cannot argue against and that is what over 20 pages of a majority of people here agree upon. There we go with the "majority" thing again. Length of forum thread does not dictate popularity due to the low patronage of the forums. This argument cheapens the position of anyone using it. You've also used the "content" word again, which is another loaded phrase. Thinking of Eve in terms of "content" puts blinkers on your ability to converse. I've given plenty of positive effects associated with this change -- the castration of the bomber meta, the potential revitalization of shield ships, increased effectiveness of travel interdiction, increased fleet roles for interceptors/covops, a higher skill ceiling for eve. If you don't like any of these, that's fine, but I find them to be overwhelmingly positive.
So you hate bombers. Gotcha. Jesus Christ that's a lot of words for "I hate being bombed!" And please stop trying to circlejerk yourself with these convoluted paragraphs of buzz words like "content" and "meta". It's beginning to sound like another propaganda Jim Jones cool aide fest that I have no intention of drinking.
If you have issues with bombers why not fix them? Why instead of screwing the pooch with everyone else CCP perhaps place warping or grid restrictions on bombers? Maybe make flying them more niche than making us all suffer for half baked fleet mechanics?
Oh of course. Instead of building a fire to keep the house warm CCP just sets the whole house on fire instead. Typical.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
828
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:38:56 -
[458] - Quote
Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:Budrick3 wrote:
Poor attempt at saving face.
Rule of all holes, stop digging when you are in one.
Your embarrassing your alliance, the people that put faith in voting for you, and most of all, your embarrassing yourself.
Does this mean I am not gonna win a popularity contest ? Aww shucks im gutted really. Weren't you elected to instill positive changes for a majority of the Eve Community? Or am I just being fickle thinking the CSM is supposed to do that.... I mean honestly. Didn't you guys take into consideration the myriad of problems this creates for people? Even if the intentions were good, the execution is utterly terrible. I mean really terrible. Can't you guys come up with something better than this? I mean besides terrible icons and super skins for only half the titans at 35 USD a pop.... Your mistake was assuming that the CSM is a widespread popularity contest. Virtually no-one in Eve likes Goonswarm Federation, yet we consistently elect 2 candidates to the CSM. A CSM member who owes his spot to his confederates has little incentive to represent the player base as a whole. Don't like it? Vote next time.
Oh this is just too cute. If this is the fruits of the CSM's labour which is nothing but self posturing and positioning to bend CCP's ear then I have no interest. Period.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:40:27 -
[459] - Quote
Tara Read wrote: So you hate bombers. Gotcha. Jesus Christ that's a lot of words for "I hate being bombed!" And please stop trying to circlejerk yourself with these convoluted paragraphs of buzz words like "content" and "meta". It's beginning to sound like another propaganda Jim Jones cool aide fest that I have no intention of drinking.
If you have issues with bombers why not fix them? Why instead of screwing the pooch with everyone else CCP perhaps place warping or grid restrictions on bombers? Maybe make flying them more niche than making us all suffer for half baked fleet mechanics?
Oh of course. Instead of building a fire to keep the house warm CCP just sets the whole house on fire instead. Typical.
I mean, I'm not a game designer, nor do I work for CCP, so I don't actually fix things. I don't even have a backchannel, nor even reliable access to the ears of a CSM member (for all the good THAT does one.) I just post words in a forum.
Also, you're allowed to use terrible, nuance-destroying buzzwords like "content," but I can't use "meta?"
What you consider "half-baked" I consider "crutch."
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Kendarr
Zebra Corp The Bastion
46
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:42:01 -
[460] - Quote
Querns wrote:Kendarr wrote:Also if you want to nerf the speed of bombers bombing, why not just put a huge timers on the bomb launchers or reload time? like 10 mins or something. Bombers are too inexpensive for this to be viable. Use a bomber, then warp to a pos or a cloaked carrier to swap out your bomber for one lacking the reload/activation timer. fake edit: CCP GREYSCALE PLEASE ADD BOMB FATIGUE
+1 for BOMB FATIGUE
Zebra-Corp
|
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:42:17 -
[461] - Quote
Tara Read wrote: Oh this is just too cute. If this is the fruits of the CSM's labour which is nothing but self posturing and positioning to bend CCP's ear then I have no interest. Period.
It's less that and more "having a group of confederates who will vote for you in excess of the amount of votes garnered by the disenfranchised masses of Eve."
If you don't like the way this works, I strongly encourage you to actually vote next time, as I said before. Otherwise, you lose your purchase towards complaining about it. The CSM does not warp to your whims because you refuse to put forth even a token amount of effort towards changing it.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
828
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:42:45 -
[462] - Quote
Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote: So you hate bombers. Gotcha. Jesus Christ that's a lot of words for "I hate being bombed!" And please stop trying to circlejerk yourself with these convoluted paragraphs of buzz words like "content" and "meta". It's beginning to sound like another propaganda Jim Jones cool aide fest that I have no intention of drinking.
If you have issues with bombers why not fix them? Why instead of screwing the pooch with everyone else CCP perhaps place warping or grid restrictions on bombers? Maybe make flying them more niche than making us all suffer for half baked fleet mechanics?
Oh of course. Instead of building a fire to keep the house warm CCP just sets the whole house on fire instead. Typical.
I mean, I'm not a game designer, nor do I work for CCP, so I don't actually fix things. I don't even have a backchannel, nor even reliable access to the ears of a CSM member (for all the good THAT does one.) I just post words in a forum. Also, you're allowed to use terrible, nuance-destroying buzzwords like "content," but I can't use "meta?" What you consider "half-baked" I consider "crutch."
You are the one constantly coming back and trying to twist a Tolkien like description of the meaning meta to say you don't like bombing runs. It's utterly hilarious.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:44:54 -
[463] - Quote
Tara Read wrote: You are the one constantly coming back and trying to twist a Tolkien like description of the meaning meta to say you don't like bombing runs. It's utterly hilarious.
Nah. I just think that with bombers castrated, the major detriments to fielding shield tanked ships are gone. In the current era of Ishtars and Tengus, it's a breath of fresh air.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
829
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:47:18 -
[464] - Quote
Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote: Oh this is just too cute. If this is the fruits of the CSM's labour which is nothing but self posturing and positioning to bend CCP's ear then I have no interest. Period.
It's less that and more "having a group of confederates who will vote for you in excess of the amount of votes garnered by the disenfranchised masses of Eve." If you don't like the way this works, I strongly encourage you to actually vote next time, as I said before. Otherwise, you lose your purchase towards complaining about it. The CSM does not warp to your whims because you refuse to put forth even a token amount of effort towards changing it.
Token of effort? My dear friend and ignorant bloated bee you've gotten too fat on the sweet honey of complacency! If you'd only gone back a few years ago to the proosed gate mechanic changes and sentry proposals to low sec youd see ive been quite active and vocal in the past which resulted in those changes not happening.
It doesn't take a CSM vote to make things in New Eden change. Certainly not if it's just the same group of ankle biting pompous self indulged personalities that grace the likes of reddit and failheap. But hey. Typical mindset of the ignorant. If you don't vote for a candidate that doesn't hold your best interests in mind you have no right to complain.
Cute.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
829
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:49:12 -
[465] - Quote
Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote: You are the one constantly coming back and trying to twist a Tolkien like description of the meaning meta to say you don't like bombing runs. It's utterly hilarious.
Nah. I just think that with bombers castrated, the major detriments to fielding shield tanked ships are gone. In the current era of Ishtars and Tengus, it's a breath of fresh air.
So you want to fly an Ishtar. God I pity you so so much.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Cypr3ss Deteis
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
9
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:50:04 -
[466] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: The goal of these changes is to encourage more individual fleet member participation and reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets (e.g bombers).
Maybe you're forgetting how things work here in Eve... but as a gentle reminder this is what is going to happen when you implement this change:
- FC brings another alt (cov-ops most likely) that he warps (cloaked) to the:
- Probe Results
- Bookmarks
- Any private deadspace item (missions, etc.)
- FC fleet warps squad to this alt, fleet F1s whatever is on grid with them.
It will in not, in any way, encourage more individual fleet member participation.
It will slow things down, so I guess 1 out of 2 ain't bad heh?
Really hope you reconsider this change.
Regards, Cypr3ss. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:50:20 -
[467] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote: Oh this is just too cute. If this is the fruits of the CSM's labour which is nothing but self posturing and positioning to bend CCP's ear then I have no interest. Period.
It's less that and more "having a group of confederates who will vote for you in excess of the amount of votes garnered by the disenfranchised masses of Eve." If you don't like the way this works, I strongly encourage you to actually vote next time, as I said before. Otherwise, you lose your purchase towards complaining about it. The CSM does not warp to your whims because you refuse to put forth even a token amount of effort towards changing it. Token of effort? My dear friend and ignorant bloated bee you've gotten too fat on the sweet honey of complacency! If you'd only gone back a few years ago to the posed gate mechanic changes and sentry proposals to low sec youd see ive been quite active and vocal in the past which resulted in those changes not happening. It doesn't take a CSM vote to make things in New Eden change. Certainly not if it's just the same group of ankle biting pompous self indulged personalities that grace the likes of reddit and failheap. But hey. Typical mindset of the ignorant. If you don't vote for a candidate that doesn't hold your best interests in mind you have no right to complain. Cute. If it doesn't take a CSM vote to make things in New Eden change, then why complain in the first place?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:51:18 -
[468] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote: You are the one constantly coming back and trying to twist a Tolkien like description of the meaning meta to say you don't like bombing runs. It's utterly hilarious.
Nah. I just think that with bombers castrated, the major detriments to fielding shield tanked ships are gone. In the current era of Ishtars and Tengus, it's a breath of fresh air. So you want to fly an Ishtar. God I pity you so so much. This is pretty far afield of anything I was actually talking about.
Also, I can fly an ishtar quite competently -- thanks for asking!
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Kendarr
Zebra Corp The Bastion
46
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:52:41 -
[469] - Quote
Cypr3ss Deteis wrote:
Really hope you reconsider this change.
Zebra-Corp
|
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
829
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:54:04 -
[470] - Quote
Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote:Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote: Oh this is just too cute. If this is the fruits of the CSM's labour which is nothing but self posturing and positioning to bend CCP's ear then I have no interest. Period.
It's less that and more "having a group of confederates who will vote for you in excess of the amount of votes garnered by the disenfranchised masses of Eve." If you don't like the way this works, I strongly encourage you to actually vote next time, as I said before. Otherwise, you lose your purchase towards complaining about it. The CSM does not warp to your whims because you refuse to put forth even a token amount of effort towards changing it. Token of effort? My dear friend and ignorant bloated bee you've gotten too fat on the sweet honey of complacency! If you'd only gone back a few years ago to the posed gate mechanic changes and sentry proposals to low sec youd see ive been quite active and vocal in the past which resulted in those changes not happening. It doesn't take a CSM vote to make things in New Eden change. Certainly not if it's just the same group of ankle biting pompous self indulged personalities that grace the likes of reddit and failheap. But hey. Typical mindset of the ignorant. If you don't vote for a candidate that doesn't hold your best interests in mind you have no right to complain. Cute. If it doesn't take a CSM vote to make things in New Eden change, then why complain in the first place?
Because it's under the cheating of Bob and deva that the CSM was formed in the first place. A check and balance system. Now it's as selfish and twisted as anything else in Eve. Sure there's a handful of members who generally care. But there's those few sweet charitable personalities who are only in it for the agenda of their groups they ally with.
Not to hold CCP in check but to bend CCP to the changes THEY want. Case in point. These changes are clearly a vieled nerf to bombers and is just another account for someone to need to run.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
|
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
829
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:56:23 -
[471] - Quote
Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote:Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote: You are the one constantly coming back and trying to twist a Tolkien like description of the meaning meta to say you don't like bombing runs. It's utterly hilarious.
Nah. I just think that with bombers castrated, the major detriments to fielding shield tanked ships are gone. In the current era of Ishtars and Tengus, it's a breath of fresh air. So you want to fly an Ishtar. God I pity you so so much. This is pretty far afield of anything I was actually talking about. Also, I can fly an ishtar quite competently -- thanks for asking!
You complain about adapting and "skill", insult my skill as an Eve player, yet boast about flying an ishtar well. I think I wet myself just now laughing.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Ryno Caval
House of Praetor Fidelas Constans
28
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:56:35 -
[472] - Quote
I dunno about all this I'm just gonna roll with the punches on this one |
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
833
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:57:34 -
[473] - Quote
Ryno Caval wrote:So obviously my previous post was poking fun at everyone complaining. This is just going to be one of those things where everyone is gonna complain, its going to happen anyways. So rather than complain about it start practicing not relying on fleet warps. I mean it is really not an elegant solution or all that complicated. Most of the complaints I hear are totally fixable by just adapting. It'll be nice to actually have use for tactics and in fleets for everyone to be accountable for their own movements to strategic locations. I see a lot of stragglers or overly cocky players being killed in fire and not being able to blame the FC anymore. Yeah it's going to suck losing perches and other fun strategies that are incorporated now but I think this will allow for some interesting gameplay changes. I don't know if will be good, I don't know if it will be bad. All I know is all you can do is adapt and have fun with it. I honestly am excited to see what new methods of fighting people will have. Who knows maybe the days of endlessly cat and mouse PVP will end and there will be some actual brawling for a change. As far as the WH issues here is an idea if you scan something down pay attention to the star map tell your fleet to go to the nearest celestial and they will be on grid much faster same thing goes for bookmarks and other things like that. Maybe you take a couple of hits but if you are scanning SIGs in a WH you should have enough tank to last at least a few seconds and your fleet should have LOGI. As far as the insta-dock, if you are in a capital in a system you undocked in (cynos should always be lit at the insta-dock), you don't know to have an insta-dock, and you don't self warp you are a moron. Lastly, they learning curve may be steep but that is why there are different types of space, the game doesn't start you out in null-sec in a corporation that is part of an alliance that is part of a coalition that expects you to know what you are doing and have experience. You start in Empire space for a reason. There is a buffer between experienced players and new players obviously at times that buffer is broken and the new players learn rough lessons. The fun of EVE is learning the ins and outs and adapting to the changing dynamic.
Good god man its called a paragraph.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
1177
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 06:58:14 -
[474] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:Budrick3 wrote:
Poor attempt at saving face.
Rule of all holes, stop digging when you are in one.
Your embarrassing your alliance, the people that put faith in voting for you, and most of all, your embarrassing yourself.
Does this mean I am not gonna win a popularity contest ? Aww shucks im gutted really. Weren't you elected to instill positive changes for a majority of the Eve Community? Or am I just being fickle thinking the CSM is supposed to do that.... I mean honestly. Didn't you guys take into consideration the myriad of problems this creates for people? Even if the intentions were good, the execution is utterly terrible. I mean really terrible. Can't you guys come up with something better than this? I mean besides terrible icons and super skins for only half the titans at 35 USD a pop....
I mean we can suggest things and give feedback however at the end of the day its CCP who decides what goes in and what doesn't. With that said I wanted to see combat probing and bombers nerfed. This change accomplishes both. Is it exact optimum ? Thats subjective I have gotten lots of positive feedback and likes for my post in regards to the subject. However as normal it is usually those that are dissatisfied with a issue that are usually most vocal. Unfortunately with constraints of NDA sometimes its hard for CSM to explain positions clearly. Perhaps you don't feel this is a positive change but others do. I can remember a vocal portion of the community unhappy when the AOE doomsday was removed or when Jump Fatigue was added. I have to say I feel for CCP it is nigh impossible to please everyone all at the same time.
@EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:00:17 -
[475] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Because it's under the cheating of Bob and deva that the CSM was formed in the first place. A check and balance system. Now it's as selfish and twisted as anything else in Eve. Sure there's a handful of members who generally care. But there's those few sweet charitable personalities who are only in it for the agenda of their groups they ally with.
Not to hold CCP in check but to bend CCP to the changes THEY want. Case in point. These changes are clearly a vieled nerf to bombers and is just another account for someone to need to run. As an aside, I love the utter helplessness betrayed by this post. The ability to influence the CSM's composition is in the hands of every individual, yet you are pre-abandoning the idea completely in lieu of posting tinfoil-coated nonsense. I'd find it sad if it wasn't so hilarious.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
HiddenPorpoise
Expendable Miscreants
357
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:01:12 -
[476] - Quote
If we want to take this to its core, I don't actually understand how this is hard on bombers. They have all the time they want or need. Most bombing targets are near a warpable point and everytime I've been in a cloaky fleet all closing in warps were manual anyway. |
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
833
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:03:45 -
[477] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Tara Read wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:Budrick3 wrote:
Poor attempt at saving face.
Rule of all holes, stop digging when you are in one.
Your embarrassing your alliance, the people that put faith in voting for you, and most of all, your embarrassing yourself.
Does this mean I am not gonna win a popularity contest ? Aww shucks im gutted really. Weren't you elected to instill positive changes for a majority of the Eve Community? Or am I just being fickle thinking the CSM is supposed to do that.... I mean honestly. Didn't you guys take into consideration the myriad of problems this creates for people? Even if the intentions were good, the execution is utterly terrible. I mean really terrible. Can't you guys come up with something better than this? I mean besides terrible icons and super skins for only half the titans at 35 USD a pop.... I mean we can suggest things and give feedback however at the end of the day its CCP who decides what goes in and what doesn't. With that said I wanted to see combat probing and bombers nerfed. This change accomplishes both. Is it exact optimum ? Thats subjective I have gotten lots of positive feedback and likes for my post in regards to the subject. However as normal it is usually those that are dissatisfied with a issue that are usually most vocal. Unfortunately with constraints of NDA sometimes its hard for CSM to explain positions clearly. Perhaps you don't feel this is a positive change but others do. I can remember a vocal portion of the community unhappy when the AOE doomsday was removed or when Jump Fatigue was added. I have to say I feel for CCP it is nigh impossible to please everyone all at the same time.
Phoebe was a necessity mainly due to the power projection your group had as a Super dominant force as well as others. But I digress. These changes are like cutting off ones foot to deal with trimming toe nails. Why not just deal with bombers directly? Why make the rest of us suffer with these changes? These are utterly rediculous in means and context.
All you are doing is placing more weight upon FC's and making people create more alts for nothing of benefit. I suggest you go to CCP and scrap this whole ordeal. If you want to nerf bombers deal with the platform directly. Not break an unbroken mechanic that already suffers from grid and placement issues.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
833
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:04:44 -
[478] - Quote
Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote:Because it's under the cheating of Bob and deva that the CSM was formed in the first place. A check and balance system. Now it's as selfish and twisted as anything else in Eve. Sure there's a handful of members who generally care. But there's those few sweet charitable personalities who are only in it for the agenda of their groups they ally with.
Not to hold CCP in check but to bend CCP to the changes THEY want. Case in point. These changes are clearly a vieled nerf to bombers and is just another account for someone to need to run. As an aside, I love the utter helplessness betrayed by this post. The ability to influence the CSM's composition is in the hands of every individual, yet you are pre-abandoning the idea completely in lieu of posting tinfoil-coated nonsense. I'd find it sad if it wasn't so hilarious.
You know jet fuel can't melt steel beams right?
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:05:32 -
[479] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote:Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote: You are the one constantly coming back and trying to twist a Tolkien like description of the meaning meta to say you don't like bombing runs. It's utterly hilarious.
Nah. I just think that with bombers castrated, the major detriments to fielding shield tanked ships are gone. In the current era of Ishtars and Tengus, it's a breath of fresh air. So you want to fly an Ishtar. God I pity you so so much. This is pretty far afield of anything I was actually talking about. Also, I can fly an ishtar quite competently -- thanks for asking! You complain about adapting and "skill", insult my skill as an Eve player, yet boast about flying an ishtar well. I think I wet myself just now laughing. Again, quite outside anything I was talking about, but, fine, I'll indulge the tangent a bit.
I've never actually undocked in an ishtar! Check my killboard if you don't believe me. For whatever dumb reason, I happen to have Gallente Cruiser, Heavy Assault Ships, and Sentry Drone Operation all at rank five, so if I was so inclined, I feel like I'd operate the ship quite well. Haven't had a reason to do so, however -- Goonswarm Federation, in general, doesn't fly them outside of SIGs.
e: In PVP, anyways -- ishtars are very common PVE ships in Deklein.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
140
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:05:42 -
[480] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Tara Read wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:Budrick3 wrote:
Poor attempt at saving face.
Rule of all holes, stop digging when you are in one.
Your embarrassing your alliance, the people that put faith in voting for you, and most of all, your embarrassing yourself.
Does this mean I am not gonna win a popularity contest ? Aww shucks im gutted really. Weren't you elected to instill positive changes for a majority of the Eve Community? Or am I just being fickle thinking the CSM is supposed to do that.... I mean honestly. Didn't you guys take into consideration the myriad of problems this creates for people? Even if the intentions were good, the execution is utterly terrible. I mean really terrible. Can't you guys come up with something better than this? I mean besides terrible icons and super skins for only half the titans at 35 USD a pop.... I mean we can suggest things and give feedback however at the end of the day its CCP who decides what goes in and what doesn't. With that said I wanted to see combat probing and bombers nerfed. This change accomplishes both. Is it exact optimum ? Thats subjective I have gotten lots of positive feedback and likes for my post in regards to the subject. However as normal it is usually those that are dissatisfied with a issue that are usually most vocal. Unfortunately with constraints of NDA sometimes its hard for CSM to explain positions clearly. Perhaps you don't feel this is a positive change but others do. I can remember a vocal portion of the community unhappy when the AOE doomsday was removed or when Jump Fatigue was added. I have to say I feel for CCP it is nigh impossible to please everyone all at the same time.
Only in eve is it the working logic that if X and Y things are a problem then nerfing the **** out of related item 1 is the solution. What's that? No the consequences to items 2, 3, 4 & 5 are totally intended despite the gamebreaking nature of their loss.
Might I suggest CSM rep if the problem is bombers and combat probes that you adovacte they be fixed and not a normal functiom like fleet warps.
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:08:05 -
[481] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote: Might I suggest CSM rep if the problem is bombers and combat probes that you adovacte they be fixed and not a normal functiom like fleet warps.
I suppose it never crossed your mind that the intent of restricting fleet warps was multi-faceted in nature. The bomber nerf is only one part. (It does, however, happen to be my favorite part!)
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
1177
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:09:07 -
[482] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:Tara Read wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:Budrick3 wrote:
Poor attempt at saving face.
Rule of all holes, stop digging when you are in one.
Your embarrassing your alliance, the people that put faith in voting for you, and most of all, your embarrassing yourself.
Does this mean I am not gonna win a popularity contest ? Aww shucks im gutted really. Weren't you elected to instill positive changes for a majority of the Eve Community? Or am I just being fickle thinking the CSM is supposed to do that.... I mean honestly. Didn't you guys take into consideration the myriad of problems this creates for people? Even if the intentions were good, the execution is utterly terrible. I mean really terrible. Can't you guys come up with something better than this? I mean besides terrible icons and super skins for only half the titans at 35 USD a pop.... I mean we can suggest things and give feedback however at the end of the day its CCP who decides what goes in and what doesn't. With that said I wanted to see combat probing and bombers nerfed. This change accomplishes both. Is it exact optimum ? Thats subjective I have gotten lots of positive feedback and likes for my post in regards to the subject. However as normal it is usually those that are dissatisfied with a issue that are usually most vocal. Unfortunately with constraints of NDA sometimes its hard for CSM to explain positions clearly. Perhaps you don't feel this is a positive change but others do. I can remember a vocal portion of the community unhappy when the AOE doomsday was removed or when Jump Fatigue was added. I have to say I feel for CCP it is nigh impossible to please everyone all at the same time. Phoebe was a necessity mainly due to the power projection your group had as a Super dominant force as well as others. But I digress. These changes are like cutting off ones foot to deal with trimming toe nails. Why not just deal with bombers directly? Why make the rest of us suffer with these changes? These are utterly rediculous in means and context. All you are doing is placing more weight upon FC's and making people create more alts for nothing of benefit. I suggest you go to CCP and scrap this whole ordeal. If you want to nerf bombers deal with the platform directly. Not break an unbroken mechanic that already suffers from grid and placement issues.
I am a FC I feel no extra weight from this change and if I did. I get volunteers from fleet to help me.
@EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny
|
Jindo Lee
EVE University Ivy League
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:11:34 -
[483] - Quote
knobber Jobbler wrote: Please give the small/micro gang elite pvp jerks their arena to go fight in and stop buggering up strategic fleet warfare. Literally two posts later...
Forlorn Wongraven (ATXI winner, 3rd place ATXII) wrote:Thanks, looking forward to this change.
|
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
846
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:12:56 -
[484] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:I am a FC I feel no extra weight from this change and if I did. I get volunteers from fleet to help me.
That's a terrible excuse Manfred. Come on.... so you expect other FC's to force other people to play fleet jockey or get another account. I rest my case.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:16:12 -
[485] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:I am a FC I feel no extra weight from this change and if I did. I get volunteers from fleet to help me. That's a terrible excuse Manfred. Come on.... so you expect other FC's to force other people to play fleet jockey or get another account. I rest my case. Far be it from people in the fleet actually having to contribute towards its success.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
143
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:17:35 -
[486] - Quote
Querns wrote:Miner Hottie wrote: Might I suggest CSM rep if the problem is bombers and combat probes that you adovacte they be fixed and not a normal functiom like fleet warps.
I suppose it never crossed your mind that the intent of restricting fleet warps was multi-faceted in nature. The bomber nerf is only one part. (It does, however, happen to be my favorite part!) Manny said bombers and combat probes are the issue (which I can agree with). So why not apply a change like a 50% reduction in bomb explosion velocity with a small increase in base damage, with a further slow down of the bombs to decrease a bombers effectiveness whilst a base slowing of combat probes scan time. Obviously these things need to be refined. But making bombs apply less damage per sig radius gives shield bs a chance (despite the devs thinking battleships are ok, they are not afaik). Point is nerfing fleet warps to fix another problem breaks other things intentional or not that's not cool if you don't state that is the intended consequence.
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:20:17 -
[487] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote:Querns wrote:Miner Hottie wrote: Might I suggest CSM rep if the problem is bombers and combat probes that you adovacte they be fixed and not a normal functiom like fleet warps.
I suppose it never crossed your mind that the intent of restricting fleet warps was multi-faceted in nature. The bomber nerf is only one part. (It does, however, happen to be my favorite part!) Manny said bombers and combat probes are the issue (which I can agree with). So why not apply a change like a 50% reduction in bomb explosion velocity with a small increase in base damage, with a further slow down of the bombs to decrease a bombers effectiveness whilst a base slowing of combat probes scan time. Obviously these things need to be refined. But making bombs apply less damage per sig radius gives shield bs a chance (despite the devs thinking battleships are ok, they are not afaik). Point is nerfing fleet warps to fix another problem breaks other things intentional or not that's not cool if you don't state that is the intended consequence. I'm not entirely sure how it "breaks" things, honestly. Does it make them less convenient? Sure!
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Teh Replika
Lazerhawks
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:20:43 -
[488] - Quote
Dear Manfred, the rest of CSM, and the CCP. With all due respect.
If you wanna nerf bombers - adjust single in game stat - bomb hit points, don't spend tons of manhours inventing stuff similar to this new fleet warp mechanic. I'am aware its not only aimed at bombers, just an example.
If you wanna nerp petes - adjust tengu offensive sub optimal bonus to rails, dont nerf med rails altogether.
And so on and so forth...
Large groups such as HK / LZHX / QEX will not suffer much from this change, as we have enough pilots and resources for throwaway pilots/ships to perform a suicide warpin role. Smaller groups will.
I'am assuming CCP's dream is that in a perfect world each toon ingame would have real person behind it @ 1:1 ratio, then please explain how suicide warpin (<1 into) the fight will be rewarding or interesting gameplay, or sitting at spot for 10+ minutes ( 0 minutes in actual fighting ) at a safespot providing fleet warpin.
I do realize that this change, among many others, is just a small brick in a huge wall that you call a vision, but sadly players don't know the details of the 'vision'. so we can't see where this all goes and as result get upset about the changes that don't make too much sense by themselves.
So for now most see it as huge quality of life drawback.
PS: Sorry for possible typo and the spelling |
Medria Lennelluc
Deep Stellar Coalition Enterprises
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:21:53 -
[489] - Quote
This seems like an idea that screws over a lot of things.
So, to be able to warp a fleet around a warp bubble, now All people need a perch or you need to wait for a scout (or bob help you a battleship) to warp there first. I know 200 au systems. Just assume you have no frigate with you, all cruisers, wait at gate for one of you to land at the perch so everyone can warp or can be warped. This kills the fleet. This kills ANY attempt at speed while staying moderately safe.
As for missions fleets, there are more than enough missions that don't have gates. So your warping now always has to be tanked enough so won't be blasted away by the time the rest comes in. This is of course awesome with slow warping ships.
Your Fc has a safespot in a hostile system where noone of your fleet was before? You're out of luck, no fleet warp there.
Seems allover like a bad idea, wrong nerf for (supposedly) the right reasons. |
Sean Parisi
Fugutive Task Force A T O N E M E N T
696
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:23:10 -
[490] - Quote
Well this makes multi boxing anoms less fun D: |
|
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
846
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:23:10 -
[491] - Quote
Querns wrote:
I've never actually undocked in an ishtar! Check my killboard if you don't believe me. For whatever dumb reason, I happen to have Gallente Cruiser, Heavy Assault Ships, and Sentry Drone Operation all at rank five, so if I was so inclined, I feel like I'd operate the ship quite well. Haven't had a reason to do so, however -- Goonswarm Federation, in general, doesn't fly them outside of SIGs.
e: In PVP, anyways -- ishtars are very common PVE ships in Deklein.
So you say these changes will help shield doctrines from bombers... Yet never undocked in an Ishtar before. Okay....
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:23:38 -
[492] - Quote
The best thing about this thread is that it is basically the Jump Fatigue thread, only in reverse.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
846
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:24:21 -
[493] - Quote
Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:I am a FC I feel no extra weight from this change and if I did. I get volunteers from fleet to help me. That's a terrible excuse Manfred. Come on.... so you expect other FC's to force other people to play fleet jockey or get another account. I rest my case. Far be it from people in the fleet actually having to contribute towards its success.
Implying you've even undocked and contributed towards something besides being on the ass end of a bombing run. You just stated you've never even undocked in an Ishtar yet speak as if well versed in shield doctrines....
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
143
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:24:45 -
[494] - Quote
Querns wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:Querns wrote:Miner Hottie wrote: Might I suggest CSM rep if the problem is bombers and combat probes that you adovacte they be fixed and not a normal functiom like fleet warps.
I suppose it never crossed your mind that the intent of restricting fleet warps was multi-faceted in nature. The bomber nerf is only one part. (It does, however, happen to be my favorite part!) Manny said bombers and combat probes are the issue (which I can agree with). So why not apply a change like a 50% reduction in bomb explosion velocity with a small increase in base damage, with a further slow down of the bombs to decrease a bombers effectiveness whilst a base slowing of combat probes scan time. Obviously these things need to be refined. But making bombs apply less damage per sig radius gives shield bs a chance (despite the devs thinking battleships are ok, they are not afaik). Point is nerfing fleet warps to fix another problem breaks other things intentional or not that's not cool if you don't state that is the intended consequence. I'm not entirely sure how it "breaks" things, honestly. Does it make them less convenient? Sure!
Immediately below your post quoted here Teh Replika gave you a pretty good example of consequences. Back to my comment why wont someone state what are the other intended consequences of this change?
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
46
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:24:55 -
[495] - Quote
This is truly dumb.
Great job on forcing FCs to have an additional alt, or if they are using the same alt as before, get that killed soon so the fights end prematurely.
Come on guys.. How do you keep making the game less and less fun at such a constant clip? |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:24:59 -
[496] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Querns wrote:
I've never actually undocked in an ishtar! Check my killboard if you don't believe me. For whatever dumb reason, I happen to have Gallente Cruiser, Heavy Assault Ships, and Sentry Drone Operation all at rank five, so if I was so inclined, I feel like I'd operate the ship quite well. Haven't had a reason to do so, however -- Goonswarm Federation, in general, doesn't fly them outside of SIGs.
e: In PVP, anyways -- ishtars are very common PVE ships in Deklein.
So you say these changes will help shield doctrines from bombers... Yet never undocked in an Ishtar before. Okay.... So first you denigrate me for thinking that I fly ishtars, now you denigrate me for not flying an ishtar? I am confused -- which one of these scenarios makes me better at Eve: Online?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1813
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:25:43 -
[497] - Quote
- Divide bomb damage by four - Divide bomb explosion radius by four - Increase flight time by two - Divide flight speed by two
There you go for bombers.
- One ECCM makes the ship unwarpable whatsoever - Wrecks can be combat probed - Active gang links return the unwarpable threshold to what it is now. - Remove the need for virtue sets to probe gang links.
There you go for combat probing.
This change just makes FCs pay 15Gé¼ or 15$ a month more to CCP for a cloaked alt who warps on top of the ennemy first, before the fleet warps to them.
Change in time : 5 seconds to warp the fleet ontop of somebody (negligible in most combat situations, especially given that a cloaked ship gives no more clue to the target) Change in money for CCP : 15 bucks a month. ($$$)
Signature Tanking Best Tanking
Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:28:54 -
[498] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:I am a FC I feel no extra weight from this change and if I did. I get volunteers from fleet to help me. That's a terrible excuse Manfred. Come on.... so you expect other FC's to force other people to play fleet jockey or get another account. I rest my case. Far be it from people in the fleet actually having to contribute towards its success. Implying you've even undocked and contributed towards something besides being on the ass end of a bombing run. You just stated you've never even undocked in an Ishtar yet speak as if well versed in shield doctrines.... I understand that you are trying to jam the crowbar of EVE SKILL DEFICIENCY into any crack in my rhetoric that you can perceive, but I'm confused as to the point of even bringing it up.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
849
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:29:43 -
[499] - Quote
Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote:Querns wrote:
I've never actually undocked in an ishtar! Check my killboard if you don't believe me. For whatever dumb reason, I happen to have Gallente Cruiser, Heavy Assault Ships, and Sentry Drone Operation all at rank five, so if I was so inclined, I feel like I'd operate the ship quite well. Haven't had a reason to do so, however -- Goonswarm Federation, in general, doesn't fly them outside of SIGs.
e: In PVP, anyways -- ishtars are very common PVE ships in Deklein.
So you say these changes will help shield doctrines from bombers... Yet never undocked in an Ishtar before. Okay.... So first you denigrate me for thinking that I fly ishtars, now you denigrate me for not flying an ishtar? I am confused -- which one of these scenarios makes me better at Eve: Online?
You clearly railed me for speaking against the changes, berated my skill as an Eve player because I disagreed and made counter points. Then you boldly made assumptions about shield doctrines and their viability against bombing runs when I clearly stated fix bombers instead of this tripe.
And still you went on until you stuck your foot in your mouth about never even undocking in an Ishtar which tells me:
You are full of ****.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:29:49 -
[500] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote: Immediately below your post quoted here Teh Replika gave you a pretty good example of consequences. Back to my comment why wont someone state what are the other intended consequences of this change?
Pretty much all game changes have consequences. What particular consequence "breaks" the game?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:31:28 -
[501] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote:Querns wrote:
I've never actually undocked in an ishtar! Check my killboard if you don't believe me. For whatever dumb reason, I happen to have Gallente Cruiser, Heavy Assault Ships, and Sentry Drone Operation all at rank five, so if I was so inclined, I feel like I'd operate the ship quite well. Haven't had a reason to do so, however -- Goonswarm Federation, in general, doesn't fly them outside of SIGs.
e: In PVP, anyways -- ishtars are very common PVE ships in Deklein.
So you say these changes will help shield doctrines from bombers... Yet never undocked in an Ishtar before. Okay.... So first you denigrate me for thinking that I fly ishtars, now you denigrate me for not flying an ishtar? I am confused -- which one of these scenarios makes me better at Eve: Online? You clearly railed me for speaking against the changes, berated my skill as an Eve player because I disagreed and made counter points. Then you boldly made assumptions about shield doctrines and their viability against bombing runs when I clearly stated fix bombers instead of this tripe. And still you went on until you stuck your foot in your mouth about never even undocking in an Ishtar which tells me: You are full of ****. There are other shield ships besides ishtars. I, in particular, am quite chuffed about the potential return of alphafleet and rokhs. These ships were retired from Goonswarm Federation active duty due to their hilarious bomb vulnerability in favor of lower sig, armor tanked ships.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:33:52 -
[502] - Quote
Regardless of your opinion of my ability to play Eve: Online, it's not exactly a mental stretch to say that bombers disproportionately affect shield tanked ships, due to the signature radius penalties associated with shield extenders and core defense field extenders (and other shield rigs.) It's just not that difficult of a concept to wrap your head around.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Anna Finster
Thundercats The Initiative.
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:40:02 -
[503] - Quote
Okay usually I don't participate in these threadnoughts but I feel I have to state that among the ocean of tears there are a few who like this change. Personally, I'm looking forward to it and the need for more individual piloting.
Fellow capsuleers, please consider that everyone will be affected by this in the same way, so lets htfu and deal with it I guess. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:41:36 -
[504] - Quote
Additionally, the dual implication that one somehow has no verifiable skill at Eve: Online if they haven't undocked an ishtar, and the denouncement of being an ishtar pilot as requiring no skill leaves me in a well of observed cognitive dissonance so vast and churning that I think I'm getting motion sickness just thinking about it.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Kathy Iron
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:44:27 -
[505] - Quote
Shilalasar wrote:Joran Jackson wrote:I think this is a fantastic change for wormholes. Anything that makes it harder for 50 man WH fleets to function gets a thumbs up from me. You do realize this does nothing to those fleets but hurts the smaller ones way more? Starting with the fact that the almost all big groups are in one corp only and will have access to corpbookmarks from the initial scout. What this change does is it kills NPSI fleets., esp in wormholespace. Have fun giving everyone in fleet the bookmarks beforehand. Multiple people from the same corp in fleet might help not a bit since they need to have corproles for bookmarks. This is especially true in wormholespace where you need a ****-ton of bookmarks just of the holes. Flying through a big system or even thera? "FC, call me in 5 minutes when you land so we can warp too" Forgot to copy one of the bookmarks? well, sucks to be you. Someone went the wrong way? You are stranded alone until someone comes back to get you. OFC that will polarize this person and force it to do nothing for 5 minutes and be left behind.Corpbookmarks haven-¦t updated yet? Well, see you in 5 minutes. You found someone in a sig you do not have a bookmark for? Combatprobe him down and hope he is still in there not just by the time you warp there, but everybody warps to you too. You better scanned in a tanky T3 and not came through one of these great only-the-smallest-of-ships wormholes. Also huge boost to WCS, everybody love those. As enough people have stated it also really hurts group PvE that isn-¦t anomrunning. Bestcase it double the traveltime (superfun with the most popular PvE ships being BS sized), worstcase "have fun tanking the site alone for 30 sec until our RR gets here too". For PvP this is a huge boost to kiting. You get a cloakyprober next to a kitingfleet, by the time your buddies land near you the kiters have made at least another 10km and are out of webrange. You use a noncloaky to keep up with them, free killmail thanks to the addition of RLMLs. Things will never warp at the same speed, tackle lands and gets faceraped, logi lands and looks stupid, mainfleet lands and is in exactly the same position as pre-warp. And then land the capitals and ask themselves why te grid is empty. Unless you are flying ishtars, T3s or mordus-¦ ships, because all of those are so little used anyways compared to BCs and BS who get shafted again. Oh, and you better hope everybody has all lvl5 navigationskills, if you FC some new players you will be out of warp long before they are. It takes away the homefield advantage of FCs with 20+ tacticals around every gate in the homeregion. Good and bad at the same time but again a huge boost to kiting. Again, this change only supports blobbing and excessive use of multiboxing, like so many other changes we have seen lately. CCP Larrikin wrote:Both of these points are solid. Corbexx brought these up while we where talking to the CSM about the change. Regarding slowing down the speed of sites, given the potential profitability of wormhole space, we don't consider this a major negative. Regarding movement fleets though WH space, we have something we're working on for this. That said some of the feedback we've received is mixed. Reducing power projection though WH space (for both WH residence & passes though) not seen as all bad. And again, lowend residents get the shaft because C5/6s. "Potential profitability" with nanoribbons creeping around 2M a piece... Warping to fleetmembers 0 on a hole needs them to be decloaked, let-¦s also anounce it in local, just in case they do not have a scout out. Sneaking up on someone in a site only works if it is not littered with asteroids, LCOs, huge gasclouds or just sleepers spawning and burning around. This change effects 5 man escalationfarmers NOT AT ALL, it is even a boost for their security. I'm glad I read through this whole thread because this is my exact feeling. Put into words exactly what I was thinking.
|
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
849
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:45:12 -
[506] - Quote
Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote:Querns wrote:
I've never actually undocked in an ishtar! Check my killboard if you don't believe me. For whatever dumb reason, I happen to have Gallente Cruiser, Heavy Assault Ships, and Sentry Drone Operation all at rank five, so if I was so inclined, I feel like I'd operate the ship quite well. Haven't had a reason to do so, however -- Goonswarm Federation, in general, doesn't fly them outside of SIGs.
e: In PVP, anyways -- ishtars are very common PVE ships in Deklein.
So you say these changes will help shield doctrines from bombers... Yet never undocked in an Ishtar before. Okay.... So first you denigrate me for thinking that I fly ishtars, now you denigrate me for not flying an ishtar? I am confused -- which one of these scenarios makes me better at Eve: Online?
You were the one to first berate my skill at this game because I simply disagreed and gave counter points. Now you don't want to play this little game anymore? Point taken.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
144
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:46:56 -
[507] - Quote
Querns wrote:Miner Hottie wrote: Immediately below your post quoted here Teh Replika gave you a pretty good example of consequences. Back to my comment why wont someone state what are the other intended consequences of this change?
Pretty much all game changes have consequences. What particular consequence "breaks" the game?
Large wormhole groups can absorb the cost of a suicide warpin for a fight, sucks to be that guy but whatever. Smaller groups cannot. Therefore they are forced to amalgamate or not play. I left null sec cause Fozzie couldn't stomach making his own sov system work outside eu/us prime. Same here changes needed to balance gameplay that make other gamplay parts that are not broken much harder or broken is a crap change.
If bombers are op nerf them, if probes are op nerf them, if ishtars are op nerf them. This fetish for nerfing elements at the edge of the problem is bullshit and I wonder what is in the water at CCPs offices.
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:48:05 -
[508] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote:Querns wrote:
I've never actually undocked in an ishtar! Check my killboard if you don't believe me. For whatever dumb reason, I happen to have Gallente Cruiser, Heavy Assault Ships, and Sentry Drone Operation all at rank five, so if I was so inclined, I feel like I'd operate the ship quite well. Haven't had a reason to do so, however -- Goonswarm Federation, in general, doesn't fly them outside of SIGs.
e: In PVP, anyways -- ishtars are very common PVE ships in Deklein.
So you say these changes will help shield doctrines from bombers... Yet never undocked in an Ishtar before. Okay.... So first you denigrate me for thinking that I fly ishtars, now you denigrate me for not flying an ishtar? I am confused -- which one of these scenarios makes me better at Eve: Online? You were the one to first berate my skill at this game because I simply disagreed and gave counter points. Now you don't want to play this little game anymore? Point taken. No -- feel free to try that crowbar as much as you want. If you're going to do it, however, do it in a way that doesn't immediately contradict itself by implying that both flying and not flying the ship in question betrays one's lack of skill; it tends to work a little more effectively.
Also, I just told you to adapt to a post-fleet warp world. Everyone has to do this; it isn't really a personal attack.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Kim Khardula
Archetype Industries
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:48:47 -
[509] - Quote
So basically everybody complains because "OMG now we have to warp a covops alt before fleetwarping to it, **** you that's effort" ? |
Neo Legath
Atztech Inc. Ixtab.
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:48:54 -
[510] - Quote
Dear CCP,
as a WH citizen, this change gives me a real headache. I will shorten my post, -since everything has been written atleast once- to this:
if you go on with this change, PLEASE make Corpbookmarks available for everyone right after they were made! At the moment, some get them instantly,and some have to wait 15 min... Thats simply a no-go if we lose Fleetwarps.
If this would be done, i would say for myself - okay, its a change i can deal with.
Please consider this adjustment.
Sincerely
Neo |
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:49:06 -
[511] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote:Querns wrote:Miner Hottie wrote: Immediately below your post quoted here Teh Replika gave you a pretty good example of consequences. Back to my comment why wont someone state what are the other intended consequences of this change?
Pretty much all game changes have consequences. What particular consequence "breaks" the game? Large wormhole groups can absorb the cost of a suicide warpin for a fight, sucks to be that guy but whatever. Smaller groups cannot. Therefore they are forced to amalgamate or not play. You need to be a large wormhole group to afford interceptors?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
1177
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:49:55 -
[512] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:I am a FC I feel no extra weight from this change and if I did. I get volunteers from fleet to help me. That's a terrible excuse Manfred. Come on.... so you expect other FC's to force other people to play fleet jockey or get another account. I rest my case.
Teamwork its a alien concept I guess hey?
@EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny
|
Raphendyr Nardieu
Unpublished Chapter Chapters.
16
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:50:46 -
[513] - Quote
In wormholes, there isn't many usefull public warp-to points (maybe sun...). So could you do something like this:
Keep the scanned signatures in the ship (client) memory over session changes (ship and system). So when I have scanned wormhole XYZ-123 the client would see it 100% warp-to point until it is gone even if I would logoff and back online.
In addition, you would be able to manually or automatically be able to share them with your fleet or corporation. This way scout could scan down all the signatures for everyone. Then FC could fleet warp to next wormhole.
I bilieve this should breake the wanted change as very rarely the combat target is near the signature point. To gang explorers on sites would still require a scout to go near it and rest of the fleet would warp to that scout. On the other hand it would keep warping to combat sites the same. |
D'Kmal
Variables Unlimited Chained Reactions
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:52:05 -
[514] - Quote
As a member of a small wormhole corp, I have to say, this won't affect us at all. We hardly ever use fleet warp, we always just warp to a cloaky who's sitting 10-5k off the target, and we warp in at optimal.
Actually thats a good point, these changes means it easier to get your vessel in your optimal range if you're not all being warped in at the same range... stop complaining people!
Amarr Capacitor Fueling Co: Disposing of your unwanted Minmatar Slaves since...
|
Jaqen Ahai
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:52:12 -
[515] - Quote
Kim Khardula wrote:So basically everybody complains because "OMG now we have to warp a covops alt before fleetwarping to it, **** you that's effort" ?
You could even have a 'real' person doing the probing and scouting. |
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
1177
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:53:48 -
[516] - Quote
Kendarr wrote:I see that Manfred Sideous has companioned this change as CSM and now no one likes it he is seriously butt hurt.
Confirming. Please someone confirm this confirmation.
@EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1691
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:55:38 -
[517] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Kendarr wrote:I see that Manfred Sideous has companioned this change as CSM and now no one likes it he is seriously butt hurt. Confirming. Please someone confirm this confirmation. Confirmed. Enjoy being a soldier of Christ.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Ogast
Zebra Corp The Bastion
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 07:59:52 -
[518] - Quote
Querns wrote:Tara Read wrote: You are the one constantly coming back and trying to twist a Tolkien like description of the meaning meta to say you don't like bombing runs. It's utterly hilarious.
Nah. I just think that with bombers castrated, the major detriments to fielding shield tanked ships are gone. In the current era of Ishtars and Tengus, it's a breath of fresh air.
I'm sorry mate but what the actual ****... Ishtars are predominantly shield tanked and Tengus are ONLY shield tanked.
|
Akballah Kassan
Zeura Brotherhood Mordus Angels
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:00:51 -
[519] - Quote
If this change (which I don't agree with) is to try and nerf bombing runs why don't they just make it so that any CLOAKED ships can't be fleet warped around? |
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
144
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:05:24 -
[520] - Quote
Querns wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:Querns wrote:Miner Hottie wrote: Immediately below your post quoted here Teh Replika gave you a pretty good example of consequences. Back to my comment whh wont someone state what are the other intended consequences of this change?
Pretty much all game changes have consequences. What particular consequence "breaks" the game? Large wormhole groups can absorb the cost of a suicide warpin for a fight, sucks to be that guy but whatever. Smaller groups cannot. Therefore they are forced to amalgamate or not play. You need to be a large wormhole group to afford interceptors?
As a former goon, it pains me not to say you are an idiot. The cost is never just the isk of the ship its the player piloting that ship, the podded clone waking up in hi sec 50 jumps from the action who is now permanently out of the fight. The fact you chose to overlook things as a wormhole expert would know, makes me wonder what the hell sort of expert you are. The finite resource in wormholes has never been isk or hulls but pods and pilots for them.
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
|
Tara Read
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
852
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:09:16 -
[521] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Tara Read wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:I am a FC I feel no extra weight from this change and if I did. I get volunteers from fleet to help me. That's a terrible excuse Manfred. Come on.... so you expect other FC's to force other people to play fleet jockey or get another account. I rest my case. Teamwork its a alien concept I guess hey?
No but I guess working on actually adressing a bomber rebalance is an alien concept instead of rolling this garbage out and forcing it upon all of us.
Visit my blog for all the latest in jeers and tears as well as news at http://hoistthecolors.org
|
Bjurn Akely
Knights of Nii The 20 Minuters
82
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:09:24 -
[522] - Quote
Implementing this without instantly propagating Alliance Bookmarks (or Fleet Bookmarks for that matter) is frankly pretty dumb. If the premise is that players should have to actively play the game (by warping themselves) then it follows that the players need to be able to do so in a timely fashion. The debacle that is propagation of Corp Bookmarks today does not suffice, in my opinion. And Alliance Bookmarks does not even exist. Fleet Bookmarks is not even discussed.
Sure, this hits (us) wormholers, but I feel open events such as Ganked or Redemption Roams get shafted something terrible. In those fleets you often have new players. Players that need all the help they can on the battlefield.
Not impressed. Either this is a think tank brain fart or the think tank want Eve to go in a direction I do not care for or agree with. |
Pure Delirium
Hot Pursuit
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:09:36 -
[523] - Quote
RIP wh pvp, RIP Bombers, RIP Providence. Thank you CCP for another great game change. Unsubs incoming.
p.s. When you will make an improvement to this game ill will re-subs my accounts.
|
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
158
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:09:56 -
[524] - Quote
The fun part is, this won't hurt bombers much. A slight modification to the default bombing tactic (one additional BM per grid for the FC, one additional warp for bombers) negates the nofleetwarp with a side effect of making it possible to bomb into bubbles and insta warpout.
For everything else it's just adds more annoyance and a very fun and rewarding dedicated cloaky nullified prober gameplay. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1057
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:14:08 -
[525] - Quote
News flash to CCP: real people who play the game are the most precious asset in this game.
Your changes, however, make the game increasingly tedious and obnoxious to play, which drives away the real people.
There is no FC on the cluster who would rather have another alt in fleet than a real person. I already delegate every possible task to my corp mates that I possibly can - the ones I keep for myself are the ones that I cannot delegate to someone who only has one account and will have no fun filling that role.
Come up with some truly rewarding roles for people in fleets. As it is, you keep multiplying the number of thankless roles that are best done on an alt - because your business strategy seems to be to squeeze as much out of the existing humans as possible.
At the same time, you consistently nerf the ability for one player to control multiple ships doing the same task (a way of reducing the tedium of running the same stale sites, anomalies, and missions over and over again).
Small gang FC's already rely heavily on bookmarks and probers. It is already hard enough to nail down some elite PVP nano/kite fleet with off-grid boosters. Now you are making it even harder to get a decent warp-in on top of them and their OGB. You are making it harder to avoid their drag bubbles as they run away because they couldn't get any kills against your counter fleet.
You are encouraging players to rely more and more on individual bookmarks. Don't those create some issues for the hamsters? When every player in the alliance needs to have all the pings on every celestial bookmarked at all times, so they can warp themselves to the right point and avoid a drag bubble as they run from a larger gang, that's going to add up.
Additionally, in place of warping a gang to bookmarks, I'll be fleet warping them at range to a cloaked alt. It will just be more tedious. I'm perfectly happy to ask a new player to be the +1 or +2 scout. They get some experience and fun out of it (unless space is totally empty, as it all too often seems to be). Asking him to warp to his bookmark 200 off the gate, so I can warp the fleet to him is not a rewarding role for anyone. I'm not maintaining multiple accounts so I can have another alt sitting off the gate where I know I will need a ping - I maintain multiple accounts so I can get through the grind part of Eve faster and get back to leading small groups in search of content.
In the past I described Eve as "white-knuckled, trembling hands, exciting." I'd literally sweat during a fight. Now the words I would use are "tedious, a chore, like a second job." The only reason I still play or stay at all engaged with Eve is because I feel I owe it to my friends to keep logging in and participating. My masochism is steadily wearing thin. Playing Eve should not be an unpleasant or boring experience, yet that is what you have been doing over the course of the past year. I accepted jump fatigue because it promised good things - it was bitter medicine that might save Eve. Now we have fatigue, entosis, and this nonsense.
You have a very narrow idea of what is fun in Eve - not everyone enjoys your pseudo-solo/small gang elitist PVP mentality. Most people just want to log in and have fun playing Eve with their friends. Make Eve easy to play - not another chore. The challenge should come from the other players, not from the interface or silly restrictions.
The Greatest Ship Ever. Credit to Shahfluffers.
|
Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
155
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:15:23 -
[526] - Quote
Querns wrote:Shilalasar wrote:And then land the capitals and ask themselves why te grid is empty. Your capitals, maybe. Mine warp faster than cruisers.
Your point being? If you are flying in a big enough blob so individual pilots-¦ contribution does not matter and are only fighting meaningless fights you are able to ignore anything. Yeah, everybody already knew that. Also almost everybody does not enjoy that playstyle, though many suffer through it.
Querns wrote:You need to be a large wormhole group to afford interceptors? You need to be in a large group to afford 1-3 throwaway pilots per engagement. If I have a full fleet of 200 I can get someone to sit on every possible hole for warpins and throw some into the enemy for every warp-in. If I do the same with 10 pilots I end up with 3 ships in combat. |
Jezza McWaffle
Grumpy Bastards No Response
217
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:15:30 -
[527] - Quote
Might as well re-post it here, this is how I see it negatively affecting Wormholes becuase there is NO POSITIVE side for wormholes with this change, absolutely zilch.
The three biggest issues I see with this change which are a day to day thing. Most of these apply to groups who run with more than just 1 corporation.
1. If you have multiple corps either from being in an alliance or on a joint op, when your going down the chain, especially if its a long chain currently you fleet warp or provide a warp in to the WH, fleet warping is preferred since you don''t have to worry about the character ahead getting caught and this while annoying I could get used to just continually warping to someone to get the chain I haven't bookmarked, it will just require more scouts all the time.
2. If your warping into a hostile fleet, this is the worst part of the change in my opinion. Currently we can fleet warp either directly into the hostile fleet or at a tactical spot and then warp down to engage them, this relies on just the fleet commander having the bookmark because often if your running in an alliance or with multiple groups then not everyone is going to have the bookmark because you bookmark so much **** in wormholes (CCP please try living out of WH's for once). After the change this is going to resort in either getting a scout at the position which if its tactical is no problem but if your warping directly to the WH no scout is going to put himself 2km away from the entire hostile fleet and their bubblers. So we'll have to resort to WAITING for the bookmarks to propogate, thank you CCP for FORCING us to wait even longer now for any chance to have some decent PvP.
3. When your going to kill some site runners, when I kill site runners who are on their own I either warp to my scout alt or fleet warp using my scout out (obviously with warp with fleet turned off) to the enemy at zero either by bookmark I made or with probes. Having to warp to my scout alt means I have to get my scout alt dangerously close, and because of the changes you CCP have made to Wormholes almost everyone scans with Covops not T3's because of frigate holes and the importance to scan quickly given how easy it is to spot new holes. If your going to kill an escalation fleet (which is actually hard if the site runners put an ounce of effort into defending themselves), then a usual thing to do is for the bubblers to be switched to a squad where the commander is the scout, scout then fleet warps the bubblers to the hostile fleet either through probes or a bookmark, and given how hard it can be (and time consuming) for a scout to manually pilot close to the enemy fleet (which is very dangerous because of the all the objects in sites) and the amount of time it consumes, giving the hostiles more time to extract once they IMMEDIATELY spot the new sig appearing. You are just making site running even safer, which is not something we want!
C6 Wormhole blog
http://holelotofwaffle.wordpress.com/
|
Kontrahage
Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance
15
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:15:41 -
[528] - Quote
As one of the few role players in eve I care more about wether changes designed by CCP make sense in the lore, which seems to be an aspect neglected most of the time.
A bookmark or probe result is information about a specific coordinate in space required for a ship navigation system to warp to. If one member of the fleet has this information, especially one in a leadership position there is no reason why this member could not share this information with the others. Especially if there is a command ship in the fleet with warfare link modules that are actually supposed to optimize the distribution of information among the fleet.
I don't much care about the mechanical changes. The idea to involve the individual fleet members more is very good as their participation in blobs has been more or less reduced to click stuff in the broadcast window but this approach does not really make sense.
If you allowed fleets with established communication networks (command ships) to still warp to any location warpable by a leader, this would be an acceptable compromise. It would also give a more directly felt impact to the loss of such a shipt to the way the fleet has to be lead. Loss of command ship = loss of command capability.
Whatever you decide to do, please consider wether it makes sense in the lore. |
Johnny Twelvebore
The Tuskers The Tuskers Co.
68
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:19:06 -
[529] - Quote
I see where this is coming from, you want to reduce reliance on one guy driving a whole fleet of F1 jockeys about and I can understand and support that.
It does however impact those of us who use probes to catch mission runners in lowsec as now it will take longer to get on top of him and increase his chances of getting off grid in time. There are a lot less of us though so I suppose we will have to live with it.
Bloody hell, another eve blog! http://johnnytwelvebore.wordpress.com
|
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
295
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:23:19 -
[530] - 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. |
|
Kim Khardula
Archetype Industries
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:24:26 -
[531] - Quote
Jaqen Ahai wrote:You could even have a 'real' person doing the probing and scouting. You mean you have to interact with other people in the MMO ? Erk.
|
Eva Peacemaker
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:31:40 -
[532] - Quote
I'm gonna be constructive and tell you that this change sucks. Thanks |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
295
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:32:35 -
[533] - 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. |
Cayden Til
Atztech Inc. Ixtab.
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:36:04 -
[534] - Quote
Dumbest idea ever from CCP without having the Corp BMs appear instantly to every player. This is so lol, do they even play their game? Kills the whole WH gameplay. |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
295
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:38:04 -
[535] - 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 -
[536] - 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.
|
Dongjun1225 Yan
The N.E.S.T Fraternity.
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:40:58 -
[537] - Quote
I am a rookie ,the eve is so hard to play, I am a Java Developer,I wanna know what do you think to make the game so hard, It is not funny. |
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS Shadow Cartel
682
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:42:35 -
[538] - Quote
Kathy Iron wrote:Shilalasar wrote:Joran Jackson wrote:I think this is a fantastic change for wormholes. Anything that makes it harder for 50 man WH fleets to function gets a thumbs up from me. You do realize this does nothing to those fleets but hurts the smaller ones way more? Starting with the fact that the almost all big groups are in one corp only and will have access to corpbookmarks from the initial scout. What this change does is it kills NPSI fleets., esp in wormholespace. Have fun giving everyone in fleet the bookmarks beforehand. Multiple people from the same corp in fleet might help not a bit since they need to have corproles for bookmarks. This is especially true in wormholespace where you need a ****-ton of bookmarks just of the holes. Flying through a big system or even thera? "FC, call me in 5 minutes when you land so we can warp too" Forgot to copy one of the bookmarks? well, sucks to be you. Someone went the wrong way? You are stranded alone until someone comes back to get you. OFC that will polarize this person and force it to do nothing for 5 minutes and be left behind.Corpbookmarks haven-¦t updated yet? Well, see you in 5 minutes. You found someone in a sig you do not have a bookmark for? Combatprobe him down and hope he is still in there not just by the time you warp there, but everybody warps to you too. You better scanned in a tanky T3 and not came through one of these great only-the-smallest-of-ships wormholes. Also huge boost to WCS, everybody love those. As enough people have stated it also really hurts group PvE that isn-¦t anomrunning. Bestcase it double the traveltime (superfun with the most popular PvE ships being BS sized), worstcase "have fun tanking the site alone for 30 sec until our RR gets here too". For PvP this is a huge boost to kiting. You get a cloakyprober next to a kitingfleet, by the time your buddies land near you the kiters have made at least another 10km and are out of webrange. You use a noncloaky to keep up with them, free killmail thanks to the addition of RLMLs. Things will never warp at the same speed, tackle lands and gets faceraped, logi lands and looks stupid, mainfleet lands and is in exactly the same position as pre-warp. And then land the capitals and ask themselves why te grid is empty. Unless you are flying ishtars, T3s or mordus-¦ ships, because all of those are so little used anyways compared to BCs and BS who get shafted again. Oh, and you better hope everybody has all lvl5 navigationskills, if you FC some new players you will be out of warp long before they are. It takes away the homefield advantage of FCs with 20+ tacticals around every gate in the homeregion. Good and bad at the same time but again a huge boost to kiting. Again, this change only supports blobbing and excessive use of multiboxing, like so many other changes we have seen lately. CCP Larrikin wrote:Both of these points are solid. Corbexx brought these up while we where talking to the CSM about the change. Regarding slowing down the speed of sites, given the potential profitability of wormhole space, we don't consider this a major negative. Regarding movement fleets though WH space, we have something we're working on for this. That said some of the feedback we've received is mixed. Reducing power projection though WH space (for both WH residence & passes though) not seen as all bad. And again, lowend residents get the shaft because C5/6s. "Potential profitability" with nanoribbons creeping around 2M a piece... Warping to fleetmembers 0 on a hole needs them to be decloaked, let-¦s also anounce it in local, just in case they do not have a scout out. Sneaking up on someone in a site only works if it is not littered with asteroids, LCOs, huge gasclouds or just sleepers spawning and burning around. This change effects 5 man escalationfarmers NOT AT ALL, it is even a boost for their security. I'm glad I read through this whole thread because this is my exact feeling. Put into words exactly what I was thinking.
Just put a guy on a WH for a warp in, is that really hard to do???
BALEX, bringing piracy on a whole new level.
|
Bloemkoolsaus
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
191
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:43:25 -
[539] - Quote
This is a very bad change for wormhole space. I will try to eplain:
Let's say we just found a new wormhole in our homesystem (we either rolled, or we got a random connection w/e). We send out scouts and soon scouts are splitting up as the connections and chains expand.
This image is a fairly common scenario, let's say a scout from corp A is scanning subchain-1 and a scout from corp B is scanning subchain-2. So, all members of corp A have bookmarks for subchain-1 and all corp members from corp B have them for subchain-2 (assuming both scouts use corp bookmarks ofc).
Now, the scout from corp B jumps in to the next wormhole, hit's his dscan and see's npc wrecks and some ships. Our fleet, from members of both corp A and corp B forms up in the home system while the scouts pinpoints their location. Speed is important here, any wrong move, or take to long and they might get scared and move away before we can get there.
The scout finds them and the fleet begins to move. Corp B members have bookmarks, but corp A members to not (remember it was a corp B scout that did the scanning, the corp A scout is scanning a different part). So, you put a corp B member in squad/wing and warp the fleet to all the holes. Corp A makes bookmarks along the way. If we wouldn't be able to do those fleet warps, that means someone from corp B must warp to the next wormhole, land, before corp A members can warp to the next wormhole. This more then doubles the response time of our fleet. By the time we get there, our targets will most likely be long gone.
The only way I can think of to solve that, would be to distribute the bookmarks from corp B to corp A while the fleet is forming up. However, it can take anywhere from 5 to 10 minutes before all bookmarks are propagated for all corp members. By that time, the targets will be long gone as well.
Unless we either get alliance bookmarks, or bookmark propagating becomes instant, this change is ver, very bad for wormholespace.
I hope that made sense... |
Xzeratuhl
Project AIice Whatever.
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:44:21 -
[540] - Quote
Honnestly CCP?!
this change will really suck! only big alys / corps will have enought "scout chars" to have warpins.
-1 |
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1361
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:46:29 -
[541] - Quote
So I woke up and apparently didnt dream this trainwreck.
"get a scout on grid"
Brilliant, and how are they going to keep up with a manuevering fleet when cloaked? Or do you think they'll last 5 seconds on grid, alone.
Also, different warp speeds of ships makes this an absolutely stupid idea, unless you ALWAYS AND FOREVER warp to an alt.
Net effect:
Bomber inconvenience (the closest I can find to a "justification" for this)
Complete pain in the arse for rest of eve. Slows everything down and/or needs sacrificial lambs to be added to a fleet.
Seriously, for once can you just fix what was broken instead of burning down the whole house to solve a spider in the bathtub? Just once.
And the notion this helps small gang is preposterous - by their very nature they are short on warm bodies and alts are used to make up for this shortfall.
I'm stunned, genuinely stunned at this move. So much collateral damage for a problem with so very many more ways to fix.
I'd have a hell of a lot more time for it if it was presented "here is the problem, here is why a,b,c,d,e...x,y,z wouldn't work to resolve this so we are stuck with this fix for now. We're sorry about the impact to other elements but there is no other way". As it is, it's just....I don't even have words for how backwards this is.
This is the kind of reaction to a post I've exclusively reserved for bad PLAYER ideas before.
/dismayed. |
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS Shadow Cartel
682
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:47:53 -
[542] - Quote
Xzeratuhl wrote:Honnestly CCP?!
this change will really suck! only big alys / corps will have enought "scout chars" to have warpins.
-1
That is not true, 99% of small groups will do just fine with the scouts. And that 1% will adapt pretty quickly because the entry level for that role is very small.
BALEX, bringing piracy on a whole new level.
|
Captain Awkward
Republic University Minmatar Republic
21
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 08:55:45 -
[543] - Quote
Prince Golem wrote:This affects a lot of people. If you go ahead with this change please enable people that would normally warp the Fleet/wing/squad to warp to a broadcasted place in space e.g. bookmark/probe result. Thereby allowing the fleet to warp to these places. Sounds like a good compromise, I hope.
I support this. Warping to something as a fleet is important. Taking away the fleet warp option from the FC and shifting it to the Fleet members is a good thing IMO, but I cant support taking away to ability of a fleet to move to a bookmark or signature without having a fleet member allready on grid.
Broadcasting bookmark or signature destinations to fleet members should be enabled to keep the current mobility of a fleet but get the responsibility for movement back to the fleet members and away from the FC. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1362
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:00:49 -
[544] - Quote
Captain Awkward wrote:Prince Golem wrote:This affects a lot of people. If you go ahead with this change please enable people that would normally warp the Fleet/wing/squad to warp to a broadcasted place in space e.g. bookmark/probe result. Thereby allowing the fleet to warp to these places. Sounds like a good compromise, I hope. I support this. Warping to something as a fleet is important. Taking away the fleet warp option from the FC and shifting it to the Fleet members is a good thing IMO, but I cant support taking away to ability of a fleet to move to a bookmark or signature without having a fleet member allready on grid. Broadcasting bookmark or signature destinations to fleet members should be enabled to keep the current mobility of a fleet but get the responsibility for movement back to the fleet members and away from the FC.
Not just that, there's now NO WAY to regulate fleet warp speeds without a "thing" to get to first. |
Bairfhionn Isu
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
72
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:01:02 -
[545] - Quote
I had too much PVP in wormholes anyway. Now I can PVE in peace.
What a nonsense change to "fix" something that isn't even broken. |
Cuchulin
DEFCON. The Initiative.
40
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:10:00 -
[546] - Quote
There are several scenarios in which these proposed changes will in my opinion add annoyance to the game:
1.) You are running missions with a group of people. I understand that nerving mission isk output vs time is not neccessarly something you guys are unhappy with, but have you considered that this just adds time for people to sit around and do nothing while waiting for the warps to finish? It would seem to me that in an allready rather slow game as EVE it would be not a good design decision to add time for people to float around and do nothing.
2.) It makes preparation in advance less meaningful. So if I have a group of dedicated people outside primetime that will go around to a hostile system and prepare tactical BMs, currently this is a big advantage. The FC can then have the bookmarks and use them in the fight. In the new proposed system I need to have someone in a cloaked ship or interceptor to provide fleet warpins on these locations. In any case it will make the fleet slower, which is again the intended outcome I understand, but it also makes the individuals less meaningfull preparing the BMs in the first place, is this also as intended?
3.) It either puts more stress on the FC or it creates an utterly boring fleet role. So either the FC needs to have yet another cloaky alt or interceptor alt to provide warpins on bookmarks and scan results, or this role needs to be filled by another fleet member. Have you considered that sitting in an interceptor (or cov-ops) for a whole fleet fight just to give warpins on bookmarks, but being unable to shoot anything, is an utterly dull and boring role to play? I get that in a realistic (whatever that means for internet spaceships :D) scenario it would be a desireable and important role to fill .... but in the reality of the game a large percentage of people would like to shoot stuff...
4.) Warping to locations in tidi. Have you considered that in big fleet fights with tidi active the effect of this change will be massively amplyfied? So in these allready extremly slow scenarios you would potentially double the time to warp to a scan result or a bookmark. So instead of people sitting idle for 5 minutes it might be 10 minutes afterwards. Do you think it is good gameplay to sit idle for 10 minutes while waiting for a warp to finish (number is pulled from thin air, please replace with more realistic number if you have it) ?
Anyway, I guess my point is, not every decision that might make sense in terms of balancing things is neccessarly a decision that will increase FUN for people playing the GAME.
Cheers Cuchulin |
Alyla By
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:13:19 -
[547] - Quote
Once this change would be delivered, the simplest new strategy would be to have a scout on place, telling the fleet to warp at X on him so people could land at the best spot they could fight from.
It'll be easier for people getting ganked (farmers, missionners, miners, whatever else) to defend themselves as long as they are not on a public location, close to the spawn. If they are in a signature they are almost totally safe : they will have to be probed down in any case, the will see the probes on D scan and just hide. They will simply have more time to react unlike the current situation of "I probed a ship, I warp my fleet on it" since they will need to send the scanner first, and then the fleet.
Here is a simple suggestion to counter balance the fact that the overall risks of getting caught in space will be decreased (I like things which explodes. Especially my own ship) : Create a T2 Probes invisible on D-scan Make those probes only usable with the T2 launcher variant, give them a smaller scan strength.
|
Ogast
Zebra Corp The Bastion
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:14:58 -
[548] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:News flash to CCP: real people who play the game are the most precious asset in this game.
Your changes, however, make the game increasingly tedious and obnoxious to play, which drives away the real people.
** Snip**
You have a very narrow idea of what is fun in Eve - not everyone enjoys your pseudo-solo/small gang elitist PVP mentality. Most people just want to log in and have fun playing Eve with their friends. Make Eve easy to play - not another chore. The challenge should come from the other players, not from the interface or silly restrictions.
Wont post all of his reply even though I agree with every word just to save peoples eyes.
I will admit I don't 'play' EVE for the game anymore I play it for the people. Playing this game built a strong gaming community a community of people that I enjoy talking to on a daily basis.
However, you've slowly changed your game and 'shifted the meta' away from fun to tedium. Once you used to be able to go out in space and engage a small group with your small group of friendly space nerds and duke it out at 0 in an adrenaline fulled death fest where you exploded or they exploded. Now however your small group of friendly space nerds has to content with this kiting meta of solo orthrus and such pushing their speed far beyond yours due to links and the bonused points and scrams.
Hell I don't even log in anymore much to be honest. I used to log in for action packed brawls and death. I don't want to log in for chasing someone for 15 systems just to lose him at a crossroads.
This new change amplifies this further. You say that you want more individual players in 'important roles' in fleets. However for the space poor among us I don't want to be relegated to scanning and warping so other people can have fun. I want to be getting the 'dank frags' as some would put it. I want to prove I was there with reams of kills or losses showing I was there doing something. Rather than spending most of my time staring at a in-game map watching probes zone in on a fleet that is likely to run as soon as ours appears on grid in deceleration.
Others may say that you could get an interceptor and burn at the enemy fleet to catch them. However anyone with a modicum of thought on that would realize you're going to get shot to **** before you get close enough to them since traversal is a thing but so are bonused webs.
Just focus on Fozziesov. Then if you feel you must do something with this then look at it and take time to do so. Don't throw out an unpolished four week version of this as you're just going to lose customers.
Focus on making the game fun again. |
Kwa Zulu
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
27
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:15:47 -
[549] - Quote
This change is idiotic, bomber fleets are already not that often used anymore and death of any useful sniper doctrine Also the reasoning to decapitate the effeciency of a fleet based on its FC does not make sense, having a good FC should matter
CCP please do not fricking do this... |
Sasha Sen
Hull Zero Two Reckoning Star Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:16:56 -
[550] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:News flash to CCP: real people who play the game are the most precious asset in this game.
Your changes, however, make the game increasingly tedious and obnoxious to play, which drives away the real people.
There is no FC on the cluster who would rather have another alt in fleet than a real person. I already delegate every possible task to my corp mates that I possibly can - the ones I keep for myself are the ones that I cannot delegate to someone who only has one account and will have no fun filling that role.
Come up with some truly rewarding roles for people in fleets. As it is, you keep multiplying the number of thankless roles that are best done on an alt - because your business strategy seems to be to squeeze as much out of the existing humans as possible.
At the same time, you consistently nerf the ability for one player to control multiple ships doing the same task (a way of reducing the tedium of running the same stale sites, anomalies, and missions over and over again).
Small gang FC's already rely heavily on bookmarks and probers. It is already hard enough to nail down some elite PVP nano/kite fleet with off-grid boosters. Now you are making it even harder to get a decent warp-in on top of them and their OGB. You are making it harder to avoid their drag bubbles as they run away because they couldn't get any kills against your counter fleet.
You are encouraging players to rely more and more on individual bookmarks. Don't those create some issues for the hamsters? When every player in the alliance needs to have all the pings on every celestial bookmarked at all times, so they can warp themselves to the right point and avoid a drag bubble as they run from a larger gang, that's going to add up.
Additionally, in place of warping a gang to bookmarks, I'll be fleet warping them at range to a cloaked alt. It will just be more tedious. I'm perfectly happy to ask a new player to be the +1 or +2 scout. They get some experience and fun out of it (unless space is totally empty, as it all too often seems to be). Asking him to warp to his bookmark 200 off the gate, so I can warp the fleet to him is not a rewarding role for anyone. I'm not maintaining multiple accounts so I can have another alt sitting off the gate where I know I will need a ping - I maintain multiple accounts so I can get through the grind part of Eve faster and get back to leading small groups in search of content.
In the past I described Eve as "white-knuckled, trembling hands, exciting." I'd literally sweat during a fight. Now the words I would use are "tedious, a chore, like a second job." The only reason I still play or stay at all engaged with Eve is because I feel I owe it to my friends to keep logging in and participating. My masochism is steadily wearing thin. Playing Eve should not be an unpleasant or boring experience, yet that is what you have been doing over the course of the past year. I accepted jump fatigue because it promised good things - it was bitter medicine that might save Eve. Now we have fatigue, entosis, and this nonsense.
You have a very narrow idea of what is fun in Eve - not everyone enjoys your pseudo-solo/small gang elitist PVP mentality. Most people just want to log in and have fun playing Eve with their friends. Make Eve easy to play - not another chore. The challenge should come from the other players, not from the interface or silly restrictions.
Maybe your aspirations in EvE to command a large fleet are a bit more than you can handle then?
Do you really have 100 friends in a fleet or they are just boots following you around with aligns and F1's? I mean if you have that many friends statistically at least one should be more then happy to fly around in a cloaky ship and give warp ins.
Recruit people who enjoy setting up warp ins?
"I'm perfectly happy to ask a new player to be the +1 or +2 scout. They get some experience and fun out of it (unless space is totally empty, as it all too often seems to be)."
Ever wonder why space is totally empty? Having the tools to synchronize movement of a large fleet with a handful of pilots is probably one of the reasons.
Read a book?
|
|
Thea Yulivee
Space Pioneers Odin's Call
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:17:41 -
[551] - Quote
Zloco Crendraven wrote:Kathy Iron wrote:Shilalasar wrote:Joran Jackson wrote:I think this is a fantastic change for wormholes. Anything that makes it harder for 50 man WH fleets to function gets a thumbs up from me. You do realize this does nothing to those fleets but hurts the smaller ones way more? Starting with the fact that the almost all big groups are in one corp only and will have access to corpbookmarks from the initial scout. What this change does is it kills NPSI fleets., esp in wormholespace. Have fun giving everyone in fleet the bookmarks beforehand. Multiple people from the same corp in fleet might help not a bit since they need to have corproles for bookmarks. This is especially true in wormholespace where you need a ****-ton of bookmarks just of the holes. Flying through a big system or even thera? "FC, call me in 5 minutes when you land so we can warp too" Forgot to copy one of the bookmarks? well, sucks to be you. Someone went the wrong way? You are stranded alone until someone comes back to get you. OFC that will polarize this person and force it to do nothing for 5 minutes and be left behind.Corpbookmarks haven-¦t updated yet? Well, see you in 5 minutes. You found someone in a sig you do not have a bookmark for? Combatprobe him down and hope he is still in there not just by the time you warp there, but everybody warps to you too. You better scanned in a tanky T3 and not came through one of these great only-the-smallest-of-ships wormholes. Also huge boost to WCS, everybody love those. As enough people have stated it also really hurts group PvE that isn-¦t anomrunning. Bestcase it double the traveltime (superfun with the most popular PvE ships being BS sized), worstcase "have fun tanking the site alone for 30 sec until our RR gets here too". For PvP this is a huge boost to kiting. You get a cloakyprober next to a kitingfleet, by the time your buddies land near you the kiters have made at least another 10km and are out of webrange. You use a noncloaky to keep up with them, free killmail thanks to the addition of RLMLs. Things will never warp at the same speed, tackle lands and gets faceraped, logi lands and looks stupid, mainfleet lands and is in exactly the same position as pre-warp. And then land the capitals and ask themselves why te grid is empty. Unless you are flying ishtars, T3s or mordus-¦ ships, because all of those are so little used anyways compared to BCs and BS who get shafted again. Oh, and you better hope everybody has all lvl5 navigationskills, if you FC some new players you will be out of warp long before they are. It takes away the homefield advantage of FCs with 20+ tacticals around every gate in the homeregion. Good and bad at the same time but again a huge boost to kiting. Again, this change only supports blobbing and excessive use of multiboxing, like so many other changes we have seen lately. CCP Larrikin wrote:Both of these points are solid. Corbexx brought these up while we where talking to the CSM about the change. Regarding slowing down the speed of sites, given the potential profitability of wormhole space, we don't consider this a major negative. Regarding movement fleets though WH space, we have something we're working on for this. That said some of the feedback we've received is mixed. Reducing power projection though WH space (for both WH residence & passes though) not seen as all bad. And again, lowend residents get the shaft because C5/6s. "Potential profitability" with nanoribbons creeping around 2M a piece... Warping to fleetmembers 0 on a hole needs them to be decloaked, let-¦s also anounce it in local, just in case they do not have a scout out. Sneaking up on someone in a site only works if it is not littered with asteroids, LCOs, huge gasclouds or just sleepers spawning and burning around. This change effects 5 man escalationfarmers NOT AT ALL, it is even a boost for their security. I'm glad I read through this whole thread because this is my exact feeling. Put into words exactly what I was thinking. Just put a guy on a WH for a warp in, is that really hard to do???
the ignorance..wow
whilst i agree with the changes in general, just the simple fact that smaller corps in WH Space can't have alt-scouts at every WH in the chain they are using, makes me wonder if CCP really thought this through. For bigger corps this won't change to much in the way of handling their day to day routine, but when it comes to small corps or multi-corp fleets this is a major pain
I agree with the statements above, that we need other options to warp to wormholes as a fleet or at least broadcast a bookmark so that every member of the fleet can warp himself. I really hope that the thing Larkin mentioned they are working on, adresses this issue...the way i see things right now, this might help larger w-space corps/alliances and hurt the smaller ones |
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
382
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:20:23 -
[552] - Quote
This is a big hit to smaller fleets. Now we need to sacrifice a alt/player just to wrap as a group? WTF? why not just make warp speed random and don't let anything land as a planed out fleet comp?
Also this won't affect bomber waves. We never used fleet warps to do them in the first place. But where are all these mass bomber waves? They don't show up on killboards or something? cus i just don't see them.
Death and Glory!
Well fun is also good.
|
Alenn G'kar
Black VooDoo Asassins The Kadeshi
18
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:20:29 -
[553] - Quote
Where can I sign the pettition! |
Bill Lane
Strategic Insanity FUBAR.
94
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:23:23 -
[554] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Hi Gentle Space Foke,
Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members.
So you want to take away responsibilities of the FLEET COMMANDER to give more to members.....FLEET COMMANDER to me implies he leads the fleet. FFS
WTF are you doing CCP? All these stupid changes you have been making are really pissing people off. Where are the damn fixes we've been asking about for years? Corp management, thousand cuts, all that? Last time you stopped listening to your customers, you had to issue a public apology to keep the game alive. Don't think you can just do that every couple years, go off on a tangent for a year, apologize, slowly stop listening, another tangent a year later, apologize, etc. Stupid, absolutely stupid.
Back on the issue at hand, so the fleet commander can't warp the fleet he commands to their POS? Are you kidding me?
WAKE UP CCP! You guys are making some really stupid decisions lately.
http://www.militarygamers.com/
|
Thea Yulivee
Space Pioneers Odin's Call
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:24:46 -
[555] - Quote
Delt0r Garsk wrote:This is a big hit to smaller fleets. Now we need to sacrifice a alt/player just to wrap as a group? WTF? why not just make warp speed random and don't let anything land as a planed out fleet comp?
Also this won't affect bomber waves. We never used fleet warps to do them in the first place. But where are all these mass bomber waves? They don't show up on killboards or something? cus i just don't see them.
you mainly don't see the bombers that much anymore because the doctrines of 0.0 have shifted to adapt to the danger of bombers - but this limits what can be fielded at all The changes with regards to bombers are not designed to kill bombing runs, but to extend the time window the FC has on grid before the bomberwing is in position |
Xzeratuhl
Project AIice Whatever.
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:25:40 -
[556] - Quote
Zloco Crendraven wrote:Xzeratuhl wrote:Honnestly CCP?!
this change will really suck! only big alys / corps will have enought "scout chars" to have warpins.
-1 That is not true, 99% of small groups will do just fine with the scouts. And that 1% will adapt pretty quickly because the entry level for that role is very small.
I dont agree. You have no chance to have your fleet together. The warpspeed from ships are diffrent. Your smal fleet get spread out. Did you even life in a wh? you know how annoing it is to come back into youre hole after get potted?
open a suicide squad with no honor!
If this change will come, eve get very much trail acc only for warpins. and after the trail ends the chars are useless.
|
Sasha Sen
Hull Zero Two Reckoning Star Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:27:15 -
[557] - Quote
Thea Yulivee wrote:
the ignorance..wow
whilst i agree with the changes in general, just the simple fact that smaller corps in WH Space can't have alt-scouts at every WH in the chain they are using, makes me wonder if CCP really thought this through. For bigger corps this won't change to much in the way of handling their day to day routine, but when it comes to small corps or multi-corp fleets this is a major pain
I agree with the statements above, that we need other options to warp to wormholes as a fleet or at least broadcast a bookmark so that every member of the fleet can warp himself. I really hope that the thing Larkin mentioned they are working on, adresses this issue...the way i see things right now, this might help larger w-space corps/alliances and hurt the smaller ones
I am confused, why would a small corp need an alt on every wh in the chain? If they are at the wh they can bm it and have the warp in? If there is another corp in the alliance they can scan it or fleet up and warp to person who does have the Bm? Or share BM with making copies?
And really if the new structures are out and asset security is handled within a corp both ways without restrictions on activities that require a POS / Citadel whatever, then perhaps being in a small corp will not be as common as now, don't you think?
|
Neo Legath
Atztech Inc. Ixtab.
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:27:46 -
[558] - Quote
Bill Lane wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:Hi Gentle Space Foke,
Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members.
So you want to take away responsibilities of the FLEET COMMANDER to give more to members.....FLEET COMMANDER to me implies he leads the fleet. FFS WTF are you doing CCP? All these stupid changes you have been making are really pissing people off. Where are the damn fixes we've been asking about for years? Corp management, thousand cuts, all that? Last time you stopped listening to your customers, you had to issue a public apology to keep the game alive. Don't think you can just do that every couple years, go off on a tangent for a year, apologize, slowly stop listening, another tangent a year later, apologize, etc. Stupid, absolutely stupid. Back on the issue at hand, so the fleet commander can't warp the fleet he commands to their POS? Are you kidding me? WAKE UP CCP! You guys are making some really stupid decisions lately.
Lets agree on Fubar.... |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1061
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:30:44 -
[559] - Quote
Sasha Sen wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:My post. Maybe your aspirations in EvE to command a large fleet are a bit more than you can handle then? Do you really have 100 friends in a fleet or they are just boots following you around with aligns and F1's? I mean if you have that many friends statistically at least one should be more then happy to fly around in a cloaky ship and give warp ins. Recruit people who enjoy setting up warp ins? "I'm perfectly happy to ask a new player to be the +1 or +2 scout. They get some experience and fun out of it (unless space is totally empty, as it all too often seems to be)." Ever wonder why space is totally empty? Having the tools to synchronize movement of a large fleet with a handful of pilots is probably one of the reasons. Read a book?
I have no aspirations to lead a large fleet, just as I have no desire to be one more Ishtar in the mob. When I play, I lead gangs of less than 20 characters. Each human matters in a fight like that.
Recruiting people who enjoy setting up warp ins? If I could find people like that, I'd sell them to exotic brothels in need of more submissives/bottoms.
Not to mention that would require there to actually be lots of new players joining Eve and staying subscribed. I'd happily recruit them if most recruits weren't bored players from hostile alliances looking for content elsewhere or trying to get a spy in somewhere.
Space is empty because people are not logging in right now.
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
So, why do I continue to provide feedback on these forums?
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5813975#post5813975
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1364
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:35:17 -
[560] - Quote
Sasha Sen wrote:Thea Yulivee wrote:
the ignorance..wow
whilst i agree with the changes in general, just the simple fact that smaller corps in WH Space can't have alt-scouts at every WH in the chain they are using, makes me wonder if CCP really thought this through. For bigger corps this won't change to much in the way of handling their day to day routine, but when it comes to small corps or multi-corp fleets this is a major pain
I agree with the statements above, that we need other options to warp to wormholes as a fleet or at least broadcast a bookmark so that every member of the fleet can warp himself. I really hope that the thing Larkin mentioned they are working on, adresses this issue...the way i see things right now, this might help larger w-space corps/alliances and hurt the smaller ones
I am confused, why would a small corp need an alt on every wh in the chain? If they are at the wh they can bm it and have the warp in? If there is another corp in the alliance they can scan it or fleet up and warp to person who does have the Bm? Or share BM with making copies?
Ships warp at different speeds. Without SOMEONE in place first, you CANNOT regulate the warp speeds.
How long do you think tackle is going to last against an enemy fleet when they're the only ships on grid?
Logi will take roughly twice as long to land as tackle, by then your tackle is already dead.
Kspace is slightly better as they could fleet warp to gates, but they now lose the ability to fleet warp to even a corp perch to avoid bubbles. the fleet arrives piecemeal.
Didn't want to keep that fleet together anyway........ |
|
Kwa Zulu
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
30
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:35:32 -
[561] - Quote
Thea Yulivee wrote: you mainly don't see the bombers that much anymore because the doctrines of 0.0 have shifted to adapt to the danger of bombers - but this limits what can be fielded at all
Dominixes, rattlesnakes, geddons, they still get used a lot. Even mining fleets are prime bomber targets and theres no lack of these either. Somehow however you barely see proper bombing runs done anymore. No your theory of that doctrines are continuously taking bombing into account does not make sense. |
Rekatan
We Heart U
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:36:43 -
[562] - Quote
The unintended consequences for this so far outweigh any potential benefit it's insane it's even being considered. I generally try to keep an open mind with controversial changes to Eve because a lot of times there's method behind the madness, but this one is just madness... Even if the goal is to nerf combat probing into the ground, what makes it a good idea to add massive headache to W-space and missions? I live out in W-space and I can't fathom losing fleet warp to signatures until the bookmark delay is fixed...
This really just feels lazy. If this solution was settled on because of legacy code then we'll happily wait for the legacy code to be handled, rather than this rushed change in an attempt to fix something that few people even recognize as a problem, while rendering whole styles of play impractical and unenjoyable. |
bunzing heet
Demon-War-Lords Circle-Of-Two
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:37:03 -
[563] - Quote
I too support individual piloting so depending on Skilled pilots getting warpins is a good change in my eyes i do get concerns with the group pve Side of This change but i think this would be so minimal it isnt a big problem I dont know enough about wh space so im not talking about that
Fly safe keep killing
And remember
I'm watching you !!!!
|
Thea Yulivee
Space Pioneers Odin's Call
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:37:55 -
[564] - Quote
Sasha Sen wrote:Thea Yulivee wrote:
the ignorance..wow
whilst i agree with the changes in general, just the simple fact that smaller corps in WH Space can't have alt-scouts at every WH in the chain they are using, makes me wonder if CCP really thought this through. For bigger corps this won't change to much in the way of handling their day to day routine, but when it comes to small corps or multi-corp fleets this is a major pain
I agree with the statements above, that we need other options to warp to wormholes as a fleet or at least broadcast a bookmark so that every member of the fleet can warp himself. I really hope that the thing Larkin mentioned they are working on, adresses this issue...the way i see things right now, this might help larger w-space corps/alliances and hurt the smaller ones
I am confused, why would a small corp need an alt on every wh in the chain? If they are at the wh they can bm it and have the warp in? If there is another corp in the alliance they can scan it or fleet up and warp to person who does have the Bm? Or share BM with making copies?
Well..sharing bookmarks would work if they would update in time and not 5 minutes later |
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS Shadow Cartel
682
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:38:30 -
[565] - Quote
When BALEX as a corp roams (10-15 ppl) max we always have min 5 alts in the fleet, be it links, or probers/scouts. We move around lowsec trough WH a lot. When we move around we always use scout warp ins, so where is the problem?
Name one situation where scouts can't handle it.
BALEX, bringing piracy on a whole new level.
|
Sasha Sen
Hull Zero Two Reckoning Star Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:38:56 -
[566] - Quote
Ok sounds like your tight knit group will be ok then, you might even have a chance if you do run in to one of those Ishtar mob fleets and catch a few stragglers who didn't have the proper bm. |
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2170
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:42:07 -
[567] - Quote
Zloco Crendraven wrote:When BALEX as a corp roams (10-15 ppl) max we always have min 5 alts in the fleet, be it links, or probers/scouts. We move around lowsec trough WH a lot. When we move around we always use scout warp ins, so where is the problem?
Name one situation where scouts can't handle it. Tackling a nullbear before they leave their site.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Sasha Sen
Hull Zero Two Reckoning Star Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:44:13 -
[568] - Quote
Thea Yulivee wrote:Sasha Sen wrote:Thea Yulivee wrote:
the ignorance..wow
whilst i agree with the changes in general, just the simple fact that smaller corps in WH Space can't have alt-scouts at every WH in the chain they are using, makes me wonder if CCP really thought this through. For bigger corps this won't change to much in the way of handling their day to day routine, but when it comes to small corps or multi-corp fleets this is a major pain
I agree with the statements above, that we need other options to warp to wormholes as a fleet or at least broadcast a bookmark so that every member of the fleet can warp himself. I really hope that the thing Larkin mentioned they are working on, adresses this issue...the way i see things right now, this might help larger w-space corps/alliances and hurt the smaller ones
I am confused, why would a small corp need an alt on every wh in the chain? If they are at the wh they can bm it and have the warp in? If there is another corp in the alliance they can scan it or fleet up and warp to person who does have the Bm? Or share BM with making copies? Well..sharing bookmarks would work if they would update in time and not 5 minutes later
And you need less then 5 minutes because....... ?
..... oh wait you found a target, you are quickly forming a fleet to pounce and so you are in a hurry, ok I get it. Then send in a scout with a cloak to get a warp in.
|
Sasha Sen
Hull Zero Two Reckoning Star Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:45:32 -
[569] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:When BALEX as a corp roams (10-15 ppl) max we always have min 5 alts in the fleet, be it links, or probers/scouts. We move around lowsec trough WH a lot. When we move around we always use scout warp ins, so where is the problem?
Name one situation where scouts can't handle it. Tackling a nullbear before they leave their site.
Fleet warps work to anoms. |
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2170
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:47:25 -
[570] - Quote
Sasha Sen wrote:Zappity wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:When BALEX as a corp roams (10-15 ppl) max we always have min 5 alts in the fleet, be it links, or probers/scouts. We move around lowsec trough WH a lot. When we move around we always use scout warp ins, so where is the problem?
Name one situation where scouts can't handle it. Tackling a nullbear before they leave their site. Fleet warps work to anoms. Fine. Tackling a nullbear before they leave their signature.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
|
Sasha Sen
Hull Zero Two Reckoning Star Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:48:06 -
[571] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Sasha Sen wrote:Zappity wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:When BALEX as a corp roams (10-15 ppl) max we always have min 5 alts in the fleet, be it links, or probers/scouts. We move around lowsec trough WH a lot. When we move around we always use scout warp ins, so where is the problem?
Name one situation where scouts can't handle it. Tackling a nullbear before they leave their site. Fleet warps work to anoms. Fine. Tackling a nullbear before they leave their signature.
warp gates..... do you eve?
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1364
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:50:12 -
[572] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:When BALEX as a corp roams (10-15 ppl) max we always have min 5 alts in the fleet, be it links, or probers/scouts. We move around lowsec trough WH a lot. When we move around we always use scout warp ins, so where is the problem?
Name one situation where scouts can't handle it. Tackling a nullbear before they leave their site.
Moving a fleet through a wormhole chain in a cohesive manner WITHOUT needing to put a scout on EVERY bookmark first.
Tell me why delaying movement like this is good gameplay addition...when the ******* "problem" is (allegedly) bombers. |
Dwaigon Aumer
The Bastards The Bastards.
16
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:50:33 -
[573] - Quote
I normally don't involve in changes, but i'll make an exception for this one.
This:
Caldari 5 wrote:This change hurts small gang, more than it does large gang/fleet, mostly due to the number of bodies available to try and get warp ins with.
When you only have a fleet of 10 or so guys having 3 or more guys trying to get warp-ins is large percentage of your potential DPS doing nothing. Yet if you have a fleet of 50 or more guys, having 4 or more guys trying to get warp-ins it is much less of an issue.
Also it hurts explorer hunters, now they actually have to use their alt for combat and exposing themselfs. If you have to probe, warp at 10km, then warp your main on top the chances that the target is gone is way to much.
Possible solutions are:
- Allow squad warp to probes, bookmarks etc.
- When fleet warping, make every member confirm it (when a member confirms, he starts to warp).
The Bastards. Technical / Security Director
http://www.the-bastards.net
Minmatar FTW!!
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2170
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:54:00 -
[574] - Quote
Sasha Sen wrote:Zappity wrote:Sasha Sen wrote:Zappity wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:When BALEX as a corp roams (10-15 ppl) max we always have min 5 alts in the fleet, be it links, or probers/scouts. We move around lowsec trough WH a lot. When we move around we always use scout warp ins, so where is the problem?
Name one situation where scouts can't handle it. Tackling a nullbear before they leave their site. Fleet warps work to anoms. Fine. Tackling a nullbear before they leave their signature. warp gates..... do you eve? wat
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2170
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:54:59 -
[575] - Quote
Dwaigon Aumer wrote:I normally don't involve in changes, but i'll make an exception for this one. This: Caldari 5 wrote:This change hurts small gang, more than it does large gang/fleet, mostly due to the number of bodies available to try and get warp ins with.
When you only have a fleet of 10 or so guys having 3 or more guys trying to get warp-ins is large percentage of your potential DPS doing nothing. Yet if you have a fleet of 50 or more guys, having 4 or more guys trying to get warp-ins it is much less of an issue. Also it hurts explorer hunters, now they actually have to use their alt for combat and exposing themselfs. If you have to probe, warp at 10km, then warp your main on top the chances that the target is gone is way to much. Possible solutions are:
- Allow squad warp to probes, bookmarks etc.
- When fleet warping, make every member confirm it (when a member confirms, he starts to warp).
Yeah, I tend to agree. This will hurt smaller groups much more than blobs. Allowing this at squad level would be much better I think.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Sasha Sen
Hull Zero Two Reckoning Star Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:56:32 -
[576] - Quote
Wait what sites are you talking about? Relics? You need a fleet to catch a cov ops? |
Valkin Mordirc
1106
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:59:18 -
[577] - Quote
Well Amarr is completely filled with Scanner Probes in Protest.... Probtest.. HA.
Anyways.
http://gyazo.com/29f6373b25b4f8de2210c4c7734ed8d0
#DeleteTheWeak
|
Bertral
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 09:59:48 -
[578] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: The goal of these changes is to encourage more individual fleet member participation [...]
So the change to make would be the opposite : allow fleet warp only on unknown locations (boomarks, probed ships) and disallow fleet warps when fleet members can just warp themselves.
You are nerfing interesting gameplay (repositioning) while still allowing the "autopilot" part of fleet warping.
In the o7 show, CCP Fozzie (I think) compared the these changes with the drone assist nerf. (It is no longer possible to have 200 drone boats controlled by one trigger.) However, these fleet warp changes would be like allowing the 200 ishtars to assist a proteus, but disallowing drone assist for small gangs (you would need to have at lest 50 drones assisted to one ship for the trigger to work).
I just don't see why you consider autopiloting interesting, and why you consider combat probing an issue. |
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2170
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:00:00 -
[579] - Quote
Sasha Sen wrote:Wait what sites are you talking about? Relics? You need a fleet to catch a cov ops? Combat signatures and escalations. http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Cosmic_Signatures#Combat_Sites You already need to be lucky to catch them because all they have to do is warp out when they see combat probes.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS Shadow Cartel
682
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:00:49 -
[580] - Quote
Sasha Sen wrote:Zappity wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:When BALEX as a corp roams (10-15 ppl) max we always have min 5 alts in the fleet, be it links, or probers/scouts. We move around lowsec trough WH a lot. When we move around we always use scout warp ins, so where is the problem?
Name one situation where scouts can't handle it. Tackling a nullbear before they leave their site. Fleet warps work to anoms.
You cant tackle it with a prober and be a warp in for rest of the fleet?
BALEX, bringing piracy on a whole new level.
|
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2170
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:04:34 -
[581] - Quote
Zloco Crendraven wrote:Sasha Sen wrote:Zappity wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:When BALEX as a corp roams (10-15 ppl) max we always have min 5 alts in the fleet, be it links, or probers/scouts. We move around lowsec trough WH a lot. When we move around we always use scout warp ins, so where is the problem?
Name one situation where scouts can't handle it. Tackling a nullbear before they leave their site. Fleet warps work to anoms. You cant tackle it with a prober and be a warp in for rest of the fleet? Yeah, this is the alternative. Care to suggest any fits for probing bonused ships that would survive even 20 seconds of drone DPS? You need an expanded launcher.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Sasha Sen
Hull Zero Two Reckoning Star Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:05:18 -
[582] - Quote
If I remember correctly 99% of combat sites have a warp gate, in null sec what you can catch now with fleet warp you will be able to catch with a solo tackle as well. Who waits around in a site when local spikes?
Escalations I have no clue about, I think those have no warp gates but you would have to use combat probes, and if they don't get out of the place while there is a person in local and combats pop out even for 15 seconds, then you will catch again with or without fleet warps.
The only valid argument so far for this change being bad is the off grid booster that needs near perfect scanner to find.
|
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
278
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:05:25 -
[583] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Come up with some truly rewarding roles for people in fleets. As it is, you keep multiplying the number of thankless roles that are best done on an alt - because your business strategy seems to be to squeeze as much out of the existing humans as possible
There are already potential roles in fleets that could be rewarding to fulfill. The problem is that supposed "fleet commanders" are control freaks who insist on doing just about everything themselves. Unfortunately, there are mechanics that such control freaks can lean on that make it possible for them to control a fleet they are also commanding. And, the more effective those mechanics are for exerting control over a fleet, the less necessary the actual players become. (Hence, alts.)
It's called "command AND control". They are differentiated for a reason. An FC really has no business warping anyone anywhere. That's the job of the fleet controllers, fleet controllers like, say, a ship's captain, an aircraft pilot, a squad leader, a gunner, etc.
Removing the ability of a control freak to control your ship means that you have to control your own ship. Let me reiterate: removing the ability of a control freak to play EVE for you means that you have to play EVE yourself.
What is the objection? |
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2170
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:06:33 -
[584] - Quote
Seems that this is actually reducing the specialised role of a prober rather than increasing it. I currently use a dedicated prober in a covops (you know, a probing ship) and they warp my cruiser onto targets. If the prober has to tackle then the fit will have to be enormously gimped. And why? That's the whole point of them - to probe, not to tackle.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
HiddenPorpoise
Expendable Miscreants
357
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:07:07 -
[585] - Quote
Zloco Crendraven wrote:Sasha Sen wrote:Zappity wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:When BALEX as a corp roams (10-15 ppl) max we always have min 5 alts in the fleet, be it links, or probers/scouts. We move around lowsec trough WH a lot. When we move around we always use scout warp ins, so where is the problem?
Name one situation where scouts can't handle it. Tackling a nullbear before they leave their site. Fleet warps work to anoms. You cant tackle it with a prober and be a warp in for rest of the fleet? With this the prober has to be the tackle unless you want to announce your intent or exclusively use recons. |
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
662
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:07:29 -
[586] - Quote
A quick analysis ... if I recall all the fleets I participated (low, null, WH, big, small, cloaky), this change would have made no difference. Within NPSI we are used to have scouts, probers, fleet members to give warp-ins and distribute bookmarks.
What I do see as a major problem (as others), catching OGBs and fleets cruising on a safe will be impossible with this change. That's not good.
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
Cypherous
Liberty Rogues Aprilon Dynasty
130
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:07:30 -
[587] - 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.
I would consider you not working for CCP if you're going to make these kind of choices a very good outcome, when are we getting the outcome we want?
Terrible design choice, ruins far too many things and just slows EVE down, PvP is supposed to be fast paced but you guys seem to have lost touch with this, Fozzie, when was the last time you actually played the game? |
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
662
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:09:31 -
[588] - Quote
HiddenPorpoise wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:Sasha Sen wrote:Zappity wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:When BALEX as a corp roams (10-15 ppl) max we always have min 5 alts in the fleet, be it links, or probers/scouts. We move around lowsec trough WH a lot. When we move around we always use scout warp ins, so where is the problem?
Name one situation where scouts can't handle it. Tackling a nullbear before they leave their site. Fleet warps work to anoms. You cant tackle it with a prober and be a warp in for rest of the fleet? With this the prober has to be the tackle unless you want to announce your intent or exclusively use recons. Yes, and this is fine ... remember a prober to scan sites needs much less skills than a combat prober.
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2170
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:10:40 -
[589] - Quote
Sasha Sen wrote:If I remember correctly 99% of combat sites have a warp gate, in null sec what you can catch now with fleet warp you will be able to catch with a solo tackle as well. Who waits around in a site when local spikes? Escalations I have no clue about, I think those have no warp gates but you would have to use combat probes, and if they don't get out of the place while there is a person in local and combats pop out even for 15 seconds, then you will catch again with or without fleet warps. The only valid argument so far for this change being bad is the off grid booster that needs near perfect scanner to find. It is just not true. There are plenty of occasions right now when the timing is extremely close and they are leaving just as I land. Other times I catch them. It wouldn't be remotely close after the change.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Oddsodz
The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare. A Band Apart.
155
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:12:08 -
[590] - Quote
I Wonder how much this change with make to catching supers in lowsec? Think about it,. That nasty Doomsday just hit your fleets dreadnought. Then it just warped of. Ok lets get a prober out and a hic. Can you guess the out come? I know I can. and it will not end in a dead super. |
|
Sasha Sen
Hull Zero Two Reckoning Star Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:13:35 -
[591] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Seems that this is actually reducing the specialised role of a prober rather than increasing it. I currently use a dedicated prober in a covops (you know, a probing ship) and they warp my cruiser onto targets. If the prober has to tackle then the fit will have to be enormously gimped. And why? That's the whole point of them - to probe, not to tackle.
I am really confused, trying really hard to see why this is bad for you.
You have a prober - check You got lock on a sig - check You warp your cov ops to the sig - check You warp with your combat ship to your scanner - check
What am I missing? |
Tyr Dolorem
Snuff Box Snuffed Out
140
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:14:13 -
[592] - Quote
Oddsodz wrote:I Wonder how much this change will make to catching supers in lowsec? Think about it,. That nasty Doomsday just hit your fleets dreadnought. Then it just warped off. Ok lets get a prober out and a hic. We have 10 minutes to find it. It can't cloak and it can't jump. Can you guess the out come? I know I can. And it will not end in a dead super.
You clearly don't know how to fit an onyx. |
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
277
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:15:41 -
[593] - Quote
replacing a bookmark with a player. not sure how this is a bad thing. |
Amy Summers
Fierce Ice
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:15:52 -
[594] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members.
While I think this is a good goal to try to achieve, this change isn't gonna do it. My prediction of what will happen is as follows.
A fleet will now need some quick small (cloaky) ships to provide warp-ins for the fleet. When they have these the game remains the same, bad stuff about to land on your kitey stuff? Warp to one of the small ships at a perch. It'll probably even make it easier for the average linemember since they can now just align to a fleet member instead of some obscure location the FC has a bookmark at.
Who will be flying those small ships? - Random linemember alt. - The poor guys who get picked to stay ahead of the fleet and do nothing else instead of flying dps or logi. Fun! - FC alts. Cause those guys don't have enough to do anyway.
The bottom line is that what you're trying to achieve here just isn't going to happen or forces people into boring roles. The only thing that will work is killing combat probing but only to an extend that it makes things a little slower which is good.
My suggestion: Keep the warping to bookmarks but remove warping to scan results. |
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2170
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:18:00 -
[595] - Quote
Sasha Sen wrote:Zappity wrote:Seems that this is actually reducing the specialised role of a prober rather than increasing it. I currently use a dedicated prober in a covops (you know, a probing ship) and they warp my cruiser onto targets. If the prober has to tackle then the fit will have to be enormously gimped. And why? That's the whole point of them - to probe, not to tackle. I am really confused, trying really hard to see why this is bad for you. You have a prober - check You got lock on a sig - check You warp your cov ops to the sig - check You warp with your combat ship to your scanner - check What am I missing? It will take an extra 20 seconds when the timing is already extremely tight right now.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16137
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:19:22 -
[596] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Seems that this is actually reducing the specialised role of a prober rather than increasing it. I currently use a dedicated prober in a covops (you know, a probing ship) and they warp my cruiser onto targets. If the prober has to tackle then the fit will have to be enormously gimped. And why? That's the whole point of them - to probe, not to tackle.
They used to be used for tackle before we got the fleet commands. It worked well then and it will work well now.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Hudson EVE
Rubbish
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:21:12 -
[597] - Quote
Dislike this change.
Serious fleets will ban noobs; Losing chance to gain skirmish exp. |
Dwaigon Aumer
The Bastards The Bastards.
17
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:26:07 -
[598] - Quote
Sasha Sen wrote:Zappity wrote:Seems that this is actually reducing the specialised role of a prober rather than increasing it. I currently use a dedicated prober in a covops (you know, a probing ship) and they warp my cruiser onto targets. If the prober has to tackle then the fit will have to be enormously gimped. And why? That's the whole point of them - to probe, not to tackle. I am really confused, trying really hard to see why this is bad for you. You have a prober - check You got lock on a sig - check You warp your cov ops to the sig - check You warp with your combat ship to your scanner - check What am I missing? When i probe i now fleet warp my inty on them, even if they saw the probes in scan and they aren't aligned i catch them. With this change by the time my alt is in the sig and i have to warp my inty to my alt the target is long gone.
The Bastards. Technical / Security Director
http://www.the-bastards.net
Minmatar FTW!!
|
Sasha Sen
Hull Zero Two Reckoning Star Alliance
9
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:26:15 -
[599] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Sasha Sen wrote:Zappity wrote:Seems that this is actually reducing the specialised role of a prober rather than increasing it. I currently use a dedicated prober in a covops (you know, a probing ship) and they warp my cruiser onto targets. If the prober has to tackle then the fit will have to be enormously gimped. And why? That's the whole point of them - to probe, not to tackle. I am really confused, trying really hard to see why this is bad for you. You have a prober - check You got lock on a sig - check You warp your cov ops to the sig - check You warp with your combat ship to your scanner - check What am I missing? It will take an extra 20 seconds when the timing is already extremely tight right now.
Prescan the site. Adapt.
The only way you catch anyone is if they stay right at the beacon after they warp in, assuming they are in the first pocket. You really want to squeeze the poor fresh eve players that much? cant give them a 20 second headstart?
|
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS Shadow Cartel
682
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:26:41 -
[600] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:Sasha Sen wrote:Zappity wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:When BALEX as a corp roams (10-15 ppl) max we always have min 5 alts in the fleet, be it links, or probers/scouts. We move around lowsec trough WH a lot. When we move around we always use scout warp ins, so where is the problem?
Name one situation where scouts can't handle it. Tackling a nullbear before they leave their site. Fleet warps work to anoms. You cant tackle it with a prober and be a warp in for rest of the fleet? Yeah, this is the alternative. Care to suggest any fits for probing bonused ships that would survive even 20 seconds of drone DPS? You need an expanded launcher.
Any cloaky scanner. Just stay near him and get warp in for the fleet. It adds 30 sec to the practice that is actual now. Or use any reacon or T3 as heavy tacklers.
BALEX, bringing piracy on a whole new level.
|
|
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1730
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:28:46 -
[601] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:The change restriction is too high and affects too many areas of life in Eve, from Kspace, to Null, to Wspace. I would propose a smaller iteration to address the concerns of how fleet warp mechanics now work.
- Permit Squad Commanders in a fleet to fleet-warp their squad to bookmarks and probed sigs.
Essentially you move the capabilities of the overall fleet and wing commander down to the squad level. You remove the big flying balls of hurt down to decisions made by the squad commander, permitting them to decide on tactical warp ins, locations and fleet warps for their squad. You restrict fleet warps down to a 10 man team, with a individual per 10 man team making individual decisions for that 10 man team, to support the fleet efforts. Fleet and Wing commanders would lose this ability to warp entire armada's to bookmarks and scanned sigs, but permit smaller skirmish groups/squads to warp their small group to them. You move the leadership role of getting tacticals and flying to the leader of the squad, reducing the blob down to at most, 10 pilots, vs the 100+ null runs into. You now create a new leadership dynamic, and permit new people to have a stepping stone to becoming a Fleet Commander. Squad Leaders gain power, and have a relevant role verses just being a booster for their fleetmates. I'd start with baby steps first, commonly known as "A Iteration" (Thanks for that CCP Rise). Remove the ability for fleet commanders and wing commanders from warping entire groups to bookmarks and scan probes, and reduce it down to the squad level. Try that first. See how it actually works.
This Is an exceptionally smart suggestion, It appears to achieve all the stated goals of the change, while reducing collateral damage.
Whilst CCP may have Unstated goals, If so It would be helpful if they disclosed them and maybe this can be iterated on to achieve those as well.
By the way whatever happened to preventing warping on-grid to a sniper? that was to prevent slippery petes being the only valid PVP sniper, or is this overarching change to achieve that too? If it is then preventing squad warp to a bookmark ON-GRID should be added to pheonix jones excellent suggestion.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
Arla Sarain
496
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:29:17 -
[602] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Zappity wrote:Seems that this is actually reducing the specialised role of a prober rather than increasing it. I currently use a dedicated prober in a covops (you know, a probing ship) and they warp my cruiser onto targets. If the prober has to tackle then the fit will have to be enormously gimped. And why? That's the whole point of them - to probe, not to tackle. They used to be used for tackle before we got the fleet commands. It worked well then and it will work well now. Would like to see this. |
Bertral
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:37:26 -
[603] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:The change restriction is too high and affects too many areas of life in Eve, from Kspace, to Null, to Wspace. I would propose a smaller iteration to address the concerns of how fleet warp mechanics now work.
- Permit Squad Commanders in a fleet to fleet-warp their squad to bookmarks and probed sigs.
Essentially you move the capabilities of the overall fleet and wing commander down to the squad level. You remove the big flying balls of hurt down to decisions made by the squad commander, permitting them to decide on tactical warp ins, locations and fleet warps for their squad. You restrict fleet warps down to a 10 man team, with a individual per 10 man team making individual decisions for that 10 man team, to support the fleet efforts. Fleet and Wing commanders would lose this ability to warp entire armada's to bookmarks and scanned sigs, but permit smaller skirmish groups/squads to warp their small group to them. You move the leadership role of getting tacticals and flying to the leader of the squad, reducing the blob down to at most, 10 pilots, vs the 100+ null runs into. You now create a new leadership dynamic, and permit new people to have a stepping stone to becoming a Fleet Commander. Squad Leaders gain power, and have a relevant role verses just being a booster for their fleetmates. I'd start with baby steps first, commonly known as "A Iteration" (Thanks for that CCP Rise). Remove the ability for fleet commanders and wing commanders from warping entire groups to bookmarks and scan probes, and reduce it down to the squad level. Try that first. See how it actually works.
Now this sounds extremely fun. Instead of suiciding the probing ship to provide the warp-in, have a dedicated squad do it (with some heavy tackle and ****). |
Nandi Milian
Evoke. Ev0ke
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:38:18 -
[604] - Quote
This change would only be bearable, if you also lower the fitting requirements for expanded probe launchers. Because a covert ops is to thin to tackle anything and is not able to tackle a super at all. |
159Pinky
Under Heavy Fire Mordus Angels
20
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:39:02 -
[605] - Quote
+1
|
Sasha Sen
Hull Zero Two Reckoning Star Alliance
9
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:41:21 -
[606] - Quote
Dwaigon Aumer wrote:Sasha Sen wrote:Zappity wrote:Seems that this is actually reducing the specialised role of a prober rather than increasing it. I currently use a dedicated prober in a covops (you know, a probing ship) and they warp my cruiser onto targets. If the prober has to tackle then the fit will have to be enormously gimped. And why? That's the whole point of them - to probe, not to tackle. I am really confused, trying really hard to see why this is bad for you. You have a prober - check You got lock on a sig - check You warp your cov ops to the sig - check You warp with your combat ship to your scanner - check What am I missing? When i probe i now fleet warp my inty on them, even if they saw the probes in scan and they aren't aligned i catch them. With this change by the time my alt is in the sig and i have to warp my inty to my alt the target is long gone.
I see you send your inty in for exploration frigates, you sure your scanner cant tackle those? Did you try? And I don't see any combat site ships caught this way, if you did it's not the norm and you know it.
|
Zarek RedHill
Stringent Method Mordus Angels
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:45:06 -
[607] - Quote
I'm by no means an expert in Eve nor game design -- but I like to think I've learned a few things along the way (yes I'm old).
- change is hard, and not always easy. That does not make it undesirable - players (and devs) greatly overestimate their ability to predict the impact of a change like this. The tendency is to recoil. - shaking things up every so often not only keeps the game fresh, it also is one of the few ways new players can be brought to the same level as older players.
All this said, here are my recommendations (these apply to core game play mechanics in general) - it would be cool if changes like this could be player tested to a degree that is not practical on the test servers. Maybe a small subset of regions (some high, some low, some null, some k-space) could be phased into the new fleet warp regime for a more extensive play test. - Even if you do go with a galaxy-wide switch to the new fleet warp regime, keep the old system around in the code base behind a feature flag (for a short while) so that if this change goes bad, a simple toggle & server reset can roll it back.
About this change specifically -- - consider giving individual players the ability to warp 150/200/250 km in any direction they with without having to have a bookmark for it. I realize this has significant implications since "getting a warp in" on a fleet is a big deal -- it'd be cool to see fleet movements be more complex than just anchoring up on the FC.
Thanks for reading. :) -Z
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2173
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:48:14 -
[608] - Quote
Zloco Crendraven wrote:Zappity wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:Sasha Sen wrote:Fleet warps work to anoms. You cant tackle it with a prober and be a warp in for rest of the fleet? Yeah, this is the alternative. Care to suggest any fits for probing bonused ships that would survive even 20 seconds of drone DPS? You need an expanded launcher. Any cloaky scanner. Just stay near him and get warp in for the fleet. It adds 30 sec to the practice that is actual now. Which is not using the scanner as a tackler.
Zloco Crendraven wrote:Or use any reacon or T3 as heavy tacklers. Which was precisely the point I made. The specific role of the prober is being reduced. You can't actually use a probing ship for the role any more. I don't like it.
I understand the reasoning behind the change for large fleets. I do not understand it for small fleets. Converting Fleet Warp to Squad Warp would be good.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Dwaigon Aumer
The Bastards The Bastards.
19
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:48:55 -
[609] - Quote
Sasha Sen wrote:Dwaigon Aumer wrote:Sasha Sen wrote:Zappity wrote:Seems that this is actually reducing the specialised role of a prober rather than increasing it. I currently use a dedicated prober in a covops (you know, a probing ship) and they warp my cruiser onto targets. If the prober has to tackle then the fit will have to be enormously gimped. And why? That's the whole point of them - to probe, not to tackle. I am really confused, trying really hard to see why this is bad for you. You have a prober - check You got lock on a sig - check You warp your cov ops to the sig - check You warp with your combat ship to your scanner - check What am I missing? When i probe i now fleet warp my inty on them, even if they saw the probes in scan and they aren't aligned i catch them. With this change by the time my alt is in the sig and i have to warp my inty to my alt the target is long gone. I see you send your inty in for exploration frigates, you sure your scanner cant tackle those? Did you try? And I don't see any combat site ships caught this way, if you did it's not the norm and you know it. Oh my alt can tackle them for sure, but i don't want it cause it will expose my alt and burn him as a scout. So everytime i use him, he becomes more and more exposed, eventually he is no longer usable so i need another alt.
What if i want to tackle an astero in my cloaky alt, those are beasts and will murder my alt before i can jump anything else on them. -edit: my alt uses an frig for scanning.
The Bastards. Technical / Security Director
http://www.the-bastards.net
Minmatar FTW!!
|
Brendan Anneto
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
37
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:49:48 -
[610] - Quote
LOL. CCP Screws supers and capitals then screws fleet abilities. What's next? Screwing the ability to warp on the grid?
I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your terror comes, When your terror comes like a storm, And your destruction comes like a whirlwind, When distress and anguish come upon you.-á-á
Proverbs 1:26-27
|
|
GallowsCalibrator
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
515
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 10:52:57 -
[611] - Quote
This seems.... not very well thought out.
The problems with stealth bombers is really the actual bomb itself - that could do with a balance pass more than anything to stop it being the be-all and end all of battleship slaughtering. (Less damage, less HP per bomb, bomb launcher increasing recloak delay, wider AoE, make non-damage bombs a lot more compelling to use?)
As it stands, this feels like it's going to make high-mobility, high-projection ships even more powerful in the meta, which although is probably great for Tengu owners and those using rail-tengu doctrines (although I for one await the age of the nanorokh) it's going to further invalidate a lot of ship/doctrine choices. Not a good thing.
It's also going to lead to a lot more burnout as it's going to make fights less likely to happen.
As an idle suggestion, this change might be a bit more palatable if there were some ships with role bonuses that allowed you to drag people on a to-be-forbidden fleet warp (hint hint recons), squad-level group warpins were still possible, or as an alternative to this, some kind of module that either made warp-ins more erratic or made probe-locks more difficult in a radius, to be able to effectively scatter bombing runs. (Which sound like they could be interesting alternative HICtor scripts or something.)
Seriously, making people work harder for fun/engagements isn't great and is a pretty big reversal of a lot of the current trend to make trudgery less of an issue. (Like how fuel and logistics has had a lot of work to make it easier rather than soul-crushing pain.) |
X4me1eoH
AirGuard LowSechnaya Sholupen
197
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:02:43 -
[612] - Quote
what about WH? There are no batles on celestial objects, all activity on books. And all warp with differense warp speed. What about missions? Like L5 mmissions without gate. When logist will be arrive, main ship can die. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16138
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:06:01 -
[613] - Quote
Hudson EVE wrote:Dislike this change.
Serious fleets will ban noobs; Losing chance to gain skirmish exp.
Good, more victories for us. Bat Country are recruiting.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
kai il
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
26
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:07:26 -
[614] - Quote
Nail in the coffin to wormhole space and combat scanning.
This would not be a terrible change if corp bookmarks showed up instantly and not the cluster **** it is now where you can have to wait up to 10 minutes.
gg CCP 10/10 update gotta pad that patch note list and make it look like you are doing something for each expansion amirite? |
Jeff Kione
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
12
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:14:00 -
[615] - Quote
Why is it not possible to fleet warp your fleet that is comprised of only corp-mates to a corp bookmark? By the logic presented in the original post this should be possible, since every individual fleet member could warp there themselves.
This change seems to hurt w-space more than anyone living in k-space, because moving around in k-space does not require scanning down signatures to find the publicly-accessible gate.
It seems to me that you're applying a blanket bandaid to try to fix the design problem of stealth bombers without actually fixing the stealth bomber problem. This is a poor design decision. Here are some better ideas that impact stealth bombers only:
- Having a bomb launcher equipped forces you to be marked exempt from fleet warps (so this change, but impacting only the targeted ship).
- Having a bomb launcher equipped reduces your warp speed by xx% (getting into position takes longer, if the fleet is moving then your warp-in could be inefficient by the time you get there).
- Having a bomb launcher equipped lowers your speed and agility (taking longer to align for a bombing run, meaning a moving enemy fleet might get out of the line of the bomb before the bombers have a chance to launch their bombs). |
Blavish
BOVRIL bOREers Mining CO-OP Brave Collective
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:14:15 -
[616] - Quote
As someone that uses mostly battleships, i'm loving this update. |
Cpt Patrick Archer
Quam Singulari Triumvirate.
45
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:18:22 -
[617] - Quote
Behold the rise of the TROLL-10km/sec-Cynabal with Entosis link. The worlds only hope of catching that has just been put in the dumpster. |
Bevici Roden
The Maythorn
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:19:33 -
[618] - Quote
I dislike this change for the following reasons.
1. Not allowing the prober to fleet warp all of the members of a fleet to a probe window result will vastly increase the time it takes to move a fleet around wormhole space.
2. Having individual pilots warp to a fleet member will take a way cohesion from fleets of different ships due to different warp speeds.
3. Currently probing signatures down includes wormholes, combat sites, data sites, relic sites, gas sites which are all different from combat probed ships, deploy-able structures, and player owned star bases.
4. Fleet warps are used offensively as well as defensively, increasing the difficultly by literally tying up a player to act as the warp in point is a horrible way to go about fixing 'individual pilot responsibility'
5. You are literally forcing the scanner into a role that was previously an option instead of a requirement. I mean that an FC could have a dedicated scanner, and this scanner could fleet warp a pilot or pilots to different areas to tackle, or to get eyes, or to whatever. Now this role is 100% on the prober in any time sensitive situation.
_____________________________________________________________________________
On a different note. I live in wormholes. When educating a new player about staying safe in wormhole space and moving around in wormhole space, as well as introducing him to exploration relic/data I need fleet warp.
I scan down and warp him around as if he was attached to my ship. We do data/relic site after data/relic site and chain through wormholes together. I can talk to him about wormhole best practices while he is 'hands off' the pilot controls just seeing the shiny things. I can watch D scan, Intel chat channels, whatever just keeping him safe as he does things and listens to me as he is preoccupied with knowledge overload.
I can let him show info and read the information on the wormhole we just jumped through, the thing he just got from a data scatter container, the ship that just showed up on D scan, all while being able to warp him to the correct locations or even off grid so he remains safe if we get jumped mid site or in transit.
After that I introduce him to corp bookmarks. I let him practice scanning and warping to things. I let him practice warping me around. I let him practice navigating through chains of wormholes with specific destinations in mind. I let him practice all the things I was previously doing for him.
If you take away fleet warp from me this process will be hindered as I can not start from "this is how I move around and do wormholes, just watch, now you try" It will instead be "hey here is this thing called warp to fleet member, do this 100 times while I try to explain what is happening" |
Wolf Crownn
Asturian Industries
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:19:55 -
[619] - Quote
...
In conclusion, it's more of a bad idea than it is good.
GÇöit's not about the value you gain, but the value they lose.
|
Lyam Gaius
Project AIice Whatever.
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:21:11 -
[620] - Quote
The winter is Comming ..... |
|
Invisible Air
Order of the Dutch Lion Gentlemen's.Parlor
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:26:06 -
[621] - Quote
stop demolishing things that work fine Was this discussed with the CSM? Cause it doesn't appear you've listened to the player base and act accordingly |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16138
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:26:41 -
[622] - Quote
Wolf Crownn wrote:...
In conclusion, it's more of a bad idea than it is good.
Only for people why rely upon the FC to do everything for their fleet.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16138
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:27:34 -
[623] - Quote
Invisible Air wrote: stop demolishing things that work fine Was this discussed with the CSM? Cause it doesn't appear you've listened to the player base and act accordingly
The CSM argued for it.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1367
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:30:05 -
[624] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Wolf Crownn wrote:...
In conclusion, it's more of a bad idea than it is good. Only for people why rely upon the FC to do everything for their fleet.
You're better than that Baltec - I cannot control the warp speeds in a mixed comp without a fleet warp. That's a pretty big deal and no amount of command and control delegation can fix that.
Not everyone has the bodies to put a pre-places ship at EVERY warp, and even if they did, it's a ****** crutch to an unnecessary problem.
It's a mechanic which was pretty essential to keep fleets as one that's taken a huge collateral swipe. |
Numen Anomalie
Bastards Of Anarchy System Inc. Drop the Hammer
9
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:30:09 -
[625] - Quote
All i can say is this:
CCP up to 2 years ago: BIG promo run to have people fly multiple accounts. Now: they say: its great, run multiple accounts everybody! BUT, we will totally KILL ANY mechanism that allows you to properly do it.
Don't know why i stick with eve anymore. Over the passed years they are going in the direction of world of warcarft. Killing all cool stuff for us veteran nerds and making it more accesible for noobs and mainstreamers. i Get it, but it doesnt mean i like it.
I heared nobody support this so far. Nobody. Okej maybe a forrest troll in the dungeon of his mother with no friends said he liked it, but besides that creature. Nobody.
Just putting it out there. |
Cypherous
Liberty Rogues Aprilon Dynasty
132
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:32:54 -
[626] - Quote
X4me1eoH wrote:what about WH? There are no batles on celestial objects, all activity on books. And all warp with differense warp speed. What about missions? Like L5 mmissions without gate. When logist will be arrive, main ship can die.
I actually forgot about the warp speed differences, thats a very important one |
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
94
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:33:33 -
[627] - Quote
Potamus Jenkins wrote:"you cannot activate your propulsion module while running command links"
sometimes you really wish you could down vote people. Ever ran a small gang with a CS fitting a link or two while also being combat fit?
|
X4me1eoH
AirGuard LowSechnaya Sholupen
199
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:34:23 -
[628] - Quote
Why you again make game more uncomfortable? |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
232
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:34:38 -
[629] - Quote
Louanne Barros wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote: Your point?
My point is that "Warping yourself or warping to Wwwww's in fleet" is not a replacement for fleet warp, as it does not synchronize the arrival of your ships. It's so unhelpful for the task that I'm grinning at the absurdity of him suggesting it.
warping to WWW's in fleet CAN BE a fleet warp, as the pilot in fleet is public and this will not stop that from being a fleet warp |
Makari Aeron
The Shadow's Of Eve TSOE Consortium
235
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:34:56 -
[630] - Quote
Wow......I just, wow. Personally, terrible idea.
CCP RedDawn: Ugly people are just playing life on HARD mode. Personally, I'm playing on an INFERNO difficulty.
CCP Goliath: I often believe that the best way to get something done is to shout at the person trying to help you. http://goo.gl/PKGDP
|
|
Ralen Zateki
Delusions of Adequacy Get Off My Lawn
181
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:36:33 -
[631] - Quote
In general I stay pretty open minded about change in this game... and in general I've been able to get behind the significant changes Sov, etc.
But this one... ugh.
A few thoughts:
1. I understand what you are trying to do by getting more involvement in individual fleet comps/ members. And I'm sure it sounds great in a brainstorming session. But in practice this is going to be a disorganized mess for fleets that aren't composed of seasoned vets. And most peeps are not seasoned vets. As an FC, it's hard enough to get people to read pings, get in the right ship, not lemming, shoot the primary, etc. etc. FC-ing can be a game of herding cats. This just adds one more significant layer to that and will likely just make it a hassle for FCs to deal with rather than act as any kind of real inspiring game play. I mean... have the people that came up with this idea ever actually run a fleet?
2. This change feels rushed and feels like an afterthought. Like, you were sitting around last week brainstorming, worked yourselves into a lather about this idea, and started pushing it out the door. Not exactly consistent with your track record of late of announcing changes well in advance and at least prep-ing peeps, etc.
3. There are some practical scenarios that I think you need to think through:
- Warping to gates or warping fleet to gain tactical advantage at celestials/ pos-es/ stations/ etc. without warping into a bubble or a death star or a brawling fleet of doom. Sure, I could use skilled & prepared inty pilots or I could use an alt with combat probes and drop www's in fleet. But likely any fleet with inexperienced members is going to result in a piece meal/ disorganized mess. Not exactly fun. And when you do land at a perch above a gate and wait for the stragglers and then anchor up what then? Do it again on grid? Rinse and repeat (especially against kitey doctrines that will likely just pick off straggler after straggler.
- I suppose you think that over time people will start getting into smaller gangs/ smaller fleets that are easier to control and that are less susceptible to the results of this change. But I think the truth is - at least in the interim which could be quite a while - you're going to lose people who want to FC and members who want to fleet up because it's more hassle than fun.
4. How 'bout you get Fozzie sov implemented in it's entirety - including the time zone scaling - before you start messing with other mechanics? I'm sure you have different teams working on different things and think it's a separate issue from your point of view. But from a member point of view it screams "we haven't implemented what we said we were going to implement with Fozzie Sov but here's a new change for you..." Not a very good perception tbh.
By all means... tilt the field toward more small gang action. We need more small gang stuff. Keep working to break up the power blocs if you think that's a healthy change. But use game mechanics that are actually fun rather than beat FCs in the head with a stick. And I also don't think attempting to completely eliminate large fleet battles is very wise. I mean... you did get a spike in subscriptions after B-R right? |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16138
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:37:54 -
[632] - Quote
afkalt wrote:baltec1 wrote:Wolf Crownn wrote:...
In conclusion, it's more of a bad idea than it is good. Only for people why rely upon the FC to do everything for their fleet. You're better than that Baltec - I cannot control the warp speeds in a mixed comp without a fleet warp. That's a pretty big deal and no amount of command and control delegation can fix that. Not everyone has the bodies to put a pre-places ship at EVERY warp, and even if they did, it's a ****** crutch to an unnecessary problem. It's a mechanic which was pretty essential to keep fleets as one that's taken a huge collateral swipe.
It returns us to what it used to be like and its how our corp has always done things. We are very excited by this change and feel that even more nerfs should happen to the fleet system.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Ralen Zateki
Delusions of Adequacy Get Off My Lawn
181
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:39:33 -
[633] - Quote
Double post. |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
300
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:40:00 -
[634] - 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. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1368
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:41:28 -
[635] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:afkalt wrote:baltec1 wrote:Wolf Crownn wrote:...
In conclusion, it's more of a bad idea than it is good. Only for people why rely upon the FC to do everything for their fleet. You're better than that Baltec - I cannot control the warp speeds in a mixed comp without a fleet warp. That's a pretty big deal and no amount of command and control delegation can fix that. Not everyone has the bodies to put a pre-places ship at EVERY warp, and even if they did, it's a ****** crutch to an unnecessary problem. It's a mechanic which was pretty essential to keep fleets as one that's taken a huge collateral swipe. It returns us to what it used to be like and its how our corp has always done things. We are very excited by this change and feel that even more nerfs should happen to the fleet system.
Yes but back in the dayGäó ship warp differences were essentially negligible. This is no longer the case.
Moving mixed compositions becomes a chore. To what gain? Why the heck should I need to put a preliminary ship out somewhere JUST to make sure the mixed fleet doesn't land minutes apart, or have stragglers waiting on grid to initiate a late warp?
It's broken. |
Ralen Zateki
Delusions of Adequacy Get Off My Lawn
181
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:44:28 -
[636] - Quote
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. 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.
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 and 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. |
Inggroth
Aurora Ominae. The Gorgon Empire
45
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:47:55 -
[637] - 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. Putting you first on my ballot wasnt wrong I'm a bit biased because i dont care about wormholes other than for travel, but this change seems to have way more upsides than downsides in my opinion.
Now CCP, do something about offgrid boosting and i'm one happy customer |
l0rd carlos
TURN LEFT The Camel Empire
1230
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:50:29 -
[638] - Quote
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. 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.
.
I wanted to post that here :P I like it.
- It will keep the core of what ccp wants (more grunt interaction)
- It's more streamlined, unlike the CCP version with a lot of exceptions. You can fleetwarp anywhere you can also solo warp. It just takes more time.
- CCPs idea is a bit more complex without any more depth. Even more so if you add more exception later on like WH signatures etc.
- People who think for themself will benefit greatly!
CCP please. This is more simple, better for what you want to archive and looks visually cool.
German blog about smallscale lowsec pvp: http://friendsofharassment.wordpress.com
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:51:25 -
[639] - Quote
afkalt wrote:
Yes but back in the dayGäó ship warp differences were essentially negligible. This is no longer the case.
Moving mixed compositions becomes a chore. To what gain? Why the heck should I need to put a preliminary ship out somewhere JUST to make sure the mixed fleet doesn't land minutes apart, or have stragglers waiting on grid to initiate a late warp?
It's broken.
You can still warp the fleet to a player.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
94
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:52:11 -
[640] - Quote
Onslaughtor wrote:So I haven't really been able to play recently. :( so I cant really test this. But can you warp to missions at range without useing a fleetwarp? I am recalling you can't.
you can. you just have to start warping. cancel warp then warp to fleet member. |
|
Leeluvv
Maas Industries
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:52:45 -
[641] - Quote
Welcome to Bookmarks Online, the new game where you make a spy that deletes Corp bookmarks, so the Fleet he isn't even in can no longer warp to its destination.
What problem is this change trying to fix, as it strikes me that this is someone's personal vendetta and not a strategic decision for the future of the game, as well as being the stupidest thing I've seen from CCP in along time? The consequences haven't been thought through, which implies it is a knee-jerk reaction and not the results of planning and debate. |
Capqu
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
1125
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:57:50 -
[642] - Quote
bombers aren't really that affected tbh, except the no brained warp fleet from 4 perches @ 42km style of bombing
we already used wrecks/alts for 90% of our squad warps
this wrecks small entities moving titans/supers tho
because that was super easy before right
as for fleet fights its not going to change anything just make the fc have another alt
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Capqu
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
1125
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 11:58:36 -
[643] - Quote
Capqu wrote:bombers aren't really that affected tbh, except the no brained warp fleet from 4 perches @ 42km style of bombing
we already used wrecks/alts for 90% of our squad warps
this wrecks small entities moving titans/supers tho
because that was super easy before right
as for fleet fights its not going to change anything just make the fc have another alt
oh and rip warping fleets to the sun @ 0 for fun
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Don Pera Saissore
45
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:01:53 -
[644] - Quote
Junior FC for Spectre fleet here. NPSI fleets have a lot of newbros participating and they have to rely on the fc to keep them safe in some situations. Lets say im engaging a fleet and something else lands on the grid that i cant fight i have to quickly extract and get my fleet members to relative safety. After this update i will have to tell them to keep bouncing celestials until i land on my safespot and then order them o regroup on me. Newbros will get picked off on the sun. Jayne plz reconsider this you know how hard it is to manage a fleet full of newbros. |
Moac Tor
Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation
89
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:03:19 -
[645] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Long Muppet wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote: To put this into context drone assign was largely removed as we know it. CCP said that they think it is bad when other people play the game for you.
This is a great point Manny! Maybe, just like with drone assign we should allow squad commanders to fleet warp their 10 people. This ensures you are still taking a nerfbat to the ridiculously huge nullsec fleets while not simultaneously killing small gangs. I get that having a scout in a large fleet isn't a big deal as they generally have many of them, but requiring a small gang to now dedicate one of their pilots as scout is unnecessary and ruins game play. Finding a middle ground (just as we did we drone assign) is the best option. Good suggestion and this is the exact reason CCP asks for feedback in these threads This option is something I was thinking of myself. It would break down a large fleet into small ten man gangs if they want to maneuver around more precisely to tactical bookmarks and probe results.
It would have the desired effect of making large fleets more difficult for one person to control, but at the same time leaving small gangs and fleets who are organised with their squad commanders unaffected. |
l0rd carlos
TURN LEFT The Camel Empire
1231
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:07:01 -
[646] - Quote
Don Pera Saissore wrote:Junior FC for Spectre fleet here. NPSI fleets have a lot of newbros participating and they have to rely on the fc to keep them safe in some situations. Lets say im engaging a fleet and something else lands on the grid that i cant fight i have to quickly extract and get my fleet members to relative safety. After this update i will have to tell them to keep bouncing celestials until i land on my safespot and then order them o regroup on me. Newbros will get picked off on the sun. Jayne plz reconsider this you know how hard it is to manage a fleet full of newbros.
Or you could fleet warp them to celestials until a not new bro is on a save spot.
German blog about smallscale lowsec pvp: http://friendsofharassment.wordpress.com
|
Moac Tor
Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation
90
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:07:03 -
[647] - Quote
l0rd carlos 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. 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.
. I wanted to post that here :P I like it.
- It will keep the core of what ccp wants (more grunt interaction)
- It's more streamlined, unlike the CCP version with a lot of exceptions. You can fleetwarp anywhere you can also solo warp. It just takes more time.
- CCPs idea is a bit more complex without any more depth. Even more so if you add more exception later on like WH signatures etc.
- People who think for themself will benefit greatly!
CCP please. This is more simple, better for what you want to archive and looks visually cool. Another good suggestion. ^ |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1368
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:10:18 -
[648] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:afkalt wrote:
Yes but back in the dayGäó ship warp differences were essentially negligible. This is no longer the case.
Moving mixed compositions becomes a chore. To what gain? Why the heck should I need to put a preliminary ship out somewhere JUST to make sure the mixed fleet doesn't land minutes apart, or have stragglers waiting on grid to initiate a late warp?
It's broken.
You can still warp the fleet to a player.
I know, that was why I said I now HAVE to use a preliminary player to do the massively tactical manoeuvre of warping to a corp BM and waiting.
What on earth is the point in that? It's an useless pain in the ass.
It adds NOTHING but pointless delays and the need for another alt. |
Bobmon
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:11:06 -
[649] - Quote
I like it! screw fleet warping, Its boring not to control your own ship and it's not going to have a massive effect on things, like people are scared about.
I mean for bomber fleets, Ok you just have an cloaky alt at the spot you wanted to warp too and if its a specifc location then you just tell your guys to bookmark the spot.
For WH stuff or sites, you simply scan down the sites with an alt, Like you would currently, then if its dangerous, you just put that alt in its pod, warp the site (sleepers etc. dont aggro the pod anyway) and you just warp yourself to that char.
All and all it brings back a little skill in terms of how/when to engage and I like it!
CCP Larrikin (and the team), you are a true bro of bro's, The hero that we deserve
GÖ¢GÖ¢Bobmon for CSM10
@BobmonEve
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:14:39 -
[650] - Quote
afkalt wrote:baltec1 wrote:afkalt wrote:
Yes but back in the dayGäó ship warp differences were essentially negligible. This is no longer the case.
Moving mixed compositions becomes a chore. To what gain? Why the heck should I need to put a preliminary ship out somewhere JUST to make sure the mixed fleet doesn't land minutes apart, or have stragglers waiting on grid to initiate a late warp?
It's broken.
You can still warp the fleet to a player. I know, that was why I said I now HAVE to use a preliminary player to do the massively tactical manoeuvre of warping to a corp BM and waiting. What on earth is the point in that? It's an useless pain in the ass. It adds NOTHING but pointless delays and the need for another alt.
It adds gameplay to that preliminary player.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
171
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:17:02 -
[651] - Quote
Sasha Sen wrote:Zappity wrote:Seems that this is actually reducing the specialised role of a prober rather than increasing it. I currently use a dedicated prober in a covops (you know, a probing ship) and they warp my cruiser onto targets. If the prober has to tackle then the fit will have to be enormously gimped. And why? That's the whole point of them - to probe, not to tackle. I am really confused, trying really hard to see why this is bad for you. You have a prober - check You got lock on a sig - check You warp your cov ops to the sig - check You warp with your combat ship to your scanner - check What am I missing? What are you missing? This : You see targets warping to safety on the covert ops alt because they saw your probes. You catch nothing and get no content.
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1368
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:17:27 -
[652] - Quote
That's clutching at straws and you know it. |
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
158
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:19:17 -
[653] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:It adds gameplay to that preliminary player. Uhh. Yeeah. Right. The same way offgrind links add gameplay to the links pilot. Been there, done that. |
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
171
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:19:40 -
[654] - Quote
Querns wrote: You need to be a large wormhole group to afford interceptors?
Interceptors are useless since the targets already warped away after seeing your probes.
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:20:32 -
[655] - Quote
afkalt wrote:That's clutching at straws and you know it.
Our frigate pilots just got an important fleet role handed to them.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Desert Ice78
Gryphons of the Western Wind
486
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:21:06 -
[656] - Quote
All except when it's just me and my alt - I will seriously miss having the fleet warp function.
Bad change - won't provide any meaningful content or interaction, just more problems.
BadAssMcKill wrote:Have you considered making the game more fun for a change
I am a pod pilot:
http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/DesertIce/POD.jpg
CCP Zulu: Came expecting a discussion about computer monitors, left confused.
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1066
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:21:22 -
[657] - Quote
Torgeir Hekard wrote:baltec1 wrote:It adds gameplay to that preliminary player. Uhh. Yeeah. Right. The same way offgrind links add gameplay to the links pilot. Been there, done that.
Baltec, I never knew you to be in favor of adding terrible game play. Acting as a bookmark is not good game play.
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
So, why do I continue to provide feedback on these forums?
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5813975#post5813975
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:22:37 -
[658] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:Querns wrote: You need to be a large wormhole group to afford interceptors?
Interceptors are useless since the targets already warped away after seeing your probes.
We already use probes to get warp in on these fleets, there is zero difference between what we have now and the future in terms of fleets running when they see probes
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2493
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:23:41 -
[659] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Rowells wrote:Tara Read wrote:Thanks for the compliment even if you meant it as an off the cuff insult. But see here's the disconnect. The reality is people fill many facets and roles in Alliances. In smaller Alliances these roles pass down to a few select people. Placing more burden on these people creates burn out and headaches that in turn create problems. The problem may then lie in the 'few select people' issue. No gameplay mechanic forces that. And certainly an FC telling his interceptor to move for a warp in isnt adding any more stress than having to run it himself. In a small alliance and even a corp, sometimes its best to trust some basic tasks to others.Heck, they could do that now and would be the better for it in terms of pressure. However, I see fairly little what this has to do with alliance leadership and roles. Unless your few FCs double double as officers and directors. You still fail to give any of us here a positive answer why these changes are GOOD. Picking apart my posts is fine, but trying to tear at my argument from one angle isn't going to get you anywhere. There's also the issue of grid placement, targets getting away, fleet separation due to warp speed variations, survivability of the on grid warp in, landing on different grids due to mechanic issues, fleet movement during travel, squad warping at missions at range due to beacon issues, probing and tackle becoming nigh impossible for hunting low sec supers, designated "tackle" and possible fleet warp in DC'ing in Tidi leading to a fleet spread and out of place etc etc. I can go on and keep giving reasons and possible issues with just one facet of these changes. But please go on about how it's clearly my misunderstanding or "lack of game skills" or my "alliances leadership" as your means for justification as to why your argument is valid. I keep picking be ause you dont seem to understand that a lot of the negatives you bring up are almost completely separate issues.
I already gave you the reason its good. More people with more meaningful things to do. And you keep trying to bring up reasons why giving players meaningful tasks and importance is bad for them. When its entirely unrelated problems. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:24:19 -
[660] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Torgeir Hekard wrote:baltec1 wrote:It adds gameplay to that preliminary player. Uhh. Yeeah. Right. The same way offgrind links add gameplay to the links pilot. Been there, done that. Baltec, I never knew you to be in favor of adding terrible game play. Acting as a bookmark is not good game play.
Terrible gameplay is having one person flying 250 semi afk ships. A scout frigate is fun to fly.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
|
CCP Larrikin
C C P C C P Alliance
103
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:25:34 -
[661] - Quote
Hi Internet Space Friends,
Ok, I've caught up on this thread! So many words...Thank you for your passionate responses. We have a bunch of points to work though, expect a post soon addressing them! |
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2493
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:25:41 -
[662] - Quote
Don Pera Saissore wrote:Junior FC for Spectre fleet here. NPSI fleets have a lot of newbros participating and they have to rely on the fc to keep them safe in some situations. Lets say im engaging a fleet and something else lands on the grid that i cant fight i have to quickly extract and get my fleet members to relative safety. After this update i will have to tell them to keep bouncing celestials until i land on my safespot and then order them o regroup on me. Newbros will get picked off on the sun. Jayne plz reconsider this you know how hard it is to manage a fleet full of newbros. you can fleet warp to celestials still. no changes there. |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
301
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:28:28 -
[663] - 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.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1369
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:28:49 -
[664] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:afkalt wrote:That's clutching at straws and you know it. Our frigate pilots just got an important fleet role handed to them.
You're mistaking important for "fun" or "value add". Did you have many frigate pilots complaining that they had nothing to do? Ever had an FC decline fast tackle? Didnt think so.
It's a chore. It is also a NEEDLESS chore and unless they can fit a cloak, they can go home because they're dead before anyone else arrives.
Fabulous gameplay - just so I can warp a fleet at the same speed?
You're NOT scouting, that's the point. You're LITERALLY a beacon to not split the unit. Fun it aint.
Remember this isn't tactical warp ins to an enemy fleet where you've got into position (good luck catching a moving fleet in a cloaky) this is JUST to get the fleet to move as a unit to corp bookmarks. |
BadAssMcKill
ElitistOps
1050
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:31:20 -
[665] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Hi Internet Space Friends,
Ok, I've caught up on this thread! So many words...Thank you for your passionate responses. We have a bunch of points to work though, expect a post soon addressing them!
By address do you mean handwave away and pretend nothing happened. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:33:41 -
[666] - Quote
afkalt wrote: You're NOT scouting, that's the point. You're LITERALLY a beacon to no split the unit. Fun it aint.
Thats scouting. Providing warps on the enemy, getting snipe points, burning a safe all of it is scouting and yes it is fun. Every fleet used to have dedicated scouts that did these things.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
171
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:33:45 -
[667] - Quote
Sasha Sen wrote:Zappity wrote:Sasha Sen wrote:Zappity wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:When BALEX as a corp roams (10-15 ppl) max we always have min 5 alts in the fleet, be it links, or probers/scouts. We move around lowsec trough WH a lot. When we move around we always use scout warp ins, so where is the problem?
Name one situation where scouts can't handle it. Tackling a nullbear before they leave their site. Fleet warps work to anoms. Fine. Tackling a nullbear before they leave their signature. warp gates..... do you eve? No warpgates in wormholes , targets will be long gone before any fleet and/or tackle lands on a siterunner. Or the cloaky scan alt near it. Because they will see the probes... . Bascily you are diminishing the possibility of conflict by a factor of 10-100.
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
Makari Aeron
The Shadow's Of Eve TSOE Consortium
235
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:35:13 -
[668] - Quote
So, this really doesn't impact squad or fleet warp that much. It just means you need a player or character at a location to warp to them. Honestly, it' just makes things a bit more complex, but doable. Still, I'm against the idea of blocking squadwarp like that. But...it could be worse.
CCP RedDawn: Ugly people are just playing life on HARD mode. Personally, I'm playing on an INFERNO difficulty.
CCP Goliath: I often believe that the best way to get something done is to shout at the person trying to help you. http://goo.gl/PKGDP
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
171
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:36:38 -
[669] - Quote
Sasha Sen wrote:Zappity wrote:Sasha Sen wrote:Zappity wrote:Seems that this is actually reducing the specialised role of a prober rather than increasing it. I currently use a dedicated prober in a covops (you know, a probing ship) and they warp my cruiser onto targets. If the prober has to tackle then the fit will have to be enormously gimped. And why? That's the whole point of them - to probe, not to tackle. I am really confused, trying really hard to see why this is bad for you. You have a prober - check You got lock on a sig - check You warp your cov ops to the sig - check You warp with your combat ship to your scanner - check What am I missing? It will take an extra 20 seconds when the timing is already extremely tight right now. Prescan the site. Adapt. The only way you catch anyone is if they stay right at the beacon after they warp in, assuming they are in the first pocket. You really want to squeeze the poor fresh eve players that much? cant give them a 20 second headstart? You can not pre-scan the site in wh-space, it is random remember?
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1369
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:37:17 -
[670] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:afkalt wrote: You're NOT scouting, that's the point. You're LITERALLY a beacon to no split the unit. Fun it aint.
Thats scouting. Providing warps on the enemy, getting snipe points, burning a safe all of it is scouting and yes it is fun. Every fleet used to have dedicated scouts that did these things.
Presumably before corp bookmarks were a thing.
Again you're missing the point. It's NOT a combat thing, it's not a "burn me a rolling safe" thing.
It's a "I can't keep a fleet in one unit to move to a corp bookmark". No, now I now need to replace that bookmark with a Red Shirt. |
|
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
159
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:37:21 -
[671] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Terrible gameplay is having one person flying 250 semi afk ships. A scout frigate is fun to fly. It's not a scout. It's a mobile bookmark. Scout is someone who gathers and relays intel to an FC. A mobile bookmark is someone browsing 4chan /e/ and alt-tabbing into the game every 15 seconds or so to make sure he's still burning into the void in the right direction. |
Datu Agimat
Crystal Millennium
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:38:10 -
[672] - Quote
Got lazy of reading after 16 pages so if this suggestion ha already been mentioned, apologies.
What about having a new "item" as well to help support fleet management?
Cloaked Beacon - Provides a warpable overview point that is shareable to Corp/Alliances/Fleets (i.e. no 10-minute delay). - Can only be shared when within 2000m (i.e. you can only change the sharing permissions when within 2000m) - 30-sec. timer before cloak engages - Lasts for a certain number of days. - Cannot be D-scanned? - Can, however, be probed down by combat probes. - Can only be deployed in WH (and null?) space. - Can be deployed by cloaked ships (i.e. deployed from Cargo Hold). - Does not reinforce (i.e. can be easily destroyed) - Sends message to owner when destroyed/attacked. - Can be built from BPCs (will need new BPCs in game some how).
The above is just a bare-bones idea but might help mitigate some of the pains that people have raised concerns about. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:38:38 -
[673] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote: No warpgates in wormholes , targets will be long gone before any fleet and/or tackle lands on a siterunner. Or the cloaky scan alt near it. Because they will see the probes... . Bascily you are diminishing the possibility of conflict by a factor of 10-100.
Warp to the site runner, no probes needed.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Fayde Sinulf
Lonestar Distribution Inc. Waterboard Comedy Tour
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:39:18 -
[674] - Quote
In real life moving any group of people form Point A to Point B relies on not only the person in charge giving instructions but the individuals actually doing what they are told. Human nature generally means someone will do something stupid and go off in wrong direction because they were not paying attention. Following this logically the idea of one FC being able to move an entire fleet about with a few clicks doesn't fit in with this model but some common sense ways round have been mentioned in the posts so far and here is my tuppence worth.
1) Give FC ability to broadcast a "warp to" signal but each member of fleet must actively carry out action to warp. This ensures that pilots must keep paying attention and anyone not exactly on the ball gets left out. This means focused groups will have an advantage over larger groups of semi AFK pilots and act as good training for new pilots.
2) Fleet warp reduced to Squad Warp. Effectively this means an FC can issue the command of warping to a given location and a squad leader can move their own squad accordingly. This moves leadership responsibilities down the chain of fleet command and means they have to paying attention and capable of getting their sub-unit on target to do a job. This also leads to possibility of fleets using squads of dedicated tacklers (most likely interceptors) while the rest of the fleet catches up.
3) Is there an option for Fleet bookmarks? Concept is that while in fleet information is shared between pilots but on leaving fleet you lose access.
4) Player deployed warp beacons. More use for WH's and system defenders I imagine but these can be deployed and can be be seen by all in system. |
Ralen Zateki
Delusions of Adequacy Get Off My Lawn
185
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:39:51 -
[675] - Quote
Ab'del Abu wrote: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.
Right. So let's use resources to design a mechanic that's already inherent to the process of moving a fleet?
Like I originally posted. In concept I kinda like the intent. But in practice there's a myriad of consequences that will not be fun.
And I'd echo the Spectre dude's concern. That's where I cut my teeth PVP ing and I didn't know **** from shining then. Can guarantee that getting singled out for being a newbro already sucks and is about to get worse.
:golf clap:
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:39:53 -
[676] - Quote
Torgeir Hekard wrote:baltec1 wrote:Terrible gameplay is having one person flying 250 semi afk ships. A scout frigate is fun to fly. It's not a scout. It's a mobile bookmark. Scout is someone who gathers and relays intel to an FC. A mobile bookmark is someone browsing 4chan /e/ and alt-tabbing into the game every 15 seconds or so to make sure he's still burning into the void in the right direction.
Yes, making a safe on the fly is exactly what a scout does.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
51
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:40:09 -
[677] - Quote
The amount of tears in this thread is nearing Jump Range changes, guess its a change in the right direction. |
l0rd carlos
TURN LEFT The Camel Empire
1232
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:41:29 -
[678] - Quote
afkalt wrote:baltec1 wrote:
You can still warp the fleet to a player.
I know, that was why I said I now HAVE to use a preliminary player to do the massively tactical manoeuvre of warping to a corp BM and waiting. What on earth is the point in that? It's an useless pain in the ass. It adds NOTHING but pointless delays and the need for another alt.
Warp the fleet to a celestial, while a smart dude in your fleet directly warps to a BM. After you land, you can warp the fleet to the player at the BM.
No need for alt, a couple of dudes have to think more quickly. You can be catched on a celestial.
Win Win Win.
German blog about smallscale lowsec pvp: http://friendsofharassment.wordpress.com
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:41:48 -
[679] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Presumably before corp bookmarks were a thing. Again you're missing the point. It's NOT a combat thing, it's not a "burn me a rolling safe" thing. It's a "I can't keep a fleet in one unit to move to a corp bookmark". No, now I now need to replace that bookmark with a Red Shirt.
And how is that bad?
More content for more players in a fleet and a very important role for low SP players.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1369
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:41:59 -
[680] - Quote
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:The amount of tears in this thread is nearing Jump Range changes, guess its a change in the right direction.
They are, however, significantly more unified. |
|
Sbrodor
Oscura Simmetria Yulai Federation
106
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:43:34 -
[681] - Quote
rip bombers bar.
you finally archived your goal. someone in CCP need a promotion.
someone have a fit for a drake?
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
171
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:43:47 -
[682] - Quote
Bobmon wrote:
For WH stuff or sites, you simply scan down the sites with an alt, Like you would currently, then if its dangerous, you just put that alt in its pod, warp the site (sleepers etc. dont aggro the pod anyway) and you just warp yourself to that char.
What utter nonesens the targets will be long gone because they saw your probes. The only way you are getting a kill that way is if they are afk mining in wh-space . There are no public places inwh-space where stuff happens.
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2174
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:44:48 -
[683] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:unimatrix0030 wrote: No warpgates in wormholes , targets will be long gone before any fleet and/or tackle lands on a siterunner. Or the cloaky scan alt near it. Because they will see the probes... . Bascily you are diminishing the possibility of conflict by a factor of 10-100.
Warp to the site runner, no probes needed. You must be trolling. I refuse to believe you are so ignorant.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1373
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:45:41 -
[684] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:afkalt wrote:Presumably before corp bookmarks were a thing. Again you're missing the point. It's NOT a combat thing, it's not a "burn me a rolling safe" thing. It's a "I can't keep a fleet in one unit to move to a corp bookmark". No, now I now need to replace that bookmark with a Red Shirt. And how is that bad? More content for more players in a fleet and a very important role for low SP players.
It delays fleet movement. Makes things take longer.
Can you tell me what problem it solves? Was coordinated fleet movement between corp BMs a problem? Did you have newbros crying about no role? Did WH residents have too much fun using corp bookmarks to move around?
No, this is 100% collateral damage because if it WAS a thing, you simply remove the "lowest speed for a fleet warp" function. They didnt. It's collateral.
For no good reason.
It reminds me of the hillbilly cutting a hedge with a chainsaw on a rope. |
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
159
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:45:42 -
[685] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Yes, making a safe on the fly is exactly what a scout does. Nope. It's something a scout may begrudgingly have to do because there's nobody else to do that, but tries to avoid doing as much as possible. It's like saying that flying droneboats is fun, and then state that scoopdeploying is exactly what a droneboat pilot does. |
Wadiest Yong
Porcus Volans Sev3rance
8
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:46:05 -
[686] - Quote
Typical example of the heavy-handed axing that we still cannot understand, affecting every type of gameplay in New Eden. Seriously, from a designing perspective this is wrong on too many aspects. This nerf affects the basis of playing with other people in pve and pvp by making it a hassle.
As you sometimes introduce new modules, why not design a new weapon, missile or deployable to help guard against bombs - as that is what some very vocal and persistent forum and CSM members are so afraid of (rightly or wrongly). Perhaps it is in their interest to get a quick fix that does not require thought when putting together fleets with anti-bomber support. Bomber wings are, after all, the only means a smaller entity can field to keep the super-powers in check when they field battleship blobs. That is before they bring the supers (they always do when they are losing, you know) and the real ship design flaws show... And any entity can field bombers, so the best tacticians should win. Small entities always reckon with the presence of supers, and it's hard to see why large entities cannot reckon with the presence of bombers IF you design a balanced counter (not a superbomb doomsdaying every normal bombs within 5 AU...).
I agree that bookmark jumping with fleets is not good gameplay. However, unless you kill the "warp to member" command (and kill fleets entirely) the proposed change is just a very bad annoyance. Earlier you designed a deployable that gives immunity against dscanning. It is rarely used because of reasons. Why not make another module that fires these as probes, also giving (a level of?) immunity to combat probing, similar to what an interdictor does for warping. Almost everyone happy, almost noone affected very badly. Win.
But you have tougher nuts to crack before you roll out the next step of the sov changes, yes, supers and titans. A single (ewar immune) super with an entosis link does real wonders to a system, especially against smaller entities. It does wonders to subscribers' motivation too. By the time you roll out a fix for supers etc, the sov landscape will be entirely dominated by the super-powers, leaving only patches open for pvp cattle farming at their leisure, and it will be too late.
2015 should not go into the history book as the year of disillusion, there's still some time to turn it around. But what's next, delete local in nullsec and can't see - can probe - but can't warp ? Please stop catering to the few. |
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
172
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:46:19 -
[687] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:unimatrix0030 wrote:Querns wrote: You need to be a large wormhole group to afford interceptors?
Interceptors are useless since the targets already warped away after seeing your probes. We already use probes to get warp in on these fleets, there is zero difference between what we have now and the future in terms of fleets running when they see probes Yeah but that is only valid in k-space, in w-space probes in space mean targets gone within 1 minute.
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:46:41 -
[688] - Quote
Zappity wrote: You must be trolling. I refuse to believe you are so ignorant.
You can warp the fleet to players.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
95
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:47:20 -
[689] - Quote
Bill Lane wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:Hi Gentle Space Foke,
Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members.
So you want to take away responsibilities of the FLEET COMMANDER to give more to members.....FLEET COMMANDER to me implies he leads the fleet. FFS WTF are you doing CCP? All these stupid changes you have been making are really pissing people off. Where are the damn fixes we've been asking about for years? Corp management, thousand cuts, all that? Last time you stopped listening to your customers, you had to issue a public apology to keep the game alive. Don't think you can just do that every couple years, go off on a tangent for a year, apologize, slowly stop listening, another tangent a year later, apologize, etc. Stupid, absolutely stupid. Back on the issue at hand, so the fleet commander can't warp the fleet he commands to their POS? Are you kidding me? WAKE UP CCP! You guys are making some really stupid decisions lately.
Leading != doing everything himself. He delegates tasks to specialized people and they do the job. some people are just F1 pushers, others have more responsibilities. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:48:24 -
[690] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote: Yeah but that is only valid in k-space, in w-space probes in space mean targets gone within 1 minute.
Same with every other area of space. This doesn't change anything in terms of ships running when they see probes.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
Tobias Frank
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:48:31 -
[691] - Quote
It would be nice if we could have the option to manually set our warpspeed. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:50:02 -
[692] - Quote
afkalt wrote: Can you tell me what problem it solves?
It helps to remove the fact that these days one player is effectively flying 251 semi afk ships.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
172
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:50:05 -
[693] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
Warp to the site runner, no probes needed.
You do know that you can not warp to someone not in fleet? What are you sudgesting ? Making the target part of the fleet?
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
Lan Wang
Stillwater Corporation That Escalated Quickly.
759
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:50:41 -
[694] - Quote
daily fc rage incoming
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
95
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:50:56 -
[695] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:Sasha Sen wrote:Zappity wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:When BALEX as a corp roams (10-15 ppl) max we always have min 5 alts in the fleet, be it links, or probers/scouts. We move around lowsec trough WH a lot. When we move around we always use scout warp ins, so where is the problem?
Name one situation where scouts can't handle it. Tackling a nullbear before they leave their site. Fleet warps work to anoms. You cant tackle it with a prober and be a warp in for rest of the fleet? Yeah, this is the alternative. Care to suggest any fits for probing bonused ships that would survive even 20 seconds of drone DPS? You need an expanded launcher.
recons, t3 (c|d), stratios, astero, covertops properly flown.
pick your poison.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:52:01 -
[696] - Quote
Torgeir Hekard wrote:baltec1 wrote:Yes, making a safe on the fly is exactly what a scout does. Nope. It's something a scout may begrudgingly have to do because there's nobody else to do that, but tries to avoid doing as much as possible. It's like saying that flying droneboats is fun, and then state that scoopdeploying is exactly what a droneboat pilot does.
Please come roam in our space, your gangs will be so easy to catch.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
light heaven
JUST SET TIMES Fraternity.
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:52:27 -
[697] - Quote
after change, it will be problem below: 1. It's hard to kill off grid bonus, as you need scan equipment in the mid and a scan bonus ship which will make you less EHP and slot for points. If you warp another ship to tackle, it will cost at least double warp time. If it is 100AB T3 bonus, it will be a long distance. And time to tackle a off grid bonus T3 is always short. It will be almost impossible to kill off grid bonus T3s. 2. Anit-scan kite ship will be overpower, as off grid bonus T3s they are hard to scan. So you need a suitable fitting ship which make you easy to kill after you warp. And the rest members need double warp time to scan point. In that time enemy ship may far away from you and keep kiting you again. 3. Make it hard to catch supers, as you have to choose interdictor which have poor scan or waste warp time and risks to scan by one ship and warp interdictor or heavy interdictor. And for other PVE ship it is the same. After change it will make less loss and safer pve. 4. Large alliance will easily have more people to make ping point. It means this change will less make less effect to large alliance, especially for these who have a lot of experience pilot. But it will be a nightmare for small fleet.
So I suggest is either remove fleet warp or keep fleet warp to bookmark and scan probe results ability for squad command.
Remove fleet warp would make everyone important for feet to win or loss battle as you always need to do something. And make opportunities for enemy to catch someone behind the fleet)
keep fleet warp to bookmark and scan probe results ability for squad command will make Small fleet more flexible and more tactics. And it is best way to kill off grid bonus T3. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:53:52 -
[698] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:baltec1 wrote:
Warp to the site runner, no probes needed.
You do know that you can not warp to someone not in fleet? What are you sudgesting ? Making the target part of the fleet?
So run sites in defensive fleets. If you are trying to catch them then there is no difference at all in terms of people running the second they see probes.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1373
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:54:04 -
[699] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:afkalt wrote: Can you tell me what problem it solves?
It helps to remove the fact that these days one player is effectively flying 251 semi afk ships.
Can you find me a way to manually coordinate fleet warp speeds today without a fleet warp?
Didn't think so. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:55:20 -
[700] - Quote
Airi Cho wrote:Zappity wrote:
You cant tackle it with a prober and be a warp in for rest of the fleet?
Yeah, this is the alternative. Care to suggest any fits for probing bonused ships that would survive even 20 seconds of drone DPS? You need an expanded launcher.
recons, t3 (c|d), stratios, astero, covertops properly flown.
pick your poison. [/quote]
Interceptors work too.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
Rek Seven
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
1977
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:56:15 -
[701] - Quote
I don't like this change because it will just cause more unnecessary chatter on comms but i'm willing to see how it shapes out (what choice do we have really). I would prefer if fleet commanders were able to broadcast a warp to command for anything he can warp to. This takes away the automacy of fleet movement but cuts down on the chatter.
TBH I wish CCP didn't have such a backwards way of developing eve. If you want to reduce the effectiveness of bomber, introduce a new module that defends against them like a battleship only mod that shoots them down. BOOM, you have just fixed bombers and made it so battleships can be fielded again... Instead they introduce change after change that actually changes nothing. All you have to do for a successful bombing run is warp to a cloaked scout so i don't see what this changes accomplishes.
+1
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 12:56:19 -
[702] - Quote
afkalt wrote:baltec1 wrote:afkalt wrote: Can you tell me what problem it solves?
It helps to remove the fact that these days one player is effectively flying 251 semi afk ships. Can you find me a way to manually coordinate fleet warp speeds today without a fleet warp? Didn't think so.
Warping the fleet to a player warps you at the slowest ships speed still.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2174
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:00:31 -
[703] - Quote
Airi Cho wrote:Zappity wrote:Yeah, this is the alternative. Care to suggest any fits for probing bonused ships that would survive even 20 seconds of drone DPS? You need an expanded launcher. recons, t3 (c|d), stratios, astero, covertops properly flown. pick your poison. Astero can't fit expanded, covops will die immediately to drones, recons and Stratios are slow warp speed cruisers. So T3 bonused for warp speed. Seriously - replace covops with T3 is the suggestion. Not convinced for small gang.
I understand the problem of lack of involvement for large fleet warfare. But this is not a problem for small fleets. Fix the problem with the large fleets and leave the small ones alone.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
95
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:00:36 -
[704] - Quote
Don Pera Saissore wrote:Junior FC for Spectre fleet here. NPSI fleets have a lot of newbros participating and they have to rely on the fc to keep them safe in some situations. Lets say im engaging a fleet and something else lands on the grid that i cant fight i have to quickly extract and get my fleet members to relative safety. After this update i will have to tell them to keep bouncing celestials until i land on my safespot and then order them o regroup on me. Newbros will get picked off on the sun. Jayne plz reconsider this you know how hard it is to manage a fleet full of newbros.
So extract them to a celestial?
Using the brain seems to be hard. |
fox targaryen
Nordwaffe
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:01:09 -
[705] - Quote
much like in real life, changes meant to "make people more responsible" don't really work |
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2174
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:01:48 -
[706] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Airi Cho wrote:Zappity wrote:
You cant tackle it with a prober and be a warp in for rest of the fleet?
Yeah, this is the alternative. Care to suggest any fits for probing bonused ships that would survive even 20 seconds of drone DPS? You need an expanded launcher. recons, t3 (c|d), stratios, astero, covertops properly flown. pick your poison.
Interceptors work too.[/quote] Expanded launcher?
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Ralen Zateki
Delusions of Adequacy Get Off My Lawn
185
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:03:30 -
[707] - Quote
This may be a surprise, but there actually are players who like to fleet up, be led around, and mash F1.
Those that prefer to take initiative are called dictor pilots, scouts, and other special snowflakes like Lachesis, huginns, boosters, heavy tackle...
Wanna make a change that really rewards individuals? Allow Logi to get on Kim's of those they save.
Ever tried to get people to step up and take initiative in larger fleets? It's usually only a handful... |
Jeff Kione
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
12
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:03:41 -
[708] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:So the guy in the wormhole warps to the bookmark and WWWWWW's up. Then everyone gets fleet warped OMG THE TRAVESTY THAT THOSE EXTRA FEW SECONDS WILL CREATE. THINK OF ALL THE BELLY LENT YOU COULD HAVE PICKED IN THOSE FEW PRECIOUS SECONDS. DAMN YOU CCP DAMN YOU!!!!!!!111ON1E
As long as it applies equally to k-space, so no fleet warps to gates. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:04:17 -
[709] - Quote
Zappity wrote: Expanded launcher?
Does fit.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
172
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:05:03 -
[710] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:unimatrix0030 wrote:baltec1 wrote:
Warp to the site runner, no probes needed.
You do know that you can not warp to someone not in fleet? What are you sudgesting ? Making the target part of the fleet? So run sites in defensive fleets. If you are trying to catch them then there is no difference at all in terms of people running the second they see probes. So basicly you hate hunting for targets and want it completely eliminated? The thrill of the hunt is what makes w-space so much fun, this change just eliminates that and makes it a pve paradise. Also you seem to hate pvp'ers and want only pve fleets then? Baiting only works for the first 10 engagements then you will get a name and no more baiting. Now we can slingshot a sabre with warp rigs(absolutly needed) and still get the targets only 1/10 of the time. After this change catching target will be impossible.
It fixes nothing in w-space it only decreases content, makes things more safe and tedious. For w-space this a a step back to before there were corp bookmarks.
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
|
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
95
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:05:57 -
[711] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Airi Cho wrote:Zappity wrote:Yeah, this is the alternative. Care to suggest any fits for probing bonused ships that would survive even 20 seconds of drone DPS? You need an expanded launcher. recons, t3 (c|d), stratios, astero, covertops properly flown. pick your poison. Astero can't fit expanded, covops will die immediately to drones, recons and Stratios are slow warp speed cruisers. So T3 bonused for warp speed. Seriously - replace covops with T3 is the suggestion. Not convinced for small gang. I understand the problem of lack of involvement for large fleet warfare. But this is not a problem for small fleets. Fix the problem with the large fleets and leave the small ones alone.
Probing out the site is enough. no need for the combat probes. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1373
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:05:58 -
[712] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:afkalt wrote:baltec1 wrote:afkalt wrote: Can you tell me what problem it solves?
It helps to remove the fact that these days one player is effectively flying 251 semi afk ships. Can you find me a way to manually coordinate fleet warp speeds today without a fleet warp? Didn't think so. Warping the fleet to a player warps you at the slowest ships speed still.
Which has nothing to do with "semi-afk" today, or tomorrow.
The change does NOTHING mechanically for the players in the main body of the fleet. They're not now forced to "manually" warp because that wouldn't help. They STILL need a fleet warp. You know "that semi-afk" thing that was you said was the problem, hasn't gone anywhere with this change.
You're smart enough to know this, I'm done debating it with the devils advocate. |
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
159
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:06:52 -
[713] - Quote
baltec1 wrote: Warping the fleet to a player warps you at the slowest ships speed still.
Which suddenly makes all those 250 semiafk dudes instantly awake and paying attention? |
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
172
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:08:25 -
[714] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Airi Cho wrote:Zappity wrote:
You cant tackle it with a prober and be a warp in for rest of the fleet?
Yeah, this is the alternative. Care to suggest any fits for probing bonused ships that would survive even 20 seconds of drone DPS? You need an expanded launcher. recons, t3 (c|d), stratios, astero, covertops properly flown. pick your poison.
Interceptors work too.[/quote] Lets see in w-space : recons and t3's will die or catch 1 or 2 dudes(max because most will have warped to safety already) instead of an entire fleet stratios, astero, covert ops will die before reinforcements arrive(if they even catch one before the targets warped to safety).
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:09:47 -
[715] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote: So basicly you hate hunting for targets and want it completely eliminated? The thrill of the hunt is what makes w-space so much fun, this change just eliminates that and makes it a pve paradise. Also you seem to hate pvp'ers and want only pve fleets then? Baiting only works for the first 10 engagements then you will get a name and no more baiting. Now we can slingshot a sabre with warp rigs(absolutly needed) and still get the targets only 1/10 of the time. After this change catching target will be impossible.
It fixes nothing in w-space it only decreases content, makes things more safe and tedious. For w-space this a a step back to before there were corp bookmarks.
Again, people running the second they see probes has nothing to do with this change.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
95
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:09:53 -
[716] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:Lets see in w-space : recons and t3's will die or catch 1 or 2 dudes(max because most will have warped to safety already) instead of an entire fleet stratios, astero, covert ops will die before reinforcements arrive(if they even catch one before the targets warped to safety).
So play your hand smart and dont blob the **** out of them right away. trickle in some DPS and logis which makes the other group think they can fend you off. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:10:42 -
[717] - Quote
Torgeir Hekard wrote:baltec1 wrote: Warping the fleet to a player warps you at the slowest ships speed still.
Which suddenly makes all those 250 semiafk dudes instantly awake and paying attention?
Clearly you have never been in any large fleet.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
172
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:11:39 -
[718] - Quote
Airi Cho wrote:
Probing out the site is enough. no need for the combat probes.
Lol, as if anyone stick around at the warpin beacon... .
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:12:15 -
[719] - Quote
afkalt wrote:
Which has nothing to do with "semi-afk" today, or tomorrow.
The change does NOTHING mechanically for the players in the main body of the fleet. They're not now forced to "manually" warp because that wouldn't help. They STILL need a fleet warp. You know "that semi-afk" thing that was you said was the problem, hasn't gone anywhere with this change.
You're smart enough to know this, I'm done debating it with the devils advocate.
I said its a start to ending the FC flying a 250 man fleet alone. More changes are on the way.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2175
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:13:16 -
[720] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:unimatrix0030 wrote: So basicly you hate hunting for targets and want it completely eliminated? The thrill of the hunt is what makes w-space so much fun, this change just eliminates that and makes it a pve paradise. Also you seem to hate pvp'ers and want only pve fleets then? Baiting only works for the first 10 engagements then you will get a name and no more baiting. Now we can slingshot a sabre with warp rigs(absolutly needed) and still get the targets only 1/10 of the time. After this change catching target will be impossible.
It fixes nothing in w-space it only decreases content, makes things more safe and tedious. For w-space this a a step back to before there were corp bookmarks.
Again, people running the second they see probes has nothing to do with this change. Yes, it does. People often don't warp fast enough and you can catch them on the align out. Please share your expanded launcher tackle interceptor fit, btw. That could be useful.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
|
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon That Escalated Quickly.
1607
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:16:03 -
[721] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Hi Gentle Space Foke, As announced on the o7 show we are making some changes to fleet warp. Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders & Squad Commanders will no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own. This includes GÇô
- Probe Results
- Bookmarks
- Any private deadspace item (missions, etc.)
Commanders will still be able to warp their fleet to other fleet members, and all other GÇÿpublicGÇÖ objects.The goal of these changes is to encourage more individual fleet member participation and reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets (e.g bombers). Q&AsQ: When is this being implemented? A: Aegis (July) Q: What if every member of the fleet has the bookmark? A: Nope, sorry, no go. Q: Can I still fleet warp to planets/moons/stations/cynos/anoms? A: Yes! Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members. Q: CCP, will there be more fleet warp changes in the future? A: Probably, yes. Dev Note: Its late in Reykjavik so you may not see a Dev response until tomorrow. However we want to give plenty of time for feedback and we will be watching this thread closely.
Q: Have you guys thought about wormhole people? A: Oh snap...**** wormhole people, right?
Q: Most pos-warps of fleets go over bookmarks (Dread optimals etc...) - have you thought about that? A: Sure we just want to be a pain in your backs mate :-D
Q: Gatebookmarks are often used in Null-sec to avoid catch bubbles - regardless if they are friendly for defense purpose or enemy catch bubbles. Moving capitals through null sec via gates relies on a good bookmark management and fleet warps - do you want to break the wheel? A: Yes, we want to break the wheel - Fozzie even dresses like Daenerys sometimes.
so many more...
TunDraGon is recruiting!
"Also, your boobs [:o] " -á
CCP Eterne, 2012
"When in doubt...make a di++k joke."-áRobin Williams - RIP
|
Soldarius
Naliao Inc. Test Alliance Please Ignore
1307
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:17:36 -
[722] - Quote
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.
Such a simple solution. Eve is not dying. Fleet combat is not dead. Almost nothing to see here. Carry on.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:19:07 -
[723] - Quote
Zappity wrote: Yes, it does. People often don't warp fast enough and you can catch them on the align out. Please share your expanded launcher tackle interceptor fit, btw. That could be useful.
prober grabs tackle, more cepters arrive, bug out, fleet lands.
As for the fit, thats for you to figure out.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Veshai
NED-Clan Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:19:24 -
[724] - Quote
It is currently YC 117 following the Eden Standard Time that was established in the year 23236 (YC 0). The technology to pinpoint a coordinate in space, sharing that coordinate with vessels nearby and organizing a coordinated fleetwarp is clearly too advanced for this time and age. |
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
172
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:20:52 -
[725] - Quote
It won't even change much in k-space, every know cellestial and pos can be scanned out in advance . People will be making corp bm's packs for every cellestial in the region. Changes undone for elite k-space alliances. Change nullified... .
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16139
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:20:59 -
[726] - Quote
Veshai wrote:It is currently YC 117 following the Eden Standard Time that was established in the year 23236 (YC 0). The technology to pinpoint a coordinate in space, sharing that coordinate with vessels nearby and organizing a coordinated fleetwarp is clearly too advanced for this time and age.
You have to dock to talk to an agent.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Rayzilla Zaraki
Yin Jian Enterprises
296
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:23:23 -
[727] - Quote
On balance, not a bad proposal. Just close a few loopholes (OGB 100mn T3s) and make corp bookmarks propogate quicker and this would be something to which players can quickly adapt.
Gate campers are just Carebears with anger issues.
|
Elsa Hayes
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
78
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:24:00 -
[728] - Quote
Eve has been dumbed down greatly over the years and it is really laughable that every attempt to avert that trend gets met with fierce resistance. Do you people know how the game was in 2006/7? With no easy probing and none of the other shenanigans?
If you wanted to get a warp in on someone you had to get someone there first! So if memory serves me right this is just a step closer to how EvE used to be and a good one at that!
|
Evi Polevhia
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security Multicultural F1 Brigade
1104
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:24:45 -
[729] - Quote
Speaking as someone who doesn't live in the world of 250-2500 man fleet fights, it sure seems like we're going to get all of the negatives associated with this change when we get none of the positives. If these changes are meant to address things that crop up in big nullsec related fights, certainly there's an easier way than to bork a feature of the game that is used by literally everyone else in all of EVE who doesn't happen to participate in Sov Null? |
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
172
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:25:35 -
[730] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:
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.
Covert ops sees fleet get out before own fleet gets in.
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
|
Mila Strelok
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
43
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:25:44 -
[731] - Quote
If CCP doesn't add Alliance bookmarks before this nerf, they will kill fleet warps. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1373
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:25:50 -
[732] - 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.
Such a simple solution. Eve is not dying. Fleet combat is not dead. Almost nothing to see here. Carry on.
It's not that the fix is hard, it's that it's pointless with respect to a great many of the affected aspects.
As is, apparently, the fashion. |
Lan Wang
Stillwater Corporation That Escalated Quickly.
759
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:25:59 -
[733] - Quote
Elsa Hayes wrote:Eve has been dumbed down greatly over the years and it is really laughable that every attempt to avert that trend gets met with fierce resistance. Do you people know how the game was in 2006/7? With no easy probing and none of the other shenanigans?
If you wanted to get a warp in on someone you had to get someone there first! So if memory serves me right this is just a step closer to how EvE used to be and a good one at that!
well its not 2006/7 and people want things different now, stop dwelling on the past
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2175
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:26:29 -
[734] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Zappity wrote: Yes, it does. People often don't warp fast enough and you can catch them on the align out. Please share your expanded launcher tackle interceptor fit, btw. That could be useful.
prober grabs tackle, more cepters arrive, bug out, fleet lands. As for the fit, thats for you to figure out. Anyone with a useful fit? Baltec, the expanded launcher is the one with the really high CPU requirement. Just in case you are confused.
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.
Such a simple solution. Eve is not dying. Fleet combat is not dead. Almost nothing to see here. Carry on. So what is the point?
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
172
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:31:01 -
[735] - Quote
And i still need to see any possitive point for people who are not part of 250 man fleet alliances.
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16141
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:32:34 -
[736] - Quote
Zappity wrote: Anyone with a useful fit? Baltec, the expanded launcher is the one with the really high CPU requirement. Just in case you are confused.
It would be nice if just for once people such as yourself spent a bit more time figuring stuff out for yourself rather than demanding everything to be handed to you on a platter.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
95
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:33:12 -
[737] - Quote
Mila Strelok wrote:If CCP doesn't add Alliance bookmarks before this nerf, they will kill fleet warps.
Wrong. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
3445
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:33:35 -
[738] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Don Pera Saissore wrote:Junior FC for Spectre fleet here. NPSI fleets have a lot of newbros participating and they have to rely on the fc to keep them safe in some situations. Lets say im engaging a fleet and something else lands on the grid that i cant fight i have to quickly extract and get my fleet members to relative safety. After this update i will have to tell them to keep bouncing celestials until i land on my safespot and then order them o regroup on me. Newbros will get picked off on the sun. Jayne plz reconsider this you know how hard it is to manage a fleet full of newbros. you can fleet warp to celestials still. no changes there. But you don't want the fleet to go to a celestial, as the enemy might be there, or follow you there. You want the fleet to go to a safespot. How to do that, fast? You can have one fleet member sit at the safespot, cloaked. Sure, it gives a new role to a fleet member, but its not a fun or engaging role.
Know a Frozen fan? Check this out
Frozen fanfiction
|
Thea Yulivee
Space Pioneers Odin's Call
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:33:47 -
[739] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:And i still need to see any possitive point for people who are not part of 250 man fleet alliances.
how about it's way more feasible to fight 250 man fleet alliances with smaller gangs if they can't constantly warp onto you once you have isolated a few pilots or repositioned on them |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16141
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:33:57 -
[740] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:And i still need to see any possitive point for people who are not part of 250 man fleet alliances.
Thats because you don't want to.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1709
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:34:21 -
[741] - Quote
The number of people decrying the fate of the SMALL GANG is reaching "think of the children" proportions.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16141
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:35:30 -
[742] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Rowells wrote:Don Pera Saissore wrote:Junior FC for Spectre fleet here. NPSI fleets have a lot of newbros participating and they have to rely on the fc to keep them safe in some situations. Lets say im engaging a fleet and something else lands on the grid that i cant fight i have to quickly extract and get my fleet members to relative safety. After this update i will have to tell them to keep bouncing celestials until i land on my safespot and then order them o regroup on me. Newbros will get picked off on the sun. Jayne plz reconsider this you know how hard it is to manage a fleet full of newbros. you can fleet warp to celestials still. no changes there. But you don't want the fleet to go to a celestial, as the enemy might be there, or follow you there. You want the fleet to go to a safespot. How to do that, fast? You can have one fleet member sit at the safespot, cloaked. Sure, it gives a new role to a fleet member, but its not a fun or engaging role.
Scout/cepter/anything warps off, you instantly warp to that pilot while he is in warp. Why is this hard for people?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Canaris Roshaak
Common Sense Ltd Nulli Secunda
19
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:36:43 -
[743] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:And i still need to see any possitive point for people who are not part of 250 man fleet alliances.
Easy: I cant warp my 250man blob on your 40 man kiting/sniper fleet in 10 seconds anymore. |
Khan Wrenth
Hedion University Amarr Empire
169
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:36:48 -
[744] - Quote
I wish I had more time to post, but...
I once recommended that combat recons get scanning bonuses and launcher bonuses as a role bonus in lieu of dscan immunity. I think it would mesh really well with this for the purposes of heavy tackle. You can rig it for faster warp if you need, but I think this is a prime opportunity to make combat recons into...well, combat recons :D
Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
|
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
95
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:37:02 -
[745] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Scout/cepter/anything warps off, you instantly warp to that pilot while he is in warp. Why is this hard for people?
Those kids never learned "warp to interceptor" for getting a safespot. |
Vol Arm'OOO
Bagel and Lox
436
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:40:09 -
[746] - Quote
Bombers will hardly be effected - they will just warp someone cloaked to the perch then warp the wing to the first bomber, do their bombing run then warp off, rinse and repeat. However, sniper fleets will suffer a death blow - snipers land on grid shoot for a while and then are supposed to warp to the next perch - but how are you supposed to know which perch the FC intends? There is no fleet BM broadcast. The only work around is to have some cloaky move to the new perch in advance of you - which is clearly awkward.
I don't play, I just fourm warrior.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16141
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:41:15 -
[747] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Bombers will hardly be effected - they will just warp someone cloaked to the perch then warp the wing to the first bomber, do their bombing run then warp off, rinse and repeat. However, sniper fleets will suffer a death blow - snipers land on grid shoot for a while and then are supposed to warp to the next perch - but how are you supposed to know which perch the FC intends? There is no fleet BM broadcast. The only work around is to have some cloaky move to the new perch in advance of you - which is clearly awkward.
Use a few cepters to burn new spots.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Vol Arm'OOO
Bagel and Lox
436
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:42:12 -
[748] - Quote
BadAssMcKill wrote:Have you considered making the game more fun for a change
Please its ccp - as the icons have taught us - if its not broke, it will be fixed until its broke.
I don't play, I just fourm warrior.
|
Vol Arm'OOO
Bagel and Lox
436
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:43:10 -
[749] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Bombers will hardly be effected - they will just warp someone cloaked to the perch then warp the wing to the first bomber, do their bombing run then warp off, rinse and repeat. However, sniper fleets will suffer a death blow - snipers land on grid shoot for a while and then are supposed to warp to the next perch - but how are you supposed to know which perch the FC intends? There is no fleet BM broadcast. The only work around is to have some cloaky move to the new perch in advance of you - which is clearly awkward. Use a few cepters to burn new spots.
How would that work with sniper fleets, since the targets will be able to see where you intend to go which is the exact opposite of what you want.
I don't play, I just fourm warrior.
|
Marox Calendale
Human League
51
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:44:04 -
[750] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:ArmEagle Kusoni wrote:So, to run anoms (in w-space) we can't easily warp there all together anymore. Everyone will need the probe scanner window open/have bookmarks or have to wait for one player to have landed. Alliance bookmarks would only make that slightly less of an issue.
That's just one example of how people will become unnecessarily more vulnarable, or things taking more time. Anoms yes, Sigs no. Edit: Yes, you'll be able to fleet warp to anoms. No, you won't be able to fleet warp to signatures. Just for clarity (which was obviously lacking) Sorry, but this doesn-¦t matter. If you-¦re doing Sleeper Sites, in let-¦s say a C4 with a group of Tengus, then you won-¦t warp to the anom, you will warp to a BM of that Anom. Because there are only 4 different kinds of Sites available and you need to sort them, so that the salvager will find the right one which is free of NPC-¦s.
Also Gas Cloud Harvesting in WH will decrease a bit, as Harvesting Fleets with more than one prospect per player will have to handle a slightly increased risk.
At the bottom line: The Material Costs for T3-¦s and D3-¦s will increase as well as group play in WH will decrease. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16141
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:45:47 -
[751] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:
How would that work with sniper fleets, since the targets will be able to see where you intend to go which is the exact opposite of what you want.
Everyone currently use this tactic and have done for the last 12 years for almost every fleet.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Garr-Song Mishi
Fedo Collection Agency Mad Associates
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:46:48 -
[752] - Quote
Personally, I think this idea is bad as it stands.
However, I do think that if (as several others have mentioned) the idea is to increase responsibility of other pilots in fleet actions, then fine....disable fleet warps but allow squad warps. The squad commander does little other than pass on boosts currently , so having them actually do the position of their squads could only be a good thing while also mitigating the horrible impact of this change on small gangs. |
h4kun4
Heeresversuchsanstalt The Bastion
30
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:48:45 -
[753] - Quote
i suppose what you guys didn't consider while thinking about those changes is, that even now catching someone with probes is hard enough because a pilot that is aware of him being scanned down, can easily escape. The only chance was to warp the whole fleet onto him and hope that you might get enough points surviving to kill him, now you've got to warp there and hope that your scanner will not die before the rest of the guys land, just brilliant.
So, workaround: Probe ceptors? Probe-tackle Proteuses? Probe Dictors? (many ships will need a CPU bonus to actually fit that role)
Also, i can't imagine a bomber wing work properly on kiting targets (like ishtars) [#nerfishtars], with this, which makes them even more OP.
An many other things getting a lot riskier, especially multiaccount pve, which sounds very interesting to me in PvP matters. \o/ shooting multiminers everyday.
I will see how it is and ether reconsider my opinion or whine about later it when its out. <- as always |
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
174
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:50:36 -
[754] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Zappity wrote: Anyone with a useful fit? Baltec, the expanded launcher is the one with the really high CPU requirement. Just in case you are confused.
It would be nice if just for once people such as yourself spent a bit more time figuring stuff out for yourself rather than demanding everything to be handed to you on a platter. So basicily you admit it is not possbile.
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16141
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:51:25 -
[755] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:baltec1 wrote:Zappity wrote: Anyone with a useful fit? Baltec, the expanded launcher is the one with the really high CPU requirement. Just in case you are confused.
It would be nice if just for once people such as yourself spent a bit more time figuring stuff out for yourself rather than demanding everything to be handed to you on a platter. So basicily you admit it is not possbile.
Where did I say that?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Ele Rebellion
Dead Star Syndicate
42
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:53:38 -
[756] - Quote
CCP Larrikin
btw.. Friendship > RHML Typhoon |
Canaris Roshaak
Common Sense Ltd Nulli Secunda
19
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:54:11 -
[757] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:baltec1 wrote:Zappity wrote: Anyone with a useful fit? Baltec, the expanded launcher is the one with the really high CPU requirement. Just in case you are confused.
It would be nice if just for once people such as yourself spent a bit more time figuring stuff out for yourself rather than demanding everything to be handed to you on a platter. So basicily you admit it is not possbile.
Hint: T3 destroyers are fast, have good tank, and a 95% fitting reduction on probes. |
Fredric Wolf
Black Sheep Down Tactical Narcotics Team
93
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:55:19 -
[758] - Quote
I am not sure this is even implementable but is there a way to share probe screens in fleet. It would still require members of fleets to warp to points but would not rule out the use of probing all together.
|
Leeluvv
Maas Industries
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:56:58 -
[759] - Quote
What issue/problem is this change designed to fix? i.e. Why has it even been considered? |
Alisanna
Mindstar Technology Get Off My Lawn
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:57:21 -
[760] - Quote
Tried to sleep on this one before commenting. I woke up and still feel the same.
This change is a bad one and should be strongly reconsidered.
Your stated goal is :
Quote:Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members.
Unfortunately, this goal does very little to enhance this behavior. You've done exactly is this-- Before: FC probes enemy fleet, FC warps fleet on top of enemy and people get content.
After: FC probes enemy fleet, FC warps fleet on top of enemy. Enemy gets away before fleet can arrive. Less content.
Here's another scenario:
Two fleets have skirmished and one is attempting to disengage and warp out. The other attempts to pursue. The escaping fleet has a dictor drop a bubble in-line with the gate that they're running towards to prevent pursuit..
Before: FC warps fleet to a gate ping and the chase is on.
After: FC warps someone to a ping. 20 seconds later, warps the fleet to the ping. Enemy fleet is long gone.
Less content.
That's just two PvP examples of how this change makes things less fun and less content oriented. We need changes that bring people into conflict with each other. Not changes that make it more difficult to get content.
Now, I recognize there is likely a subset of Eve players who are solo gankers, cloaky campers, and the like who think a change like this (making it much more difficult to deal with them) would be fine and I accept that point-of-view; however, the vast majority of people playing this game don't want it to be less fun.
Additionally, I think the effect on new pilots will be larger than you might expect. Most pilots getting into PvP have enough trouble remembering not to split their guns and to align to something. This makes it harder for them to learn and we all know what Eve needs is a steeper learning curve.
|
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
174
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 13:57:48 -
[761] - Quote
Canaris Roshaak wrote:unimatrix0030 wrote:baltec1 wrote:Zappity wrote: Anyone with a useful fit? Baltec, the expanded launcher is the one with the really high CPU requirement. Just in case you are confused.
It would be nice if just for once people such as yourself spent a bit more time figuring stuff out for yourself rather than demanding everything to be handed to you on a platter. So basicily you admit it is not possbile. Hint: T3 destroyers are fast, have good tank, and a 95% fitting reduction on probes. Can't cloak, will get spotted on d-scan . Targets will be gone.
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
Delucian
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
75
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:00:54 -
[762] - Quote
Okay, TLDR, and I know you are tyring to play to the bottom 80% of Eve who can't - align, watch local, Dscan, be asked to lose a ship in a game about losing ships - but really!
This seems more about dumbing down for the masses than making a challenging game that entices one to become better.
Next will be that we cant have multiple ship types in a fleet. |
Sister Bliss
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
80
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:01:26 -
[763] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote: With that said I wanted to see combat probing and bombers nerfed. This change accomplishes both. Is it exact optimum ? Thats subjective I have gotten lots of positive feedback and likes for my post in regards to the subject.
+1
Bombers and combat probing have needed fixing for a long time; personally I don't think this fix is optimal for either, but I'm grateful it's at least addressing the issue somewhat.
Bombing has been OP for such a long time, particularly with the ability to fleet warp wings...the outcome of which has been to dramatically shift and obsolete a large number of ship and fleet types. I think other changes would have been better for bombers but this is manageable at least as an interim measure.
The bigger item and which has been equally dramatic over the years is combat probing and fleet warp to zero. With the exception of *unprobable* setups, skirmish and sniping tactics have become marginalised. It's just far too easy to fleet warp a blob onto an enemy gang and use sheer weight of numbers.
Options to innovate, use skill, environment factors and tactics have been supplemented by just driving to get more people in fleet and outnumber the opponent. If this change reverses that trend, which I believe it does in part (again, somewhat inelegantly) then there will be a huge positive impact with more fleet types being flown, more strategies employed and ultimately more PVP which is good for everyone.
On the negative side;
* It feels like there are issues for WH occupants which need looking into (no opinion here, I skimmed those parts)
* Not sure why fleet-warp-to-bm's is a bad idea. if BM's can be made instantly then yes it's a loophole/workaround to removing fleet-warp-to-probe-results. There are a lot of potential mitigants which could support keeping bm's fleet warpable including delays to bm creation, visual cues/indicators that a bm is being made in space, options to reveal bm's in space etc. Perhaps this can be explored to consider the utility value of bm's which wouldn't impact on the primary drivers for this change
* Not sure why missions or anoms are a big deal here which needs addressing?
Overall, I'm happy with the negatives given the big potential upswing here.
At least we can be satisfied the Ishtar is getting nerfed for a 3rd time \o/
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
174
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:01:50 -
[764] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:unimatrix0030 wrote:And i still need to see any possitive point for people who are not part of 250 man fleet alliances. Thats because you don't want to. Pff, i can say the same thing about you not seeing the downsides of this. But that doesn't help anyone.
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16141
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:02:54 -
[765] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote: Can't cloak, will get spotted on d-scan . Targets will be gone.
So fit for warp speed then.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16141
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:03:42 -
[766] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:baltec1 wrote:unimatrix0030 wrote:And i still need to see any possitive point for people who are not part of 250 man fleet alliances. Thats because you don't want to. Pff, i can say the same thing about you not seeing the downsides of this. But that doesn't help anyone.
Difference between me and you is that I can adapt to changes.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
stoicfaux
5888
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:05:42 -
[767] - Quote
Zappity wrote: Anyone with a useful fit? Baltec, the expanded launcher is the one with the really high CPU requirement. Just in case you are confused.
To paraphrase the US Marines, "Semper Gumby" (Always Flexible) 3,800 raw EHP 3,581 m/s 8.1 AU/s
[Prospect, Baltec's Cloaky Probe "Interceptor"] Damage Control II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Nanofiber Internal Structure II
5MN Microwarpdrive II Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I Faint Warp Disruptor I
Covert Ops Cloaking Device II Expanded Probe Launcher II, Core Scanner Probe I [empty high slot]
Small Hyperspatial Velocity Optimizer II Small Hyperspatial Velocity Optimizer I
Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
|
Canaris Roshaak
Common Sense Ltd Nulli Secunda
19
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:07:22 -
[768] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:unimatrix0030 wrote: Can't cloak, will get spotted on d-scan . Targets will be gone.
So fit for warp speed then.
Goes back to your point about people being too lazy to figure things out that aren't handed to them on a silver platter... |
Leeluvv
Maas Industries
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:26:19 -
[769] - Quote
Sister Bliss wrote:Bombing has been OP for such a long time, particularly with the ability to fleet warp wings...the outcome of which has been to dramatically shift and obsolete a large number of ship and fleet types.
So the bombing mechanic is a problem and the change is to fleet warping? WTF! Why not reduce the resistance of bombs so any 2nd bomb destroys the first, removing the ability to annihilate fleets with bombs, because that would be a bombing change to fix a bombing problem...
As for combat probes, it appears that the problem is they scan ships down too fast. So, make the probe results for a ship have an inherent error, so you can't guarantee landing on the target and need to use a ship at the location to confirm the accuracy or is a combat scanning fix to combat scanning too hard. Hell, make it so you only get a 100% result if you are on grid if combat probing ships is that big an issue.
Both of these are just random ideas I came up with 10 seconds ago, neither of which change the entire fleet warping game mechanics.
Dear CCP, understand and fix the cause, not the symptom. |
Frenjo Borkstar
Borkstar Laboratories
74
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:27:55 -
[770] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Are we really going to have change after change after change that do nothing but make the game a little bit more irritating to play?
This is exactly my point, we're only making the game more complicated and more irritating for everyone. I've been involved in a few wormhole fleets with other corps, and this is going to be very bad.
I want MORE functionality, not less! Keep what we've got and add, don't change a mechanic that's going to ruin everybody's eve experience!
Truth is, this isn't really "feedback", because I don't think it's going to have much of an effect.
Dr. Frenjo Borkstar,
Project Lead for Arek'Jaalan's Project Salus.
|
|
Honey Zam
Delusions of Adequacy Get Off My Lawn
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:28:14 -
[771] - Quote
Not sure the change will kill anything out right, however I think it's going to burn FCs out. It will hurt large fleets too. I see the reasoning, but these big changes along with sov changes. I hope this all turns out how you want it to CCP. Plz don't kill the game. Players adapt but forcing too much adaptation could see more and more leave. I am worried. |
SpaceSaft
Capts Deranged Cavaliers Gentlemen's.Club
153
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:31:37 -
[772] - Quote
How is warping together with different sizes going to work now?
Say there is a heterogenous fleet of cruisers and battleships or cruisers and frigates and everyone warps, the smaller stuff will now arrive first.
Are Battleships just going to be slower than cruisers all the time (cruisers/frigs)?
Are forces just going to arrive out of sync on grid every time, guaranteed?
I.e. is ccp going to compensate for taking group warps away in some way and replace it with a new system...
like a warp confirm everyone has to press, thus "paricipating" (idk)
...or are they just going to rip it out?
The UI is still bad.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16141
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:33:35 -
[773] - Quote
SpaceSaft wrote:How is warping together with different sizes going to work now?
Say there is a heterogenous fleet of cruisers and battleships or cruisers and frigates and everyone warps, the smaller stuff will now arrive first.
Are Battleships just going to be slower than cruisers all the time (cruisers/frigs)?
Are forces just going to arrive out of sync on grid every time, guaranteed and we have to deal with that?
I.e. is ccp going to compensate for taking group warps away in some way and replace it with a new system...
like a warp confirm everyone has to press, thus "paricipating" (idk)
...or are they just going to rip it out?
Warping the fleet to a player still means the fleet warps as fast as the slowest ship.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Leeluvv
Maas Industries
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:37:38 -
[774] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Warping the fleet to a player still means the fleet warps as fast as the slowest ship.
Not exactly. The fleet now warps as fast as the slowest ship + the time it takes for the ship you're going to warp to to get there and be in position to warp to. |
Soolarize
The Icarian Oath Utopian Society
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:38:04 -
[775] - Quote
My Nemesis cries. And I feel quite lonely in WH now :(
CEO @ The Icarian Oath Utopian Society [I.OUS]
Site Officiel
|
SpaceSaft
Capts Deranged Cavaliers Gentlemen's.Club
153
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:38:11 -
[776] - Quote
Oh ok so it's literally only nerfing combat probing. Gotcha. Not sure why that's needed but I'm safer now.
The UI is still bad.
|
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
160
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:40:39 -
[777] - Quote
baltec1 wrote: Difference between me and you is that I can adapt to changes.
Anyone can adapt to changes. I bet you can adapt to your hand being chopped off. Which does not put chopping off your hand on your to-do list. Probably. I'm not quite sure.
This change does not solve any problems. It does not hit bombing as a concept. It does not hit combat probing as a concept. It only hits the poor guy who will be strapped to a probing tengu and be sitting on a perch and watching anime while his fleetmates are fighting. It is not fun. I've been there (dedicated links+probing), and it was fun the first 2 weeks and then it was "oh I've probed down some offgrid links. Again. Now back to the book". |
Elenahina
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
740
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:41:49 -
[778] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:afkalt wrote: You're NOT scouting, that's the point. You're LITERALLY a beacon to no split the unit. Fun it aint.
Thats scouting. Providing warps on the enemy, getting snipe points, burning a safe all of it is scouting and yes it is fun. Every fleet used to have dedicated scouts that did these things.
Whatever happened to that?
Oh yeah, on grid probe alts.
Agony Unleashed is Recruiting - Small Gang PvP in Null Sec
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16146
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:43:52 -
[779] - Quote
Leeluvv wrote: Not exactly. The fleet now warps as fast as the slowest ship + the time it takes for the ship you're going to warp to to get there and be in position to warp to.
So use a warp speed rigged cov-ops or interceptor.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Leeluvv
Maas Industries
8
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:46:50 -
[780] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:So use a warp speed rigged cov-ops or interceptor.
So you want your probing ship to potentially have no probing bonus and no probing rigs? |
|
Elenahina
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
740
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:48:34 -
[781] - Quote
Torgeir Hekard wrote:baltec1 wrote:Yes, making a safe on the fly is exactly what a scout does. Nope. It's something a scout may begrudgingly have to do because there's nobody else to do that, but tries to avoid doing as much as possible. It's like saying that flying droneboats is fun, and then state that scoopdeploying is exactly what a droneboat pilot does.
You need better scouts. If I tell my scout to make rolling safes, and he says, "Ugh, fine if I have to", I will leave his ass to die at the next gate camp (and I might help them kill him).
The FC runs the fleet, the members carry out tasks issued by the FC. If the members are incapable or unwilling to carry out those tasks, replace them. It's just that simple.
The days of the FC basically doing everything but clicking "Jump" and pushing "F1" need to die with a furious vengenace in the firey pits of hades.
Go watch the Eve is real trailer again and ask yourself where the hero interceptors are these days?
Agony Unleashed is Recruiting - Small Gang PvP in Null Sec
|
Leeluvv
Maas Industries
8
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:50:06 -
[782] - Quote
Elenahina wrote:Torgeir Hekard wrote:baltec1 wrote:Yes, making a safe on the fly is exactly what a scout does. Nope. It's something a scout may begrudgingly have to do because there's nobody else to do that, but tries to avoid doing as much as possible. It's like saying that flying droneboats is fun, and then state that scoopdeploying is exactly what a droneboat pilot does. You need better scouts. If I tell my scout to make rolling safes, and he says, "Ugh, fine if I have to", I will leave his ass to die at the next gate camp (and I might help them kill him). The FC runs the fleet, the members carry out tasks issued by the FC. If the members are incapable or unwilling to carry out those tasks, replace them. It's just that simple. The days of the FC basically doing everything but clicking "Jump" and pushing "F1" need to die with a furious vengenace in the firey pits of hades. Go watch the Eve is real trailer again and ask yourself where the hero interceptors are these days?
You can ask your carrier pilot to make rolling safes, doesn't mean it's a sensible fleet decision.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1376
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:51:32 -
[783] - Quote
Elenahina wrote:baltec1 wrote:afkalt wrote: You're NOT scouting, that's the point. You're LITERALLY a beacon to no split the unit. Fun it aint.
Thats scouting. Providing warps on the enemy, getting snipe points, burning a safe all of it is scouting and yes it is fun. Every fleet used to have dedicated scouts that did these things. Whatever happened to that? Oh yeah, on grid probe alts.
That wasn't my complaint. The complaint is fleet warping at a uniform speed to CORP BMs took it right in the ass for no good reason nor demonstrable reason. |
Natya Alekscyev
Pretty Hate Machine.
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:52:58 -
[784] - Quote
So what this means is that say a fc wants to warp fleet to a bm that is say near a sun, and enemy fleet is on their butt. So fc says align sun or bm, and then has to tell everyone to warp individually? Is this made to make it imposible for w-space dwellers to do their thing in groups? Or is it made to cater to the whim of whining individuals who dont have more than one toon.
CCP you are probably going to lose an ungodly amount of people over this sort of stuff. Every multiboxer i know (which is probably 99% of everyone i know ) hate this idea and sees it as a multiboxers worst nightmare. So this route is going to lead to me personally cutting off 5-6 subs, and most of the people i know and previously spoke of will drop accounts as well, just because the fun of playing with multiple toons will now be gone as it will be huge hassle to warp to warp to warp to with 4 different toons without dying every time
Is ccp under new management btw? Cause they used to seem to care about people subbing, now it seems they are at war with all people who play multiple toons.
Seriously CSM , back the pilots up on this one, cause this is the worst change ive seen in years, bookmarks in particular. The remainder is bearable, barely.
KILL FAST , DIE -áSLOW
|
Elana Apgar
Static-Noise Upholders
49
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:54:57 -
[785] - Quote
Dear CCP Larkin and CCP Fozzie,
This is game breaking for W-Space.
And here are the two main reasons:
The main game breaking reason is:
When travelling in W-Space AS A FLEET you almost always have to Fleet Warp from a bookmark to travel from Wormhole to Wormhole until you get to your destination Wormhole. Sometimes you engage hostiles on a wormhole, other times you Fleet Warp to a specific location, whether it be a safe, bounce off of a tower, a tractor unit/wreck, or even a friendly tower.
If we cannot move as a fleet, this will absolutely break Fleet engagements in W-Space. Just like in Null-Sec it is important to move as a fleet, but unlike Null Sec we do not have Gates on our overview or Stations on our overview. We use bookmarks for safes, wormholes, and POS'.
How can you seriously expect us to do anything in a coordinated manner if we cannot warp as a group? Have you even been involved in wormhole fleet fights to see how it all works? If you'd like specific examples of how various wormhole engagements would be impossible, I'd be more then happy to supply them.
The second reason:
When in wormhole space, you sometimes have to combat scan a small ship to kill him. And often times you need to "throw" a tackle ship at that ship you are combat scanning. With these changes it will be near impossible to catch a small ship because by the time your combat scan ship lands the target will quite possibly be gone, or if you tackle in the scan ship, it might not survive until help arrives.
I am strongly URGING you to reconsider how this change will IRREPARABLY DAMAGE W-Space before implementing this. W-Space in many ways is struggling, and this could very well destroy it. I really don't understand why CCP feels the need to have all changes in the game revolve around Null Sec.
Thank you for your time.
|
Canenald
Jump Drive Appreciation Society Test Alliance Please Ignore
73
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:56:57 -
[786] - Quote
This pretty much hands most of medium and large fights, where getting a good warp in is extremely important, to groups with more experienced players. It seems to be in contrast to other changes made to lower the entry barrier for new groups in nullsec and increase new player retention. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1712
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:59:30 -
[787] - Quote
Leeluvv wrote:baltec1 wrote:So use a warp speed rigged cov-ops or interceptor. So you want your probing ship to potentially have no probing bonus and no probing rigs? I'm sure the number of Hard To Probe ratting fits you waddle upon on a daily basis is staggering.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots Black Legion.
307
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 14:59:43 -
[788] - Quote
Well you are not supposed to be using input automation anyways, and I don't see any huge issue being a multi-account user myself. CCP may not be making a better game for Input automators, but they are making it better for everyone else. I fully endorse these new changes, it's going to make big space battles much more dynamic. It will probably slow them down a bit as well due to the changes for probing and warpins. I'm cool with that. I think more stuff will explode.
EXXXPLLOOOSSSIONNNSSSSS!!!!!!!
I'm also positive Michael Bay would approve. |
Jack Tronic
borkedLabs
238
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:04:13 -
[789] - Quote
CCP removal of wspace. |
Elenahina
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
741
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:04:21 -
[790] - Quote
Leeluvv wrote: You can ask your carrier pilot to make rolling safes, doesn't mean it's a sensible fleet decision.
Generally, you want your fastest ship to make your rolling safes, you can keep the fleet moving as rapidly as possible to stop the other fleet landing a punt on you.
In 99% of fleets, that will be one of your scouts burning away from you at 3k plus. Repeat until the other fleet gets bored.
I fail to see how that's a bad decision.
Agony Unleashed is Recruiting - Small Gang PvP in Null Sec
|
|
Desert Ice78
Gryphons of the Western Wind
488
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:06:11 -
[791] - Quote
This proposed change is clearly harsh on the WH population for simple navigation purposes.
How about this - you scan down a WH and warp to it, and once on grid you now have the ability to change it to a celestial on your overview, stargate style? There after warp to it with gusto - you and your fleet in tow.
I am a pod pilot:
http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/DesertIce/POD.jpg
CCP Zulu: Came expecting a discussion about computer monitors, left confused.
|
Dentric Crendraven
Static-Noise Upholders
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:11:06 -
[792] - Quote
Seriously, this is a ******** change. Why would we not be able to fleet warp to a ship we scanned down? Lets say you're in a T3D fleet fighting another T3D fleet. You scan em down, but instead of fleet warping your fleet to them to have to warp yourself in point range where you'll essentially be alpha'd and MAYBE you're lucky and some of your guys warped before you died. It would be the same for any kiting fleet, its not like they already had huge amounts of reasons to be preferred over brawling fleets lets give them another one where you can no longer get faster ships on top of them in scram range very quickly anymore. Might as well just rolle strictly confessors since its not like a Svipul fleet is really gonna get in range to **** that fleet up.
Someone comes into your wormhole in a Nullified Tengu and is warping around your wormhole, why does it make more sense to have to warp a single ship in first, then fleetwarp to the scan ship? This just slows things down unnecessarily.
Fleet warping as it currently is is not broken and never was in any way. WHY change it? Because some Nullsec guy said so? Seriously, think about how **** affects EVERY playstyle, not just nullsec.
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?
How about not bring battleships if you know they have bombers? or Bring Interceptors, Insta Svipuls, Keres, or the many other types that could kill the bomber as soon as they decloak, server tick-wise, if they have enough time to perform 2 actions, (decloak, drop bomb) so do you (Lock, shoot/point). |
Leeluvv
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:11:44 -
[793] - Quote
Querns wrote:Leeluvv wrote:baltec1 wrote:So use a warp speed rigged cov-ops or interceptor. So you want your probing ship to potentially have no probing bonus and no probing rigs? I'm sure the number of Hard To Probe ratting fits you waddle upon on a daily basis is staggering.
I don't need to probe ratting ships at anomalies in a WH, I can find them on DSCAN easily enough, but the frigate at a Relic site that may need a dictor dropping on him before he warps off, to give enough time for webs and scram.... |
Terminus Antollare
Federal Logistics Initiative Conglomerate United Interests
13
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:12:33 -
[794] - Quote
You mean to tell me CCP wants us to work together and perhaps actually have to put some thought into the game? I can see why this is so unpopular. |
Valterra Craven
575
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:13:13 -
[795] - Quote
I guess I just don't understand what this goal achieves:
Quote: The goal of these changes is to encourage more individual fleet member participation and reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets (e.g bombers)
Reducing the speed of fleet to target doesn't create more engagement. Reducing the speed of fleet to target doesn't change any imbalances or fleet metas Reducing the speed of fleet to target doesn't change anything of any other relevance other than to add annoyance to almost everyone in game.
Besides, if the goal is JUST to reduce speed of fleet to target, then why not just make all ships in fleet warp fly at a given slow speed like 1AU a sec... It would be really helpful if when you talk about changes you talk about why you have your goal and what the end game actually is. |
Heinrich Rotwang
Zentralrat deutscher Fliesentischbesitzer e.V.
82
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:15:41 -
[796] - Quote
I hope I will be able to master the exciting new challenge of getting warped to FCs alt instead of a bookmark. Might consider taking classes and training lessons in preparation of the patch.
This change is totally about making fleet participation more interesting. Nomnomnom cool aid. |
Lan Wang
Stillwater Corporation That Escalated Quickly.
760
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:15:56 -
[797] - Quote
so carebears can still fleet warp dozens of alts around making isk in belts and missions etc, so only for pvp'ers really
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
303
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:19:45 -
[798] - 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 -
[799] - 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 |
Bowfingerz
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:24:12 -
[800] - Quote
What a waste of time try changing things people want changed mybe ask us first i wonder if you did a poll how many people don't want this changed (i could be wrong).
Why dont you ask the player base what they want fixed and fix those issues first...just saying.
#Thecustomerisalwayswrong eh ccp |
|
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
663
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:26:34 -
[801] - Quote
Leeluvv wrote:Querns wrote:Leeluvv wrote:baltec1 wrote:So use a warp speed rigged cov-ops or interceptor. So you want your probing ship to potentially have no probing bonus and no probing rigs? I'm sure the number of Hard To Probe ratting fits you waddle upon on a daily basis is staggering. I don't need to probe ratting ships at anomalies in a WH, I can find them on DSCAN easily enough, but smaller ships at a Relic site that may need a dictor dropping on them before they warp off, to give enough time for webs and scram. This isn't just about large fleets, it affects 2 or 3 ship gangs/fleets too. Take a T3D (I lately killed an AFK travel ceptor at 4km/s with one) Scan with bonused ship, bookmark, switch to dictor, warp&bubble&profit
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
160
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:28:30 -
[802] - Quote
Elenahina wrote:You need better scouts. If I tell my scout to make rolling safes, and he says, "Ugh, fine if I have to", I will leave his ass to die at the next gate camp (and I might help them kill him).
The FC runs the fleet, the members carry out tasks issued by the FC. If the members are incapable or unwilling to carry out those tasks, replace them. It's just that simple. Goods need to be hauled. Towers need to be fuelled. Timers need to be alarmclocked. Someone has to run rolling safes. The necessity alone does not exactly make all that stuff exciting. Valuable does not equal fun. I'm not advocating for thunderdomes, but there's complexity, and there's tedium. Those are different things. Flying a ship with a dozen active modules is complexity. Managing a T2 production chain is complexity. Bookmarking gate warping so you don't have to slowboat 15km to gate is tedium. Having a guy who's only purpose is to sit on a perch and watch the carnage unfold is tedium. |
Bowfingerz
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:28:44 -
[803] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:I guess I just don't understand what this goal achieves: Quote: The goal of these changes is to encourage more individual fleet member participation and reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets (e.g bombers)
Reducing the speed of fleet to target doesn't create more engagement. Reducing the speed of fleet to target doesn't change any imbalances or fleet metas Reducing the speed of fleet to target doesn't change anything of any other relevance other than to add annoyance to almost everyone in game. Besides, if the goal is JUST to reduce speed of fleet to target, then why not just make all ships in fleet warp fly at a given slow speed like 1AU a sec... It would be really helpful if when you talk about changes you talk about why you have your goal and what the end game actually is.
'The aim of this patch is to try to discourage people from multi boxing in pvp' ..... not hard to see that. |
Valterra Craven
577
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:31:44 -
[804] - Quote
Bowfingerz wrote:Valterra Craven wrote:I guess I just don't understand what this goal achieves: Quote: The goal of these changes is to encourage more individual fleet member participation and reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets (e.g bombers)
Reducing the speed of fleet to target doesn't create more engagement. Reducing the speed of fleet to target doesn't change any imbalances or fleet metas Reducing the speed of fleet to target doesn't change anything of any other relevance other than to add annoyance to almost everyone in game. Besides, if the goal is JUST to reduce speed of fleet to target, then why not just make all ships in fleet warp fly at a given slow speed like 1AU a sec... It would be really helpful if when you talk about changes you talk about why you have your goal and what the end game actually is. 'The aim of this patch is to try to discourage people from multi boxing in pvp' ..... not hard to see that.
Which it doesn't even achieve. The only way to do that would be to remove fleet warp in all situations entirely. |
Ralen Zateki
Delusions of Adequacy Get Off My Lawn
185
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:34:56 -
[805] - 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.
Such a simple solution. Eve is not dying. Fleet combat is not dead. Almost nothing to see here. Carry on.
Why are we fixing and solving what previously was a non issue? And I agree, your solution will be what we need to do, so yea whatever but....
I suspect most of the time the warp in is gonna be a dual boxing FC alt...which is just going to be another layer of **** to manage.
My objection is more aimed at where did this change come from and why is CCP spending resources on an at best inconvenience item that isn't going to add do much to achieve the intent? Especially as other issues go unresolved, and Fozzie doc has not yet been implemented (and afaik they've yet to. Resolve the implementation of flexible time zone options)
I mean, if you're going to start messing with core systems like fleet mechanics isn't that worth a more thought out debate over a bit of time? |
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
737
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:42:45 -
[806] - Quote
Wow, I go away for 3 days and this **** pops up?
CCP ya don goofd.
This is no fun at all...
EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
|
oien cabrereas
Ospray Corp Unreachable
34
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:44:08 -
[807] - Quote
This change to fleet warps really sucks for people who live in WH space. :P
-1 for this idea |
Kurt Hectic
Doped Player's Inc.
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:44:56 -
[808] - Quote
more ******** changes... do u guys want us to shoot another monument ?.... cause we can u know...
also if u wanna get rid of kill2 i'am sure there's a easier way then fubarring up the game so 200k or more subs get cancelled and ur forced to lay off a buncha scrubs... |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1713
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:52:15 -
[809] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:I guess I just don't understand what this goal achieves: Quote: The goal of these changes is to encourage more individual fleet member participation and reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets (e.g bombers)
Reducing the speed of fleet to target doesn't create more engagement. Reducing the speed of fleet to target doesn't change any imbalances or fleet metas Reducing the speed of fleet to target doesn't change anything of any other relevance other than to add annoyance to almost everyone in game. Besides, if the goal is JUST to reduce speed of fleet to target, then why not just make all ships in fleet warp fly at a given slow speed like 1AU a sec... It would be really helpful if when you talk about changes you talk about why you have your goal and what the end game actually is. I daresay their opinion is that combat probing allows fleets to engage too quickly. You're falling into the trap of commoditizing Eve gameplay under the monkey filth that is the contemporary use of the word "content."
Also, reducing the power of bombers almost certainly will allow the fleet meta to shift, as fleet meta is currently dominated by ships whose vulnerability to bombs is at a minimum.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Rutger Centemus
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
28
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:54:10 -
[810] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hopelesshobo wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote: As announced on the o7 show we are making some changes to fleet warp. Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders & Squad Commanders will no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own. This includes GÇô
Bookmarks Does this include corporation bookmarks that the person in the same corp could warp to? Yes. You can only fleet warp to things that any member of your fleet could warp to, no matter what corp or alliances they are a part of. Incomplete answer. If the fleet consists of members of 1 corp, all could warp to a corp BM and (according to your answer) should be able to get fleetwarped there. If the fleet consists of people that all have the same BM, in either personal or corp BMs, they can all warp to that BM and should (as per your logic) be able to get fleetwarped there.
So, which is it - can't fleetwarp to BMs [period] or can't fleetwarp to locations some of your fleetmembers can't warp themselves to...? |
|
Gorski Car
624
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:55:22 -
[811] - Quote
get good.
Collect this post
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1713
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:56:40 -
[812] - Quote
Ralen Zateki wrote: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.
Such a simple solution. Eve is not dying. Fleet combat is not dead. Almost nothing to see here. Carry on. Why are we fixing and solving what previously was a non issue? And I agree, your solution will be what we need to do, so yea whatever but.... I suspect most of the time the warp in is gonna be a dual boxing FC alt...which is just going to be another layer of **** to manage. My objection is more aimed at where did this change come from and why is CCP spending resources on an at best inconvenience item that isn't going to add do much to achieve the intent? Especially as other issues go unresolved, and Fozzie doc has not yet been implemented (and afaik they've yet to. Resolve the implementation of flexible time zone options) I mean, if you're going to start messing with core systems like fleet mechanics isn't that worth a more thought out debate over a bit of time?
Please refrain from using specious argument tactics.
For reference, the two you used are:
* Assumption that development time in Eve is completely fungible between concerns. It's not, and CCP, being an entity that hires more than one person to develop the game, is capable of doing multiple things at once. * Declaration that the game change in question cannot be implemented until every niggling issue, imagined or real, has been thoroughly debated and solved. We don't need to cure cancer in order to reduce a fever or bandage a wound.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2496
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:56:52 -
[813] - Quote
Rutger Centemus wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hopelesshobo wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote: As announced on the o7 show we are making some changes to fleet warp. Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders & Squad Commanders will no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own. This includes GÇô
Bookmarks Does this include corporation bookmarks that the person in the same corp could warp to? Yes. You can only fleet warp to things that any member of your fleet could warp to, no matter what corp or alliances they are a part of. Incomplete answer. If the fleet consists of members of 1 corp, all could warp to a corp BM and (according to your answer) should be able to get fleetwarped there. If the fleet consists of people that all have the same BM, in either personal or corp BMs, they can all warp to that BM and should (as per your logic) be able to get fleetwarped there. So, which is it - can't fleetwarp to BMs [period] or can't fleetwarp to locations some of your fleetmembers can't warp themselves to...? It doesn't matter what your fleet comp is. The same rules apply to a fleet of ransoms as do a fleet of corporates.
Fleet warp does not look at your corp/alliance data, which includes corp/alliance bookmarks. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16155
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 15:57:44 -
[814] - Quote
Leeluvv wrote:baltec1 wrote:So use a warp speed rigged cov-ops or interceptor. So you want your probing ship to potentially have no probing bonus and no probing rigs?
When did CCP remove cov-ops bonuses?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2496
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:01:13 -
[815] - Quote
Repeating again,
Please take a look at expanding ships that can fit probes without massive gimping of fits. Current limits in this category are covops, t3s, and D3s, which actually affects the fleet comp and strength at smaller gang levels. |
Hendrink Collie
Steel Fleet Gentlemen's.Club
29
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:03:29 -
[816] - Quote
Generally I am for these changes. I think it will add some interesting dynamics and will open up doctrine choices that were over-shadowed with the current META of overpowered probing/fleet warp mechanics. There is one thing I'd like to change though:
Only in wormhole space, allow for fleet warps to cosmic signatures. Currently these changes disproportional affect wormholers, and I believe the proposed changes wouldn't benefit overall tactics in wormhole space compared to everywhere else.
|
Ralen Zateki
Delusions of Adequacy Get Off My Lawn
185
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:04:25 -
[817] - Quote
Querns wrote:Ralen Zateki wrote: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.
Such a simple solution. Eve is not dying. Fleet combat is not dead. Almost nothing to see here. Carry on. Why are we fixing and solving what previously was a non issue? And I agree, your solution will be what we need to do, so yea whatever but.... I suspect most of the time the warp in is gonna be a dual boxing FC alt...which is just going to be another layer of **** to manage. My objection is more aimed at where did this change come from and why is CCP spending resources on an at best inconvenience item that isn't going to add do much to achieve the intent? Especially as other issues go unresolved, and Fozzie doc has not yet been implemented (and afaik they've yet to. Resolve the implementation of flexible time zone options) I mean, if you're going to start messing with core systems like fleet mechanics isn't that worth a more thought out debate over a bit of time? Please refrain from using specious argument tactics. For reference, the two you used are: * Assumption that development time in Eve is completely fungible between concerns. It's not, and CCP, being an entity that hires more than one person to develop the game, is capable of doing multiple things at once. * Declaration that the game change in question cannot be implemented until every niggling issue, imagined or real, has been thoroughly debated and solved. We don't need to cure cancer in order to reduce a fever or bandage a wound.
I figured all that was a safe assumption. But let me spell it out so that you don't have to think too hard:
Lots of change right now as it is, peeps still curious about how Fozzie sov will play out and be actually implemented, lots of uncertainty about super cap future. From a messaging perspective I think CCP lost their focus on this one and didn't think through the angles before rushing to conclusions and a delivery date. Seems that's a waste of resources no?
Or is that too specious for you still?
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16155
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:05:29 -
[818] - Quote
Elana Apgar wrote:Dear CCP Larkin and CCP Fozzie,
This is game breaking for W-Space.
And here are the two main reasons:
The main game breaking reason is:
When travelling in W-Space AS A FLEET you almost always have to Fleet Warp from a bookmark to travel from Wormhole to Wormhole until you get to your destination Wormhole. Sometimes you engage hostiles on a wormhole, other times you Fleet Warp to a specific location, whether it be a safe, bounce off of a tower, a tractor unit/wreck, or even a friendly tower.
If we cannot move as a fleet, this will absolutely break Fleet engagements in W-Space. Just like in Null-Sec it is important to move as a fleet, but unlike Null Sec we do not have Gates on our overview or Stations on our overview. We use bookmarks for safes, wormholes, and POS'.
How can you seriously expect us to do anything in a coordinated manner if we cannot warp as a group? Have you even been involved in wormhole fleet fights to see how it all works? If you'd like specific examples of how various wormhole engagements would be impossible, I'd be more then happy to supply them.
The second reason:
When in wormhole space, you sometimes have to combat scan a small ship to kill him. And often times you need to "throw" a tackle ship at that ship you are combat scanning. With these changes it will be near impossible to catch a small ship because by the time your combat scan ship lands the target will quite possibly be gone, or if you tackle in the scan ship, it might not survive until help arrives.
I am strongly URGING you to reconsider how this change will IRREPARABLY DAMAGE W-Space before implementing this. W-Space in many ways is struggling, and this could very well destroy it. I really don't understand why CCP feels the need to have all changes in the game revolve around Null Sec.
Thank you for your time.
one pilot in a fast interceptor fixes your problem.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Rekatan
We Heart U
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:05:46 -
[819] - Quote
Please consider the option presented by abdel_abu on Reddit at http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/39kcrq/fleet_warp_nerf_alternative_delayed_warp_spool_up/
This is seriously valuable feedback, which provides a happy compromise while adding so much potential intensity to the game, rather than headache. |
Leeluvv
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:06:54 -
[820] - Quote
Hendrink Collie wrote:Generally I am for these changes. I think it will add some interesting dynamics and will open up doctrine choices that were over-shadowed with the current META of overpowered probing/fleet warp mechanics. There is one thing I'd like to change though:
Only in wormhole space, allow for fleet warps to cosmic signatures. Currently these changes disproportional affect wormholers, and I believe the proposed changes wouldn't benefit overall tactics in wormhole space compared to everywhere else.
If you have to compromise the implementation, then the solution you have chosen to implement is flawed and not actually fit for purpose. This is the classic case of a solution looking for a problem. |
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1713
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:08:12 -
[821] - Quote
Ralen Zateki wrote: I figured all that was a safe assumption. But let me spell it out so that you don't have to think too hard:
Lots of change right now as it is, peeps still curious about how Fozzie sov will play out and be actually implemented, lots of uncertainty about super cap future. From a messaging perspective I think CCP lost their focus on this one and didn't think through the angles before rushing to conclusions and a delivery date. Seems that's a waste of resources no?
Or is that too specious for you still?
Yes. You're still assuming that developer time at CCP is completely fungible, and that work in one department somehow necessarily detracts from another.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Sir Livingston
Club Deadspace
344
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:08:14 -
[822] - Quote
Solo buff!
EVE Online videos to inform and inspire
http://www.youtube.com/JonnyPew
|
Leeluvv
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:08:40 -
[823] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Elana Apgar wrote:Dear CCP Larkin and CCP Fozzie,
This is game breaking for W-Space.
And here are the two main reasons:
The main game breaking reason is:
When travelling in W-Space AS A FLEET you almost always have to Fleet Warp from a bookmark to travel from Wormhole to Wormhole until you get to your destination Wormhole. Sometimes you engage hostiles on a wormhole, other times you Fleet Warp to a specific location, whether it be a safe, bounce off of a tower, a tractor unit/wreck, or even a friendly tower.
If we cannot move as a fleet, this will absolutely break Fleet engagements in W-Space. Just like in Null-Sec it is important to move as a fleet, but unlike Null Sec we do not have Gates on our overview or Stations on our overview. We use bookmarks for safes, wormholes, and POS'.
How can you seriously expect us to do anything in a coordinated manner if we cannot warp as a group? Have you even been involved in wormhole fleet fights to see how it all works? If you'd like specific examples of how various wormhole engagements would be impossible, I'd be more then happy to supply them.
The second reason:
When in wormhole space, you sometimes have to combat scan a small ship to kill him. And often times you need to "throw" a tackle ship at that ship you are combat scanning. With these changes it will be near impossible to catch a small ship because by the time your combat scan ship lands the target will quite possibly be gone, or if you tackle in the scan ship, it might not survive until help arrives.
I am strongly URGING you to reconsider how this change will IRREPARABLY DAMAGE W-Space before implementing this. W-Space in many ways is struggling, and this could very well destroy it. I really don't understand why CCP feels the need to have all changes in the game revolve around Null Sec.
Thank you for your time.
one pilot in a fast interceptor fixes your problem.
As has already been mentioned, an interceptor with no probing bonus is your probing ship now or do I need 3 people to do what used to be done by 1? Bye, bye small gang PvP in WHs. |
Akrasjel Lanate
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
1784
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:09:14 -
[824] - Quote
Nice change
Also remember this will affect you but also the enemy you are fighting...
Next... "anchoring" nerf if that is possible
Akrasjel Lanate
Member of Black Thorne Corporation
Black Thorne Alliance
Citizen of Solitude
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
292
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:13:45 -
[825] - Quote
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) to group warping depending on the size of the group. The delay for fleet warping would be larger than the delay for wing warping, which in turn would be larger than the time it takes to enter a squad warp. Add to that, there would be a prominent visual effect in order to help opponents react to an imminent group warp. Pros:
- Clean solution, easy to understand. A group can warp to anything that an individual could warp to, but with a certain penalty. Makes for in interesting choice!
- Individual warping/piloting would be much faster and well organised groups more effective, thus "more individual fleet member participation" would likely be achieved.
- The downsides for group warps would be quite significant:
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 could no longer 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. You guys really don't want your fleet members to think on their own do you?
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Delucian
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
75
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:16:20 -
[826] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave 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) to group warping depending on the size of the group. The delay for fleet warping would be larger than the delay for wing warping, which in turn would be larger than the time it takes to enter a squad warp. Add to that, there would be a prominent visual effect in order to help opponents react to an imminent group warp. Pros:
- Clean solution, easy to understand. A group can warp to anything that an individual could warp to, but with a certain penalty. Makes for in interesting choice!
- Individual warping/piloting would be much faster and well organised groups more effective, thus "more individual fleet member participation" would likely be achieved.
- The downsides for group warps would be quite significant:
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 could no longer 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. You guys really don't want your fleet members to think on their own do you?
Want to and "Can" are two differnt concepts!
|
Ralen Zateki
Delusions of Adequacy Get Off My Lawn
185
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:18:33 -
[827] - Quote
Querns wrote:Ralen Zateki wrote: I figured all that was a safe assumption. But let me spell it out so that you don't have to think too hard:
Lots of change right now as it is, peeps still curious about how Fozzie sov will play out and be actually implemented, lots of uncertainty about super cap future. From a messaging perspective I think CCP lost their focus on this one and didn't think through the angles before rushing to conclusions and a delivery date. Seems that's a waste of resources no?
Or is that too specious for you still?
Yes. You're still assuming that developer time at CCP is completely fungible, and that work in one department somehow necessarily detracts from another.
Sigh. No, I'm not. I'm saying its a messaging issue - bad mechanics aside - that conveys a perception of a lack of focus and concern for vetting given the context of all other change going on.
Despite your assumptions I'm generally aware that multi million dollar organizations are capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time... |
Ripblade Falconpunch
Centurion Logistics
174
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:21:40 -
[828] - 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.
In your opinion. And the 42 pages of mostly negative feedback seem to think that by and large, your opinion sucks.
Sadly there's no mechanic for impeaching CSM members - because you and most of your brethren would be on the docket right now after the buggy / broken / terrible map, the "new and improved" icons, and now this. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1713
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:22:02 -
[829] - Quote
Ralen Zateki wrote:Querns wrote:Ralen Zateki wrote: I figured all that was a safe assumption. But let me spell it out so that you don't have to think too hard:
Lots of change right now as it is, peeps still curious about how Fozzie sov will play out and be actually implemented, lots of uncertainty about super cap future. From a messaging perspective I think CCP lost their focus on this one and didn't think through the angles before rushing to conclusions and a delivery date. Seems that's a waste of resources no?
Or is that too specious for you still?
Yes. You're still assuming that developer time at CCP is completely fungible, and that work in one department somehow necessarily detracts from another. Sigh. No, I'm not. I'm saying its a messaging issue - bad mechanics aside - that conveys a lack of focus and concern for vetting given the context of all other change going on. Despite your assumptions I'm generally aware that multi million dollar organizations are capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time... Vetting by whom? The community? Because that falls under the purvey of the second mistake: requiring every niggling issue to be solved before any change can be moved forward.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1713
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:23:36 -
[830] - Quote
Ripblade Falconpunch 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. In your opinion. And the 42 pages of mostly negative feedback seem to think that by and large, your opinion sucks. Sadly there's no mechanic for impeaching CSM members - because you and most of your brethren would be on the docket right now after the buggy / broken / terrible map, the "new and improved" icons, and now this. You have a very strange view of how the CSM works that is wrong in more than one way.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
Elana Apgar
Static-Noise Upholders
50
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:24:25 -
[831] - Quote
Querns wrote:Valterra Craven wrote:I guess I just don't understand what this goal achieves: Quote: The goal of these changes is to encourage more individual fleet member participation and reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets (e.g bombers)
Reducing the speed of fleet to target doesn't create more engagement. Reducing the speed of fleet to target doesn't change any imbalances or fleet metas Reducing the speed of fleet to target doesn't change anything of any other relevance other than to add annoyance to almost everyone in game. Besides, if the goal is JUST to reduce speed of fleet to target, then why not just make all ships in fleet warp fly at a given slow speed like 1AU a sec... It would be really helpful if when you talk about changes you talk about why you have your goal and what the end game actually is. I daresay their opinion is that combat probing allows fleets to engage too quickly. You're falling into the trap of commoditizing Eve gameplay under the monkey filth that is the contemporary use of the word "content." Also, reducing the power of bombers almost certainly will allow the fleet meta to shift, as fleet meta is currently dominated by ships whose vulnerability to bombs is at a minimum.
Unless you're in a carrier, if you're paying attention you should be able to notice combat probes. Messing with Fleet Warp mechanics and breaking W-Space is not the way to solve the problem of people not paying attention. |
Abla Tive
95
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:24:32 -
[832] - Quote
Between industry and market work, I run hi sec missions with an alt. I don't look forward to PVP and take the usual precautions against it.
This change will slow down my missioning (as I warp the mission holder to the gate and then warp the alt to the gate)
It simply adds a pointless step to the process. I.e. it adds no fun or challenge.
|
Leeluvv
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:27:36 -
[833] - Quote
This is another knee jerk and is a fix for a fix, so likely to have even more unintended consequences. Interesting idea, but it doesn't fix bombers or combat probes, the stated cause of the problem. |
Elenahina
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
742
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:30:09 -
[834] - Quote
Abla Tive wrote:Between industry and market work, I run hi sec missions with an alt. I don't look forward to PVP and take the usual precautions against it.
This change will slow down my missioning (as I warp the mission holder to the gate and then warp the alt to the gate)
It simply adds a pointless step to the process. I.e. it adds no fun or challenge.
So it makes multiboxing less attractive for farmers.
At the risk of repeating myself: Op Success
Agony Unleashed is Recruiting - Small Gang PvP in Null Sec
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1713
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:30:34 -
[835] - Quote
Elana Apgar wrote:Querns wrote:Valterra Craven wrote:I guess I just don't understand what this goal achieves: Quote: The goal of these changes is to encourage more individual fleet member participation and reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets (e.g bombers)
Reducing the speed of fleet to target doesn't create more engagement. Reducing the speed of fleet to target doesn't change any imbalances or fleet metas Reducing the speed of fleet to target doesn't change anything of any other relevance other than to add annoyance to almost everyone in game. Besides, if the goal is JUST to reduce speed of fleet to target, then why not just make all ships in fleet warp fly at a given slow speed like 1AU a sec... It would be really helpful if when you talk about changes you talk about why you have your goal and what the end game actually is. I daresay their opinion is that combat probing allows fleets to engage too quickly. You're falling into the trap of commoditizing Eve gameplay under the monkey filth that is the contemporary use of the word "content." Also, reducing the power of bombers almost certainly will allow the fleet meta to shift, as fleet meta is currently dominated by ships whose vulnerability to bombs is at a minimum. Unless you're in a carrier, if you're paying attention you should be able to notice combat probes. Messing with Fleet Warp mechanics and breaking W-Space is not the way to solve the problem of people not paying attention. Bombers don't really strike at disconnected W-space farming groups. They attack large fleets, where the presence of combat probes is both assured and in numbers precluding easy identification of their owner.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Seven Koskanaiken
FinFleet Northern Coalition.
1545
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:31:40 -
[836] - Quote
Elsa Hayes wrote:Eve has been dumbed down greatly over the years and it is really laughable that every attempt to avert that trend gets met with fierce resistance. Do you people know how the game was in 2006/7? With no easy probing and none of the other shenanigans?
If you wanted to get a warp in on someone you had to get someone there first! So if memory serves me right this is just a step closer to how EvE used to be and a good one at that!
Uh huh. See, the thing about this point is what is defined as complex or difficult or "elite gameplay" in EVE is, when thrown into relief against other twitch style games, still laughably simple and boring by comparison (even after this change or others like it). But, EVE has always got around this by never competing with them in the first place but relying on the strategy/planning/rock-paper-scissor model, even distinguishing and promoting itself on this fact.
Now, if you really want to go down this road the question inevitably becomes; if I wanted to play this sort of game, why wouldn't I just leave EVE and go and play something that not only already does it, and does it so much better in every conceivable way? Why would I play a "worse version of Elite", when I can just go and play...the actual Elite/SC/[insert future title here]? |
Kane Fenris
NWP
157
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:32:33 -
[837] - Quote
BadAssMcKill wrote:Have you considered making the game more fun for a change
THIS!
|
Elana Apgar
Static-Noise Upholders
51
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:33:23 -
[838] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Elana Apgar wrote:Dear CCP Larkin and CCP Fozzie,
This is game breaking for W-Space.
And here are the two main reasons:
The main game breaking reason is:
When travelling in W-Space AS A FLEET you almost always have to Fleet Warp from a bookmark to travel from Wormhole to Wormhole until you get to your destination Wormhole. Sometimes you engage hostiles on a wormhole, other times you Fleet Warp to a specific location, whether it be a safe, bounce off of a tower, a tractor unit/wreck, or even a friendly tower.
If we cannot move as a fleet, this will absolutely break Fleet engagements in W-Space. Just like in Null-Sec it is important to move as a fleet, but unlike Null Sec we do not have Gates on our overview or Stations on our overview. We use bookmarks for safes, wormholes, and POS'.
How can you seriously expect us to do anything in a coordinated manner if we cannot warp as a group? Have you even been involved in wormhole fleet fights to see how it all works? If you'd like specific examples of how various wormhole engagements would be impossible, I'd be more then happy to supply them.
The second reason:
When in wormhole space, you sometimes have to combat scan a small ship to kill him. And often times you need to "throw" a tackle ship at that ship you are combat scanning. With these changes it will be near impossible to catch a small ship because by the time your combat scan ship lands the target will quite possibly be gone, or if you tackle in the scan ship, it might not survive until help arrives.
I am strongly URGING you to reconsider how this change will IRREPARABLY DAMAGE W-Space before implementing this. W-Space in many ways is struggling, and this could very well destroy it. I really don't understand why CCP feels the need to have all changes in the game revolve around Null Sec.
Thank you for your time.
one pilot in a fast interceptor fixes your problem.
No, it won't. When you are attacking at tower in W-Space, and need to warp to bounces AS A FLEET a fast tackle interceptor won't help. When you are warping a fleet from a hostile tower or wormhole AS A FLEET to a safe/friendly tower, a fast tackle interceptor won't work. When you are running capital escalation sites in a C5 or C6 and you need to warp back to the friendly POS AS A FLEET, a fast tackle interceptor won't work. When you are fighting off of a tower with a hostile fleet and need to warp to a safe spot as A FLEET fast tackle won't work, because it could very well be dead. Fast tackle might be the answer for everything in Null Sec, but it certainly isn't in W-Space. |
Col North Chanlin
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:36:01 -
[839] - Quote
Just a request; Can you please disclose how much the Nullsec funders paid for the further killing of W-Space life? |
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
98
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:36:33 -
[840] - Quote
Elana Apgar wrote:No, it won't. When you are attacking at tower in W-Space, and need to warp to bounces AS A FLEET a fast tackle interceptor won't help. When you are warping a fleet from a hostile tower or wormhole AS A FLEET to a safe/friendly tower, a fast tackle interceptor won't work. When you are running capital escalation sites in a C5 or C6 and you need to warp back to the friendly POS AS A FLEET, a fast tackle interceptor won't work. When you are fighting off of a tower with a hostile fleet and need to warp to a safe spot as A FLEET fast tackle won't work, because it could very well be dead. Fast tackle might be the answer for everything in Null Sec, but it certainly isn't in W-Space.
Warp to ceptor, bounce to pos by warping yourself? |
|
Suspicious Tubesteak
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:37:04 -
[841] - Quote
Querns wrote:Naglerr wrote:Querns wrote:Naglerr wrote: By constructing our fleet in a particular way and actively swapping fleet leadership roles when needed we can manage to achieve warpins on nearly all targets we want to engage. We heavily make use of fleet warps to bookmarks and probe returns as a method of pvp engagement generation. With the proposed changes our method of combat becomes completely not possible. Yes it is true that we can warp the scout on grid with the target, but that only doubles the time required to perform the same action that was previously possible with a reasonable level of efficiency and at greatly increased risk to our scanners. This will result in missed opportunities on targets for no observable gain in mechanics.
Adapt. Kills are not a commodity that you are owed -- they are a reward. If they become more difficult to acquire, the reward should be sweeter. I would be perfectly happy to adapt to a mechanic that has at least some positive impact. This change is one that simply makes more burdensome the same tasks I've previously had to complete in order to earn kills. I guess I'm just not understanding how literally removing functionality from a product is supposed to make it more appealing to the customers of said product. Can you explain that one to me Querns? This change has plenty of positive impact -- it severely diminishes the efficacy of bombers, whose omnipresence choked off available fleet comps to those that could either not be caught, or had small enough signature radii to shrug off bombing runs. Assuming workarounds are not found, we could see the resurgence of shield doctrines for subcaps. This returns a whole host of ships to combat effectiveness, which, to me, is a win.
So why not just fix bombers and/or bomb damage application then? |
Hendrink Collie
Steel Fleet Gentlemen's.Club
30
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:42:53 -
[842] - Quote
Leeluvv wrote:Hendrink Collie wrote:Generally I am for these changes. I think it will add some interesting dynamics and will open up doctrine choices that were over-shadowed with the current META of overpowered probing/fleet warp mechanics. There is one thing I'd like to change though:
Only in wormhole space, allow for fleet warps to cosmic signatures. Currently these changes disproportional affect wormholers, and I believe the proposed changes wouldn't benefit overall tactics in wormhole space compared to everywhere else.
If you have to compromise the implementation, then the solution you have chosen to implement is flawed and not actually fit for purpose. This is the classic case of a solution looking for a problem.
... isn't that the whole idea of feedback, to find possible issues with the idea and to give ways to fix the issues? I know it's popular just to lay on the floor kicking and screaming, but I find it more constructive to give feedback that could help groups of people that are oppressively affected by changes. I believe what I have said is a good compromise. What say you? |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1713
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:47:35 -
[843] - Quote
Suspicious Tubesteak wrote: So why not just fix bombers and/or bomb damage application then?
This change goes a long way to help the situtation.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1713
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:48:23 -
[844] - Quote
Elana Apgar wrote:No, it won't. When you are attacking at tower in W-Space, and need to warp to bounces AS A FLEET a fast tackle interceptor won't help. When you are warping a fleet from a hostile tower or wormhole AS A FLEET to a safe/friendly tower, a fast tackle interceptor won't work. When you are running capital escalation sites in a C5 or C6 and you need to warp back to the friendly POS AS A FLEET, a fast tackle interceptor won't work. When you are fighting off of a tower with a hostile fleet and need to warp to a safe spot as A FLEET fast tackle won't work, because it could very well be dead. Fast tackle might be the answer for everything in Null Sec, but it certainly isn't in W-Space. It sounds like you need to find new tactics.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Suspicious Tubesteak
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:52:19 -
[845] - Quote
Querns wrote:Suspicious Tubesteak wrote: So why not just fix bombers and/or bomb damage application then?
This change goes a long way to help the situtation.
Goes a long way to help the situation for nullsec and basically nobody else.
I meant more along the lines of why not just fix the ships and / or bombs directly? |
HTC NecoSino
No Vacancies
237
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:53:51 -
[846] - Quote
Col North Chanlin wrote:Just a request; Can you please disclose how much the Nullsec funders paid for the further killing of W-Space life?
They have to get their return off buying a CSM, dontchyaknow. #RecallCorbexx. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16157
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:54:13 -
[847] - Quote
Leeluvv wrote:baltec1 wrote:Elana Apgar wrote:Dear CCP Larkin and CCP Fozzie,
This is game breaking for W-Space.
And here are the two main reasons:
The main game breaking reason is:
When travelling in W-Space AS A FLEET you almost always have to Fleet Warp from a bookmark to travel from Wormhole to Wormhole until you get to your destination Wormhole. Sometimes you engage hostiles on a wormhole, other times you Fleet Warp to a specific location, whether it be a safe, bounce off of a tower, a tractor unit/wreck, or even a friendly tower.
If we cannot move as a fleet, this will absolutely break Fleet engagements in W-Space. Just like in Null-Sec it is important to move as a fleet, but unlike Null Sec we do not have Gates on our overview or Stations on our overview. We use bookmarks for safes, wormholes, and POS'.
How can you seriously expect us to do anything in a coordinated manner if we cannot warp as a group? Have you even been involved in wormhole fleet fights to see how it all works? If you'd like specific examples of how various wormhole engagements would be impossible, I'd be more then happy to supply them.
The second reason:
When in wormhole space, you sometimes have to combat scan a small ship to kill him. And often times you need to "throw" a tackle ship at that ship you are combat scanning. With these changes it will be near impossible to catch a small ship because by the time your combat scan ship lands the target will quite possibly be gone, or if you tackle in the scan ship, it might not survive until help arrives.
I am strongly URGING you to reconsider how this change will IRREPARABLY DAMAGE W-Space before implementing this. W-Space in many ways is struggling, and this could very well destroy it. I really don't understand why CCP feels the need to have all changes in the game revolve around Null Sec.
Thank you for your time.
one pilot in a fast interceptor fixes your problem. As has already been mentioned, an interceptor with no probing bonus is your probing ship now or do I need 3 people to do what used to be done by 1? Bye, bye small gang PvP in WHs.
FC ships have probes fitted already. I dont see where the issue is, if you want the bonus then just use a fast cov-ops.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Leeluvv
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:55:12 -
[848] - Quote
Hendrink Collie wrote:Leeluvv wrote:Hendrink Collie wrote:Generally I am for these changes. I think it will add some interesting dynamics and will open up doctrine choices that were over-shadowed with the current META of overpowered probing/fleet warp mechanics. There is one thing I'd like to change though:
Only in wormhole space, allow for fleet warps to cosmic signatures. Currently these changes disproportional affect wormholers, and I believe the proposed changes wouldn't benefit overall tactics in wormhole space compared to everywhere else.
If you have to compromise the implementation, then the solution you have chosen to implement is flawed and not actually fit for purpose. This is the classic case of a solution looking for a problem. ... isn't that the whole idea of feedback, to find possible issues with the idea and to give ways to fix the issues? I know it's popular just to lay on the floor kicking and screaming, but I find it more constructive to give feedback that could help groups of people that are oppressively affected by changes. I believe what I have said is a good compromise. What say you?
Not necessarily. If someone was going to fix my flat tyre by painting the car blue to hide the flat, you tell them that painting is the wrong solution, you don't suggest red would hide it better. |
Ele Rebellion
Dead Star Syndicate
42
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:56:50 -
[849] - Quote
CCP can we expect that the concern about OGBs and WH bookmarks will be addressed before this is implemented?
|
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort DARKNESS.
87
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:56:52 -
[850] - Quote
Col North Chanlin wrote:Just a request; Can you please disclose how much the Nullsec funders paid for the further killing of W-Space life?
Hate to tell you this buddy, we hate it just as much as you. It's a pointless change that makes the need of +1 cloaky alt all the more important. Good for their bottom line until people throw their hands up and leave from the added monotony with little return. |
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1713
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:57:01 -
[851] - Quote
HTC NecoSino wrote:Col North Chanlin wrote:Just a request; Can you please disclose how much the Nullsec funders paid for the further killing of W-Space life? They have to get their return off buying a CSM, dontchyaknow. #RecallCorbexx. This shit right here is why I keep coming back to eveo.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1713
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:58:11 -
[852] - Quote
Suspicious Tubesteak wrote:Querns wrote:Suspicious Tubesteak wrote: So why not just fix bombers and/or bomb damage application then?
This change goes a long way to help the situtation. Goes a long way to help the situation for nullsec and basically nobody else. I meant more along the lines of why not just fix the ships and / or bombs directly? Who said the change was specifically to nerf bombers? The knock-on effects to wormhole space may even be intentional!
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
1671
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 16:58:42 -
[853] - Quote
I thought Fozzie SOV would need a cruisers with cloaks and some scouts to keep griefing defenders. Now they won't be able to probe tackle anyone so they don't even need cloaks.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
Suspicious Tubesteak
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:00:16 -
[854] - Quote
Suspicious Tubesteak wrote:Querns wrote:Suspicious Tubesteak wrote: So why not just fix bombers and/or bomb damage application then?
This change goes a long way to help the situtation. Goes a long way to help the situation for nullsec and basically nobody else. I meant more along the lines of why not just fix the ships and / or bombs directly?
Disregard, I just answered my own question. Because bombers ARE stupidly OP in certain situations, and nobody wants to give that up by nerfing them.
So the "have your cake and eat it as well" solution is to nerf fleet warping, which initially sounds somewhat OK - until you think about all the mundane uses for fleet warp as a general QOL function, used by many people in all classes of space. |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
293
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:00:27 -
[855] - Quote
Nasar Vyron wrote:Col North Chanlin wrote:Just a request; Can you please disclose how much the Nullsec funders paid for the further killing of W-Space life? Hate to tell you this buddy, we hate it just as much as you. It's a pointless change that makes the need of +1 cloaky alt all the more important. Good for their bottom line until people throw their hands up and leave from the added monotony with little return. the same rhetoric was vomited when Phoebe was announced. The game is better and people didn't run out and buy more accounts.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Jeff Kione
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
13
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:01:09 -
[856] - Quote
Querns wrote:The knock-on effects to wormhole space may even be intentional!
Right, because there was a problem in w-space that needed to be solved. That's just nonsense. |
Ele Rebellion
Dead Star Syndicate
42
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:03:18 -
[857] - Quote
HTC NecoSino wrote: They have to get their return off buying a CSM, dontchyaknow. #RecallCorbexx.
Funny how CCP Larrikin mentioned Corbexx by name in post #104 as if he's defending him. (maybe CCP Larrikin is actually GSF Larrikin)
CCP Larrikin wrote: Corbexx brought these up while we where talking to the CSM about the change.
|
Budrick3
POS Party Low-Class
108
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:06:01 -
[858] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Tara Read wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:I am a FC I feel no extra weight from this change and if I did. I get volunteers from fleet to help me. That's a terrible excuse Manfred. Come on.... so you expect other FC's to force other people to play fleet jockey or get another account. I rest my case. Teamwork its a alien concept I guess hey?
Not everyone chooses to fly in blobs that can warrant a scouting position. |
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort DARKNESS.
87
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:07:23 -
[859] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Nasar Vyron wrote:Col North Chanlin wrote:Just a request; Can you please disclose how much the Nullsec funders paid for the further killing of W-Space life? Hate to tell you this buddy, we hate it just as much as you. It's a pointless change that makes the need of +1 cloaky alt all the more important. Good for their bottom line until people throw their hands up and leave from the added monotony with little return. the same rhetoric was vomited when Phoebe was announced. The game is better and people didn't run out and buy more accounts.
You're right, but hundreds of accounts were unsubbed. I'd like to direct your attention to eveoffline.... Ya. You need to go do some research for what little CCP makes available to us. I know I unsubbed 3 cyno accounts, which also happen to have a few combat pilots attached. I was not nearly alone as I have friends within my own alliance that have gone from 6+ accounts to around 3.
While the players may not be leaving, the accounts are which in the eyes of CCP's wallet is one and the same.
EDIT: While I cannot deny the changes have had some positive effects. I can firmly say that better changes could have been made to reduce the collateral damage. Much like this suggested change and it's effect on relatively innocent WH dwellers. Also crippling the ability for small and large gangs alike to catch others hiding in safes without giving a further advantage to the one doing the running/hiding.
PS- Have fun catching that super safe logging in under 30 seconds when you have to probe the ship, then warp your probe ship in, then the dictor/hic. |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
233
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:12:03 -
[860] - Quote
Ele Rebellion wrote:HTC NecoSino wrote: They have to get their return off buying a CSM, dontchyaknow. #RecallCorbexx. Funny how CCP Larrikin mentioned Corbexx by name in post #104 as if he's defending him. (maybe CCP Larrikin is actually GSF Larrikin) CCP Larrikin wrote: Corbexx brought these up while we where talking to the CSM about the change.
Larrikin came to CCP via PL and NCdot, not GSF |
|
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
233
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:12:55 -
[861] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Nasar Vyron wrote:Col North Chanlin wrote:Just a request; Can you please disclose how much the Nullsec funders paid for the further killing of W-Space life? Hate to tell you this buddy, we hate it just as much as you. It's a pointless change that makes the need of +1 cloaky alt all the more important. Good for their bottom line until people throw their hands up and leave from the added monotony with little return. the same rhetoric was vomited when Phoebe was announced. The game is better and people didn't run out and buy more accounts.
I unsubbed 18 accounts, but i still play on plenty of accounts, but overall -18 after phoebe |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1714
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:15:54 -
[862] - Quote
Jeff Kione wrote:Querns wrote:The knock-on effects to wormhole space may even be intentional! Right, because there was a problem in w-space that needed to be solved. That's just nonsense. That's just, like, your opinion, man.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1716
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:16:45 -
[863] - Quote
Budrick3 wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:Tara Read wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote:I am a FC I feel no extra weight from this change and if I did. I get volunteers from fleet to help me. That's a terrible excuse Manfred. Come on.... so you expect other FC's to force other people to play fleet jockey or get another account. I rest my case. Teamwork its a alien concept I guess hey? Not everyone chooses to fly in blobs that can warrant a scouting position. Scouting is valuable to gangs of all sizes. Hell, I use scouts when in a gang consisting of solely my own accounts.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16157
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:17:34 -
[864] - Quote
Jeff Kione wrote:Querns wrote:The knock-on effects to wormhole space may even be intentional! Right, because there was a problem in w-space that needed to be solved. That's just nonsense.
The problem is with fleets everywhere.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16157
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:21:32 -
[865] - Quote
Budrick3 wrote:
Not everyone chooses to fly in blobs that can warrant a scouting position.
People like you are the reason why titans get caught traveling solo.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Valterra Craven
578
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:23:27 -
[866] - Quote
Querns wrote: I daresay their opinion is that combat probing allows fleets to engage too quickly.
Then why not adjust combat probing, or how quickly fleets warp instead of changing something unrelated that has effects beyond the stated goal?
Querns wrote: You're falling into the trap of commoditizing Eve gameplay under the monkey filth that is the contemporary use of the word "content."
Normally, I respect your opinion, but this just makes no sense. What are you even talking about?
Querns wrote: Also, reducing the power of bombers almost certainly will allow the fleet meta to shift, as fleet meta is currently dominated by ships whose vulnerability to bombs is at a minimum.
But this doesn't actually reduce the power of bombers. Cuse ya know they are still just as powerful as before. Bombs aren't affected by this change and neither are bombers capabilities. You can still fleet warp to a cloaky on grid and bombers can still do the same amount of damage as before. This change just makes no sense.
|
Leoric Firesword
Rolling Static Gone Critical
133
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:26:13 -
[867] - Quote
Sparrow Creature wrote:this change will kill wormhole just saying..
not really, after you align to your next site, instead of your FC warping you he gives the command "warp now" or "warp to b" and boom, you're doing the same thing you did before.
you're welcome that I fixed wormholing for you :) |
Telizane
Ospray Corp Unreachable
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:29:22 -
[868] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:The change restriction is too high and affects too many areas of life in Eve, from Kspace, to Null, to Wspace. I would propose a smaller iteration to address the concerns of how fleet warp mechanics now work.
- Permit Squad Commanders in a fleet to fleet-warp their squad to bookmarks and probed sigs.
Essentially you move the capabilities of the overall fleet and wing commander down to the squad level. You remove the big flying balls of hurt down to decisions made by the squad commander, permitting them to decide on tactical warp ins, locations and fleet warps for their squad. You restrict fleet warps down to a 10 man team, with a individual per 10 man team making individual decisions for that 10 man team, to support the fleet efforts. Fleet and Wing commanders would lose this ability to warp entire armada's to bookmarks and scanned sigs, but permit smaller skirmish groups/squads to warp their small group to them. You move the leadership role of getting tacticals and flying to the leader of the squad, reducing the blob down to at most, 10 pilots, vs the 100+ null runs into. You now create a new leadership dynamic, and permit new people to have a stepping stone to becoming a Fleet Commander. Squad Leaders gain power, and have a relevant role verses just being a booster for their fleetmates. I'd start with baby steps first, commonly known as "A Iteration" (Thanks for that CCP Rise). Remove the ability for fleet commanders and wing commanders from warping entire groups to bookmarks and scan probes, and reduce it down to the squad level. Try that first. See how it actually works.
+1 |
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
664
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:31:50 -
[869] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:I thought Fozzie SOV would need a cruisers with cloaks and some scouts to keep griefing defenders. Now they won't be able to probe tackle anyone so they don't even need cloaks. You don't need skills to probe down an MWDing cruiser ... just fit a T3D for probing, speed and tackle and the cruiser is toast. The problem comes with the near unprobable OGB and cruising fleets, where you either need a perfect prober or more than one tackler.
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1069
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:35:03 -
[870] - Quote
Elenahina wrote:
Go watch the Eve is real trailer again and ask yourself where the hero interceptors are these days?
In my fleets? Along with their brothers and sisters the hero interdictors...
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
So, why do I continue to provide feedback on these forums?
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5813975#post5813975
|
|
Imataki Nobuno
Sword of Glory
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:40:00 -
[871] - Quote
I feel like this nerfs mixed corp/alliance fleets. When doing a convoy, jump bridges sometimes need to be used. If a fleet jumps into system and the FC says to warp to a jump bridge, the only ones in the initial warp will only be members of the corporation that bookmarked the jump bridge. This could be a good chunk of the fleet, leaving the rest sitting around until a warp-to-member is available.
Moving bookmark/probe warps to squads sounds like an awesome idea, which allows the functionality but not on the grand-scale that broke it. |
TheSmokingHertog
TALIBAN EXPRESS
314
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:41:50 -
[872] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hopelesshobo wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote: As announced on the o7 show we are making some changes to fleet warp. Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders & Squad Commanders will no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own. This includes GÇô
Bookmarks Does this include corporation bookmarks that the person in the same corp could warp to? Yes. You can only fleet warp to things that any member of your fleet could warp to, no matter what corp or alliances they are a part of.
Would that mean, you are not encouraged to fly fleets filled with people from different corporations, not spanning an alliance?
With several friends I have intel channels that form fleet ops based on online activity, not on cohesive structures offered in game, mostly due the fact that those people don't like CTA's and things like that. They just like to hang out and play EVE when able.
"Dogma is kind of like quantum physics, observing the dogma state will change it." ~ CCP Prism X
"Schrödinger's Missile. I dig it." ~ Makari Aeron
-= "Brain in a Box on Singularity" - April 2015 =-
|
Harrison Tato
Yamato Holdings
384
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:43:14 -
[873] - Quote
MrBrookes wrote:Ok so what about the person who has multi accounts in this game.....................
did u ever think of them??? We rely on the fleet warp to get us from point A to B.
Everyone in this game HAS A ALT and enjoys the fleet warp option to help move things around. It just makes the gaming that much easier and once again U SCREW IT ALL UP all because you are thinking of one group and forgetting the rest of us.
Don't speak for all of us. |
Imataki Nobuno
Sword of Glory
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:43:17 -
[874] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:The change restriction is too high and affects too many areas of life in Eve, from Kspace, to Null, to Wspace. I would propose a smaller iteration to address the concerns of how fleet warp mechanics now work.
- Permit Squad Commanders in a fleet to fleet-warp their squad to bookmarks and probed sigs.
Essentially you move the capabilities of the overall fleet and wing commander down to the squad level. You remove the big flying balls of hurt down to decisions made by the squad commander, permitting them to decide on tactical warp ins, locations and fleet warps for their squad. You restrict fleet warps down to a 10 man team, with a individual per 10 man team making individual decisions for that 10 man team, to support the fleet efforts. Fleet and Wing commanders would lose this ability to warp entire armada's to bookmarks and scanned sigs, but permit smaller skirmish groups/squads to warp their small group to them. You move the leadership role of getting tacticals and flying to the leader of the squad, reducing the blob down to at most, 10 pilots, vs the 100+ null runs into. You now create a new leadership dynamic, and permit new people to have a stepping stone to becoming a Fleet Commander. Squad Leaders gain power, and have a relevant role verses just being a booster for their fleetmates. I'd start with baby steps first, commonly known as "A Iteration" (Thanks for that CCP Rise). Remove the ability for fleet commanders and wing commanders from warping entire groups to bookmarks and scan probes, and reduce it down to the squad level. Try that first. See how it actually works.
This, this is a good post. |
Savesti Kyrsst
CTRL-Q Spaceship Bebop
16
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:47:24 -
[875] - Quote
Couple assumptions seem to be being made in the "arguing for" position:
1) If you can't get someone competent in fleet to scout for you your dudes are just bad. I know when FCing tiny ass gangs, which is all I do, I'll use both, but my alt as scout is always reliable, doesn't have to go sleep, speaks english as a first language etc. I dunno in groups where I *couldn't* get someone competent to play scout tbh we probably were just bad. So, well, imo this "for" argument is actually valid.
2) Screw multiboxers doing pve. Eh, I don't think this will help sub numbers hugely, but whatever.
3) Manfred Sideous wrote:Luft Reich wrote:I see our wormhole CSM is valiantly defending the life style of people in wormhole space.... Yeah, it might be good for nullsec but have you really thought about the effects on wormhole space? Clearly not. Warping yourself or warping to Wwwww's in fleet Zomgz life is over .
Manny think for like a second, it means they have to do this for hours going down new chains every day. It will be a major pain in the ass for them. Come on I'm sure you've been in WHs more than me, and I see that.
4) CCP Larrikin wrote:Masao Kurata wrote:This is unnecessarily problematic for warping a fleet onto a target who is on a station, and thus you cannot get a covops remotely near without decloaking him. I think you've only considered a narrow range of fleet warp scenarios and are making people that are already very safe even safer. Somone who is on a station (stations can be fleet warped to) is already safe?
Not if aggressed. And station dock radii are huge. However I haven't got many kills of noobs who are playing station games/don't understand aggression since the glory days of 2008. I see "someone who is on a station is already safe" as more a statement of design intent than fact, which is interesting, but after being irritated by the factual innacuracy I can agree with the sentiment.
Personally I don't think this will cause a significant dip in subs.
Booster alts will be sorted soon, I'm sure. Mine is fully trained about now so it's inevitable by Murphy's Law, right?
I think the "squad warp" solution is better, IF it is technically feasable.
Making the game more fun needs to be a design goal informing every step; however I can see good arguments that it will make it more fun, as well as more annoying sometimes.
I think those who are saying this will ease FC burnout, and are using this to argue "for", are being a little tendentious. Really depends on the FC and the group and a lot of intangible factors. Clearly there is some division in the thread between FCs on the issues. BL and PL seem strongly "for". I guess all we could do is wait and see.
I think arguing that this makes it harder for new players has little validity. If we want to increase sub numbers we need to do radical things, like make NPE bearable, revamp the bits of the game that have changed little since ~2003, and ease the burden of skill training - or even radically remove it for lower-end ships. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1718
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:50:03 -
[876] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:Querns wrote: I daresay their opinion is that combat probing allows fleets to engage too quickly.
Then why not adjust combat probing, or how quickly fleets warp instead of changing something unrelated that has effects beyond the stated goal? This is an adjustment to combat probing.
Quote:Querns wrote: You're falling into the trap of commoditizing Eve gameplay under the monkey filth that is the contemporary use of the word "content."
Normally, I respect your opinion, but this just makes no sense. What are you even talking about? Your use of the term "engagement" falls under the general purview of the use of the word "content" as a term meaning "a commodity borne of engaging in PVP activity in Eve Online."
Quote: But this doesn't actually reduce the power of bombers. Cuse ya know they are still just as powerful as before. Bombs aren't affected by this change and neither are bombers capabilities. You can still fleet warp to a cloaky on grid and bombers can still do the same amount of damage as before. This change just makes no sense.
Positioning matters. Contemporary bombing runs rely on split-second combat probing. Requiring a physical warp-in not only decreases the number of bombing runs that can happen, but also places a weakness in the whole shebang in the form of the warp-in.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Rectar en Meunk
Rifterlings The WeHurt Initiative
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:50:07 -
[877] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Long Muppet wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote: To put this into context drone assign was largely removed as we know it. CCP said that they think it is bad when other people play the game for you.
This is a great point Manny! Maybe, just like with drone assign we should allow squad commanders to fleet warp their 10 people. This ensures you are still taking a nerfbat to the ridiculously huge nullsec fleets while not simultaneously killing small gangs. I get that having a scout in a large fleet isn't a big deal as they generally have many of them, but requiring a small gang to now dedicate one of their pilots as scout is unnecessary and ruins game play. Finding a middle ground (just as we did we drone assign) is the best option. Good suggestion and this is the exact reason CCP asks for feedback in these threads Make it happen and this will become my favorite patch ever (after bookmarks in space).
To add to https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5813029#post5813029, this change requires sub-fcs which might just do warping, or they might do more. A perfect position to put FCs in training into. |
M1k3y Koontz
Respawn Disabled Initiative Mercenaries
757
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:50:49 -
[878] - Quote
Ripblade Falconpunch 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. In your opinion. And the 42 pages of mostly negative feedback seem to think that by and large, your opinion sucks almost as much as your attitude towards people with different opinions. Sadly there's no mechanic for impeaching CSM members - because you and most of your brethren would be on the docket right now after the buggy / broken / terrible map, the "new and improved" icons, and now this.
Fourty-two pages of bitching about a change that isn't the end of the world is a Tuesday for EVE.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
TheSmokingHertog
TALIBAN EXPRESS
314
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:53:39 -
[879] - Quote
Fayde Sinulf wrote: 4) Player deployed warp beacons. More use for WH's and system defenders I imagine but these can be deployed and can be be seen by all in system.
That would be a great addition for fleets with a mixed corporate composition, for a lot of ops performed by fleet, you can map possibilities within the ops target, at that moment a prepared fleet will get nice results.
"Dogma is kind of like quantum physics, observing the dogma state will change it." ~ CCP Prism X
"Schrödinger's Missile. I dig it." ~ Makari Aeron
-= "Brain in a Box on Singularity" - April 2015 =-
|
Lidia Caderu
Harbingers of Chaos Inc Gentlemen's.Club
42
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:55:24 -
[880] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets (e.g bombers).
Aha |
|
Dermeisen
14
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 17:59:21 -
[881] - Quote
Elenahina wrote:Torgeir Hekard wrote:baltec1 wrote:Yes, making a safe on the fly is exactly what a scout does. Nope. It's something a scout may begrudgingly have to do because there's nobody else to do that, but tries to avoid doing as much as possible. It's like saying that flying droneboats is fun, and then state that scoopdeploying is exactly what a droneboat pilot does. You need better scouts. If I tell my scout to make rolling safes, and he says, "Ugh, fine if I have to", I will leave his ass to die at the next gate camp (and I might help them kill him). The FC runs the fleet, the members carry out tasks issued by the FC. If the members are incapable or unwilling to carry out those tasks, replace them. It's just that simple. The days of the FC basically doing everything but clicking "Jump" and pushing "F1" need to die with a furious vengenace in the firey pits of hades. Go watch the Eve is real trailer again and ask yourself where the hero interceptors are these days?
Love this comment, yes CCP have reinvigorated a long neglected career: the scout. I have met some Gor Dam'ed awesome scouts in this game. It's an art, getting the perfect warp from a cov-ops, getting the drop on the enemy should be more about team work and less about convenient mechanics.
Getting from the "run spot" to the warp-in means the bombers must be pointed in the right way, aligned to drop out of war at the right distance to blab them real quick , beautiful. The only way to acquire those kind of skills is to require them.
We're hearing lot of 'game breaking' hyperbole but no one's providing much evidence. Or is it a better game when FC's warped us all to point X and all we had to do was drop sentries, come on please we need only train up better scouts.
FC's online is fine game if all you aspire to be is a drone
+1 for this change
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
Vic Jefferson
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
352
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:00:53 -
[882] - Quote
What you need is a bandaid for a few hedge cases of large fleet encounters, and you instead order a brain surgery.
This change would be horrible. You should encourage the smashing of fleets onto each other more; half the problem of big fleet fights is the ease of disengagement because every damn thing out there worth flying doesn't brawl. Higher body count encounters where fleets can't just wisp away from each other easily is a GOOD THING, and this change more or less helps fleets be really picky about engagements. It continually amazes me how little ISK in ships is lost in fights in null compared to what is fielded; the meta does enough work to keep fleets alive, why would you exacerbate this more and take one of the few tools that lets kiting fleets be punished?
Fix bombers separately. Jesus.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X
|
xeddyx
Capts Deranged Cavaliers Gentlemen's.Club
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:01:56 -
[883] - Quote
Remove fleet and wing warps for those, leave squad warps alone. |
Brother Mercury
Fire on the Mountain
17
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:08:40 -
[884] - Quote
Please do not implement this in its current form or even before fozzie sov comes onto TQ in its entirety. I don't think you've appreciated all the adverse effects that it will cause, with little to no benefits.
CCP wrote:The goal of these changes is to encourage more individual fleet member participation and reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets (e.g bombers).
This will not encourage more individual fleet member participation, but rather it will make FCing with a covert-ops alt mandatory. At BEST it makes a non-alt covert-ops fleet member mandatory. Thus, literally, your goal to encourage more fleet member participation results in the "participation" of exactly ONE added person playing the, more often than not boring, role of probing/scouting.
Fix bombers specifically, instead of implementing this change which will have drastic impacts many other gameplay areas.
CCP wrote:Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members.
Again, you're not transferring ANY responsibility besides making it mandatory for one fleet member to be a covert-ops scout, and you should know very well CCP that this just makes this a mandatory role for the FC, aka another alt.
Potential positive changes:
- Bombing runs take slightly longer to perform/are harder to pull off.
- Exactly ONE fleet member potentially has more ability to help fleet engagements, unless the FC just adds another alt -- which 90% of the time he will.
- Makes dictors/hics stronger -- is this good?
Negative changes:
- Time for a battle to take place INCREASED. If you can't find your target or your desired location to warp-in, it will only make engagements more boring and drawn-out, if not prevent a fight from happening outright. To go along with this point, it makes it that much more difficult to catch nano fleet comps/gangs and really engage, rather than the nano fleet poking you twice and running, resulting in a waste of an hour trying to probe them/catch them down. This is your idea of fun?
- Contrary to what you believe a result will be -- that is, to make meta shifts away from nano fleets -- it will only increase their power due to fast movement and the inability to catch them. No one will even consider (not that it happens often) using a slow speed/warp fleet.
- I don't think anyone (at CCP) has realized how drastically this will impact arrival times of ships on grid. No more fleet warping to fleet member. OK, so now when your fleet of cruisers, frigs, battleships (haha not anymore), etc. have to warp individually the landing times on-grid will be extremely varied.
- Makes gameplay/moving a fleet that much more tedious than it already is.
- Makes it mandatory to have MANY more bookmarks. Having a timer come out? Better get your entire alliance to make the same perches around the timer objective! RIP the hamsters.
- Off-grid boosters are even safer, contrary to what your intentions are.
- I'm not a WH player, but from what I've read the way it takes bookmarks to propagate, this change just makes their gameplay even more tedious, boring, and alt filled.
- Makes dictors/HICS stronger. Bad?
Overall the changes give little to encourage the type of behavior you're seeking, while taking away good gameplay and increasing tedious and boring gameplay.
I'm quoting a part of this post as well because it is very accurate. The whole post is spot on as well.
FT Diomedes wrote:News flash to CCP: real people who play the game are the most precious asset in this game.
Your changes, however, make the game increasingly tedious and obnoxious to play, which drives away the real people.
There is no FC on the cluster who would rather have another alt in fleet than a real person. I already delegate every possible task to my corp mates that I possibly can - the ones I keep for myself are the ones that I cannot delegate to someone who only has one account and will have no fun filling that role.
Come up with some truly rewarding roles for people in fleets. As it is, you keep multiplying the number of thankless roles that are best done on an alt - because your business strategy seems to be to squeeze as much out of the existing humans as possible.
In the past I described Eve as "white-knuckled, trembling hands, exciting." I'd literally sweat during a fight. Now the words I would use are "tedious, a chore, like a second job." The only reason I still play or stay at all engaged with Eve is because I feel I owe it to my friends to keep logging in and participating. My masochism is steadily wearing thin. Playing Eve should not be an unpleasant or boring experience, yet that is what you have been doing over the course of the past year. I accepted jump fatigue because it promised good things - it was bitter medicine that might save Eve. Now we have fatigue, entosis, and this nonsense.
You have a very narrow idea of what is fun in Eve - not everyone enjoys your pseudo-solo/small gang elitist PVP mentality. Most people just want to log in and have fun playing Eve with their friends. Make Eve easy to play - not another chore. The challenge should come from the other players, not from the interface or silly restrictions. |
Xzeratuhl
Project AIice Whatever.
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:09:58 -
[885] - Quote
Change "Defender Missiles" to destroy Bombs?
Never see in my eve time Defender Missiles. Was that a CCP prank? |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
235
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:18:18 -
[886] - Quote
Vic Jefferson wrote:What you need is a bandaid for a few hedge cases of large fleet encounters, and you instead order a brain surgery. This change would be horrible. You should encourage the smashing of fleets onto each other more; half the problem of big fleet fights is the ease of disengagement because every damn thing out there worth flying doesn't brawl. Higher body count encounters where fleets can't just wisp away from each other easily is a GOOD THING, and this change more or less helps fleets be really picky about engagements. It continually amazes me how little ISK in ships is lost in fights in null compared to what is fielded; the meta does enough work to keep fleets alive, why would you exacerbate this more and take one of the few tools that lets kiting fleets be punished? Fix bombers separately. Jesus.
The same could be said for SC/Titans, instead we got Fatty Gay |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2498
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:22:46 -
[887] - Quote
Has the general trend of FC'ing really devolved so much to 1 man his alts and a handful of bored line pilots? |
|
CCP Larrikin
C C P C C P Alliance
116
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:24:02 -
[888] - Quote
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! |
|
Imataki Nobuno
Sword of Glory
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:28:12 -
[889] - 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! Would you be able to address mixed corp/alliance fleets in the OP as well, or will that be addressed next week? |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2498
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:28:42 -
[890] - 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! Just curious, as sometimes I see a pattern, is the right before the weekend post release an intentional thing or unfortunate consequence of how dev work goes?
Or am I just off point there |
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1380
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:28:48 -
[891] - Quote
Leoric Firesword wrote:Sparrow Creature wrote:this change will kill wormhole just saying.. not really, after you align to your next site, instead of your FC warping you he gives the command "warp now" or "warp to b" and boom, you're doing the same thing you did before. you're welcome that I fixed wormholing for you :)
And al the different ship classess arrive in dibs and drabs and are obliterated because there was no logi or support for the logi.
Brilliant.
Or did you forget they all warp at different speeds now? You did, didn't you..... |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1380
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:31:03 -
[892] - 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!
You really need to address a way to allow people to coordinate warp speeds because you're crippling/killing the ONLY way we currently have to do this. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1718
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:31:40 -
[893] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Leoric Firesword wrote:Sparrow Creature wrote:this change will kill wormhole just saying.. not really, after you align to your next site, instead of your FC warping you he gives the command "warp now" or "warp to b" and boom, you're doing the same thing you did before. you're welcome that I fixed wormholing for you :) And al the different ship classess arrive in dibs and drabs and are obliterated because there was no logi or support for the logi. Brilliant. Or did you forget they all warp at different speeds now? You did, didn't you..... In what world do you live in where ships die instantly upon loading grid?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Servanda
Liga Freier Terraner Northern Coalition.
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:31:56 -
[894] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Leoric Firesword wrote:Sparrow Creature wrote:this change will kill wormhole just saying.. not really, after you align to your next site, instead of your FC warping you he gives the command "warp now" or "warp to b" and boom, you're doing the same thing you did before. you're welcome that I fixed wormholing for you :) And al the different ship classess arrive in dibs and drabs and are obliterated because there was no logi or support for the logi. Brilliant. Or did you forget they all warp at different speeds now? You did, didn't you.....
1. Cloaked alt warps first 2. FC warps Fleet to that alt
Fixed |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2498
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:32:10 -
[895] - Quote
Imataki Nobuno wrote: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! Would you be able to address mixed corp/alliance fleets in the OP as well, or will that be addressed next week? If you are referring to the bookmarks thing, it's addressed in the OP update |
Jeff Kione
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
14
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:33:02 -
[896] - 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!
Fleet participation =/= sitting in space pretending to be a bookmark. That's not very engaging. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2498
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:34:06 -
[897] - Quote
Jeff Kione wrote: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! Fleet participation =/= sitting in space pretending to be a bookmark. That's not very engaging. Sitting in space pretending you are bookmark = not using brainpower |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1718
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:34:29 -
[898] - Quote
Jeff Kione wrote: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! Fleet participation =/= sitting in space pretending to be a bookmark. That's not very engaging. It is when you are in the middle of an enemy fleet, desperately keeping traversal up to survive.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Dun'Gal
Myriad Contractors Inc.
234
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:35:18 -
[899] - Quote
Bad change overall - though I guess I should thank you for saving the subscription fee I pay for my probing alt? |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1380
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:37:22 -
[900] - Quote
Servanda wrote:afkalt wrote:Leoric Firesword wrote:Sparrow Creature wrote:this change will kill wormhole just saying.. not really, after you align to your next site, instead of your FC warping you he gives the command "warp now" or "warp to b" and boom, you're doing the same thing you did before. you're welcome that I fixed wormholing for you :) And al the different ship classess arrive in dibs and drabs and are obliterated because there was no logi or support for the logi. Brilliant. Or did you forget they all warp at different speeds now? You did, didn't you..... 1. Cloaked alt warps first 2. FC warps Fleet to that alt Fixed
Well god knows that adds 'depth' to WH gameplay. It's totally not a points ******* speedbump.
Still, at lesat they are reviewing it because they're not happy. Although why the hell it was posted in that state I'll never know....it's almost as if they didn't think it through. |
|
Jeff Kione
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
15
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:38:27 -
[901] - Quote
Querns wrote:Jeff Kione wrote: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! Fleet participation =/= sitting in space pretending to be a bookmark. That's not very engaging. It is when you are in the middle of an enemy fleet, desperately keeping traversal up to survive.
Getting warp ins is not something new from this change. Having to have a ship sitting at a tactical in order to be able to move the fleet there is, however, and that's boring for the pilot tasked with that mundane job. |
Headhunter JAX
Macabre Votum Northern Coalition.
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:39:44 -
[902] - Quote
Dear CCP, u destroyed :
- Jump mechanics for capitals (range) - recently ICONS :F - now destroying another cool mechanics for fleets
Eve is becoming
like :
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2014/1/24/1390568266206/cat-jump-fail.gif
or like this :
http://www.killthehydra.com/wp-content/uploads/cat-jump-fail-gif.gif
#bringOldeveback :F |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1380
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:39:44 -
[903] - Quote
Querns wrote:Jeff Kione wrote: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! Fleet participation =/= sitting in space pretending to be a bookmark. That's not very engaging. It is when you are in the middle of an enemy fleet, desperately keeping traversal up to survive.
You're mixing up combat enagagement vs simply warping to a corp bookmark.
Given the lag on BM propogation there's NO COMBAT impact to those, but hey - we don't need QOL or a way to move fleets as a unit efficiently, right? We need to find something for those poor poor frigates that everyone leaves at home because no FC ever wants tackle.
Right?
It's horseshit. There were a plethora of ways to address the perceived issues without heinous collateral damage and these changes are not it. It's like deleting drones because of ishtars. |
Asuka Solo
Knights of Azrael Circle-Of-Two
2964
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:44:25 -
[904] - Quote
Ripblade Falconpunch 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. In your opinion. And the 42 pages of mostly negative feedback seem to think that by and large, your opinion sucks almost as much as your attitude towards people with different opinions..
I recall a crap ton of hate filled pages regarding the introduction of jump fatigue and the deletion of skynet.... but it was good for the game wasn't it.... So get over yourself.
Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!
|
Bjurn Akely
Knights of Nii The 20 Minuters
83
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:49:30 -
[905] - Quote
I propose we test this. Next fleet you FC, don't use fleet warp. That should give us some opinions based upon experience. Sure, I *think* I know how this will end up... but hey, few things can refute empirical evidence. |
Tsukino Stareine
Sock Robbers Inc. Low-Class
1181
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:50:07 -
[906] - Quote
Remove fleet warps to sigs but don't give us alliance bookmarks.
Thanks assholes. |
Marech Bhayanaka
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:50:59 -
[907] - Quote
There are an awful lot of misguided responses here, or at least responses from a very narrow point of view.
Some say it changes nothing, because FC's will just run another alt scout. This is kind of a hard choice, because they can do that and be less effective overall (divided attention) or they can let someone else scout the warp to points. Hard choices make the game interesting
Then some say nobody will want to do the scouting because they want in on the kill mails, and those poor pvpers will be forced to scout instead. But not everyone measures their time in the game by their killboards. Some simply want a sense that they have made a meaningful contribution to the success of their team, and if scouting becomes more important, it will be easier for scouts to feel so.
Some bemoan the inability to get the whole fleet to land on grid at once. Except that in most situations, you can still fleet warp to a scout. And if it takes more planning and skill to coordinate arrival when not doing a fleet warp, this seems to me like another way that a well trained fleet has an advantage over a poorly trained one. That's a good thing. The more opportunities there are for player skill to matter, the more interesting the game is.
I don't know overall how this change will be. It impacts so many different scenarios that I don't profess to understand all the impacts. But it seems to me that many of the responses we are seeing are overblown and emotional rather than factual.
And using that as a clumsy segue, I'd like to point out that the posts which devs are responding to are not the ones that say "As always you are f**** up", or "this will kill the game!!!!". Devs are responding to posts that clearly describe potential issues in a step by step, rational way. If you'd like YOUR post to matter at all, you might consider emulating that style.
Marech. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1069
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:54:35 -
[908] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Q: CCP, this change doesn't create more pilot engagement / participation, the FC will just run another alt that he fleet warps too! A: That would work sure. But fleets who have members assisting the FC by setting up warpin's, getting tackle, etc. are going to be a lot more effective. We can't force you to participate in the fleet, but we can give an advantage to those that do.
Want to Buy: the FC who currently does not rely on other humans to perform these tasks already.
This strawman that all fleets are composed of a single FC with 255 F1-monkeys is absurd. If that's really what you people think, you should try getting on coalition comms during a large fleet. FC channels are abuzz with information. The main channel is full of people muzzled by the need to pass information.
Sure, in squad sized fleets, everyone can talk and report more, but the same is true in the real world. My Marines don't try to talk over the battalion CO when he issues his orders, but they tell their squad and team leaders what they see going on out on patrol.
Every large fleet I have ever been on has numerous subchannels full of scouts, spies, staging system eyes, backup FC's, FC mentors, capital FC's, etc. The fact that some dude can warp 255 other pilots from point A to point B is not the key to his success. It is the system and organization supporting him.
This system, like nearly every other change over the past year, clearly favors the largest and best organized groups to the detriment of everyone else. The harder you make Eve to play, the more powerful the meta game becomes. The more bureaucracy you require to succeed, the less fun the game becomes.
All you elite PVPers circle-jerking over "now the F1 monkeys will have to have some real skill and we can pwn them with our 1337 h@xor skills" need to remove your craniums from your rectums. You'll still win when the odds are in your favor and you'll still get your faces pushed in when they are not. It will just be slightly more obnoxious than it is now - while Eve as a whole is trending towards fewer active players and more tedium every day.
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
So, why do I continue to provide feedback on these forums?
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5813975#post5813975
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1718
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:54:40 -
[909] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Querns wrote:Jeff Kione wrote: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! Fleet participation =/= sitting in space pretending to be a bookmark. That's not very engaging. It is when you are in the middle of an enemy fleet, desperately keeping traversal up to survive. You're mixing up combat enagagement vs simply warping to a corp bookmark. Given the lag on BM propogation there's NO COMBAT impact to those, but hey - we don't need QOL or a way to move fleets as a unit efficiently, right? We need to find something for those poor poor frigates that everyone leaves at home because no FC ever wants tackle. Right? It's horseshit. There were a plethora of ways to address the perceived issues without heinous collateral damage and these changes are not it. It's like deleting drones because of ishtars. It sounds like, indeed, they think moving fleets is too easy. It appears to be the primary point of the change. Is it less convenient than the status quo to which you and quite a few of the posters here are accustomed? Of course.
Also, your insistence, and the insistence of several posters in the thread, of corp bookmarks being the solution to the problem (or a font of annoyance due to their slow propagation time) is amusing. These bandaid workarounds only work if all of your pilots are in the same corporation. Being able to share bookmarks and probe results in this fashion automatically would give homogeneous groups an advantage over those not in the same corporation. As such, I steadfastly disagree that corp bookmarks should ever be instantaneous.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1380
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:58:40 -
[910] - Quote
Marech Bhayanaka wrote:Some bemoan the inability to get the whole fleet to land on grid at once. Except that in most situations, you can still fleet warp to a scout. And if it takes more planning and skill to coordinate arrival when not doing a fleet warp, this seems to me like another way that a well trained fleet has an advantage over a poorly trained one. That's a good thing.
Again, people are conflating combat manoeuvres with basic fleet movement to corp BMs.
There's a hefty lag on a corp BM propogating (so useless in a fight). I shouldn't need a throwaway ship to "warp to" in order to coordinate a corporate fleet warp to a freakin' corp bookmark.
It's illogical and downright unnecessary.
Or we should have a way to regulate/match warp speeds to replace the lost functionality. Currently the ONLY way to do this is the fleet warp.
Is it insurmountable? No, alts can be employed. Is it smart? Does it add value? Good gamplay? Does it hell. |
|
Zazad Antollare
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 18:59:13 -
[911] - Quote
Just remove all fleet warp and let me broadcast bookmarks and scan results. You don't warp people around you just tell them where to go. |
Seraph Essael
eXceed Inc.
1112
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:01:47 -
[912] - Quote
*Slowclap*
Such a thourough and well thought out plan. I applaud CCP on considering all aspects of the game and not screwing any particular group over...
Quoted from Doc Fury: "Concerned citizens: Doc seldom plays EVE on the weekends during spring and summer, so you will always be on your own for a couple days a week. Doc spends that time collecting kittens for the on-going sacrifices, engaging in reckless outdoor activities, and speaking in the 3rd person."
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1380
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:02:47 -
[913] - Quote
Querns wrote:afkalt wrote:Querns wrote:Jeff Kione wrote: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! Fleet participation =/= sitting in space pretending to be a bookmark. That's not very engaging. It is when you are in the middle of an enemy fleet, desperately keeping traversal up to survive. You're mixing up combat enagagement vs simply warping to a corp bookmark. Given the lag on BM propogation there's NO COMBAT impact to those, but hey - we don't need QOL or a way to move fleets as a unit efficiently, right? We need to find something for those poor poor frigates that everyone leaves at home because no FC ever wants tackle. Right? It's horseshit. There were a plethora of ways to address the perceived issues without heinous collateral damage and these changes are not it. It's like deleting drones because of ishtars. It sounds like, indeed, they think moving fleets is too easy. It appears to be the primary point of the change. Is it less convenient than the status quo to which you and quite a few of the posters here are accustomed? Of course. Also, your insistence, and the insistence of several posters in the thread, of corp bookmarks being the solution to the problem (or a font of annoyance due to their slow propagation time) is amusing. These bandaid workarounds only work if all of your pilots are in the same corporation. Being able to share bookmarks and probe results in this fashion would automatically would give homogeneous groups an advantage over those not in the same corporation. As such, I steadfastly disagree that corp bookmarks should ever be instantaneous.
I have never complained about the propagation delay or asked for them to be instant. The very fact they lag is WHY you should be allowed to fleet warp there. It prevents ad-hoc combat use, it helps the well prepared by adding value to pre-scouting/pre bookmarking areas. It gives people a home field advantage in their home systems by having corp bounces available to fleets.
The lag should remain, but we should be allowed to warp there as a fleet because all pilots CAN warp directly there manually.
Alternatively, let us regulate our warp speeds.
As I say, if the aim was to split fleets, then they simply stop the unification of warp speeds in a fleet warp. They have not - thus it is apparent that this is collateral damage. |
Marech Bhayanaka
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:08:56 -
[914] - Quote
afkalt wrote: Again, people are conflating combat manoeuvres with basic fleet movement to corp BMs.
There's a hefty lag on a corp BM propogating (so useless in a fight). I shouldn't need a throwaway ship to "warp to" in order to coordinate a corporate fleet warp to a freakin' corp bookmark.
If this is not a combat situation, why does it have to be a "throwaway" ship? (Not arguing, just asking).
Marech.
|
Helios Anduath
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:10:41 -
[915] - Quote
So, let me get this straight, with this change CCP are trying to kill, or at least severely nerfing by slowing down, several different game play styles:
1. Wormhole life/activity in general. With one hand, you give us fun new W-Space systems but with the other you make it more tedious and unappealing to play in them as a group.
2. Group exploration roams. Specifically roams where you allocate different people in fleet to scan different sigs and everyone then warps to the juicy relic/data to run it together. This will also impact on any exploration training roams for newer players into lowsec/nulslec as the teacher will also have to be scanning down sigs rather than just focusing on keeping the newbies safer and looking for threats.
3. NPSI Fleets and other rag-tag fleets where not every one has access to a shared set of bookmarks (shared bookmarks are NOT a "solution" for this bad change because of different warp speeds/acceleration).
4. ANY fleet that makes spontaneous/unplanned use of tactical bookmarks and pings.
5. Manually multiboxing miners, or even a normal mining fleet or any multiboxed group, where you want to be able to fleet warp to a safe.
6. fleet Blitz-daytripping into Wormholes for ninja gas huffing. Now everyone in the fleet will have to go and make safes rather than just the scout who found the site/hole.
7. Advanced intelligence gathering/preparation where a scout goes ahead of the fleet by some time to set up bookmarks, etc.
8. Providing scouting services through Thera and other wormhole chains where the scout is the only one with the bookmarks.
9. Level 5 missions (or any other group PVE for that matter).
10. Any fleet that wants to arrive simultaneously at a bookmark. Before people suggest allowing us to vary our warp speed, think how many other "exploitable" headaches that would result in.
Yes, cloaky scouts could be used to mitigate some of these but how many scouts would you need? For some situations, I could see LOTS of scouts being needed to the order or more scouts than people partaking in the actual fleet activity. Some speculation from me here, but you would also need the same number number for each additional fleet in large operations with more than one fleet involved.
For some situations, this is going to require either a multiboxed alt just to sit at a safe/ping/POS/wherever or have an actual player sat there effectively AFK cloaked. If it has to be a player, you know it is going to end up being the newest/lowest skilled person in the group - Being sat there doing nothing is NOT engaging gameplay and you are just creating another problem reminiscent of off grid boosters.
This is going to hit both large fleet ops and small fleet ops but my personal feeling is that this is going to have the greatest un-mitigatable negative effect on actual small group activities by requiring lots of supporting players/alts and more preparation. I could see this change helping to push EvE towards the two extremes of there only being solo play and larger fleet activity as everything else is too tedious and requires a disproportionate ammount or preparation.
From an FC point of view, unless I have a competent scout sat at the destination who is actually there and not off taking a bio or watching netflix (non-engaging gameplay remember) this just makes my job more frustrating as I now have to worry about if people are warping and when they warp so that they arrive as a cohesive group in addition to worrying about if they are doing whatever we are going to do. My opinion is this is going to increase FC Burnout and make FCing a lot less fun.
|
Lim Yoona
12
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:12:47 -
[916] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Just curious, as sometimes I see a pattern, is the right before the weekend post release an intentional thing or unfortunate consequence of how dev work goes?
Or am I just off point there
The White House does the same thing
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1380
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:13:28 -
[917] - Quote
I should perhaps have said throwaway/covops. Sitting in a hole waiting on the rest of the fleet arriving at some point is not a nice thing to do.
Basically if they're removing things and trying to put things in the hands of pilots - but not furnishing us with tools to strategically match warp speeds with comrades which can no longer fleet warp to do so.....that's not really adding depth so much as a penalty.
I don't really care if the fleet warp is gone - what I care about it I have *no* replacement method available to me as a pilot to regulate warp speed. I need to wait until $DUDE gets into position so the FC can do tomorrow what he does today. There is absolutely no skill added to my gameplay nor options or scope for error.
It's neither makes sense nor fits with the spirit of the changes. |
Dun'Gal
Myriad Contractors Inc.
234
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:16:33 -
[918] - Quote
Seraph Essael wrote:*Slowclap*
Such a thourough and well thought out plan. I applaud CCP on considering all aspects of the game and not screwing any particular group over... This, many times over, I sort of get the reasoning... I think? But as a (somewhat) solo pilot, living in lowsec, with an outlaw main, it is exceedingly difficult to surprise targets hanging in deadspace with said outlaw. Having a second account able to provide fleet warp from the in-gate to sig helps, but by know means ensures a caught target, particularly one that is half-way vigilant or just hyper paranoid of new locals. Sitting my main in local to probe someone out is going to result in too much time idle for that main, likely resulting in the target leaving simply due to my presence in system.
Who knows, perhaps this is one of the cases they are intentionally trying to remove, in which case I despise the change even more. That said, I doubt "solo" pilots being able to fleet warp themselves is creating enough problems for them to warrant this kind of targeted nerf. |
Tsukino Stareine
Sock Robbers Inc. Low-Class
1182
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:17:39 -
[919] - Quote
This is what happens when wormholers don't have a voice in CSM |
Valterra Craven
578
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:18:44 -
[920] - Quote
Querns wrote: In what world do you live in where ships die instantly upon loading grid?
Lol Rooks and Kings kinda invented pipe bombing that does this almost exact thing haha. |
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1718
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:20:33 -
[921] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:Querns wrote: In what world do you live in where ships die instantly upon loading grid?
Lol Rooks and Kings kinda invented pipe bombing that does this almost exact thing haha. Sure, but logistics arriving too late due to non-uniform warp speeds wouldn't help you in that situation.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Kelso en Gravonere
Serrice Council Holding Corp Serrice Council.
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:22:58 -
[922] - 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.
It won't necessarily open up combat/fleets tactics if you are a small corp without a massive number of high sp alts who can do all the specialist roles... or if you like to fly with other smaller alliances on nrsi roams
and yes its great to have pvp pilots who can warp exactly where they are told by their stressed fc doing three other things at once... but to get new bros there they do need some 'comfort' fleet work especially when they are new to null sec...
there's more time to explain the game and what the fleet is doing while your fleet warping everyone..
no its sounds like on top of all the other stuff our 'valuable' content creators aka FC's have to do they will also need the patience of a saint whilst herding new to eve kittens around trying to keep them alive long enough to enjoy the 'fun' of pvp combat |
Lucius Kalari
Limited Power Inc It Must Be Jelly Cause Jam Don't Shake
14
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:23:23 -
[923] - 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!
+1 for CCP Larrikin for acknowledging the feedback. -1 for Fozzie who seems to be hiding in the corner.
Hi, I'm Lucius Kalari and I'm .LIMP
|
Kelso en Gravonere
Serrice Council Holding Corp Serrice Council.
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:24:47 -
[924] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:
Q: CCP, this change doesn't create more pilot engagement / participation, the FC will just run another alt that he fleet warps too! A: That would work sure. But fleets who have members assisting the FC by setting up warpin's, getting tackle, etc. are going to be a lot more effective. We can't force you to participate in the fleet, but we can give an advantage to those that do.
Want to Buy: the FC who currently does not rely on other humans to perform these tasks already. This strawman that all fleets are composed of a single FC with 255 F1-monkeys is absurd. If that's really what you people think, you should try getting on coalition comms during a large fleet. FC channels are abuzz with information. The main channel is full of people muzzled by the need to pass information. Sure, in squad sized fleets, everyone can talk and report more, but the same is true in the real world. My Marines don't try to talk over the battalion CO when he issues his orders, but they tell their squad and team leaders what they see going on out on patrol. Every large fleet I have ever been on has numerous subchannels full of scouts, spies, staging system eyes, backup FC's, FC mentors, capital FC's, etc. The fact that some dude can warp 255 other pilots from point A to point B is not the key to his success. It is the system and organization supporting him. This system, like nearly every other change over the past year, clearly favors the largest and best organized groups to the detriment of everyone else. The harder you make Eve to play, the more powerful the meta game becomes. The more bureaucracy you require to succeed, the less fun the game becomes. All you elite PVPers circle-jerking over "now the F1 monkeys will have to have some real skill and we can pwn them with our 1337 h@xor skills" need to remove your craniums from your rectums. You'll still win when the odds are in your favor and you'll still get your faces pushed in when they are not. It will just be slightly more obnoxious than it is now - while Eve as a whole is trending towards fewer active players and more tedium every day.
agreed |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
295
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:25:47 -
[925] - Quote
Tsukino Stareine wrote:This is what happens when wormholers don't have a voice in CSM This line of thinking is so tiresome.
I bet if CCP said wormholes would be unaffected by this change, you all would move the goal post immediately.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
98
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:27:32 -
[926] - Quote
You have 2 and also see this. |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
295
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:27:50 -
[927] - Quote
Lucius Kalari wrote: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! +1 for CCP Larrikin for acknowledging the feedback. -1 for Fozzie who seems to be hiding in the corner. Probably because Larrikin is behind this change and not Fozzie. But hey, don't let me get in the way of a good narrative.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
biz Antollare
eXceed Inc.
59
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:30:08 -
[928] - Quote
why don't you just remove w-space from the game.
also let's see the wh activity meter since the last round of genius fozzie ideas as was promised. (wh jump mass change)
it's crap like this that will make me unsub and start playing another game |
Winter Archipelago
Furtherance.
382
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:31:17 -
[929] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: Q: CCP, this change doesn't create more pilot engagement / participation, the FC will just run another alt that he fleet warps too! A: That would work sure. But fleets who have members assisting the FC by setting up warpin's, getting tackle, etc. are going to be a lot more effective. We can't force you to participate in the fleet, but we can give an advantage to those that do.
So the fleets that run dedicated scanners controlled as non-alt chars are going to be more effective via voice communications with their FC, trying to translate all of the events on-grid to the FC, trying to get a decent warp-in for the FC, all of this and more, will be more effective than the FC using an alt and being on-grid themselves to see what's happening, the movements, and set up a warp-in?
Information is lost in communication. The most effective fleets will be the ones whose scanning and warp-ins are provided by an alt of the FC simply because there will be no delay, no miscommunication, no missed information, etc.
Nevermind that there's still nothing addressing how heavily this will impact small gangs. Or micro gangs. Or whatever single-digit groups are being called this month.
Being a dedicated scout in a small gang is boring. Being forced to use T3 destroyers and cruisers, despite the 100 other ships in the game, is boring. This change does almost nothing to affect the large fleets who already ran multiple scouts, but it has a major impact on small gangs who will be forced into two types of ships (so everyone can scan) or will be forced to make one of their members (a significant percentage of their gang) to act as a dedicated scanner to sit there with their thumbs up their ass while the rest of the gang acts.
Preemptive "Put your scanner in a T3 destroyer or cruiser so they can join in the battle" response: **** that. Once again, why force people into one of two classes of ships when they had access to 100 other ships previously.
The change affects everyone, but it doesn't affect everyone equally.
Planning a trip to Thera? Check out http://eve-scout.com/ for a list of the current connections.
Once you've made your choice, join the channels EVE-Scout or Furtherance Public and request a scout to make sure your connection is clear!
|
niteyninja II
Sunshine Bear Crack Factory Mining is Funn
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:31:48 -
[930] - Quote
What a horrible idea |
|
Michal Jita
Lords Of The Universe
18
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:33:39 -
[931] - Quote
Not sure how many times this has been mentioned before but one of the biggest pros of fleet warp is warping with the speed of a slowest fleet member, a PVP or PVE fleet in WH will have to align and warp to bookmark often not having a scout in place beforehand especially in PVP, warping individually is not an option as smaller ships will land on grid and die before larger ones can come to their aid, this gets worse the longer the warp. Not being able to warp to corp bookmarks is very bad in my opinion, this removes a full part of the game where people could be at advantage by having these and being able to react quickly to what is goingo on on the grid. Now reacting quickly will be out of the window as to do anything you will need to put one member of the fleet in its place before warping rest. You have done such a great job placing bookmarks in space so we can see them on grid, now you are removing the biggest benefit of it, by not allowing us to react quickly. Those that were prepared and had bookmarks around the grid could use it now, it will be all about the numbers, those with more scouts doted around the grid will be at an advantage.
I can see more bad from this then good especially for small fleet roams and wormhole space.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16159
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:35:01 -
[932] - 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!
Dont give in to the lazy, no surrender.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Imataki Nobuno
Sword of Glory
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:35:06 -
[933] - Quote
Querns wrote:afkalt wrote:Querns wrote:Jeff Kione wrote: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! Fleet participation =/= sitting in space pretending to be a bookmark. That's not very engaging. It is when you are in the middle of an enemy fleet, desperately keeping traversal up to survive. You're mixing up combat enagagement vs simply warping to a corp bookmark. Given the lag on BM propogation there's NO COMBAT impact to those, but hey - we don't need QOL or a way to move fleets as a unit efficiently, right? We need to find something for those poor poor frigates that everyone leaves at home because no FC ever wants tackle. Right? It's horseshit. There were a plethora of ways to address the perceived issues without heinous collateral damage and these changes are not it. It's like deleting drones because of ishtars. It sounds like, indeed, they think moving fleets is too easy. It appears to be the primary point of the change. Is it less convenient than the status quo to which you and quite a few of the posters here are accustomed? Of course. Also, your insistence, and the insistence of several posters in the thread, of corp bookmarks being the solution to the problem (or a font of annoyance due to their slow propagation time) is amusing. These bandaid workarounds only work if all of your pilots are in the same corporation. Being able to share bookmarks and probe results in this fashion would automatically would give homogeneous groups an advantage over those not in the same corporation. As such, I steadfastly disagree that corp bookmarks should ever be instantaneous.
Regarding the bolded part, I think he means enabling an FC to fleet warp to a corporation bookmark while still disallowing FC fleet warps to personal bookmarks. If an FC fleet warps to a corporation bookmark, it will still warp members of the fleet not in that corporation. Because they do take longer to update, it would be useful for FCs that wish to warp their fleet directly to Jump Bridges or to insta-dock locations on stations while being entirely useless for combat. |
niteyninja II
Sunshine Bear Crack Factory Mining is Funn
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:35:18 -
[934] - Quote
Focus less on UI and ship/game mechanics, and more on new ship classes, modules, and ship rebalances. The latter will make the game more enjoyable. |
Jeff Kione
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
17
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:45:30 -
[935] - Quote
afkalt wrote:@Marech Bhayanaka: I should perhaps have said throwaway/covops. Sitting in a hole waiting on the rest of the fleet arriving at some point is not a nice thing to do.
We had a NPSI wormhole fleet a while back where we lost a ton of people along the chain because they couldn't keep up, people didn't want to sit around on the wormhole to provide the warp in for too long, etc. What happened to those people? They got left out of the content. |
Tsukino Stareine
Sock Robbers Inc. Low-Class
1183
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:48:06 -
[936] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Tsukino Stareine wrote:This is what happens when wormholers don't have a voice in CSM This line of thinking is so tiresome. I bet if CCP said wormholes would be unaffected by this change, you all would move the goal post immediately.
Funny that, because that would mean that they are listening to us and I wouldn't have such a low opinion of them in the first place. |
Kaliba Mort
Patriotic Tendencies Executive Outcomes
15
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:48:53 -
[937] - Quote
1. get a cov ops prober 2. get cov ops in perfect position in plex, target, warp in, whatever 3. fleet warp to cov. op. 4. profit
There is no ??? here. It's straight forward and simple.
Then you still have "warp with slowest member of fleet", and you have even better positioning than just warping at range to some probe result. You have eyes on target. You can send dictor ahead of main fleet to bubble up before fleet lands.
Overall, good change. Much less of a change than jump changes and upcoming sov changes.
|
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
249
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:49:18 -
[938] - Quote
Every competent -10 gank fleet starts with fleet warping to an instant undock bookmark. Any waiting in system requires fleet warping to safes, this is mechanically enforced by facpol and a gank fleet is completely useless if the whole fleet does not land on the target together. Do you want to kill gank fleets entirely? |
Jenshae Chiroptera
1671
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:53:48 -
[939] - Quote
This change also makes multi-language fleets more difficult.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
Na'hkin Oaks
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 19:54:00 -
[940] - Quote
Whoever thought of this flamboyant idea should take a 20% pay cut. |
|
Tia Mong
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 20:02:01 -
[941] - Quote
With the amount of stuff that could use some tweaking and repairing to better enhance the game I would have to say this should be a low priority on the totem pole. It brings myself to question what steps you came from to get this on your deployment radar and why this would come as a desire for change. You have mapping issues, Alliance book marking shares, and a laundry list more of stuff that could be focused on other then... in perspective finding a way to add a toilet to an automobile because no one has one. Judging from your overall changes that you typically make you should spend more time looking over game issues and work on them to harmonize your gamers experience then chasing non-essentials.
just my 2 isk... |
Elona Solette
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
17
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 20:06:15 -
[942] - Quote
The idea floating around that you allow probers to broadcast their results to the fleet seems a more elegant solution than probing dictators putting WWWs in fleet.
Retains the requirement for people to press their own movement buttons and does away with the WWWs mucking around.
Flying your own ship is a good thing btw. |
Vic Jefferson
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
359
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 20:08:22 -
[943] - Quote
Masao Kurata wrote:Every competent -10 gank fleet starts with fleet warping to an instant undock bookmark. Any waiting in system requires fleet warping to safes, this is mechanically enforced by facpol and a gank fleet is completely useless if the whole fleet does not land on the target together. Do you want to kill gank fleets entirely?
Harder yes, impossible not at all.
Put a cloaky dude at on offgrid instant bookmark; fleet undock, warp to Cloaky McEyes @ 100. Depending on the final destination, you may need one or two more such alts to complete said gank. I must admit it is a little bit more work and requires more characters, so I hear you there. Every good gank-commander I've known has at least 2 though so i wouldn't expect to see considerably less ganking. I used to warp catalysts directly to undock bookmarks and on top of barges with probes before too...and there is a lot of friction and timing issues with these fleets. Yeah this is a bit dumb.
Actually yeah after some amount of consideration, this is just another railroading of yet another playstyle care of the current meta and bombers.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X
|
didthat hurt
Delayed Effect
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 20:10:47 -
[944] - Quote
Your initial goal from this was to nerf bombers:
Quote:The goal of these changes is to encourage more individual fleet member participation and reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets (e.g bombers).
However, you have not nerfed bombers but have altered all styles of gameplay in a completely unnecessary manner.
You openly acknowledge bombers are a problem, as do we. Every player in null and every staff member at CCP knows they are a problem so just nerf them already. Take away all resistances for bombs so that they destroy themselves when launched en masse.
Quote:[UPDATE 2015-06-12] Q: CCP, this unduly effects people who live in wormholes! A: Yes, and we're not happy about that. We have some systems and ideas we're working on to mitigate these effects. However we're not ready to announce those yet.
Quote:......no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own.
Q: What if every member of the fleet has the bookmark? A: Nope, sorry, no go.
Obviously you haven't put enough thought into this. You have an idea in your mind of what you want: nerfed bombers. This is a terrible way of doing that, and I know you agree.
|
stoicfaux
5891
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 20:14:12 -
[945] - Quote
[tinfoil] This sounds like a back end run to set up a situation by introducing a problem (fleet warp change) that is then restored via an "expedited fleet warp" module only usable by Command BCs/T3s which then conveniently leads into "links now only work on-grid" (because, hey, your BC/T3 is on grid already...) [/tinfoil]
Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
|
Theia Matova
Dominance Theory
129
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 20:19:27 -
[946] - Quote
Since warping to fleet member is still enabled this would drive people to create alts for jump targets.. Which is pretty lame.. I own 2 accounts but I am still against multiboxing as its a feature that will make it harder for new people to come to PVP driven game as they realize the game is not meant to be played by one account.
Also what comes to WH space this will make it much less enjoyable or fun to live in WH.
Interested to hear how CCP is planning to counter the negative impact of the change.. Surely hope they don't think that people start subscribing more accounts for fleet warp alts. |
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
249
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 20:21:02 -
[947] - Quote
Vic Jefferson wrote:Masao Kurata wrote:Every competent -10 gank fleet starts with fleet warping to an instant undock bookmark. Any waiting in system requires fleet warping to safes, this is mechanically enforced by facpol and a gank fleet is completely useless if the whole fleet does not land on the target together. Do you want to kill gank fleets entirely? Harder yes, impossible not at all.
"Kill entirely" was an overstatement, I'm aware of this. But some FCs just won't bother any more. |
Bjurn Akely
Knights of Nii The 20 Minuters
83
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 20:26:03 -
[948] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:[tinfoil] This sounds like a back end run to set up a situation by introducing a problem (fleet warp change) that is then restored via an "expedited fleet warp" module only usable by Command BCs/T3s which then conveniently leads into "links now only work on-grid" (because, hey, your BC/T3 is on grid already...) [/tinfoil]
[tinfoil] I'd actually not mind that. Much. [opinion There should be a slew of different things that only specialized ships with specialized modules should be able to do. [/opinion] Especially of it was still doable to do squad warps. [/tinfoil] |
kyoukoku
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
34
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 20:30:21 -
[949] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:
[UPDATE 2015-06-12] Q: CCP, this unduly effects people who live in wormholes! A: Yes, and we're not happy about that. We have some systems and ideas we're working on to mitigate these effects. However we're not ready to announce those yet.
So don't fraking well implement the nerf on Fleet Warp to BM's until you've explored all side effects and taken steps to resolve the issues properly!!
Don't lump this in with fixing whatever issues exist with Bombers.
There's no point in releasing it as you've described it to us thus far, annoying the crap out of what is likely to be a large percentage of your playerbase, only to have to reverse some or all of the damage you've done at a later date, because that will be a huge waste of your time & resources which could've been put to much better use.
I'm all for increasing the level of teamwork & interaction between actual real people, and not increasing the legions of alts & huge fleets made up of huge scale multi-boxer setups (I have no problem with small scale multi-box/multi-client players as I have 2 accounts myself), but please think things through properly and consider the effects on everyone in all corners of New Eden. |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
633
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 20:35:17 -
[950] - Quote
If bombers are the issue, why not give the bomb launcher a spool-up timer like a MJD. That way they can't land and immediately fire their bombs. |
|
Alexis Crane Sharvas
Empire Assault Corp Dead Terrorists
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 20:42:23 -
[951] - Quote
I'll very simply say this does nothing to help improve fleet member involvement. This is a horribad idea. Terrible. Worse than jump fatigue. I wish we could get back to patches/changes that made the game more fun or interesting or worthwhile....instead of trying to make things more difficult. That's all that results here.....you are making some aspect of the game more difficult. That's counter intuitive imho. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2498
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 20:42:53 -
[952] - Quote
didthat hurt wrote:Your initial goal from this was to nerf bombers: Since when? |
Ponder Yonder
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
70
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 20:51:01 -
[953] - Quote
Dear CCP,
I can understand the benefits this change would have to fleet warfare, but I think there are 2 use cases that will suffer unduly: 1. Micro-fleets, i.e. 5 or less pilots ganging up for beer and bad-assery. Not being able to have coordinated warp-ins to targets of opportunity will hurt this play style. 2. Legitimate multi-boxers. I.e. players with multiple accounts playing Eve on multiple machines or monitors. These are your best customers, CCP. When multi-boxing, fleet warps are absolutely required. Individual warps simply can't be managed by a single human.
In order to address these two use cases I would propose that the intended changes apply to FLEET warps only. Leave SQUAD warps as they are. Squad commanders should be able to warp squad to bookmarks, etc., while fleet commanders can only warp to public objects.
This will allow the above two playstyles to continue without adverse effects and will bring additional benefits: 1. Squad commanders get operational responsibility 2. Squad commanders have a role, apart from 'filling a hole in the fleet hierarchy' 3. Squad command becomes a stepping stone on the path to FC. 4. Provides a better distinction of roles in fleets: FC's can focus on strategic decisions, while squad commanders are more focused on tactical decisions.
I believe this proposal is in line with your objectives of increasing player contribution to fleet operations and will reward those fleets with better organisational and managerial skills, while also opening a career progression path not previously available.
- Ponder |
DaReaper
Net 7
2206
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 20:58:26 -
[954] - Quote
kyoukoku wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:
[UPDATE 2015-06-12] Q: CCP, this unduly effects people who live in wormholes! A: Yes, and we're not happy about that. We have some systems and ideas we're working on to mitigate these effects. However we're not ready to announce those yet.
So don't fraking well implement the nerf on Fleet Warp to BM's until you've explored all side effects and taken steps to resolve the issues properly!!
this is why they as for feedback. The devs are human, and a lot of times, humans can't see the logical conclution or issues with there own ideas. And if you have a room full of like minded people, who are just looking at numbers, it gets harder for someone to say 'wait this is bad cause' because they ALL have the same info.
Add in 12 CSM members, lets go with an even split on agree/disagree, but just hearing for 6 people might make the room go 'oh you are over blowing things; or again, the 6 against may not be giving convincing arguments as to why this is bad.
So here is the hive mind. you place these ideas out there, and see where the trouble lies, then based on the info make changes.
In some cases, the trouble was an acceptable issue (jump fatigue making logistics hard) or the toruble will be dead based on a second feature or something else coming thats not linked to a change.
but offten times logical, concise, fact filled replies of 'no you are incorrect because of this' will make someone pause and go 'oh.. oops missed that'
this is why they do feed back. The alternative is to tell you nothing, and you find out on patch day.
OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!
|
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
264
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 20:59:56 -
[955] - 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! Another question: when the new structures, such as Citadels, come into the game, will fleet warp work with them as well? |
Lt Shard
Team Pizza Good at this Game
34
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 21:02:02 -
[956] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:[UPDATE 2015-06-12] Q: CCP, this unduly effects people who live in wormholes! A: Yes, and we're not happy about that. We have some systems and ideas we're working on to mitigate these effects. However we're not ready to announce those yet.
Is just not applying this change at all off the table? |
The Boogieman
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
33
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 21:08:46 -
[957] - Quote
Dunk Dinkle wrote:It appears that to nerf bombers, you are nerfing all fleets.
This, of course, has become the new way things are done around the office. It's the same principle that is currently strangling eve and causing so many cancellations in the thousands. Nerfing the entire game to stop single individuals or several individuals with "too much power", because certain people with influence at the top lose sleep over it.
It is the cancer killing eve and if it doesent stop, will incrementally cause its collapse. Making nerfs to the entire games player base because of a couple of people.
Welcome, to the World of Warcraft.
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
296
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 21:18:38 -
[958] - Quote
The Boogieman wrote:Dunk Dinkle wrote:It appears that to nerf bombers, you are nerfing all fleets. This, of course, has become the new way things are done around the office. It's the same principle that is currently strangling eve and causing so many cancellations in the thousands. Nerfing the entire game to stop single individuals or several individuals with "too much power", because certain people with influence at the top lose sleep over it. It is the cancer killing eve and if it doesent stop, will incrementally cause its collapse. Making nerfs to the entire games player base because of a couple of people. Welcome, to the World of Warcraft. So because you now how to fly your ship, the game has turned into WoW?
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Kinete Jenius
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
28
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 21:22:30 -
[959] - Quote
The Boogieman wrote:Dunk Dinkle wrote:It appears that to nerf bombers, you are nerfing all fleets. This, of course, has become the new way things are done around the office. It's the same principle that is currently strangling eve and causing so many cancellations in the thousands. Nerfing the entire game to stop single individuals or several individuals with "too much power", because certain people with influence at the top lose sleep over it. It is the cancer killing eve and if it doesent stop, will incrementally cause its collapse. Making nerfs to the entire games player base because of a couple of people. Welcome, to the World of Warcraft. Indeed
CCP "We need to nerf ishtars"
*Nerfs all sentry drones*
CCP "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!!!"
In comparison this nerf is astoundingly specifically targeted. I do find the willingness to make further adjustments to the nerf and the acknowledgement that it is hitting people it's not intended to hit good. I just hope they follow through with tweaking the nerf to be more friendly to those not intentionally being targeted. |
Andre Vauban
Quantum Cats Syndicate
405
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 21:25:01 -
[960] - Quote
I see this as a single solution to fix multiple problems:
1. Bombers are OP and mess up the doctrines available in nullsec 2. Probing and warping to fleets on grid messes up the doctrines available.
Instead of making the fleet warp changes, why not do the following:
1. Disallow fleet warp to anything on grid. If you want to fleet warp, you have to warp off to a different grid and then back. If you want to warp directly to the fleet, you need a scout to get on top of the enemy same as the CCP proposal. However, all the other downsides are removed.
2. Nerf the crap out of bombers by removing a lot of the bomb resistances. Make it so that you cannot have a bomb surviving more than 2-3 other bomb explosions. Bombers were originally an anti-blob mechanism to discourage people from forming giant blob fleets. However, with Fozzie-Sov providing its own anti-blob carrots bombers aren't needed as much to "reduce the blob".
.
|
|
D'Kmal
Variables Unlimited Chained Reactions
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 21:25:21 -
[961] - Quote
Dunk Dinkle wrote:...causing so many cancellations in the thousands.
Citation needed.
Amarr Capacitor Fueling Co: Disposing of your unwanted Minmatar Slaves since...
|
Crazy Candy
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
14
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 21:28:59 -
[962] - Quote
People need to stop saying this messes up bombing. It doesn't. A competent bombing FC has probes on his bomber, and can just warp down to the bombing spot to check if its good before telling the squad to warp to him. A lot of people were already doing this, anyways. It changes nothing.
If you wanted to nerf bombing, you beefed it again CCP. You just ****** up a ton of other stuff in the process. Good job. |
Helios Anduath
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
12
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 21:31:34 -
[963] - Quote
Ponder Yonder wrote: In order to address these two use cases I would propose that the intended changes apply to FLEET warps only. Leave SQUAD warps as they are. Squad commanders should be able to warp squad to bookmarks, etc., while fleet commanders can only warp to public objects.
This will allow the above two playstyles to continue without adverse effects and will bring additional benefits: 1. Squad commanders get operational responsibility 2. Squad commanders have a role, apart from 'filling a hole in the fleet hierarchy' 3. Squad command becomes a stepping stone on the path to FC. 4. Provides a better distinction of roles in fleets: FC's can focus on strategic decisions, while squad commanders are more focused on tactical decisions.
This actually makes a lot of sense and I quite like it... |
HiddenPorpoise
Expendable Miscreants
358
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 21:33:00 -
[964] - Quote
D'Kmal wrote:Dunk Dinkle wrote:...causing so many cancellations in the thousands.
Citation needed. We aren't at a real "EvE is dying" point, but yes, the numbers are slipping pretty bad from a late 2013 peak. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1720
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 21:37:50 -
[965] - Quote
HiddenPorpoise wrote:D'Kmal wrote:Dunk Dinkle wrote:...causing so many cancellations in the thousands.
Citation needed. We aren't at a real "EvE is dying" point, but yes, the numbers are slipping pretty bad from a late 2013 peak. Given that CCP doesn't publish subscription numbers, I find it difficult to believe you could actually prove this.
Note: peak concurrent user count has poor correlation to subscriber count.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Dermeisen
14
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 21:38:58 -
[966] - Quote
Servanda wrote:afkalt wrote:Leoric Firesword wrote:Sparrow Creature wrote:this change will kill wormhole just saying.. not really, after you align to your next site, instead of your FC warping you he gives the command "warp now" or "warp to b" and boom, you're doing the same thing you did before. you're welcome that I fixed wormholing for you :) And al the different ship classess arrive in dibs and drabs and are obliterated because there was no logi or support for the logi. Brilliant. Or did you forget they all warp at different speeds now? You did, didn't you..... 1. Cloaked alt warps first 2. FC warps Fleet to that alt Fixed
You are able to warp in a staggered fashion with that in mind and you hadn't forgotten about the session timer when you land on grid. You had, hadn't you......
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
Marech Bhayanaka
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 21:40:37 -
[967] - Quote
Scott Ormands wrote: Myself and other FC's already triple box, dont make it even more complicated when it doesn't have to be. Just because there is a way around it doesn't mean they should have to be used
If this gets to be too much for one person to do all by himself, I'm really not sure that's a bad thing.
Marech. |
Theia Matova
Dominance Theory
129
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 21:46:01 -
[968] - Quote
Querns wrote:HiddenPorpoise wrote:D'Kmal wrote:Dunk Dinkle wrote:...causing so many cancellations in the thousands.
Citation needed. We aren't at a real "EvE is dying" point, but yes, the numbers are slipping pretty bad from a late 2013 peak. Given that CCP doesn't publish subscription numbers, I find it difficult to believe you could actually prove this. Note: peak concurrent user count has poor correlation to subscriber count.
You cannot release count of subscriptions as they don't reflect to real player count anyway. As many of the accounts are alt accounts.
EVE will have more difficult time to attract new players as existing character base skill sets don't expire.. New players cannot virtually ever get on same level with old player. Plus for many players its impossible thought to even pay for one account. When they figure out you need more than one to succesfully do most of anything they will just quit.
CCP should be worried about this and about keeping the game still attracting for new players. |
scotayne hawkins
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
37
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 21:46:27 -
[969] - Quote
if the problem is with well educted bomber pilots and how they use those bomb's why not just change the dam bomb's, instead of the entire game mechanic alot of us use. i mean the deployable mines was removed cause they was so over powered and the problems they caused.
personally i use 4 accounts in deep space transports and squad warp those around moving feul etc through wh chains. 3 of which have no other use.
so with this in mind if this goes ahead i'd now have to manually warp 4 times per system. i foresee myself and properly many other removing our secondary accounts
so question is how many accounts are alts that rely on squad warps to get all those characters on grid that if this goes ahead is now potentially going to be de-activated.
at a guess i'd guess most ppl have atleast 2 accounts could CCP really afford for 50% of your subscription instantly turn off cause that sounds like redunances to me AGAIN.
Learn from History dont repeat it |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16161
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 21:57:01 -
[970] - Quote
HiddenPorpoise wrote:D'Kmal wrote:Dunk Dinkle wrote:...causing so many cancellations in the thousands.
Citation needed. We aren't at a real "EvE is dying" point, but yes, the numbers are slipping pretty bad from a late 2013 peak.
Citation needed.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
98
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 21:58:50 -
[971] - Quote
Crazy Candy wrote:People need to stop saying this messes up bombing. It doesn't. A competent bombing FC has probes on his bomber, and can just warp down to the bombing spot to check if its good before telling the squad to warp to him. A lot of people were already doing this, anyways. It changes nothing.
If you wanted to nerf bombing, you beefed it again CCP. You just ****** up a ton of other stuff in the process. Good job.
IMHO that is what they want to achieve. |
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2181
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 21:59:42 -
[972] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:unimatrix0030 wrote: Can't cloak, will get spotted on d-scan . Targets will be gone.
So fit for warp speed then. Roll up folks! Here we have a scanning intercept fit courtesy of baltec1! Apparently a combat prober should now also land tackle (obviously):
[Malediction, Baltec1's Probing Malediction]
Co-Processor II Co-Processor II Co-Processor II Co-Processor I
5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive Faint Warp Disruptor I [Empty Med slot]
Expanded Probe Launcher II [Empty High slot] [Empty High slot]
Small Processor Overclocking Unit II Small Hyperspatial Velocity Optimizer I
As you can see this is a perfect fit for both probing out and tackling ships. The choice of an unbonused hull is deliberate because using a covops to do your scanning is clearly too straightforward for CCP. This is more fun because it takes twice as long to resolve a signature, meaning that you will spend a lot more time in the new map which is just perfect for the task.
Of course it is also perfect for tackle. It has 2.43k EHP, more than enough to survive up to three seconds on grid with any enemy. Pay no attention to those people who say that more than a couple of fitting mods on a ship is bad - they are just failing to adapt.
---
On a more serious note, I often trundle around with my scanning alt in this:
[Cheetah, T2 fit]
Photonic Upgraded Co-Processor Micro Auxiliary Power Core I Inertial Stabilizers II
5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive Scan Rangefinding Array II Scan Pinpointing Array II Scan Rangefinding Array II
Covert Ops Cloaking Device II [Empty High slot] Expanded Probe Launcher II, Sisters Combat Scanner Probe
Small Warp Core Optimizer II Small Hyperspatial Velocity Optimizer II
(Small Warp Core Optimizer II because Thera.)
It is good at quickly resolving ships and then fleet warps tackle to catch the target. Timing is of the essence. In fact, they almost always get away because they are paying attention to local (null) or watching for probes (wormholes). Occasionally, however, they are a bit slow or hang around in the site too long. And then they get caught. This is balanced.
This game play is ruined with the change. A dedicated scanning alt will no longer be required for my roams because there will be no added advantage of having a fast prober.
Of course I will adapt. But I don't understand the point of ruining my game play when the design goals could be met with more intelligent changes rather than the typical sledgehammer approach.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Rayna 4
Oberon Incorporated Get Off My Lawn
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 22:00:07 -
[973] - Quote
I don't see how this is going to hinder those alliances that can field larger fleets. They just coordinate better with the extra needed alts from the 50+ players they have in fleet.
Small fleets on the other hand were all the work was done by an FC suddenly have lost an advantage they had over bigger fleets.
ccp may hate bomber runs but I saw a lot of it helped to more equalize the field of small vs large fleets. |
Marech Bhayanaka
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
12
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 22:00:28 -
[974] - Quote
Tara Read wrote: I've heard not ONE person praise the icon changes.
I saw a fair number. Here is another ... I like the new, more informative icons.
Marech. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16161
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 22:07:32 -
[975] - Quote
Theia Matova wrote:Querns wrote:HiddenPorpoise wrote:D'Kmal wrote:Dunk Dinkle wrote:...causing so many cancellations in the thousands.
Citation needed. We aren't at a real "EvE is dying" point, but yes, the numbers are slipping pretty bad from a late 2013 peak. Given that CCP doesn't publish subscription numbers, I find it difficult to believe you could actually prove this. Note: peak concurrent user count has poor correlation to subscriber count. You cannot release count of subscriptions as they don't reflect to real player count anyway. As many of the accounts are alt accounts. EVE will have more difficult time to attract new players as existing character base skill sets don't expire.. New players cannot virtually ever get on same level with old player. Plus for many players its impossible thought to even pay for one account. When they figure out you need more than one to succesfully do most of anything they will just quit. CCP should be worried about this and about keeping the game still attracting for new players.
You can do just fine with one account and you can only put so much SP into any one ship so saying new players cannot catch up is a flat out lie.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Lurifax
Shiva Nulli Secunda
26
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 22:09:18 -
[976] - Quote
Slippery pete's online |
Lars Erlkonig
Discrete Solutions Ltd.
16
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 22:10:02 -
[977] - Quote
LOW SEC ISSUES
For those of us that play in low sec, these changes cause some issues:
1) I probe out a DED site with my cov-ops that someone else is/may soon be running and warp to the site at 10 or 20 so I don't decloak. Currently any fleet members that try to warp to me at range will just land on the gate at 0 and if they are flying cloaked ships will also decloak. Fleet warping let me get a fleet on the site quickly and stealthily all at once. Any fix for this planned due to the changes?
2) For getting safe in lowsec, people are often using very fast ships, good scan strength/sig radius ratios, and aligned (100mn cruisers/10mn ab garmurs) in safe spots to minimize their risk of being caught. Often the only way to get a tackle on them is to fleet warp to the probe results and hope that you land in time before they burn out of range/off grid. Should people with snakes and a small enough scan sig be impossible to catch to due to the need to double warp to probe results in lowsec now? Are we creating a new no-risk meta for low sec?
3) Fixing fleets is all and good for giant alliances, but for small gang PVP, the ability to warp with the cov-ops is normally necessary to catch canny targets in time. This change removes a lot of risk from low sec...and it needs more risk tbh. Just limit warps to probe results to the squad level and mission fixed. Why use a wrecking ball when a hammer works just fine.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16161
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 22:11:34 -
[978] - Quote
Rayna 4 wrote:I don't see how this is going to hinder those alliances that can field larger fleets. They just coordinate better with the extra needed alts from the 50+ players they have in fleet.
Small fleets on the other hand were all the work was done by an FC suddenly have lost an advantage they had over bigger fleets.
ccp may hate bomber runs but I saw a lot of it helped to more equalize the field of small vs large fleets.
One of the most effective bomber FCs also just happens to fly for the group able to field 6 full fleets of subcaps and an entire fleets of supers and titans.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Dermeisen
14
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 22:12:18 -
[979] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:
Q: CCP, this change doesn't create more pilot engagement / participation, the FC will just run another alt that he fleet warps too! A: That would work sure. But fleets who have members assisting the FC by setting up warpin's, getting tackle, etc. are going to be a lot more effective. We can't force you to participate in the fleet, but we can give an advantage to those that do.
Want to Buy: the FC who currently does not rely on other humans to perform these tasks already. This strawman that all fleets are composed of a single FC with 255 F1-monkeys is absurd. If that's really what you people think, you should try getting on coalition comms during a large fleet. FC channels are abuzz with information. The main channel is full of people muzzled by the need to pass information. Sure, in squad sized fleets, everyone can talk and report more, but the same is true in the real world. My Marines don't try to talk over the battalion CO when he issues his orders, but they tell their squad and team leaders what they see going on out on patrol. Every large fleet I have ever been on has numerous subchannels full of scouts, spies, staging system eyes, backup FC's, FC mentors, capital FC's, etc. The fact that some dude can warp 255 other pilots from point A to point B is not the key to his success. It is the system and organization supporting him. This system, like nearly every other change over the past year, clearly favors the largest and best organized groups to the detriment of everyone else. The harder you make Eve to play, the more powerful the meta game becomes. The more bureaucracy you require to succeed, the less fun the game becomes. All you elite PVPers circle-jerking over "now the F1 monkeys will have to have some real skill and we can pwn them with our 1337 h@xor skills" need to remove your craniums from your rectums. You'll still win when the odds are in your favor and you'll still get your faces pushed in when they are not. It will just be slightly more obnoxious than it is now - while Eve as a whole is trending towards fewer active players and more tedium every day.
Interesting, but I don't buy it.... Of course it's organisation that wins fights however the rules of any game should accentuate the differences between ability otherwise skill is overwhelmed by other factors. Discipline in fleets is not trivial and F1 monkeys are a thing it's not actually elitist to point that out. Splitting fleets is a highly effective tactic when fighting a numerically superior force and this change amplifies the difficulty of managing a large fleet, undeniably making the value of an alert fleet and good scouts, more effective than a multi boxer or a drunken roam for instance. Isn't that just as it should be, not that I don't love a drunken roam. I say, not to you, but in general: live with it before you allow yourself to become hysterical and denounce the game.
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
didthat hurt
Delayed Effect
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 22:14:09 -
[980] - Quote
Rowells wrote:didthat hurt wrote:Your initial goal from this was to nerf bombers: Since when?
Since the initial post on page one, which was quoted in my reply. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16161
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 22:15:37 -
[981] - Quote
didthat hurt wrote:Rowells wrote:didthat hurt wrote:Your initial goal from this was to nerf bombers: Since when? Since the initial post on page one, which was quoted in my reply.
The one that says they are wanting to impact all fleets and gives bombers as just one example?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2499
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 22:23:25 -
[982] - Quote
didthat hurt wrote:Rowells wrote:didthat hurt wrote:Your initial goal from this was to nerf bombers: Since when? Since the initial post on page one, which was quoted in my reply. The one that literally mentioned it's not just for bombers? |
Marech Bhayanaka
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 22:31:52 -
[983] - Quote
Tara Read wrote: That's a terrible excuse Manfred. Come on.... so you expect other FC's to force other people to play fleet jockey or get another account.
And while we are on the topic, it sucks that FCs need other players to do the shooting and ewar, and control the drones. Think of the poor masses forced to interact with game like this!
Marech. |
Sakul Aubaris
IX Legio Hispana Aquila Fidelas Constans
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 22:36:43 -
[984] - Quote
Rowells wrote:didthat hurt wrote:Rowells wrote:didthat hurt wrote:Your initial goal from this was to nerf bombers: Since when? Since the initial post on page one, which was quoted in my reply. The one that literally mentioned it's not just for bombers?
The initial goal is to remove the posibillitiy to relocate your whole fleet with the bookmarks/ combatscanresulst of a single person in just one second.
Interceptors and cloaky scouts are the new way to add a bid more delay and complexity.
In wh space there is allmost allways a scout with the fleet, who can give you a warpin on a wh. Ceptors are already part of most midscale and bigger fleet, because they are great tackling ships and give you purges easily.
Yes it might be a bit more complex, but when ccp removed other features, a lot of guys complained about eve getting to easy: Here is your new "challenge". Adopt it, or die. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16163
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 22:37:25 -
[985] - Quote
Marech Bhayanaka wrote:Tara Read wrote: That's a terrible excuse Manfred. Come on.... so you expect other FC's to force other people to play fleet jockey or get another account.
And while we are on the topic, it sucks that FCs need other players to do the shooting and ewar, and control the drones. Think of the poor masses forced to interact with game like this! Marech.
Oh how the they feel the loss of having the whole fleet assisting their drones to them.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
AlienFury
EAT ATTiC
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 23:01:54 -
[986] - Quote
this is a horribad idea for reasons mentioned.
you guys need to work on opening station doors and leave fleet warps alone
|
Sirran The Lunatic
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
20
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 23:06:46 -
[987] - Quote
Want to command Fleets? Better sub an alt account.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$lolccp
Also, all this "rip bombers" "rip petes" garbage....
But yeah. Alt account$. Well played. |
Laena Solette
Know your Role EON Alliance
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 23:07:52 -
[988] - Quote
RIP Miningfleet controlled by one person?! If a neut comes in the system, what can i do with my fleet? -I can't use a fleetwarp to the POS-location -I can't use a fleetwarp to a deepsave
-I can use a fleetwarp to the station (Interdictors have fun) -I can warp to my Rorqualpilot and pray, that no fleetmember bump it outsite the forcefield -.- |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1722
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 23:13:08 -
[989] - Quote
Laena Solette wrote:RIP Miningfleet controlled by one person?! If a neut comes in the system, what can i do with my fleet? -I can't use a fleetwarp to the POS-location -I can't use a fleetwarp to a deepsave
-I can use a fleetwarp to the station (Interdictors have fun) -I can warp to my Rorqualpilot and pray, that no fleetmember bump it outsite the forcefield -.- Warping your fleet to your rorq at 10km is hard.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16163
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 23:13:16 -
[990] - Quote
Sirran The Lunatic wrote:Want to command Fleets? Better sub an alt account.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$lolccp
Also, all this "rip bombers" "rip petes" garbage....
But yeah. Alt account$. Well played.
Or you could, you know, get one or two fleet members to do it.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1506
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 23:14:58 -
[991] - Quote
Sirran The Lunatic wrote:Want to command Fleets? Better sub an alt account.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$lolccp
Also, all this "rip bombers" "rip petes" garbage....
But yeah. Alt account$. Well played. Why would you need an alt account? Why does this theoretical FC not know a single competent scout? |
Steven Hackett
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
177
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 23:21:34 -
[992] - 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! Please don't. We would like this change to be reviewed by an objective team who will take all of EVE into account, and not just butter their own bread.
Miss EVE 2015 popularity contest isn't a good venue for that sort of things. |
Marech Bhayanaka
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 23:22:41 -
[993] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:.As it is, you keep multiplying the number of thankless roles that are best done on an alt - because your business strategy seems to be to squeeze as much out of the existing humans as possible.
At the same time, you consistently nerf the ability for one player to control multiple ships doing the same task
Just reread this part of what you wrote. Cash you not see how conflicted and improbable it is?
Marech. |
BrundleMeth
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
441
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 00:03:25 -
[994] - Quote
RIP EVE... |
Marech Bhayanaka
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
14
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 00:52:12 -
[995] - Quote
Bill Lane wrote:
So you want to take away responsibilities of the FLEET COMMANDER to give more to members.....FLEET COMMANDER to me implies he leads the fleet. FFS
A fleet commander commands the fleet. He doesn't, or shouldn't have to, control their every twitch. Command and control are not the same thing.
Marech. |
Lyra Gerie
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
50
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 01:00:35 -
[996] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Lyra Gerie wrote:I like this change as much as I hate it. I love the idea of individuals being more responsible, but it KILLS quality of living at the same time. Unfortunately the two are fairly closely linked.
This issue goes double in wormholes where bookmarks are used almost more often for logistics than killing or fleet fights.
Perhaps a new deployable anchors and or anchor probes?
An anchor probe would show up on D-scan when launched at a 100% signal before showing on grid. They would have a warp of 4.5 AU/s and EHP around 10-25k depending on meta level and balance. After landing on grid it would auto deploy over 5-15 seconds again based on meta level and balance.
The attackers can now still warp to a target however it gives the target fair warning and time to destroy the probe before the scouts fleet can warp in.
As for deployable anchors they would stay in space for a certain amount of time or require some kind of fuel to stay anchored. There could be those that are short term used in single battles, or long term/more global anchors.
So the guy in the wormhole warps to the bookmark and WWWWWW's up. Then everyone gets fleet warped OMG THE TRAVESTY THAT THOSE EXTRA FEW SECONDS WILL CREATE. THINK OF ALL THE BELLY LENT YOU COULD HAVE PICKED IN THOSE FEW PRECIOUS SECONDS. DAMN YOU CCP DAMN YOU!!!!!!!111ON1E
This post shows you have NO idea how wormhole space works in actual practice and that your hard push to get this in was ignorant and not thought through.
Wormhole chains would require that you have someone ahead of you the whole time, it's not a matter of warping to public gates, but bookmarked wormholes with limited life. If no one is around to bring you through or share the book marks you have to scan them. That's not seconds, but minutes, or depending on the chain and people online to help scan it out, hours.
Logistic chains will be a pain in the ass to set up without fleet warps especially when it's an alliance and not just one corp occupying a wormhole. Sure there is bookmark sharing but even that by itself is a pain in the ass which is why people have been pushing for alliance bookmarks.
We're talking an extra 10-30 minutes on average between attacking, defending, logistics and further reliance on bookmark sharing which is already a terrible system. Add to that things like D-scan immune ships, harder to roll holes and so on it seems like CCP is making quality of life terrible for wormhole residents and there are other ways to approach the problem of more individual control in fleet battles. But this solution does too much to too many without regard to them and only with regard to it's effects in null and that is wrong. |
Marech Bhayanaka
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
14
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 01:01:05 -
[997] - Quote
afkalt wrote: Moving a fleet through a wormhole chain in a cohesive manner WITHOUT needing to put a scout on EVERY bookmark first.
You need ONE scout with bookmarks. The fleet warps to the scout and before they even land he is through the wormhole and off to the next BM. What am I missing here? (Seriously asking.)
Marech. |
HiddenPorpoise
Expendable Miscreants
358
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 01:27:57 -
[998] - Quote
Marech Bhayanaka wrote:afkalt wrote: Moving a fleet through a wormhole chain in a cohesive manner WITHOUT needing to put a scout on EVERY bookmark first.
You need ONE scout with bookmarks. The fleet warps to the scout and before they even land he is through the wormhole and off to the next BM. What am I missing here? (Seriously asking.) Marech. Wormholes make people rightly paranoid and they'd rather punt people down a chain than be in the open at what is more or less a permanently blind gate. That and large systems where the scout may take nearly 30 seconds to cross in the first place are why wormholers are so upset. |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
899
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 01:43:26 -
[999] - Quote
THIS IS THE DUMBEST GOD-DAMNED IDEA I HAVE EVER READ.
There, I said it. Seriously though, why don't you let ISIS just put this game in a cage and burn it to death? There are a zillion and one uses for fleetwarps that don't involve 250-man fleets being moved around like lemmings by bloc-level FCs. If you want to make big fleet ops, "more involving for regular grunts," or whatever then take these warp-targets away from FLEET commanders. For god's sake, leave the ability to squad warp to bookmarks and probe results.
If you do this to the game you are literally worse than Pol Pot. Seriously. I don't use all-caps, bold type, or underlines much, but this absolutely deserves all three. Do not do this. |
Marech Bhayanaka
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
14
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 01:43:26 -
[1000] - Quote
baltec1 wrote: Again, people running the second they see probes has nothing to do with this change.
Actually this seems like one of the few legitimate concerns. It will increase the time between probes appearing and the aggressing fleet landing on grid by the warp time of the probing ship. The concern is that this may significantly increase the probability of the grid being empty when the aggressors arive.
Marech. |
|
Mitchellion Saroir
Sudden Buggery Prolapse.
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 02:03:27 -
[1001] - Quote
I don't believe anyone has suggested it yet but as a solution to the proposed issue of different sized fleet compositions landing at different time on corp bookmarks such as wormholes (tackle before dps before triage for example) risking the early arrivals being volleyed; Is it possible to add an option for the player to set their warpspeed to the slowest ship in the fleet? That way everyone warps at triage speed and so lands within a few seconds of each other, assuming they were all aligned.
obviously this would have to be able to be toggled else 'fast tackle' would rapidly become a misnomer... |
Jenshae Chiroptera
1673
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 02:23:16 -
[1002] - Quote
Sakul Aubaris wrote:... Here is your new "challenge". ... Note how even while saying it he stresses how ridiculous it is.
I think they are trying to force more engagements. Instead, I believe it will make people more risk adverse. No longer +1 scouts and risk getting caught in a system but +2 and +3 scouts front and back.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
298
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 02:26:48 -
[1003] - Quote
50 pages of F1 monkey tears.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Emma Yassavi
Lonestar Distribution Inc. Waterboard Comedy Tour
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 02:27:55 -
[1004] - Quote
This is stupid. I recently got an alt account so I could participate more in my corp's pvp, but this would destroy what we do, and there'd be litterally no reason for me to have that account. |
Rath Valent
235MeV Waterboard Comedy Tour
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 02:28:55 -
[1005] - Quote
This is a really bad solution in search of a problem and it should be dropped.
There are too many game activities which I enjoy -- both PvP and non-PvP in nature -- that need the ability to warp a group of ships to a bookmark.
It also arguably creates an unkillable class of ship -- the booster T3 -- unless its pilot is afk while uncloaked. People who are experienced enough to fly booster T3s don't make that sort of mistake.
RV
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
1674
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 02:30:36 -
[1006] - Quote
Lyra Gerie wrote:Manfred Sideous wrote: Blah. This post shows you have NO idea how wormhole space works ... ... bookmark sharing which is already a terrible system. ... To chime in on this, ratting in high end worm holes usually requires a good little team, with mixed ship types (so different warp speeds) going to a book marked and scanned site. Let us assume though that they are going to use just Tech 3 cruisers and logistics, so one of the logistics is too slow and *pop* goes the first one to land ... and *pop* goes a T3 cruiser.
Risk is now far out weighing reward.Sakul Aubaris wrote:... Here is your new "challenge". ... Note how even while saying it he stresses how ridiculous it is.
I think they are trying to force more engagements. Instead, I believe it will make people more risk adverse. No longer +1 scouts and risk getting caught in a system but +2 and +3 scouts front and back.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
Shadowforge Dawkins
Catastrophic Overview Failure Brave Collective
8
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 02:32:15 -
[1007] - Quote
Sakul Aubaris wrote:Rowells wrote:didthat hurt wrote:Rowells wrote:didthat hurt wrote:Your initial goal from this was to nerf bombers: Since when? Since the initial post on page one, which was quoted in my reply. The one that literally mentioned it's not just for bombers? The initial goal is to remove the posibillitiy to relocate your whole fleet with the bookmarks/ combatscanresulst of a single person in just one second. Interceptors and cloaky scouts are the new way to add a bid more delay and complexity. In wh space there is allmost allways a scout with the fleet, who can give you a warpin on a wh. Ceptors are already part of most midscale and bigger fleet, because they are great tackling ships and give you purges easily. Yes it might be a bit more complex, but when ccp removed other features, a lot of guys complained about eve getting to easy: Here is your new "challenge". Adopt it, or die.
This is not just about wormholes, bookmarks are equally important, If I (the scout) cannot get on top of the target without being de-cloaked, or said target is moving too fast from can-to-can in a relic site, we use our squad warps to land us in front of the target, or IN the cloud that would otherwise decloak us.
also, remember the people in areas away from cities where they don't have the luxury of high speed internet. they rely on their team for help in the event they hit a lag spike. just warp the guy to the safe... I have had this happen with a corp member twice
Lastly, no there is NOT always a scout as said 'scout' had to go back and re-ship because he/she is needed for dps or logi. Oh we found a Armageddon, we only have 5 people, no room for a scout we need dps, neuts, a jamgu would be nice. the scout found the target sure, but for some smaller groups there is no room for someone to sit around and watch. Leave the squad warp ability at least. |
Emma Yassavi
Lonestar Distribution Inc. Waterboard Comedy Tour
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 02:32:57 -
[1008] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:50 pages of F1 monkey tears.
Because only people in large alliances should be able to affect fleets. This change would make t3 boosters in deep safes unkillable if the pilot is paying any attention at all. There's an easy compromise: let squad commanders warp. It lets small fleets still be effective while helping to prevent the blobs that CCP seems to be trying to prevent with this. |
M1k3y Koontz
Respawn Disabled Initiative Mercenaries
757
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 02:47:30 -
[1009] - Quote
Kinete Jenius wrote:The Boogieman wrote:Dunk Dinkle wrote:It appears that to nerf bombers, you are nerfing all fleets. This, of course, has become the new way things are done around the office. It's the same principle that is currently strangling eve and causing so many cancellations in the thousands. Nerfing the entire game to stop single individuals or several individuals with "too much power", because certain people with influence at the top lose sleep over it. It is the cancer killing eve and if it doesent stop, will incrementally cause its collapse. Making nerfs to the entire games player base because of a couple of people. Welcome, to the World of Warcraft. Indeed CCP "We need to nerf ishtars" *Nerfs all sentry drones* CCP "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!!!" In comparison this nerf is astoundingly specifically targeted. I do find the willingness to make further adjustments to the nerf and the acknowledgement that it is hitting people it's not intended to hit good. I just hope they follow through with tweaking the nerf to be more friendly to those not intentionally being targeted.
They also announced a direct nerf to Ishtars. In the same o7 episode as the idea this thread is supposed to be about.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
M1k3y Koontz
Respawn Disabled Initiative Mercenaries
757
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 02:51:49 -
[1010] - Quote
Lurifax wrote:Slippery pete's online
Slippery Pete's die to literally any other sniper with the same range. Their whole thing is that they have no tank, and don't need it.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
|
Potamus Jenkins
eXceed Inc.
159
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 02:52:00 -
[1011] - Quote
Airi Cho wrote:Potamus Jenkins wrote:"you cannot activate your propulsion module while running command links" sometimes you really wish you could down vote people. Ever ran a small gang with a CS fitting a link or two while also being combat fit?
yes we use ongrid boosting occasionally
im unclear as to what your statement has to do with the soon to be (already almost) uncatchable off grid booster? you understand the dev has already implied its going to be nerfed yes? |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
300
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 02:57:49 -
[1012] - Quote
Emma Yassavi wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:50 pages of F1 monkey tears. Because only people in large alliances should be able to affect fleets. This change would make t3 boosters in deep safes unkillable if the pilot is paying any attention at all. There's an easy compromise: let squad commanders warp. It lets small fleets still be effective while helping to prevent the blobs that CCP seems to be trying to prevent with this. So instead of one person piloting 255 ships, it will be 25 piloting 250 ships. Hmmm...
Sorry, I still like the idea of 256 pilots piloting 256 ships.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
300
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 03:02:18 -
[1013] - Quote
M1k3y Koontz wrote:Lurifax wrote:Slippery pete's online Slippery Pete's die to literally any other sniper with the same range. Their whole thing is that they have no tank, and don't need it. "But, but those sniping ships all die to all those bombers... Wait. Because it will no longer be easy mode for bombers, it means battleships and battlecruisers will have a place on the battlefield now. Damn it. My entire argument is crumbling around me. Curses!"
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Winter Archipelago
Furtherance.
384
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 03:09:45 -
[1014] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote: "But, but those sniping ships all die to all those bombers... Wait. Because it will no longer be easy mode for bombers, it means battleships and battlecruisers will have a place on the battlefield now. Damn it. My entire argument is crumbling around me. Curses!"
This isn't going to be the huge negative impact on bombers that some people seem to believe it will be.
Planning a trip to Thera? Check out http://eve-scout.com/ for a list of the current connections.
Once you've made your choice, join the channels EVE-Scout or Furtherance Public and request a scout to make sure your connection is clear!
|
Amia Katana
235MeV Waterboard Comedy Tour
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 03:16:57 -
[1015] - Quote
This is absurd , so your saying that if a member of my fleet that scans down a signature , I now will not be able to warp to it ? or vice versa ? You'd think that given all the technology here in New Eden , one could text coordinates data to another ships computer automatically , and all ships in the fleet could warp there simultaneously .
This will severely , and adversely impact my game play style , so that if this change occurs , I will unsubscribe because you are no longer selling a product that I am interested in purchasing . Why would I , or anyone else here in New Eden want to play a game with both hands tied behind there backs ?
It seems to me that the only people that support this change in game mechanics are either pilots that don't fully understand the negative impact this will have on PvP and fleet cohesion . Not to mention how badly it will affect Corps, and Alliances that live in Wormhole space . And , or , the only other pilots that support this change are capitol , and super capitol pilots . Witch removes a great deal of the " RISK " in the " Risk vs Reward " aspect of the game . An aspect that I greatly enjoy , one of the reasons I play EVE Online almost exclusively , because almost no other game out there has been able to reproduce this risk vs reward mechanic as well as EVE .
It seems to me CCP , that you are catering to these capitol , and super capitol pilots , witch breaks down to you favoring the rich and powerful . I have no desire to continue to pay for a game subscription to a company that unfairly plays favorites to the rich and powerful players , and robs less powerful pilots of their gaming content .
|
Maria Daphiti
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
45
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 03:18:34 -
[1016] - Quote
I have no words. This is a horrible idea.
From a practical perspective, since i am deaf in real life, I can't use team speak.
Fleet warp has helped me stay with the squad, especially in bail out situations where people are too busy to relay via text.
This change means if I am in a fleet with multiple corps, or a quickly made book mark, I will be left in the dust. Fleet warping to a celestial is generally not smart in pvp.
|
Rain InCargo
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 03:20:29 -
[1017] - Quote
do you know how difficult for a inty to tackle a fleet, especially for a high-speed fleet. Seriously, no one like this idea, and you are trolling the FC. I cannot imagine you will implement this **** even most of the people are complaining and even decide to unsub due to this idea |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2500
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 03:21:10 -
[1018] - Quote
Public Service Announcement
Please do not smoke the tinfoil. I repeat: do not smoke the tinfoil.
Thank you
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6719
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 03:28:57 -
[1019] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:I think they are trying to force more engagements. Instead, I believe it will make people more risk adverse. No longer +1 scouts and risk getting caught in a system but +2 and +3 scouts front and back. Good thing those things you entosis can be warped to directly
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Tarunik Raqalth'Qui
Anomalous Existence Low-Class
211
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 03:40:15 -
[1020] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:50 pages of F1 monkey tears.
LOL. You really think that this is a good idea?
Go share a wormhole with another corporation in your alliance for a month, and then come back to me.
Seriously, this is brutal when running joint (i.e multiple corporation) fleets -- instead of a FC fleetwarping to bookmarks, now we will have to send someone with the bookmarks ahead to serve as a fleetwarp target on a very regular basis, or juggle bookmarks back and forth on an equally regular basis. Both of these consume valuable, if not critical, time when in a high-threat situation.
Worse yet -- this renders fleetwarps to safespots and scanned signatures impossible. Fleetwarps to scanned signatures are again a staple of joint fleet operations in W-space; further more, fleetwarping to safespots is used by fleets of all shapes and sizes to prevent stragglers from being left behind during manual warp sequences, leading to both easy pickoff kills by a hostile probing fleet and busted safespots for the defending fleet. |
|
Darkplayer38
235MeV Waterboard Comedy Tour
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 03:46:09 -
[1021] - Quote
0/10 would never warp again. |
Shadowforge Dawkins
Catastrophic Overview Failure Brave Collective
9
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 03:47:27 -
[1022] - Quote
One thing I have noticed brought up on nearly every page; FC's using alts. I have been living in this Wormhole for quite some time and when we rage roll our hole for 'content'... namely more people to fight, we don't send an alt in to find the target and sit on it. We roll the hole, scan down the new, toss someone through it. Considering it is a rage roll we have 8-12 people online during our Peak times so we send 2-3 people in. Lets say we find a target, 3 Gila's are ratting in a combat site. Gila's are something to be reckoned with when fit right. Scouts come back and refit/reship bookmarking the site and where the gila's were sitting.
Assuming Standard Wormhole, not bonuses, we will grab the Devoter, 3 guardians, a second Devoter if possible, 2 guys in Jam ships to Jam them out is a bonus(we have 1 IF he is online) and all the DPS we can get. so lets assess the warp in, the DPS, the Guardians, and the Jamgu all will land at different times. some of our dps are in battlecruisers (myself in a Myrmidon). This presents a tactical problem that sure can be solved with simple math, but that math was already done by squad warp. now we get to waste unnecessary time calculating who jumps and when. So weight off the FC... no. Our FC using alts? no. Anyone using alts in that squad? again, no. You are negating the reason to Risk attacking those Gilas based on timing alone.
You guys who like to blame people using a thousand alts this is not everywhere. Wormhole space is nothing like Nullsec or known space for that matter. A group of 5-10 people can form into a Corp and have a POS and control their own little C1 wormhole without the need for territorial claim units or titans or caps... or even battleships. do we evict them? maybe if we REALLY hate them. Why not? because we love content and fights, and not evicting them means we get to roll into them later and fight again. Getting the drop on a ratting Gila or a ratting Rattlesnake is almost always done after someone rolls into a new, unscanned wormhole. This means we may only have a few minutes to form fleet, get to the wormhole that guy is in, and get the jump on it.
Not all FC's need alts. Fleet warp is used constantly without alt's and you seem to be basing your entire argument on alt's. I don't have any alt's nor intend to. and some of the folk's I play with spend more time in the climbing gym than they do on this game. Quit recking the game for the sake of making PL's life easier in terms of their preferred way of combat or PVP. It is about the Community as a whole, not one nook of EVE where a particular group thrives and would be better suited if people couldn't fleet warp on top of them. |
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
150
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 03:50:50 -
[1023] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Wolf Crownn wrote:...
In conclusion, it's more of a bad idea than it is good. Only for people why rely upon the FC to do everything for their fleet.
So the FC cycles my weapons for me? Is able to press my jump key for me?
Da **** you smoking bro?
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16167
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 03:59:41 -
[1024] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote:baltec1 wrote:Wolf Crownn wrote:...
In conclusion, it's more of a bad idea than it is good. Only for people why rely upon the FC to do everything for their fleet. So the FC cycles my weapons for me? Is able to press my jump key for me? Da **** you smoking bro?
Before CCP nerfed drone assist yea, they did fire your weapons for you.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
HiddenPorpoise
Expendable Miscreants
358
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 04:05:22 -
[1025] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Before CCP nerfed drone assist yea, they did fire your weapons for you. Unless you were in Low where such niceties don't work. And where a lack of bombs hasn't set off a battleship meta. |
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
38058
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 04:21:21 -
[1026] - Quote
HiddenPorpoise wrote:baltec1 wrote:Before CCP nerfed drone assist yea, they did fire your weapons for you. Unless you were in Low where such niceties don't work. And where a lack of bombs hasn't set off a battleship meta. What doesn't work about drone assist in lowsec?
Worked before. Still works now, just limited to max 50 drones assisted.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Adarnof
Free Trade Monopoly You Are Being Monitored
87
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 04:23:39 -
[1027] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Q: CCP, this unduly effects people who live in wormholes! A: Yes, and we're not happy about that. We have some systems and ideas we're working on to mitigate these effects. However we're not ready to announce those yet.
Also pronounced "lol screw those guys". How did Fozzie sucker you into taking the fall for this one? If bombers are broken then nerf bombers. It's really not hard. Changing fundamental game mechanics to resolve a niche imbalance is not the way to go. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16168
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 04:25:39 -
[1028] - Quote
Adarnof wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:Q: CCP, this unduly effects people who live in wormholes! A: Yes, and we're not happy about that. We have some systems and ideas we're working on to mitigate these effects. However we're not ready to announce those yet. Also pronounced "lol screw those guys". How did Fozzie sucker you into taking the fall for this one? If bombers are broken then nerf bombers. It's really not hard. Changing fundamental game mechanics to resolve a niche imbalance is not the way to go.
This isnt aimed at just bombers but at all fleets.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Dictateur Imperator
Babylon Knights DARKNESS.
23
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 04:32:01 -
[1029] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hopelesshobo wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote: As announced on the o7 show we are making some changes to fleet warp. Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders & Squad Commanders will no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own. This includes GÇô
Bookmarks Does this include corporation bookmarks that the person in the same corp could warp to? Yes. You can only fleet warp to things that any member of your fleet could warp to, no matter what corp or alliances they are a part of.
And for mining fleet ? A lot of miner don't play with 1 account so they use warp squad to go to they're POS to reprocess/refine. And not only on WH.
So with your solution : 1) if it's a corporation fleet : all people have the corpo BM can they warp in ? Other case you will nerf mining who can't warp easely to the belt : change window for 15 account (and a lot of miner have this). 2) It's an alliance fleet : Yo have a squad only with your corpomate/a wing . You make a warp fleet to go in your BM in belt to avoid to have to do 50 KM in propulsion mod : Can you do this if it's a corpo BM when you warp your squad of corporate. 3) Have you see the problem of BM management if you do this. 4)I propose to you to allow the old fleet warp to : Corporate POS (all your corpo must have it, and solve maybe some problem in WH to). Allow old fleet warp to warble point in celestial => like asteroid/structure in a anomaly : Only if all people are able to warp in (so if it's anom who don't require to prob). |
HiddenPorpoise
Expendable Miscreants
358
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 05:09:17 -
[1030] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:HiddenPorpoise wrote:baltec1 wrote:Before CCP nerfed drone assist yea, they did fire your weapons for you. Unless you were in Low where such niceties don't work. And where a lack of bombs hasn't set off a battleship meta. What doesn't work about drone assist in lowsec? Worked before. Still works now, just limited to max 50 drones assisted. In low, unless it's a CONCORD legal target, drones have a habit of not engaging when assisted. |
|
Shalashaska Adam
Partial Safety
88
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 05:23:09 -
[1031] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders & Squad Commanders will no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own.
CCP Larrikin wrote:Q: What if every member of the fleet has the bookmark? A: Nope, sorry, no go.
Basically just a huge quality of life reduction then, rather than a thought out balance change. |
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
38058
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 05:31:38 -
[1032] - Quote
HiddenPorpoise wrote:Scipio Artelius wrote:HiddenPorpoise wrote:baltec1 wrote:Before CCP nerfed drone assist yea, they did fire your weapons for you. Unless you were in Low where such niceties don't work. And where a lack of bombs hasn't set off a battleship meta. What doesn't work about drone assist in lowsec? Worked before. Still works now, just limited to max 50 drones assisted. In low, unless it's a CONCORD legal target, drones have a habit of not engaging when assisted. That happens when the person that drones are assisted to doesn't cycle their guns.
There is nothing special about lowsec that changes drone assist. All drones are a little bit rogue, not matter what the status of the space they are in.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2182
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 05:45:13 -
[1033] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:HiddenPorpoise wrote:Scipio Artelius wrote:HiddenPorpoise wrote:Unless you were in Low where such niceties don't work. And where a lack of bombs hasn't set off a battleship meta. What doesn't work about drone assist in lowsec? Worked before. Still works now, just limited to max 50 drones assisted. In low, unless it's a CONCORD legal target, drones have a habit of not engaging when assisted. That happens when the person that drones are assisted to doesn't cycle their guns. There is nothing special about lowsec that changes drone assist. All drones are a little bit rogue, not matter what the status of the space they are in. There isn't anything such as CONCORD legal target is lowsec. There is crimewatch that monitors acts of aggression and will trigger sentry guns if you perform a suspect or criminal act within 150km of them, but you can always shoot anyone you want depending on your own safety setting. Not quite:
CCP Fozzie wrote:Drones will never take an action that causes their owner to get a crimewatch flag unless the owner explicitly instructs them to. Basically going flashy is cool, going flashy without any choice in the matter is not. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5788543#post5788543
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1071
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 06:00:58 -
[1034] - Quote
All the people saying, "this will make players in large fleets have to interact more! That is a good thing! This will improve quality of life for everyone!"
I call nonsense.
Being one of 256 pilots in a fleet sucks. It sucks for the FC, who is trying to herd cats, keep abreast of the tactical/operational situation, and hear himself think over DBRB whooping for joy. It sucks for the line member, who cannot chat with his friends, who has to endure listening to DBRB talk about his dog, or just has to sit there waiting for something [anything] to happen.
This change is not going to improve the large fleet experience in any way shape or form. Eve is a fun small gang game - where you have pilots who know each other, work well together, and can communicate easily, whether explicitly or implicitly.
Quote:Typical coalition fleet pilot's thoughts:
Did he say warp? I think he said warp... damn, that chick is hot! Mr. Snugglepants always drops the best links in fleet chat! Plus, my wife doesn't know how to check the history on the in-game browser!
Where did he say to align? Was it planet 1 moon 7? Or planet 7, moon 1? Maybe I should ask in fleet chat? Or am I supposed to ask those "stupid" questions in corp chat?
Man, TIDI blows! It's not as bad as the lag from back in 2007, but man, this sucks... To the moron on comms, "Yes, we know there is ******* TIDI you mouth-breathing, window-licking imbecile." Did I say that out load? Did I press push to talk?
Did the FC just say, "Cancel Fleet Warp! If you don't you are dead and it will be your own fault!" Oh crap! There I go! I guess I'm dead...
Wow! That was close. I went afk to get another beer, had to take the trash out to keep the wife off my back, made a sandwich, put the dog out in the yard, and came back to find we are still sitting in the POS waiting to find out if we are going to get blueballed...
Oh wow! Here we go, we are warping in! Loading grid... Loading grid. Primary is RonanIsPrimary? Humph... I bet he thinks that's a clever name. Well, he's dead now. Another T1 cruiser killmail. Yay? Too bad our dictor pilots all died and the rest of the enemy got away...
Oh look, we are going to sit on this gate in case the enemy comes back. Apparently SOMEONE else, wink wink nudge nudge ZOMG OPSEC is going to kill the tower. Why didn't I get the ping for Supers? Why is it always the FC's inner circle who get to use their shiny toys?
FC: "Okay, ladies, You know how we came out to Catch through that WH?" Fleet: "Yeah..." FC: "Well, someone collapsed it while we were on that four long POS-reinforcement op. I have been up all night and have to be at work in twenty minutes. So, either self-destruct, or dock up in the NPC station, or hang out here for the next 1 day, 18 hours, until the POS comes out of reinforcement, or you can try to roam back the 47 jumps... if there is someone willing to lead the fleet. Any volunteers? Noobie FC: "Yes, me! I'll do it!" FC: "Okay guys, Mr. Gullible will lead you back home. Interceptors please don't just all warp back and leave the rest of the fleet hanging, they'll need scouts..." Interceptor pilots: "Whoosh! Whoosh! Whoosh! So long suckers! We only have to do this for 30 minutes because we warp so fast! Sucks to be you guys!"
And you people think taking away fleet warps is going to make being one of 256 pilots more fun? Get real.
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
So, why do I continue to provide feedback on these forums?
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5813975#post5813975
|
Resa Moon
New Eden Miners Association
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 06:36:46 -
[1035] - Quote
Proposed changes to fleet warp are idiotic. Eve has enough tedium as is, don't present more. Ridiculous if you feel you have to FORCE players into engaging with the game.
New Eden Mining Blog
|
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
665
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 06:38:16 -
[1036] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:HiddenPorpoise wrote:Scipio Artelius wrote:HiddenPorpoise wrote:baltec1 wrote:Before CCP nerfed drone assist yea, they did fire your weapons for you. Unless you were in Low where such niceties don't work. And where a lack of bombs hasn't set off a battleship meta. What doesn't work about drone assist in lowsec? Worked before. Still works now, just limited to max 50 drones assisted. In low, unless it's a CONCORD legal target, drones have a habit of not engaging when assisted. That happens when the person that drones are assisted to doesn't cycle their guns. There is nothing special about lowsec that changes drone assist. All drones are a little bit rogue, not matter what the status of the space they are in. There isn't anything such as CONCORD legal target is lowsec. There is crimewatch that monitors acts of aggression and will trigger sentry guns if you perform a suspect or criminal act within 150km of them, but you can always shoot anyone you want depending on your own safety setting. Drone assist doesn't work for me either in low, except for rats. I suppose it has to do with the not so recent change in drone aggression. Now drones will not start a new limited engagement without your explicit command. Hence assisted drones will not aggress neutrals or suspects in low unless you already have a limited engagement with them.
And yes, there are special rules in lowsec which matter here.
EDIT: Zappity already has the quote and confirmation.
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
Louanne Barros
Hole Violence Whole Squid
52
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 07:00:57 -
[1037] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:All the people saying, "this will make players in large fleets have to interact more! That is a good thing! This will improve quality of life for everyone!"
I call nonsense.
Being one of 256 pilots in a fleet sucks. It sucks for the FC, who is trying to herd cats, keep abreast of the tactical/operational situation, and hear himself think over DBRB whooping for joy. It sucks for the line member, who cannot chat with his friends, who has to endure listening to DBRB talk about his dog, or just has to sit there waiting for something [anything] to happen.
Quoted for truth.
A) This is an accurate representation of the DBRB experience.
B) The other coordination required to operate a big fleet is immense, and running a small cruiser gang does not offer a valid point of comparison. More things to play "game of telephone" with is not going to IF YOU WARPED YOU'RE DEAD any additional engagement in EVE. |
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2183
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 07:03:25 -
[1038] - Quote
Resa Moon wrote:Proposed changes to fleet warp are idiotic. Eve has enough tedium as is, don't present more. Ridiculous if you feel you have to FORCE players into engaging with the game. This is an interesting point. Changes which make people want to be engaged would surely be better. I wonder if CCP understands the appeal of blob warfare (I certainly don't but acknowledge that there must be something I'm missing).
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1078
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 07:09:57 -
[1039] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Resa Moon wrote:Proposed changes to fleet warp are idiotic. Eve has enough tedium as is, don't present more. Ridiculous if you feel you have to FORCE players into engaging with the game. This is an interesting point. Changes which make people want to be engaged would surely be better. I wonder if CCP understands the appeal of blob warfare (I certainly don't but acknowledge that there must be something I'm missing).
The appeal is in winning. The appeal is in not having to move out of your space. The appeal is in having a modicum of stability in an unstable and harsh universe. The cost is that the actual PVP element of the game becomes less engaging.
It's kind of like that quote from Vietnam, "We had to destroy the village in order to save it."
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
So, why do I post here?
Because of this: http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1383
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 07:37:25 -
[1040] - Quote
Dermeisen wrote:Servanda wrote:afkalt wrote:Leoric Firesword wrote:Sparrow Creature wrote:this change will kill wormhole just saying.. not really, after you align to your next site, instead of your FC warping you he gives the command "warp now" or "warp to b" and boom, you're doing the same thing you did before. you're welcome that I fixed wormholing for you :) And al the different ship classess arrive in dibs and drabs and are obliterated because there was no logi or support for the logi. Brilliant. Or did you forget they all warp at different speeds now? You did, didn't you..... 1. Cloaked alt warps first 2. FC warps Fleet to that alt Fixed You are able to warp in a staggered fashion with that in mind and you hadn't forgotten about the session timer when you land on grid. You had, hadn't you......
Yes, leaving ships on grid at the start of the warp is so different from them left alone at the desto, right? |
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1383
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 07:44:41 -
[1041] - Quote
HiddenPorpoise wrote:Marech Bhayanaka wrote:afkalt wrote: Moving a fleet through a wormhole chain in a cohesive manner WITHOUT needing to put a scout on EVERY bookmark first.
You need ONE scout with bookmarks. The fleet warps to the scout and before they even land he is through the wormhole and off to the next BM. What am I missing here? (Seriously asking.) Marech. Wormholes make people rightly paranoid and they'd rather punt people down a chain than be in the open at what is more or less a permanently blind gate. That and large systems where the scout may take nearly 30 seconds to cross in the first place are why wormholers are so upset.
^^ That's why.
Your fleet could be being approached by a cloaky dictor at any time, and you have NO IDEA.
Sitting on grid waiting on a scout landing....not cool. |
Diggertothend
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 07:49:22 -
[1042] - Quote
CCP there are plenty of problems but fleet warping isnt one of them. Please don't destroy what has been working without any problems for no good reason |
Dermeisen
14
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 08:18:32 -
[1043] - Quote
All fleets need tackling scouts wormhole fleets especially?
CCP (crowd control ..... no kidding) should reduce the CPU of a combat probe launcher, as you essentially have with the utility of the tactical destroyer.
Perhaps interceptors/assault frigates should have a similar bonus. Scouts should be able to tackle effectively and probe shouldn't they?
The people worst hit are multi boxer miners, and while I think they are basically bad for the game I also think you addressed them effectively in rule changes.
Hitting mining without first make mining more damn interesting, i.e rewarding the lone miner is a very legitimate gripe imo.
Go have a look at other space games for inspiration CCP because mining sucks and the only way to make if fun it to run multiple clients. Multi box gate campers and bomber wings should be hit hard by this also and while under the new rules their game is legitimate I for one won't weep at its passing.
[..... it takes guts to do the unpopular thing. Tough changes for a better game ++
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
Anya Klibor
Wormhole Engineers Greater Realms
779
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 09:30:12 -
[1044] - Quote
Want to just remove "Warp to 0" as well, since clearly this mechanic is a problem as well? I mean, you want to make the players more responsible...
We're recruiting! :D
|
Sasha Cohenberg
Cohenberg's Ethical Hauling CODE.
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 09:58:39 -
[1045] - Quote
how about we just remove fleets altgother? |
Anya Klibor
Wormhole Engineers Greater Realms
779
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 10:16:07 -
[1046] - Quote
Sasha Cohenberg wrote:how about we just remove fleets altgother?
Please stop giving them ideas...
We're recruiting! :D
|
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
99
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 10:36:35 -
[1047] - Quote
Potamus Jenkins wrote:Airi Cho wrote:Potamus Jenkins wrote:"you cannot activate your propulsion module while running command links" sometimes you really wish you could down vote people. Ever ran a small gang with a CS fitting a link or two while also being combat fit? yes we use ongrid boosting occasionally im unclear as to what your statement has to do with the soon to be (already almost) uncatchable off grid booster? you understand the dev has already implied its going to be nerfed yes?
I do understand that they will find measures against OGB.... that's what makes your suggestion even more stupid. then everyone would be ongrid and you would block link ships from using prop mods. |
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
99
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 10:37:46 -
[1048] - Quote
M1k3y Koontz wrote:Lurifax wrote:Slippery pete's online Slippery Pete's die to literally any other sniper with the same range. Their whole thing is that they have no tank, and don't need it.
And snipers might finally be viable again \o/ |
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
99
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 10:41:55 -
[1049] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:And you people think taking away fleet warps is going to make being one of 256 pilots more fun? Get real.
You assume many people care about such big blobs. |
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
99
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 10:47:36 -
[1050] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Zappity wrote:Resa Moon wrote:Proposed changes to fleet warp are idiotic. Eve has enough tedium as is, don't present more. Ridiculous if you feel you have to FORCE players into engaging with the game. This is an interesting point. Changes which make people want to be engaged would surely be better. I wonder if CCP understands the appeal of blob warfare (I certainly don't but acknowledge that there must be something I'm missing). The appeal is in winning. The appeal is in not having to move out of your space. The appeal is in having a modicum of stability in an unstable and harsh universe. The cost is that the actual PVP element of the game becomes less engaging. It's kind of like that quote from Vietnam, "We had to destroy the village in order to save it." That's why I have always tried to balance it all out. I'll participate in large coalition fleets, click my PAP links, then get back to chilling on comms on gate camps, casual roams, exploration, or hunting ratters. The way I see it, large blob fleets are a necessary evil if you want to live in your own space and don't want to live in a WH. It's just part of the grind of Eve. To make it slightly less awful, I generally try to only fly capital ships or Interdictors. With the former you have a real asset at stake, with the latter, you get to be the hero or the goat. For me, I'll stay in my current corporation until all my friends finally quit Eve, then I'll either go find another hobby or give WH space a try.
a) sov war fare will be vastely different in july b) Most people dont want 1000vs1000 fights. not even CCP.
|
|
Dermeisen
14
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 10:56:59 -
[1051] - Quote
Airi Cho wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:And you people think taking away fleet warps is going to make being one of 256 pilots more fun? Get real. You assume many people care about such big blobs.
More dramatic, requiring more thought and attention certainly.
Not for FCs I should think, they will be the temperamental princesses they are throwing their toys out if the pram because half the feet warped to the wrong scout/ got too stretched out and the derpy bastards in the last ships keep getting picked off! MUCH MORE FUN!
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
BrundleMeth
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
443
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 11:08:42 -
[1052] - Quote
I don't get it...
CCP Stooges really seem intent on running this game into the ground...
I really just don't understand why... |
kraken11 jensen
The Gallant Collective Requiem Eternal
88
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 11:19:40 -
[1053] - Quote
who wanted fleet warp to get removed? (or reduced possibility) someone in csm was pushing for it? or? im not totally sure about this. |
Ogast
Zebra Corp The Bastion
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 11:29:50 -
[1054] - Quote
kraken11 jensen wrote:who wanted fleet warp to get removed? (or reduced possibility) someone in csm was pushing for it? or? im not totally sure about this.
Manny wants it gone. I think he wrote in the mid teens about that. |
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
151
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 11:48:55 -
[1055] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:baltec1 wrote:Wolf Crownn wrote:...
In conclusion, it's more of a bad idea than it is good. Only for people why rely upon the FC to do everything for their fleet. So the FC cycles my weapons for me? Is able to press my jump key for me? Da **** you smoking bro? Before CCP nerfed drone assist yea, they did fire your weapons for you.
Seeing as I don't have much in the way of drone skills He/She/It didn't do that for me at all. But to really ram the point home for you, when did the FC ever press jump for me? Where was the 'anchor on FC at 500' command? What about the "starburst 2 prop mod cycle" drop down menu?
*crickets chirp*
If bombers and combat probes are a problem... then fix them and that solves the problem. If there are 'other' things this change fixes, why is CCP being reticent with stating them? CCP Larrikans update to the opening post wasn't good enough just like the justification for this change coming from Manny.
CCP assuaging the butthurt of PL who were lost several engagements to BNI, (before hitting the IWIN super button) by making the life of the lesser player harder, unlevelling the Eve playing field if you will, is a terrible idea and that's before we start on the total clusterfvck this idea is in wormholes.
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
Domatavus Fallatus
Liga Freier Terraner Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 11:50:57 -
[1056] - Quote
most ******** nerf you could do... I'ts already not easy to FC, why make it a ******* nightmare again?
REMEMBER LIKE 8 YEARS AGO YOU WANTED TO INTRODUCE FC UI?
Oh wait.. that would mean actual work and new features.... nahhhh instead you introduced the oh so "useful" tactical overlay which is about as tactical as the first ESP haxx for CS Beta 5 .... yeah.. that was in 1999 last century....
cancelling sub b4 they do this, then limit BMs because server load goes up 500% with 20% less subs due to bookmark sharing becoming mandatory again... yayyyyyy |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1383
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 11:53:31 -
[1057] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote:baltec1 wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:baltec1 wrote:Wolf Crownn wrote:...
In conclusion, it's more of a bad idea than it is good. Only for people why rely upon the FC to do everything for their fleet. So the FC cycles my weapons for me? Is able to press my jump key for me? Da **** you smoking bro? Before CCP nerfed drone assist yea, they did fire your weapons for you. Seeing as I don't have much in the way of drone skills He/She/It didn't do that for me at all. But to really ram the point home for you, when did the FC ever press jump for me? Where was the 'anchor on FC at 500' command? What about the "starburst 2 prop mod cycle" drop down menu? *crickets chirp* If bombers and combat probes are a problem... then fix them and that solves the problem. If there are 'other' things this change fixes, why is CCP being reticent with stating them? CCP Larrikans update to the opening post wasn't good enough just like the justification for this change coming from Manny. CCP assuaging the butthurt of PL who were lost several engagements to BNI, (before hitting the IWIN super button) by making the life of the lesser player harder, unlevelling the Eve playing field if you will, is a terrible idea and that's before we start on the total clusterfvck this idea is in wormholes.
It's also fecking annoying just to move alts about when dual boxing.
So many simple little quality of life things die, when all they ned to do is block warping to scan results, if combat is the focus.
I have a hard time believing that making the game a bigger chore to do day to day operations is on the whiteboard.
|
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
236
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 11:54:32 -
[1058] - 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.
AS always, you never disappoint
I actually took the time to read all 48 pages, although I had to take breaks to catch my breath
+1, would read again |
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
151
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 11:57:41 -
[1059] - Quote
kraken11 jensen wrote:who wanted fleet warp to get removed? (or reduced possibility) someone in csm was pushing for it? or? im not totally sure about this.
One Manfred Sideous of Pandemic Legion, CSM rep and if you want tin foil, CCP Larriakn is formerly Bam Stroker, of Van Demons Demise, a member corp of Pandemic Legion.
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1098
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 12:03:53 -
[1060] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote:kraken11 jensen wrote:who wanted fleet warp to get removed? (or reduced possibility) someone in csm was pushing for it? or? im not totally sure about this. One Manfred Sideous of Pandemic Legion, CSM rep and if you want tin foil, CCP Larriakn is formerly Bam Stroker, of Van Demons Demise, a member corp of Pandemic Legion.
It's almost as if currently people are working on mechanics they are familiar with, or have *abused* themselves in the past and see why eve be better off without it. Some rough edges still though. |
|
Asuka Solo
Knights of Azrael Circle-Of-Two
2966
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 12:21:19 -
[1061] - Quote
I don't often find myself enjoying the forum topics bemaoning nerfs to this game, but the nerd rage induced tears in this thread keeps me young.
+ many interwebz
Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16175
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 12:28:05 -
[1062] - Quote
Lloyd Roses wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:kraken11 jensen wrote:who wanted fleet warp to get removed? (or reduced possibility) someone in csm was pushing for it? or? im not totally sure about this. One Manfred Sideous of Pandemic Legion, CSM rep and if you want tin foil, CCP Larriakn is formerly Bam Stroker, of Van Demons Demise, a member corp of Pandemic Legion. It's almost as if currently people are working on mechanics they are familiar with, or have *abused* themselves in the past and see why eve be better off without it. Some rough edges still though.
Which would explain why the GSF reps are also pushing for this. Infact, most of the people who use these mechanics in a big way seem to be fans of the change, the ones who are kicking up a fuss are no name NPC alts and bad pilots who cant think for themselves, terrified at the thought of actually having to play EVE when they play EVE.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1383
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 12:50:10 -
[1063] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Lloyd Roses wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:kraken11 jensen wrote:who wanted fleet warp to get removed? (or reduced possibility) someone in csm was pushing for it? or? im not totally sure about this. One Manfred Sideous of Pandemic Legion, CSM rep and if you want tin foil, CCP Larriakn is formerly Bam Stroker, of Van Demons Demise, a member corp of Pandemic Legion. It's almost as if currently people are working on mechanics they are familiar with, or have *abused* themselves in the past and see why eve be better off without it. Some rough edges still though. Which would explain why the GSF reps are also pushing for this. Infact, most of the people who use these mechanics in a big way seem to be fans of the change, the ones who are kicking up a fuss are no name NPC alts and bad pilots who cant think for themselves, terrified at the thought of actually having to play EVE when they play EVE.
And wormholers, since there's more to eve than nullsec and bombs - something oft forgotten
But hey, the WH CSM argued hard, right? They are not happy with the changes so are revisiting them. That's why the OP was posted as such that other over-affected areas were still being looked at. Or not, only after the tyre smoke of the uturn cleared, did that become clear: making it obvious it hadn't been given a second thought much less a care in the world.
Amusingly, no-one is really complaining about the impact in fights, it's about everything else that is crap with it. The scorched earth around what could be and should be a surgical fix.
But I suppose those guys warping alts to missions or gas sites were a demon to be crushed too, right?
Letting people warp to corp BMs would alleviate almost all of this (barring mixed corp fleets, but that's just another advantage to being in the same corp. Alliances need fixed). |
S'ombra
the muppets
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 12:51:52 -
[1064] - Quote
Just saying that you are hurting WH in an unintended way , but this will get trough either way so ... |
Seven Koskanaiken
FinFleet Northern Coalition.
1546
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 12:54:46 -
[1065] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Lloyd Roses wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:kraken11 jensen wrote:who wanted fleet warp to get removed? (or reduced possibility) someone in csm was pushing for it? or? im not totally sure about this. One Manfred Sideous of Pandemic Legion, CSM rep and if you want tin foil, CCP Larriakn is formerly Bam Stroker, of Van Demons Demise, a member corp of Pandemic Legion. It's almost as if currently people are working on mechanics they are familiar with, or have *abused* themselves in the past and see why eve be better off without it. Some rough edges still though. Which would explain why the GSF reps are also pushing for this. Infact, most of the people who use these mechanics in a big way seem to be fans of the change, the ones who are kicking up a fuss are no name NPC alts and bad pilots who cant think for themselves, terrified at the thought of actually having to play EVE when they play EVE.
I'm sure a bunch of never-log-in metagamers are a fan of a change they'll hardly ever have to experience, never mind the opinions of those who you know, actually undock every day and fly spaceships...
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16176
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 13:00:57 -
[1066] - Quote
afkalt wrote:And wormholers, since there's more to eve than nullsec and bombs - something oft forgotten But hey, the WH CSM argued hard, right? They are not happy with the changes so are revisiting them. That's why the OP was posted as such that other over-affected areas were still being looked at. Or not, only after the tyre smoke of the uturn cleared, did that become clear: making it obvious it hadn't been given a second thought much less a care in the world. Amusingly, no-one is really complaining about the impact in fights, it's about everything else that is crap with it. The scorched earth around what could be and should be a surgical fix. But I suppose those guys warping alts to missions or gas sites were a demon to be crushed too, right? Letting people warp to corp BMs would alleviate almost all of this (barring mixed corp fleets, but that's just another advantage to being in the same corp. Alliances need fixed).
Allowing them to warp to corp bookmarks means nothing changes.
We got along just fine before we had this command for fleets, back when probing took much longer to do. This isn't the doomsday you lot are getting into a flap about. Every single insurmountable problem brought up so far has been solved with just having a scout/warping someone there first.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
knobber Jobbler
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
557
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 13:03:47 -
[1067] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:M1k3y Koontz wrote:Lurifax wrote:Slippery pete's online Slippery Pete's die to literally any other sniper with the same range. Their whole thing is that they have no tank, and don't need it. "But, but those sniping ships all die to all those bombers... Wait. Because it will no longer be easy mode for bombers, it means battleships and battlecruisers will have a place on the battlefield now. Damn it. My entire argument is crumbling around me. Curses!"
Bomber is still on easy mode as they no longer decloak each other. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1383
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 13:14:09 -
[1068] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:afkalt wrote:And wormholers, since there's more to eve than nullsec and bombs - something oft forgotten But hey, the WH CSM argued hard, right? They are not happy with the changes so are revisiting them. That's why the OP was posted as such that other over-affected areas were still being looked at. Or not, only after the tyre smoke of the uturn cleared, did that become clear: making it obvious it hadn't been given a second thought much less a care in the world. Amusingly, no-one is really complaining about the impact in fights, it's about everything else that is crap with it. The scorched earth around what could be and should be a surgical fix. But I suppose those guys warping alts to missions or gas sites were a demon to be crushed too, right? Letting people warp to corp BMs would alleviate almost all of this (barring mixed corp fleets, but that's just another advantage to being in the same corp. Alliances need fixed). Allowing them to warp to corp bookmarks means nothing changes. We got along just fine before we had this command for fleets, back when probing took much longer to do. This isn't the doomsday you lot are getting into a flap about. Every single insurmountable problem brought up so far has been solved with just having a scout/warping someone there first.
Except the extensive propagation lag.
If a corp BM remains valid by the time it propagates in a a fight, the enemy is bad and deserve everything they're going to get.
No-one said insurmountable (except OGB), people are saying bad for quality of life out of fights, indisputably crap for WH dwellers - collateral damage.
People are unhappy because the intended impact has far too much collaterl damage which is utterly apparent that they have given not a single iota of thought to. It's an exceedingly poor way to act. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16176
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 13:16:21 -
[1069] - Quote
afkalt wrote:
Except the extensive propagation lag.
No more so than now.
afkalt wrote: If a corp BM remains valid by the time it propagates in a a fight, the enemy is bad and deserve everything they're going to get.
No-one said insurmountable (except OGB), people are saying bad for quality of life out of fights, indisputably crap for WH dwellers - collateral damage.
People are unhappy because the intended impact has far too much collaterl damage which is utterly apparent that they have given not a single iota of thought to. It's an exceedingly poor way to act.
Again, taking a scout with you is not the end of the world.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1383
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 13:17:31 -
[1070] - Quote
Well then lets ban fleet warps to gates and stations too, should keep you happy. Scouting is easy.
And amons.
In fact everything which isn't a player. |
|
Jeanne Tivianne
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 13:19:33 -
[1071] - Quote
It is going to be a good year to start an independent scouting business. |
t0Ny St4rkZ
Hole Violence Whole Squid
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 13:19:52 -
[1072] - Quote
http://imgur.com/AWtWqXt |
Elizabeth Seven
Nuwa Foundation
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 13:32:30 -
[1073] - Quote
who make this idea need to get the **** out of CCP |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16176
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 13:35:33 -
[1074] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Well then lets ban fleet warps to gates and stations too, should keep you happy. Scouting is easy.
And anons.
In fact everything which isn't a player and make gates need to be scanned.
Scouting is easy.
I would be quite happy to manually fly my ship in fleets given that I do this most of the time anyway.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2506
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 13:41:06 -
[1075] - Quote
Seven Koskanaiken wrote:baltec1 wrote:Lloyd Roses wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:kraken11 jensen wrote:who wanted fleet warp to get removed? (or reduced possibility) someone in csm was pushing for it? or? im not totally sure about this. One Manfred Sideous of Pandemic Legion, CSM rep and if you want tin foil, CCP Larriakn is formerly Bam Stroker, of Van Demons Demise, a member corp of Pandemic Legion. It's almost as if currently people are working on mechanics they are familiar with, or have *abused* themselves in the past and see why eve be better off without it. Some rough edges still though. Which would explain why the GSF reps are also pushing for this. Infact, most of the people who use these mechanics in a big way seem to be fans of the change, the ones who are kicking up a fuss are no name NPC alts and bad pilots who cant think for themselves, terrified at the thought of actually having to play EVE when they play EVE. I'm sure a bunch of never-log-in metagamers are a fan of a change they'll hardly ever have to experience, let's never mind the opinions of those who you know, actually undock every day and fly spaceships... NCDocked |
Jenshae Chiroptera
1675
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 13:42:31 -
[1076] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:I think they are trying to force more engagements. Instead, I believe it will make people more risk adverse. No longer +1 scouts and risk getting caught in a system but +2 and +3 scouts front and back. Good thing those things you entosis can be warped to directly Who cares about that? Stage out of Low Sec or NPC Null space like NC. are doing and control moons from there. Magic wands are a joke. FT Diomedes wrote:Zappity wrote:Resa Moon wrote:Proposed changes to fleet warp are idiotic. Eve has enough tedium as is, don't present more. Ridiculous if you feel you have to FORCE players into engaging with the game. This is an interesting point. Changes which make people want to be engaged would surely be better. I wonder if CCP understands the appeal of blob warfare (I certainly don't but acknowledge that there must be something I'm missing). The appeal is in winning. .... The appeal is also helping to beat crazy odds, you find a Titan and some supers dropped on you and make them run or you help hold up paper thing ships because they are flown right and you fit your logi ships right.
There is so much that goes on in a large battle that anchoring and fleet warps help to control.
Unnecessary complexity.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
Hemmo Paskiainen
481
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 13:42:40 -
[1077] - Quote
Gooooood change!! Welcome Sniper fleets!!
Yaaaaaayyyyy
I missed my 2007 Eagle! Real skills comes back again!!
Awesome1!!!!
Ship lockrage shouldnt be limited to 249km max. If i gimp the fitting sooooo badly, i would like to be able to lock 400km with my eagle pls?
"Relativity equals time plus momentum: if it can be erased by a single click on a button, would it be worth spending your time?"
|
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
99
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 13:50:25 -
[1078] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote:Seeing as I don't have much in the way of drone skills He/She/It didn't do that for me at all. But to really ram the point home for you, when did the FC ever press jump for me? Where was the 'anchor on FC at 500' command? What about the "starburst 2 prop mod cycle" drop down menu?
*crickets chirp*
There is actually a fleet command for anchoring up on the FC ... :) |
Jenshae Chiroptera
1675
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 13:54:21 -
[1079] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:... the ones who are kicking up a fuss are no name NPC alts and bad pilots who cant think for themselves, terrified at the thought of actually having to play EVE when they play EVE. Yes, disparage and put people down when an idea is complete stupid. Attack them to try remove their opposition.
How can you play so long and not grasp some really simple things?
There are different ways of playing this game. There are those who love to get in with fast ships, mess about with transversals and feathering, being solo heroes. While there are those that like to play a more strategic game, forming up a solid wall of heavy tanks and grinding down the enemies.
Tournament style, twitch reflex gaming or Army planning and grinding.
CCP are screwing up, they have been reducing the solo and small gang options and now they are taking away the blobs. Soon, we are all going to be forced into a mediocre mush inbetween and half the people will constantly hate it or quit.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
153
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 14:00:03 -
[1080] - Quote
Lloyd Roses wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:kraken11 jensen wrote:who wanted fleet warp to get removed? (or reduced possibility) someone in csm was pushing for it? or? im not totally sure about this. One Manfred Sideous of Pandemic Legion, CSM rep and if you want tin foil, CCP Larriakn is formerly Bam Stroker, of Van Demons Demise, a member corp of Pandemic Legion. It's almost as if currently people are working on mechanics they are familiar with, or have *abused* themselves in the past and see why eve be better off without it. Some rough edges still though.
Or would benefit most from it?
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
|
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
153
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 14:03:47 -
[1081] - Quote
Airi Cho wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:Seeing as I don't have much in the way of drone skills He/She/It didn't do that for me at all. But to really ram the point home for you, when did the FC ever press jump for me? Where was the 'anchor on FC at 500' command? What about the "starburst 2 prop mod cycle" drop down menu?
*crickets chirp*
There is actually a fleet command for anchoring up on the FC ... :)
Not actually a command for anchoring. Just making ships reapproach the FC and isn't highly used or very useful.
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
White 0rchid
EVE University Ivy League
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 14:19:02 -
[1082] - Quote
So with this change, you are going to kill off NPSI public fleets (bombers bar etc) and newbro fleets (like some of the ones the uni runs).
Not exactly an ideal solution if you ask me.
I mean, don't ask me, because I don't know what the solution is, but this is not it. |
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
99
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 14:19:59 -
[1083] - Quote
White 0rchid wrote:So with this change, you are going to kill off NPSI public fleets (bombers bar etc) and newbro fleets (like some of the ones the uni runs).
Not exactly an ideal solution if you ask me.
I mean, don't ask me, because I don't know what the solution is, but this is not it.
How does it kill NPSI? |
Jenshae Chiroptera
1679
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 14:24:37 -
[1084] - Quote
Airi Cho wrote:... How does it kill NPSI? Newbies don't get left behind so much and as a result tend to live a bit longer.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
99
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 15:06:06 -
[1085] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Airi Cho wrote:... How does it kill NPSI? Newbies don't get left behind so much and as a result tend to live a bit longer.
So teach them about the watchlist? |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16179
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 15:14:12 -
[1086] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
How can you play so long and not grasp some really simple things?
I was around before we had these fleet commands, the world didn't end because you delegated a task to members of the fleet.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
46
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 15:15:32 -
[1087] - Quote
How do all you muppets keep pretending scouts don't exist, or don't provide warpiins in existing fleets? Do you lot even Eve in big fleets?
This nonsense will add tedium to little effect and is really not "fixing" a problem that isn't quite broken..
Keep fixing imaginary problems - great for the game. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
46
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 15:16:17 -
[1088] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
How can you play so long and not grasp some really simple things?
I was around before we had these fleet commands, the world didn't end because you delegated a task to members of the fleet.
I'm assuming you still get on fleets. Where tasks get delegated. Or do they not let you on command comms anymore? |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
46
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 15:19:45 -
[1089] - Quote
Seven Koskanaiken wrote:
I'm sure a bunch of never-log-in metagamers are a fan of a change they'll hardly ever have to experience, let's never mind the opinions of those who you know, actually undock every day and fly spaceships...
This - very much this. Most people don't enjoy Eve like the PL elite pvp dudes, or the CSM ones. They wanna sit back and enjoy - not have a second job. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16179
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 15:23:51 -
[1090] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:baltec1 wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
How can you play so long and not grasp some really simple things?
I was around before we had these fleet commands, the world didn't end because you delegated a task to members of the fleet. I'm assuming you still get on fleets. Where tasks get delegated. Or do they not let you on command comms anymore? Edit: also, I'm told you're just trolling people for answers but you really think this is a stupid idea. Good job on that ;) I don't appreciate the underhand way you are doing it though.
I don't think they have taken it far enough. I would like repair broadcasts reduced to squad only too.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
Jeanne Tivianne
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 15:29:46 -
[1091] - Quote
This change makes me want to be come a professional cloaky scout. I could make a killing if I get good at it, sell my services for a nominal fee.
But, dreams need foundation, gotta get the core skills up first. We'll see. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
46
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 15:31:26 -
[1092] - Quote
Let's not pretend one FC can run a 250-man fleet. It just does not happen. There are at least a dozen people doing specialized things - feeding him intel, proving warp ins, anchors, boosts, tackle, etc. etc., if not more. It's usually more that you have to shut people up cause they feel like they have important information to give. Adding a forced, redious 13th man role will do little to change the level of engagement in fleets.
F1-monkeys were an issue with drone assignment, for example. And that was applauded when fixed. This is not an F1-monkey issue. Kill that red herring already. |
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
102
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 15:41:40 -
[1093] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Airi Cho wrote:... How does it kill NPSI? Newbies don't get left behind so much and as a result tend to live a bit longer.
Teach them how to fly there ships then and not just fleet warp them every were for 2h and get them to F1 a few times... |
White 0rchid
EVE University Ivy League
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 15:42:30 -
[1094] - Quote
Airi Cho wrote:White 0rchid wrote:So with this change, you are going to kill off NPSI public fleets (bombers bar etc) and newbro fleets (like some of the ones the uni runs).
Not exactly an ideal solution if you ask me.
I mean, don't ask me, because I don't know what the solution is, but this is not it. How does it kill NPSI?
Generally public fleets go where the FC feels like. They are not always in your back yard and won't always have the bookmarks required. Hence with this change I see a lot of (and have spoke to some of) the FCs just not bothering. It can be hard enough FC'ing a fleet of people you don't know as it is. |
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
154
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 15:52:12 -
[1095] - Quote
Tappits wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Airi Cho wrote:... How does it kill NPSI? Newbies don't get left behind so much and as a result tend to live a bit longer. Teach them how to fly there ships then and not just fleet warp them every were for 2h and get them to F1 a few times... Most of the comments about this are... EVE too hard... sending a scout to somewhere 1st is too hard.... getting people to fly there own ships is too hard... blar blar blar... BEST CHANGES EVER NOW CAN YOU PLZ MAKE MIN WARP DISTANCE 250km AND REMOVE APPROACH AND ORBIT FROM THE WATCH LIST MENUS PLZ THANKS
As one of Eve's most elite players are you willing to help teach Eve newbies?
After all that, I mean BNI managed to teach their EWAR pilots how to activate all their damps (Alt F1 to F4 usually) on you guys don't they? I remember Grath being really positive about Celestis damps on Kugu after he violated OTEC in support of Insidious Empires campaign in Vale of the Silent back in the Halloween War.
So pressing more than F1 can't be that hard to teach.
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16180
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 15:57:59 -
[1096] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:
Let's not pretend one FC can run a 250-man fleet. It just does not happen.
It happens in every strat OP.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
46
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 15:59:08 -
[1097] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:
Let's not pretend one FC can run a 250-man fleet. It just does not happen.
It happens in every strat OP.
You should try to get on your own command comms sometime ;) |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
236
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 16:00:25 -
[1098] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:baltec1 wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:
Let's not pretend one FC can run a 250-man fleet. It just does not happen.
It happens in every strat OP. You should try to get on your own command comms sometime ;)
You should try posting on your main so we can give you a shred of credibility |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16180
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 16:01:10 -
[1099] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:
You should try to get on your own command comms sometime ;)
I do.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
46
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 16:01:50 -
[1100] - Quote
Kenneth Feld wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:baltec1 wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:
Let's not pretend one FC can run a 250-man fleet. It just does not happen.
It happens in every strat OP. You should try to get on your own command comms sometime ;) You should try posting on your main so we can give you a shred of credibility
Nope. Not gonna happen. Too much at risk.
Also, Ken, I'm sorry you had to leave the TGRAD cause goons were being such a **** cause they liked Wusti more. Loved your application material though.
|
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
178
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 16:08:55 -
[1101] - Quote
Worst change ever and all that because null sec dudes are unable to adept to the current situation.
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16180
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 16:11:47 -
[1102] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:Worst change ever and all that because null sec dudes are unable to adept to the current situation.
The irony here is golden.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Teacher'sPet
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 16:18:30 -
[1103] - Quote
no more 1 person with 87 Dominix accounts warping to one location at the same time. +1 for not enabling multiboxers ant longer. |
nlun
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 16:27:32 -
[1104] - Quote
More pve in WH, more targets. Because the combat scanner cant warp fleet.
one possible solution: Interdictor with combatscan bonus
second possible solution: ......... no change? |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
237
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 16:29:46 -
[1105] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Kenneth Feld wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:baltec1 wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:
Let's not pretend one FC can run a 250-man fleet. It just does not happen.
It happens in every strat OP. You should try to get on your own command comms sometime ;) You should try posting on your main so we can give you a shred of credibility Nope. Not gonna happen. Too much at risk. Also, Ken, I'm sorry you had to leave the TGRAD cause goons were being such a **** cause they liked Wusti more. Loved your PL application material though.
In the end, the **** flowed downhill and Wusti got what he deserved
Cest la vie, I am in a much better place for me and happier for it |
Canon Makanen
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 16:44:57 -
[1106] - Quote
No one notice the corp bookmark has a few minutes delay? |
Nick Actilete
I'm Fine and You Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 16:52:39 -
[1107] - Quote
Good job on continually ruining different aspects of the game CCP. Do you think before you make changes or just do? |
Vivien Meally
Des-Meisters-Lakaien Brothers of Tangra
46
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 17:06:32 -
[1108] - Quote
I think CCP will just kill EVE. ... Or some CCP devs will kill EVE.
R.I.P Public Fleets
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
13409
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 17:26:54 -
[1109] - Quote
And here I was waiting for them to announce alliance bookmarks as a way to mitigate the huge negative effect this has on flying fleets between corps in an alliance.
Of course not.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Noslen Nosilla
Federal Logistics Initiative Conglomerate United Interests
24
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 17:34:05 -
[1110] - 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.
With the slow down of bomb speeds and now this, you've pretty much killed bombers.
Oh Great Bird of the Galaxy does no one ever read the news?
|
|
Noslen Nosilla
Federal Logistics Initiative Conglomerate United Interests
24
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 17:39:35 -
[1111] - Quote
Right now one pilot can punt another pilot from a station (pilot sits in a cloakie on grid with the station and calls for the pilot in station to undock, as soon as the in station pilot appears on overview the cloakie pilot fleet warps the other to an straight out undock bookmark). With the changes you will now need an additional pilot to warp to at the undock bookmark. In times of war in hisec this is often the only way that a pilot can escape from a camped station, which allows him to engage in combat as a fleet member rather than a 1 v 10 gank.
Oh Great Bird of the Galaxy does no one ever read the news?
|
Zen Tsai
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 17:42:24 -
[1112] - Quote
CCP, you are nerfing competent FCs by directly attacking the impact of their player skills. All this does is equal the playing field between the great FCs and the mediocre FCs. In effect, it dumbs the game down, and caters to the unskilled players getting smeared by the truly talented players. And all while masquerading as a change that will get fleet members more involved in fights.
Why slow down the game? Who was so mad at getting outplayed that they lobbied this ridiculous change through? Whose ego is being catered to with this change? Whoever you are, HTFU you whiny space nerd. Those who are best at playing the game SHOULD win. |
Olleybear
Armed And Angry
219
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 17:45:15 -
[1113] - Quote
My perspective as a solo / small gang pilot and fc in mostly low sec:
Firstly, I personally do not see a problem with this change. Even when in a small gang, fleet members rely too much on the FC to do everything for them. This small change may just force the less experienced fleet members to use their damn brains for once.
For instance:
"Ok fellas, our fleet composition today is kiting ships. Use your orbit and keep range button to stay alive while making sure you keep range from any other enemy ships that try to catch you and.... Oh hell. Nevermind. Just orbit the FC at 500 with your mwd's on and the FC will take care of the rest....." The number of multi year old pilots who still have no idea how to keep themselves alive is sickening.
Second: When hunting down targets with an alt while flying solo, or in small gangs, when the target is probed out, the probe ship warps there, stays cloaked, makes sure the target is still there and didnt warp out, and then we warp to the probe ship. The proposed change would not affect this.
This small change to fleet warps is going to force the fleet members to do slightly more than just sit in fleet, like a vegetable, waiting to press the fire button after everything has been done for them. I encourage this kind of change.
But, then again, this is coming from my solo / small gang and low sec roaming lifestyle in Eve and I know this change give me an advantage over the larger, but less skilled entities that are out there.
When it comes to PvP, I am like a chiwawa hanging from a grizzley bears pair of wrinklies for dear life.
|
Marech Bhayanaka
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
16
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 17:46:07 -
[1114] - Quote
Emma Yassavi wrote:This is stupid. I recently got an alt account so I could participate more in my corp's pvp, but this would destroy what we do, and there'd be litterally no reason for me to have that account. Fewer reasons to feel like you need an apt to participate in PVP sounds like a highly positive outcome.
Marech. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16184
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 17:59:34 -
[1115] - Quote
Zen Tsai wrote:Who was so mad at getting outplayed that they lobbied this ridiculous change through? Whose ego is being catered to with this change? Whoever you are, HTFU you whiny space nerd. Those who are best at playing the game SHOULD win.
The people who won dominion sov called for this.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Syzygium
Friends Of Harassment EON Alliance
95
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 18:03:26 -
[1116] - Quote
great change. rewards individual fleet member skill, punishes multiboxing and hits big fleets a lot harder than small gangs.
work on target broadcasting next please. |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
237
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 18:07:48 -
[1117] - Quote
Zen Tsai wrote:CCP, you are nerfing competent FCs by directly attacking the impact of their player skills. All this does is equal the playing field between the great FCs and the mediocre FCs. In effect, it dumbs the game down, and caters to the unskilled players getting smeared by the truly talented players. And all while masquerading as a change that will get fleet members more involved in fights.
Why slow down the game? Who was so mad at getting outplayed that they lobbied this ridiculous change through? Whose ego is being catered to with this change? Whoever you are, HTFU you whiny space nerd. Those who are best at playing the game SHOULD win.
I put alot more space between your paragraphs because in para 1, you announce that unskilled players would get creamed by truly talented players
Then in para 2 you announce those that are best at playing the game should win
I can only assume you are elated in the fact the truly talented players that are the best at playing the game will win fights |
Virgil Scipion
Bionesis Technologies
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 18:11:11 -
[1118] - Quote
I understand the reasons and the advantages behind this idea. But I dislike it a lot : it's a huge penalty for small roaming gangs.
FCs used a lot of their personnal time to scout a target area, doing bookmarks and using it to move their gangs. And now they have to throw all that effort to trash if they can't warp their gang to these BM. Sparing BM with corporation is not useful when half of fleet is not in the corpo, and small gangs have rarely ships to split from fleet to be a warp point.
Please don't punish LS for null-sec sins. I have faith in you, CCP, I'm sure you can find a better idea :)
Virgil Scipion
Bionesis Technologies
|
Tatsuj Khan
Team Pizza Good at this Game
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 18:17:06 -
[1119] - Quote
Some posters casually dismiss the serious concerns of wormhole residents, with pithy statements like get warp-to scouts to sit on the WHs in our chains. Imagine if system gates are NOT 'public' and you need to have scouts sit on zero on them for fleet OPs. For huge alliance such as the goons and pl with hundreds of ships at their disposal in their regions, it's not a problem. But for many much smaller, corps the changes are a problem.
For WH corps, the changes hit even harder. Life in w-space is different from what you know and the changes degrade the game for residents there. For your convenience, Shadowforge Dawkins explains well how the proposed changes will hit hard life in w-space -
Shadowforge Dawkins wrote: This is not just about wormholes, bookmarks are equally important, If I (the scout) cannot get on top of the target without being de-cloaked, or said target is moving too fast from can-to-can in a relic site, we use our squad warps to land us in front of the target, or IN the cloud that would otherwise decloak us.
also, remember the people in areas away from cities where they don't have the luxury of high speed internet. they rely on their team for help in the event they hit a lag spike. just warp the guy to the safe... I have had this happen with a corp member twice
Lastly, no there is NOT always a scout as said 'scout' had to go back and re-ship because he/she is needed for dps or logi. Oh we found a Armageddon, we only have 5 people, no room for a scout we need dps, neuts, a jamgu would be nice. the scout found the target sure, but for some smaller groups there is no room for someone to sit around and watch. Leave the squad warp ability at least.
Shadowforge Dawkins wrote: One thing I have noticed brought up on nearly every page; FC's using alts. I have been living in this Wormhole for quite some time and when we rage roll our hole for 'content'... namely more people to fight, we don't send an alt in to find the target and sit on it. We roll the hole, scan down the new, toss someone through it. Considering it is a rage roll we have 8-12 people online during our Peak times so we send 2-3 people in. Lets say we find a target, 3 Gila's are ratting in a combat site. Gila's are something to be reckoned with when fit right. Scouts come back and refit/reship bookmarking the site and where the gila's were sitting.
Assuming Standard Wormhole, not bonuses, we will grab the Devoter, 3 guardians, a second Devoter if possible, 2 guys in Jam ships to Jam them out is a bonus(we have 1 IF he is online) and all the DPS we can get. so lets assess the warp in, the DPS, the Guardians, and the Jamgu all will land at different times. some of our dps are in battlecruisers (myself in a Myrmidon). This presents a tactical problem that sure can be solved with simple math, but that math was already done by squad warp. now we get to waste unnecessary time calculating who jumps and when. So weight off the FC... no. Our FC using alts? no. Anyone using alts in that squad? again, no. You are negating the reason to Risk attacking those Gilas based on timing alone.
You guys who like to blame people using a thousand alts this is not everywhere. Wormhole space is nothing like Nullsec or known space for that matter. A group of 5-10 people can form into a Corp and have a POS and control their own little C1 wormhole without the need for territorial claim units or titans or caps... or even battleships. do we evict them? maybe if we REALLY hate them. Why not? because we love content and fights, and not evicting them means we get to roll into them later and fight again. Getting the drop on a ratting Gila or a ratting Rattlesnake is almost always done after someone rolls into a new, unscanned wormhole. This means we may only have a few minutes to form fleet, get to the wormhole that guy is in, and get the jump on it.
Not all FC's need alts. Fleet warp is used constantly without alt's and you seem to be basing your entire argument on alt's. I don't have any alt's nor intend to. and some of the folk's I play with spend more time in the climbing gym than they do on this game. Quit recking the game for the sake of making PL's life easier in terms of their preferred way of combat or PVP. It is about the Community as a whole, not one nook of EVE where a particular group thrives and would be better suited if people couldn't fleet warp on top of them.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16185
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 18:18:50 -
[1120] - Quote
Virgil Scipion wrote:I understand the reasons and the advantages behind this idea. But I dislike it a lot : it's a huge penalty for small roaming gangs.
FCs used a lot of their personnal time to scout a target area, doing bookmarks and using it to move their gangs. And now they have to throw all that effort to trash if they can't warp their gang to these BM. Sparing BM with corporation is not useful when half of fleet is not in the corpo, and small gangs have rarely ships to split from fleet to be a warp point.
Please don't punish LS for null-sec sins. I have faith in you, CCP, I'm sure you can find a better idea :)
So I take it you currently jump your small gang into systems without a scout then?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16185
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 18:20:04 -
[1121] - Quote
Tatsuj Khan wrote:Some posters casually dismiss the serious concerns of wormhole residents, with pithy statements like get warp-to scouts to sit on the WHs in our chains. Imagine if system gates are NOT 'public' and you need to have scouts sit on zero on them for fleet OPs. For huge alliance such as the goons and pl with hundreds of ships at their disposal in their regions, it's not a problem. But for many much smaller, corps the changes are a problem.
Sounds like a perfect time to go recruit some new players and get them into low SP scout ships.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
kraken11 jensen
The Gallant Collective Requiem Eternal
88
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 18:54:39 -
[1122] - Quote
Teacher'sPet wrote:no more 1 person with 87 Dominix accounts warping to one location at the same time. +1 for not enabling multiboxers any longer.
lol, I just have to ask if you have an number too mutch? maby the 8 or the 7. but 87 is just not serious. no one as far as I know fly that mutch accounts. No one, |
kraken11 jensen
The Gallant Collective Requiem Eternal
88
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 18:57:34 -
[1123] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Tatsuj Khan wrote:Some posters casually dismiss the serious concerns of wormhole residents, with pithy statements like get warp-to scouts to sit on the WHs in our chains. Imagine if system gates are NOT 'public' and you need to have scouts sit on zero on them for fleet OPs. For huge alliance such as the goons and pl with hundreds of ships at their disposal in their regions, it's not a problem. But for many much smaller, corps the changes are a problem.
Sounds like a perfect time to go recruit some new players and get them into low SP scout ships.
the bookmark delay, and not to be able to warp fleet to wormhole bookmarks 'etc. would be an really big extra pain in the ass. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16185
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 19:02:11 -
[1124] - Quote
kraken11 jensen wrote: the bookmark delay, and not to be able to warp fleet to wormhole bookmarks 'etc. would be an really big extra pain in the ass.
So have your scouts fit for speed.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1083
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 19:02:30 -
[1125] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Tatsuj Khan wrote:Some posters casually dismiss the serious concerns of wormhole residents, with pithy statements like get warp-to scouts to sit on the WHs in our chains. Imagine if system gates are NOT 'public' and you need to have scouts sit on zero on them for fleet OPs. For huge alliance such as the goons and pl with hundreds of ships at their disposal in their regions, it's not a problem. But for many much smaller, corps the changes are a problem.
Sounds like a perfect time to go recruit some new players and get them into low SP scout ships.
Sounds like a perfect time for CCP to attract some new players to the game so we can recruit them. That would involve not making bone-headed suggestions that make Eve less fun to play.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
So, why do I post here?
Because of this: http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility
|
OverLord V1C70RY
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 19:04:17 -
[1126] - Quote
yet another update that ruins some people game..
it have to stop somewhere, players play the game because they like it as it is, changing its balance to a degree is a good thing Fozzie. Changing the major things that make the game work is NOT good Mr Fozzie.
You just changed how bomber fleets work, how MOST pilots act in the fleet. meaning that yet again you pissed off a lot of your clients. Sorry Fozzie but i really fail to see how thats a good outcome.
Please stop changing/ruining our game.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16187
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 19:06:45 -
[1127] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:
Sounds like a perfect time for CCP to attract some new players to the game so we can recruit them. That would involve not making bone-headed suggestions that make Eve less fun to play.
So that means you approve of this change as it gives newer pilots a very wanted fleet role.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Jeanne Tivianne
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 19:06:48 -
[1128] - Quote
kraken11 jensen wrote:baltec1 wrote:Tatsuj Khan wrote:Some posters casually dismiss the serious concerns of wormhole residents, with pithy statements like get warp-to scouts to sit on the WHs in our chains. Imagine if system gates are NOT 'public' and you need to have scouts sit on zero on them for fleet OPs. For huge alliance such as the goons and pl with hundreds of ships at their disposal in their regions, it's not a problem. But for many much smaller, corps the changes are a problem.
Sounds like a perfect time to go recruit some new players and get them into low SP scout ships. the bookmark delay, and not to be able to warp fleet to wormhole bookmarks 'etc. would be an really big extra pain in the ass.
You get your new low SP scout friend to warp to the site to scout. At the point the all-clear is given, warp to the scout.
If you don't need to go to the sight right away, then have the scout make a corp bookmark. The delay does not apply to this since you are delaying going to the site right away anyway.
Way I see it, this is more fun than waiting for some pilot I have most likely never met face-to-face tell me to press F1 while he does all the rest of the work.
Unless, you know, I am missing something. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
51
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 19:08:38 -
[1129] - Quote
Teacher'sPet wrote:no more 1 person with 87 Dominix accounts warping to one location at the same time. +1 for not enabling multiboxers any longer.
Because this stops him from adding a 88th account to probe his domis onto something how? Makes it more tedious, does not require a 2nd person, makes it harder for other fleet that is trying to juggle probers onto nasty isboxer. This "solution" therefore fails again.
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
51
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 19:17:16 -
[1130] - Quote
OverLord V1C70RY wrote:yet another update that ruins some people game..
it have to stop somewhere, players play the game because they like it as it is, changing its balance to a degree is a good thing Fozzie. Changing the major things that make the game work is NOT good Mr Fozzie.
You just changed how bomber fleets work, how MOST pilots act in the fleet. meaning that yet again you pissed off a lot of your clients. Sorry Fozzie but i really fail to see how thats a good outcome.
Please stop changing/ruining our game.
You're right, good sir. The current CCP thinks everyone wants to play the game like PL. And you can't blame them, a lot of them *are* PL. At this rate, they will certainly end up with all those elite and elite-wannabes, but the server will be 1/5-th the size. |
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
52
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 19:21:28 -
[1131] - Quote
Jeanne Tivianne wrote: Way I see it, this is more fun than waiting for some pilot I have most likely never met face-to-face tell me to press F1 while he does all the rest of the work.
Unless, you know, I am missing something.
You're assuming this does not happen already. People are asked to step up for scout roles and they are crucial for fleets. I don't understand why people keep assuming scouts and warp-ins don't exist at the moment. They do, and they do exactly what we're talking about.
You also assume that FCs actually prefer to do ALL the work while you remain a monkey. If you are in such a corp/alliance, feel free to move - your enthusiasm and interest will be welcome elsewhere. |
Shadowforge Dawkins
Catastrophic Overview Failure Brave Collective
12
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 19:26:20 -
[1132] - Quote
Jeanne Tivianne wrote:kraken11 jensen wrote:baltec1 wrote:Tatsuj Khan wrote:Some posters casually dismiss the serious concerns of wormhole residents, with pithy statements like get warp-to scouts to sit on the WHs in our chains. Imagine if system gates are NOT 'public' and you need to have scouts sit on zero on them for fleet OPs. For huge alliance such as the goons and pl with hundreds of ships at their disposal in their regions, it's not a problem. But for many much smaller, corps the changes are a problem.
Sounds like a perfect time to go recruit some new players and get them into low SP scout ships. the bookmark delay, and not to be able to warp fleet to wormhole bookmarks 'etc. would be an really big extra pain in the ass. You get your new low SP scout friend to warp to the site to scout. At the point the all-clear is given, warp to the scout. If you don't need to go to the sight right away, then have the scout make a corp bookmark. The delay does not apply to this since you are delaying going to the site right away anyway. Way I see it, this is more fun than waiting for some pilot I have most likely never met face-to-face tell me to press F1 while he does all the rest of the work. Unless, you know, I am missing something.
You are missing something, you don't live in a wormhole from what I can tell... #1 RULE of wormhole space is what? CLOAK. what do scouts do? Cloak and dagger. What do paranoid wormhole bears do? put scouts at 15km from wormhole.
What you are missing is if we have a scout at 0 on a wormhole, as with gates, you are De-cloaked. enemy scout can see you, they are gone or now prepping an ambush. The element of surprise is a vital component in wormhole space combat.
What you are missing #2; Most wormhole corps don't have low SP counter parts. If you don't have cloaking 4 minimum, a covops ship you are either in one of the wormhole newb training corps or you are a daytripper. Some lower requirement WH corps entail.... about 10-12 million SP. So don't expect a low SP friend to do that.
What you are missing #3; As a person who enjoys bringing friends and others into games I enjoy playing, I'm not going to force a new player into boredom sitting his hide on a wormhole as a scout, he/she will be a part of the fight even if I think they will get killed because that is what gets people to stay in this game when it comes to PVP. That they are IN the fights, not hearing about it over the comms. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16188
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 19:26:34 -
[1133] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote: You're assuming this does not happen already. People are asked to step up for scout roles and they are crucial for fleets. I don't understand why people keep assuming scouts and warp-ins don't exist at the moment. They do, and they do exactly what we're talking about.
Right now the FC ship is also the probing ship most of the time, they don't need an alt.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
1680
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 19:27:19 -
[1134] - Quote
Tappits wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Airi Cho wrote:... How does it kill NPSI? Newbies don't get left behind so much and as a result tend to live a bit longer. Teach them how to fly their ships then and ... Information overload. It is a thing.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16188
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 19:29:17 -
[1135] - Quote
Shadowforge Dawkins wrote:
You are missing something, you don't live in a wormhole from what I can tell... #1 RULE of wormhole space is what? CLOAK. what do scouts do? Cloak and dagger. What do paranoid wormhole bears do? put scouts at 15km from wormhole.
What you are missing is if we have a scout at 0 on a wormhole, as with gates, you are De-cloaked. enemy scout can see you, they are gone or now prepping an ambush. The element of surprise is a vital component in wormhole space combat.
What you are missing #2; Most wormhole corps don't have low SP counter parts. If you don't have cloaking 4 minimum, a covops ship you are either in one of the wormhole newb training corps or you are a daytripper. Some lower requirement WH corps entail.... about 10-12 million SP. So don't expect a low SP friend to do that.
What you are missing #3; As a person who enjoys bringing friends and others into games I enjoy playing, I'm not going to force a new player into boredom sitting his hide on a wormhole as a scout, he/she will be a part of the fight even if I think they will get killed because that is what gets people to stay in this game when it comes to PVP. That they are IN the fights, not hearing about it over the comms.
I question if you have ever left highsec because your fleets would be silly easy to catch. As for boring gameplay, who wants to sit in a fleet where one guy is doing all the work? A scout in a battle is one of the most action packed roles you can have in EVE.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16188
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 19:30:30 -
[1136] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Tappits wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Airi Cho wrote:... How does it kill NPSI? Newbies don't get left behind so much and as a result tend to live a bit longer. Teach them how to fly their ships then and ... Information overload. It is a thing.
New players absorb info like a sponge, its the mid term players who are stuck in their ways that are hard to teach.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
52
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 19:36:42 -
[1137] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote: You're assuming this does not happen already. People are asked to step up for scout roles and they are crucial for fleets. I don't understand why people keep assuming scouts and warp-ins don't exist at the moment. They do, and they do exactly what we're talking about.
Right now the FC ship is also the probing ship most of the time, they don't need an alt.
Very rarely, when he feels ballsy enough to fit links, AND a combat probes, AND evade anti-booster hunters.
More often than not, one FC alt is in an off-grid or on-grid boosting ship that is just boosting in the FC/WC position. The other alt is probing stuff down, that the first alt then warps people to. Which is what this "change" supposedly wants to force.
Ask your skirmish commanders who are in 90% of fleets by count. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
1680
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 19:39:14 -
[1138] - Quote
Current theory doing the rounds is that Fozzie is a mole for Riot. It would explain the latest crop of ideas.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16190
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 19:52:03 -
[1139] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:
Very rarely, when he feels ballsy enough to fit links, AND a combat probes, AND evade anti-booster hunters.
More often than not, one FC alt is in an off-grid or on-grid boosting ship that is just boosting in the FC/WC position. The other alt is probing stuff down, that the first alt then warps people to. Which is what this "change" supposedly wants to force.
Ask your skirmish commanders who are in 90% of fleets by count.
I am a skirmish commander.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Cancel Align NOW
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
509
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 20:35:20 -
[1140] - Quote
I can see this change making fleets more dynamic. That is a good thing. |
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
179
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 20:40:42 -
[1141] - Quote
This change is only for big null sec alliances and everyone else gets the short end of the stick. Large alliances can spare extra scanners and warps in alts(both in the same person is not possible choose scanning or tackling). Small to medium alliances have ALL the disadvantages. Bombers fleets will hardly be affected . What does this even improve? Nothing at all!!! There will be less ships exploding because you won't catch anyone. Wormhole space will get even emptier then before, catching fleets will be impossible. Getting to a new chain will take a lot longer. Catching people in sites will become impossible. Maybe we can add a 5 minute delay in null sec to see the warp beacon of a gate, see how you guys like it.
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
103
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 20:54:24 -
[1142] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote: As one of Eve's most elite players are you willing to help teach Eve newbies?
Yes, yes i am, that's why i am one of the main Dir's in Pandemic horde and have also done some live classes for them. and also almost always online doing stuff for the new beans. maybe you should not try callout out people for not helping new players before finding out the facts of what people do in eve. |
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
179
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 20:57:29 -
[1143] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Tatsuj Khan wrote:Some posters casually dismiss the serious concerns of wormhole residents, with pithy statements like get warp-to scouts to sit on the WHs in our chains. Imagine if system gates are NOT 'public' and you need to have scouts sit on zero on them for fleet OPs. For huge alliance such as the goons and pl with hundreds of ships at their disposal in their regions, it's not a problem. But for many much smaller, corps the changes are a problem.
Sounds like a perfect time to go recruit some new players and get them into low SP scout ships. And again you dismiss the serious concerns for a problem that does not exist now and will be created by this change.
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
103
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 21:03:57 -
[1144] - Quote
Zen Tsai wrote:CCP, you are nerfing competent FCs by directly attacking the impact of their player skills. All this does is equal the playing field between the great FCs and the mediocre FCs. In effect, it dumbs the game down, and caters to the unskilled players getting smeared by the truly talented players. And all while masquerading as a change that will get fleet members more involved in fights.
Why slow down the game? Who was so mad at getting outplayed that they lobbied this ridiculous change through? Whose ego is being catered to with this change? Whoever you are, HTFU you whiny space nerd. Those who are best at playing the game SHOULD win.
It does the opposite, it enables good teams of people working together to be stronger than a single person trying to do everything. If FC's are not getting the right support then there in the wrong place to do what there trying to do, and should move to a better place with a better support structure to enable them to be top tear. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16192
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 21:06:19 -
[1145] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote: And again you dismiss the serious concerns for a problem that does not exist now and will be created by this change.
I dismiss it because it is not a problem unless you are incompetent.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
179
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 21:10:21 -
[1146] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:unimatrix0030 wrote: And again you dismiss the serious concerns for a problem that does not exist now and will be created by this change.
I dismiss it because it is not a problem unless you are incompetent. Ha, you just don't want to see it as a problem.
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
266
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 21:17:29 -
[1147] - Quote
Winter Archipelago wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote: "But, but those sniping ships all die to all those bombers... Wait. Because it will no longer be easy mode for bombers, it means battleships and battlecruisers will have a place on the battlefield now. Damn it. My entire argument is crumbling around me. Curses!"
This isn't going to be the huge negative impact on bombers that some people seem to believe it will be.
Most of the bombing fleets I have been in, no wait, all of the bombing fleets I have been in use a warp in scout. Scout gets into position then designated waves of bombers warp to the scout.
If anything, I see this neutering of Fleet Warp as targeted to people who multi-box. Unfortunately, it impacts non-multi-boxers with equal ferocity.
My main issue with this is the inconsistency of the change. Personally, I don't think CCP should do this in half-measures, just remove Fleet Warp completely instead of doing it in parts.
Edit to add: and it would be easy to justify the removal of fleet warp from the game because of the introduction of the entosis link - slaving your navigation computer to someone elses is a security risk that the entosis link could take advantage of. |
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
103
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 21:22:00 -
[1148] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:This change is only for big null sec alliances and everyone else gets the short end of the stick. Large alliances can spare extra scanners and warps in alts(both in the same person is not possible choose scanning or tackling). Small to medium alliances have ALL the disadvantages. Bombers fleets will hardly be affected . What does this even improve? Nothing at all!!! There will be less ships exploding because you won't catch anyone. Wormhole space will get even emptier then before, catching fleets will be impossible. Getting to a new chain will take a lot longer. Catching people in sites will become impossible. Maybe we can add a 5 minute delay in null sec to see the warp beacon of a gate, see how you guys like it.
I don't think any of this will happen...
probing alts will still be the same probing alts. you will still catch people. there will be more stranglers there will be more time were people cannot warp out while you come in because they don't have there out spot setup yet. what it will stop is scrub FC's endlessly pinging his fleet around unwilling to fight because scaree.. People will still WH how will the time to get a chain set up take longer? and how will catching people in sites be impossible?
Most of every ones comments are just lazy people who have had easy mode for far too long.... |
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
180
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 21:47:47 -
[1149] - Quote
Tappits wrote:
I don't think any of this will happen...
probing alts will still be the same probing alts. you will still catch people. there will be more stranglers there will be more time were people cannot warp out while you come in because they don't have there out spot setup yet. what it will stop is scrub FC's endlessly pinging his fleet around unwilling to fight because scaree.. People will still WH how will the time to get a chain set up take longer? and how will catching people in sites be impossible?
Most of every ones comments are just lazy people who have had easy mode for far too long....
CCP adds some challenging TEAM play to the game and every one cry's because they had some one be able to do everything for them for years.
First of all probing alts won't be the same since they now need to be able to tackle. New wormhole, you jump in and the clock start ticking, either they saw you come in, are safe already or see a new sig on scan. They already start to align to the pos. Scouts sees wrecks on scan, and starts looking for targets. Most targets who look on d-scan will already be in warp. Because of the long spawn ranges in sleeper sites most fleets won't be on 0 of the warp in. So you put out probes, then you have 1 minute to get a lock and warp a interdictor to it. With this you will first need to warp a covert ops to it, who will have trouble scanning them because of the warp rigs. And then the interdictor can start to warp, to land when the targets already warped out. No content. And getting the chain propagates will be a pain once more. First we need to wait 5 minutes for the corp of the scanner to drop bookmarks.Then all the other corps need to pick up the bm's and put it in, other members need to wait for an other 5 minutes for them to propagate. O and don't come with those bring an alt to have a warp in to everything, with 10 dudes missing 1 dude sitting in a warp to ship is a big difference! Brining more alts is not a way to fix things and only work in favor of the bigger alliances. So basicly you lose 5 minutes when targets warp to there pos in less then half that. And no having the fleet one jump after the scanner is not possible since you scan more then one chain at a time just to be able to find anyone. And all this because null has one little issue with combat probing... .
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2512
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 22:03:46 -
[1150] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:With this you will first need to warp a covert ops to it, who will have trouble scanning them because of the warp rigs. So, the ship with the highest base warp speed and the highest bonus to probes, is going to have a hard time probing people?
What did you use before, QA modules?
The only added factor in your scenario with regards to time, is the prober warping to site and having dictor warp to his location, which, in a worst case scenario, only adds double the warp time of the dictor pilot.
All the other factors are identical. |
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2190
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 22:07:29 -
[1151] - Quote
Please reduce CPU requirement of Expanded probe launchers.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2513
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 22:09:27 -
[1152] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Please reduce CPU requirement of Expanded probe launchers. Gonna quote every time I see it. |
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2190
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 22:13:06 -
[1153] - Quote
Why not increase the scan time for combat probes instead of buggering about with fleet warp?
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2513
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 22:17:56 -
[1154] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Why not increase the scan time for combat probes instead of buggering about with fleet warp? Doesn't fit the stated goal of 'more pilot interaction' just increases time. |
Lyra Gerie
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
54
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 22:20:27 -
[1155] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Why not increase the scan time for combat probes instead of buggering about with fleet warp?
Because that doesn't fix the problem they are trying to address. That doesn't change the fact that their current idea does fix it and also breaks or heavily hinders other parts of the game. If this is how they want fleets to behave there are other ways to approach it then hitting ALL fleets.
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2190
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 22:27:38 -
[1156] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Zappity wrote:Why not increase the scan time for combat probes instead of buggering about with fleet warp? Doesn't fit the stated goal of 'more pilot interaction' just increases time. That is one if their stated goals: "...reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets."
I think the fleet warp change is ridiculous for the player involvement goal anyway. You might get a few extra scouts but the vast majority of fleet members won't do anything different. Surely it would be better to reduce maximum fleet size and nerf target broadcasting for this goal.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Emrys Alf
Seagull Fleet Alternate Allegiance
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 22:31:58 -
[1157] - Quote
Pity the additions are not as good as the nurfing.
What a pain. What a waste. |
Zepheros Naeonis
TinklePee
42
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 22:33:06 -
[1158] - Quote
More illogical changes, brought to you by CCP. |
Lyra Gerie
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
54
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 22:43:12 -
[1159] - Quote
Zepheros Naeonis wrote:More illogical changes, brought to you by CCP. The logic is there, the implementation is not |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2513
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 22:43:26 -
[1160] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Rowells wrote:Zappity wrote:Why not increase the scan time for combat probes instead of buggering about with fleet warp? Doesn't fit the stated goal of 'more pilot interaction' just increases time. That is one if their stated goals: "...reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets." I think the fleet warp change is ridiculous for the player involvement goal anyway. You might get a few extra scouts but the vast majority of fleet members won't do anything different. Surely it would be better to reduce maximum fleet size and nerf target broadcasting for this goal. Scan time hits one goal, but the warp need hits both, while using one effect as a cause for the other.
There's definitely some things need to be ironed out though. I definitely thing more probing options plays more into the interaction. Depending on how low the requirements go, may even make ranged doctrines more vulnerable. But that's a bit off topic I guess. |
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
13416
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 22:51:44 -
[1161] - Quote
Zappity wrote: That is one if their stated goals: "...reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets."
I'm still wondering why that was under consideration to begin with.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Insurance Agent
Perkone Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 23:04:48 -
[1162] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote: First of all probing alts won't be the same since they now need to be able to tackle. New wormhole, you jump in and the clock start ticking, either they saw you come in, are safe already or see a new sig on scan. They already start to align to the pos. Scouts sees wrecks on scan, and starts looking for targets. Most targets who look on d-scan will already be in warp. Because of the long spawn ranges in sleeper sites most fleets won't be on 0 of the warp in. So you put out probes, then you have 1 minute to get a lock and warp a interdictor to it. With this you will first need to warp a covert ops to it, who will have trouble scanning them because of the warp rigs. And then the interdictor can start to warp, to land when the targets already warped out. No content.
First you say that your scout either get's spoted or not on entering system, and most pve savy pilots will be in warp asap when they do notice your scout.
At this point probes will do no good for you. If they didn't notice you come in, and you do notice wrecks, why would you need to probe? Of course they could be in a data/relic site, but those have a different meta. You either have plenty of time to find and locate targets, or they have prepared and outside fleets would have almost no chance to drop on them. Why should a competent pve fleet have more disadvantages then a pvp fleet? |
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2192
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 23:20:26 -
[1163] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Zappity wrote: That is one if their stated goals: "...reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets."
I'm still wondering why that was under consideration to begin with. As far as I can tell this is a problem in the nullsec fleet meta and they are perfectly happy to stuff up fleets everywhere else to fix that problem.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
13419
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 23:29:34 -
[1164] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Zappity wrote: That is one if their stated goals: "...reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets."
I'm still wondering why that was under consideration to begin with. As far as I can tell this is a problem in the nullsec fleet meta and they are perfectly happy to stuff up fleets everywhere else to fix that problem.
What, that people can get fights? If they want fleets to drop on people less quickly, then how about they curb the hilarious speed power creep that has cropped up the past couple of years?
Or would that mean admitting that the interceptor changes were wrong?
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
1681
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 23:41:59 -
[1165] - Quote
It looks like Null Sec is going to be too annoying to live in. I am torn between making plans to live in a worm hole (again), run missions in High Sec or quit.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2193
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 23:47:16 -
[1166] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Zappity wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Zappity wrote: That is one if their stated goals: "...reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets."
I'm still wondering why that was under consideration to begin with. As far as I can tell this is a problem in the nullsec fleet meta and they are perfectly happy to stuff up fleets everywhere else to fix that problem. What, that people can get fights? If they want fleets to drop on people less quickly, then how about they curb the hilarious speed power creep that has cropped up the past couple of years? Or would that mean admitting that the interceptor changes were wrong? I doubt they have a cohesive plan. Interceptor change and mining signatures being changed to anomalies go in one direction, this goes in the other. Bizarre.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
13432
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 00:01:49 -
[1167] - Quote
Zappity wrote: I doubt they have a cohesive plan. Interceptor change and mining signatures being changed to anomalies go in one direction, this goes in the other. Bizarre.
Gotta agree on that one. It seems like, due to Fozzie's earlier comment, they are just scrambling to make this not look like an obvious sidehanded nerf to bombers.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2817
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 00:59:18 -
[1168] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:Kendarr wrote:I see that Manfred Sideous has companioned this change as CSM and now no one likes it he is seriously butt hurt. Confirming. Please someone confirm this confirmation.
I am confirming that Manny confirmed this but not that he was the only one who supported it. That would take a different confirmation.
Yeah, I supported it as well and still do. Yeah the wormhole aspect was discussed and the filthy goon still remembered his roots. No, this is not about killing your specific lifestyle but making people need to be present when playing. At least as far as I am confirmed.
Oh and for the record? Yeah OGB could go tomorrow and I would cheer it on and this from a guy with all the leadership skills done to V.
Be in the game if you be playing the game, yo.
m
Mike Azariah Gö¼GöÇGöÇGö¼n++ ¯|(pâä)/¯
|
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
902
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 01:33:10 -
[1169] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Yeah, I supported it as well and still do. Yeah the wormhole aspect was discussed and the filthy goon still remembered his roots. No, this is not about killing your specific lifestyle but making people need to be present when playing. At least as far as I am confirmed.
And I suppose that everyone using fleetwarps for things other than major fleet ops can just get shafted, right?
- No more slinging tacklers onto targets - No more warping your alts to a safespot without ten thousand clicks - No more catching ships that are rolling safes or simply MWDing in a random direction to evade capture (AFK inty pilots do this all the time) - No more tackling safe-rolling supercaps in lowsec ever (unless you can gimp-fit an expanded launcher onto a hictor) - No more warping your alts off a cyno grid when they jump in (using fleetwarp you can currently make them start warping before the UI finishes loading on the jumping clients)
There's a ton of uses for fleetwarps that have nothing to do with moving giant nullsec lemming fleets around. This change sucks. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2514
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 02:02:33 -
[1170] - Quote
E: oops |
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1089
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 02:15:47 -
[1171] - Quote
Why not just get rid of Fleet Commanders and Wing Commanders? Reimburse the SP for those skills. Then increase squad size to 25-50 but that is the largest [only] unit. In short: lower total fleet size from 256 to 25-50. I'm leaning more towards a smaller number than a large one. You limit the power of boosters, broadcasting, fleet warping, watch listing, etc. you increase the number of actual leaders helping pilots make decisions by a factor of 5-10. The blob becomes inherently harder to control, but small gangs are relatively unaffected. Thoughts?
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
So, why do I post here?
Because of this: http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility
|
Alexis Nightwish
242
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 02:18:22 -
[1172] - Quote
So I'm away for a few days and this happens.
CCP, I can understand your goal of removing the effect combat probing had on snipers, and I agree with it, but this change is absolutely terrible for the following reasons:
It will not achieve your goal of "transferring more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members" because FCs will just be forced to dual box a cloaky probe alt to get the warp-in. This will lead to to increased FC burnout as it just adds more frustration to this already tedious role.
It harms mission runners for no reason. People running L4s as a group, or someone multiboxing missions is something that needs to be nerfed? You're just adding frustration to the game.
This will do nothing to bombers. FC will just pilot two bombers: his 'main' for fleet warp command, and his 'alt' for probing/warp-ins. Perhaps if you looked at changing the terrible bomb damage mechanic, bombers wouldn't be such an issue?
This harms small gang roams as FCs w/o the luxury of a cloaky prober alt, will force someone into the role of the 'alt' which is a gloryless, frustrating job that no one wants to do.
This harms WHs because our "gates" (notice this is in quotes Larkin), must be bookmarked because as soon as you leave the system or change ships you lose all your scan results. So just traveling as a group becomes frustrating.
This harms any group that isn't a corp, including NPSI communities, ad-hoc gangs, and alliances. Alliances! These groups cannot share BMs (other than the horribly tedious and frustrating BM copy and jettison method because for some reason our space ships' computers can't transfer this information), and thus have to, yet again, have an alt for warp-ins, or they all get to warp themselves to the previously shared BMs. Cause we all love tedium and busywork in our internet spaceships game!
In any case where your fleet does not have a warp-in alt, but you do have the BMs (such as corporations after waiting the 5ish minutes for the damn things to propagate) everyone will have to warp themselves, which I guess is your goal? But the end result is that we'll have to homogenize our fleets so they warp at the same speed, or use an out of game tool that I'm sure someone will write that gives the timing that ship classes must warp in order to land at the same time. Sounds frustrating and/or tedious.
Are you seeing the theme here?
tl;dr Doesn't prevent what you want, doesn't get "fleet members more involved", doesn't achieve any of your goals because it can all be bypassed by a cloaky probe alt. Does add a massive amount of tedium and frustration to a game with a reputation for being tedious and frustrating.
CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Fixing bombs, not the bombers
|
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
155
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 02:26:11 -
[1173] - Quote
Tappits wrote:Miner Hottie wrote: As one of Eve's most elite players are you willing to help teach Eve newbies?
Yes, yes i am, that's why i am one of the main Dir's in Pandemic horde and have also done some live classes for them. and also almost always online doing stuff for the new beans. maybe you should not try callout out people for not helping new players before finding out the facts of what people do in eve.
Good for you. You have done some (less than the average eve uni lecturer).
I note you left the rest if my comment out. Tacit agreement if there ever was that every thing else I said was right.
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2195
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 02:34:23 -
[1174] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:No, this is not about killing your specific lifestyle but making people need to be present when playing. At least as far as I am confirmed...Be in the game if you be playing the game, yo. The problem is fleet involvement in nullsec? Then fix fleet involvement in nullsec. This isn't a problem in small gang lowsec, wormholes and your current solution is both a quality of life and useful feature reduction.
Fixing the problem of nullsec fleet involvement is good. Doing it at the expense of my gameplay isn't. Identify the root of the problem and address it rather than an indiscriminate sledgehammer solution.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Busta Rock
The DawnSoarers
40
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 02:59:21 -
[1175] - Quote
I only have issues with the nerfing of fleet warps to bookmarks. a fleet/wing/squad commander should have the ability to make any personal bookmarks he likes public to the fleet he is commanding for that purpose. if you cant deal with the speed at which bombers and other fleets can reposition to perches and other bookmarks, YOU ARE THE PROBLEM.
along that line of thought, here is a suggestion:
as a posible pair of solutions to the OGB/rolling safes/random 1k+ AB/MWD ships at deep safes - a problem that has greeatly annoyed me in the past because those ships are so damn hard to catch with probe ships (the last time I really hunted them was before slinging was possible... how I wish I could do that back then!)
1) Give Interceptors the ability to warp DIRECTLY to Dscan results. The ability to warp directly to Dscan results would allow them to actually DO what their name suggests... INTERCEPT.
2) Give all recons an extra utility high slot and combat probe specific bonuses better than existing covops (which are bonused for both at a lesser value). Being truly competent with combat probes only (alongside their cloaking/Dscan invisibility depending on specific type) would allow them to tackle targets at range without actually having to be superfast to the grid - plus they can actually survive engaging a target long enough for backup to arrive if they bite off more than they can chew, which Interceptors simply cannot do unless they have a numerical advantage. this capability would probably be of most use to the Lachesis and Arazu, with the Huginn and Rapier also being useful in the role, but all recons could be of use to some extent with it.
another possible addition to capability would be to have target signature radius directly affect the effective range of warp disrupters, scramblers and webs. depends on how effective the above new abilities to interceptors and recons were.
I have always been of the opinion that capabilities should be ADDED to enable new evolutions to gameplay, NOT nerfed (or at the very least additions should be made to compensate FOR nerfs), this goes at least as far back as the Great Nano Nerf, where I would have much preferred capability additions to counter nanomachs and the like (been playing the game for 7+ years now, and the moment nanoships got nerfed, I lost all interest in the Machariel... it was my dream ship BECAUSE SPEED) |
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
13436
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 03:59:18 -
[1176] - Quote
Busta Rock wrote: I have always been of the opinion that capabilities should be ADDED to enable new evolutions to gameplay, NOT nerfed (or at the very least additions should be made to compensate FOR nerfs), this goes at least as far back as the Great Nano Nerf, where I would have much preferred capability additions to counter nanomachs and the like (been playing the game for 7+ years now, and the moment nanoships got nerfed, I lost all interest in the Machariel... it was my dream ship BECAUSE SPEED)
I oppose power creep in general just on principle, but if you can't admit that the nano age was a goddamned nightmare, then I don't know what to tell you.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Busta Rock
The DawnSoarers
40
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 04:04:13 -
[1177] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote: I oppose power creep in general just on principle, but if you can't admit that the nano age was a goddamned nightmare, then I don't know what to tell you.
power creep is the way of the world. technology ADVANCES... new capabilities are developed to counter existing paradigms. this nerf is quite literally taking one step forward, THREE steps back. also known as design by lawyers.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16198
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 04:17:10 -
[1178] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Mike Azariah wrote:No, this is not about killing your specific lifestyle but making people need to be present when playing. At least as far as I am confirmed...Be in the game if you be playing the game, yo. The problem is fleet involvement in nullsec? Then fix fleet involvement in nullsec. This isn't a problem in small gang lowsec, wormholes and your current solution is both a quality of life and a useful feature reduction. Fixing the problem of nullsec fleet involvement is good. Doing it at the expense of my gameplay isn't. Identify the root of the problem and address it rather than an indiscriminate sledgehammer solution.
They did identify it and its an issue with every fleet everywhere. Its not like this is hard to adapt to.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2197
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 04:26:18 -
[1179] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Zappity wrote:Mike Azariah wrote:No, this is not about killing your specific lifestyle but making people need to be present when playing. At least as far as I am confirmed...Be in the game if you be playing the game, yo. The problem is fleet involvement in nullsec? Then fix fleet involvement in nullsec. This isn't a problem in small gang lowsec, wormholes and your current solution is both a quality of life and a useful feature reduction. Fixing the problem of nullsec fleet involvement is good. Doing it at the expense of my gameplay isn't. Identify the root of the problem and address it rather than an indiscriminate sledgehammer solution. They did identify it and its an issue with every fleet everywhere. Its not like this is hard to adapt to. No, lack of involvement is not 'an issue with every fleet everywhere'. It is not an issue with small gangs in lowsec or wormholes. It is not an issue with highsec mission running or ganking groups. It is certainly not an issue when I am using fleet warp to a signature on an alt.
I do not want to adapt to it. I want them to come up with a better solution that fixes the problem without degrading my game play.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
1687
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 04:26:20 -
[1180] - Quote
I wonder if we make it worse? CCP is renowned for taking critism badly, constructive or otherwise. If they come up with a horrible idea they will try push it through and bandaid fix it. If they can't bandaid fix it then they will latch onto the compromise that is closest to their plan, usually suggested by players to reduce the damage.
It seems to be about not losing face. That they have to keep forcing that they are "right" or they might lose morale and confidence.
I probably don't have my finger on it quite right but I think sometimes that we pressure them to be more stupid that usual.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16198
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 04:32:14 -
[1181] - Quote
Zappity wrote: I do not want to adapt to it.
And here we have the real reason as to why people are against this.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Needmore Longcat
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
235
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 04:45:35 -
[1182] - Quote
I thought you guys couldn't top Phoebe. I was wrong. |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
280
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 04:54:09 -
[1183] - Quote
Alexis Nightwish wrote:1.CCP, I can understand your goal of removing the effect combat probing had on snipers
2.FCs will just be forced to dual box a cloaky probe alt to get the warp-in. This will lead to to increased FC burnout as it just adds more frustration to this already tedious role.
3. It harms mission runners for no reason.
4. This will do nothing to bombers.
5. This harms small gang roams as FCs w/o the luxury of a cloaky prober alt, will force someone into the role of the 'alt' which is a gloryless, frustrating job that no one wants to do.
6. This harms WHs because . . .
7. [Non-corp] groups cannot share BMs (other than the horribly tedious and frustrating BM copy and jettison method . . .), and thus have to, yet again, have an alt for warp-ins, or they all get to warp themselves to the previously shared BMs.
8. the end result is [how do we make all our fleet be in the same place at the same time?]
9. Are you seeing the theme here?
1. If you think there is only one reason for the change and that every other affect is "collateral damage", that might be why you don't understand or accept it.
2. FC's are not "forced" to do anything. They don't even have to log in. If FCing is too hard for them after this change, then maybe they were not officer material to begin with. Not everyone is cut out to be a leader. It sounds like a lot of the objection to this change is from people who just don't want to accept that cold, harsh reality.
3. PVE'ers, by definition, adapt to their environment. They overcome the challenges their environment imposes on them. If they can't do that, maybe they should go do something easier, like ganking noobs in Uitra.
4. Is it supposed to do something to bombers? Bomber pilots are supposed to be elite operators capable of complex, cooperative behavior. The harder EVE gets, the GREATER the advantage to such players.
5. This does nothing to small gangs. Small gang pilots tend to fall into one of two categories: noobs and elites. Or, in other words, people who are learning how to play the game and people who are good at playing the game. The former were already going to adapt, else how would they be able to play the game at all? The latter are already proven to be capable of adaptation. It's how they got good at the game. Besides that, I've never been in a small gang that blind-fleet warped to a probe signature, not in high sec, not in low sec, not in null, and not in a wormhole. We ALWAYS sent in a scout.
Whether you think scouting is a glory-less or frustrating job depends on your playstyle. In the non-PVE fleets I've flown in, the scout(s) were usually the better players. Unfortunately, it takes a competent FC to understand their value and employ them effectively, and it takes a competent operator to scout effectively in a hostile environment. One or both of those are lacking in many fleets, but a scout is "the tip of the spear". That's a fun job for some people, for some playstyles.
6. In the wormhole operations I've been involved in, you manage your own bookmarks. Yes, sometimes you can grab/use a corp bookmark or a friend's bookmark, but generally, you didn't stand around twiddling your thumbs while others are doing the work of securing the hole, gathering intel, scanning down signatures, fighting for their lives, etc. And, this is not just so you don't get lost; it's also in case someone else (person_B) gets lost, the closest person or the person in a small ship (person_A) can be tasked to go back and provide a warp-in without one of his responsible, boomark-managing teammates (person_C) having to hold his hand and guide him to the wormhole that he couldn't be arsed to bookmark himself when he came through. If having to wait an extra 20 seconds for your scout to say "GO!" makes it impossible for you to play in wormholes, you should GTFO of wormholes.
7. [Non-corp] group leaders can share bookmarks with eachother. Then, they can each share bookmarks with their groups. A lazy FC could also just not share bookmarks and just warp ahead of his fleet, who could then warp to him. Then, the person with the bookmarks would only have to share them with the FC . . . wait, I think that was redundant.
8. That is called a "problem". Some types of people are good at figuring out solutions to "problems". When those people are empowered to give other people "commands", they are generally referred to as "commander", not to be confused with the specific rank of Commander which is used in many militaries and other organizations with such hierarchical social structures. When a "commander" is empowered to give orders to a fleet and its members, he/she is called a "fleet commander", generally abbreviated as "FC" in EVE Online.
9. I am seeing a theme and it is this: You are not fleet command material. :-( |
Crazy Candy
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
22
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 05:24:05 -
[1184] - Quote
Reminder that countless players continue to sub to this game to only log in for pings and press F1 when it is needed.
Reminder that if players wish to be more "active" they often start FCing themselves, or seeking out smaller gang play styles.
Reminder that people are clearly contempt pressing F1, as they can do more than press F1 when they feel like it, and this change is unnecessary. |
Ayara Itris
Iron.Guard Iron Armada
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 06:12:55 -
[1185] - Quote
From a small gang perspective, it kind of ruins stuff as an FC. Before this change, an FC could carry a probe launcher on, say, a Confessor. With these changes, it basically makes it completely impossible for the FC to multitask as a damage + scanner, and forces the fleet to either drop a combat ship if they want to be able to counter people's links, or buy an alt, which is silly. |
Dun'Gal
Myriad Contractors Inc.
234
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 06:18:11 -
[1186] - Quote
Did some thinking on this and I have one request, but a lot of other things to say as well - so appolgies for the wall of text.
The Request: I would like, explained in detail, all the things that this change is intended to fix. It has been stated that bomber fleets aren't the only reason, and it has been mentioned that there are other considerations here, ie. extreme multiboxers. But other than these cases what exactly is this fixing.
Suggesting that the intention is to prevent fleets from getting onto there targets so quickly seems a bit backwards, considering you promote this game as a PVP game. You would think you would want people fighting more, not less. Because frankly the more you slow down the ability for people to get on there targets, the more likely those targets simply aren't going to be around when they arrive, resulting in less pew.
The claim that you should just warp a scout in first and then warp your fleet to said scout, great, but why should I be forced to do this? If I want to dive head first into a situation where I don't know what I may or may not be landing on, in order to get there faster I should have that option. Avoidance is already far to easy for anyone with half a brain cell, why make it completely idiot proof. That extra 2-3 seconds to land scout, then warp fleet to scout is plenty of time for that target to say, "hell naw" and just warp to a safe/station/pos, whatever.
You made probes visible on dscan quite some time ago to give the bears a chance to see the impending warp-in already. And anyone vigilant enough to be paying attention already warps at the first sign of combat probes on dscan. As it is, you would be lucky to land on them before they leave grid, now you want to give them even more time. (Edit: I suppose you could remove probes from Dscan again to counter balance this.)
I would argue that the fleets in null sec that this is supposedly going to help aren't playing the game right/paying attention. The tools are already there to see when they are going to get dropped on, why aren't they using them? You want to provide more fleet interaction. Get your F1 monkeys watching Dscan for combat probes, or in systems that are too large to scan entirely, have scouts out actively looking for probes in these spaces that aren't dscannable where your fleet is at. Telling the rest of EvE to adapt to a change that has been pushed through to protect your incompetence/laziness as a fc is laughable, especially when the tools to protect or at the very least prepare yourselves, already exist.
This change needs to be scrapped, because at this point without some real examples of exactly what this fixes, all I'm seeing here is a blanket change that does so little to affect what you supposedly want to fix, but destroys/removes interaction and gameplay for a great many more players in your "sandbox."
Again, appologies for the wall of text. |
Canon Makanen
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 06:27:11 -
[1187] - Quote
IF you really want to let more people take responsibility in the fleet, then you should let the fleet boss to assign the ability of whole fleet warp to other member by flag. NOT your terrible removing **** idea |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
280
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 06:52:04 -
[1188] - Quote
Dun'Gal wrote:I would like, explained in detail, all the things that this change is intended to fix. . . . This change needs to be scrapped, because at this point without some real examples of exactly what this fixes, all I'm seeing here is a blanket change that does so little to affect what you supposedly want to fix, but destroys/removes interaction and gameplay for a great many more players in your "sandbox."
Do you see the problem with your thinking? You DON'T know what this change fixes (supposedly, after an explanation by some of the devs and 60 pages of feedback), but you DO know it doesn't fix that and hurts the the game for more people than it helps. Your objection is illogical. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16198
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 07:04:58 -
[1189] - Quote
Ayara Itris wrote:From a small gang perspective, it kind of ruins stuff as an FC. Before this change, an FC could carry a probe launcher on, say, a Confessor. With these changes, it basically makes it completely impossible for the FC to multitask as a damage + scanner, and forces the fleet to either drop a combat ship if they want to be able to counter people's links, or buy an alt, which is silly.
Having one guy doing all the work is the silly thing here.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Dun'Gal
Myriad Contractors Inc.
234
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 07:47:29 -
[1190] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Dun'Gal wrote:I would like, explained in detail, all the things that this change is intended to fix. . . . This change needs to be scrapped, because at this point without some real examples of exactly what this fixes, all I'm seeing here is a blanket change that does so little to affect what you supposedly want to fix, but destroys/removes interaction and gameplay for a great many more players in your "sandbox."
Do you see the problem with your thinking? You DON'T know what this change fixes (supposedly, after an explanation by some of the devs and 60 pages of feedback), but you DO know it doesn't fix that and hurts the the game for more people than it helps. Your objection is illogical. If it is so obvious to you, then please in detail explain what this fixes other than the two things mentioned in my post. I'm fairly certain everyone here would love to be enlightened as to what horribly bad thing, not mentioned, exists in eve that warrants the removal of the ability to warp fleet members to scanned signatures. |
|
Na'hkin Oaks
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 07:50:08 -
[1191] - Quote
So basically this is a business decision. Some bright guy decided that they didn't want to increase the ship loss, in fact by not leaving the fleet warp to bookmarks will ultimately cost less to all fleets, because people have lives, and might not make it to the battlefield.
In the end, pilot Joe won't have to buy that plex or 3 because he didn't lose that nestor because he was afk; while his fc warped him into battle. Overall CCP this is a monetarily loss for your company. Less plexes will be purchased.
Just a thought why don't we just nerf everything up a notch or two, then it won't seem so bad, instead of nerfing downward all the time. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16198
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 08:00:13 -
[1192] - Quote
Dun'Gal wrote: If it is so obvious to you, then please in detail explain what this fixes other than the two things mentioned in my post. I'm fairly certain everyone here would love to be enlightened as to what horribly bad thing, not mentioned, exists in eve that warrants the removal of the ability to warp fleet members to scanned signatures.
Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Solecist Punk
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
342
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 08:07:19 -
[1193] - Quote
With these fleet-changes, it would be impossible for me to move around a fleet of -10.
The possibilities would get reduced to what all the lesser gankers do, which means only ever having them undock and warp to the scout which sits at the target.
This change completely removes my ability to move around a fleet of -10 on grid, bouncing between bookmarks. Of course I could share all the bookmarks, but then it will become virtually impossible to strike onto a target, as everyone's timing would be completely different.
Simply having an alt who sits at the target is not only sad and boring gameplay, it would not help in such a case, because there would be no way to have them all land at the same time.
Dear CCP Fozzie, have you ever considered that you are already so "deep into it" that you completely lost the sense for what is good and right, compared to what is bad and crap?
The CSM member who came up with this was the same who came up with the jump fatigue. Have you ever considered that this person might not actually have such good ideas? Just because it seems to fix something, does not mean it actually fixes something.
In this case, you are not fixing anything. In most cases your change can get circumvented, in other cases it *completely breaks gameplay*. When this happens, what's the point of such a change?
It does not promote the individual at all. Most individuals do not even want to be "promoted". They are F1 monkeys for a reason ! Have you ever considered that ? This CSM is disconnected with the people the changes affect.
You should get some distance, because you are completely losing sight and reason. It's a common psychological effect that affects anyone who is too long into something. One does not realise that one is losing sight and the "viewpoint from above" like you do. This change is a perfect example.
I will make sure this CSM member will suffer for this serious crap, legally, within the game's rules.
Thanks. |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
281
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 08:27:08 -
[1194] - Quote
Dun'Gal wrote:the removal of the ability to warp [alts] to scanned signatures.
Is that what this is about? Why don't you just SAY that? |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16199
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 08:30:01 -
[1195] - Quote
Solecist Punk wrote:With these fleet-changes, it would be impossible for me to move around a fleet of -10.
Everyone undocks from station, warp to insta undock, fleet warp to scanner at target, gank as normal.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Olivia Velocitas
The Executioners
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 08:39:10 -
[1196] - Quote
Got to say that I don't think this change has been fully thought through. CCP needs to back up on this one, at least delay it and consider just moving on.
Sorry Fozzie. Don't like this change to something that has existed for years.
NO to this change |
Mika Mikone
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 08:44:30 -
[1197] - Quote
Remove fleet warp, add "fleet bookmarks" that every member of the fleet can warp to |
Dun'Gal
Myriad Contractors Inc.
234
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 08:47:11 -
[1198] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Dun'Gal wrote:the removal of the ability to warp [alts] to scanned signatures. Is that what this is about? Why don't you just SAY that? Continue skirting the question, thats fine, it's clear you can't answer it. But to answer yours, no this isn't about warping alts to signatures - but if you must know my reference to signatures would be a scanned ship signatures, and warping a main to said scanned ship. This is my only (personal) use case for the mechanic, but there are many other use cases for this. As I pointed out, if CCP are this intent on removing interaction with players they may as well remove interaction with other players entirely. The only thing in the OP that is succesfully being accomplished is slowing down the rate at which players, can get to other players to shoot, which as I also mentioned provides more protection than what is already provided by halfway diligent directional scanning for probes.
They suggest this will add more interaction to fleets.... for what, one person who is now your warp-in. Woopy doo, great job at getting the rest of the fleet involved. F1 monkeys are just as capable of pressing the one button it takes to warp to a destination as they are capable of pressing F1 (most of them anyway.) You are creating precisely zero extra interaction than what already exists, and they are creating an extra step/extra time for fleets to get on there targets that's completely unneccessary. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16201
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 08:50:38 -
[1199] - Quote
Dun'Gal wrote:Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Dun'Gal wrote:the removal of the ability to warp [alts] to scanned signatures. Is that what this is about? Why don't you just SAY that? Continue skirting the question, thats fine, it's clear you can't answer it. But to answer yours, no this isn't about warping alts to signatures - but if you must know my reference to signatures would be a scanned ship signatures, and warping a main to said scanned ship. This is my only (personal) use case for the mechanic, but there are many other use cases for this. As I pointed out, if CCP are this intent on removing interaction with players they may as well remove interaction with other players entirely. The only thing in the OP that is succesfully being accomplished is slowing down the rate at which players, can get to other players to shoot, which as I also mentioned provides more protection than what is already provided by halfway diligent directional scanning for probes. They suggest this will add more interaction to fleets.... for what, one person who is now your warp-in. Woopy doo, great job at getting the rest of the fleet involved. F1 monkeys are just as capable of pressing the one button it takes to warp to a destination as they are capable of pressing F1 (most of them anyway.) You are creating precisely zero extra interaction than what already exists, and they are creating an extra step/extra time for fleets to get on there targets that's completely unneccessary.
Other way around there buddy. This change means you have to interact with more people not less.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Lucas Quaan
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
93
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 09:37:29 -
[1200] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:- No more tackling safe-rolling supercaps in lowsec ever (unless you can gimp-fit an expanded launcher onto a hictor) [Onyx, low-sec hunter] Internal Force Field Array I Power Diagnostic System II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Nanofiber Internal Structure II
50MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive Large Shield Extender II Large Shield Extender II Large Shield Extender II EM Ward Field II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Prototype Cloaking Device I Warp Disruption Field Generator II, Focused Warp Disruption Script Cynosural Field Generator I Expanded Probe Launcher I, Sisters Combat Scanner Probe Medium Diminishing Power System Drain I Medium Diminishing Power System Drain I
Medium Hyperspatial Velocity Optimizer II Medium Hyperspatial Velocity Optimizer II
Gimp not included. |
|
Dun'Gal
Myriad Contractors Inc.
235
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 09:41:00 -
[1201] - Quote
I suppose your idea of "more" interaction is telling your fleet mates to warp, instead of doing it for them? |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1392
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 09:49:51 -
[1202] - Quote
Dun'Gal wrote:I suppose your idea of "more" interaction is telling your fleet mates to warp, instead of doing it for them?
Nah, waiting for one guy to slap wwww in fleet and the FC warps everyone anyway.
Brilliant depth added to combat, fleet still moved by one guy (the 'big' problem...I see no one is pushing for the anchoring abilities orbit/KaR to go though) and everything else takes the hit along the way.
As folks are keen to point out - warping fleet to a player is easy and basically what happens today in bigger fights so nothing changes in said problem area. Side effected areas be damned. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16201
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 09:52:12 -
[1203] - Quote
Dun'Gal wrote:I suppose your idea of "more" interaction is telling your fleet mates to warp, instead of doing it for them?
Currently the FC probes out the target in their ship and warps the fleet.
In future the FC gets someone else to probe out the target and then warps the fleet to the prober.
That's more interaction not less.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Harry Forever
SpaceJunkys
1177
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 09:52:29 -
[1204] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Dun'Gal wrote: If it is so obvious to you, then please in detail explain what this fixes other than the two things mentioned in my post. I'm fairly certain everyone here would love to be enlightened as to what horribly bad thing, not mentioned, exists in eve that warrants the removal of the ability to warp fleet members to scanned signatures.
Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members.
Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want to show you that goonswarm is a complete failure and just consists of brainless puppets
YouTube
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16201
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 09:54:56 -
[1205] - Quote
afkalt wrote: the 'big' problem...I see no one is pushing for the anchoring abilities orbit/KaR to go though) and everything else takes the hit along the way.
We have. Also want repair broadcasts to only be seen by the squad they are in so logi gets a nerf without having her nerf logistics ships.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Lucas Quaan
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
93
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 09:57:45 -
[1206] - Quote
afkalt wrote:As folks are keen to point out - warping fleet to a player is easy and basically what happens today in bigger fights Except that's not true. Instead all the bigger fights have probes in the FC position and fleet warp to a fresh result every 10s or use personal bm's that the FC set up beforehand.
What this system intends to do is force fleets to warp to players instead, making scouts a valuable asset once again, but slowing down the constant ongrid warping that we see today. |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
281
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 10:03:22 -
[1207] - Quote
Dun'Gal wrote:Continue skirting the question
What question? What does it fix? You're the one claiming something is broken. I think the CHANGE is a change to the ease with which a fleet can precisely assault a target. Have you ever tried to get 10 tanks, 10 artillery pieces, 20 humvees, and 250 infantry from one place to another? How about an aircraft carrier, a cruiser, 2 submarines, 4 or 5 destroyers, a fleet oiler and whatever the hell else a battlegroup floats around with? What about a wing of strategic bombers with long range fighter escorts that need multiple mid-air refuelings? Christ, my kids don't go on a field trip without 10 parent chaperones. How awesome would it be if the teacher could just fleet warp the entire class to the destination? But, that would sure be some science-*******-fiction, my friend. I wouldn't bet a PLEX on the ability of all of them to even make it from their class to the schoolbus in the parking lot without a hiccup.
Should the game be easier than real life? It is. "How much easier than real life should it be?" <- Is that the question you are referring to? "How does making it much easier affect the gameplay and demographics of the player population?" <- What about that one?
Dun'Gal wrote:they are creating an extra step/extra time for fleets to get on there targets that's completely unneccessary.
That is the answer to your question and you are right. It is COMPLETELY unnecessary. So is blowing other people up. To answer your next question: Giving the dude who is about to get dropped on time to observe, orient, decide, and (re)act makes EVE into a game, rather than it being a deterministic process of comparison between two forces. If that dude has time, he might still run away from you, but he might also do what good boxers sometimes do when they are fighting an aggressive opponent: take a deep breath and a long step back and then lay into you, and maybe CCP thinks that kind of gameplay is . . . better. |
Dun'Gal
Myriad Contractors Inc.
235
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 10:04:54 -
[1208] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Dun'Gal wrote:I suppose your idea of "more" interaction is telling your fleet mates to warp, instead of doing it for them? Currently the FC probes out the target in their ship and warps the fleet. In future the FC gets someone else to probe out the target and then warps the fleet to the prober. That's more interaction not less.
And this was exactly the one, "extra" interaction I pointed out. The fact is this "extra" interaction can be done now. So this does nothing, additionally, in the future there is literally no reason for the fc not to do this, because once said warp in is on grid you can warp it off and ignore for the duration of fleet fight (read alt of fc.) |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16202
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 10:09:55 -
[1209] - Quote
Dun'Gal wrote:
And this was exactly the one, "extra" interaction I pointed out. The fact is this "extra" interaction can be done now. So this does nothing, additionally, in the future there is literally no reason for the fc not to do this, because once said warp in is on grid you can warp it off and ignore for the duration of fleet fight (read alt of fc.)
It is a lot harder to be running two clients then running one ship.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Dun'Gal
Myriad Contractors Inc.
235
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 11:02:50 -
[1210] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Dun'Gal wrote:
And this was exactly the one, "extra" interaction I pointed out. The fact is this "extra" interaction can be done now. So this does nothing, additionally, in the future there is literally no reason for the fc not to do this, because once said warp in is on grid you can warp it off and ignore for the duration of fleet fight (read alt of fc.)
It is a lot harder to be running two clients then running one ship. If you say so, considering you literally only need to look at one at a time. Not to mention this precise thing is already done quite frequently, by solo pilots, in small gangs, etc. These people seem to get by just fine, dual boxing a prober and a main, it's certainly not rocket science.
So other than allowing a single fleet member to do nothing but fly a probe ship, warp to a target and wait for everyone else to show up, can you come up with any other reasons why this can be considered a "positive" change; one that betters Eve as a whole, instead of creating an unnecessary extra step and removing (in-system) ease of fleet movements for everyone. |
|
Sumeragy
Revolution of Chaos Nemesis Enterprises.
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 11:05:29 -
[1211] - Quote
Yeah... another CCP nerv against the player will.
+1 for Another nice idear you did because off why not ? BALLS OF STEEL and so -1000 Becuase every Member in EvE is in need of those BOOKMARKS and srsly why the hell Nerv Missions warpins ????
ps: sry for bad english german and so and even the german isnt perfekt \o/
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16203
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 11:10:20 -
[1212] - Quote
Dun'Gal wrote: If you say so, considering you literally only need to look at one at a time. Not to mention this precise thing is already done quite frequently, by solo pilots, in small gangs, etc. These people seem to get by just fine, dual boxing a prober and a main, it's certainly not rocket science.
So other than allowing a single fleet member to do nothing but fly a probe ship, warp to a target and wait for everyone else to show up, can you come up with any other reasons why this can be considered a "positive" change; one that betters Eve as a whole, instead of creating an unnecessary extra step and removing (in-system) ease of fleet movements for everyone.
You assume this is the end of the changes to fleet mechanics. The goal of this nerf is to get fleets to rely upon more than just the FC and it does that. CCP are doing the smart thing here and are staggering the changes so they don't all land at once.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16203
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 11:11:48 -
[1213] - Quote
Sumeragy wrote:Yeah... another CCP nerv against the player will.
+1 for Another nice idear you did because off why not ? BALLS OF STEEL and so -1000 Becuase every Member in EvE is in need of those BOOKMARKS and srsly why the hell Nerv Missions warpins ????
ps: sry for bad english german and so and even the german isnt perfekt \o/
I started reading that in a german accent before I got to the last bit
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Dun'Gal
Myriad Contractors Inc.
236
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 11:17:36 -
[1214] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:What question? What does it fix? You're the one claiming something is broken. I think the CHANGE is a change to the ease with which a fleet can precisely assault a target. I suppose in the literal sense the word "fix" hasn't been used in the op, so appologies for the misuse of the word. But making changes with a vague purpose that hinders more than it helps is equally asinine.
Mayhaw Morgan wrote: But, that would sure be some science-*******-fiction, my friend.
Guess what genius? We're playing a science fiction game, nice argument though.
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:That is the answer to your question and you are right. It is COMPLETELY unnecessary. So is blowing other people up. To answer your next question: Giving the dude who is about to get dropped on time to observe, orient, decide, and (re)act makes EVE into a game, rather than it being a deterministic process of comparison between two forces. If that dude has time, he might still run away from you, but he might also do what good boxers sometimes do when they are fighting an aggressive opponent: take a deep breath and a long step back and then lay into you, and maybe CCP thinks that kind of gameplay is . . . better.
Hey guess what else, this guy already has the tools to see probes on scan, and make a decision as to what he wants to do, flee or fight. Arguing that blowing other people up is unneccesary in a game where a very large part of it, is about exactly that, is ridiculous. It is entirely necessary, in many situations. Particularly among the group that seems so vocal in this thread that this is supposedly a "positive" change. If the null blocs had no need to blow people up, there would be no need for fleets, fleet warp, thousands of alliance members, coalitions, or any of that. We'd have an extraordinarily stale game on our hands, or rather it would be an entirely different game.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16203
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 11:27:13 -
[1215] - Quote
Dun'Gal wrote:
Edit: and in reply to you Baltec1, I'm no so foolish to think that they do not have other changes down the pipe as well (they've eluded to as much in this thread already.) This one change though is completely ridiculous, and not one person can give any real reason, any GOOD reason for this change to happen. On the other hand there's 60+ pages of arguments as to why this shouldn't happen. So no, CCP aren't doing the smart thing here - the smart thing would be to say: Ok here's our "roadmap" for fleet changes (they seem to like roadmaps for other game changes.) So IF there is any real good reason why this change should happen in the first place, perhaps those of us who don't work at CCP and aren't limited by NDA can be let it in on the big secret thing that this change is presumably intended to help/hinder.
We have 60+ pages of people decrying the end of the world is upon us because they now need a scout rather than relying upon the FC to do all the work. Its hardly a convincing argument from your side.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
195
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 11:36:03 -
[1216] - Quote
I give this proposal a -1.
I see it ******* off the AFK multi-account miners further which is a good thing probably. I didn't actually watch the o7 broadcast but can you tell us what this proposal is actually trying to fix Also if you don't like people fleeting up why don't you just remove that part of the game along with all the leadership skills etc
I does appear that current problems such as the need to iterate sentry drones and now this derive from PvP elements of the game mainly. Is there a way to fix problems within PvP without destroying the remaining parts of the game. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16203
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 11:43:23 -
[1217] - Quote
Bethan Le Troix wrote:I give this proposal a -1. I see it ******* off the AFK multi-account miners further which is a good thing probably. I didn't actually watch the o7 broadcast but can you tell us what this proposal is actually trying to fix Also if you don't like people fleeting up why don't you just remove that part of the game along with all the leadership skills etc I does appear that current problems such as the need to iterate sentry drones and now this derive from PvP elements of the game mainly. Is there a way to fix problems within PvP without destroying the remaining parts of the game.
Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members.
They like people forming fleets, they do not like the FC doing just about everything in the fleet.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Sumeragy
Revolution of Chaos Nemesis Enterprises.
8
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 11:54:44 -
[1218] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Bethan Le Troix wrote:I give this proposal a -1. I see it ******* off the AFK multi-account miners further which is a good thing probably. I didn't actually watch the o7 broadcast but can you tell us what this proposal is actually trying to fix Also if you don't like people fleeting up why don't you just remove that part of the game along with all the leadership skills etc I does appear that current problems such as the need to iterate sentry drones and now this derive from PvP elements of the game mainly. Is there a way to fix problems within PvP without destroying the remaining parts of the game. Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members. They like people forming fleets, they do not like the FC doing just about everything in the fleet.
Yeah but fixing something but destroying everything else ehm where did i saw this once ohhh wait here :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZ9Xk0Lln5Y |
Yuki Akishino
UnSkilleD Inc. Reverberation Project
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 12:05:50 -
[1219] - Quote
Are you aware that for a little corp who make little fleets about 10-15 persons : - You're making us having someone multiboxing (because we can't afford to loose a pilot, it's already difficult enough like that), so that guy will have to spend a PLEX or 20$ - Don't speak about corp bookmarks they're bugged as hell.
So basically you're saying "Little corps go f*ck yourself" and then i'm saying "I'm not paying anymore find someone else". It's not like the game is loosing his clients patch after patch.
So when that patch land i won't pay anymore and i'm sure i'm not alone. Because it seems that CCP member are not playing the game they develop anymore and the CSM only think about big structures because they're a bunch of guy who are there because you know "I know X who know Y who know Z and they have all said to their member vote to A or that'll be bad"
So thanks to have kill little corps. So because a bunch are abusing of game mechanic, one more time, you're nerfing the whole ******* game. When are you gonna play that game ? Your reaction it's like - "I have found a virus on Internet !" <- Player - "We have the solution, we remove Internet from the world" <- CCP - "But, but, but No more youtube, no more ****, ..." <- Player - "Don't know what you're talking about" <- CCP
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2199
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 12:08:17 -
[1220] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Dun'Gal wrote:
Edit: and in reply to you Baltec1, I'm no so foolish to think that they do not have other changes down the pipe as well (they've eluded to as much in this thread already.) This one change though is completely ridiculous, and not one person can give any real reason, any GOOD reason for this change to happen. On the other hand there's 60+ pages of arguments as to why this shouldn't happen. So no, CCP aren't doing the smart thing here - the smart thing would be to say: Ok here's our "roadmap" for fleet changes (they seem to like roadmaps for other game changes.) So IF there is any real good reason why this change should happen in the first place, perhaps those of us who don't work at CCP and aren't limited by NDA can be let it in on the big secret thing that this change is presumably intended to help/hinder.
We have 60+ pages of people decrying the end of the world is upon us because they now need a scout rather than relying upon the FC to do all the work. Its hardly a convincing argument from your side. No. We have 60 pages of people explaining why this change negatively affects their game when their game is not the intended target. We also have 60 pages of you (and pretty much you alone) telling them to htfu.
Should they also remove warp to zero? After all, you only need a scout to go ahead and burn to the gate first. This is a similar argument - it would increase "player involvement" in fleets and be a complete pita for everyone else.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
|
Rat Scout
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 12:11:21 -
[1221] - Quote
Zappity wrote:baltec1 wrote:Dun'Gal wrote:
Edit: and in reply to you Baltec1, I'm no so foolish to think that they do not have other changes down the pipe as well (they've eluded to as much in this thread already.) This one change though is completely ridiculous, and not one person can give any real reason, any GOOD reason for this change to happen. On the other hand there's 60+ pages of arguments as to why this shouldn't happen. So no, CCP aren't doing the smart thing here - the smart thing would be to say: Ok here's our "roadmap" for fleet changes (they seem to like roadmaps for other game changes.) So IF there is any real good reason why this change should happen in the first place, perhaps those of us who don't work at CCP and aren't limited by NDA can be let it in on the big secret thing that this change is presumably intended to help/hinder.
We have 60+ pages of people decrying the end of the world is upon us because they now need a scout rather than relying upon the FC to do all the work. Its hardly a convincing argument from your side. No. We have 60 pages of people explaining why this change negatively affects their game when their game is not the intended target. We also have 60 pages of you (and pretty much you alone) telling them to htfu. Should they also remove warp to zero? After all, you only need a scout to go ahead and burn to the gate first. This is a similar argument - it would increase "player involvement" in fleets and be a complete pita for everyone else.
For every person claiming this is a negative change there is also a person who then benefits from this change. . . by proxy
|
Harry Forever
SpaceJunkys
1177
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 12:14:23 -
[1222] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Bethan Le Troix wrote:I give this proposal a -1. I see it ******* off the AFK multi-account miners further which is a good thing probably. I didn't actually watch the o7 broadcast but can you tell us what this proposal is actually trying to fix Also if you don't like people fleeting up why don't you just remove that part of the game along with all the leadership skills etc I does appear that current problems such as the need to iterate sentry drones and now this derive from PvP elements of the game mainly. Is there a way to fix problems within PvP without destroying the remaining parts of the game. Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members. They like people forming fleets, they do not like the FC doing just about everything in the fleet.
so you could not handle the pressure? why that?
YouTube
|
Tobias Frank
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 12:18:54 -
[1223] - Quote
Rat Scout wrote: For every person claiming this is a negative change there is also a person who then benefits from this change. . . by proxy
Except that people who like this change aren't complaining here.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16204
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 12:19:34 -
[1224] - Quote
The fix is to make things harder for fleets.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16204
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 12:22:06 -
[1225] - Quote
Zappity wrote: No. We have 60 pages of people explaining why this change negatively affects their game when their game is not the intended target. We also have 60 pages of you (and pretty much you alone) telling them to htfu.
Should they also remove warp to zero? After all, you only need a scout to go ahead and burn to the gate first. This is a similar argument - it would increase "player involvement" in fleets and be a complete pita for everyone else.
And here you go off the deep end again with your doom mongering. Scouts being needed for fleets is not the end of the world, if you don't have the numbers then go hire some newbees from a starter system.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
281
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 12:32:00 -
[1226] - Quote
Dun'Gal wrote:Hey guess what else, this guy already has the tools to see probes on scan, and make a decision as to what he wants to do, flee or fight.
Cool, then, this "change" doesn't actually change anything. So, what's the objection? 60+ pages of despair and sadness, for what?
Dun'Gal wrote:Arguing that blowing other people up is unnecessary in a game where a very large part of it, is about exactly that, is ridiculous. It is entirely necessary, in many situations. Particularly among the group that seems so vocal in this thread that this is supposedly a "positive" change. If the null blocs had no need to blow people up, there would be no need for fleets, fleet warp, thousands of alliance members, coalitions, or any of that. We'd have an extraordinarily stale game on our hands, or rather it would be an entirely different game.
If you are arguing that blowing people up is important, then HOW people blow eachother up is also important. You seem to think that people should blow eachother up by magically appearing on-grid, in-force, in proximity, with very little warning, and asymmetrically striking their target. I think people should blow eachother up by conducting a methodical, observable, and disruptable search and approach and engaging in relatively symmetrical combat with their target.
Your way is more realistic, but as you say: "We're playing a science fiction game". Whack-a-Mole with bazookas is fun, but maybe we could try it with just shotguns. |
Rat Scout
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 12:43:19 -
[1227] - Quote
Tobias Frank wrote:Rat Scout wrote: For every person claiming this is a negative change there is also a person who then benefits from this change. . . by proxy
Except that people who like this change aren't complaining here.
Oh how logical they are, there are sensible people on the internet I guess.
|
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
281
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 12:50:54 -
[1228] - Quote
Zappity wrote:baltec1 wrote:We have 60+ pages of people decrying the end of the world is upon us because they now need a scout rather than relying upon the FC to do all the work. Its hardly a convincing argument from your side. No. We have 60 pages of people explaining why this change negatively affects their game when their game is not the intended target. We also have 60 pages of you (and pretty much you alone) telling them to htfu. Should they also remove warp to zero? After all, you only need a scout to go ahead and burn to the gate first. This is a similar argument - it would increase "player involvement" in fleets and be a complete pita for everyone else.
Why did they make warp-to-zero possible? Why did they make it IMpossible to start?
What is getting lost here is the idea that a ship, any ship, can transmit pinpoint accurate navigational information to any other ship in the game if they are fleeted. The only other ways to do that are with combat probes or by lighting cynosural field. You can't warp to a ship under other circumstances, not even if you have a target lock on it. So, why should you be able to magically "form a fleet" with a ship and suddenly have powerful features like Warp To Member, letalone synchronized Fleet Warping and "boosting"? What is the trade off for these things? It's an unacknowledge buff to group play, i.e. a nerf to solo players or players who do not operate as a game-mechanics sanctioned "fleet". Why? And before you answer "Because, it's the future . . ." remember that that knife cuts both ways. |
Syzygium
Friends Of Harassment EON Alliance
97
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 13:36:01 -
[1229] - Quote
well, one of my corpmates suggested a slightly different solution:
Allow FleetWarps as they are now, but:
- add a delay for executing the command. Lets say 15 Seconds in which all fleet members get a "synchronizing warp drives" Message. They can still cancel the warp during this time and warp manually to be faster on their target.
- synchronizing warp drives then also means, all the fleet is warping with the same speed of the slowest ship in fleet. So if you use FleetWarps, even your Frigs and HACs will be slow as Battleships if you also have Battleships moving with your fleet.
This way the FC still had "full control" if he prefers to have it, but at the penalty of movement speed
But groups with a higher level of organization could use individual warping to their advantage and skip delays and slowdowns if their members are warping themselves or by squads of different warpspeeds. They will land a lot faster on the target and can tackle... but they also have to hold on their own until the rest of the fleet arrives.
Options, Choices... Benefits, Drawbacks... looks like some kind of strategic value for me. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16207
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 13:50:09 -
[1230] - Quote
Syzygium wrote:well, one of my corpmates suggested a slightly different solution:
Allow FleetWarps as they are now, but:
- add a delay for executing the command. Lets say 15 Seconds in which all fleet members get a "synchronizing warp drives" Message. They can still cancel the warp during this time and warp manually to be faster on their target.
- synchronizing warp drives then also means, all the fleet is warping with the same speed of the slowest ship in fleet. So if you use FleetWarps, even your Frigs and HACs will be slow as Battleships if you also have Battleships moving with your fleet.
This way the FC still had "full control" if he prefers to have it, but at the penalty of movement speed
But groups with a higher level of organization could use individual warping to their advantage and skip delays and slowdowns if their members are warping themselves or by squads of different warpspeeds. They will land a lot faster on the target and can tackle... but they also have to hold on their own until the rest of the fleet arrives.
Options, Choices... Benefits, Drawbacks... looks like some kind of strategic value for me.
CCPs fix is better, it gives us a reason to use people as scouts thus creating more content for fleet members.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
Lendren
Blaze Orange Expeditions Absence of Light
14
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 13:54:42 -
[1231] - Quote
Rowells wrote: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. Oh, I'm not complaining...too much. However I wonder if axing all the potential warp-ins is necessary? Could the broadcast 'warp-to' be extended to allow members to warp themselves to specific targets that were warp able before?
This!!! |
Syzygium
Friends Of Harassment EON Alliance
97
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 15:09:37 -
[1232] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:CCPs fix is better, it gives us a reason to use people as scouts thus creating more content for fleet members. the idea was to offer a compromise, so there would be a slow mode (current style) with some drawbacks for fleets involving a lot of beginners or for scenarios where there there are no (more) scouts available or these "emergency warpouts" when lag kills control, but always the option to increase performance by managing things manually if the fleet and its members are able to.
In general I absolutely like the removal of fleet-warps (and would like adjustments to broadcasts as well); however I like the idea of having different rewarding or penalizing options at different times under different circumstances even more... |
ZzyyzzxX
Another Nameless Corp....
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 16:08:13 -
[1233] - Quote
Something that could help with the logistics of the proposed changes:
Create a new "align to" and "warp to" option where the FC can select a fleetmate as the destination of the "align to" or "warp to" command.
I have noticed that comms can get pretty busy in large fleets, and trying to find a "www" message among the infinite GIF posts and jabber can be frustrating. |
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1101
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 16:11:41 -
[1234] - Quote
Syzygium wrote:- synchronizing warp drives then also means, all the fleet is warping with the same speed of the slowest ship in fleet. So if you use FleetWarps, even your Frigs and HACs will be slow as Battleships if you also have Battleships moving with your fleet.
That's already around. Fleet warps happen at the speed of the slowest ship warping along. |
Leeluvv
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 16:34:10 -
[1235] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
CCPs fix is better, it gives us a reason to use people as scouts thus creating more content for fleet members.
Please define the scout role as you see it that isn't already in the game and this change implements, other than 'replaces a bookmark'. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
57
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 16:47:56 -
[1236] - Quote
Leeluvv wrote:baltec1 wrote:
CCPs fix is better, it gives us a reason to use people as scouts thus creating more content for fleet members.
Please define the scout role as you see it that isn't already in the game and this change implements, other than 'replaces a bookmark'.
Very much this.
The pretense that scouts are not used exactly how this change supposedly will inspire is laughable. |
Shadowforge Dawkins
Catastrophic Overview Failure Brave Collective
18
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 16:49:52 -
[1237] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:[quote=Shadowforge Dawkins]
I question if you have ever left highsec because your fleets would be silly easy to catch. As for boring gameplay, who wants to sit in a fleet where one guy is doing all the work? A scout in a battle is one of the most action packed roles you can have in EVE.
I currently live in a wormhole and have for quite some time. Goonswarm if I am correct lives in nullsec. And Catastrophic Overview Failure is a corp that takes in new players to live in wormhole space, not daytrip into them.
Our corp roams in nullsec on a regular basis, even using the newly introduced Entosis link to cause mischief often killing first responders, we also roam in Low sec on occasion. However mainly our fights are in Wormhole space.
As for your statement on the action a scout gets in on. And as a scout myself, I enjoy getting into the fights as well, not sitting around watching and recording fights all the time. Yes, people do love getting to kill things as much as getting credit for finding the fight in the first place. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16209
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 16:57:16 -
[1238] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Leeluvv wrote:baltec1 wrote:
CCPs fix is better, it gives us a reason to use people as scouts thus creating more content for fleet members.
Please define the scout role as you see it that isn't already in the game and this change implements, other than 'replaces a bookmark'. Very much this. The pretense that scouts are not used exactly how this change supposedly will inspire is laughable.
Right now the "scout" is the FC ship that everyone is anchored on.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Leeluvv
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
13
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 17:05:32 -
[1239] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Leeluvv wrote:baltec1 wrote:
CCPs fix is better, it gives us a reason to use people as scouts thus creating more content for fleet members.
Please define the scout role as you see it that isn't already in the game and this change implements, other than 'replaces a bookmark'. Very much this. The pretense that scouts are not used exactly how this change supposedly will inspire is laughable. Right now the "scout" is the FC ship that everyone is anchored on.
Oh, you're assuming that 0.0 PvP is the only PvP. My bad.
|
Zen Tsai
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 17:10:39 -
[1240] - Quote
Kenneth Feld wrote:Zen Tsai wrote:CCP, you are nerfing competent FCs by directly attacking the impact of their player skills. All this does is equal the playing field between the great FCs and the mediocre FCs. In effect, it dumbs the game down, and caters to the unskilled players getting smeared by the truly talented players. And all while masquerading as a change that will get fleet members more involved in fights.
Why slow down the game? Who was so mad at getting outplayed that they lobbied this ridiculous change through? Whose ego is being catered to with this change? Whoever you are, HTFU you whiny space nerd. Those who are best at playing the game SHOULD win. I put alot more space between your paragraphs because in para 1, you announce that unskilled players would get creamed by truly talented players Then in para 2 you announce those that are best at playing the game should win I can only assume you are elated in the fact the truly talented players that are the best at playing the game will win fights
Nope. In para 1 I said that the change "caters to the unskilled players (who are) getting smeared by the truly talented players." I probably could have worded that more clearly, but I was sincerely pissed when I wrote it.
Good players should routinely destroy mediocre players. This change punishes FCs by limiting our moves on the game board.
|
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16209
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 17:23:57 -
[1241] - Quote
Leeluvv wrote:
Oh, you're assuming that 0.0 PvP is the only PvP. My bad.
Yea because only null blocks are smart enough to abuse the current mechanics
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Annah Sun-Scape
Temet Nosce Ex Astra
12
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 17:26:46 -
[1242] - Quote
Nope! Petiton?
- next changes should be about Corp and Ally UI not this nonsence! |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1093
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 17:41:50 -
[1243] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Leeluvv wrote:baltec1 wrote:
CCPs fix is better, it gives us a reason to use people as scouts thus creating more content for fleet members.
Please define the scout role as you see it that isn't already in the game and this change implements, other than 'replaces a bookmark'. Very much this. The pretense that scouts are not used exactly how this change supposedly will inspire is laughable. Right now the "scout" is the FC ship that everyone is anchored on.
What I find funniest about this is that I have been the scout for numerous coalition fleets in which baltec1 has participated. Even more amazing, I was not the FC! I was, however, bored to tears burning perches for Laz (among others) and then acting as a rolling safe spot. But hey, that's quality game play!
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
So, why do I post here?
Because of this: http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility
|
Heinrich Rotwang
Zentralrat deutscher Fliesentischbesitzer e.V.
83
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 17:44:08 -
[1244] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
CCPs fix is better, it gives us a reason to use people as scouts thus creating more content for fleet members.
Because nobody ever did that already. The fix is because certain people don't like it to be scanned out and warped at. The fleet participation nonsense is just made up as a selling point. |
Zen Tsai
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 17:52:52 -
[1245] - Quote
Heinrich Rotwang wrote:baltec1 wrote:
CCPs fix is better, it gives us a reason to use people as scouts thus creating more content for fleet members.
Because nobody ever did that already. The fix is because certain people don't like it to be scanned out and warped at. The fleet participation nonsense is just made up as a selling point.
It's also about how certain people did not like it when an enemy FC landed a blob on them because they were sitting still on a BM the enemy FC had.
Instead of "Fight Aligned" as a solution, they're nerfing the mechanic that makes it necessary.
Again, to the CCP bads who are mad about being blobbed... FIGHT ALIGNED and HTFU you bads! |
Busta Rock
The DawnSoarers
42
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 18:33:16 -
[1246] - Quote
like I said before, people whining about fleet warp the way it was are mainly those incapable of adapting. those of us who are complaining are in fact those who will adapt, and remain just as big a headache to those that lobbied for this change as before. next thing you'll know, the idiots who pushed for this will be complaining about how good FCs are able to maximize their use of scouts, and start pushing for removal of ALL warp to fleet member functionality!
enough of that, and eventually CCP will just remove bookmarks altogether, leaving us with no ability to warp to ANYTHING that isnt a fully public nav target, even if we're solo.
|
Solecist Punk
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
346
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 18:37:08 -
[1247] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Solecist Punk wrote:With these fleet-changes, it would be impossible for me to move around a fleet of -10.
Everyone undocks from station, warp to insta undock, fleet warp to scanner at target, gank as normal. And if you had properly read my post, you would have noticed that I said that there are people who do not wish to play like all the lesser gankers. There are people who actually provide gameplay for -10, beyond sitting in station and waiting for the scout to find a target so everyone can play for thirty seconds and then go afk again.
This change is fine if that's what you want, but it is gamebreaking for anyone who wants to actually play. If it is beyond you to understand that there is more than "wait for scout, undock, warp to target" then that is your issue. I accept if you do not know everything that can be done, but please do not assume that you do.
For a proper fleet of -10, who does more than be afk in station most of the time, this change is game breaking. You do not seem to have understanding of that, which is fine, but stop assuming you know better when you clearly don't. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1094
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 18:44:43 -
[1248] - Quote
Solecist Punk wrote:baltec1 wrote:Solecist Punk wrote:With these fleet-changes, it would be impossible for me to move around a fleet of -10.
Everyone undocks from station, warp to insta undock, fleet warp to scanner at target, gank as normal. And if you had properly read my post, you would have noticed that I said that there are people who do not wish to play like all the lesser gankers. There are people who actually provide gameplay for -10, beyond sitting in station and waiting for the scout to find a target so everyone can play for thirty seconds and then go afk again. This change is fine if that's what you want, but it is gamebreaking for anyone who wants to actually play. If it is beyond you to understand that there is more than "wait for scout, undock, warp to target" then that is your issue. I accept if you do not know everything that can be done, but please do not assume that you do. For a proper fleet of -10, who does more than be afk in station most of the time, this change is game breaking. You do not seem to have understanding of that, which is fine, but stop assuming you know better when you clearly don't.
As someone pointed out about 25 pages back, baltec1 is just trolling people opposed to this change.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
So, why do I post here?
Because of this: http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility
|
Syzygium
Friends Of Harassment EON Alliance
100
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 19:08:05 -
[1249] - Quote
Solecist Punk wrote:For a proper fleet of -10, who does more than be afk in station most of the time, this change is game breaking. You do not seem to have understanding of that, which is fine, but stop assuming you know better when you clearly don't. I was -10 for 6 years (2009-2015) and CEO of a smallscale pirate corporation for several years and I don't agree with you.
Especially -10s and WH people are skilled enough to adapt quickly and benefit from their higher overall fleet movement and independent member activity compared to fleets of larger 0.0 groups who greatly rely on the FC and his commands.
This change will give smaller groups of skilled players an edge over large pulks of F1 drones and that alone makes it a good change. That it will lead to more important scout-roles even in larger fleets, offering people with low SP but high softskills jobs they can excel in instead of fitting meta-guns to a level III skilled BS hull just to add "more dps" to the fleet. |
Hengle Teron
Explosions Delivered with Love
53986
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 19:18:38 -
[1250] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Solecist Punk wrote:With these fleet-changes, it would be impossible for me to move around a fleet of -10.
Everyone undocks from station, warp to insta undock, fleet warp to scanner at target, gank as normal. Except if you actually like to play between the ganks, and not wait in station for a target. |
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1404
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 19:55:09 -
[1251] - Quote
Syzygium wrote:Solecist Punk wrote:For a proper fleet of -10, who does more than be afk in station most of the time, this change is game breaking. You do not seem to have understanding of that, which is fine, but stop assuming you know better when you clearly don't. I was -10 for 6 years (2009-2015) and CEO of a smallscale pirate corporation for several years and I don't agree with you. Especially -10s and WH people are skilled enough to adapt quickly and benefit from their higher overall fleet movement and independent member activity compared to fleets of larger 0.0 groups who greatly rely on the FC and his commands. This change will give smaller groups of skilled players an edge over large pulks of F1 drones and that alone makes it a good change. That it will lead to more important scout-roles even in larger fleets, offering people with low SP but high softskills jobs they can excel in instead of fitting meta-guns to a level III skilled BS hull just to add "more dps" to the fleet.
Training covops and perfect scanning is a really, really bad way to start eve.
Useful skills perhaps, but a crap day 0 ambition and more importantly, crap experience. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2517
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 20:09:27 -
[1252] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Syzygium wrote:Solecist Punk wrote:For a proper fleet of -10, who does more than be afk in station most of the time, this change is game breaking. You do not seem to have understanding of that, which is fine, but stop assuming you know better when you clearly don't. I was -10 for 6 years (2009-2015) and CEO of a smallscale pirate corporation for several years and I don't agree with you. Especially -10s and WH people are skilled enough to adapt quickly and benefit from their higher overall fleet movement and independent member activity compared to fleets of larger 0.0 groups who greatly rely on the FC and his commands. This change will give smaller groups of skilled players an edge over large pulks of F1 drones and that alone makes it a good change. That it will lead to more important scout-roles even in larger fleets, offering people with low SP but high softskills jobs they can excel in instead of fitting meta-guns to a level III skilled BS hull just to add "more dps" to the fleet. Training covops and perfect scanning is a really, really bad way to start eve. Useful skills perhaps, but a crap day 0 ambition and more importantly, crap experience. That depends on how you set it up. If it's literally someone's first day, then you might want them to have a passive role as they figure out how fleets work. As they learn how the buttons work and how the fleet positions work (you can get a basic understanding of roles through listening to comms and asking questions) then you start getting them into other jobs. |
Dun'Gal
Myriad Contractors Inc.
240
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 20:24:12 -
[1253] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Dun'Gal wrote:Hey guess what else, this guy already has the tools to see probes on scan, and make a decision as to what he wants to do, flee or fight. Cool, then, this "change" doesn't actually change anything. So, what's the objection? 60+ pages of despair and sadness, for what? Dun'Gal wrote:Arguing that blowing other people up is unnecessary in a game where a very large part of it, is about exactly that, is ridiculous. It is entirely necessary, in many situations. Particularly among the group that seems so vocal in this thread that this is supposedly a "positive" change. If the null blocs had no need to blow people up, there would be no need for fleets, fleet warp, thousands of alliance members, coalitions, or any of that. We'd have an extraordinarily stale game on our hands, or rather it would be an entirely different game. If you are arguing that blowing people up is important, then HOW people blow eachother up is also important. You seem to think that people should blow eachother up by magically appearing on-grid, in-force, in proximity, with very little warning, and asymmetrically striking their target. I think people should blow eachother up by conducting a methodical, observable, and disruptable search and approach and engaging in relatively symmetrical combat with their target. Your way is more realistic, but as you say: "We're playing a science fiction game". Whack-a-Mole with bazookas is fun, but maybe we could try it with just shotguns.
You absolutely haven't got a clue what the hell you are talking about do you? 60+pages of "despair and sadness" you say? Try going over those pages again, you'll find YOU are the sad one in this thread. Asking to be given extra time to go cower in a corner when the big bad man comes knocking on your door. Your ONLY argument in this is that you feel that fleets should have a more difficult time warping to you, so they can kill you, because you're too damn lazy and incompetent to pay attention to your directional scan. You need even more time than you are already given to decide to GTFO if you so chose. Throw around your "methodical" and "symmetrical" terms all you want, the only thing you are really asking for here, is to be left alone so you don't lose more ships.
With that being said, if you want to continue using your "real world" ideas of how warfare, and navigation should be done, explain to me how this makes sense to you - if someone passes coordinates on to you for you to travel to, why in the hell should you have to wait for them to arrive there first just so you can go there too? It's an arbitrary restriction that makes no sense. It would be no different than a friend giving me the address to a place they found online, but in order for me to go there I have to wait for him to get there first, to..... make sure it stil exists? It's absolutely ridiculous. |
Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
159
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 20:28:08 -
[1254] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Training covops and perfect scanning is a really, really bad way to start eve.
Useful skills perhaps, but a crap day 0 ambition and more importantly, crap experience.
Not true since the best income for brandnew players are radar/mag sites. Also lets them travel in a safe way and allows them to dip their toes in dangerous space.
Sysyz-¦s idea (by proxy) might not be ideal but it shows a better way to aproach the subject: An easy way that is slow or the manual way that is way faster. Not the "there is a problem and we will throw everyone else under the bus too just to be safe". |
Dermeisen
15
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 20:30:41 -
[1255] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote:1.CCP, I can understand your goal of removing the effect combat probing had on snipers
noted 1. If you think there is only one reason for the change and that every other affect is "collateral damage", that might be why you don't understand or accept it. 2. FC's are not "forced" to do anything. They don't even have to log in. If FCing is too hard for them after this change, then maybe they were not officer material to begin with. Not everyone is cut out to be a leader. It sounds like a lot of the objection to this change is from people who just don't want to accept that cold, harsh reality. 3. PVE'ers, by definition, adapt to their environment. They overcome the challenges their environment imposes on them. If they can't do that, maybe they should go do something easier, like ganking noobs in Uitra. 4. Is it supposed to do something to bombers? Bomber pilots are supposed to be elite operators capable of complex, cooperative behavior. The harder EVE gets, the GREATER the advantage to such players. 5. This does nothing to small gangs. Small gang pilots tend to fall into one of two categories: noobs and elites. Or, in other words, people who are learning how to play the game and people who are good at playing the game. The former were already going to adapt, else how would they be able to play the game at all? The latter are already proven to be capable of adaptation. It's how they got good at the game. Besides that, I've never been in a small gang that blind-fleet warped to a probe signature, not in high sec, not in low sec, not in null, and not in a wormhole. We ALWAYS sent in a scout. Whether you think scouting is a glory-less or frustrating job depends on your playstyle. In the non-PVE fleets I've flown in, the scout(s) were usually the better players. Unfortunately, it takes a competent FC to understand their value and employ them effectively, and it takes a competent operator to scout effectively in a hostile environment. One or both of those are lacking in many fleets, but a scout is "the tip of the spear". That's a fun job for some people, for some playstyles. 6. In the wormhole operations I've been involved in, you manage your own bookmarks. Yes, sometimes you can grab/use a corp bookmark or a friend's bookmark, but generally, you didn't stand around twiddling your thumbs while others are doing the work of securing the hole, gathering intel, scanning down signatures, fighting for their lives, etc. And, this is not just so you don't get lost; it's also in case someone else (person_B) gets lost, the closest person or the person in a small ship (person_A) can be tasked to go back and provide a warp-in without one of his responsible, boomark-managing teammates (person_C) having to hold his hand and guide him to the wormhole that he couldn't be arsed to bookmark himself when he came through. If having to wait an extra 20 seconds for your scout to say "GO!" makes it impossible for you to play in wormholes, you should GTFO of wormholes. 7. [Non-corp] group leaders can share bookmarks with eachother. Then, they can each share bookmarks with their groups. A lazy FC could also just not share bookmarks and just warp ahead of his fleet, who could then warp to him. Then, the person with the bookmarks would only have to share them with the FC . . . wait, I think that was redundant. 8. That is called a "problem". Some types of people are good at figuring out solutions to "problems". When those people are empowered to give other people "commands", they are generally referred to as "commander", not to be confused with the specific rank of Commander which is used in many militaries and other organizations with such hierarchical social structures. When a "commander" is empowered to give orders to a fleet and its members, he/she is called a "fleet commander", generally abbreviated as "FC" in EVE Online. 9. I am seeing a theme and it is this: You are not fleet command material. :-(
Great reply Mayhaw, just what I though as I read though that list, a concise knockdown of all the straw men arguments presented.
On a more prospective note I would like to see CCP respond by lessening the fitting requirement for a combat probe launcher or the meta will be dominated by tactical destroyers.
Cheers this is good change but as they say of old physicists, they don't change their minds they just die!
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1408
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 21:08:59 -
[1256] - Quote
Shilalasar wrote:afkalt wrote:Training covops and perfect scanning is a really, really bad way to start eve.
Useful skills perhaps, but a crap day 0 ambition and more importantly, crap experience. Not true since the best income for brandnew players are radar/mag sites. Also lets them travel in a safe way and allows them to dip their toes in dangerous space. Sysyz-¦s idea (by proxy) might not be ideal but it shows a better way to aproach the subject: An easy way that is slow or the manual way that is way faster. Not the "there is a problem and we will throw everyone else under the bus too just to be safe".
No, they lack the rest of the metagame skillset to be successful here. How to navigate camps, how WHs work, the hacking skills themselves, the inability to defend themselves, training paths off doctrine paths not to mention the up and down nature of the profession.
It's a fine role for an alt to be sure, but as a newbro? No, it's the road to stagnation, frustration.
Newbros thrive, in my experience, in immediately training into fast tackle: It's easy to train into, it's skills useful in all ships, FCs fall over themselves for fast tackle and it's interactive and obviously useful to the fleetmates for the newbro to observe with his own eyes. Scouting is much less....tangible.
Not to mention a GOOD scout needs years of experience under their belt. The very best scouts have almost a 6th sense for the environment and that can't be trained, just takes time. At best a new scout will scare away the enemy, at worst they'll just get you killed. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16210
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 21:47:55 -
[1257] - Quote
afkalt wrote: No, they lack the rest of the metagame skillset to be successful here. How to navigate camps, how WHs work, the hacking skills themselves, the inability to defend themselves, training paths off doctrine paths not to mention the up and down nature of the profession.
It's a fine role for an alt to be sure, but as a newbro? No, it's the road to stagnation, frustration.
Newbros thrive, in my experience, in immediately training into fast tackle: It's easy to train into, it's skills useful in all ships, FCs fall over themselves for fast tackle and it's interactive and obviously useful to the fleetmates for the newbro to observe with his own eyes. Scouting is much less....tangible.
Not to mention a GOOD scout needs years of experience under their belt. The very best scouts have almost a 6th sense for the environment and that can't be trained, just takes time. At best a new scout will scare away the enemy, at worst they'll just get you killed.
Every scout was new at some point. How do you expect to get new scouts if you refuse to train them?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
61
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 21:52:30 -
[1258] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Leeluvv wrote:baltec1 wrote:
CCPs fix is better, it gives us a reason to use people as scouts thus creating more content for fleet members.
Please define the scout role as you see it that isn't already in the game and this change implements, other than 'replaces a bookmark'. Very much this. The pretense that scouts are not used exactly how this change supposedly will inspire is laughable. Right now the "scout" is the FC ship that everyone is anchored on.
Because that ship can be in two spots at the same time? Dev hax, or quantum physics seeing its day in space court?
Kidding aside, FCs are either in probing boosters that have paper think tank and never come on field, or are brick tanked on field, and never bother fitting a prober on that ship.
In the first case, no one is anchored on the ship and is the forward scout that this change supposedly bring about.
In the second case, he ain't scanning anything, and is warping to his alt. Again, the elusive scout already exists.
Really, friend, stop trolling :)
|
Azarah Aubaris
The Irukandji The Irukandji.
41
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 21:53:53 -
[1259] - Quote
this idea is still ********.
FC's need the ability to punt fleet members
the mechanic doesnt need to be nerfd so some little **** gets to feel special that he got the fleet a warpin.
this change is unrealistic and pointless |
Olivias Lahoe
Black Market Imperium
9
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 21:56:49 -
[1260] - Quote
Making arbitrary downgrades to hurt certain players, whom certain GM's don't like, effectively pissing off the entire player base.
EvE has a bright future under its new leadership.
There is no rational reason for this, it's the personal agenda of one man. Period. |
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
61
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 21:57:06 -
[1261] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:baltec1 wrote:
Right now the "scout" is the FC ship that everyone is anchored on.
What I find funniest about this is that I have been the scout for numerous coalition fleets in which baltec1 has participated. Even more amazing, I was not the FC! I was, however, bored to tears burning perches for Laz (among others) and then acting as a rolling safe spot. But hey, that's quality game play!
Likewise. I understand he's trolling, but I'm not sure why.
Some reasons that come to mind: - the CFC has enough people to fill these roles, and can probably only be matched by PL or very good low sec groups who make up for numbers with skill. This change will only ensure CFC superiority yet again. - he really is against these changes, but by being the "idiot" devil's advocate, is getting everyone riled up, and to no small extent, has contributed to this thread being well on its way to 100 pages. - it's just that entertaining to get knee jerk reactions from people who are clutching at straws.
|
Azarah Aubaris
The Irukandji The Irukandji.
41
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 21:59:22 -
[1262] - Quote
Lucas Quaan wrote: What this system intends to do is force fleets to warp to players instead, making scouts a valuable asset once again, but slowing down the constant ongrid warping that we see today.
scouts have a role with or without this change. scouts still have always had the ability to provided warpins in ceptors cloaky t3's and such. but when it comes to large fleet battles the FC needs to be able to punt fleet members together to regroup and ad maneuver on grid. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
61
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 22:02:59 -
[1263] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Every scout was new at some point. How do you expect to get new scouts if you refuse to train them?
Not by making them cannon fodder, but giving them +1 or -1 responsibilities, then creating pings on hostile grids, then in cloaky ships that provide positional advantages, then basically being on the FC's beck and call.
You know, just like how we do it now.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16211
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 22:18:02 -
[1264] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:
Because that ship can be in two spots at the same time? Dev hax, or quantum physics seeing its day in space court?
Kidding aside, FCs are either in probing boosters that have paper thin tank and never come on field, or are brick tanked on field, and never bother fitting a prober on that ship.
In the first case, no one is anchored on the ship and it is the scanning "scout" that this change supposedly bring about.
In the second case, he ain't scanning anything, and is warping his wing/fleet to his alt, cause he's the FC/WC and the prober can't do it himself. Again, the elusive scout already exists in the alt.
Really, friend, stop trolling :)
All FC ships have expanded probe launchers on them.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
61
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 22:26:24 -
[1265] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:All FC ships have expanded probe launchers on them.
Lol. |
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
163
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 00:04:09 -
[1266] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:
Because that ship can be in two spots at the same time? Dev hax, or quantum physics seeing its day in space court?
Kidding aside, FCs are either in probing boosters that have paper thin tank and never come on field, or are brick tanked on field, and never bother fitting a prober on that ship.
In the first case, no one is anchored on the ship and it is the scanning "scout" that this change supposedly bring about.
In the second case, he ain't scanning anything, and is warping his wing/fleet to his alt, cause he's the FC/WC and the prober can't do it himself. Again, the elusive scout already exists in the alt.
Really, friend, stop trolling :)
All FC ships have expanded probe launchers on them.
Ok Baltec you have had enough fun trolling this thread but you have ceased contributing anything of use at about page 2. Time to pack up your bat and ball and go welp a megathron (I have an old Baltec megathron for sale in YAO if you need a spare).
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
Dun'Gal
Myriad Contractors Inc.
245
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 00:18:42 -
[1267] - Quote
baltec1 wrote: All FC ships have expanded probe launchers on them.
/thread Obviously this is why we should push this change through, how could anyone here have missed this most obvious reason, maintaining the status quo |
Jenshae Chiroptera
1702
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 00:23:28 -
[1268] - Quote
baltec1 wrote: Also want repair broadcasts to only be seen by the squad they are in so logi gets a nerf without having her nerf logistics ships. Hahahaha! The way power creep is going with more damage and alphas? Are you nuts?
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
Dentia Caecus
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
17
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 01:16:36 -
[1269] - Quote
The Wormhole issue has been well addressed. However, this \unfairly hurts noncombatant activities in New Eden to justify implementation. Mining, standard and wormhole activities both by raiding parties and residents, all actively use warping to bookmarks for both survivability ad basic function. I appreciate the concept behind the announced intentions, but this just doesn't work. |
Battledonkey Dogeman
Evocati Aeterna Nerfed Alliance Go Away
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 01:45:52 -
[1270] - Quote
Why are you guys trying to make CCP change their minds?
You guys know they like to fix problems by harvesting cotton with a flamethrower |
|
Miao Sajuuk
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 02:23:39 -
[1271] - Quote
Suicide coordinate transmitter? CCP you should request them light up a cyno to let other ship warp to him.
Am I really playing a space sci-fi sandbox game? |
Dun'Gal
Myriad Contractors Inc.
245
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 02:44:40 -
[1272] - Quote
Battledonkey Dogeman wrote:Why are you guys trying to make CCP change their minds?
You guys know they like to fix problems by harvesting cotton with a flamethrower It's funny though, I've noticed that the Features & Ideas "Discussion" threads posted by CCP are more or less Features & Ideas Announcement threads, as no real discussion on the part of the developers really takes shape. And IF there happens to be any discussion involved, it generally follows the lines of, "we know what's best, deal with it." As opposed to, "You bring up valid points lets rethink this." The only reason I participate in some of these is when the changes are so outrageous that it really warrants the effort, in the hope that this will be the one time they actually look at the feedback. |
Senov Belis
235MeV Waterboard Comedy Tour
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 02:58:46 -
[1273] - Quote
+1 to the "not playing anymore" list.
All I do is follow my FC and shoot things. If this is no longer possible, bye, I can not give you money anymore. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2517
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 03:06:28 -
[1274] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:baltec1 wrote: Also want repair broadcasts to only be seen by the squad they are in so logi gets a nerf without having her nerf logistics ships. Hahahaha! The way power creep is going with more damage and alphas? Are you nuts? which is in no small part a result of...? Take a guess. |
Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
298
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 03:47:34 -
[1275] - Quote
CCP waves bye bye to eve subscriptions o/
Seriously though this seems like a really unnecessary change whose results could be achieved through other changes. This seems like a knee-jerk reaction idea. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
11394
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 04:21:24 -
[1276] - Quote
Senov Belis wrote:+1 to the "not playing anymore" list.
All I do is follow my FC and shoot things. If this is no longer possible, bye, I can not give you money anymore.
This is counter productive, because this is where CCP starts looking at people and saying "you say that, but you ain't quitting, we know" lol. Those of us who have reasonable concerns about a CCP action always get sabotaged by people who say this "-1 sub" crap.
If you're going to quit, quit quietly so the rest of us can have a productive discussion with the developers of the game we play.
|
Alexis Nightwish
249
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 05:15:22 -
[1277] - Quote
Dermeisen wrote:Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote:noted 1. If you think there is only one reason for the change and that every other affect is "collateral damage", that might be why you don't understand or accept it. 2. FC's are not "forced" to do anything. They don't even have to log in. If FCing is too hard for them after this change, then maybe they were not officer material to begin with. Not everyone is cut out to be a leader. It sounds like a lot of the objection to this change is from people who just don't want to accept that cold, harsh reality. 3. PVE'ers, by definition, adapt to their environment. They overcome the challenges their environment imposes on them. If they can't do that, maybe they should go do something easier, like ganking noobs in Uitra. 4. Is it supposed to do something to bombers? Bomber pilots are supposed to be elite operators capable of complex, cooperative behavior. The harder EVE gets, the GREATER the advantage to such players. 5. This does nothing to small gangs. Small gang pilots tend to fall into one of two categories: noobs and elites. Or, in other words, people who are learning how to play the game and people who are good at playing the game. The former were already going to adapt, else how would they be able to play the game at all? The latter are already proven to be capable of adaptation. It's how they got good at the game. Besides that, I've never been in a small gang that blind-fleet warped to a probe signature, not in high sec, not in low sec, not in null, and not in a wormhole. We ALWAYS sent in a scout. Whether you think scouting is a glory-less or frustrating job depends on your playstyle. In the non-PVE fleets I've flown in, the scout(s) were usually the better players. Unfortunately, it takes a competent FC to understand their value and employ them effectively, and it takes a competent operator to scout effectively in a hostile environment. One or both of those are lacking in many fleets, but a scout is "the tip of the spear". That's a fun job for some people, for some playstyles. 6. In the wormhole operations I've been involved in, you manage your own bookmarks. Yes, sometimes you can grab/use a corp bookmark or a friend's bookmark, but generally, you didn't stand around twiddling your thumbs while others are doing the work of securing the hole, gathering intel, scanning down signatures, fighting for their lives, etc. And, this is not just so you don't get lost; it's also in case someone else (person_B) gets lost, the closest person or the person in a small ship (person_A) can be tasked to go back and provide a warp-in without one of his responsible, boomark-managing teammates (person_C) having to hold his hand and guide him to the wormhole that he couldn't be arsed to bookmark himself when he came through. If having to wait an extra 20 seconds for your scout to say "GO!" makes it impossible for you to play in wormholes, you should GTFO of wormholes. 7. [Non-corp] group leaders can share bookmarks with eachother. Then, they can each share bookmarks with their groups. A lazy FC could also just not share bookmarks and just warp ahead of his fleet, who could then warp to him. Then, the person with the bookmarks would only have to share them with the FC . . . wait, I think that was redundant. 8. That is called a "problem". Some types of people are good at figuring out solutions to "problems". When those people are empowered to give other people "commands", they are generally referred to as "commander", not to be confused with the specific rank of Commander which is used in many militaries and other organizations with such hierarchical social structures. When a "commander" is empowered to give orders to a fleet and its members, he/she is called a "fleet commander", generally abbreviated as "FC" in EVE Online. 9. I am seeing a theme and it is this: You are not fleet command material. :-( Great reply Mayhaw, just what I thought as I read though that list, a concise knockdown of all the straw men arguments presented. On a more prospective note I would like to see CCP respond by lessening the fitting requirement for a combat probe launcher or the meta will be dominated by tactical destroyers. Cheers this is good change but as they say of old physicists, they don't change their minds they just die!
I don't think you know what strawman means.
At no point did I misrepresent the opposition's arguments which are thus:
CCP Larrikin wrote: The goal of these changes is to encourage more individual fleet member participation and reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets (e.g bombers).
CCP Larrikin wrote: Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members.
CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Fixing bombs, not the bombers
|
Mephiztopheleze
Republic University Minmatar Republic
64
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 06:02:59 -
[1278] - Quote
if this is balanced (for want of a better word) by giving players the ability to broadcast a bookmark that their fleet can then warp themselves to, then perhaps it's not such a bad concept.
as mentioned, removing fleet-warp to scanned sigs also makes off-grid boosters even more invulnerable than they are.
Occasional Resident Newbie Correspondent for TMC: http://themittani.com/search/site/mephiztopheleze
|
Jack Miton
WeebleCORP
4509
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 06:27:34 -
[1279] - Quote
I think what this actually comes down to is not that the fleet warp change itself is bad, it's that the bookmark mechanics are bad. If CCP added alliance and fleet level bookmark systems, along with a sync button on the BM screens that would instantly sync an individual's bookmarks without needing to wait 5min for the auto sync, then this change would be generally applauded.
In its current state, the bookmark system just does not and cannot provide an acceptable substitute for the fleet warp mechanic. As such, at least squad warp needs to remain.
There is no Bob.
Stuck In Here With Me: http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/
Down the Pipe: http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1409
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 06:48:29 -
[1280] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:I think what this actually comes down to is not that the fleet warp change itself is bad, it's that the bookmark mechanics are bad. If CCP added alliance and fleet level bookmark systems, along with a sync button on the BM screens that would instantly sync an individual's bookmarks without needing to wait 5min for the auto sync, then this change would be generally applauded.
In its current state, the bookmark system just does not and cannot provide an acceptable substitute for the fleet warp mechanic. As such, at least squad warp needs to remain.
Or allow corp BMs to be warped to by corp members as a fleet (I'm aware of mixed fleet issues).
After all, they can all warp to the desto.
However I'm betting it's a technical limitation because it's if't not an anom, on your overview or a player then you can't do it. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16213
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 07:46:42 -
[1281] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote:
Ok Baltec you have had enough fun trolling this thread but you have ceased contributing anything of use at about page 2. Time to pack up your bat and ball and go welp a megathron (I have an old Baltec megathron for sale in YAO if you need a spare).
You think I'm trolling but our FC ships do infact all come with combat probes fitted. Think about this, the organisation that has effectively won null and owns a good number of the best FCs in the game has put forwards this idea to nerf fleets. We are calling to nerf our own fleets because they are too easy to run. This change is not a hard one to adapt to but it does remove one of the biggest advantages we have in a fight vs the highly disorganized rabble that is most of EVE.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
283
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 07:48:04 -
[1282] - Quote
Busta Rock wrote:like I said before, people whining about fleet warp the way it was are mainly those incapable of adapting. those of us who are complaining about this nerf of fleet warp mechanics NOW are in fact those who will adapt, and remain just as big a headache to those that lobbied for this change as before. next thing you'll know, the idiots who pushed for this will be complaining about how good FCs are able to maximize their use of scouts, and start pushing for removal of ALL warp to fleet member functionality!
enough of that, and eventually CCP will just remove bookmarks altogether, leaving us with no ability to warp to ANYTHING that isnt a fully public nav target, even if we're solo.
ah stop, to remove warp to fleet members would break fleets and it's not ever going to happen. bookmarks removed altogether? you didn't really think that comment through did you.
but fleet warp to boomarks i have no problem with them going.
|
Calorn Marthor
Standard Fuel Company
49
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 08:19:22 -
[1283] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Tatsuj Khan wrote:Suggestion: Make corporate wormhole BMs "public" just as gates are, and allow fleets to warp from WH to WH in a coherent group. Otherwise as the Dev proposal stands now, the fleet can't work together as they land because ships are strung out throughout the system. This allows the enemy to pick off small faster ships first as the landing fleet straggles in.
If wormhole BMs are made "public", it should significantly lessen the damage this nerf does to WH corp membership and fleet ops. I recall somewhere in the sov changes thread, devs stated that changes should enhance game play rather than add unnecessary difficulties and tedium. This is a great suggestion. Building on it - allowing fleet warping to WH probe results could also work. There are a couple of questions we'd like to thrash out and get more feedback on relating to power projection in WH space before we make a change like this.
Could a deployable "warp beacon" be a solution? You anchor something in space that becomes visible throughout the system (like a cyno). This would not be a copy of the existing mechanisms, but a new element of gameplay (please discuss).
A site would need to be prepared to work as a warp target (e.g. a scout would have to set up those "road signs" to allow fast travel through a WH chain). However, this takes away some part of the sneakyness... other people might become aware that there is a position of interest and that someone might want to warp there in the future and interact with the beacon (camp it, destroy it, misplace it, whatever...) |
Solecist Punk
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
350
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 08:20:34 -
[1284] - Quote
Syzygium wrote:Solecist Punk wrote:For a proper fleet of -10, who does more than be afk in station most of the time, this change is game breaking. You do not seem to have understanding of that, which is fine, but stop assuming you know better when you clearly don't. I was -10 for 6 years (2009-2015) and CEO of a smallscale pirate corporation for several years and I don't agree with you. Especially -10s and WH people are skilled enough to adapt quickly and benefit from their higher overall fleet movement and independent member activity compared to fleets of larger 0.0 groups who greatly rely on the FC and his commands. This change will give smaller groups of skilled players an edge over large pulks of F1 drones and that alone makes it a good change. That it will lead to more important scout-roles even in larger fleets, offering people with low SP but high softskills jobs they can excel in instead of fitting meta-guns to a level III skilled BS hull just to add "more dps" to the fleet. And you are just a lesser ganker like the rest of them. Your empty words mean nothing, because you do not even understand what I am talking about. Just because you were -10 does not mean you know what every -10 does or can do. What matters is that the relevant people (not you) understand that this breaks my gameplay and there is no way to properly adapt to it. I do not need to explain it to you, as you do not matter in the slightest. Hell, the amount of empty words in your post is embarassing. You should go into politics.
I will not respond in this thread any more, as the important parts have been set and done. None of you can go into this, because none of you plays like me. I can absolutely guarantee that. CCP can easily go through years of logs about Solstice Project and Solecist Project and find out all by themselves that this would completely break my fleets.
That is *all* that matters. I am not posting here to discuss with you, because you do not matter. Your opinions matter when it comes to the change, but not when it comes to what others say about that change. They especially do not matter when you do not understand what the other person is talking about and randomly trying to argue with people is completely silly and childish. (baltec, for example, who is attention whoring like a madman).
That's all there is to say. CCP, this breaks my gameplay and prevents me from ever again FCing a proer fleet of outlaws in highsec. It reduces my gameplay to all that of the lesser gankers and there *is* *nothing* I can do to adapt. I can happily SHOW YOU if you wish so, just throw me an eve-mail at Solecist Project.
Cheers. |
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
165
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 08:33:15 -
[1285] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:
Ok Baltec you have had enough fun trolling this thread but you have ceased contributing anything of use at about page 2. Time to pack up your bat and ball and go welp a megathron (I have an old Baltec megathron for sale in YAO if you need a spare).
You think I'm trolling but our FC ships do infact all come with combat probes fitted. Think about this, the organisation that has effectively won null and owns a good number of the best FCs in the game has put forwards this idea to nerf fleets. We are calling to nerf our own fleets because they are too easy to run. This change is not a hard one to adapt to but it does remove one of the biggest advantages we have in a fight vs the highly disorganized rabble that is most of EVE.
Now you are just trolling. When did Manny join the CFC? He was quite enthusiastic about this early on the thread.
As for winning null sec so what? What is a minor inconvenience for the Imperium and its blob of ships is difficult for small gang and god fvcking awful in wormholes.
And still at the end if it all the justifications dribbled out by CCP don't pass muster when considering the wealth of real broken things to fix (obligatory fix POS's statement) or the broadly vaguely identified items this does "fix" bombers and probing.
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
Corben Arctus
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
30
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 09:40:45 -
[1286] - Quote
Speed up the propagation of corp bookmarks, and I've no problem with this change.
It's still gonna suck for fleets made up of multiple corps. WTB fleet bookmark system. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16213
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 09:56:04 -
[1287] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote:baltec1 wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:
Ok Baltec you have had enough fun trolling this thread but you have ceased contributing anything of use at about page 2. Time to pack up your bat and ball and go welp a megathron (I have an old Baltec megathron for sale in YAO if you need a spare).
You think I'm trolling but our FC ships do infact all come with combat probes fitted. Think about this, the organisation that has effectively won null and owns a good number of the best FCs in the game has put forwards this idea to nerf fleets. We are calling to nerf our own fleets because they are too easy to run. This change is not a hard one to adapt to but it does remove one of the biggest advantages we have in a fight vs the highly disorganized rabble that is most of EVE. Now you are just trolling. When did Manny join the CFC? He was quite enthusiastic about this early on the thread. As for winning null sec so what? What is a minor inconvenience for the Imperium and its blob of ships is difficult for small gang and god fvcking awful in wormholes. And still at the end if it all the justifications dribbled out by CCP don't pass muster when considering the wealth of real broken things to fix (obligatory fix POS's statement) or the broadly vaguely identified items this does "fix" bombers and probing.
Because having a dedicated scout is impossible to ask of a small gang
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
382
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 09:56:22 -
[1288] - Quote
65 pages in and the summary is basically:
WH:
Bookmarks are just too slow. Really they are, anything from 1 min to over 5 mins. It is a pain in the ares regardless of these changes. So a fix would be nice anyway. But with these changes it is needed.
Mixed corp fleets:
Again bookmarks. Alliance bookmarks is something everyone has wanted for some time. These changes do really need something like that fixed. Esp with the roll out of fozzieSov.
Bombers:
No idea why anyone thinks this would change bombers. I can only assume 99.9% of people who go on about bombers have never flown them. We have *never* used fleet warp for bomb runs. We have almost never used bookmarks. Someone flys to a perch and we use public warp to points for warp out, and its is never done with fleet warp. You decloak yourself, bomb yourself and warp off yourself. So ZERO change here. However i don't think CCP had any bomber effect intention here anyway.
baltec1:
Troll for 60 pages. Please Ignore.
Final thoughts:
Don't add tedium for no reason. Without some bookmark changes/fixes this adds a lot of tedium for no benefit.
Death and Glory!
Well fun is also good.
|
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
382
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 09:57:50 -
[1289] - Quote
65 pages in and the summary is basically:
WH:
Bookmarks are just too slow. Really they are, anything from 1 min to over 5 mins. It is a pain in the ares regardless of these changes. So a fix would be nice anyway. But with these changes it is needed.
Mixed corp fleets:
Again bookmarks. Alliance bookmarks is something everyone has wanted for some time. These changes do really need something like that fixed. Esp with the roll out of fozzieSov.
Bombers:
No idea why anyone thinks this would change bombers. I can only assume 99.9% of people who go on about bombers have never flown them. We have *never* used fleet warp for bomb runs. We have almost never used bookmarks. Someone flys to a perch and we use public warp to points for warp out, and its is never done with fleet warp. You decloak yourself, bomb yourself and warp off yourself. So ZERO change here. However i don't think CCP had any bomber effect intention here anyway.
baltec1:
Troll for 60 pages. Please Ignore.
Final thoughts:
Don't add tedium for no reason. Without some bookmark changes/fixes this adds a lot of tedium for no benefit.
Death and Glory!
Well fun is also good.
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
1703
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 09:58:22 -
[1290] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:baltec1 wrote: Also want repair broadcasts to only be seen by the squad they are in so logi gets a nerf without having her nerf logistics ships. Hahahaha! The way power creep is going with more damage and alphas? Are you nuts? which is in no small part a result of...? Take a guess. Feeding the "I want crowd" Logi haven't changed in what? A decade? Now they are a problem? Tier 3s, T3s, etc while the T1s languish. Newbies keep having further and further to go and that is disheartening.
Utility > power.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16213
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 10:03:55 -
[1291] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Rowells wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:baltec1 wrote: Also want repair broadcasts to only be seen by the squad they are in so logi gets a nerf without having her nerf logistics ships. Hahahaha! The way power creep is going with more damage and alphas? Are you nuts? which is in no small part a result of...? Take a guess. Feeding the "I want crowd" Logi haven't changed in what? A decade? Now they are a problem? Tier 3s, T3s, etc while the T1s languish. Newbies keep having further and further to go and that is disheartening. Utility > power.
Logi has been a problem for years now.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2218
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 10:13:25 -
[1292] - Quote
It had been an interesting thread to watch. Many sov null people believe that their part of the game is the only important one and that anything that improves their gameplay should be implemented regardless of the effect on the rest of the game.
They are, of course, wrong and it is difficult to respect or take such a position seriously. Such extreme parochialism is embarrassing, frankly.
Personally, I do not understand the attraction of blob warfare but understand many others love it. I wish them luck and hope their game improves. Just not at the expense of everyone else's. EVE would be much poorer if it was a game of sov null only.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Lan Wang
Stillwater Corporation That Escalated Quickly.
769
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 10:14:13 -
[1293] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
You think I'm trolling but our FC ships do infact all come with combat probes fitted. Think about this, the organisation that has effectively won null and owns a good number of the best FCs in the game has put forwards this idea to nerf fleets. We are calling to nerf our own fleets because they are too easy to run. This change is not a hard one to adapt to but it does remove one of the biggest advantages we have in a fight vs the highly disorganized rabble that is most of EVE.
so because you're overlord fc's have mastered fleet fights you want them nerfed so its harder for any upcoming/learning fc to engage in fleet fights? what a selfish thing to say
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
Syzygium
Friends Of Harassment EON Alliance
101
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 10:21:11 -
[1294] - Quote
Solecist Punk wrote: ...random flames and butthurt...
That's all there is to say. CCP, this breaks my gameplay and prevents me from ever again FCing a proer fleet of outlaws in highsec. It reduces my gameplay to all that of the lesser gankers and there *is* *nothing* I can do to adapt. I can happily SHOW YOU if you wish so, just throw me an eve-mail at Solecist Project.
tbh, if your Thrasher-Ganks of capsules and noobships in Highsec are not longer possible, no none will cry a tear.
"FCing fleets of outlaws in highsec..." ... lol... and I really did expect to find something innovative or exciting after your rant. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16213
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 10:23:44 -
[1295] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:
so because you're overlord fc's have mastered fleet fights you want them nerfed so its harder for any upcoming/learning fc to engage in fleet fights? what a selfish thing to say
That is like saying it was selfish of us to tell CCP they needed to nerf tracking titans. We stand to lose the most from this change as our tactics rely heavily upon one guy in the fleet doing nearly all the work.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16213
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 10:26:16 -
[1296] - Quote
Syzygium wrote:Solecist Punk wrote: ...random flames and butthurt...
That's all there is to say. CCP, this breaks my gameplay and prevents me from ever again FCing a proer fleet of outlaws in highsec. It reduces my gameplay to all that of the lesser gankers and there *is* *nothing* I can do to adapt. I can happily SHOW YOU if you wish so, just throw me an eve-mail at Solecist Project.
tbh, if your Thrasher-Ganks of capsules and noobships in Highsec are not longer possible, no none will cry a tear. "FCing fleets of outlaws in highsec..." ... lol... and I really did expect to find something innovative or exciting after your rant.
Best part of this is they are ranting at the corp that invented every tactic and ship fitting they currently use for ganking.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Natya Mebelle
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
169
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 10:56:22 -
[1297] - Quote
So the idea is to decrease surprise time by default and put in more pilot effort to get good results. I can get behind that idea and like it.
So... corporation bookmarks would mean every corpmember in the fleet will follow into warp while the rest stays behind. If you exclude all bookmarks by default, then you are basically contradicting your own statement. Will you ship alliance bookmarks when Aegis goes live?
This looks like it will boil down to another question of "will CCP release another half-finished product". If CCP can make proper adjustments and inclusions of Corporation / alliance bookmarks to be executed, then I think this will be an interesting change. If they exclude all bookmark warping by default... then not, and more people will be leaving.
Death by a thousand paper cuts. There are only so many things a player will accept happening to their game until their discontent about it is greater than the social bonds they have in the game.
So please CCP... work on corporate / alliance bookmark inclusion for warps. Do not contradict your own statements. Please. |
Syzygium
Friends Of Harassment EON Alliance
101
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 11:06:44 -
[1298] - Quote
They should rather work on Fleet Bookmarks that only exist temporarily as long as the fleet exists but are updated for every fleet member every some seconds.
Of course still excluding them from fleet warping or only allow that with a spool-up delay, but every member can use them on his own instantly as soon as they are available to speed up fleet movement. |
kraken11 jensen
The Gallant Collective Requiem Eternal
88
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 11:19:05 -
[1299] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Lan Wang wrote:
so because you're overlord fc's have mastered fleet fights you want them nerfed so its harder for any upcoming/learning fc to engage in fleet fights? what a selfish thing to say
That is like saying it was selfish of us to tell CCP they needed to nerf tracking titans. We stand to lose the most from this change as our tactics rely heavily upon one guy in the fleet doing nearly all the work.
An fleet is an co-play between a lot off inviduals in big scale I suppose. Everyone have their jobs, like in bigger battels you need to keep your eyes on the overview to make sure you can broadcast fast enough. if you're not actively doing that you more than likely going to die. so, yea. also logi anchor is another one that have to do work, and everyone have to do their part. |
Dermeisen
15
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 11:33:00 -
[1300] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:In its current state, the bookmark system just does not and cannot provide an acceptable substitute for the fleet warp mechanic. As such, at least squad warp needs to remain.
This comment is based on a misunderstanding Jack, and you're right the bookmark system just is not and cannot provide an acceptable substitute for the fleet warp mechanic.
In actuality fleet warp is too efficient, it's stifling, suppressing diversity. It does make FCing more difficult and this is an issue for these vital instigators, but hey ho fame should be a bit of a curse. This will also make casually policing your bit of null space more difficult I know because the time to target is lengthened.
If you can require fights then commitment comes more out of the need to defend and not to hide: with "blue balls" or the "no fun" tactic of, I hope, the past.
In fleet combat it is enhancing the difficulty of, as in Judo getting a good grip, the initial engagement or closing with the enemy.
In my opinion this will also create a more dynamic arena around fighting for entosis control points.
TO the wormholers you need something to make this pill less bitter and I hope that's addressed. However I can't say I see this as anything more than an inconvenience that you'll get over or work round.
TO the multiboxers, especially the cool ones like the provi pipe campers, who do it with three clients or more but with no software automation: like the Aussies in No Not Believing - your game has gotten even more tricky and that sucks but at least gates are still warp-able.
TO the gankers chasing killboard stats, boohoo.
TO the multibox miners, CCP needs to look at your game. I'd love to see a big buff in solo mining. I'd love to see a mini game play tractoring in rocks some area effects around mining that effected stuff: combat !! radiation clouds that effect lock distances or visibility by proximity. Hiding in mine fields could be a thing, ok perhaps I'm dreaming.
TO FC's in Brave you guys are the coolest, I guess the dojo needs a new scouting class - which it might already have as far as I know.
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
|
Dermeisen
15
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 11:47:14 -
[1301] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Lan Wang wrote:
so because you're overlord fc's have mastered fleet fights you want them nerfed so its harder for any upcoming/learning fc to engage in fleet fights? what a selfish thing to say
That is like saying it was selfish of us to tell CCP they needed to nerf tracking titans. We stand to lose the most from this change as our tactics rely heavily upon one guy in the fleet doing nearly all the work.
Or indeed like saying of soccer: because some teams are masters of defensive play we should to make football into a series of penalty shootouts. Damn I find myself respecting the goons more and more these days, it's a highly unnerving experience.
In any case I hope we can all be relied upon to be selfish, I know I can!
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
253
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 11:55:49 -
[1302] - Quote
Syzygium wrote:Solecist Punk wrote: ...random flames and butthurt...
That's all there is to say. CCP, this breaks my gameplay and prevents me from ever again FCing a proer fleet of outlaws in highsec. It reduces my gameplay to all that of the lesser gankers and there *is* *nothing* I can do to adapt. I can happily SHOW YOU if you wish so, just throw me an eve-mail at Solecist Project.
tbh, if your Thrasher-Ganks of capsules and noobships in Highsec are not longer possible, no none will cry a tear.
In other words you've never actually FCed at -10 in highsec, so you have literally no insight into what this means for -10 highsec fleets. |
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1105
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 12:08:12 -
[1303] - Quote
Solecist Punk wrote:Syzygium wrote:Solecist Punk wrote:For a proper fleet of -10, who does more than be afk in station most of the time, this change is game breaking. You do not seem to have understanding of that, which is fine, but stop assuming you know better when you clearly don't. I was -10 for 6 years (2009-2015) and CEO of a smallscale pirate corporation for several years and I don't agree with you. Especially -10s and WH people are skilled enough to adapt quickly and benefit from their higher overall fleet movement and independent member activity compared to fleets of larger 0.0 groups who greatly rely on the FC and his commands. This change will give smaller groups of skilled players an edge over large pulks of F1 drones and that alone makes it a good change. That it will lead to more important scout-roles even in larger fleets, offering people with low SP but high softskills jobs they can excel in instead of fitting meta-guns to a level III skilled BS hull just to add "more dps" to the fleet. And you are just a lesser ganker like the rest of them. Your empty words mean nothing, because you do not even understand what I am talking about. Just because you were -10 does not mean you know what every -10 does or can do. What matters is that the relevant people (not you) understand that this breaks my gameplay and there is no way to properly adapt to it. I do not need to explain it to you, as you do not matter in the slightest. Hell, the amount of empty words in your post is embarassing. You should go into politics. I will not respond in this thread any more, as the important parts have been set and done. None of you can go into this, because none of you plays like me. I can absolutely guarantee that. CCP can easily go through years of logs about Solstice Project and Solecist Project and find out all by themselves that this would completely break my fleets. That is *all* that matters. I am not posting here to discuss with you, because you do not matter. Your opinions matter when it comes to the change, but not when it comes to what others say about that change. They especially do not matter when you do not understand what the other person is talking about and randomly trying to argue with people is completely silly and childish. (baltec, for example, who is attention whoring like a madman). That's all there is to say. CCP, this breaks my gameplay and prevents me from ever again FCing a proer fleet of outlaws in highsec. It reduces my gameplay to all that of the lesser gankers and there *is* *nothing* I can do to adapt. I can happily SHOW YOU if you wish so, just throw me an eve-mail at Solecist Project. Cheers.
This inconclusive, void-of-arguments rabbling is an insult to fellow readers. Please, less condescending and actual arguments beside *I'm so good, ask me why*. |
Elsa Hayes
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
80
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 12:10:55 -
[1304] - Quote
Masao Kurata wrote:Syzygium wrote:Solecist Punk wrote: ...random flames and butthurt...
That's all there is to say. CCP, this breaks my gameplay and prevents me from ever again FCing a proer fleet of outlaws in highsec. It reduces my gameplay to all that of the lesser gankers and there *is* *nothing* I can do to adapt. I can happily SHOW YOU if you wish so, just throw me an eve-mail at Solecist Project.
tbh, if your Thrasher-Ganks of capsules and noobships in Highsec are not longer possible, no none will cry a tear. In other words you've never actually FCed at -10 in highsec, so you have literally no insight into what this means for -10 highsec fleets.
Ah the guy with 17 kill and a birth date of 2013 talks down on the guy with 1300+ kills from 2009. This is currently the best popcorn thread on all of eve o forums.
Heavy alt ship toasting from the faction that does dislike the upcoming change while the ones in favor seem to use their mains, wonder why that is?
Anything that forces people to interact and use their brain some more is good!
|
Lan Wang
Stillwater Corporation That Escalated Quickly.
769
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 12:15:44 -
[1305] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Lan Wang wrote:
so because you're overlord fc's have mastered fleet fights you want them nerfed so its harder for any upcoming/learning fc to engage in fleet fights? what a selfish thing to say
That is like saying it was selfish of us to tell CCP they needed to nerf tracking titans. We stand to lose the most from this change as our tactics rely heavily upon one guy in the fleet doing nearly all the work.
yeah that was a pretty sh!t thing to say on my part and tbh i cant even think of any sort of comeback because it was so terrible, sorry i actually dont really know why i even posted that.
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
Elsa Hayes
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
80
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 12:20:07 -
[1306] - Quote
Back in the days people had to do exactly this, warp scouts first and then warp the fleet to the scout, even every fleet member him/herself manually at times, gasp, I wonder how people managed it back then or has the average IQ of the people deteriorate this much that it is now considered too hard for people?
At this pace I wonder what will be considered too hard next? Logging in? |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2517
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 12:20:27 -
[1307] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Rowells wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:baltec1 wrote: Also want repair broadcasts to only be seen by the squad they are in so logi gets a nerf without having her nerf logistics ships. Hahahaha! The way power creep is going with more damage and alphas? Are you nuts? which is in no small part a result of...? Take a guess. Feeding the "I want crowd" Logi haven't changed in what? A decade? Now they are a problem? Tier 3s, T3s, etc while the T1s languish. Newbies keep having further and further to go and that is disheartening. Utility > power. Logis have been a root problem as to why the increases happen. Not the only, by far not the smallest reason. And not being changed doesn't mean anything in regards to their place. If you haven't noticed, a lot of things that were 'fine' and untouched for years are getting redone and tweaked.
Sure, it could be the 'I want' crowd too, but how do you distinguish who is who in a room of people who think everyone else is wrong? |
Dun'Gal
Myriad Contractors Inc.
255
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 12:35:55 -
[1308] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Rowells wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:baltec1 wrote: Also want repair broadcasts to only be seen by the squad they are in so logi gets a nerf without having her nerf logistics ships. Hahahaha! The way power creep is going with more damage and alphas? Are you nuts? which is in no small part a result of...? Take a guess. Feeding the "I want crowd" Logi haven't changed in what? A decade? Now they are a problem? Tier 3s, T3s, etc while the T1s languish. Newbies keep having further and further to go and that is disheartening. Utility > power. Logis have been a root problem as to why the increases happen. Not the only, by far not the smallest reason. And not being changed doesn't mean anything in regards to their place. If you haven't noticed, a lot of things that were 'fine' and untouched for years are getting redone and tweaked. Sure, it could be the 'I want' crowd too, but how do you distinguish who is who in a room of people who think everyone else is wrong? It's not that EVERYONE else is wrong, just the one's who don't agree with me |
Amaterasu Sennin
I Maicar Mordo Alternate Allegiance
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 12:38:04 -
[1309] - Quote
so you basically kill WH cuz those rely on bookmarks, you limit the option to warp out and back in in a fight which kills slow ships (read: BS, BC, AHAC), you pretty much remove HS missioner-ganking which makes HS a safer place to carebear in, you make travelling via pings in nullsec take 100% longer, and i could continue all day long. besides of killing multiboxer-miners cuz they cant warp their fleet to pos or dock-bookmark, which in return hurts subscriptions even more and thus lowers your income so eve will continue to die instead of surviving. yay. |
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
253
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 12:44:44 -
[1310] - Quote
Elsa Hayes wrote:Ah the guy with 17 kill and a birth date of 2013 talks down on the guy with 1300+ kills from 2009. This is currently the best popcorn thread on all of eve o forums.
And if he has a single kill in highsec I sure can't find it. Sorry that I don't post on the character I have over 2000 kills on but I started posting on my scout and I'll continue doing so. |
|
Bam Stroker
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
430
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 14:00:33 -
[1311] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote:kraken11 jensen wrote:who wanted fleet warp to get removed? (or reduced possibility) someone in csm was pushing for it? or? im not totally sure about this. One Manfred Sideous of Pandemic Legion, CSM rep and if you want tin foil, CCP Larriakn is formerly Bam Stroker, of Van Demons Demise, a member corp of Pandemic Legion.
While New Eden would be an amazing place full of love, friendship and solidarity if I were CCP Larrikin I have to let everyone down by clearing up this misunderstanding.
EVE Down Under - a Fanfest for the AUTZ
27-29 November 2015 in Sydney, Australia
http://www.evedownunder.com
|
Xindi Kraid
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
953
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 14:22:18 -
[1312] - Quote
If you're going to do something like this, I would suggest you allow fleet members to actually share more of the items they can warp to but the fleet cant, for instance, let the FC link a bookmark as the fleet destination and then let fleet members warp to that. |
Dersen Lowery
Defy.
1639
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 14:32:42 -
[1313] - Quote
Crazy Candy wrote:Reminder that people are clearly contempt pressing F1, as they can do more than press F1 when they feel like it, and this change is unnecessary.
Your Freudian slip is showing.
Put yourself in CCP's shoes: you have a game that has defied the odds repeatedly. The game made it into a museum while remaining viable. You're putting your heart and soul into gussying it up for its second decade and you're really excited about all the enhancements you're making to the game. Do you want to go on to your own forums and hear that "people just wait for Jabber pings and press F1?"
People complained about ISBoxer giving one person a vastly outsized influence on the game. Well, this is the same thing, only in wetware. You have one person (the FC) actually invested in the game, and then however many people who log in when told, anchor up when told, and press F1 when told, and then log out. If they do stay in the game, it's to run PVE AFK so that CONCORD automagically puts ISK in their wallets while they play League of Legends.
These people have absolutely no investment in the game. They're force multipliers for the handful of people who do. That's great for that handful of people, at least until they burn out, but what does it mean for the health and the longevity of the game?
I FC'd my first roam the other night. It was a very small gang: three Vexors, no links, no alts at all. There was much derping, because I was a first-time FC, and it turns out that "any decision is better than no decision" is much easier to assert than it is to put into practice; but this change wouldn't have substantially affected anything. When we needed a scout, we sent a Vexor.
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
I voted in CSM X!
|
Khan Wrenth
Hedion University Amarr Empire
170
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 14:45:25 -
[1314] - Quote
Masao Kurata wrote:Elsa Hayes wrote:Ah the guy with 17 kill and a birth date of 2013 talks down on the guy with 1300+ kills from 2009. This is currently the best popcorn thread on all of eve o forums. And if he has a single kill in highsec I sure can't find it. Sorry that I don't post on the character I have over 2000 kills on but I started posting on my scout and I'll continue doing so.
I'd be happy if I had one kill that wasn't a suicide gank. I suck at EVE. But I have fun, so I keep at it.
That aside, I think it'll be interesting to see how this pans out. It's possible that people may not like the change now, but they may grow to embrace it. As far as changes to the game go, this is something that is reversible if there's a demonstrated need.
Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1895
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 15:22:48 -
[1315] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Zappity wrote: No. We have 60 pages of people explaining why this change negatively affects their game when their game is not the intended target. We also have 60 pages of you (and pretty much you alone) telling them to htfu.
Should they also remove warp to zero? After all, you only need a scout to go ahead and burn to the gate first. This is a similar argument - it would increase "player involvement" in fleets and be a complete pita for everyone else.
And here you go off the deep end again with your doom mongering. Scouts being needed for fleets is not the end of the world, if you don't have the numbers then go hire some newbees from a starter system.
But then people can't keep their 20 mill SP requirement...
|
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
166
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 15:29:08 -
[1316] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:baltec1 wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:
Ok Baltec you have had enough fun trolling this thread but you have ceased contributing anything of use at about page 2. Time to pack up your bat and ball and go welp a megathron (I have an old Baltec megathron for sale in YAO if you need a spare).
You think I'm trolling but our FC ships do infact all come with combat probes fitted. Think about this, the organisation that has effectively won null and owns a good number of the best FCs in the game has put forwards this idea to nerf fleets. We are calling to nerf our own fleets because they are too easy to run. This change is not a hard one to adapt to but it does remove one of the biggest advantages we have in a fight vs the highly disorganized rabble that is most of EVE. Now you are just trolling. When did Manny join the CFC? He was quite enthusiastic about this early on the thread. As for winning null sec so what? What is a minor inconvenience for the Imperium and its blob of ships is difficult for small gang and god fvcking awful in wormholes. And still at the end if it all the justifications dribbled out by CCP don't pass muster when considering the wealth of real broken things to fix (obligatory fix POS's statement) or the broadly vaguely identified items this does "fix" bombers and probing. Because having a dedicated scout is impossible to ask of a small gang
Nope. Now you're just dodging the real issue (wormholes) and being that guy :getout:
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
166
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 15:34:22 -
[1317] - Quote
Bam Stroker wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:kraken11 jensen wrote:who wanted fleet warp to get removed? (or reduced possibility) someone in csm was pushing for it? or? im not totally sure about this. One Manfred Sideous of Pandemic Legion, CSM rep and if you want tin foil, CCP Larriakn is formerly Bam Stroker, of Van Demons Demise, a member corp of Pandemic Legion. While New Eden would be an amazing place full of love, friendship and solidarity if I were CCP Larrikin I have to let everyone down by clearing up this misunderstanding.
That was a derp on my behalf (I get you two confused) I meant Dark Razer (the rest of the statement is still correct).
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
Stalence
Caldari Colonial Defense Ministry Templis CALSF
49
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 16:28:22 -
[1318] - Quote
Until Alliance bookmarks exist, this change to fleet warp mechanics shouldn't even be entertained. If you need to nerf bomber fleets then nerf bomber fleets, not all fleet warfare.
Just have bombers de-cloak each other and be done with it.
Member of #tweetfleet @stalence //
Combat FRAPs on YouTube
|
Executor Ardur
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 16:44:25 -
[1319] - Quote
I am afraid this is another half fast job done without any real thought put behind the game.
Besides we are going back to the old days 2007, we are nerfing the game tactics.
So now warping the fleet you either need to use a scout with all the bookmarks that goes ahead and everybody jumps to him. Ofcource the easy counter to this is go after the scout time and time again and the fleet cannot really kite after that and are forced to either leave the battle or engage is disfavourable terms. In effect CCP just killed kitting with this. Now you will be forced to stand ground and fight even thought you can be out numbered. This change is very bad when small entities are taking on large ones. All the recent changes were suppose to benefits the smaller entities and help them get more space etc. Now this goes completelly against it and benefits only the larger entities. As a result scouts which already are in inties and cannot be trapped by bubbles will fit outragious implants and do 10km/s. Exactly like in the past. I thought we moved from this to make the game better?
Been forced to do "sharing of bookmarks" is the worst idea in my opinion. I mean all you need is a spy and whats the points of having a bookmarks when you enemy knows them already. Again killed kitting/snipping, element of surprise and tactics. We have encountered many cases where the spies have stolen our bookmarks before and came very close to be trapped. Imagine now with this change. Its free intel with no effort besides putting someone on some corp.
And i think the wormhole people have said plenty in this thread.
I feel like CCP is trying to fix something by doing this and I am not sure what exactly is. FC will still continue and drive the whole fleets no matter what I think.
Its too wasy for the larger entities to just kill the scout. Once the scout is dead, its GG!
|
Ben Ishikela
38
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 16:45:02 -
[1320] - Quote
+1 for a hard change that the playerbase does not understand YET. +1 for more involvement required. +1 for more frigate utility required. +1 for more teamwork required. +1 for more social skill required.
-1 for that i have to adapt to new strategies now. I cannot be lazy anymore. +1 for making fleets fun again, when you cannot fly the doctrine's dps/logi and therefor fly a ceptor. I think this changes WH taktics to the better. Just be creative damn it.
For roaming in WH-Chain: Use a covertfrigate to position itself at the next wormhole and provide a warpin. then it moves to the next one. it has a high warpspeed. This should work with inter-corp fleets.
Add new modules or ships that can use tactics and strategies to shake any op meta or use totaly different gameplay yourself to make it happen! yay :)
....und Local braucht ganz dringend ein Update!
|
|
Phaade
Perimeter Defense Systems
356
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 16:59:54 -
[1321] - Quote
Senov Belis wrote:+1 to the "not playing anymore" list.
All I do is follow my FC and shoot things. If this is no longer possible, bye, I can not give you money anymore.
Good, one less f1 monkey.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16220
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 17:06:34 -
[1322] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:baltec1 wrote:Lan Wang wrote:
so because you're overlord fc's have mastered fleet fights you want them nerfed so its harder for any upcoming/learning fc to engage in fleet fights? what a selfish thing to say
That is like saying it was selfish of us to tell CCP they needed to nerf tracking titans. We stand to lose the most from this change as our tactics rely heavily upon one guy in the fleet doing nearly all the work. yeah that was a pretty sh!t thing to say on my part and tbh i cant even think of any sort of comeback because it was so terrible, sorry i actually dont really know why i even posted that.
You are a rare gem.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16221
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 17:20:27 -
[1323] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote:
Nope. Now you're just dodging the real issue (wormholes) and being that guy :getout:
Wormholes operate in the same way as any other area of space when it comes to scanning stuff down with scouts. If anything WH entities should have an advantage after this change in having more experienced probing pilots per head in their organisations.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
283
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 17:24:35 -
[1324] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:
Nope. Now you're just dodging the real issue (wormholes) and being that guy :getout:
Wormholes operate in the same way as any other area of space when it comes to scanning stuff down with scouts. If anything WH entities should have an advantage after this change in having more experienced probing pilots per head in their organisations.
nail on the head and it's not exactly hard these days to probe. so all people gotta do is up the scout numbers and train more probers. |
Juan Mileghere
Incident Command Southern Star Dominion
31
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 17:48:19 -
[1325] - Quote
Literally this fixes/changes nothing except adding a few cloaky alts/members to fleet to achieve the same damn thing as currently is and causes hassles for those in WH space as well as moving fleets in null-sec space. People will adapt though as always though.
Blobbing Explained
|
Ima Spyalt
Republic University Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 17:57:41 -
[1326] - Quote
This change just makes what I do more tedious so much so that instead of paying for the account I'll just make some newbies do it for me and go back to what I used to do and see how many players I make leave this game. On a side note instead of Awoxing getting destroyed now its half the game you all get to suffer like us awoxers had to we adapted but still is tedious and boring. |
Dersen Lowery
Defy.
1640
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 18:12:03 -
[1327] - Quote
Juan Mileghere wrote:Literally this fixes/changes nothing except adding a few cloaky alts/members to fleet to achieve the same damn thing as currently is and causes hassles for those in WH space as well as moving fleets in null-sec space. People will adapt though as always though.
I'm amazed at the number of WH groups who don't use scouts much. We certainly did.
No wonder there was so much crying over recons getting dscan immunity.
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
I voted in CSM X!
|
Princess Bride
Corripe Cervisiam Trade Consortium
664
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 18:53:57 -
[1328] - Quote
Elsa Hayes wrote:I wonder what will be considered too hard next? Logging in?
Only if CCP makes logging in take twice as long as it does now. Because that's what they're doing now with fleet warps. And it's just as stupid of an idea.
http://eveprincessbride.wordpress.com/
|
Alix Tichelman
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 19:11:03 -
[1329] - Quote
I love how all of the proponents of this idea are constantly urging us all to "make" a guy in our corp scout. Or "get a guy to" do it.... "Recruit nubs to" spend their game time LITERALLY invisible (both on grid and on KMs) during fights. No one is saying "Oh my god this new role for scout will be AMAZEBALLS! EVERYONE will be tripping over themselves to scout because it will be SO FUN. And why is that? Because it's going to be a crap, thankless, mostly doable with an alt, role that no one will want to play. The only time you get noticed is when you screw up and get decloaked, or someone else screws up and warps to you at zero. All the visibility of an OGB, the lack of KMs like logi, but without the any direct interaction between you and your fleet or the enemy fleet once the fight starts. Requires an experienced pilot to pull it off without dying, and experienced pilots are going to LOATHE doing it. In the end, FCs will simply multibox the role, because it's that or wait for someone else to step up and do it. I predict it will be used routinely as punishment for screwing up, like KP duty or hauling POS fuel.
But yeah... GREAT IDEA. |
Iowa Banshee
Fenrir Vangard
9
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 19:32:49 -
[1330] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hopelesshobo wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote: As announced on the o7 show we are making some changes to fleet warp. Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders & Squad Commanders will no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own. This includes GÇô
Bookmarks Does this include corporation bookmarks that the person in the same corp could warp to? Yes. You can only fleet warp to things that any member of your fleet could warp to, no matter what corp or alliances they are a part of.
I can have a fleet made up of just my corp mates, all have access to the corp bookmarks, all are able to warp on their own to these bookmarks and there are NO other Non-Corp fleet members
Just to clarify this:- Can they still fleet warp?
and if not - considering that they meet all the perquisites - why not? |
|
Onslaughtor
Occult National Security Phoenix Naval Systems
147
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 19:43:17 -
[1331] - Quote
So me and a bunch of friends found a possible solution to keeping the main design goal of getting people involved with fleets and a sense of personal agency, while maintaining our current level of fleet ability, AND adding in new ability in the form of sudo fleet formations.
Current fleet warp functions are split into 2 parts.
1 Fleet warps as we know them now become emergency fleet warps. They can only warp to a few permanent objects such as the sun, planets, stations, and gates. This is the "No time to explain we are leaving" option for the fc and keeps that functionality alive while limiting it and allowing game play to form in the chase.
2 The new fleet warp mechanic is a fleet warp broadcast. This broadcast works on anything the current (pre aegis) fleetwarp can. Upon activation, everyone gets a visible broadcast saying the fc is starting a fleet warp. From there each pilot mush click on it and accept the warp at a range they choose. After some number of seconds (ten seems reasonable) the fleetwarp is initiated for everyone who signed on. After that, any fleet member may still warp to the broadcast in the fleet history.
In this way, current functionality is preserved and the design goals are meet, while also adding new functionality. Programing my be required, o dear.
If you agree please quote as these forums seem to bury things really quickly. |
holdmybeer
The Conference Elite CODE.
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 19:55:51 -
[1332] - Quote
My concerns about these changes are all in high-sec.
As someone with very low security status, it's going to be extremely tedious to be in fleet and coordinate good warp-ins on top of a target in high-sec, who are carrying my assets but don't still know it. There are problems I immediately see
Flying in low/null sec is probably manageable, as you can sit still in space for as long as you like, without getting destroyed by NPCs if you don't warp right away as you land or right after you shoot. Sure, I could command the fleet to "warp to x in 3, 2, 1.." that's how I command them to press the undock button, but then I would need to trade all new fleet members my bookmarks, I'd have to be doing this constantly.
As an FC I do however have a way around this: Warping my alt or other fleet members characters first to the bookmarks I want to use only so I can warp the fleet to it right after. This is the only way to keep the fleet together as it is absolutely crucial for me and my whole alliance in high-sec. I can just imagine myself explaining the mechanics to others and saying like "Oh yeah, we used to be able to warp into bookmarks before as a fleet, but now you have to fill in the role of a bookmark instead of shooting ships. Sorry bro" (In my opinion it's a horrible idea giving fleet members the role of a bookmark.)
These changes will simply force me to do more work as FC for the fleet to be successful, since high-sec mechanics are preventing my fleet members to navigate properly on their own.
Is this intentional, or will you have systems and ideas for high-sec, just like you have them for wormholes? I would hope that we could atleast warp into bookmarks as a fleet when in high-sec. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2520
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 20:04:15 -
[1333] - Quote
Iowa Banshee wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hopelesshobo wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote: As announced on the o7 show we are making some changes to fleet warp. Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders & Squad Commanders will no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own. This includes GÇô
Bookmarks Does this include corporation bookmarks that the person in the same corp could warp to? Yes. You can only fleet warp to things that any member of your fleet could warp to, no matter what corp or alliances they are a part of. I can have a fleet made up of just my corp mates, all have access to the corp bookmarks, all are able to warp on their own to these bookmarks and there are NO other Non-Corp fleet members Just to clarify this:- Can they still fleet warp? and if not - considering that they meet all the perquisites - why not? Another way to say it:
All bookmarks are invalid targets for all fleet warp situations |
Iowa Banshee
Fenrir Vangard
9
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 20:23:51 -
[1334] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Iowa Banshee wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hopelesshobo wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote: As announced on the o7 show we are making some changes to fleet warp. Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders & Squad Commanders will no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own. This includes GÇô
Bookmarks Does this include corporation bookmarks that the person in the same corp could warp to? Yes. You can only fleet warp to things that any member of your fleet could warp to, no matter what corp or alliances they are a part of. I can have a fleet made up of just my corp mates, all have access to the corp bookmarks, all are able to warp on their own to these bookmarks and there are NO other Non-Corp fleet members Just to clarify this:- Can they still fleet warp? and if not - considering that they meet all the perquisites - why not? Another way to say it: All bookmarks are invalid targets for all fleet warp situations
As always we adapt - So the new method will be
After scanning jump out of the Buzzard into the Domi Wait 10mins for the bookmarks to update Check that the 2 other fleet members have the bookmarks Announce jump to XXX at 20km Announce 3-2-1 Warp
It just seems like there's a lot more needless stuff than click "warp fleet"
|
kraken11 jensen
The Gallant Collective Requiem Eternal
88
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 20:26:55 -
[1335] - Quote
Phaade wrote:Senov Belis wrote:+1 to the "not playing anymore" list.
All I do is follow my FC and shoot things. If this is no longer possible, bye, I can not give you money anymore. Good, one less f1 monkey.
so everyone that click f1 is an f1 monkey. |
Dun'Gal
Myriad Contractors Inc.
256
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 20:41:25 -
[1336] - Quote
kraken11 jensen wrote:Phaade wrote:Senov Belis wrote:+1 to the "not playing anymore" list.
All I do is follow my FC and shoot things. If this is no longer possible, bye, I can not give you money anymore. Good, one less f1 monkey. so everyone that click f1 is an f1 monkey. yes |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16222
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 21:01:52 -
[1337] - Quote
Iowa Banshee wrote:
As always we adapt - So the new method will be
After scanning jump out of the Buzzard into the Domi Wait 10mins for the bookmarks to update Check that the 2 other fleet members have the bookmarks Announce jump to XXX at 20km Announce 3-2-1 Warp
It just seems like there's a lot more needless stuff than click "warp fleet"
Scan target, warp buzzard to it, warp the fleet to the buzzard.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16222
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 21:04:26 -
[1338] - Quote
holdmybeer wrote:My concerns about these changes are all in high-sec.
As someone with very low security status, it's going to be extremely tedious to be in fleet and coordinate good warp-ins on top of a target in high-sec, who are carrying my assets but don't still know it. There are problems I immediately see
Flying in low/null sec is probably manageable, as you can sit still in space for as long as you like, without getting destroyed by NPCs if you don't warp right away as you land or right after you shoot. Sure, I could command the fleet to "warp to x in 3, 2, 1.." that's how I command them to press the undock button, but then I would need to trade all new fleet members my bookmarks, I'd have to be doing this constantly.
As an FC I do however have a way around this: Warping my alt or other fleet members characters first to the bookmarks I want to use only so I can warp the fleet to it right after. This is the only way to keep the fleet together as it is absolutely crucial for me and my whole alliance in high-sec. I can just imagine myself explaining the mechanics to others and saying like "Oh yeah, we used to be able to warp into bookmarks before as a fleet, but now you have to fill in the role of a bookmark instead of shooting ships. Sorry bro" (In my opinion it's a horrible idea giving fleet members the role of a bookmark.)
These changes will simply force me to do more work as FC for the fleet to be successful, since high-sec mechanics are preventing my fleet members to navigate properly on their own.
Is this intentional, or will you have systems and ideas for high-sec, just like you have them for wormholes? I would hope that we could atleast warp into bookmarks as a fleet when in high-sec.
In terms of ganking nothing changes. Everyone undocks, warp to insta-undock safe, fleet warp to ship scanner guy, gank.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2224
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 21:07:03 -
[1339] - Quote
Just increase combat probe scan time and slow down fleet warp speed. Leave the usefulness of the feature alone.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Shadowforge Dawkins
Catastrophic Overview Failure Brave Collective
21
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 21:08:53 -
[1340] - Quote
Onslaughtor wrote:So me and a bunch of friends found a possible solution to keeping the main design goal of getting people involved with fleets and a sense of personal agency, while maintaining our current level of fleet ability, AND adding in new ability in the form of sudo fleet formations.
Current fleet warp functions are split into 2 parts.
1 Fleet warps as we know them now become emergency fleet warps. They can only warp to a few permanent objects such as the sun, planets, stations, and gates. This is the "No time to explain we are leaving" option for the fc and keeps that functionality alive while limiting it and allowing game play to form in the chase.
2 The new fleet warp mechanic is a fleet warp broadcast. This broadcast works on anything the current (pre aegis) fleetwarp can. Upon activation, everyone gets a visible broadcast saying the fc is starting a fleet warp. From there each pilot mush click on it and accept the warp at a range they choose. After some number of seconds (ten seems reasonable) the fleetwarp is initiated for everyone who signed on. After that, any fleet member may still warp to the broadcast in the fleet history.
In this way, current functionality is preserved and the design goals are meet, while also adding new functionality. Programing my be required, o dear.
If you agree please quote as these forums seem to bury things really quickly.
While this seems viable on paper... however I foresee ungodly lag spikes coming from it. Imagine a fleet of 500 people getting that same broadcast and having to click on it, couldn't tell you. As for Wormhole space, not going to fly. If our target can align in 15 seconds we just lost him due to the warp time being another 10 seconds out of warp waiting on the fleet warp.
I believe it would be best suited to reduce fleet warp to squads at the most. possibly let wings as well. |
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2520
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 21:12:39 -
[1341] - Quote
kraken11 jensen wrote:Phaade wrote:Senov Belis wrote:+1 to the "not playing anymore" list.
All I do is follow my FC and shoot things. If this is no longer possible, bye, I can not give you money anymore. Good, one less f1 monkey. so everyone that click f1 is an f1 monkey. How does one 'click' F1? |
stoicfaux
5900
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 21:29:08 -
[1342] - Quote
Rowells wrote:kraken11 jensen wrote:Phaade wrote:Senov Belis wrote:+1 to the "not playing anymore" list.
All I do is follow my FC and shoot things. If this is no longer possible, bye, I can not give you money anymore. Good, one less f1 monkey. so everyone that click f1 is an f1 monkey. How does one 'click' F1? Mechanical keyboard? Chorded? Pedantic?
Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
|
Shadowforge Dawkins
Catastrophic Overview Failure Brave Collective
22
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 21:37:36 -
[1343] - Quote
If CCP really wants to nail this concept on the head... of forcing more content and not ******* over other areas of k-space and wormhole space, why don't they change this a bit.
While still adhereing to the plans of removing fleet warp; Allow squads to keep fleet warp, ONLY the squads.
Q; Why only squads? A; It will Create new Tactics in all aspects of space, both known and wormhole.
Q; What kind of new content is created? -all space A; FC's will now get to pick out who is in the special ops Squad that no one else listens to and get their own channel. Short bus.
Q; How does this affect T3 tactics? A; A group of Scouts and Tackle will now occupy the same squad, with the new duty of only hunting, catching, and killing T3's at range.
Q; Does it kill wormhole fighting capabilities? A; No, They will have to select what ships are in what squads if and when we exceed 10 people... they will have to adapt, yes, but it will not be raze another monument worthy.
Q; Does it mess up those annoying altaholics? A; No... maybe? if someone has that many alts they deserve to suffer. seriously. I have a life away from the computer tho so I have a rather one sided opinion on these altaholics.
Q; Does it wreck pirate fleets causing calculated mayhem in highsec? A; No, so long as it is a small fleet of 10 or less. Otherwise I'd love to see the end result of it.
Q; Does it end the Blob Battles? A; Even if you got rid of fleet warp all together, still going to happen. They will just be coming in droves of 10 now. If ill timed you can wipe out their Logi then whatever comes next. |
stoicfaux
5900
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 21:40:13 -
[1344] - Quote
@baltec1 Quick[1] question: IIRC, somewhere in this thread, didn't you state that you can fleet warp to a ship that's already in warp?
Does the fleet warp to the target ship-still-in-warp's current location, or the destination location of the warp?
[1] Quick, dumb, potato, potatoe...
Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
|
Foxstar Damaskeenus
SiIhouette Shadow Cartel
267
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 21:40:51 -
[1345] - Quote
I'm willing to admit I'm wrong. However, this seems like trying to fix something that isn't broke or fix something that's broken by breaking 5 other things.
I'm concerned for high sec gankers. Some CODE. members were saying this was going to ruin some of their gank fleets. The last thing this game needs, i thought, was people mining all day in high sec and tanking the price of minerals. This is also going to make people safer from combat probing and fleets warping on them.
Eve is a hard game, not a risk averse game. This feels very much like a step in the wrong direction.
This may be the first time I've come on forums to gripe since the rumor Hilmar wanted to sell "pay to win" special ammo in the Aurum store.
No changes to skill points EVER!!!
|
Sumeragy
Revolution of Chaos Nemesis Enterprises.
8
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 21:43:27 -
[1346] - Quote
This Tread should be the reason we should invent for the Forums an dislike button !! |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16225
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 21:48:42 -
[1347] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:@baltec1 Quick[1] question: IIRC, somewhere in this thread, didn't you state that you can fleet warp to a ship that's already in warp?
Does the fleet warp to the target ship-still-in-warp's current location, or the destination location of the warp?
[1] Quick, dumb, potato, potatoe...
Current location. Get a fast ship to warp around in a triangle, have the fleet make their own safe and you wind you with stuff everywhere. Makes scanning stuff a real pain for the enemy.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Onslaughtor
Occult National Security Phoenix Naval Systems
148
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 21:49:07 -
[1348] - Quote
Shadowforge Dawkins wrote:Onslaughtor wrote:So me and a bunch of friends found a possible solution to keeping the main design goal of getting people involved with fleets and a sense of personal agency, while maintaining our current level of fleet ability, AND adding in new ability in the form of sudo fleet formations.
Current fleet warp functions are split into 2 parts.
1 Fleet warps as we know them now become emergency fleet warps. They can only warp to a few permanent objects such as the sun, planets, stations, and gates. This is the "No time to explain we are leaving" option for the fc and keeps that functionality alive while limiting it and allowing game play to form in the chase.
2 The new fleet warp mechanic is a fleet warp broadcast. This broadcast works on anything the current (pre aegis) fleetwarp can. Upon activation, everyone gets a visible broadcast saying the fc is starting a fleet warp. From there each pilot mush click on it and accept the warp at a range they choose. After some number of seconds (ten seems reasonable) the fleetwarp is initiated for everyone who signed on. After that, any fleet member may still warp to the broadcast in the fleet history.
In this way, current functionality is preserved and the design goals are meet, while also adding new functionality. Programing my be required, o dear.
If you agree please quote as these forums seem to bury things really quickly. While this seems viable on paper... however I foresee ungodly lag spikes coming from it. Imagine a fleet of 500 people getting that same broadcast and having to click on it, couldn't tell you. As for Wormhole space, not going to fly. If our target can align in 15 seconds we just lost him due to the warp time being another 10 seconds out of warp waiting on the fleet warp. I believe it would be best suited to reduce fleet warp to squads at the most. possibly let wings as well.
broadcasting to 256 (as that is the actual limit) fleet members as we have seen in game already takes no time at all or lag that we have ever really seen. Yes this may be a little different but to judge a idea on something so unknown and irreverent based on the current broadcast system and warpsystem combined, is futile at best.
As for the second one, ships still take time to align into warp. The fc can start the broadcast as soon as he hits grid and then people can follow it while they align, in other words similar to a un pre aligned fleet warp. If you want faster then you have to warp yourself. I don't really see how the argument you gave is really unique to wh space or really even related. All wh bookmark and fleet warping functionality is saved while maybe slowing down your fleet warping in the case of ceptors. And if in your case you have eyes on target like I would expect a good wh hunter to do then you can just warp to fleetmate and save the hassle. Some small changes may have to be made in the case of combat scanning, but you can fit combat probe launchers to your t3ds and dictors if you try.
Finally your last proposal doesn't meet the original design goal for the change. It may be better than what fozzie wants (this is his idea btw) but still doesn't fix the problem of player agency in fleets. |
Foxstar Damaskeenus
SiIhouette Shadow Cartel
267
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 21:50:41 -
[1349] - Quote
How about they just don't change it, this is dumb.
No changes to skill points EVER!!!
|
stoicfaux
5900
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 21:51:28 -
[1350] - Quote
Sumeragy wrote:This Tread should be the reason we should invent for the Forums an dislike button !! CCP was going to implement a dislike button for individuals to express their displeasure over a post, but a vocal component of player base whined that FCs should be able to "Fleet Dislike" a post, whereupon CCP rolled their eyes and nerfed drone assignment instead.
Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
|
|
Insurance Agent
Perkone Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 21:54:50 -
[1351] - Quote
Foxstar Damaskeenus wrote:I'm willing to admit I'm wrong. However, this seems like trying to fix something that isn't broke or fix something that's broken by breaking 5 other things.
I'm concerned for high sec gankers. Some CODE. members were saying this was going to ruin some of their gank fleets. The last thing this game needs, i thought, was people mining all day in high sec and tanking the price of minerals. This is also going to make people safer from combat probing and fleets warping on them.
Eve is a hard game, not a risk averse game. This feels very much like a step in the wrong direction.
This may be the first time I've come on forums to gripe since the rumor Hilmar wanted to sell "pay to win" special ammo in the Aurum store.
It ironic that you say this will make fleet movement hard.
Like you said, eve should be hard so get good without fleet warps... mkay |
Azarah Aubaris
The Irukandji The Irukandji.
42
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 22:07:11 -
[1352] - Quote
this idea is still fuking re-tar-ded |
Bleedingthrough
Project AIice
166
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 22:36:27 -
[1353] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:
Nope. Now you're just dodging the real issue (wormholes) and being that guy :getout:
Wormholes operate in the same way as any other area of space when it comes to scanning stuff down with scouts. If anything WH entities should have an advantage after this change in having more experienced probing pilots per head in their organisations.
Nope, it will be pretty bad for multi corporation WH groups. They can no longer move their fleets in WH space unless everyone got all the BMs which is typically not the case if you open a new static and the chain connected to it.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5305080#post5305080
|
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
166
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 23:05:10 -
[1354] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:
Nope. Now you're just dodging the real issue (wormholes) and being that guy :getout:
Wormholes operate in the same way as any other area of space when it comes to scanning stuff down with scouts. If anything WH entities should have an advantage after this change in having more experienced probing pilots per head in their organisations.
That reply makes no sense.
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1103
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 01:43:56 -
[1355] - Quote
Eve should be hard because of the challenge presented by other players, not because of the interface or controls available to the players.
My recommendation: cap maximum fleet size at 50. Now you require more FC's (an actual fun role), you limit the power of watch lists and broadcasts considerably (limits remote repair somewhat), it lessens the number of people one FC can assist. And, for the most part, you don't screw up WH's, small gangs, catching OGB's, and most of the other things about which people are upset.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
roxas121
Static-Noise Upholders
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 02:36:33 -
[1356] - Quote
Lets just put it this way CCP I have been playing for 7 and a half years now I have 4 accounts that I pay for and I enjoy the game. I live in wormhole space I enjoy WH space, but it is already hard to get the drop on site runners or even other pvp fleets because of the time it takes to scan them down get the fleet organized and on their way.
If you want to stop Stealth bombers from Nuking people then take out bombs or nerf their damage or make it to where the oh I dont know DEFENDER MISSILES ACTUALLY WORK AND KILL BOMBS! If you want to nerf F1 jockeys and blobs this is not the way to do it there will always be F1 jockeys and blobers they will just learn ways around them as far as this change is conserned this is going to hurt the WH community much more than anyone else your saying your targeting.
If this change goes though I do not plan on continuing to play EVE online I WILL UNSUB and I wont come back until it is fixed. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
64
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 02:37:07 -
[1357] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:
nail on the head and it's not exactly hard these days to probe. so all people gotta do is up the scout numbers and train more probers.
Instead of doing things that are useful to fleet and interesting to them, like, oh I don't know, logis, neuts, jams, or .. dps? Why create a chore and take away from the fun of people who operate in a pretty specialized manner? |
kyoukoku
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
40
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 02:47:35 -
[1358] - Quote
This nice article by Talvorian Dex, on Target Caller's blog, about the change got linked to in /r/eve an hour ago, so I thought it should be linked here for CCP to take notice of. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1105
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 03:45:22 -
[1359] - Quote
kyoukoku wrote:This nice article by Talvorian Dex, on Target Caller's blog, about the change got linked to in /r/eve an hour ago, so I thought it should be linked here for CCP to take notice of.
That's a pretty good article.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
Fifth Blade
Jump Drive Appreciation Society Test Alliance Please Ignore
62
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 03:48:25 -
[1360] - Quote
kyoukoku wrote:This nice article by Talvorian Dex, on Target Caller's blog, about the change got linked to in /r/eve an hour ago, so I thought it should be linked here for CCP to take notice of.
+1 Having an option to broadcast probe results is an excellent idea, and I can see no good argument against it. |
|
Dun'Gal
Myriad Contractors Inc.
257
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 05:40:53 -
[1361] - Quote
Fifth Blade wrote:kyoukoku wrote:This nice article by Talvorian Dex, on Target Caller's blog, about the change got linked to in /r/eve an hour ago, so I thought it should be linked here for CCP to take notice of. +1 Having an option to broadcast probe results is an excellent idea, and I can see no good argument against it. This right here is literally the only acceptable compromise for derping things up with the proposed change. Would honestly prefer the change doesn't go through at all, but if it must, than this needs to be included otherwise it's just another poorly concieved change that appears to be happening simply for the sake of change, as every argument for this change has given absolutely zero examples on what this actually improves/fixes. |
Lt Shard
Team Pizza Good at this Game
45
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 06:05:14 -
[1362] - Quote
Shadowforge Dawkins wrote:If CCP really wants to nail this concept on the head... of forcing more content and not ******* over other areas of k-space and wormhole space, why don't they change this a bit.
While still adhereing to the plans of removing fleet warp; Allow squads to keep fleet warp, ONLY the squads. .
I like this. It promotes small gang maneuverability, while still keeping some more niche techniques in the game. |
Starbuck05
Pretty Hate Machine.
260
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 06:15:15 -
[1363] - Quote
Good stuff...i mean its not like subscription numbers are going down as it is...just w8 till this gets out...
Its like CCP is not even trying to make money not to mention improve the game we all enjoy so much...
Just my 2$ ...i don' t have 2 cents
-á- I am the commanding officer , u should adress me as sir !
-á- But if i call u sir , what would i call your wife then ??
|
Ben Ishikela
38
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 08:23:31 -
[1364] - Quote
I cannot believe that the rather intelligent playerbase of EvE is so blind. Did all the F1-monkeyery make you stupid all of a sudden? You, as many others, seem to miss the point.
Providing warpins is a very fun activity. Its get the heart pumping. Everyone is relying on you. Here you can show off your skills and make the warpin even closer and better (ofc at more risk). But it is overshadowed by current fleetwarps in combination with probing. Its hardly needed currently.
With the changes, an interceptor or cloaky frigate will be a very valuable asset. For a Pilot to help his fleet, he does not need to be able to sit in a MNI or Ishtar with perfect rekking-skills. Then he'll need low training time required, only 30mil for a a fitted fast ship and a little experience of manual piloting. I dont say its easy, there is communication and other skills required. But Eve is hard. If its getting harder, well.... even better. I am predicting, that Corporations are going to need more pilots and not only SP-heavy scanning alts.... And that, i believe, is a good thing for the health of a game.
Tactik for cloaky warpin: let the covops (fitted hyperspacial etc) warp to 10 of his target. as soon as he lands he calls that out and the fleet warps to 0km onto him. at that time, the enemy might be farther away, so bonus if they have speed. but then again, a wise interceptor pilot could help to predict that movement. Well, maybe even assault frigates will be useful again!
Let the paying noobs have a shiny day in a fleet too!!! (... and if he f*s up, its just a little frigate wreck more. not the end of the day.)
Add new modules or ships that can use tactics and strategies to shake any op meta or use totaly different gameplay yourself to make it happen! yay :)
....und Local braucht ganz dringend ein Update!
|
Kristian Hackett
Alpha Republic - Transcenders of Space and Time Solyaris Chtonium
51
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 09:01:34 -
[1365] - Quote
Ok so let me get this straight - the FC can't warp members to any location that the members can't warp to via any combination of normal overview settings? So if I'm leading a bunch of newbros in a mission fleet, I won't be able to warp the entire fleet into the mission location, I'll have to warp to it first and then they all have to warp to me once I land on grid?
Honestly, I'm failing to see how this is a change that needs to be made. Stepping away from the meta conversation here and going into the game, you would think that if we've got the technology to warp across vast distances of space in a matter of seconds, a fleet commander broadcasting warp coordinates on the fly (aka warp fleet to a bookmark) should be a trivial matter. Sorry CCP, this just seems to be a step in the wrong direction.
Aircraft Maintenance - Using a high school diploma to fix what a college degree just f***ed up.
"Life is too short to drink cheap beer."
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 09:18:15 -
[1366] - Quote
Ben Ishikela wrote:I cannot believe that the rather intelligent playerbase of EvE is so blind. Did all the F1-monkeyery make you stupid all of a sudden? You, as many others, seem to miss the point.
... reasons ...
Let the paying noobs have a shiny day in a fleet too!!! (... and if he f*s up, its just a little frigate wreck more. not the end of the day.)
It's cute that you're buying the argument hook, line and sinker. However... - This change will mean that it forces the FC to get another alt, unless s/he already uses a cloaky prober one, which is the case in a large majority of fleets. They're not suddenly going to start 'trusting noobs' just cause a game mechanic is forced on them - Many if not most groups encourage and promote new players and old to play the role of scout when they step up. Forcing this game mechanic will not make them double down on this just cause..
A word to the wise - if Eve's otherwise "intelligent playerbase" is suddenly up in arms about something that you don't understand, perhaps it's worthwhile to consider that it is your comprehension that is lacking :) |
knobber Jobbler
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
558
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 10:00:15 -
[1367] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Ben Ishikela wrote:I cannot believe that the rather intelligent playerbase of EvE is so blind. Did all the F1-monkeyery make you stupid all of a sudden? You, as many others, seem to miss the point.
... reasons ...
Let the paying noobs have a shiny day in a fleet too!!! (... and if he f*s up, its just a little frigate wreck more. not the end of the day.) It's cute that you're buying the argument hook, line and sinker. However... - This change will mean that it forces the FC to get another alt, unless s/he already uses a cloaky prober one, which is the case in a large majority of fleets. They're not suddenly going to start 'trusting noobs' just cause a game mechanic is forced on them - Many if not most groups encourage and promote new players and old to play the role of scout when they step up. Forcing this game mechanic will not make them double down on this just cause.. A word to the wise - if Eve's otherwise "intelligent playerbase" is suddenly up in arms about something that you don't understand, perhaps it's worthwhile to consider that it is your comprehension that is lacking :)
You're ignoring the point that this means less deaths. Lots of people whine that not enough stuff dies, not enough fights. Removing the ability to fleet warp to a location probed out by the guy in the FC slot means less dropping on top of enemy fleets at 0. All this change does is reinforce the current longer range kiting doctrines. Yawn.
A happy medium here could be met, that is a fleet member could probe out another fleet then broad cast that location which fleet members could individually warp themselves too. That way more is put on individual fleet members however the pace of fights isn't diminished, which is what will happen after this change. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 10:53:51 -
[1368] - Quote
knobber Jobbler wrote:A happy medium here could be met, that is a fleet member could probe out another fleet then broad cast that location which fleet members could individually warp themselves too. That way more is put on individual fleet members however the pace of fights isn't diminished, which is what will happen after this change.
Agreed. I don't know if Talvorian was the first to suggest this idea, but it's a good one.
Much better at addressing the issue of fleet participation than the current bone-headed suggestion. |
Canon Makanen
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 10:57:13 -
[1369] - Quote
no more update? or cancel? after 70 pages' disagreements and still no dev to respond our question? cancel this change or delay it please |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1412
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 11:04:16 -
[1370] - Quote
Ben Ishikela wrote:Providing warpins is a very fun activity. Its get the heart pumping. Everyone is relying on you. Here you can show off your skills and make the warpin even closer and better (ofc at more risk). But it is overshadowed by current fleetwarps in combination with probing. Its hardly needed currently.
Go move a mixed fleet through thera, repeatedly.
Let me know how "fun" it is.
I'll agree, it IS very much good in combat, but day to day movement? It's absolutely NO FUN being a mobile bookmark, or waiting on said bookmark landing with your junk hanging out.
|
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16225
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 11:40:40 -
[1371] - Quote
kyoukoku wrote:This nice article by Talvorian Dex, on Target Caller's blog, about the change got linked to in /r/eve an hour ago, so I thought it should be linked here for CCP to take notice of.
He doesn't get the change right off the bat. This change isn't meant to alter everything, its a very targeted change aimed at one thing. The whole point is to stop The FC being the scout too and to remove their ability to probe out a target and warp the entire fleet to it on their own. This is only the first of many changes likely to come.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1898
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 12:23:24 -
[1372] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Ben Ishikela wrote:Providing warpins is a very fun activity. Its get the heart pumping. Everyone is relying on you. Here you can show off your skills and make the warpin even closer and better (ofc at more risk). But it is overshadowed by current fleetwarps in combination with probing. Its hardly needed currently. Go move a mixed fleet through thera, repeatedly. Let me know how "fun" it is. I'll agree, it IS very much good in combat, but day to day movement? It's absolutely NO FUN being a mobile bookmark, or waiting on said bookmark landing with your junk hanging out.
You could always warp to your "BM" while he is still mid warp so you don't have to keep your junk hangning out. Pretty sure he count as a valid target as long as he is at least 150KM away. Is using 2 warp instead of just one hard? |
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1106
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 12:41:03 -
[1373] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:A word to the wise - if Eve's otherwise "intelligent playerbase" is suddenly up in arms about something that you don't understand, perhaps it's worthwhile to consider that it is your comprehension that is lacking :)
This is pretty biased statement.
Most people like the change or welcome it, nearly all like it with reservations. A bunch of SOV-null people and some low/wh-blobbers don't like it. Notice the tendency. People that are known for being bad are complaining the most. |
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
205
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 12:53:36 -
[1374] - Quote
oh, so squad warping my 2 member fleet to a mission is "power projection" now, is it? like really, i can understand some of the reasons behind this nerf, but ccp approach on this matter seems something like: "you can't fix something? you need a bigger hammer then" ... |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16225
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 12:54:56 -
[1375] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:afkalt wrote:Ben Ishikela wrote:Providing warpins is a very fun activity. Its get the heart pumping. Everyone is relying on you. Here you can show off your skills and make the warpin even closer and better (ofc at more risk). But it is overshadowed by current fleetwarps in combination with probing. Its hardly needed currently. Go move a mixed fleet through thera, repeatedly. Let me know how "fun" it is. I'll agree, it IS very much good in combat, but day to day movement? It's absolutely NO FUN being a mobile bookmark, or waiting on said bookmark landing with your junk hanging out. You could always warp to your "BM" while he is still mid warp so you don't have to keep your junk hangning out. Pretty sure he count as a valid target as long as he is at least 150KM away. Is using 2 warp instead of just one hard?
Or use a warp speed fitted interceptor/cov ops.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16225
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 12:56:21 -
[1376] - Quote
gascanu wrote:oh, so squad warping my 2 member fleet to a mission is "power projection" now, is it? like really, i can understand some of the reasons behind this nerf, but ccp approach on this matter seems something like: "you can't fix something? you need a bigger hammer then" ...
Because waiting a few more seconds is the end of the world for mission runners.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
275
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 12:57:25 -
[1377] - Quote
Happy with this change, will be a bit more work living in wormholes but nothing too much of an issue. |
rsantos
TEC-NOLOGY Sorry We're In Your Space Eh
45
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 13:10:27 -
[1378] - Quote
CCP DON'T BE SHY!
"Commanders will still be able to warp their fleet to other fleet members".
Remove this too! DOOO IT!
Let all the F1 pushers and multiboxers cry! |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1413
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 13:42:01 -
[1379] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:afkalt wrote:Ben Ishikela wrote:Providing warpins is a very fun activity. Its get the heart pumping. Everyone is relying on you. Here you can show off your skills and make the warpin even closer and better (ofc at more risk). But it is overshadowed by current fleetwarps in combination with probing. Its hardly needed currently. Go move a mixed fleet through thera, repeatedly. Let me know how "fun" it is. I'll agree, it IS very much good in combat, but day to day movement? It's absolutely NO FUN being a mobile bookmark, or waiting on said bookmark landing with your junk hanging out. You could always warp to your "BM" while he is still mid warp so you don't have to keep your junk hangning out. Pretty sure he count as a valid target as long as he is at least 150KM away. Is using 2 warp instead of just one hard?
You can indeed.
Although not exactly adding "fun" really, is it. Or devolving responsibility from the FC.
I mean sure, it slows down fleet movements....WOOPWOOP. Engaging gameplay alert!
In fact it is almost as if the change is shonky and ill thought through |
Lan Wang
Stillwater Corporation That Escalated Quickly.
776
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 13:45:31 -
[1380] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:afkalt wrote:Ben Ishikela wrote:Providing warpins is a very fun activity. Its get the heart pumping. Everyone is relying on you. Here you can show off your skills and make the warpin even closer and better (ofc at more risk). But it is overshadowed by current fleetwarps in combination with probing. Its hardly needed currently. Go move a mixed fleet through thera, repeatedly. Let me know how "fun" it is. I'll agree, it IS very much good in combat, but day to day movement? It's absolutely NO FUN being a mobile bookmark, or waiting on said bookmark landing with your junk hanging out. You could always warp to your "BM" while he is still mid warp so you don't have to keep your junk hangning out. Pretty sure he count as a valid target as long as he is at least 150KM away. Is using 2 warp instead of just one hard? You can indeed. Although not exactly adding "fun" really, is it. Or devolving responsibility from the FC. I mean sure, it slows down fleet movements....WOOPWOOP. Engaging gameplay alert! In fact it is almost as if the change is shonky and ill thought through
Plot Twist:
only applicable in highsec to stealth nerf ganking
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
11418
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 13:55:27 -
[1381] - Quote
The thing that is always missing from these discussions is an examination of the current situation and WHY it exists.
As it is now, in a fleet fight, an FC fleet warping at the right moment saves a lot of fleet members from getting caught and blown up. So fleet warping adds to tactical depth because it keeps fights going for longer because it's hard to trap the enemy. This change may well mean it's easier to catch a fleet (especially in lag) or harder to get away.
Now some will think that's a good thing. If they do, they don't understand human nature. Putting people in a situation where they can be caught more easily doesn't lead to more fight, it leads to attempts to compensate, and if that doesn't work then it leads to more fight avoidance.
This change favors bigger fleets and punishes skirmisher type smaller fleets. It will lead to nothing more than larger fleets, heavier tanks and more logis in the (brick tanked and thus un-entertaining) fleets that do choose to fight, More "Slippery Pete" nullfied type fleets and more FCs choosing to not even undock because a single dictor can lead to the deaths of too many fleet members who had trouble warping themselves out do to lag or misalignment. |
Lan Wang
Stillwater Corporation That Escalated Quickly.
776
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 14:00:41 -
[1382] - Quote
yeah jenn, the fc rage is going to be unbearable when members dont hear commands and get caught in shiney srp'd doctrines
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
Dermeisen
16
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 14:14:30 -
[1383] - Quote
I have spent quite some time reading this thread. The idea I like the best is keeping squad warp.
It may get us away from thinking in terms of blob allowing for a devolved fleet structure.
It would still impact larger fleets.
Honestly I think keeping the squad warp wouldn't be a compromise too far.
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
Shadowforge Dawkins
Catastrophic Overview Failure Brave Collective
24
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 14:20:49 -
[1384] - Quote
Ben Ishikela wrote:I cannot believe that the rather intelligent playerbase of EvE is so blind. Did all the F1-monkeyery make you stupid all of a sudden? You, as many others, seem to miss the point.
Providing warpins is a very fun activity. Its get the heart pumping. Everyone is relying on you. Here you can show off your skills and make the warpin even closer and better (ofc at more risk). But it is overshadowed by current fleetwarps in combination with probing. Its hardly needed currently.
With the changes, an interceptor or cloaky frigate will be a very valuable asset. For a Pilot to help his fleet, he does not need to be able to sit in a MNI or Ishtar with perfect rekking-skills. Then he'll need low training time required, only 30mil for a a fitted fast ship and a little experience of manual piloting. I dont say its easy, there is communication and other skills required. But Eve is hard. If its getting harder, well.... even better. I am predicting, that Corporations are going to need more pilots and not only SP-heavy scanning alts.... And that, i believe, is a good thing for the health of a game.
Tactik for cloaky warpin: let the covops (fitted hyperspacial etc) warp to 10 of his target. as soon as he lands he calls that out and the fleet warps to 0km onto him. at that time, the enemy might be farther away, so bonus if they have speed. but then again, a wise interceptor pilot could help to predict that movement. Well, maybe even assault frigates will be useful again!
Let the paying noobs have a shiny day in a fleet too!!! (... and if he f*s up, its just a little frigate wreck more. not the end of the day.)
Except only being useful for being a scout gets old. we all came to this game to fight. Not sit and watch everything or hear about it on comms sitting on the far side of a wormhole. being the scout when the fight turns into a 45 minute brawl on a wormhole needs more dps/logi not more scouts.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16225
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 14:26:10 -
[1385] - Quote
Shadowforge Dawkins wrote:
Except only being useful for being a scout gets old. we all came to this game to fight. Not sit and watch everything or hear about it on comms sitting on the far side of a wormhole.
Yet off grid boosters are a thing. We also have cyno ships, supercarrier pilots who spend 90% of their time sitting in the staging system waiting for a call that never comes and haulers who carry around POS and other structures. Being a scout is a lot more entertaining that all of those activities.
Shadowforge Dawkins wrote: being the scout when the fight turns into a 45 minute brawl on a wormhole needs more dps/logi not more scouts.
No probes means you dont have as much freedom to move around the battle which means you have less options.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1902
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 14:36:13 -
[1386] - Quote
Shadowforge Dawkins wrote:Ben Ishikela wrote:I cannot believe that the rather intelligent playerbase of EvE is so blind. Did all the F1-monkeyery make you stupid all of a sudden? You, as many others, seem to miss the point.
Providing warpins is a very fun activity. Its get the heart pumping. Everyone is relying on you. Here you can show off your skills and make the warpin even closer and better (ofc at more risk). But it is overshadowed by current fleetwarps in combination with probing. Its hardly needed currently.
With the changes, an interceptor or cloaky frigate will be a very valuable asset. For a Pilot to help his fleet, he does not need to be able to sit in a MNI or Ishtar with perfect rekking-skills. Then he'll need low training time required, only 30mil for a a fitted fast ship and a little experience of manual piloting. I dont say its easy, there is communication and other skills required. But Eve is hard. If its getting harder, well.... even better. I am predicting, that Corporations are going to need more pilots and not only SP-heavy scanning alts.... And that, i believe, is a good thing for the health of a game.
Tactik for cloaky warpin: let the covops (fitted hyperspacial etc) warp to 10 of his target. as soon as he lands he calls that out and the fleet warps to 0km onto him. at that time, the enemy might be farther away, so bonus if they have speed. but then again, a wise interceptor pilot could help to predict that movement. Well, maybe even assault frigates will be useful again!
Let the paying noobs have a shiny day in a fleet too!!! (... and if he f*s up, its just a little frigate wreck more. not the end of the day.) Except only being useful for being a scout gets old. we all came to this game to fight. Not sit and watch everything or hear about it on comms sitting on the far side of a wormhole. being the scout when the fight turns into a 45 minute brawl on a wormhole needs more dps/logi not more scouts.
Everybody want to be in the spotlight and would rather act as a herd of cows to be partially in it than do different roles where they might not show up on KM but still have a bigger impact on a fight.
The issue wiith "I want to be in the action" is that a metric ass ton of people can't understand how those tactical roles have much more impact than a grunt following order like a robot in the ball of DPS ever will. People don't want to do the "thankless" jobs because there are too many retards who won't thank them for doing what is essential. They all take it for granted and think of themself highly because they got their name on 42 KM that night while the dude who delivered those KM on a silver platter to them by providing them a perfect warp in gets nothing.
It's the same reason sooooooooo many people won't fly logi for example. People don't understand that the end result, a KM, is the result of a much longer process than ctrl+click F1. As long as the mentality stays as it is now, support roles will never be "rewarding" to do even if it brings better overall gameplay to the game. Remember when people bitched because drone assist was getting limited? This si the same thing. CCP is asking you do do stuff while you are in fleet and not just a whole 3 command total. Currently, it's whatever you want to use for anchoring (keep at range, approach or orbit), ctrl+click on called target and F1 on primary. At most, you might get a "prop mod on" because you MWD can't be kept on forever. Having to do your warp yourself is not entertaining? How "fun" is a message in the middle of the screen telling you "Oh btw, X decided you would warp now". |
Shadowforge Dawkins
Catastrophic Overview Failure Brave Collective
24
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 14:39:08 -
[1387] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Shadowforge Dawkins wrote:
Except only being useful for being a scout gets old. we all came to this game to fight. Not sit and watch everything or hear about it on comms sitting on the far side of a wormhole.
Yet off grid boosters are a thing. We also have cyno ships, supercarrier pilots who spend 90% of their time sitting in the staging system waiting for a call that never comes and haulers who carry around POS and other structures. Being a scout is a lot more entertaining that all of those activities. Shadowforge Dawkins wrote: being the scout when the fight turns into a 45 minute brawl on a wormhole needs more dps/logi not more scouts.
No probes means you dont have as much freedom to move around the battle which means you have less options.
We fought one of these shiny hole fight last night with Team Pizza, was good. as for moving around, everything was on the hole except for 5 ships orbiting at 50. you are not going to warp to that nor off the hole. being on the hole is a tactic that when you are about to die you go thru the hole. scouts were useless and there were none.
And in W-space, off grid boosters are not common as your fancy nullsec. we primary gank squads and on the occasion get to have a brawl. there were about 30 people total. no of grid boosts. instead they went for a carrier. Also I am yet to see a cyno ship in a wormhole. that is also a nullsec thing.
Im not saying scouts are utterly useless, I am saying that in w-space you get much more of the small group type content that btw is in all parts of EVE, not just w-space. and that scouts often are going home to reship into dps or logi in the case we find ex: 3 ratting gila's. you drop a bookmark close to them and go get a dictor, dps, and logi. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16225
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 14:46:17 -
[1388] - Quote
Shadowforge Dawkins wrote:
We fought one of these shiny hole fight last night with Team Pizza, was good. as for moving around, everything was on the hole except for 5 ships orbiting at 50. you are not going to warp to that nor off the hole. being on the hole is a tactic that when you are about to die you go thru the hole. scouts were useless and there were none.
And in W-space, off grid boosters are not common as your fancy nullsec. we primary gank squads and on the occasion get to have a brawl. there were about 30 people total. no of grid boosts. instead they went for a carrier. Also I am yet to see a cyno ship in a wormhole. that is also a nullsec thing.
Im not saying scouts are utterly useless, I am saying that in w-space you get much more of the small group type content that btw is in all parts of EVE, not just w-space. and that scouts often are going home to reship into dps or logi in the case we find ex: 3 ratting gila's. you drop a bookmark close to them and go get a dictor, dps, and logi.
so in future you leave a cloaked ship at the target and call for help. Seems to me that this change makes very little difference to you in WH.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Shadowforge Dawkins
Catastrophic Overview Failure Brave Collective
24
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 14:47:19 -
[1389] - Quote
How "fun" is a message in the middle of the screen telling you "Oh btw, X decided you would warp now".[/quote]
How fun is it to spend 15 minutes calculating your cruisers, logi, and battlecruisers so you know who needs to warp first, second, last so that the enemy does not alpha your smaller ships or logi before the whole fleet arrives?
How fun is it to have to wait for bookmarks to propagate when your target could leave at any moment?
How fun is it to have to trade bookmarks constantly in order to get things done 'efficiently'? |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16225
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 14:52:37 -
[1390] - Quote
Shadowforge Dawkins wrote:
How fun is it to spend 15 minutes calculating your cruisers, logi, and battlecruisers so you know who needs to warp first, second, last so that the enemy does not alpha your smaller ships or logi before the whole fleet arrives?
You can still fleet warp as you do now.
Shadowforge Dawkins wrote: How fun is it to have to wait for bookmarks to propagate when your target could leave at any moment?
You dont wait for bookmarks, you wait a few seconds for a scout to ping.
Shadowforge Dawkins wrote: How fun is it to have to trade bookmarks constantly in order to get things done 'efficiently'?
Already happens, no change here.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
Shadowforge Dawkins
Catastrophic Overview Failure Brave Collective
24
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 14:54:54 -
[1391] - Quote
so in future you leave a cloaked ship at the target and call for help. Seems to me that this change makes very little difference to you in WH.[/quote]
Unlike you and what seems to be most people in eve, I dont have 2 accounts. I have 1 account. I am also a scout. many newbros dont have alt accounts either. so just sitting there all day does nothing. Also please keep in mind that in cases of ratting/gassing there are many things that will decloak you if you get too close. so sometimes the best you will get is 20-40 kilometers. hence why warping to bookmarks is important. you bookmark their gas cloud they are in/ you bookmark their MTU and warp to it when they go to scoop it. many tricks that we use these BM's for because we can't get close.
I also have a job and a life outside EVE, im never going to have a plex'd alt account nor intend to in the future. I see no reason to have an alt account and with this change most people will find them mandatory just for the sake of warp in. |
Shadowforge Dawkins
Catastrophic Overview Failure Brave Collective
24
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 14:58:51 -
[1392] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Shadowforge Dawkins wrote:
How fun is it to spend 15 minutes calculating your cruisers, logi, and battlecruisers so you know who needs to warp first, second, last so that the enemy does not alpha your smaller ships or logi before the whole fleet arrives?
You can still fleet warp as you do now. Shadowforge Dawkins wrote: How fun is it to have to wait for bookmarks to propagate when your target could leave at any moment?
You dont wait for bookmarks, you wait a few seconds for a scout to ping. Shadowforge Dawkins wrote: How fun is it to have to trade bookmarks constantly in order to get things done 'efficiently'?
Already happens, no change here.
--as noted earlier it is common practice in w-space to warp to bookmarks. we dont have beacons, stargates, stations like you do
--And if said scout had to reship for a bigger ship so the gank fleet doesn't die
No typically in a wormhole corp we don't have to trade bookmarks at all. The need for them will arise out of the need for them to propagate immediately rather than in 10 minutes. We have corp bookmarks and use them well. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1902
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 15:10:50 -
[1393] - Quote
Shadowforge Dawkins wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote: How "fun" is a message in the middle of the screen telling you "Oh btw, X decided you would warp now". How fun is it to spend 15 minutes calculating your cruisers, logi, and battlecruisers so you know who needs to warp first, second, last so that the enemy does not alpha your smaller ships or logi before the whole fleet arrives? How fun is it to have to wait for bookmarks to propagate when your target could leave at any moment? How fun is it to have to trade bookmarks constantly in order to get things done 'efficiently'?
You could always ask your FC to fleetwarp you to the scout and not ahve to deal with calculating warp speed, waitign for BM or trading BM... |
Dermeisen
17
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 15:35:54 -
[1394] - Quote
Shadowforge Dawkins wrote:
Unlike you and what seems to be most people in eve, I dont have 2 accounts. I have 1 account. I am also a scout. many newbros dont have alt accounts either. so just sitting there all day does nothing. Also please keep in mind that in cases of ratting/gassing there are many things that will decloak you if you get too close. so sometimes the best you will get is 20-40 kilometers. hence why warping to bookmarks is important. you bookmark their gas cloud they are in/ you bookmark their MTU and warp to it when they go to scoop it. many tricks that we use these BM's for because we can't get close.
I also have a job and a life outside EVE, im never going to have a plex'd alt account nor intend to in the future. I see no reason to have an alt account and with this change most people will find them mandatory just for the sake of warp in.
You make scouting sound deliciously challenging. You say you have a job and a life outside of Eve. What about kids, do you have kids?
You could alway make some friends, or fly a 'tactical' destroyer, oh so that's why they call it a tactical destroyer doesn't seem so odd now that probing bonus (wheels within wheels).
Or should Eve explicitly accommodate those with an antisocial personality disorder.
Oh dear silly me that's what Eve is for isn't it
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
Shadowforge Dawkins
Catastrophic Overview Failure Brave Collective
25
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 15:44:32 -
[1395] - Quote
You could always ask your FC to fleetwarp you to the scout and not ahve to deal with calculating warp speed, waitign for BM or trading BM...[/quote]
And there is the problem that I have noted that you are ignoring, and that is that in many situations the scout cannot be on top of the target without being de-cloaked. Even with very fast scouts, you still have to keep in mind that de-cloaking with most likely end the element of surprise and possibly allow them to escape entirely. as I said earlier, bookmark their MTU or the can they are hacking or the cloud they are sitting in or the asteroid they are next to allows us to drop on top of them before they finish their site. or in the case of MTU's, drop on them when they have finished killing rats and before they can warp off. |
Dermeisen
17
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 16:02:18 -
[1396] - Quote
Shadowforge Dawkins wrote:
And there is the problem that I have noted that you are ignoring, and that is that in many situations the scout cannot be on top of the target without being de-cloaked. Even with very fast scouts, you still have to keep in mind that de-cloaking with most likely end the element of surprise and possibly allow them to escape entirely. as I said earlier, bookmark their MTU or the can they are hacking or the cloud they are sitting in or the asteroid they are next to allows us to drop on top of them before they finish their site. or in the case of MTU's, drop on them when they have finished killing rats and before they can warp off.
I was in a fleet about five years ago, it was being FCed by a guy who is now a Dev, he is one of the devs involved is fozzi sov come to think of it, he was in a cov ops and we were in bombers. We warped to him as he warped away, we got right onto the target at optimal but he could just as easily been on the other side of the fleet and we could have warped to him at range, right into the midst of the fleet.
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
325
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 16:17:23 -
[1397] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hopelesshobo wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote: As announced on the o7 show we are making some changes to fleet warp. Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders & Squad Commanders will no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own. This includes GÇô
Bookmarks Does this include corporation bookmarks that the person in the same corp could warp to? Yes. You can only fleet warp to things that any member of your fleet could warp to, no matter what corp or alliances they are a part of.
For clarification (and it may have been clarified already, I admit my eyes started swimming about page 10):
If every member of the fleet has the bookmark - either they're all a member of the same corporation, or you copy the corp bookmark to your cargo hold, hand it to a member of another corp, and they put it in as a corp bookmark - and repeat this process for every corp in the fleet so that everyone in the fleet is capable of warping to that bookmark - are you still unable to warp the fleet to this?
I understand the game balance issues you're looking at, and don't mind them at all in the context of battlefield management, but warping to a POS, anomaly, station insta-dock, etc - it seems a bit much to, in the name of increasing fleet member participation in actual activities, throw up more obstacles in the way of getting to the activities.
To say nothing of 'we have instantaneous superluminal communication across the entire EVE Cluster, but my ship can't transmit coordinates to the other guys 5km away from me even if I were able to read the 3 pairs of numbers off verbally on comms' aspect.
Just seems a little... silly. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16226
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 16:26:49 -
[1398] - Quote
Shadowforge Dawkins wrote:so in future you leave a cloaked ship at the target and call for help. Seems to me that this change makes very little difference to you in WH.
Unlike you and what seems to be most people in eve, I dont have 2 accounts. I have 1 account. I am also a scout. many newbros dont have alt accounts either. so just sitting there all day does nothing. Also please keep in mind that in cases of ratting/gassing there are many things that will decloak you if you get too close. so sometimes the best you will get is 20-40 kilometers. hence why warping to bookmarks is important. you bookmark their gas cloud they are in/ you bookmark their MTU and warp to it when they go to scoop it. many tricks that we use these BM's for because we can't get close.
I also have a job and a life outside EVE, im never going to have a plex'd alt account nor intend to in the future. I see no reason to have an alt account and with this change most people will find them mandatory just for the sake of warp in.[/quote]
I have one pvp account, I work 60-80 hours a week, I enjoy BBQs and going down the local as much as the next bloke and I have never plexed an account. None of these are valid excuses.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
325
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 16:28:12 -
[1399] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:I have one pvp account, I work 60-80 hours a week, I enjoy BBQs and going down the local as much as the next bloke and I have never plexed an account. None of these are valid excuses.
To be fair, man, you also scout in a Megathron fitted out to move like a frippin' Harpy. God, I love your fits. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16226
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 16:30:48 -
[1400] - Quote
Shadowforge Dawkins wrote:You could always ask your FC to fleetwarp you to the scout and not ahve to deal with calculating warp speed, waitign for BM or trading BM...
And there is the problem that I have noted that you are ignoring, and that is that in many situations the scout cannot be on top of the target without being de-cloaked. Even with very fast scouts, you still have to keep in mind that de-cloaking with most likely end the element of surprise and possibly allow them to escape entirely. as I said earlier, bookmark their MTU or the can they are hacking or the cloud they are sitting in or the asteroid they are next to allows us to drop on top of them before they finish their site. or in the case of MTU's, drop on them when they have finished killing rats and before they can warp off.[/quote]
If only there was a cloaky ship with bonused longpoints....
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1905
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 16:41:00 -
[1401] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Shadowforge Dawkins wrote:You could always ask your FC to fleetwarp you to the scout and not ahve to deal with calculating warp speed, waitign for BM or trading BM... And there is the problem that I have noted that you are ignoring, and that is that in many situations the scout cannot be on top of the target without being de-cloaked. Even with very fast scouts, you still have to keep in mind that de-cloaking with most likely end the element of surprise and possibly allow them to escape entirely. as I said earlier, bookmark their MTU or the can they are hacking or the cloud they are sitting in or the asteroid they are next to allows us to drop on top of them before they finish their site. or in the case of MTU's, drop on them when they have finished killing rats and before they can warp off.
If only there was a cloaky ship with bonused longpoints....[/quote]
There ar a zulution for every problems it seems... |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1413
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 16:52:41 -
[1402] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hopelesshobo wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote: As announced on the o7 show we are making some changes to fleet warp. Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders & Squad Commanders will no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own. This includes GÇô
Bookmarks Does this include corporation bookmarks that the person in the same corp could warp to? Yes. You can only fleet warp to things that any member of your fleet could warp to, no matter what corp or alliances they are a part of. For clarification (and it may have been clarified already, I admit my eyes started swimming about page 10): If every member of the fleet has the bookmark - either they're all a member of the same corporation, or you copy the corp bookmark to your cargo hold, hand it to a member of another corp, and they put it in as a corp bookmark - and repeat this process for every corp in the fleet so that everyone in the fleet is capable of warping to that bookmark - are you still unable to warp the fleet to this? I understand the game balance issues you're looking at, and don't mind them at all in the context of battlefield management, but warping to a POS, anomaly, station insta-dock, etc - it seems a bit much to, in the name of increasing fleet member participation in actual activities, throw up more obstacles in the way of getting to the activities. To say nothing of 'we have instantaneous superluminal communication across the entire EVE Cluster, but my ship can't transmit coordinates to the other guys 5km away from me even if I were able to read the 3 pairs of numbers off verbally on comms' aspect. Just seems a little... silly.
That is correct.
If it's not an anom, a player or on the overview; fleet warp is going nowhere. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2521
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 17:01:32 -
[1403] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hopelesshobo wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote: As announced on the o7 show we are making some changes to fleet warp. Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders & Squad Commanders will no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own. This includes GÇô
Bookmarks Does this include corporation bookmarks that the person in the same corp could warp to? Yes. You can only fleet warp to things that any member of your fleet could warp to, no matter what corp or alliances they are a part of. For clarification (and it may have been clarified already, I admit my eyes started swimming about page 10): If every member of the fleet has the bookmark - either they're all a member of the same corporation, or you copy the corp bookmark to your cargo hold, hand it to a member of another corp, and they put it in as a corp bookmark - and repeat this process for every corp in the fleet so that everyone in the fleet is capable of warping to that bookmark - are you still unable to warp the fleet to this? I understand the game balance issues you're looking at, and don't mind them at all in the context of battlefield management, but warping to a POS, anomaly, station insta-dock, etc - it seems a bit much to, in the name of increasing fleet member participation in actual activities, throw up more obstacles in the way of getting to the activities. To say nothing of 'we have instantaneous superluminal communication across the entire EVE Cluster, but my ship can't transmit coordinates to the other guys 5km away from me even if I were able to read the 3 pairs of numbers off verbally on comms' aspect. Just seems a little... silly. Change the idea from "can X player warp to this" to "is this a valid warp target"
Celestials, anoms, etc. (they show up without any player involvement) are valid.
If it requires someone making it a location (bookmarks, scanned sigs, etc.) are not valid.
Only outlier/exception is fleet members. Those are valid.
|
Syzygium
Friends Of Harassment EON Alliance
103
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 17:07:17 -
[1404] - Quote
- if only you could fit tackling gear on a scout ship.. - if only you could warp cloaked tacklers with bonus tacklerange to your target... - if only you could position your scout up to 100km behind your target, away from any decloaking stuff and warp your fleet at range so they land exactly at zero...
if only... |
Executor Ardur
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 17:08:42 -
[1405] - Quote
kyoukoku wrote:This nice article by Talvorian Dex, on Target Caller's blog, about the change got linked to in /r/eve an hour ago, so I thought it should be linked here for CCP to take notice of.
Good article, to the heart of the problem. These changes are been rushed and virtually no thought has been put of the impact. Its lets do X and screw everyone else. We are going back to 2007 and without taking into concideration other changes in game that has happened since then. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16226
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 17:13:12 -
[1406] - Quote
Executor Ardur wrote:kyoukoku wrote:This nice article by Talvorian Dex, on Target Caller's blog, about the change got linked to in /r/eve an hour ago, so I thought it should be linked here for CCP to take notice of. Good article, to the heart of the problem. These changes are been rushed and virtually no thought has been put of the impact. Its lets do X and screw everyone else. We are going back to 2007 and without taking into concideration other changes in game that has happened since then.
No, its a bad article as it makes wrong assumptions, does not understand what is being targeted and fails to see just how easily this can be adapted to.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 17:33:38 -
[1407] - Quote
Syzygium wrote:- if only you could fit tackling gear on a scout ship.. - if only you could warp cloaked tacklers with bonus tacklerange to your target... - if only you could position your scout up to 100km behind your target, away from any decloaking stuff and warp your fleet at range so they land exactly at zero...
if only...
We do this now, and we will be able to do this after the proposed changes. What's your point?
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 17:35:20 -
[1408] - Quote
Shadowforge Dawkins wrote:Except only being useful for being a scout gets old. we all came to this game to fight. Not sit and watch everything or hear about it on comms sitting on the far side of a wormhole. being the scout when the fight turns into a 45 minute brawl on a wormhole needs more dps/logi not more scouts.
A great point.
At best, it will be the extra alt the FC has been forced to make, unless s/he uses such an alt already.
At worst, it will be an otherwise active pilot being hamstrung into becoming a mobile bookmark instead of actually enjoying the game the way s/he wanted to.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16227
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 17:38:26 -
[1409] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Shadowforge Dawkins wrote:Except only being useful for being a scout gets old. we all came to this game to fight. Not sit and watch everything or hear about it on comms sitting on the far side of a wormhole. being the scout when the fight turns into a 45 minute brawl on a wormhole needs more dps/logi not more scouts.
A great point. At best, it will be the extra alt the FC has been forced to make, unless s/he uses such an alt already. At worst, it will be an otherwise active pilot being hamstrung into becoming a mobile bookmark instead of actually enjoying the game the way s/he wanted to.
What is more enjoyable with anchoring on the FC, targeting what he calls and pressing f1?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
942
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 17:38:26 -
[1410] - Quote
Good change. I like it.
Not today spaghetti.
|
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1905
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 17:45:24 -
[1411] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Shadowforge Dawkins wrote:Except only being useful for being a scout gets old. we all came to this game to fight. Not sit and watch everything or hear about it on comms sitting on the far side of a wormhole. being the scout when the fight turns into a 45 minute brawl on a wormhole needs more dps/logi not more scouts.
A great point. At best, it will be the extra alt the FC has been forced to make, unless s/he uses such an alt already. At worst, it will be an otherwise active pilot being hamstrung into becoming a mobile bookmark instead of actually enjoying the game the way s/he wanted to. What is more enjoyable with anchoring on the FC, targeting what he calls and pressing f1?
But DUUUUUDE!!!!!! I get to be on the killmail while the scout might not.
People don't want to be "just a scout" for the exact same damn reason the SRP manager somehow had to include a damn rule about no guns on logi.
Muuuuuuuh killboard!!!!!! |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16227
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 17:56:35 -
[1412] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:
But DUUUUUDE!!!!!! I get to be on the killmail while the scout might not.
People don't want to be "just a scout" for the exact same damn reason the SRP manager somehow had to include a damn rule about no guns on logi.
Muuuuuuuh killboard!!!!!!
The need for green is real.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Syzygium
Friends Of Harassment EON Alliance
103
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 17:56:44 -
[1413] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Syzygium wrote:- if only you could fit tackling gear on a scout ship.. - if only you could warp cloaked tacklers with bonus tacklerange to your target... - if only you could position your scout up to 100km behind your target, away from any decloaking stuff and warp your fleet at range so they land exactly at zero...
if only... We do this now, and we will be able to do this after the proposed changes. What's your point? The point is, that - as you observed correctly - it will still be possible to catch targets, even if they are inside of whatever gas-clouds, debrid-fields or similar areas. Some people claimed they wouldn't be able to do this after the fleetwarp change.
Correct is, they can't do it the way they did before. They can still do it with some adaptations. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1905
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 18:12:30 -
[1414] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:
But DUUUUUDE!!!!!! I get to be on the killmail while the scout might not.
People don't want to be "just a scout" for the exact same damn reason the SRP manager somehow had to include a damn rule about no guns on logi.
Muuuuuuuh killboard!!!!!!
The need for green is real.
The whole "problem" is an attitude one. If you think you don't contribute as a scout, you are not doing it wrong but thinking wrong. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
67
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 18:15:26 -
[1415] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:[quote=Awkward Pi Duolus]What is more enjoyable with anchoring on the FC, targeting what he calls and pressing f1?
The euphoria from seeing your enemies annihilated one by one in a brilliant flash as the collective alpha of a fleet chews through them is quite something, actually.
Sure, doing small gang stuff is a different kind of heart pumping fun, but that's for my late night T3D/dessie jaunts.
Sometimes though, say on weekends with friends, I just like to sit back and see things burn without having to break too much of a sweat. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
67
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 18:19:54 -
[1416] - Quote
Syzygium wrote:The point is, that - as you observed correctly - it will still be possible to catch targets, even if they are inside of whatever gas-clouds, debrid-fields or similar areas. Some people claimed they wouldn't be able to do this after the fleetwarp change.
Correct is, they can't do it the way they did before. They can still do it with some adaptations.
Agreed. Some of the knee-jerk reactions in this thread opposing this change are not well thought out at all.
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
67
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 18:23:53 -
[1417] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote: The whole "problem" is an attitude one. If you think you don't contribute as a scout, you are not doing it wrong but thinking wrong.
Eh, people's expectation from this game and the amount of effort they want to put into it differ.
Scouting is like being a logi or a fleet booster - you don't do it for the killmails, but because you get the satisfaction from knowing that you made a disproportionately positive contribution to the fleet.
Unfortunately, nothing in this change will cause people who otherwise wouldn't have become scouts, now become scouts. It will, however, increase the burden on FCs to have a backup prober alt ready, if they don't already, when no one steps up. |
Dermeisen
17
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 18:36:32 -
[1418] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Shadowforge Dawkins wrote:Except only being useful for being a scout gets old. we all came to this game to fight. Not sit and watch everything or hear about it on comms sitting on the far side of a wormhole. being the scout when the fight turns into a 45 minute brawl on a wormhole needs more dps/logi not more scouts.
A great point. At best, it will be the extra alt the FC has been forced to make, unless s/he uses such an alt already. At worst, it will be an otherwise active pilot being hamstrung into becoming a mobile bookmark instead of actually enjoying the game the way s/he wanted to.
No it isn't a great point, it a foolish and myopic point - you may be surprised to find that not everyone came to the game with the same aspirations as you, whoever you are. Some people came to this game to give out hugs in signal cartel or to spend weeks gaining the trust of some dude to overturn an alliance or simple to explore the beauty that is Eve. Loads of guys will love the new scout power:
imagine you become the +¬minence grise, you warp all these mugs to victory or defeat, or perhaps to certain death!
I've just worked out why Bat Country are so into supporting this. lol
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1905
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 18:40:24 -
[1419] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote: The whole "problem" is an attitude one. If you think you don't contribute as a scout, you are not doing it wrong but thinking wrong.
Eh, people's expectation from this game and the amount of effort they want to put into it differ. Scouting is like being a logi or a fleet booster - you don't do it for the killmails, but because you get the satisfaction from knowing that you made a disproportionately positive contribution to the fleet. Unfortunately, nothing in this change will cause people who otherwise wouldn't have become scouts, now become scouts. It will, however, increase the burden on FCs to have a backup prober alt ready, if they don't already, when no one steps up.
The FC could always do what they do when no-one steps up to logi... |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1906
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 18:58:01 -
[1420] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:baltec1 wrote:What is more enjoyable with anchoring on the FC, targeting what he calls and pressing f1? The euphoria from seeing your enemies annihilated one by one in a brilliant flash as the collective alpha of a fleet chews through them is quite something, actually. Sure, doing small gang stuff is a different kind of heart pumping fun, but that's for my late night T3D/dessie jaunts. Sometimes though, say on weekends with friends, I just like to sit back and see things burn without having to break too much of a sweat.
It's ok, you will still be euphoric when the FC fleet warp you to his scout, alt or player, before resuming with the CTRL-CLICK F1 fun gameplay. |
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
67
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 19:00:26 -
[1421] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote: The FC could always do what they do when no-one steps up to logi...
Absolutely. After all, a fleet only ever needs one logi, which could easily be alt-tabbed.
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
67
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 19:01:17 -
[1422] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote: It's ok, you will still be euphoric when the FC fleet warp you to his scout, alt or player, before resuming with the CTRL-CLICK F1 fun gameplay.
Then what's the point of making the game any more tedious for the FC and less fun for the poor scout who's now relegated to being a mobile bookmark?
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
67
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 19:03:54 -
[1423] - Quote
Dermeisen wrote:No it isn't a great point, it a foolish and myopic point - you may be surprised to find that not everyone came to the game with the same aspirations as you, whoever you are. Some people came to this game to give out hugs in signal cartel or to spend weeks gaining the trust of some dude to overturn an alliance or simple to explore the beauty that is Eve. Loads of guys will love the new scout power: imagine you become the +¬minence grise, you warp all these mugs to victory or defeat, or perhaps to certain death! I've just worked out why Bat Country are so into supporting this. lol
Imposing the certainty of tedium for the possibility of emergent game play seems like a rather bad trade-off. |
Brokk Witgenstein
Extreme Agony
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 19:07:39 -
[1424] - Quote
Look at all that forumwhine. Lovely! Good idea for a number of reasons; most noticably the involvement of dedicated scouts/tacklers over the "blops your ass" approach. I take it fleetwarp to a member will still be possible, yes?
Now, if somebody could explain me once more, very slowly, why this would "break wormholes" ? People in wormholes can't hit "warp to corp location" for themselves? People don't know how to type "X" in fleet chat or profoundly dislike to listen to comms and warp their own goddamn asses?
Or is it maybe because then you'd have to be IN the corp and not just purple whist staying safely in NPC corps? I don't get the whole fuzz here-- please explain. Warp drive still working as intended, only difference being you have the additional human factor of good vs bad scout, good vs bad warp-your-own. Oh wait! I get it. The notion that the group with the better pilots might win scares you?
Lol. And +1 Fozzie.
While I'm on a roll pissing of people across the globe, can I pitch the idea of a midslot module called the "Remote Cyno Jammer"? Not *that* would really stir up the place "Oh noes! I'll unsub all my 843 accounts at once!!" LOL and LOL. But seriously guys; can CCP do anything without y'all going heads-over-heels about how this would break the game forever? Good idea is good. EvEwiki has a good article on how to engage your warpdrive. Read it. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1906
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 19:14:53 -
[1425] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote: The FC could always do what they do when no-one steps up to logi...
Absolutely. After all, a fleet only ever needs one logi, which could easily be alt-tabbed.
It's easyer to fill 1 scount than 8 logi no?
Well not with whoring drones or guns in high I guess...
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote: It's ok, you will still be euphoric when the FC fleet warp you to his scout, alt or player, before resuming with the CTRL-CLICK F1 fun gameplay.
Then what's the point of making the game any more tedious for the FC and less fun for the poor scout who's now relegated to being a mobile bookmark?
How about you think of your FC and realize he probably does not find it fun to scan everything by himself, provide the warp ins by himself and then direct the fleet all by himself? Is your lazy attitude of not being willing to work for the fleet to work supposed to be a god given right that nobody will ever remove from you?
The reason FC might overload from a change like this is because there are too many lazy people in fleet would would be happy if they could farm KM while afk. When FC start quitting because nobody steps up to support them and just step down themselves and decide to just be F1 grunt, then maybe people will realise they should of stepped up just a little bit once in a while to do the "hard and boring" job of enabling all your friends to have a fight.
The "enablers" in this game do all the work and as soon as some MIGHT get offloaded to the rest of the fleet, it's all tears and rage because the god given right of the lazy leeches might be somewhat reduced...
Shakespeare could not write a bigger tragedy... |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
68
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 19:38:37 -
[1426] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:
How about you think of your FC and realize he probably does not find it fun to scan everything by himself, provide the warp ins by himself and then direct the fleet all by himself? Is your lazy attitude of not being willing to work for the fleet to work supposed to be a god given right that nobody will ever remove from you?
The reason FC might overload from a change like this is because there are too many lazy people in fleet would would be happy if they could farm KM while afk. When FC start quitting because nobody steps up to support them and just step down themselves and decide to just be F1 grunt, then maybe people will realise they should of stepped up just a little bit once in a while to do the "hard and boring" job of enabling all your friends to have a fight.
The "enablers" in this game do all the work and as soon as some MIGHT get offloaded to the rest of the fleet, it's all tears and rage because the god given right of the lazy leeches might be somewhat reduced...
Shakespeare could not write a bigger tragedy...
I share your indignation, my friend. If my arguments make me seem like a F1-monkey, then lemme correct that saying I fly inties, sabres, SBs and logi - those with specific roles. I couldn't care less about KMs at this point.
BUT! Fleet is full of people trying to get whom into specialized roles is like pulling teeth. A game mechanic change will not entice them to do anything. It will simply mean more work for those that care.
I wouldn't call it a tragedy though, and much less a Shakespearean one at that - people are entitled to their gameplay styles, and I wouldn't presume to dictate their choices. I certainly wouldn't want to make it any more tedious than it already is. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1908
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 19:41:16 -
[1427] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:
How about you think of your FC and realize he probably does not find it fun to scan everything by himself, provide the warp ins by himself and then direct the fleet all by himself? Is your lazy attitude of not being willing to work for the fleet to work supposed to be a god given right that nobody will ever remove from you?
The reason FC might overload from a change like this is because there are too many lazy people in fleet would would be happy if they could farm KM while afk. When FC start quitting because nobody steps up to support them and just step down themselves and decide to just be F1 grunt, then maybe people will realise they should of stepped up just a little bit once in a while to do the "hard and boring" job of enabling all your friends to have a fight.
The "enablers" in this game do all the work and as soon as some MIGHT get offloaded to the rest of the fleet, it's all tears and rage because the god given right of the lazy leeches might be somewhat reduced...
Shakespeare could not write a bigger tragedy...
I share your indignation, my friend. If my arguments make me seem like a F1-monkey, then lemme correct that saying I fly inties, sabres, SBs and logi - those with specific roles. I couldn't care less about KMs at this point. BUT! Fleet is full of people trying to get whom into specialized roles is like pulling teeth. A game mechanic change will not entice them to do anything. It will simply mean more work for those that care. I wouldn't call it a tragedy though, and much less a Shakespearean one at that - people are entitled to their gameplay styles, and I wouldn't presume to dictate their choices. I certainly wouldn't want to make it any more tedious than it already is.
So you are some kind of "defender of the dead weight"? |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
68
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 19:53:47 -
[1428] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:So you are some kind of "defender of the dead weight"?
More like, defender of folks who don't want to play this game like it's their second job.
I would not call them dead weight at all. Inactive characters are dead weight. People who PvE all day in null are dead weight. People who wh*re with a logi gun instead of repping are dead weight. Forum warriors with 0 kills are dead weight.
Casual players who just wanna have some fun and make up many, if not most, of the gamers in Eve - not dead weight.
Tying it to the proposed changes, there is nothing there that would force these folks to be the "I was there" guy. There is also nothing in game now that prevents those who wanna be the "I was there" guy, be that guy.
That is what makes this such a vacuous game mechanic change. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
69
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 20:00:59 -
[1429] - Quote
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:Look at all that forumwhine. Lovely! Good idea for a number of reasons; most noticably the involvement of dedicated scouts/tacklers over the "blops your ass" approach. I take it fleetwarp to a member will still be possible, yes?
Now, if somebody could explain me once more, very slowly, why this would "break wormholes" ? People in wormholes can't hit "warp to corp location" for themselves? People don't know how to type "X" in fleet chat or profoundly dislike to listen to comms and warp their own goddamn asses?
Or is it maybe because then you'd have to be IN the corp and not just purple whist staying safely in NPC corps? I don't get the whole fuzz here-- please explain. Warp drive still working as intended, only difference being you have the additional human factor of good vs bad scout, good vs bad warp-your-own. Oh wait! I get it. The notion that the group with the better pilots might win scares you?
Lol. And +1 Fozzie.
While I'm on a roll pissing of people across the globe, can I pitch the idea of a midslot module called the "Remote Cyno Jammer"? Not *that* would really stir up the place "Oh noes! I'll unsub all my 843 accounts at once!!" LOL and LOL. But seriously guys; can CCP do anything without y'all going heads-over-heels about how this would break the game forever? Good idea is good. EvEwiki has a good article on how to engage your warpdrive. Read it.
Your post brought a smile to my face :)
Even in a thread with this much emotion and misunderstanding, debate and righteous indignation, constructive criticisms and knee-jerk reactions, your words stand out like a blinding beacon of ignorance.
Dude points out EveWiki.. read the damn 72 pages you lazy muppet
|
joecuster
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
63
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 20:15:08 -
[1430] - Quote
This is the best patch ever. Death to NPSI cancer Death to f1 monkeys
This game was starting to get too carebear friendly and now people might actually learn how to play the game xaxaxaxaxaxa Fozzie take all my money. Best day of my life |
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2521
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 20:20:33 -
[1431] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Forum warriors with 0 kills are dead weight. Says the NPC forum alt. |
Winter Archipelago
Furtherance.
392
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 20:27:07 -
[1432] - Quote
joecuster wrote:Death to NPSI cancer Whelp, time to buy stock in popcorn companies and Kleenex.
Planning a trip to Thera? Check out http://eve-scout.com/ for a list of the current connections.
Once you've made your choice, join the channels EVE-Scout or Furtherance Public and request a scout to make sure your connection is clear!
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1908
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 20:45:00 -
[1433] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Forum warriors with 0 kills are dead weight. Says the NPC forum alt.
THough it was targetted at me then I remembered I participated on 2 kills last week.
OP success |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
70
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 20:51:26 -
[1434] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Forum warriors with 0 kills are dead weight. Says the NPC forum alt.
Precisely why this toon is in an NPC corp ;)
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1911
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 20:58:38 -
[1435] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:So you are some kind of "defender of the dead weight"? More like, defender of folks who don't want to play this game like it's their second job. I would not call them dead weight at all. Inactive characters are dead weight. People who PvE all day in null are dead weight. People who wh*re with a logi gun instead of repping are dead weight. Forum warriors with 0 kills are dead weight. Casual players who just wanna have some fun and make up many, if not most, of the gamers in Eve - not dead weight. Tying it to the proposed changes, there is nothing there that would force these folks to be the "I was there" guy. There is also nothing in game now that prevents those who wanna be the "I was there" guy, be that guy. That is what makes this such a vacuous game mechanic change.
Your "not dead weight" crowd will still get their fleet warp at the end of the day so their gameplay is not affected. The FC will be able to deal with it as long as his group is willing to train people into the required roles. If they are not willing, I guess they will get defeated by the side who does... |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
70
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 21:08:53 -
[1436] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Your "not dead weight" crowd will still get their fleet warp at the end of the day so their gameplay is not affected. The FC will be able to deal with it as long as his group is willing to train people into the required roles. If they are not willing, I guess they will get defeated by the side who does...
So.. given that FCs are currently willing to train new scouts anyway, what's the point of this change then?
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
1706
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 21:14:57 -
[1437] - Quote
Anger. Denial. Attempts to compromise. Acceptance.
CCP thinks that everyone will get over it and move on to "the next thing to whine about" because all of it is just "people not liking change"
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16227
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 21:18:17 -
[1438] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Your "not dead weight" crowd will still get their fleet warp at the end of the day so their gameplay is not affected. The FC will be able to deal with it as long as his group is willing to train people into the required roles. If they are not willing, I guess they will get defeated by the side who does... So.. given that FCs are currently willing to train new scouts anyway, what's the point of this change then?
To stop the FC ship from being the scout in a battle.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
joecuster
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
63
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 21:21:36 -
[1439] - Quote
TIL not having a basic understanding of simple game mechanics = casual |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
70
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 21:25:34 -
[1440] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:To stop the FC ship from being the scout in a battle.
We covered this red herring already here and here.
|
|
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
253
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 21:27:09 -
[1441] - Quote
So are CCP going to respond to ANY of this, are they posting on reddit instead, tweeting or just ignoring all the legitimate issues with this godawful change? |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16227
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 21:27:14 -
[1442] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:baltec1 wrote:To stop the FC ship from being the scout in a battle. We covered this red herring already here and here.
All you did earlier on is show you have no idea how our fleets work.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
70
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 21:34:00 -
[1443] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:All you did earlier on is show you have no idea how our fleets work.
I'll leave it to general populace to judge the absurdity of your claim of a 250 man fleet as being a one-man show.
|
Nanar DeNanardon
Babylon Knights DARKNESS.
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 21:39:27 -
[1444] - Quote
As a multi-accounts Miner I really dislike this change.
To mine in null with a kind of security I never warp directly in belt but always warp squad to a BM at 300km from the belt, then I warp squad to an asteroid. And to be safe I warp to a BM in pos...
This change will suddenly remove me all safety I did learn the latest year I passed in NULL-SEC.
The reply "Warping directly into belt is still possible" is just a joke and create a prefect rendez-vous between the hostile inty and your mining fleet.
Maybe this change will create content on the PVP side, maybe.
But if this change is done for PVP why nerfing PVE ? Why does all changes done in this game are currently just removing feature ?
If this change is done, multi accounts-mining in null sec will just be too risky. If I a can't mine with a kind of safety (I have 10s to warp out from the belt when an inty come) I'll have no interest to keep 5 accounts.
But maybe nerfing bombers have something to do with nerfing miners and WH...
Will we still be able to warp fleet to an asteroid ?...
My 2cents
|
joecuster
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
63
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 21:47:35 -
[1445] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:baltec1 wrote:To stop the FC ship from being the scout in a battle. We covered this red herring already here and here. All you did earlier on is show you have no idea how our fleets work. All these bads.... I mean casuals come crawling out of the wood work to run their mouths about things they don't have a very good understanding of. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
70
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 21:54:53 -
[1446] - Quote
joecuster wrote: All these bads.... I mean casuals come crawling out of the wood work to run their mouths about things they don't have a very good understanding of.
Leave baltec alone - he might be a bit off base, but his heart is in the right place, and the man has a doctrine named after him - can't get much more space VIP than that.
Incidentally, since when did VoC have an F1 problem? You of all people should know this change isn't necessary to whip the elites into a pvp frenzy..
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16227
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 22:05:18 -
[1447] - Quote
joecuster wrote: All these bads.... I mean casuals come crawling out of the wood work to run their mouths about things they don't have a very good understanding of.
It makes you wonder what their rage is going to be like when the logi nerf lands.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Lan Wang
Stillwater Corporation That Escalated Quickly.
776
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 22:06:09 -
[1448] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:joecuster wrote: All these bads.... I mean casuals come crawling out of the wood work to run their mouths about things they don't have a very good understanding of.
It makes you wonder what their rage is going to be like when the logi nerf lands.
LOGI NERF WTF!
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
stoicfaux
5908
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 22:18:45 -
[1449] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:baltec1 wrote:joecuster wrote: All these bads.... I mean casuals come crawling out of the wood work to run their mouths about things they don't have a very good understanding of.
It makes you wonder what their rage is going to be like when the logi nerf lands. LOGI NERF WTF! Here's the article.
Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
|
Lan Wang
Stillwater Corporation That Escalated Quickly.
776
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 22:25:19 -
[1450] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Lan Wang wrote:baltec1 wrote:joecuster wrote: All these bads.... I mean casuals come crawling out of the wood work to run their mouths about things they don't have a very good understanding of.
It makes you wonder what their rage is going to be like when the logi nerf lands. LOGI NERF WTF! Here's the article.
damnit foiled again
What i thought
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
|
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
168
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 22:36:42 -
[1451] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Executor Ardur wrote:kyoukoku wrote:This nice article by Talvorian Dex, on Target Caller's blog, about the change got linked to in /r/eve an hour ago, so I thought it should be linked here for CCP to take notice of. Good article, to the heart of the problem. These changes are been rushed and virtually no thought has been put of the impact. Its lets do X and screw everyone else. We are going back to 2007 and without taking into concideration other changes in game that has happened since then. No, its a bad article as it makes wrong assumptions, does not understand what is being targeted and fails to see just how easily this can be adapted to.
A good idea for changing gameplay/game design would allow us to apply multiple solutions aa a new way to play the game. This change does not provide that. It provides only 1 viable solution, having a ship at the warp target if it's not a celestial or similar.
I have yet to see you spout another solution to this conundrum.
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
joecuster
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
63
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 22:38:38 -
[1452] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote:baltec1 wrote:Executor Ardur wrote:kyoukoku wrote:This nice article by Talvorian Dex, on Target Caller's blog, about the change got linked to in /r/eve an hour ago, so I thought it should be linked here for CCP to take notice of. Good article, to the heart of the problem. These changes are been rushed and virtually no thought has been put of the impact. Its lets do X and screw everyone else. We are going back to 2007 and without taking into concideration other changes in game that has happened since then. No, its a bad article as it makes wrong assumptions, does not understand what is being targeted and fails to see just how easily this can be adapted to. A good idea for changing gameplay/game design would allow us to apply multiple solutions aa a new way to play the game. This change does not provide that. It provides only 1 viable solution, having a ship at the warp target if it's not a celestial or similar. I have yet to see you spout another solution to this conundrum. Heres a solution: gain situational awareness and be able to warp yourself where you need to be instead of relying on an fc to fly your ship for you. |
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
168
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 22:47:47 -
[1453] - Quote
joecuster wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:baltec1 wrote:Executor Ardur wrote:kyoukoku wrote:This nice article by Talvorian Dex, on Target Caller's blog, about the change got linked to in /r/eve an hour ago, so I thought it should be linked here for CCP to take notice of. Good article, to the heart of the problem. These changes are been rushed and virtually no thought has been put of the impact. Its lets do X and screw everyone else. We are going back to 2007 and without taking into concideration other changes in game that has happened since then. No, its a bad article as it makes wrong assumptions, does not understand what is being targeted and fails to see just how easily this can be adapted to. A good idea for changing gameplay/game design would allow us to apply multiple solutions aa a new way to play the game. This change does not provide that. It provides only 1 viable solution, having a ship at the warp target if it's not a celestial or similar. I have yet to see you spout another solution to this conundrum. Heres a solution: gain situational awareness and be able to warp yourself where you need to be instead of relying on an fc to fly your ship for you.
I like flying in fleets mixed between frigates and cruisers all the way to capitals. I also like to arrive on grid with my mates. Not first cause my T3 cruiser landed on grid ahead of my triage. But hey, calculating relative warp speeds is "situational awarness" according to you.
Also, I love nothing more than waiting for bookmarks to sync after we probe something in a hole. But you knew that already.
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16227
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 22:54:27 -
[1454] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote: I have yet to see you spout another solution to this conundrum.
What makes you think there should be a way around this? The whole point is to make you use dedicated probers.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Miner Hottie
Haywire.
168
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 23:08:57 -
[1455] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Miner Hottie wrote: I have yet to see you spout another solution to this conundrum.
What makes you think there should be a way around this? The whole point is to make you use dedicated probers.
Who said anything about a way around this? Like its something to be beaten? What happened to gameplay changes that opened up the game and gave us multiple new options and multiple counters?
Despite your repeated attempts at supporting this change nothing about it makes for compelling gameplay (unless yiu count forum trolling as compelling... which may actually be compelling for you).
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
joecuster
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
63
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 00:09:12 -
[1456] - Quote
It compels null bears to work in smaller effective groups. It also forces people to pay attention and actually learn the game. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
326
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 00:13:49 -
[1457] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:baltec1 wrote:All you did earlier on is show you have no idea how our fleets work. I'll leave it to general populace to judge the absurdity of your claim of a 250 man fleet as being a one-man show.
Actually, he's right. The current line of FC fittings for our fleets all include the ability to probe.
What's more, most of our FCs are using multiple accounts during every engagement, running their brick-tanked FC ship (which may or may not be a booster) as well as a probing covops. Why? Well, it's really quite simple:
90% of humanity is a bunch of mouth-breathing morons who'd have a hard time finding their heads with both hands if they weren't attached.
This is also why for large organizations, fittings are standardized - we simply don't trust the average salt-of-the-earth nitwit to have the first clue how to fit a ship.
We also tend not to trust the average salt-of-the-earth nitwit to not be shooting his own fleet members during a fight - and experience has proven us right on this one at least once pretty much every fight.
So if you expect the FCs to not be control-freaks who feel like this change means they have to do everything themselves on even more simultaneous logins... you're either incredibly naive, or smoking crack.
And if you think this is unfairly critical of people in general, I encourage you to talk with people who run large organizations outside of EVE. This is not a condition that exists only for explodable internet space pixels. The more points of failure you introduce, the more places failure will occur.
Always. |
Onslaughtor
Occult National Security Phoenix Naval Systems
152
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 00:24:03 -
[1458] - Quote
So im just going to bring this back since we are talking about broadcasts now.
Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members.
CCPs current design goal is to give players more agency in fleets. As many FCs and line members have said, the current proposal does not truly address this and removes semi necessary functionality. Overall a bad game design.
Quote: So me and a bunch of friends found a possible solution to keeping the main design goal of getting people involved with fleets and a sense of personal agency, while maintaining our current level of fleet ability, AND adding in new ability in the form of sudo fleet formations.
Current fleet warp functions are split into 2 parts.
1 Fleet warps as we know them now become emergency fleet warps. They can only warp to a few permanent objects such as the sun, planets, stations, and gates. This is the "No time to explain we are leaving" option for the fc and keeps that functionality alive while limiting it and allowing game play to form in the chase.
2 The new fleet warp mechanic is a fleet warp broadcast. This broadcast works on anything the current (pre aegis) fleetwarp can. Upon activation, everyone gets a visible broadcast saying the fc is starting a fleet warp. From there each pilot mush click on it and accept the warp at a range they choose. After some number of seconds (ten seems reasonable) the fleetwarp is initiated for everyone who signed on. After that, any fleet member may still warp to the broadcast in the fleet history.
In this way, current functionality is preserved and the design goals are meet, while also adding new functionality. Programing my be required, o dear.
If you agree please quote as these forums seem to bury things really quickly.
combined this with the requested broadcast warp to fleet member and your pretty much all set.
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
1706
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 00:30:24 -
[1459] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:[quote=baltec1]All you did earlier on is show you have no idea how our fleets work. ... Edit to add: As for the specific claim about 'a 250 man fleet being a one-man show'... it's usually more like a four-man show. Maybe up to 9 if you want to include the WC's turning their boosts on and off. So, some of our top pilots just get lucky all the time? No. You have always had the option to follow the FC blindly or think for yourself within the context of the battle. That won't change. What will changes is more ships dying for a short time. Then people will become more risk adverse and put out scouts even further. If they aren't entirely sure they can beat the others they will turn tail and run. If they are sure, then the other side will run.
This is a very short sighted mechanics change.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
joecuster
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
63
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 00:33:30 -
[1460] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Arrendis wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:[quote=baltec1]All you did earlier on is show you have no idea how our fleets work. ... Edit to add: As for the specific claim about 'a 250 man fleet being a one-man show'... it's usually more like a four-man show. Maybe up to 9 if you want to include the WC's turning their boosts on and off. So, some of our top pilots just get lucky all the time? No. You have always had the option to follow the FC blindly or think for yourself within the context of the battle. That won't change. What will changes is more ships dying for a short time. Then people will become more risk adverse and put out scouts even further. If they aren't entirely sure they can beat the others they will turn tail and run. If they are sure, then the other side will run. This is a very short sighted mechanics change. They already put scouts far away and run even if 1 neutral pops in local. Your point is null. The only way to get fights is to deceive bads into thinking they can win. |
|
Azarath NazGhoul
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 01:28:10 -
[1461] - Quote
Seriously I donGÇÖt understand how people donGÇÖt learn.
This change will ONLY make fleets more annoying, no fleet will EVER engage with GÇ£warp yourselfGÇ¥ due to how the game works. Warp yourself worked back in the days of 10 ship fleets but they are long gone. If you try to warp yourself in a fleet fight you will lose that fight if you have anything like even numbers due to how the game is working. You need to land with the full fleet at the same time or big parts of the fleet will be destroyed before you can even fight back.
This means NO fc will use GÇ£warp yourselfGÇ¥, we will wait for a cloaked warping or not engage.
So the GÇ£more pilot engagementGÇ¥ argument is BS. Left is some conspiracy theories like CCP donGÇÖt want fleet fights anymore, they want solo cruiser gameplay (nerf fleet, make cruisers the best ship class for multiple reasons, nerf capitals take away the need of a fleet to take structures.
|
1nverted
What Could Go Wrong Lethal Intent.
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 02:29:31 -
[1462] - Quote
Hi CCP
I'm really pleased with these changes.
I think they will accomplish three things which are all good for the game:
1. Make non slippery pete snipper doctrines viable again as it will take longer for tackle to land on them. In this added time, the sniper fleet can fully align.
2. As noted it will need bombers. Good.
3. It will make pilots making perches and warp ins far more valuable. I performed this role extensively in black legion and it was great fun. I welcome changes that make this role more important.
Stick to your guns!
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
71
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 02:49:52 -
[1463] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:
Actually, he's right. The current line of FC fittings for our fleets all include the ability to probe.
What's more, most of our FCs are using multiple accounts during every engagement, running their brick-tanked FC ship (which may or may not be a booster) as well as a probing covops. Why? Well, it's really quite simple:
90% of humanity is a bunch of mouth-breathing morons who'd have a hard time finding their heads with both hands if they weren't attached.
This is also why for large organizations, fittings are standardized - we simply don't trust the average salt-of-the-earth nitwit to have the first clue how to fit a ship.
We also tend not to trust the average salt-of-the-earth nitwit to not be shooting his own fleet members during a fight - and experience has proven us right on this one at least once pretty much every fight.
So if you expect the FCs to not be control-freaks who feel like this change means they have to do everything themselves on even more simultaneous logins... you're either incredibly naive, or smoking crack.
And if you think this is unfairly critical of people in general, I encourage you to talk with people who run large organizations outside of EVE. This is not a condition that exists only for explodable internet space pixels. The more points of failure you introduce, the more places failure will occur.
Always.
Edit to add: As for the specific claim about 'a 250 man fleet being a one-man show'... it's usually more like a four-man show. Maybe up to 9 if you want to include the WC's turning their boosts on and off.
Thank you for your detailed response. I underlined two parts that actually make the same points I was making in my posts, and that baltec1 was supposedly refuting.
Specifically, the points are: - FCs use multiple accounts at the moment, with a dedicated cov ops prober and a brick tank booster. (Not one ship, as baltec ludicrously claims) - You don't trust 90% of the fleet, let alone the noob, to do anything of responsibility.
So tell me, what in these changes would allow new players to supposedly become "I was there" scouts, when FCs already have that role fulfilled, and don't trust the others anyway?
Forgive me for chuckling as I appreciate the fact that you contradict that baltec1 is saying, even though I find your efforts admirable, because his logic is really that bad. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
71
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 02:51:33 -
[1464] - Quote
joecuster wrote: They already put scouts far away and run even if 1 neutral pops in local. Your point is null. The only way to get fights is to deceive bads into thinking they can win.
Exactly - they do all this change is supposed to enforce already. What, then, is the point of adding another task, and a tedious one at that?
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
71
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 04:14:00 -
[1465] - Quote
*failed edit attempt* |
joecuster
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
63
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 05:21:02 -
[1466] - Quote
This change is good it kills the blob and forces people to learn to play the game |
Azarath NazGhoul
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 05:27:00 -
[1467] - Quote
joecuster wrote:This change is good it kills the blob and forces people to learn to play the game
No it doesn't, why would it? It just make the fights more annoying, do you really think any competent FC will say "well the hostiles are at x. Warp there at a good range for your ship"
That will never happen, so nothing will change except the gameplay for fleets will be more annoying.
|
HiddenPorpoise
Expendable Miscreants
362
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 05:33:15 -
[1468] - Quote
I really do want to know how this nerfs bombers. People keep saying it does, and I keep thinking about in, but I just can't figure it out. |
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
389
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 05:36:30 -
[1469] - Quote
HiddenPorpoise wrote:I really do want to know how this nerfs bombers. People keep saying it does, and I keep thinking about in, but I just can't figure it out. It doesn't do anything for bombers. Really. Bomb runs use a once of "bookmark" for a perch, so most of the time you don't bother with the bookmark. Just warp to fleet member.
Death and Glory!
Well fun is also good.
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
71
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 06:07:29 -
[1470] - Quote
Delt0r Garsk wrote:HiddenPorpoise wrote:I really do want to know how this nerfs bombers. People keep saying it does, and I keep thinking about in, but I just can't figure it out. It doesn't do anything for bombers. Really. Bomb runs use a once off "bookmark" for a perch, so most of the time you don't bother with the bookmark. Just warp to fleet member.
And what happens when you have to bomb now? Does the bomb magically leave your bay from your perch and end up on the reds? Or does the FC have to warp squad @ 30 to whatever you want to bomb? (Unless you're setting up on a gate..) If FC can't warp squad to 30, then some poor sod will have to sit at 30 in just the right alignment so you can warp to them and bomb before losing alignment, or do a kamikaze @ 0 and then you can bomb him @ 30.
That extra dude stuck in the line of fire.. things make sense now?
|
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
71
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 06:08:21 -
[1471] - Quote
joecuster wrote:This change is good it kills the blob and forces people to learn to play the game
Care to offer some reasoning behind that, or is the feeling of "truthiness" sufficient?
|
HiddenPorpoise
Expendable Miscreants
362
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 06:18:25 -
[1472] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Delt0r Garsk wrote:HiddenPorpoise wrote:I really do want to know how this nerfs bombers. People keep saying it does, and I keep thinking about in, but I just can't figure it out. It doesn't do anything for bombers. Really. Bomb runs use a once off "bookmark" for a perch, so most of the time you don't bother with the bookmark. Just warp to fleet member. And what happens when you have to bomb now? Does the bomb magically leave your bay from your perch and end up on the reds? Or does the FC have to warp squad @ 30 to whatever you want to bomb? (Unless you're setting up on a gate..) If FC can't warp squad to 30, then some poor sod will have to sit at 30 in just the right alignment so you can warp to them and bomb before losing alignment, or do a kamikaze @ 0 and then you can bomb him @ 30. That extra dude stuck in the line of fire.. things make sense now? If they're anything like my bombing FCs they'll just target a wreck and tell us to warp to that then target a ship. I have never been fleet warped to a hostle grid in a bomber. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
71
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 06:24:01 -
[1473] - Quote
HiddenPorpoise wrote:If they're anything like my bombing FCs they'll just target a wreck and tell us to warp to that then target a ship. I have never been fleet warped to a hostle grid in a bomber.
You kidding.. you're missing out! Also, 'a' ship? You'd so missing out :)
You get a timely warp @30 and you can wipe out a whole fleet. Look up some youtube videos of Nulli Secunda first void bombing tengus and then electron bombing them to oblivion. All right into the hostile grid.
|
Dermeisen
18
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 06:31:17 -
[1474] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:baltec1 wrote:All you did earlier on is show you have no idea how our fleets work. I'll leave it to general populace to judge the absurdity of your claim of a 250 man fleet as being a one-man show. Actually, he's right. The current line of FC fittings for our fleets all include the ability to probe. ...... 90% of humanity is a bunch of mouth-breathing morons who'd have a hard time finding their heads with both hands if they weren't attached. This is also why for large organizations, fittings are standardized - we simply don't trust the average salt-of-the-earth nitwit to have the first clue how to fit a ship. We also tend not to trust the average salt-of-the-earth nitwit to not be shooting his own fleet members during a fight - and experience has proven us right on this one at least once pretty much every fight. So if you expect the FCs to not be control-freaks who feel like this change means they have to do everything themselves on even more simultaneous logins... you're either incredibly naive, or smoking crack. ...... Edit to add: As for the specific claim about 'a 250 man fleet being a one-man show'... it's usually more like a four-man show. Maybe up to 9 if you want to include the WC's turning their boosts on and off.
Beyond your contempt for you fellow man I'd have to agree with your diagnosis if not the cause. These 'mouth breathers' need responsibility that's the only way they'll get good - and they will get real good given the chance, Fozzie sov will do it. These changes are uncomfortable and will challenge your faith in a brother but it's this kind of attitude that has really kicked this game in the proverbials. Nerf FCs listen to the guys who are best at the game such as Gorski Car.
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
HiddenPorpoise
Expendable Miscreants
362
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 06:52:12 -
[1475] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:HiddenPorpoise wrote:If they're anything like my bombing FCs they'll just target a wreck and tell us to warp to that then target a ship. I have never been fleet warped to a hostle grid in a bomber. You kidding.. you're missing out! Also, 'a' ship? You'd so missing out :) You get a timely warp @30 and you can wipe out a whole fleet. Look up some youtube videos of Nulli Secunda first void bombing tengus and then electron bombing them to oblivion. All right into the hostile grid. I don't think you understood any of what I just said. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
71
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 07:03:42 -
[1476] - Quote
HiddenPorpoise wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:HiddenPorpoise wrote:If they're anything like my bombing FCs they'll just target a wreck and tell us to warp to that then target a ship. I have never been fleet warped to a hostle grid in a bomber. You kidding.. you're missing out! Also, 'a' ship? You'd so missing out :) You get a timely warp @30 and you can wipe out a whole fleet. Look up some youtube videos of Nulli Secunda first void bombing tengus and then electron bombing them to oblivion. All right into the hostile grid. I don't think you understood any of what I just said.
Do tell. What did I miss?
|
Dermeisen
19
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 07:27:04 -
[1477] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:HiddenPorpoise wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:HiddenPorpoise wrote:If they're anything like my bombing FCs they'll just target a wreck and tell us to warp to that then target a ship. I have never been fleet warped to a hostle grid in a bomber. You kidding.. you're missing out! Also, 'a' ship? You'd so missing out :) You get a timely warp @30 and you can wipe out a whole fleet. Look up some youtube videos of Nulli Secunda first void bombing tengus and then electron bombing them to oblivion. All right into the hostile grid. I don't think you understood any of what I just said. Do tell. What did I miss?
I agree Pi the confusion comes from you guys talking at cross-porpoises, 'Hidden Porpoise' is talking, I guess, about a bomber torp fit rather than in a bombing role , the timings and direction do require a little more finesse in the bombing role.
LOVE your toon's name 'Hidden Porpoise'
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
71
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 07:34:00 -
[1478] - Quote
Dermeisen wrote: I agree Pi the confusion comes from you guys talking at cross-porpoises, 'Hidden Porpoise' is talking, I guess, about a bomber torp fit rather than in a bombing role , the timings and direction do require a little more finesse in the bombing role.
LOVE your toon's name 'Hidden Porpoise'
Hah, that makes sense. Well then.. if that is how HiddenPorpoise has only used bombers.. can I just say to him again is.. boy you're missing out!!! =) |
X4me1eoH
AirGuard LowSechnaya Sholupen
211
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 08:26:48 -
[1479] - Quote
Every patch, the game gets worse and worse. First, you make this uncolored, nondescript and inconvenient neocom Second, you make crude version of new map. With broken filters. Gods, it is a year in beta version. Third, new crude overview. With ******* drones looks like a ships. Fourthly you want remove fleet warp. What else?
WHY YOU MAKE GAME UNCOMFORTABLE? |
joecuster
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
66
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 08:51:12 -
[1480] - Quote
These casual tears are the best. Fozzie can rate how good a patch is for the health of the game by how many bads come out of the wood work. The more bads crying, the better it is. |
|
Aphoxema G
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security Multicultural F1 Brigade
381
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 09:26:23 -
[1481] - Quote
So max probe skills and best hardware isn't going to be enough to catch most people now. |
X4me1eoH
AirGuard LowSechnaya Sholupen
211
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 09:48:41 -
[1482] - Quote
maybe remove fleetwarp and wingwarp? but retain squadwarp? |
Executor Ardur
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 10:09:45 -
[1483] - Quote
it will seem that this thread is going to become rather large. Seem a lot of people are not happy or got plenty to say about how badly rushed it is. In comparison has the largest reply with other threads that were very important from the date it was initiated... Someone is going to be come very un popular with the eve community. |
Jellyfish Original
Dawn Expeditionary Force
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 10:57:51 -
[1484] - Quote
Maybe CCP should restore the old mechanic on developers experiencing the game, which developers can have regular accounts. Then we are sure that it is not that someone who does not play eve developing it. |
Schluffi Schluffelsen
State War Academy Caldari State
46
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 11:17:04 -
[1485] - Quote
Honestly, just remove fleet warp as a feature in general :) |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16234
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 11:23:03 -
[1486] - Quote
Jellyfish Original wrote:Maybe CCP should restore the old mechanic on developers experiencing the game, which developers can have regular accounts. Then we are sure that it is not that someone who does not play eve developing it.
CSM asked for this
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
5362
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 11:49:47 -
[1487] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Jellyfish Original wrote:Maybe CCP should restore the old mechanic on developers experiencing the game, which developers can have regular accounts. Then we are sure that it is not that someone who does not play eve developing it. CSM asked for this
Specifically Manny, who was quite vociferous on the matter.
Woo! CSM X!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
327
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 11:52:07 -
[1488] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote: Thank you for your detailed response. I underlined two parts that actually make the same points I was making in my posts, and that baltec1 was supposedly refuting.
Well, except for the fact that's not wrong. That brick-tanked damnation? Has probes. The FC Proteus? Has Probes. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
327
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 12:01:27 -
[1489] - Quote
Dermeisen wrote: Beyond your contempt for you fellow man I'd have to agree with your diagnosis if not the cause. These 'mouth breathers' need responsibility that's the only way they'll get good - and they will get real good given the chance, Fozzie sov will do it. These changes are uncomfortable and will challenge your faith in a brother but it's this kind of attitude that has really kicked this game in the proverbials. Nerf FCs listen to the guys who are best at the game such as Gorski Car.
Believe it or don't, I'm an optimist at heart who'd really love to believe in the basic ability of individuals to rise to the occasion when they must... I've just seen enough of the world to know that unfortunately... they don't. Not 'they can't', mind you - they don't. They're far more likely to keep on wallowing where they are, blaming everyone for their problems but their own unwillingness to rouse themselves from what they think is relative 'comfort'.
And again, if you think I'm being unfair in my assessment, ask yourself why every large organization has to pretty much write policy instructions, safety instructions, etc etc, for the lowest common denominator? Even the ones who start off from a position of filtering out the really low-end applicants? Why the assumption of individual performance is minimal, again and again?
I really wish I was wrong. I'm not. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
327
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 12:04:26 -
[1490] - Quote
1nverted wrote:1. Make non slippery pete snipper doctrines viable again as it will take longer for tackle to land on them. In this added time, the sniper fleet can fully align.
and simultaneously make people wonder why they're flying a sniper doctrine that isn't bubble-immune, more maneuverable than battleships and sniper ABCs, and even harder to probe down!
Yeah. Really gonna bring back the non-Pete snipers. If anything, Petes will be the order of the day everywhere. |
|
TinkerHell
Nocturnal Romance Cynosural Field Theory.
155
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 12:48:57 -
[1491] - Quote
BadAssMcKill wrote:Have you considered making the game more fun for a change
This quote that was all that was needed in response to this idea.
This and the last few changes lead to:
- Fleet warp is now becoming a hassle and will take longer.. - My warping is slower (i hate frigate pvp) - I now have fatigue timers
Three changes that are making travelling take longer, and limiting my actual pvp time. I play EVE because i want to PVP not travel.
|
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots Black Legion.
307
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 13:08:22 -
[1492] - Quote
I frequently have frigate gangs attempt to probe and warp to me. With this change, I'll know if a cloaky prober is after me by seeing if just one guy warps to me, or a whole bunch. If its a bunch, I'll know there must be a cloaky prober close...opening up the viability of using CRAZY IVAN manoeuvers to find and kill them. +1 |
Annah Sun-Scape
Temet Nosce Ex Astra
12
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 13:26:08 -
[1493] - Quote
Fleet warp need changes! |
HiddenPorpoise
Expendable Miscreants
363
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 13:39:21 -
[1494] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:HiddenPorpoise wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:HiddenPorpoise wrote:If they're anything like my bombing FCs they'll just target a wreck and tell us to warp to that then target a ship. I have never been fleet warped to a hostle grid in a bomber. You kidding.. you're missing out! Also, 'a' ship? You'd so missing out :) You get a timely warp @30 and you can wipe out a whole fleet. Look up some youtube videos of Nulli Secunda first void bombing tengus and then electron bombing them to oblivion. All right into the hostile grid. I don't think you understood any of what I just said. Do tell. What did I miss? Targeting a single ship is to line up the shot on the center of the fleet, we didn't get fleet warps to hostle grids so that lag wouldn't decloak everyone. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1917
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 13:40:23 -
[1495] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:1nverted wrote:1. Make non slippery pete snipper doctrines viable again as it will take longer for tackle to land on them. In this added time, the sniper fleet can fully align.
and simultaneously make people wonder why they're flying a sniper doctrine that isn't bubble-immune, more maneuverable than battleships and sniper ABCs, and even harder to probe down! Yeah. Really gonna bring back the non-Pete snipers. If anything, Petes will be the order of the day everywhere.
That's because Petes are ******* ********. Whoever though it was a great idea to design a ship would would be both combat capable and able to dodge interdiction system is the guy to blame. He isn't necessarily an idiot but he did lack forethought in the same way supercap/titan design was lacking... |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1917
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 13:41:46 -
[1496] - Quote
TinkerHell wrote:BadAssMcKill wrote:Have you considered making the game more fun for a change This quote that was all that was needed in response to this idea. This and the last few changes lead to: - Fleet warp is now becoming a hassle and will take longer.. - My warping is slower (i hate frigate pvp) - I now have fatigue timers Three changes that are making travelling take longer, and limiting my actual pvp time. I play EVE because i want to PVP not travel.
Live closer to target and you won't have to travel that damn long. |
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots Black Legion.
307
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 13:55:25 -
[1497] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Arrendis wrote:1nverted wrote:1. Make non slippery pete snipper doctrines viable again as it will take longer for tackle to land on them. In this added time, the sniper fleet can fully align.
and simultaneously make people wonder why they're flying a sniper doctrine that isn't bubble-immune, more maneuverable than battleships and sniper ABCs, and even harder to probe down! Yeah. Really gonna bring back the non-Pete snipers. If anything, Petes will be the order of the day everywhere. That's because Petes are ******* ********. Whoever though it was a great idea to design a ship would would be both combat capable and able to dodge interdiction system is the guy to blame. He isn't necessarily an idiot but he did lack forethought in the same way supercap/titan design was lacking...
Awww...Pete's ruining your game? Wait a minute, I thought that was supposed to be Goons MO. |
stoicfaux
5910
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 14:02:36 -
[1498] - Quote
TinkerHell wrote:BadAssMcKill wrote:Have you considered making the game more fun for a change This quote that was all that was needed in response to this idea. This and the last few changes lead to: - Fleet warp is now becoming a hassle and will take longer.. - My warping is slower (i hate frigate pvp) - I now have fatigue timers Three changes that are making travelling take longer, and limiting my actual pvp time. I play EVE because i want to PVP not travel. The goons have realized that it is easier to "ruin your gameplay" by controlling the CSM rather than trying to herd their cats (members) in-game for the same goal?
Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
|
davet517
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
88
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 15:08:14 -
[1499] - Quote
So, you'll need scouts that you trust enough to warp to when they say they have a good warp-in, or, you'll have to juggle a bunch of alts because you don't have scouts that you trust. Not having good scouts will be a disadvantage. Seems reasonable.
A decent scout will know a good warp-in from a bad one. A better scout will have flown with the FC enough to know the positioning that he or she prefers. A really good scout will be able to keep the target between them and the fleet so that they can call for a warp-in at range and land their fleet at 0, if that's what they're trying to do.
So, you've expanded the number of players in a 200 man fleet that need skill beyond "shoot the primary", or "rep the broadcast" from one, to several. I don't see that as an unreasonable expectation.
You have made living in a WH more tedious, but, not terribly so. Again, good scouts will be at a premium.
You've also made it (intentionally or not) even more difficult to ninja-move a capital or super. It's pretty standard to have the cyno fleet warp the ship jumping in to a safe when it lands. |
kraken11 jensen
The Gallant Collective Requiem Eternal
88
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 15:17:42 -
[1500] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Anger. Denial. Attempts to compromise. Acceptance.
CCP thinks that everyone will get over it and move on to "the next thing to whine about" because all of it is just "people not liking change"
well, I think personally that if if ccp make the game more off an hassle (less fun and more work) that then maybe people 're going to unsub. if not all off his/her account's, then maybe every account without 1. but idk. -.- |
|
Madbuster73
C.Q.B Snuffed Out
139
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 15:20:09 -
[1501] - Quote
All that this change will do is make Kiting fleets superior to everything..... Just fly around with your Ishtars at 100km kiting your enemy. Nobody will get you because the prober needs to warp to the Ishtars first, and then the fleet will follow later, by that time the Ishtars have moved another 50km!
This change will make kiting the only viable option.
RIP good brawlfights.
|
stoicfaux
5910
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 15:48:13 -
[1502] - Quote
How does the fleet warp change impact/synergize/undermine the whole entosis capture thing? I keep feeling there's a subtle connection somehow. :/
Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
75
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 16:17:36 -
[1503] - Quote
joecuster wrote:These casual tears are the best. Fozzie can rate how good a patch is for the health of the game by how many bads come out of the wood work. The more bads crying, the better it is.
Actually.. no. "Casuals" make up the majority of players, I'd think. As it is, there are a bunch of reasons that are pissing off people who just wanna log on and have fun; not go through hoops to relearn the game. Making the game more tedious and more difficult to get kills on top of that does not help to increase retention.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16237
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 16:19:34 -
[1504] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:How does the fleet warp change impact/synergize/undermine the whole entosis capture thing? I keep feeling there's a subtle connection somehow. :/
It doesnt. Cant warp around the grid and entosis at the same time.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
75
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 16:35:17 -
[1505] - Quote
HiddenPorpoise wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:HiddenPorpoise wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:HiddenPorpoise wrote:If they're anything like my bombing FCs they'll just target a wreck and tell us to warp to that then target a ship. I have never been fleet warped to a hostle grid in a bomber. You kidding.. you're missing out! Also, 'a' ship? You'd so missing out :) You get a timely warp @30 and you can wipe out a whole fleet. Look up some youtube videos of Nulli Secunda first void bombing tengus and then electron bombing them to oblivion. All right into the hostile grid. I don't think you understood any of what I just said. Do tell. What did I miss? Targeting a single ship is to line up the shot on the center of the fleet, we didn't get fleet warps to hostle grids so that lag wouldn't decloak everyone.
Are you using torps or bombs?
Also, "lag" doesn't decloak people - it doesn't even exist anymore due to tidi. A good bomber FC would keep a perch on the hostile grid - say 300 out, and warp you there whlie your bomb tubes cool down. That way you are loaded on grid already. Even better bomber FCs would ask you to keep everything of off your overview that isn't needed to warp in, release payload and warp out. But this isn't a thread about SBs so I'll stop there..
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
75
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 16:44:56 -
[1506] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:stoicfaux wrote:How does the fleet warp change impact/synergize/undermine the whole entosis capture thing? I keep feeling there's a subtle connection somehow. :/
It doesnt. Cant warp around the grid and entosis at the same time.
No, but you do have to warp to the thing entosising your things.
Imagine an orthrus with T2 entosis links, boosted, with slaves, and having had a sip or two of Quafe Zero. Moving at ludicrous speed. First you have to have the prober get close to them. Then you have to warp fleet to prober. They you realize he's kinda far away. So far, in fact, that you will be in warp range again in a few moments. Just so you can start it all over again.
So stoicfaux, it's a pretty direct link - anything that can fit a T2 entosis link and be fast can potentially kite your sov out of existence. :) |
stoicfaux
5910
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 17:28:10 -
[1507] - Quote
Disclaimer: Probably (most likely) don't know what I'm talking about.
Attackers put 250km range entosis on brick tank. Attackers (Entosis unit) are off plane in relation to standard warp lanes so the defenders have to get a scout on it first. Bubble is between entosis unit and enemy structure (i.e. the only place the enemy fleet can easily warp from.) Rest of attacking fleet at optimal range to blow up anything that gets bubbled. Standard decloaking items floating in space or smartbombs.
So unless the enemy has extreme sniper fits (200+ km range,) they probably won't have enough time to get close enough to the entosis unit to kill it before it cycles. However, if the defender is sniper fit, then the attacking fleet can warp to the defender and savage the under-tanked and under-gunned defenders with short range weapons.
Plus with lag/tidi/1hz server tick, a small defender probe scout (and pod) may not survive long enough to serve as a warp-to point.
Both friendly and enemy ships will want/need refitting abilities to swap between extreme sniping and normal combat fits. Heavy tank probe scouts may be "mandatory" to survive long enough to serve as a fleet warp-to point. Creating corp bookmarks in advance around structures will probably become mandatory for defense and offense (and possibly pre-positioned cloaked ships as well.)
Note to self: grid fu and drag bubbles.
Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
|
VirusMD
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 17:40:59 -
[1508] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:The change restriction is too high and affects too many areas of life in Eve, from Kspace, to Null, to Wspace. I would propose a smaller iteration to address the concerns of how fleet warp mechanics now work.
- Permit Squad Commanders in a fleet to fleet-warp their squad to bookmarks and probed sigs.
Essentially you move the capabilities of the overall fleet and wing commander down to the squad level. You remove the big flying balls of hurt down to decisions made by the squad commander, permitting them to decide on tactical warp ins, locations and fleet warps for their squad. You restrict fleet warps down to a 10 man team, with a individual per 10 man team making individual decisions for that 10 man team, to support the fleet efforts. Fleet and Wing commanders would lose this ability to warp entire armada's to bookmarks and scanned sigs, but permit smaller skirmish groups/squads to warp their small group to them. You move the leadership role of getting tacticals and flying to the leader of the squad, reducing the blob down to at most, 10 pilots, vs the 100+ null runs into. You now create a new leadership dynamic, and permit new people to have a stepping stone to becoming a Fleet Commander. Squad Leaders gain power, and have a relevant role verses just being a booster for their fleetmates. I'd start with baby steps first, commonly known as "A Iteration" (Thanks for that CCP Rise). Remove the ability for fleet commanders and wing commanders from warping entire groups to bookmarks and scan probes, and reduce it down to the squad level. Try that first. See how it actually works.
Genius this guy ^
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
188
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 17:45:00 -
[1509] - Quote
I still wonder why null sec and low sec gets the free fleet warps to stations and gates, can't they warp there themselfs?
No local in null sec would fix everything!
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
329
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 18:07:55 -
[1510] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:How does the fleet warp change impact/synergize/undermine the whole entosis capture thing? I keep feeling there's a subtle connection somehow. :/
Well, it does mean that if you can build something that moves fast enough and targets far enough, they're gonna have a ***** of a time warping their tacklers onto you... |
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2526
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 18:09:41 -
[1511] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Disclaimer: Probably (most likely) don't know what I'm talking about.
Attackers put 250km range entosis on brick tank. Attackers (Entosis unit) are off plane in relation to standard warp lanes so the defenders have to get a scout on it first. Bubble is between entosis unit and enemy structure (i.e. the only place the enemy fleet can easily warp from.) Rest of attacking fleet at optimal range to blow up anything that gets bubbled. Standard decloaking items floating in space or smartbombs.
So unless the enemy has extreme sniper fits (200+ km range,) they probably won't have enough time to get close enough to the entosis unit to kill it before it cycles. However, if the defender is sniper fit, then the attacking fleet can warp to the defender and savage the under-tanked and under-gunned defenders with short range weapons.
Plus with lag/tidi/1hz server tick, a small defender probe scout (and pod) may not survive long enough to serve as a warp-to point.
Both friendly and enemy ships will want/need refitting abilities to swap between extreme sniping and normal combat fits. Heavy tank probe scouts may be "mandatory" to survive long enough to serve as a fleet warp-to point. Creating corp bookmarks in advance around structures will probably become mandatory for defense and offense (and possibly pre-positioned cloaked ships as well.)
Note to self: grid fu and drag bubbles. Warp to node/structure at 100. Prove in warp warp self to e-link dude. Tackle And if your dictors warp themselves they should land before cycle ends (in an optimal situation). You mis-guess his timer then doesn't really matter. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2526
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 18:11:47 -
[1512] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:stoicfaux wrote:How does the fleet warp change impact/synergize/undermine the whole entosis capture thing? I keep feeling there's a subtle connection somehow. :/
Well, it does mean that if you can build something that moves fast enough and targets far enough, they're gonna have a ***** of a time warping their tacklers onto you... Fortunately, anything filling that description has other viable counters.
I had a talos orbiting 200-250 at 6km/s and a barghest almost ended that escapade. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
329
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 18:23:32 -
[1513] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Arrendis wrote:stoicfaux wrote:How does the fleet warp change impact/synergize/undermine the whole entosis capture thing? I keep feeling there's a subtle connection somehow. :/
Well, it does mean that if you can build something that moves fast enough and targets far enough, they're gonna have a ***** of a time warping their tacklers onto you... Fortunately, anything filling that description has other viable counters. I had a talos orbiting 200-250 at 6km/s and a barghest almost ended that escapade.
Yeah... I've been playing w/the idea of a high-speed ECM ship... someone locks you to stop your entosising, jam 'em.
|
Theophilas
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
34
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 18:49:55 -
[1514] - Quote
BadAssMcKill wrote:Have you considered making the game more fun for a change |
Civ Kado
Dutch East Querious Company Phoebe Freeport Republic
81
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 19:03:48 -
[1515] - Quote
ATTENTION, I'VE GOT IT, STOP THE PRESSES! THIS IS NOT A DRILL!
guys, guys, what if, guys, what if we add a stacking penalty to fleets? a fleet of 20 outputs it's full DPS, every additional fleet member outputs 50% of its original DPS. This penalty is cumulative on to the other additional member of the fleet until eventually someone is just outputting close to 0 DPS.
this probably won't solve anything, but the tears it will create will be well worth it. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
78
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 19:09:04 -
[1516] - Quote
Civ Kado wrote:ATTENTION, I'VE GOT IT, STOP THE PRESSES! THIS IS NOT A DRILL!
guys, guys, what if, guys, what if we add a stacking penalty to fleets? a fleet of 20 outputs it's full DPS, every additional fleet member outputs 50% of its original DPS. This penalty is cumulative on to the other additional member of the fleet until eventually someone is just outputting close to 0 DPS.
this probably won't solve anything, but the tears it will create will be well worth it.
Or.. as FT Diomedes noted earlier, make fleets smaller. 100-man fleets will make alliances that can field 1000 people have 10 FCs. Will force them to think of roles for each FC, commensurate with experience. If you wanna be specially mean, make it 50 :)
|
Civ Kado
Dutch East Querious Company Phoebe Freeport Republic
81
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 19:12:47 -
[1517] - Quote
Quote:Or.. as FT Diomedes noted earlier, make fleets smaller. 100-man fleets will make alliances that can field 1000 people have 10 FCs. Will force them to think of roles for each FC, commensurate with experience. If you wanna be specially mean, make it 50 :).
I liek my idea better |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
78
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 19:22:40 -
[1518] - Quote
Civ Kado wrote:Quote:Or.. as FT Diomedes noted earlier, make fleets smaller. 100-man fleets will make alliances that can field 1000 people have 10 FCs. Will force them to think of roles for each FC, commensurate with experience. If you wanna be specially mean, make it 50 :). I liek my idea better
Since this is a thread discussing a particularly terrible idea, I guess it's only appropriate it is in good company.
|
stoicfaux
5911
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 19:24:46 -
[1519] - Quote
Civ Kado wrote:ATTENTION, I'VE GOT IT, STOP THE PRESSES! THIS IS NOT A DRILL!
guys, guys, what if, guys, what if we add a stacking penalty to fleets? a fleet of 20 outputs it's full DPS, every additional fleet member outputs 50% of its original DPS. This penalty is cumulative on to the other additional member of the fleet until eventually someone is just outputting close to 0 DPS.
this probably won't solve anything, but the tears it will create will be well worth it. Don't forget the stacking penalized logistics component: https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3a5kn0/csm10_massacring_sacred_cows_reforming_logistics/
Let's see, between it taking longer to warp a fleet around, fleet warping to non-public objects being more difficult, stacking penalized DPS, stacking penalized logistics, short entosis cycles, short vulnerability timers, and radically different sov mechanics in general, all requiring more distributed leadership and management of fleets, an organization that trains ahead of time[1] to master these new fleet tactics and that has reorganized their fleets accordingly, could overrun organizations still used to "F1 Monkey" tactics and fleet compositions.
Small Mammals versus Dinosaurs, and CCP is the comet? (Or is the comet actually CCP + organizations playing the meta-game (e.g. CSM?))
/tinfoil...
Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
329
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 20:04:46 -
[1520] - Quote
I have to admit, as a dedicated logi pilot, the power of logistics in the current combat model is just beyond broken, and desperately needs fixing.
That said, the problem with any single set 'solution' is the same one that's kept jump fatigue, sov changes, and pretty much every other 'solution' from really having any effect on the big orgs:
There is no problem in the history of mankind for which a solution has been found where that solution was not found quicker, or a better solution found, by the group that could devote more brainpower to the search. There has never been a solution in the history of mankind which cannot be better implemented by the group with more manpower to devote to the task.
Ever.
Strength in numbers isn't always about finding 5 other guys and beating some lone troublemaker to death with aluminum bats in the empty Blockbuster parking lot behind Burger King on Rte 111 at 4:30 in the morning in the dead of winter in 1983 because he owes you te-... er.....
I may have said too much. |
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1920
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 20:14:53 -
[1521] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:I have to admit, as a dedicated logi pilot, the power of logistics in the current combat model is just beyond broken, and desperately needs fixing. That said, the problem with any single set 'solution' is the same one that's kept jump fatigue, sov changes, and pretty much every other 'solution' from really having any effect on the big orgs: There is no problem in the history of mankind for which a solution has been found where that solution was not found quicker, or a better solution found, by the group that could devote more brainpower to the search. There has never been a solution in the history of mankind which cannot be better implemented by the group with more manpower to devote to the task. Ever. Strength in numbers isn't always about finding 5 other guys and beating some lone troublemaker to death with aluminum bats in the empty Blockbuster parking lot behind Burger King on Rte 111 at 4:30 in the morning in the dead of winter in 1983 because he owes you te-... er..... I may have said too much.
The game is built around the fact you can always throw more ressources "ISk, ships, bigger/better ships, pilots,..." at a problem and you still have people not understanding every single nerf will be overpowered through with more number untill it become absolutely impossible even for the biggest organisation.
The very premise of the game is what is creating those situations. A game where you can stack the odds to the very limit to your advantage ended up with fights with odds so stacked people refused to undock. Go figure... |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
330
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 20:24:24 -
[1522] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote: The game is built around the fact you can always throw more ressources "ISk, ships, bigger/better ships, pilots,..." at a problem and you still have people not understanding every single nerf will be overpowered through with more number untill it become absolutely impossible even for the biggest organisation.
The very premise of the game is what is creating those situations. A game where you can stack the odds to the very limit to your advantage ended up with fights with odds so stacked people refused to undock. Go figure...
Any 'sandbox' that doesn't artificially limit the amount of manpower you can have playing will fall prey to it. Forget the game's premise - without the artificial limits on raid sizes, it'd be easier to kill a boss in any MMO by bringing 2000 dudes to the fight.
The game isn't built around the ability to throw more resources as a problem - it's built without the artificial constraints that prevent it in other games. A subtle difference, but an important one. Just like the fact that it's built without the artificial concept of 'item binds on acquire', resulted in jetcanning - the game wasn't 'built around the ability to jetcan', it was a result of players not being told 'you can't do this thing that would totally make sense for you to do.'
Which, now, is exactly what we're being told. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16237
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 20:55:32 -
[1523] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Rowells wrote:Arrendis wrote:stoicfaux wrote:How does the fleet warp change impact/synergize/undermine the whole entosis capture thing? I keep feeling there's a subtle connection somehow. :/
Well, it does mean that if you can build something that moves fast enough and targets far enough, they're gonna have a ***** of a time warping their tacklers onto you... Fortunately, anything filling that description has other viable counters. I had a talos orbiting 200-250 at 6km/s and a barghest almost ended that escapade. Yeah... I've been playing w/the idea of a high-speed ECM ship... someone locks you to stop your entosising, jam 'em.
Interceptor armed with sensor damp does the job easily enough.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1924
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 21:09:41 -
[1524] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Arrendis wrote:Rowells wrote:Arrendis wrote:stoicfaux wrote:How does the fleet warp change impact/synergize/undermine the whole entosis capture thing? I keep feeling there's a subtle connection somehow. :/
Well, it does mean that if you can build something that moves fast enough and targets far enough, they're gonna have a ***** of a time warping their tacklers onto you... Fortunately, anything filling that description has other viable counters. I had a talos orbiting 200-250 at 6km/s and a barghest almost ended that escapade. Yeah... I've been playing w/the idea of a high-speed ECM ship... someone locks you to stop your entosising, jam 'em. Interceptor armed with sensor damp does the job easily enough.
You can get around most of those defense with number, You can only fit so many damps on an inty or ECM mods on an ECM ship after all. Oh look, the solution is again the same as to many problems... |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
78
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 21:18:07 -
[1525] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote: You can get around most of those defense with number, You can only fit so many damps on an inty or ECM mods on an ECM ship after all. Oh look, the solution is again the same as to many problems...
Not to mention, you actually have to land anywhere near the inty's lock range. Good luck with that when the task involved is first a scan, and then a warp by the prober, and then a warp by you to the prober :)
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1924
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 21:23:05 -
[1526] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote: You can get around most of those defense with number, You can only fit so many damps on an inty or ECM mods on an ECM ship after all. Oh look, the solution is again the same as to many problems...
Not to mention, you actually have to land anywhere near the inty's lock range. Good luck with that when the task involved is first a scan, and then a warp by the prober, and then a warp by you to the prober :)
Or you can use the most "OP" thing in this game and clutter the grid around his target with friendly ship. One of them will catch or kill or push it away. A loose ball of caracals with rapid light will force an inty off the field. Entosis inty will still be stupid but at least you can shove him off the field. Letting ships as manoeuvrable and fast as inties being able to run entosis link is where the mistakes was made imo. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
78
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 21:25:29 -
[1527] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Or you can use the most "OP" thing in this game and clutter the grid around his target with friendly ship. One of them will catch or kill or push it away. A loose ball of caracals with rapid light will force an inty off the field. Entosis inty will still be stupid but at least you can shove him off the field. Letting ships as manoeuvrable and fast as inties being able to run entosis link is where the mistakes was made imo.
Yeah..
And then imagine if a group decides to escalate with a bunch of orthruses, which are zipping out at 200km, using T2 links. Any inty or cruiser hull that gets anywhere near it will get evaporated. At least with 10 inties, you could hope that a few of them land scrams and webs. With these changes, they will always land 50-100km behind those guys. If entosis troll wasn't a thing before, now it will be. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1924
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 21:36:09 -
[1528] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:
Or you can use the most "OP" thing in this game and clutter the grid around his target with friendly ship. One of them will catch or kill or push it away. A loose ball of caracals with rapid light will force an inty off the field. Entosis inty will still be stupid but at least you can shove him off the field. Letting ships as manoeuvrable and fast as inties being able to run entosis link is where the mistakes was made imo.
Yeah.. And then imagine if a group decides to escalate with a bunch of orthruses, which are zipping out at 200km, using T2 links. Any inty or cruiser hull that gets anywhere near it will get evaporated. At least with 10 inties, you could hope that a few of them land scrams and webs. With these changes, they will always land 50-100km behind those guys. If entosis troll wasn't a thing before, now it will be.
Fast maneuvrable boat with long range are kinda stupid.
News at 11. |
Dermeisen
20
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 21:43:35 -
[1529] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:stoicfaux wrote:How does the fleet warp change impact/synergize/undermine the whole entosis capture thing? I keep feeling there's a subtle connection somehow. :/
It doesnt. Cant warp around the grid and entosis at the same time.
I believe that's correct at the level of game mechanics however I anticipate warping to the command/control points that spawn in the system during the new process will involve much probing, engagement and new tactics ....
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1925
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 21:48:58 -
[1530] - Quote
Dermeisen wrote:baltec1 wrote:stoicfaux wrote:How does the fleet warp change impact/synergize/undermine the whole entosis capture thing? I keep feeling there's a subtle connection somehow. :/
It doesnt. Cant warp around the grid and entosis at the same time. I believe that's correct at the level of game mechanics however I anticipate warping to the command/control points that spawn in the system during the new process will involve much probing, engagement and new tactics ....
The guy running the link will still be unable to warp as it would break his lock. For the others, it will depend how the nodes are built. It will either permit free warp to it's grid or force a warp-in point. It might be deadspace for example and not permit warp inside of this grid. |
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2227
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 21:54:07 -
[1531] - Quote
Fleet Warp Q&A with CCP Larrikin and Spectre Fleet:
https://soundcloud.com/jayne-fillon/spectre-fleet-qa-with-ccp-larrikin
Someone wrote a tl;dr on reddit:
First question is why change in the first place:
* Give more people roles in fleets. When questioned about alts he didn't really have an answer. * Give sniper fleets more of an advantage. (Like they really need it since practically everyone runs them)
What about small fleets who can't spare the member to act as a warp beacon?
* Well that kind of sucks for them.
How will this change make it better? Regarding perch bookmarks.
* "That would be tough to find." * Share the bookmarks.
This would give corp fleets and advantage over NPSI and other mixed fleets.
* Would like to do alliance bookmarks but "technical difficulties". * Use an alt. * Doesn't think it gives an advantage.
Changes to bookmarks?
* "Yes" * "We realize this will impact wormhole groups."
Slippery Petes OP?
* Will flail nerf bat if it gets bad.
Why not let squad commanders warp?
* This breaks the what we want to do with the bomber meta.
This change will cause fleet members to land at different times due to warp speeds, is this intended?
* Fleet warp to a scout if you want to prevent this.
Why include mission locations?
* Consistency * Slowing mission runners down is not a bad thing.
Planned solutions for wormhole people?
* Looking into it.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16237
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 22:23:47 -
[1532] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:
You can get around most of those defense with number, You can only fit so many damps on an inty or ECM mods on an ECM ship after all. Oh look, the solution is again the same as to many problems...
If they bring numbers the FYF will take over.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1925
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 22:31:41 -
[1533] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:
You can get around most of those defense with number, You can only fit so many damps on an inty or ECM mods on an ECM ship after all. Oh look, the solution is again the same as to many problems...
If they bring numbers the FYF will take over.
And again, you used to eternal solution to most of EVE's problems. It create another but hey, we all wanted to not have limits right?
Off topic, what would happen if 2 FYF faced off? Fastest locker win? |
Rekatan
We Heart U
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 22:41:07 -
[1534] - Quote
Listening to the Q&A has been extremely frustrating... Every time a good compromise is suggested "ya, but that won't meet our goals with bombing runs" is the response... This should indicate to you Larrikin that bombing runs need to be addressed by specifically working with the bomber. Why they are getting lumped into this goal of making pilots more active is beyond me. The two goals clearly require two separate solutions, and it feels extremely lazy that compromises like squad warp being retained, or a delayed fleet warp "spool up" mechanic aren't being considered, solely because you're trying so hard to kill 2 or even 3 birds with 1 stone. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16237
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 22:47:38 -
[1535] - Quote
Rekatan wrote:Listening to the Q&A has been extremely frustrating... Every time a good compromise is suggested "ya, but that won't meet our goals with bombing runs" is the response... This should indicate to you Larrikin that bombing runs need to be addressed by specifically working with the bomber. Why they are getting lumped into this goal of making pilots more active is beyond me. The two goals clearly require two separate solutions, and it feels extremely lazy that compromises like squad warp being retained, or a delayed fleet warp "spool up" mechanic aren't being considered, solely because you're trying so hard to kill 2 or even 3 birds with 1 stone.
Nobody has managed to cook up a direct nerf to bombers that doesn't make them utterly useless. All of the "compromises" also result in even bigger nerfs to fleet warping. How exactly is squad warping easier to live with than warping the whole fleet to a scout?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16237
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 22:49:00 -
[1536] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Off topic, what would happen if 2 FYF faced off? Fastest locker win?
It would be a battle between two rocks to see which one the wind erodes away first.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1925
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 22:52:59 -
[1537] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:
Off topic, what would happen if 2 FYF faced off? Fastest locker win?
It would be a battle between two rocks to see which one the wind erodes away first.
Reductio ad Celestisums.
I don't even know what to think of this now... |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
78
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 22:55:30 -
[1538] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Fleet Warp Q&A with CCP Larrikin and Spectre Fleet: https://soundcloud.com/jayne-fillon/spectre-fleet-qa-with-ccp-larrikin Someone wrote a tl;dr on reddit at https://m.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3a71h3/fleet_warp_qa_with_ccp_larrikin_and_spectre_fleet/ (below) First question is why change in the first place: * Give more people roles in fleets. When questioned about alts he didn't really have an answer. * Give sniper fleets more of an advantage. (Like they really need it since practically everyone runs them) What about small fleets who can't spare the member to act as a warp beacon? * Well that kind of sucks for them. How will this change make it better? Regarding perch bookmarks. * "That would be tough to find." * Share the bookmarks. This would give corp fleets and advantage over NPSI and other mixed fleets. * Would like to do alliance bookmarks but "technical difficulties". * Use an alt. * Doesn't think it gives an advantage. Changes to bookmarks? * "Yes" * "We realize this will impact wormhole groups." Slippery Petes OP? * Will flail nerf bat if it gets bad. Why not let squad commanders warp? * This breaks the what we want to do with the bomber meta. This change will cause fleet members to land at different times due to warp speeds, is this intended? * Fleet warp to a scout if you want to prevent this. Why include mission locations? * Consistency * Slowing mission runners down is not a bad thing. Planned solutions for wormhole people? * Looking into it.
Thank you, Z.
I'm going to hope that CCP Fozzie will sleep on this tonight and wake up realizing that he effectively made the case for why this is such a bad idea, and why the supposed benefits are marginal at best. It's easy to ignore forum whiners like me, but hopefully hearing the demerits of the idea in your own voice has a greater effect.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16237
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 22:56:36 -
[1539] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:baltec1 wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:
Off topic, what would happen if 2 FYF faced off? Fastest locker win?
It would be a battle between two rocks to see which one the wind erodes away first. Reductio ad Celestisums. I don't even know what to think of this now...
I does fit into the mantra of no fun allowed.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
78
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 22:57:25 -
[1540] - Quote
Rekatan wrote:Listening to the Q&A has been extremely frustrating... Every time a good compromise is suggested "ya, but that won't meet our goals with bombing runs" is the response... This should indicate to you Larrikin that bombing runs need to be addressed by specifically working with the bomber. Why they are getting lumped into this goal of making pilots more active is beyond me. The two goals clearly require two separate solutions, and it feels extremely lazy that compromises like squad warp being retained, or a delayed fleet warp "spool up" mechanic aren't being considered, solely because you're trying so hard to kill 2 or even 3 birds with 1 stone.
Exactly.. it's such a ham-handed "solution" to a bunch of problems it doesn't even fix, and creates even more issues..
|
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2821
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 23:33:17 -
[1541] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote: The goons have realized that it is easier to "ruin your gameplay" by controlling the CSM rather than trying to herd their cats (members) in-game for the same goal?
heh, good luck with that
m
Mike Azariah Gö¼GöÇGöÇGö¼n++ ¯|(pâä)/¯
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
1717
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 23:36:32 -
[1542] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:How does the fleet warp change impact/synergize/undermine the whole entosis capture thing? I keep feeling there's a subtle connection somehow. :/ Really fast magic wand ship that you can no longer warp tackle onto?
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
254
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 00:23:59 -
[1543] - Quote
If large fleets fighting aligned to safes is your main concern, the squad warp limitation would be FINE and wouldn't break every other use of fleet warp. You are throwing the baby out with the bathwater! |
Vandarra Deneroth
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 01:45:39 -
[1544] - Quote
If the underlying problem is about bombing runs then nerf bombing runs.
Make it so bombers have a 10-15 second cloak/warp activation timer after launching their bombs - at least this gives fleets the chance to blap a few of them and make it more viable to bring anti bomber support - fleets without anti-bomber support...well tough.
There is nothing wrong with bombers (damage wise) apart from the fact they can make run after run in relative safety.
Still - i agree with some of the changes that have been suggested by CCP but they are making them a little heavy handed and for the wrong reasons. Removing Fleet Warping to bookmarks "in space" (i.e. not an object) should be removed however how do you go about this without removing warping to Jump bridges etc as they are effectively ... bookmarks.
- Leave fleet warp how it is - Remove fleet warping to bookmarks - Allow JB's/Alliance/Ally structures such as JB's to appear in your menu for warp location - Disable warp/cloak on bombers for 10-15 secs after launch
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
333
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 01:46:39 -
[1545] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Interceptor armed with sensor damp does the job easily enough.
No, it doesn't - can't fit a T2 entosis link. With the smaller entosis range, it's a lot easier to sit a gallente recon w/a sebo to scram it and kill it.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
333
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 01:49:19 -
[1546] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Off topic, what would happen if 2 FYF faced off? Fastest locker win?
Contrary to Baltec's erosion response, direct experience says that yes, the side that hits critical mass of sensor dampening on the enemy fleet's Celestes then proceeds to kill those Celestes, and wins.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
333
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 01:50:20 -
[1547] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:heh, good luck with that
m
Haven't you already been accused multiple times of being one of our secret CSM plants, Mike? |
Omega 3333
Aliastra Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 03:29:10 -
[1548] - Quote
CCP.... your getting the feedback and its mostly NEGATIVE... dont do this, listen to your community. |
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2821
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 04:14:02 -
[1549] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Mike Azariah wrote:heh, good luck with that
m Haven't you already been accused multiple times of being one of our secret CSM plants, Mike?
Often accused, never convicted.
I still have to listen to the soundcloud to see what larrikin said. For me it is still not about bombers but players having to play.
m
Mike Azariah Gö¼GöÇGöÇGö¼n++ ¯|(pâä)/¯
|
Mario Putzo
1434
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 04:16:31 -
[1550] - Quote
How to solve all the complaints.
Make Bookmarks a shareable warp to link in chat. Such as linking a system.
- Scout gets BM, drags from people and places, into fleet chat, everyone then warps to the bookmark from fleet chat.
Accomplishes the same desire of having people fly their own ships, it forces the FC to ensure his pilots are warping in an efficient order so the fleet lands in an effective formation and not staggering in.
|
|
joecuster
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
66
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 04:16:43 -
[1551] - Quote
This is a step in the right direction more patches like this death to the null bear/blob |
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2231
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 04:21:47 -
[1552] - Quote
Oh for goodness sake, he wants to remove Orbit, Approach and Keep at Range next. This would utterly kill so much frigate and destroyer game play by making it impossible to get under the guns of a slower tracking weapon system.
I manually pilot cruisers and above. But for small ships the server tick speed means you cannot orbit manually at close range because you are already out of orbit by the time the next tick comes around. And you have to manage cap, reps, tackle and webs, weapons, overheating, target switching for drones etc etc.
Discussed in the wormhole feedback soundcloud: https://m.soundcloud.com/jimsuletu/wormholefleetwarping
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
333
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 04:41:34 -
[1553] - Quote
Zappity wrote:he wants to remove Orbit, Approach and Keep at Range next
Yeaaaaah, if they want to do that, they damned well better give us 3-dimensional navigation systems, or it's going to be impossible to keep a fleet moving together.
'Everybody aim 4 stars left of the nearest planet... and then up, even with the second cloud band up from the planet's equator.' 'FC, I'm playing on low graphics because there's 1200 people on grid?' 'RIP.'
I mean, hell, at least give us the ability to set xy/z headings off of the 'north' each system map defaults to - and let us put them in through an actual gorram nav interface, not clicking more or less blindly in space. 'Everyone align heading 283 by -30' will still throw things into utter chaos, but at least then we can enjoy mocking one another for not being able to use a keypad.
|
joecuster
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
66
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 04:42:07 -
[1554] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Oh for goodness sake, he wants to remove Orbit, Approach and Keep at Range next. This would utterly kill so much frigate and destroyer game play by making it impossible to get under the guns of a slower tracking weapon system. I manually pilot cruisers and above. But for small ships the server tick speed means you cannot orbit manually at close range because you are already out of orbit by the time the next tick comes around. And you have to manage cap, reps, tackle and webs, weapons, overheating, target switching for drones etc etc. Discussed in the wormhole feedback soundcloud: https://m.soundcloud.com/jimsuletu/wormholefleetwarping lolwut |
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2231
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 05:04:30 -
[1555] - Quote
joecuster wrote:Zappity wrote:Oh for goodness sake, he wants to remove Orbit, Approach and Keep at Range next. This would utterly kill so much frigate and destroyer game play by making it impossible to get under the guns of a slower tracking weapon system. I manually pilot cruisers and above. But for small ships the server tick speed means you cannot orbit manually at close range because you are already out of orbit by the time the next tick comes around. And you have to manage cap, reps, tackle and webs, weapons, overheating, target switching for drones etc etc. Discussed in the wormhole feedback soundcloud: https://m.soundcloud.com/jimsuletu/wormholefleetwarping lolwut What is lolwut?
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
335
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 05:10:02 -
[1556] - Quote
Yup, it's at 23:30 on the soundcloud. He'd love to remove Approach, Keep at Range, and Orbit. Because in any kind of fight of significant size, the logistics clearly don't have enough to do, trying to catch broadcasts that can be coming in at a rate of dozens in a second while still keeping themselves from drifting off away from the fleet or into enemy gun range.
Tell you what, Larrikin: forget the nav interface - give me a crew, so I can have the 10-50 people able to focus on different tasks that my cruiser's already supposed to have at minimum.
Cuz I'm good, but I can't actually do the work of 10 brains at once, let alone 50.
Honestly, when was the last time these guys did anything larger than a dozen people in their fleet? |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
83
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 05:10:10 -
[1557] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Oh for goodness sake, he wants to remove Orbit, Approach and Keep at Range next. This would utterly kill so much frigate and destroyer game play by making it impossible to get under the guns of a slower tracking weapon system. I manually pilot cruisers and above. But for small ships the server tick speed means you cannot orbit manually at close range because you are already out of orbit by the time the next tick comes around. And you have to manage cap, reps, tackle and webs, weapons, overheating, target switching for drones etc etc. Discussed in the wormhole feedback soundcloud: https://m.soundcloud.com/jimsuletu/wormholefleetwarping
And the the TL;DR for those who don't wanna listen to the whole thing: http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3a8pss/recording_of_ccp_fleet_warp_meeting_with_wormhole/csac3si
I cringed reading through it all. A lot. RIP Eve?
|
Canon Makanen
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 05:14:26 -
[1558] - Quote
Many FC just leave the game already, in spectre or other null alliances; and you are still want to make the rest of them annoying to play the game, gg CCP |
Dun'Gal
Myriad Contractors Inc.
257
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 06:38:31 -
[1559] - Quote
Everyone knows why they want to remove those options right? It's because you can now pilot with your keyboard if you so choose - because you know, they invested time into making that work, may as well force us to use it.... |
Ihal Urgudz
Open University of Celestial Hardship Art of War Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 06:41:02 -
[1560] - Quote
Reyko DU93 wrote: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. Just as I started flying bombers
And now I have no reason to even start training stealth bombers, torps, cloaks, and missile skills The reason for resubscribing this pilot is in question. Canceling account, and will submit a support ticket for a refund,. |
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2231
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 07:01:16 -
[1561] - Quote
Ihal Urgudz wrote:Reyko DU93 wrote: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. Just as I started flying bombers And now I have no reason to even start training stealth bombers, torps, cloaks, and missile skills The reason for resubscribing this pilot is in question. Canceling account, and will submit a support ticket for a refund,. Bombers will still be useful. You will just have to be better at flying them.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1418
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 07:21:19 -
[1562] - Quote
This one nails it for me.
Quote:CCP Larrikin: Let's talk about combat warping, such as joining a fight on POS or Wormhole. You won't land all at the same time, and that is one of our stated design goals. People participating instead of being warped around with perfect precision is exactly what we want. We want to give room for skilled fleets rather than skill FC's to shine.
Someone want to educate me in how I can SLOW DOWN my warp speed by using my "skills" please.
Anyone?
Hello......? |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
83
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 07:26:43 -
[1563] - Quote
afkalt wrote:This one nails it for me. Quote:CCP Larrikin: Let's talk about combat warping, such as joining a fight on POS or Wormhole. You won't land all at the same time, and that is one of our stated design goals. People participating instead of being warped around with perfect precision is exactly what we want. We want to give room for skilled fleets rather than skill FC's to shine.
Someone want to educate me in how I can SLOW DOWN my warp speed by using my "skills" please. Anyone? Hello......?
See, what will happen is the FC will get his alt into position, and then warp the fleet to that alt at the right range. This will fulfill none of the stated goals because: - the alt is the FC's and he will have to do more work for the same result. - if the alt is not the FC, that dude is now a mobile bookmark and will sit out the fight waiting to provide the next warpin, whereas he would have been a logi or dps or something he enjoys. (Note that if he enjoyed being a scout he would have been one already..) - the average Joe in fleet is participating no more than before, since he's still being warped around. He does face a lower quality of life, as he is sitting on his hands for that much longer.
|
Rat Scout
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 07:44:06 -
[1564] - Quote
afkalt wrote:This one nails it for me. Quote:CCP Larrikin: Let's talk about combat warping, such as joining a fight on POS or Wormhole. You won't land all at the same time, and that is one of our stated design goals. People participating instead of being warped around with perfect precision is exactly what we want. We want to give room for skilled fleets rather than skill FC's to shine.
Someone want to educate me in how I can SLOW DOWN my warp speed by using my "skills" please. Anyone? Hello......? Edit: The best way to explain it in a one liner came from there too. You're not making things hard, you're making them awkward. Awkward isn't fun, nor is overcoming it "skill".
U use a Higs rig, DUH |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16237
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 10:13:12 -
[1565] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:baltec1 wrote:Interceptor armed with sensor damp does the job easily enough. No, it doesn't - can't fit a T2 entosis link. With the smaller entosis range, it's a lot easier to sit a gallente recon w/a sebo to scram it and kill it.
I wasn't fitting an entosis on it, It was simply to disrupt the other guy.Turns out its not terribly hard to deal with enemy entosis gangs.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16237
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 10:21:11 -
[1566] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:afkalt wrote:This one nails it for me. Quote:CCP Larrikin: Let's talk about combat warping, such as joining a fight on POS or Wormhole. You won't land all at the same time, and that is one of our stated design goals. People participating instead of being warped around with perfect precision is exactly what we want. We want to give room for skilled fleets rather than skill FC's to shine.
Someone want to educate me in how I can SLOW DOWN my warp speed by using my "skills" please. Anyone? Hello......? See, what will happen is the FC will get his alt into position, and then warp the fleet to that alt at the right range. This will fulfill none of the stated goals because: - the alt is the FC's and he will have to do more work for the same result. - if the alt is not the FC, that dude is now a mobile bookmark and will sit out the fight waiting to provide the next warpin, whereas he would have been a logi or dps or something he enjoys. (Note that if he enjoyed being a scout he would have been one already..) - the average Joe in fleet is participating no more than before, since he's still being warped around. He does face a lower quality of life, as he is sitting on his hands for that much longer.
If you don't want to be a scout then dont be one, to say you are nothing more than a boring mobile bookmark though is a lie. This is how we used to do things and there was a lot of people who had fun with it. It is one of the most active jobs you could have in a fleet and a damnsight more engaging than ctrl-click next broadcasted target.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Barrogh Habalu
Forever Winter Absolute Zero.
864
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 10:25:40 -
[1567] - Quote
Inb4 "time your warp". Although I don't see how it's a fun gameplay. |
Yun Kuai
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
258
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 10:27:16 -
[1568] - Quote
afkalt wrote:This one nails it for me. Quote:CCP Larrikin: Let's talk about combat warping, such as joining a fight on POS or Wormhole. You won't land all at the same time, and that is one of our stated design goals. People participating instead of being warped around with perfect precision is exactly what we want. We want to give room for skilled fleets rather than skill FC's to shine.
Someone want to educate me in how I can SLOW DOWN my warp speed by using my "skills" please. Anyone? Hello......? Edit: The best way to explain it in a one liner came from there too. You're not making things hard, you're making them awkward. Awkward isn't fun, nor is overcoming it "skill".
You know how every ship has different warp speeds? You know how 99.9% of doctrines all fly 1-3 ships in each doctrine setting? You know how easy it would be to say, "BS (lol, who uses BS in fleet fights...) start your warp now." *counts down timer* "Logi, start your warp at 50km" *counts down timer* Inties, start your warp now"
Then all of sudden you have a fleet landing roughly at the same time as opposed to the current version of exactly at the same time. This change will give players a lot more responsibility (unless the overlord FC continues to micro manage everything in a fleet as current status quo), and it's still manageable to keep the fleet nearly together. But it also allows players to make mistakes and get punished by that; i.e. warping too early, warping to the wrong range, warping off grid too late and getting caught, etc.
--------------------------------------------------------::::::::::::--:::-----:::---::::::::::::--------------:::----------:::----:::---:::----------------------:::::::-------:::---:::----::::::-------------------:::-----------:::--:::----:::---------------------::::::::::::----:::::::----:::::::::::::-------
|
Barrogh Habalu
Forever Winter Absolute Zero.
864
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 10:29:29 -
[1569] - Quote
Yun Kuai wrote:You know how every ship has different warp speeds? You know how 99.9% of doctrines all fly 1-3 ships in each doctrine setting? You know how easy it would be to say, "BS (lol, who uses BS in fleet fights...) start your warp now." *counts down timer* "Logi, start your warp at 50km" *counts down timer* Inties, start your warp now" And well, it's FC playing the game and the rest being drones again if you think about it.
I don't think the main goal is being achieved like that. |
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2232
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 10:31:59 -
[1570] - Quote
So Larrikin confirmed in the wormhole whatsit that he had not thought about the tight timing involved in catching bears in wormhole sites. This is also an issue in nullsec. If you have to combat scan you are on the clock.
While I understand the goals I do not want this play style hurt by these changes. I hope that CCP's wormhole solution (assuming there is one) is also applicable in null so I have a chance at catching people under these circumstances.
Please at least consider reducing the fitting requirements of Expanded Probe launchers so I don't have to use a T3 to scan and tackle.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16237
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 10:46:49 -
[1571] - Quote
Zappity wrote:So Larrikin confirmed in the wormhole whatsit that he had not thought about the tight timing involved in catching bears in wormhole sites. This is also an issue in nullsec. If you have to combat scan you are on the clock.
While I understand the goals I do not want this play style hurt by these changes. I hope that CCP's wormhole solution (assuming there is one) is also applicable in null so I have a chance at catching people under these circumstances.
Please at least consider reducing the fitting requirements of Expanded Probe launchers so I don't have to use a T3 to scan and tackle.
Use a cov-ops.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2232
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 10:47:34 -
[1572] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Zappity wrote:So Larrikin confirmed in the wormhole whatsit that he had not thought about the tight timing involved in catching bears in wormhole sites. This is also an issue in nullsec. If you have to combat scan you are on the clock.
While I understand the goals I do not want this play style hurt by these changes. I hope that CCP's wormhole solution (assuming there is one) is also applicable in null so I have a chance at catching people under these circumstances.
Please at least consider reducing the fitting requirements of Expanded Probe launchers so I don't have to use a T3 to scan and tackle. Use a cov-ops. To tackle? Lol
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
William Husker Adama
Kimotoro Company The Volition Cult
16
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 11:26:34 -
[1573] - Quote
Stop, just stop. This proposed change to fleet warping will only make the game more tedious, not more engaging. It causes many more problems than it claims to fix and punishes people who have different playstyles than nullsec blobs. But even from my corner of nullsec, from what I've seen and heard there is minimal to zero support for this change. Please fix real problems first; add alliance bookmarks, work on the new structures, make sure fozzie sov works properly, don't waste time and resources on problems that don't even really exist.
Please, no half-assed compromises, let this idea die gracefully as it should. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16237
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 11:49:39 -
[1574] - Quote
Zappity wrote: To tackle? Lol
Why not? We use just as flimsy interceptors, t1 frigates and Ewar frigs.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1419
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 11:53:04 -
[1575] - Quote
Yun Kuai wrote:afkalt wrote:This one nails it for me. Quote:CCP Larrikin: Let's talk about combat warping, such as joining a fight on POS or Wormhole. You won't land all at the same time, and that is one of our stated design goals. People participating instead of being warped around with perfect precision is exactly what we want. We want to give room for skilled fleets rather than skill FC's to shine.
Someone want to educate me in how I can SLOW DOWN my warp speed by using my "skills" please. Anyone? Hello......? Edit: The best way to explain it in a one liner came from there too. You're not making things hard, you're making them awkward. Awkward isn't fun, nor is overcoming it "skill". You know how every ship has different warp speeds? You know how 99.9% of doctrines all fly 1-3 ships in each doctrine setting? You know how easy it would be to say, "BS (lol, who uses BS in fleet fights...) start your warp now." *counts down timer* "Logi, start your warp at 50km" *counts down timer* Inties, start your warp now" Then all of sudden you have a fleet landing roughly at the same time as opposed to the current version of exactly at the same time. This change will give players a lot more responsibility (unless the overlord FC continues to micro manage everything in a fleet as current status quo), and it's still manageable to keep the fleet nearly together. But it also allows players to make mistakes and get punished by that; i.e. warping too early, warping to the wrong range, warping off grid too late and getting caught, etc.
Except we don't have access to a TTL (time to land) formula, so this isn't possible to work out with any degree of accuracy.
All that will happen is people warp to a mobile bookmark covops at ranges.
Value add: OP SUCCESS. Apparently. |
Obidiah Kane
Black Rebel Rifter Club The Devil's Tattoo
22
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 12:52:00 -
[1576] - Quote
Dear CCP - while I am not completely against the changes you propose (at least in principle), I am against subscriptions to my favourite game dropping even further...and this proposal is causing a lot of disquiet. There have been a number of alternative suggestions (great one on reddit at the moment) that I think you guys should probably take away and consider, pushing back any decision for a couple of months...much like the discussed changes to cloaking that got shelved.
It is also probably wise to drop these bombshells a few months in advance, too - giving us a few weeks only allows for the reactive anger cycle, not the following reflective cycle that may actually bring some balance to the debate.
[I would also like you to add ship and mod balancing to this list of 'early warning'- as they effectively cost real world money and I would stop wasting said money on to-be-nerfed skills/ hulls, if I was informed in good time.]
As an aside; I am a product manager for a piece of Software-as-a-Service and if I encountered such open disdain for proposed changes, from my client base, I would at least pause and consider, regardless of the perceived need. The code is my livelihood...threats to it's future efficacy and profitability; actual or perceived, direct or indirect, should be the absolute priority...
TL;DR: Think this clearly needs a little more time and thought, at the very least. |
Barrogh Habalu
Forever Winter Absolute Zero.
865
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 12:55:53 -
[1577] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Except we don't have access to a TTL (time to land) formula, so this isn't possible to work out with any degree of accuracy. Well, I'm pretty sure it's not impossible to roughly approximate it by gathering experimental data from people in your corp/alliance. Pretty sure that's what some entities were doing since forever when faced with tasks like this one.
It helps that doctrines don't have huge variance of warp speeds, so you can leave out bothering with trying to stuff warp speed variable as opposed to counting what you need on class-by-class basis.
Not that I'm trying to support the change, but it's a way to go around in case these changes drop. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1927
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 12:58:28 -
[1578] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Yup, it's at 23:30 on the soundcloud. He'd love to remove Approach, Keep at Range, and Orbit. Because in any kind of fight of significant size, the logistics clearly don't have enough to do, trying to catch broadcasts that can be coming in at a rate of dozens in a second while still keeping themselves from drifting off away from the fleet or into enemy gun range. Tell you what, Larrikin: forget the nav interface - give me a crew, so I can have the 10-50 people able to focus on different tasks that my cruiser's already supposed to have at minimum. Cuz I'm good, but I can't actually do the work of 10 brains at once, let alone 50. Honestly, when was the last time these guys did anything in subcaps larger than a dozen people in their fleet?
The new guy trying to learn this job will have an even harder time than a vet like you who already can handle part of it.
Can't wait for logi frigs to constantly get slingshotted by their own fleet because they dared take their eyes off their overview to have their range tot he main fleet so they could check the broadcast window and their target to apply reps. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1927
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 13:00:01 -
[1579] - Quote
Barrogh Habalu wrote:afkalt wrote:Except we don't have access to a TTL (time to land) formula, so this isn't possible to work out with any degree of accuracy. Well, I'm pretty sure it's not impossible to roughly approximate it by gathering experimental data from people in your corp/alliance. Pretty sure that's what some entities were doing since forever when faced with tasks like this one. It helps that doctrines don't have huge variance of warp speeds, so you can leave out bothering with trying to stuff warp speed variable as opposed to counting what you need on class-by-class basis. Not that I'm trying to support the change, but it's a way to go around in case these changes drop.
It's not like logistics have a 50% advantage in warp speed over battleship right... It looks small because it's only like 1 AU/s but thats still happen to be 50% of 2AU/s... |
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
255
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 14:16:31 -
[1580] - Quote
Offloading some fleet movement to the FC frees fleet members to make other tactical decisions rather than spending all their time following lots of trivial orders. EVE is a complicated game and if fleet members aren't already using their brains, they're underperforming. Apart from the warp change breaking multiple playstyles, wormhole life and -10 highsec fleets, nerfing fleet warping or indeed anchoring doesn't change the skill cap, it changes the skill floor and effectively excludes more people from fleets.
If your goal is to increase "fleet participation", driving everyone but another FC alt away from fleets is a terrible way to go about it. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16238
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 14:36:58 -
[1581] - Quote
Masao Kurata wrote:Offloading some fleet movement to the FC frees fleet members to make other tactical decisions rather than spending all their time following lots of trivial orders. EVE is a complicated game and if fleet members aren't already using their brains, they're underperforming. Apart from the warp change breaking multiple playstyles, wormhole life and -10 highsec fleets, nerfing fleet warping or indeed anchoring doesn't change the skill cap, it changes the skill floor and effectively excludes more people from fleets.
If your goal is to increase "fleet participation", driving everyone but another FC alt away from fleets is a terrible way to go about it.
That post is a fine example of telling if someone has no experience in fleets.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Veskrashen
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
868
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 14:47:10 -
[1582] - Quote
Some suggestions:
1. Nuke fleet warp completely. If CCP wants folks to have to fly more individually, then just do it already. 2. Allow bookmarks to be broadcast as a "Warp to" / "Align to" command. 3. Restrict broadcasting to up/down 1 level. In other words, squad members broadcast to their squadmates and Squad Commander only. Squad Commanders broadcast to their squad members and Wing Commander only. Wing Commanders broadcast to fellow WCs and SCs in their Wing only. FCs only broadcast down to WCs.
IMO, it appears that one big change that CCP is angling towards is to break the ability of a small minority of superstar FCs to efficiently control massive numbers of other pilots. Fleet warp + alts + probes = being able to move masses of people in perfect coordination. Breaking that down by requiring pilots to warp themselves forces pilots to be more on the ball. Fleet success then becomes a bit more about line members being able to fly well than having a good FC plus N+1 F1 monkeys.
Moreover, by restricting broadcasts, you require those in leadership slots to relay commands up/down the fleet structure. This would not only cause delays in targeting and damage application, but would also ensure that someone taking damage didn't get immediate reps from an entire logi wing or similar situation.
At the moment, there are absolutely no downsides to N+1, since a competent FC with a probe alt can ensure perfect coordination. By requiring intermediary levels of command in a fleet to also be on the ball, N+1 is only as effective as the ENTIRETY of your command structure, not just those at the top. This means that a smaller, more well-coordinated fleet would stand a better chance of having an impact against a larger mass with worse coordination.
We Gallente have a saying: "CCP created the Gallente Militia to train the Fighters..."
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31912
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 14:52:13 -
[1583] - Quote
The new multiboxing meta: have identically-skilled pilots in identically-fit reships ready to warp in as you die.
Looks like we're going to separate the men from the boys, as they say.
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
|
Dermeisen
20
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 14:53:05 -
[1584] - Quote
How about squad warp, but no squad warp for cloaked ships.....
It is useful to use take a parsimonious approach to each goals and address each with the least invasive change.
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
Quiggle Queue
POS Party Low-Class
28
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 14:59:50 -
[1585] - Quote
Proposed Solution
Step 1 - Allow broadcast to warp target.
Step 2 - Allow each pilot to set their warp-speed (up to ship max), in the HUD.
Outcome:
- Interaction goes up
- Everyone has to be on their toes
- If all goes well, everyone can land together
- Plenty of opportunity for mistakes, and for pilots to shine
|
Dermeisen
20
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 15:10:25 -
[1586] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Zappity wrote:he wants to remove Orbit, Approach and Keep at Range next Yeaaaaah, if they want to do that, they damned well better give us 3-dimensional navigation systems, or it's going to be impossible to keep a fleet moving together. 'Everybody aim 4 stars left of the nearest planet... and then up, even with the second cloud band up from the planet's equator.' 'FC, I'm playing on low graphics because there's 1200 people on grid?' 'RIP.' I mean, hell, at least give us the ability to set xy/z headings off of the 'north' each system map defaults to - and let us put them in through an actual gorram nav interface, not clicking more or less blindly in space. 'Everyone align heading 283 by -30' will still throw things into utter chaos, but at least then we can enjoy mocking one another for not being able to use a keypad. Edit to add: Ideally, this would work reciprocally - clicking in space would display the heading you've set on the nav display, so the FC can align, then give everyone the heading. (Or, for that matter, scouts and other fleet members could relay that nav data by clicking in space to get a relative heading - 'FC, they're landing on-grid, bearing 125 degrees by 80 degrees.')
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31912
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 15:13:06 -
[1587] - Quote
My clickfinger hurts just thinking about this.
This needs to be offset by an improved UI that doesn't require your eyes to move to the edges of the screen.
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
|
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
1181
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 15:41:57 -
[1588] - Quote
Maybe with the jumpdrive changes killing off hordes of cyno alts, no clear role for Capitals in Fozziesov causing unsubs of Titan, Supercarrier, and even more cyno alts, and a future of POSes being replaced with Citadels terminating flocks of POS timer alts, they realised they needed to come up with a replacement reason for alt accounts to keep the subs coming in. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
85
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 16:01:43 -
[1589] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:If you don't want to be a scout then dont be one, to say you are nothing more than a boring mobile bookmark though is a lie. This is how we used to do things and there was a lot of people who had fun with it. It is one of the most active jobs you could have in a fleet and a damnsight more engaging than ctrl-click next broadcasted target.
Except, as one of your own alliance mates points out, this task will be completed by the FC, and therefore do jack all for the average fleet member. |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
309
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 16:08:22 -
[1590] - Quote
Quiggle Queue wrote:Step 2 - Allow each pilot to set their warp-speed (up to ship max), in the HUD.
That basically undermines one of the main goals of this change. Also this will be massively abused. Ships setting the lowest
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
85
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 16:13:42 -
[1591] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Zappity wrote: To tackle? Lol
Why not? We use just as flimsy interceptors, t1 frigates and Ewar frigs.
With that covops also playing the role of being the linchpin for positioning the fleet, it's a great way to make sure that they all go home after it dies waiting for its fleetmates to land. Unless it's going for something like a badger or a shuttle, I suppose.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
337
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 16:16:40 -
[1592] - Quote
Barrogh Habalu wrote:Inb4 "time your warp".
Edit: I don't think it's terrible idea to allow pilot to warp at speeds slower than maximum.
I've actually wanted that ability for a while. It might seem nuts, but if I'm trying to burn off jump fatigue, being able to tell my carrier to do that 100 AU warp at 0.01 au/s while I bounce safes? mmmmm, tasty. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31915
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 16:17:51 -
[1593] - Quote
EVE is the most fun while playing on just one client. Multiboxing happens because some people will simply play as hard as they can. Take the ability or benefit away, and then we can start playing a game that is balanced and played under the assumption of using just one character per player. You get better balance decisions that way.
As for uses of alts, there will always be scouting. I don't see that going away until EVE is declared one-client only. You'd think that won't happen any time soon, but lately I've been surprised at the bold decisions that impact multiboxing. It would be an interesting development.
This change, though, removing align and orbit, and approach, and keep at range... the bulk of the impact is on players who don't know what's going on, but maybe that's a good thing. It requires more instruction by experienced players, which is the type of thing that builds bonds.
It's bad, though, because EVE is already confounding, and I often wonder if this game's intellectual barrier to entry is a bit much. I worry about that because I'd like to see more players in EVE. The unsettling thing about that possibility is EVE would have to be more enjoyable first, then the increase in player numbers follows.
Right now you have Fozzie ideating changes like these that would forcibly improve gameplay, but a lack of intuitive UI design to make up for the loss of awareness.
It might seem odd that players react to a single change like this with so much conviction, but it's because of the context of isolated changes within the rest of the game. I think the biggest deficiency outside of these types of changes is the UI. I hate seeing it even called a UI, because the goal should be more of a HUD. The client design strategy can be accurately described as tables.
I miss Soundwave. I could tell he understood this type of interplay.
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
|
stoicfaux
5915
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 16:19:21 -
[1594] - Quote
Dermeisen wrote:How about squad warp, but no squad warp for cloaked ships..... It is useful to use take a parsimonious approach to each goals and address each with the least invasive change. Or maybe remove covert ops cloak from bombers? Tweak their warp deceleration constant and/or fiddle with their bomb release timings to balance them. (Instead of nerfing fleet warp.)
Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16239
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 16:49:20 -
[1595] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:baltec1 wrote:If you don't want to be a scout then dont be one, to say you are nothing more than a boring mobile bookmark though is a lie. This is how we used to do things and there was a lot of people who had fun with it. It is one of the most active jobs you could have in a fleet and a damnsight more engaging than ctrl-click next broadcasted target. Except, as one of your own alliance mates points out, this task will be completed by the FC, and therefore do jack all for the average fleet member.
It can be but doesnt mean it will be. FCs tend to lose their cov ops alts a lot which is why they fly FC ships with probe launchers. There will be a need for multiple scouts in fleets and an FC cannot fly that many things.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16239
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 16:53:35 -
[1596] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:baltec1 wrote:Zappity wrote: To tackle? Lol
Why not? We use just as flimsy interceptors, t1 frigates and Ewar frigs. With that covops also playing the role of being the linchpin for positioning the fleet, it's a great way to make sure that they all go home after it dies waiting for its fleetmates to land. Unless it's going for something like a badger or a shuttle, I suppose.
So bring more than one.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
337
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 17:06:57 -
[1597] - Quote
Yun Kuai wrote: You know how every ship has different warp speeds? You know how 99.9% of doctrines all fly 1-3 ships in each doctrine setting? You know how easy it would be to say, "BS (lol, who uses BS in fleet fights...) start your warp now." *counts down timer* "Logi, start your warp at 50km" *counts down timer* Inties, start your warp now"
Completely setting aside the foolishness of '1-3 ships in each doctrine'...
Add in different top speeds within each general ship category, different skills for the pilots, and different times to accelerate into warp, and different times to accelerate from 'entering warp' to their max warp speeds, and different times to decelerate again...
So: I need to warp 50 Dominixes, 9 Armageddons, Baltec1's Navy Megathron, 5 Guardians, 6 Oneiros, 2 Augorors, an Exequror, 3 Damnations, 4 Loki, 6 Proteii, 3 Vigils, and a Hyena.
Dominix: 2.0 au/s. Max velocity*: 109 m/s. Inertia Modifier: 0.1254 Armageddon: 2.0 au/s. Max velocity: 100 m/s. Inertia Modifier: 0.13 Megathron Navy Issue: 2.0 au/s. Max velocity: 130 m/s. Inertia Modifier: 0.105 Damnation: 3.0 au/s. Max velocity: 150 m/s. Inertia Modifier: 0.7 Guardian: 3.3 au/s. Max velocity: 209 m/s. Inertia Modifier: 0.61 Oneiros: 3.3 au/s. Max velocity: 230 m/s. Inertia Modifier: 0.615 Augoror: 3.0 au/s. Max velocity: 235 m/s. Inertia Modifier: 0.56 Exequror: 3.0 au/s. Max velocity: 240 m/s. Inertia Modifier: 0.61 Loki**: 3.0 au/s. Max velocity: 237 m/s. Inertia Modifier: 0.34 Proteus**: 3.0 au/s. Max velocity: 237 m/s. Inertia Modifier: 0.4 Vigil: 5.0 au/s. Max velocity: 410 m/s. Inertia Modifier: 3.22 Hyena: 5.5 au/s. Max velocity: 375 m/s. Inertia Modifier: 3.93
My scout is 10km directly behind the enemy fleet (for the sake of simplicity), exactly 100 au away. For the first, and most straightforward example, we'll assume everyone has been previously aligned (say they're aligning toward the station grid the enemy fleet is on).
1)So, since we're stipulating everyone's already nicely aligned and at max speed, this one's simple: Give me the countdowns for each ship category. 100 au.
2)Now give me the countdowns for each ship class if the situation abruptly changes and a second enemy fleet comes in through a gate 23.48 au off the fleet's staging point (safe spot, POS, wherever the fleet was going to take that 100 au warp from). We'll be nice and simple and say that it's a nice, clean 90 degree heading change.
3)Now give me the countdowns for that same situation, except half your battleships only have Spaceship Command IV (we'll be nice and say it's half of each type), meaning they have 2% lower final agility than the ones w/Spaceship Command V. 3 of the Logi have SSC III, and one of the Vigils only has SSC I.
and do all of this on the fly, with under 30 seconds to react.
Still think it's easy?
* - all speeds base, no plates, no rigs, purely for demonstration purposes. ** - for purposes of this example, Lokis and Proteii have been given the subsystems of common builds, and an assumed subsystem skill of 5.
*** - HIDDEN STEALTH TRICK QUESTION: Baltec's actually flying his HARPYFLEET fit, so his Megathron Navy Issue warps at the same 5.5 au/s as an assault frigate, with similar velocity/agility numbers. (really, Baltec, I love those insane fits of yours.) |
Grinder2210
Most Unknown
39
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 17:08:28 -
[1598] - Quote
Such a bad idea in so many was the more i think about this idea the more a think CCP dosnt get how the game works at
So let me just outline the biggist reason why CCP is being stupid here, Its simple really.
This will create less need for alts and more need for active players IE this will cost you money CCP
Honestly the change it self isnt that big a deal I personally dont care about CCP's bottom line just saying.
As CCP Hellmar said on the O7 show " we whould have to mess something up to not last another 12 year" This type of unneeded change to fix one problem. Is as good as starting the car down the road there ..
Here's another way to fix bombers ... GET RID OF THERE No fireing delay after uncloaking .. I lot can happen if five sec's proof to that is simply ITs the same amount of time your going to delay bomber fleets form getting there with this change anyway ..
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16239
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 17:16:33 -
[1599] - Quote
Arrendis wrote: *** - HIDDEN STEALTH TRICK QUESTION: Baltec's actually flying his HARPYFLEET fit, so his Megathron Navy Issue warps at the same 5.5 au/s as an assault frigate, with similar velocity/agility numbers. (really, Baltec, I love those insane fits of yours.)
Fun fact, I have a commandthron that can double up as a scout prober :getin:
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Sierra Payne
Swamphole Inc. Swamphole
15
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 17:24:52 -
[1600] - Quote
Idea:
Let's assume for a second that this all goes through.
Please allow players to manually set their warp-speed in order to be able to warp at similar speed as the rest of your fleet. That way we can control our arrival time somewhat acceptably, and not have the Guardians land 20 seconds before the DPS (or other way around).
Please? |
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
85
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 17:32:24 -
[1601] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:So bring more than one.
I suspect people won't do much of that for the same reason they don't use covops as tackle in a gate camp, or roaming fleet.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16239
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 17:33:15 -
[1602] - Quote
Sierra Payne wrote:Idea:
Let's assume for a second that this all goes through.
Please allow players to manually set their warp-speed in order to be able to warp at similar speed as the rest of your fleet. That way we can control our arrival time somewhat acceptably, and not have the Guardians land 20 seconds before the DPS (or other way around).
Please?
Just use a cloaky scout and fleet warp to it. Works the say way it currently does.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16239
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 17:35:48 -
[1603] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:baltec1 wrote:So bring more than one. I suspect people won't do much of that for the same reason they don't use covops as tackle in a gate camp, or roaming fleet.
They dont currently because they dont need to. We used them in the past, we will use them in the furture when this lands. In terms of adapting to change this is an easy one.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
338
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 17:37:17 -
[1604] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Arrendis wrote: *** - HIDDEN STEALTH TRICK QUESTION: Baltec's actually flying his HARPYFLEET fit, so his Megathron Navy Issue warps at the same 5.5 au/s as an assault frigate, with similar velocity/agility numbers. (really, Baltec, I love those insane fits of yours.)
Fun fact, I have a commandthron that can double up as a scout prober :getin:
This surprises me not even a little. |
Naglerr
Sanguine Penguin Rote Kapelle
42
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 17:47:30 -
[1605] - Quote
http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3a8pss/recording_of_ccp_fleet_warp_meeting_with_wormhole/
This discussion(linked) makes a few things very clear to me:
- The currently proposed removal of game functionality seems destined to occur.
- There will be future changes to the game intended to remove additional functionality from the game for some reason.
- The end result product will not in any way resemble the EVE game that I currently enjoy playing.
I don't know why I'm surprised at all, when CCP messed with the spawn distances to wormholes and the majority response was "do not want" they did it anyway. Why would 80 pages of mostly negative feedback from their customers alter their plans now? I guess it just rubs me the wrong way that they refuse to even compromise when confronted with such voluminous opposition. This situation applied to real business would be something like a major car manufacturer issuing a mandatory recall where they disable all cruise control because that feature causes people to use their cars in a way the manufacturer doesn't like.
Could I adapt? Yes, I suppose I could find a way to have content in this new game, but what it boils down to for me is this: I do not like the game CCP is changing EVE to be and I don't want to. |
Sierra Payne
Swamphole Inc. Swamphole
15
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 17:49:50 -
[1606] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Sierra Payne wrote:Idea:
Let's assume for a second that this all goes through.
Please allow players to manually set their warp-speed in order to be able to warp at similar speed as the rest of your fleet. That way we can control our arrival time somewhat acceptably, and not have the Guardians land 20 seconds before the DPS (or other way around).
Please? Just use a cloaky scout and fleet warp to it. Works the say way it currently does.
I am a wormhole player, which means I need to be able to warp to my bookmarks at 0. A cloaky scout will never be at 0 on the hole when a hostile fleet is present, which means you need insane amounts of effort to get warp-ins behind/around the wormhole even if that wormhole has no other celestials in the direction where your bookmark is.
If we would purely follow your suggestion, it would be extremely cumbersome for anything to be done and really kill the fun. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16240
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 17:57:02 -
[1607] - Quote
Sierra Payne wrote:
I am a wormhole player, which means I need to be able to warp to my bookmarks at 0. A cloaky scout will never be at 0 on the hole when a hostile fleet is present, which means you need insane amounts of effort to get warp-ins behind/around the wormhole even if that wormhole has no other celestials in the direction where your bookmark is.
If we would purely follow your suggestion, it would be extremely cumbersome for anything to be done and really kill the fun.
You can warp to 0 on a cloaky.
Simply tell it when you enter warp so it can move out of the way.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
87
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 18:06:43 -
[1608] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:They dont currently because they dont need to. We used them in the past, we will use them in the furture when this lands. In terms of adapting to change this is an easy one.
I don't think there's any doubt we can adapt.
Question is why we should adapt to something that: - makes the FC do more and tedious work, often at the cost of getting additional alts, - reduces the quality of life for the average pilot by making them sit around longer, - cause balance issues with kiting setups by making them even more un-catchable, - forces WH groups to relegate a previously useful and engaged pilot to the position of a mobile bookmarks, and slow travel down by about 2x, - etc. etc.
When it's not even clear that this change will achieve what it has set out to.
|
Sierra Payne
Swamphole Inc. Swamphole
15
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 18:11:51 -
[1609] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote: - forces WH groups to relegate a previously useful and engaged pilot to the position of a mobile bookmarks, and slow travel down by about 2x,
I can't agree more.
As wormhole group you're already limited to the mass you can bring, along with the lack of people that play w-space outside the major groups. It's pretty challenging to recruit people now, and it'll be only worse if they keep pushing things like this. It forces me to triple box instead of dualbox, simply because it's insanely more tedious. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1117
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 18:19:12 -
[1610] - Quote
Naglerr wrote:http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3a8pss/recording_of_ccp_fleet_warp_meeting_with_wormhole/ This discussion(linked) makes a few things very clear to me:
- The currently proposed removal of game functionality seems destined to occur.
- There will be future changes to the game intended to remove additional functionality from the game for some reason.
- The end result product will not in any way resemble the EVE game that I currently enjoy playing.
I don't know why I'm surprised at all, when CCP messed with the spawn distances to wormholes and the majority response was "do not want" they did it anyway. Why would 80 pages of mostly negative feedback from their customers alter their plans now? I guess it just rubs me the wrong way that they refuse to even compromise when confronted with such voluminous opposition. This situation applied to real business would be something like a major car manufacturer issuing a mandatory recall where they disable all cruise control because that feature causes people to use their cars in a way the manufacturer doesn't like. Could I adapt? Yes, I suppose I could find a way to have content in this new game, but what it boils down to for me is this: I do not like the game CCP is changing EVE to be and I don't want to.
Those reddit comments are just about the most depressing thing I have read in a while.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
|
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
34
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 18:19:55 -
[1611] - Quote
Naglerr wrote:http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3a8pss/recording_of_ccp_fleet_warp_meeting_with_wormhole/ This discussion(linked) makes a few things very clear to me:
- The currently proposed removal of game functionality seems destined to occur.
- There will be future changes to the game intended to remove additional functionality from the game for some reason.
- The end result product will not in any way resemble the EVE game that I currently enjoy playing.
I don't know why I'm surprised at all, when CCP messed with the spawn distances to wormholes and the majority response was "do not want" they did it anyway. Why would 80 pages of mostly negative feedback from their customers alter their plans now? I guess it just rubs me the wrong way that they refuse to even compromise when confronted with such voluminous opposition. This situation applied to real business would be something like a major car manufacturer issuing a mandatory recall where they disable all cruise control because that feature causes people to use their cars in a way the manufacturer doesn't like. Could I adapt? Yes, I suppose I could find a way to have content in this new game, but what it boils down to for me is this: I do not like the game CCP is changing EVE to be and I don't want to.
At this point, we'd be better off giving developers back the ability to spawn items at will. It's unfortunate that the industry learned so little from the mistakes of SOE with Star Wars Galaxies.
|
Brother Mercury
Fire on the Mountain
21
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 18:30:28 -
[1612] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Sierra Payne wrote:
I am a wormhole player, which means I need to be able to warp to my bookmarks at 0. A cloaky scout will never be at 0 on the hole when a hostile fleet is present, which means you need insane amounts of effort to get warp-ins behind/around the wormhole even if that wormhole has no other celestials in the direction where your bookmark is.
If we would purely follow your suggestion, it would be extremely cumbersome for anything to be done and really kill the fun.
You can warp to 0 on a cloaky. Simply tell it when you enter warp so it can move out of the way.
The question/problem is just this: how does making this a reality, that is, this added step of warping to cloaky fleet member instead of warping fleet directly, achieve the stated goal of CCP (i.e. more fleet member participation) when 95% of the time, the FC will be the one doing this cloaky roll?
Most of us here, and I think correctly, have argued it doesn't. CCP is removing playability in return for a major inconvenience (and let's be honest, just another arbitrarily added step) which will only make fleet engagements THAT much more of a pain in the ass. And for what? One person (assuming it's not the FC -- which as we already know it will be) to have a slightly larger, albeit boring role?
I don't think most people are against increasing fleet member participation -- there have been MANY good suggestions posted that would accomplish this goal in a better way.
What scares people is the fact that CCP is clearly going to just go ahead with this change regardless of the other better ideas.
On a related note, I do believe that this change will significantly reduce new player subscriptions, unfortunately. |
Rekatan
We Heart U
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 18:30:50 -
[1613] - Quote
Larrikin and others @ CCP need to read http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3a90hi/ccpls_root_cause_analysis_or_how_to_fix_what_you/ and then reread it as many times as it takes. There's way too much "can't see the forest for the trees" going on here. After listening to both of the recorded Q&As, it really boils down to one thing:
If you're having to explain away more "side effects" and "drawbacks" than the initial change would have provided in terms of benefits, then the entire premise for the change is flawed. The above post does an outstanding job of going into more detail on that.
Would Eve benefit from removal of fleet warp (what this in fact is for most practical applications)? Possibly. Is CCP prepared for the development time/cost associated with providing adequate replacements so as to enhance the player's experience rather than ruin it? After listening to these two Q&As, clearly not.
Adding more tedium to the game is NOT how you make players more involved... No one wants this change for next month because it doesn't add content, it just adds headache. Once it adds content, it will likely receive a very different reception. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
89
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 18:31:28 -
[1614] - Quote
baltec1 wrote: You can warp to 0 on a cloaky.
Simply tell it when you enter warp so it can move out of the way.
He's talking about being a warp in for the hole itself. You don't sit at 0 on the hole. Even at 3k, you can now land up to 5km away when you warp to said cloaky at 0. I suppose the slowdown multiplier is more than 2x..
|
Iowa Banshee
Fenrir Vangard
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 18:35:57 -
[1615] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Iowa Banshee wrote:
As always we adapt - So the new method will be
After scanning jump out of the Buzzard into the Domi Wait 10mins for the bookmarks to update Check that the 2 other fleet members have the bookmarks Announce jump to XXX at 20km Announce 3-2-1 Warp
It just seems like there's a lot more needless stuff than click "warp fleet"
Scan target, warp buzzard to it, warp the fleet to the buzzard.
Then warp Buzzard to POS jump in Domi to join in fleet. Warp back to tower jump in the Buzzard warp to sig ... rinse & repeat - or maybe jetcan the sigs?
Amazing -- In a civilization so advanced it has faster than light travel, stargates, A communication channel between players that allows everything from social chat, swapping fits & overviews to instant cash transfers AND the best way to get a spot in space to warp to is Flush it out & scoop it up
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
338
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 18:43:10 -
[1616] - Quote
Iowa Banshee wrote:Amazing -- In a civilization so advanced it has faster than light travel, stargates, A communication channel between players that allows everything from social chat, swapping fits & overviews to instant cash transfers AND the best way to get a spot in space to warp to is Flush it out & scoop it up
That's right - superluminal communications completely unaffected by distances of thousands of light years, and my ship's computer can't give your ship's computer the 3 pairs of numbers that form coordinates when we're 1500m apart. |
Domania
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
66
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 18:54:07 -
[1617] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Hi Gentle Space Foke,
As announced on the o7 show we are making some changes to fleet warp.
Nope.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31920
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 19:45:36 -
[1618] - Quote
Somehow I don't think subscription income works the way people think.
This type of change is bold, and it might seem to mean fewer vet subs, and then EVE will die. But consider the possibility that most of EVE's subscription / real money income is from baddies buying PLEX.
So the income reality might actually be the opposite of what you think--less pressure on PLEX means lower ISK value on market, which means baddies will buy more PLEX to have the same amount of ISK, assuming their ISK spending stays the same.
It's a nice thought that EVE is being revamped for the sake of pure gameplay, subscriptions be damned... but that's unrealistic.
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
|
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
34
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 20:04:48 -
[1619] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:Somehow I don't think subscription income works the way people think.
This type of change is bold, and it might seem to mean fewer vet subs, and then EVE will die. But consider the possibility that most of EVE's subscription / real money income is from baddies buying PLEX.
So the income reality might actually be the opposite of what you think--less pressure on PLEX means lower ISK value on market, which means baddies will buy more PLEX to have the same amount of ISK, assuming their ISK spending stays the same.
It's a nice thought that EVE is being revamped for the sake of pure gameplay, subscriptions be damned... but that's unrealistic.
An amusing, relevant quote.
Jayne: "Can't get paid if you crawl away like a little bitty bug, neither. I got a share in this job. Ten percent of nothing isGÇölet me do the math here. Nothing into nothin'. Carry the nothin'..." |
Dermeisen
20
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 20:10:51 -
[1620] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Dermeisen wrote:How about squad warp, but no squad warp for cloaked ships..... It is useful to use take a parsimonious approach to each goals and address each with the least invasive change. Or maybe remove covert ops cloak from bombers? Tweak their warp deceleration constant and/or fiddle with their bomb release timings to balance them. (Instead of nerfing fleet warp.)
+1 for taking me at my word, and while this is appealing and bombers prevent a cool battleship meta this reply assumes that bombers are the only reason for nerfing fleet warp and we know that this isn't the case. Therefore in essence it's a straw man argument, i.e. an attempt to reframe CCPS concerns in a way that one can attack or ridicule.
I don't think bombers deserve to be complete disabled either, they are cool and the torp version is pretty effective for a low skill point player to have some pretty radical time.
On grid probing is the problem, and this change would be good for the game, if a little awkward. So for goodness sake if we want a positive change then lets not be too disingenuous.
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
|
stoicfaux
5917
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 20:17:32 -
[1621] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Iowa Banshee wrote:Amazing -- In a civilization so advanced it has faster than light travel, stargates, A communication channel between players that allows everything from social chat, swapping fits & overviews to instant cash transfers AND the best way to get a spot in space to warp to is Flush it out & scoop it up
That's right - superluminal communications completely unaffected by distances of thousands of light years, and my ship's computer can't give your ship's computer the 3 pairs of numbers that form coordinates when we're 1500m apart. Meh. According to the lore, your ship's gravity capacitor (not computer) has to lock onto a gravity signal into order to warp to it. So in theory, random bookmarks shouldn't work. Nor should warping to most/all sub-caps work. Nor should any target smaller than a "cluster of asteroids..."
If CCP can completely ignore their lore, then appealing to logic is probably a sub-optimal debate tactic as well.
edit: Gravity capacitor, not computer, decides where you warp.
Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
|
Elsa Hayes
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
80
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 20:27:20 -
[1622] - Quote
People just act as if this was a change to something absolutely unheard in EvE when all it really is is a sort of roll back to how things were a couple of years back when there was far less holding hands and catering to the aut****.
People managed back then, they actually manged just fine and people will manage again.
And as of 80 pages "negative" feedback, I see mostly alts and minor scrubs like myself posting against it except I am not against it, I am in favor still does not change that I am a minor scrub none the less while the guys from the major alliance and a lot of vets who actually still know how things used to be a couple of years back are very much in favor of the change.
It seems that the people against it are the newer ones and people who think that log in, join fleet, assign drones, watch furry smut, come back and admire your increased kill board stats is indeed leet peeveepee.
|
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
35
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 20:27:44 -
[1623] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Arrendis wrote:Iowa Banshee wrote:Amazing -- In a civilization so advanced it has faster than light travel, stargates, A communication channel between players that allows everything from social chat, swapping fits & overviews to instant cash transfers AND the best way to get a spot in space to warp to is Flush it out & scoop it up
That's right - superluminal communications completely unaffected by distances of thousands of light years, and my ship's computer can't give your ship's computer the 3 pairs of numbers that form coordinates when we're 1500m apart. Meh. According to the lore, your ship's gravity capacitor (not computer) has to lock onto a gravity signal into order to warp to it. So in theory, random bookmarks shouldn't work. Nor should warping to most/all sub-caps work. Nor should any target smaller than a "cluster of asteroids..." If CCP can completely ignore their lore, then appealing to logic is probably a sub-optimal debate tactic as well. edit: Gravity capacitor, not computer, decides where you warp.
If you can "lock on" to a gravity signal, you can use the positions of those signals to plot another point in space. It's not lore, it's math.
Of course, CCP ignores math too, so perhaps you are correct.
|
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
35
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 20:31:33 -
[1624] - Quote
Elsa Hayes wrote:
And as of 80 pages "negative" feedback, I see mostly alts and minor scrubs like myself posting against it except I am not against it, I am in favor still does not change that I am a minor scrub none the less while the guys from the major alliance and a lot of vets who actually still know how things used to be a couple of years back are very much in favor of the change.
Please, feel free to tabulate such things, and get back to us. Discounting 80 pages of posts by hand-waving it away as "alts and scrubs" isn't really a cogent argument.
*I'm sure CCP is capable of sorting out who the scrubs are. I imagine they have a spreadsheet or two. Possibly even a database. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
90
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 20:39:08 -
[1625] - Quote
Elsa Hayes wrote:People just act as if this was a change to something absolutely unheard in EvE when all it really is is a sort of roll back to how things were a couple of years back when there was far less holding hands and catering to the aut****.
People managed back then, they actually manged just fine and people will manage again.
And as of 80 pages "negative" feedback, I see mostly alts and minor scrubs like myself posting against it except I am not against it, I am in favor still does not change that I am a minor scrub none the less while the guys from the major alliance and a lot of vets who actually still know how things used to be a couple of years back are very much in favor of the change.
It seems that the people against it are the newer ones and people who think that log in, join fleet, assign drones, watch furry smut, come back and admire your increased kill board stats is indeed leet peeveepee.
Extending your confidence in your insignificance to your confidence of the collective insignificance of folks posting here may be a tad misplaced. |
Malei Kinra
The Maythorn
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 20:49:59 -
[1626] - Quote
Just posted my two cents on Reddit r/eve; I won't cut and paste (it's a wall o' text) but you can read it here.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3aaove/why_the_proposed_fleet_changes_are_stupid_in/ |
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2236
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 20:52:07 -
[1627] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Arrendis wrote:Iowa Banshee wrote:Amazing -- In a civilization so advanced it has faster than light travel, stargates, A communication channel between players that allows everything from social chat, swapping fits & overviews to instant cash transfers AND the best way to get a spot in space to warp to is Flush it out & scoop it up
That's right - superluminal communications completely unaffected by distances of thousands of light years, and my ship's computer can't give your ship's computer the 3 pairs of numbers that form coordinates when we're 1500m apart. Meh. According to the lore, your ship's gravity capacitor (not computer) has to lock onto a gravity signal into order to warp to it. So in theory, random bookmarks shouldn't work. Nor should warping to most/all sub-caps work. Nor should any target smaller than a "cluster of asteroids..." If CCP can completely ignore their lore, then appealing to logic is probably a sub-optimal debate tactic as well. edit: Gravity capacitor, not computer, decides where you warp. My scan probes can warp anywhere, not even a bookmark required.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Emo Creeper
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 20:56:45 -
[1628] - Quote
Rekatan wrote:Larrikin and others @ CCP need to read http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3a90hi/ccpls_root_cause_analysis_or_how_to_fix_what_you/ and then reread it as many times as it takes. There's way too much "can't see the forest for the trees" going on here. After listening to both of the recorded Q&As, it really boils down to this: If you're having to explain away more "side effects" and "drawbacks" than the initial change would have provided in terms of benefits, then the entire premise for the change is flawed. The above post does an outstanding job of going into more detail on that. Would Eve benefit from removal of fleet warp (what this in fact is for most practical applications)? Possibly. Is CCP prepared for the development time/cost associated with providing adequate replacements so as to enhance the player's experience rather than ruin it? After listening to these two Q&As, clearly not. Adding more tedium to the game is NOT how you make players more involved... No one wants this change for next month because it doesn't add content, it just adds headache. Once it adds content, it will likely receive a very different reception.
I would honestly be 100% OK with a slight nerf to combat probes. Not only does it achieve the intended goals stated by CCP devs, it doesn't actually take any tools away from fleet commanders.
Also, could we get some sort of dev blog about this? Because both of the round tables weren't very informative. Sorry CCP Larrikin, but you didn't exactly give players an intended goal for this change and what it would fix. |
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
35
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 21:14:51 -
[1629] - Quote
Emo Creeper wrote:[quote=Rekatan] Also, could we get some sort of dev blog about this? Because both of the round tables weren't very informative. Sorry CCP Larrikin, but you didn't exactly give players an intended goal for this change and what it would fix.
Palming your forums (and their moderation) off onto Reddit is much cheaper. It also is easier to hide responses there, without having to resort to pesky rules. |
Dr Leech
Immortalis Fratres Vacui Legio immortales CXCI
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 21:52:38 -
[1630] - Quote
I cant say how much this would suck |
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2827
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 21:59:46 -
[1631] - Quote
CSM members are still talking to CCP about this.
Some of us are still, here, listening and taking reasonable concerns and suggestions.
m
Mike Azariah Gö¼GöÇGöÇGö¼n++ ¯|(pâä)/¯
|
Naglerr
Sanguine Penguin Rote Kapelle
45
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 22:07:35 -
[1632] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:CSM members are still talking to CCP about this.
Some of us are still, here, listening and taking reasonable concerns and suggestions.
m
This is fantastic news. Protip: Don't look here for additional reasonable concerns, those were all voiced in the first 40 pages. Now most of us are just sitting around complaining and trolling until the verdict is finalized. |
Soldari Orion
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 22:21:38 -
[1633] - Quote
Hi CCP Devs,
I'm /u/jokeres from Reddit.
I've put down my hesitations about your proposed changes and laid out what I think are some possible ideas to get you rolling on something to fix the problem statement here: http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3a90hi/ccpls_root_cause_analysis_or_how_to_fix_what_you/
As I said I'd do it, i'm posting the text reformatted to this board here, now that we've had some discussion about it, post split into two parts since it doesn't quite fit in one.
CCP,
I'll start out saying that I respect your vision and have enjoyed your game for quite some time. I've disagreed with many of your decisions (mining anomalies spring to mind) and have come to like some of the changes i thought would ruin some of my enjoyment of the game (warp speed changes). I enjoyed the changes to mining barges, the changes to assault frigates, tiericide was stellar, and I haven't seen a ship design modification that I haven't liked.
Now, that being said: I've understood the rationale behind each of your changes. They made sense. I'm a systems engineer, and from the community opinion, it always seemed like there was a rationale related decision for each of these. Warp speed changes were natural - large capital ships should never have been able to traverse space as quickly as interceptors and while I don't necessarily agree that the correct speed was chosen, the choice was logical. Mining anomalies revealed mining fleets to incoming enemies, rather than only to probers meaning mining fleets could successfully be engaged - the design decision made sense. Tiericide allowed all battleships to be usable, if not preferred in certain situations - fleet variety is awesome. I don't understand your rationale behind these proposed fleet warp changes. Heck, I'm not even confident you've correctly defined your problem statement.
The stated problem statement is:
Quote:The goal of these changes is to encourage more individual fleet member participation and reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets (e.g bombers).
Let's quickly analyze this, we've got two ideas here:
Quote:The goal of these changes is to encourage more individual fleet member participation and reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets (e.g bombers).
Let's examine how this proposed change achieves the objective of participation:
- Forcing a player to perform more actions conceivably increases their participation as they will be performing more actions. Is changing fleet warping to a location scanned down by a prober to individual warping to a location scanned down and spread by bookmarks really increasing participation?
- Why should we allow any types of fleet warping, if the goal is more individual participation? This is a difference which certainly can confuse new players. In the proposed change, you can only fleet warp to players, but you can warp some element of that very same fleet to bookmarks. Remember the simple KISS principle: Keep It Simple Stupid. We want one action to perform the same for all objects, and to interact in a similar manner no matter the case. If I go in a POS shield with an interceptor, it should behave the same was as if I go in a POS shield with a carrier. If I fleet warp to a planet it should behave the same way as a bookmark, especially if as an individual I can warp to a planet in the same was as a bookmark.
Let's examine how this proposed achieves the objective of reducing the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets:
- In order to warp in on fleets, as the prober, I now need to warp to the location before other pilots can warp to me. This encourages alt-probing, as FCs will now be able to warp to another player's probe result rather than their own.
- Interceptors are in no greater a position than they already are, because burning over a great distance at an enemy fleet is suicide. This doesn't help them, and doesn't help tackle achieve their goal, as this encourages low sig fleets that require more probing.
There are definitely other advantages, but let me pull on a common thread. Combat probing is the origin of each of these problems.Why can an FC warp to a location of an enemy? The FC must first find them, via combat probing. Why do fleet members not need to participate in the current meta? Probing to get on top of members is intensive and requires specific modules. Without them, the common line member cannot participate in finding the enemy. They cannot involve themselves in getting placement, and achieving the goal of acquiring tackle. |
Soldari Orion
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 22:23:57 -
[1634] - Quote
Part 2:
Instead, i'd propose the following problem statement:
Quote:Combat probing has slowly but surely become too effective at placing fleets on top of other fleets. It is effectively a sledgehammer, with efficiency, speed, and exact location. It is the cause of fleet combat slowly but surely becoming a game of warping directly onto the enemy and in placing bombers into a location. Combat probing is so effective that one cannot run a nullsec fleet effectively without it. Being able to warp to a probe result has effectively negated any advantage of home field due to the ease and efficiency of combat scanning.
So, to recap: If we want to fix this while increasing fleet member participation and reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets, let's fix combat probing.
Let's look through the problem statement:
Quote:Combat probing has slowly but surely become too effective at placing fleets on top of other fleets. It is effectively a sledgehammer, with efficiency, speed, and exact location. It is the cause of fleet combat slowly but surely becoming a game of warping directly onto the enemy and in placing bombers into a location. Combat probing is so effective that one cannot run a nullsec fleet effectively without it. Being able to warp to a probe result has effectively negated any advantage of home field due to the ease and efficiency of combat scanning.
- Efficiency - Combat probes are not targetable and are reusable. There is no defense against combat probing, beyond merely warping away. Repeatable probe arrangements have also decreased the positioning difficulty.
- Speed - Combat probe results occur quickly, with effectively no delay. Recovery time between scans is relatively quick - allowing a user to scan, re-scan, re-scan over and over to pinpoint it.
- Exact Location - Probes return the exact location of the object, allowing the fleet to effectively warp on top of it.
Change any of these, and we effectively fix the stated problem statement. If we don't have an exact location, we encourage multiple probe locations so that an FC can warp tackle to two locations to try to catch enemy fleets, and encourage tackle to burn from the warp-in to grab enemies. If we don't have speed, fleets can move and adjust from locations during a delay, or scanning could take more time allowing tackle to be more effective. Efficiency causes there to be an action that can be done to inhibit scanning or make combat probes expendable.
Let's fix the problem instead of stabbing wildly in the dark.
Respectfully,
jokeres
Soldari Orion
An Interested Yet Confused Eve Player
P.S. If bombers go off the warp-in by 10 km, it's major. If they have to warp to a cloaked pilot who just scanned and warped, it barely effects them. CCP, your stated goal doesn't fix that for the vast majority of bombing runs.
P.P.S. This also retains "home field advantage" for FCs by allowing them to warp to their local bookmarks and engage enemies. The proposed fleet warp change negatively affect home field advantage and runs counter to Fozzie's proposed sovereignty design. |
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
35
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 22:37:01 -
[1635] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:CSM members are still talking to CCP about this.
Some of us are still, here, listening and taking reasonable concerns and suggestions.
m
Hopefully it turns out better than jump fatigue. |
Emo Creeper
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 23:08:51 -
[1636] - Quote
A55 Burger wrote: Hopefully it turns out better than jump fatigue.
To be fair, Jump Fatigue is huge pain in the ass but it didn't prevent you from jumping to some locations all together. Hell, it (jump fatigue) even had some benefit in reducing the effective range of large cap fleets, letting smaller groups use their capitals. This change has very little to no estimated benefit.
This change effects EVERYONE and not just cap/logistics pilots, hence the VERY LARGE outcry (and overwhelming negative response) on the Eve Forums, Reddit, Eve News sites, Eve blogs, etc.
Mike Azariah wrote:CSM members are still talking to CCP about this.
Some of us are still, here, listening and taking reasonable concerns and suggestions.
m
Oh god, please tell me most of you guys on the CSM can see why this is a terrible idea. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
340
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 23:15:39 -
[1637] - Quote
Emo Creeper wrote:Oh god, please tell me most of you guys on the CSM can see why this is a terrible idea.
Pretty sure the CSM can't tell you how the CSM feels, only that they're still listening and talking to CCP. |
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
36
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 23:24:22 -
[1638] - Quote
Emo Creeper wrote:A55 Burger wrote: Hopefully it turns out better than jump fatigue.
To be fair, Jump Fatigue is huge pain in the ass but it didn't prevent you from jumping to some locations all together. Hell, it (jump fatigue) even had some benefit in reducing the effective range of large cap fleets, letting smaller groups use their capitals. This change has very little to no estimated benefit.
Just to catch you up, the CSM got backdoored on the jump fatigue changes. That's germane to this discussion, as for the actual mechanics, not so much. |
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2831
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 23:27:24 -
[1639] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Emo Creeper wrote:Oh god, please tell me most of you guys on the CSM can see why this is a terrible idea. Pretty sure the CSM can't tell you how the CSM feels, only that they're still listening and talking to CCP.
Not true. I can always tell you how I feel. Just not what is said by CCP nor can I hint at ccp discussions by saying things like 'I feel that the AOE omnidamage module for POS shields is a tad overkill' Not that that topic has come up (as far as you know)
This was suggested by someone (I am too lazy to go look) that some eve related media outlet occasionally ask CSM members what they think of threadnaught topics. Of course, some of them will not bother answering pubbies. No point is there?
As for me, to get back to the implied question.
No, I do not see it as a terrible idea but one that needs iteration, consideration, and some tweaking. I stand by the basic idea behind it of not abdicating ships powers to another pilot to do things for you. I could haul out slippery slope arguments or make strawmen but I won't bother. We are far enough along this thread that most of them have been done to death already.
m
Mike Azariah Gö¼GöÇGöÇGö¼n++ ¯|(pâä)/¯
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus Blades of Grass
85
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 23:39:25 -
[1640] - Quote
lol - I would argue the the targeted ship for this change (bomber) is actually the least affected, as you can warp a bomber cloaked, so getting one guy on target while remaining safe isn't all that difficult. However, every other other type of ship has been kicked in the Saq, as you have to dangle a solo out there in full view of all of creation and hope the rest can get there in time.
I just find it ironic that the amplification of issues and impact of the not-really-intended-to-target ship class is so flagrantly worse... |
|
Emo Creeper
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 23:52:39 -
[1641] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:lol - I would argue the the targeted ship for this change (bomber) is actually the least affected, as you can warp a bomber cloaked, so getting one guy on target while remaining safe isn't all that difficult. However, every other other type of ship has been kicked in the Saq, as you have to dangle a solo out there in full view of all of creation and hope the rest can get there in time.
I just find it ironic that the amplification of issues and impact of the not-really-intended-to-target ship class is so flagrantly worse...
Not to mention that an aware FC won't be able to warp a fleet off to a perch if he sees bombs. RIP fleet. |
Ion Udan
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
103
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 00:05:38 -
[1642] - Quote
Soldari Orion wrote:Part 2: Instead, i'd propose the following problem statement: Quote:Combat probing has slowly but surely become too effective at placing fleets on top of other fleets. It is effectively a sledgehammer, with efficiency, speed, and exact location. It is the cause of fleet combat slowly but surely becoming a game of warping directly onto the enemy and in placing bombers into a location. Combat probing is so effective that one cannot run a nullsec fleet effectively without it. Being able to warp to a probe result has effectively negated any advantage of home field due to the ease and efficiency of combat scanning. So, to recap: If we want to fix this while increasing fleet member participation and reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets, let's fix combat probing. Let's look through the problem statement: Quote:Combat probing has slowly but surely become too effective at placing fleets on top of other fleets. It is effectively a sledgehammer, with efficiency, speed, and exact location. It is the cause of fleet combat slowly but surely becoming a game of warping directly onto the enemy and in placing bombers into a location. Combat probing is so effective that one cannot run a nullsec fleet effectively without it. Being able to warp to a probe result has effectively negated any advantage of home field due to the ease and efficiency of combat scanning.
- Efficiency - Combat probes are not targetable and are reusable. There is no defense against combat probing, beyond merely warping away. Repeatable probe arrangements have also decreased the positioning difficulty.
- Speed - Combat probe results occur quickly, with effectively no delay. Recovery time between scans is relatively quick - allowing a user to scan, re-scan, re-scan over and over to pinpoint it.
- Exact Location - Probes return the exact location of the object, allowing the fleet to effectively warp on top of it.
Change any of these, and we effectively fix the stated problem statement. If we don't have an exact location, we encourage multiple probe locations so that an FC can warp tackle to two locations to try to catch enemy fleets, and encourage tackle to burn from the warp-in to grab enemies. If we don't have speed, fleets can move and adjust from locations during a delay, or scanning could take more time allowing tackle to be more effective. Efficiency causes there to be an action that can be done to inhibit scanning or make combat probes expendable. Let's fix the problem instead of stabbing wildly in the dark. Respectfully, jokeres Soldari Orion An Interested Yet Confused Eve Player P.S. If bombers go off the warp-in by 10 km, it's major. If they have to warp to a cloaked pilot who just scanned and warped, it barely effects them. CCP, your stated goal doesn't fix that for the vast majority of bombing runs. P.P.S. This also retains "home field advantage" for FCs by allowing them to warp to their local bookmarks and engage enemies. The proposed fleet warp change negatively affect home field advantage and runs counter to Fozzie's proposed sovereignty design.
CCP Larrikin, you should read this mans post repeatedly until it sinks in.
So, glorious QEX brother steals potatoes from hisec.
|
Elsa Hayes
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
81
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 00:24:33 -
[1643] - Quote
A55 Burger wrote:Elsa Hayes wrote:
And as of 80 pages "negative" feedback, I see mostly alts and minor scrubs like myself posting against it except I am not against it, I am in favor still does not change that I am a minor scrub none the less while the guys from the major alliance and a lot of vets who actually still know how things used to be a couple of years back are very much in favor of the change.
Please, feel free to tabulate such things, and get back to us. Discounting 80 pages of posts by hand-waving it away as "alts and scrubs" isn't really a cogent argument. *I'm sure CCP is capable of sorting out who the scrubs are. I imagine they have a spreadsheet or two. Possibly even a database.
If you think it is important to you but you do not even have the balls to post with your mains what does that show the world? Since I am in favor I can happily hide behind an alt without being an hypocrite. Since 80 pages of alts refused to show even that much of sincerity why should CCP care? |
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
36
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 00:49:51 -
[1644] - Quote
Elsa Hayes wrote:A55 Burger wrote:Elsa Hayes wrote:
And as of 80 pages "negative" feedback, I see mostly alts and minor scrubs like myself posting against it except I am not against it, I am in favor still does not change that I am a minor scrub none the less while the guys from the major alliance and a lot of vets who actually still know how things used to be a couple of years back are very much in favor of the change.
Please, feel free to tabulate such things, and get back to us. Discounting 80 pages of posts by hand-waving it away as "alts and scrubs" isn't really a cogent argument. *I'm sure CCP is capable of sorting out who the scrubs are. I imagine they have a spreadsheet or two. Possibly even a database. If you think it is important to you but you do not even have the balls to post with your mains what does that show the world? Since I am in favor I can happily hide behind an alt without being an hypocrite. Since 80 pages of alts refused to show even that much of sincerity why should CCP care?
Your opinion is duly noted. It's not you that has the power to make any changes to the game, and if you did, I wouldn't play it. The discussion is about changes to the game, not who someone's main is. Argue with the message, not the man. Thanks for playing! |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31925
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 00:53:28 -
[1645] - Quote
A55 Burger wrote:Rain6637 wrote:Somehow I don't think subscription income works the way people think.
This type of change is bold, and it might seem to mean fewer vet subs, and then EVE will die. But consider the possibility that most of EVE's subscription / real money income is from baddies buying PLEX.
So the income reality might actually be the opposite of what you think--less pressure on PLEX means lower ISK value on market, which means baddies will buy more PLEX to have the same amount of ISK, assuming their ISK spending stays the same.
It's a nice thought that EVE is being revamped for the sake of pure gameplay, subscriptions be damned... but that's unrealistic. An amusing, relevant quote. Jayne: "Can't get paid if you crawl away like a little bitty bug, neither. I got a share in this job. Ten percent of nothing isGÇölet me do the math here. Nothing into nothin'. Carry the nothin'..." Independents won't know any different, I think it will miss them for the most part.
Players who understand what's going on in space around them should like the removal of piloting automation. I hope drone assist is next to go. Yes, completely.
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
|
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
36
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 00:57:38 -
[1646] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote: Independents won't know any different, I think it will miss them for the most part.
Players who understand what's going on in space around them should like the removal of piloting automation. I hope drone assist is next to go. Yes, completely.
Yes, more of this arguing with the man, not the message. Automation is bad, sure. Deciding to make changes without actually playing the game being changed is even worse. This is what these threads are for, is to discuss what's being changed. Not to demand to know who people are. CCP knows what accounts I have... and I'm pretty sure they ignore all this "Post with your main" nonsense accordingly.
|
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
36
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 01:02:39 -
[1647] - Quote
The point I'm making Rain, is that you know more about what should change in the game than CCP does. I'm not going to speak as to how much more, because that's between me, you, and the fence post.
This shouldn't be the case. Developers of the game should be able to utilize the vast data collection tools at their disposal, as well as experiences with the game itself at all levels in order to effectively steer it.
This doesn't happen. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16242
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 01:04:25 -
[1648] - Quote
A55 Burger wrote:Rain6637 wrote: Independents won't know any different, I think it will miss them for the most part.
Players who understand what's going on in space around them should like the removal of piloting automation. I hope drone assist is next to go. Yes, completely.
Yes, more of this arguing with the man, not the message. Automation is bad, sure. Deciding to make changes without actually playing the game being changed is even worse. This is what these threads are for, is to discuss what's being changed. Not to demand to know who people are. CCP knows what accounts I have... and I'm pretty sure they ignore all this "Post with your main" nonsense accordingly.
They do play the game, just not on their old accounts.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
36
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 01:07:24 -
[1649] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:A55 Burger wrote:Rain6637 wrote: Independents won't know any different, I think it will miss them for the most part.
Players who understand what's going on in space around them should like the removal of piloting automation. I hope drone assist is next to go. Yes, completely.
Yes, more of this arguing with the man, not the message. Automation is bad, sure. Deciding to make changes without actually playing the game being changed is even worse. This is what these threads are for, is to discuss what's being changed. Not to demand to know who people are. CCP knows what accounts I have... and I'm pretty sure they ignore all this "Post with your main" nonsense accordingly. They do play the game, just not on their old accounts.
I don't think they do at all levels. It stopped being fun for them when they couldn't create items out of thin air, and if you aren't getting paid for something related to your job, you're not going to spend that long doing it. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16242
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 01:13:34 -
[1650] - Quote
A55 Burger wrote:
I don't think they do at all levels.
Doesn't matter what you think, fact is they do play EVE. The other fact is that the CSM support this change too.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
36
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 01:21:25 -
[1651] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:A55 Burger wrote:
I don't think they do at all levels.
Doesn't matter what you think, fact is they do play EVE. The other fact is that the CSM support this change too.
This is somewhat a fair point. However, it doesn't matter what any of us 'think'. What matters is the almighty dollar, and after spending probably 5K USD on this game over the last 7 years, the nature of their disconnect from what many players think is what alarms me. Call it my experiences with another MMO making sweeping changes without long contemplation.
Removing all the ship commands is a pretty sweeping change, and has me contemplating walking away from the whole mess.
I like game changes, as long as they are for a reason that makes sense. Changing how every ship in the game operates to address one ship class is absurd. Perhaps that isn't the real reason for the change, but if that's the case, that process should be transparent. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16243
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 01:32:08 -
[1652] - Quote
A55 Burger wrote:baltec1 wrote:A55 Burger wrote:
I don't think they do at all levels.
Doesn't matter what you think, fact is they do play EVE. The other fact is that the CSM support this change too. This is somewhat a fair point. However, it doesn't matter what any of us 'think'. What matters is the almighty dollar, and after spending probably 5K USD on this game over the last 7 years, the nature of their disconnect from what many players think is what alarms me. Call it my experiences with another MMO making sweeping changes without long contemplation. Removing all the ship commands is a pretty sweeping change, and has me contemplating walking away from the whole mess. I like game changes, as long as they are for a reason that makes sense. Changing how every ship in the game operates to address one ship class is absurd. Perhaps that isn't the real reason for the change, but if that's the case, that process should be transparent.
They aren't removing orbit, approach and the like any time soon. This is another example of CCP saying something and people going off the deep end thinking they said something else. The only change happening is the fleet warp nerf as specified in the OP, nothing more. This change simply means you need to use dedicated scouts like we used to, nothing more. All of this talk of having to stagger warps in mixed fleets is nonsense. As is the view this is aimed only at bombers, CCP gave bombers as just one example of a fleet that would need to alter its tactics a bit.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16243
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 01:33:51 -
[1653] - Quote
A55 Burger wrote:[quote=baltec1][quote=A55 Burger]
*Lots of people play this game for relatively narrow segments of gameplay. What would you do without the Megathron?
Fly another ship.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
36
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 01:36:21 -
[1654] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:A55 Burger wrote:baltec1 wrote:A55 Burger wrote:
I don't think they do at all levels.
Doesn't matter what you think, fact is they do play EVE. The other fact is that the CSM support this change too. This is somewhat a fair point. However, it doesn't matter what any of us 'think'. What matters is the almighty dollar, and after spending probably 5K USD on this game over the last 7 years, the nature of their disconnect from what many players think is what alarms me. Call it my experiences with another MMO making sweeping changes without long contemplation. Removing all the ship commands is a pretty sweeping change, and has me contemplating walking away from the whole mess. I like game changes, as long as they are for a reason that makes sense. Changing how every ship in the game operates to address one ship class is absurd. Perhaps that isn't the real reason for the change, but if that's the case, that process should be transparent. They aren't removing orbit, approach and the like any time soon. This is another example of CCP saying something and people going off the deep end thinking they said something else. The only change happening is the fleet warp nerf as specified in the OP, nothing more. This change simply means you need to use dedicated scouts like we used to, nothing more. All of this talk of having to stagger warps in mixed fleets is nonsense. As is the view this is aimed only at bombers, CCP gave bombers as just one example of a fleet that would need to alter its tactics a bit.
I'm not concerned with the 'when' of future changes, I'm simply so dissatisfied with the direction of the game (this change being one point, the future change being the other) that I'm talking about it, as are many others.
It's almost as if the developers think there is some magic pool of customers out there just waiting to play the game, but they won't jump in just yet. I don't know if that's the case. The proliferation of these types of games is why I think this. Once, Eve had virtually no competition. This isn't the case anymore.
For the most part, the customers they have and have had are it. For this game to remain engaging, those players need to play it. |
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
36
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 01:42:30 -
[1655] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
They aren't removing orbit, approach and the like any time soon. This is another example of CCP saying something and people going off the deep end thinking they said something else. The only change happening is the fleet warp nerf as specified in the OP, nothing more. This change simply means you need to use dedicated scouts like we used to, nothing more. All of this talk of having to stagger warps in mixed fleets is nonsense. As is the view this is aimed only at bombers, CCP gave bombers as just one example of a fleet that would need to alter its tactics a bit.
The best way I can articulate why I'm worried is the boiling frogs syndrome. The water just seems... warmer to me... you know?
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16244
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 01:47:22 -
[1656] - Quote
A55 Burger wrote:
The best way I can articulate why I'm worried is the boiling frogs syndrome. The water just seems... warmer to me... you know?
As one of those old timers who remembers what it was like before we got all of these fancy fleet broadcasts the water has gone from freezing to just cold. I expect a few other changes such as on grid warping going from 150km to at least 200km and I hope repair broadcasts becoming squad only.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31926
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 01:55:30 -
[1657] - Quote
A55 Burger wrote:The point I'm making Rain, is that you know more about what should change in the game than CCP does. I'm not going to speak as to how much more, because that's between me, you, and the fence post.
This shouldn't be the case. Developers of the game should be able to utilize the vast data collection tools at their disposal, as well as experiences with the game itself at all levels in order to effectively steer it.
This doesn't happen. I've said the same thing in the past. When gameplay is this deep, you begin to lose touch as a developer. At the same time it's odd that EVE has managed to iterate on itself so little.
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
|
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
36
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 01:59:45 -
[1658] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:A55 Burger wrote:The point I'm making Rain, is that you know more about what should change in the game than CCP does. I'm not going to speak as to how much more, because that's between me, you, and the fence post.
This shouldn't be the case. Developers of the game should be able to utilize the vast data collection tools at their disposal, as well as experiences with the game itself at all levels in order to effectively steer it.
This doesn't happen. I've said the same thing in the past. When gameplay is this deep, you begin to lose touch as a developer. At the same time it's odd that EVE has managed to iterate on itself so little.
I agree completely. That's why I feel a change that affects so many boxes of gameplay shouldn't happen. Small tweaks, not sledgehammers. They changed the release cycle so they could do this. |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
240
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 02:01:19 -
[1659] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:A55 Burger wrote:The point I'm making Rain, is that you know more about what should change in the game than CCP does. I'm not going to speak as to how much more, because that's between me, you, and the fence post.
This shouldn't be the case. Developers of the game should be able to utilize the vast data collection tools at their disposal, as well as experiences with the game itself at all levels in order to effectively steer it.
This doesn't happen. I've said the same thing in the past. When gameplay is this deep, you begin to lose touch as a developer. At the same time it's odd that EVE has managed to iterate on itself so little.
Larrikin only went from player to developer a few months ago
I doubt he has lost much insight |
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
36
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 02:05:55 -
[1660] - Quote
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Larrikin only went from player to developer a few months ago
I doubt he has lost much insight
This is helpful, actually. It doesn't change my feelings on the overall direction, but it does make things a little less schizophrenic. Thanks!
|
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16244
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 02:10:55 -
[1661] - Quote
A55 Burger wrote:
I agree completely. That's why I feel a change that affects so many boxes of gameplay shouldn't happen. Small tweaks, not sledgehammers. They changed the release cycle so they could do this.
This is a small change.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus Blades of Grass
86
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 02:14:59 -
[1662] - Quote
While I commented on the hilarity of the intended effect vs the real effect, I must say this change is minor, and part of some bells and whistles that there was a time we never had. When things are too easy it just isn't fun, and dropping an armada right on top of someone at will is probably a bit too easy. |
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
36
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 02:17:46 -
[1663] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:A55 Burger wrote:
I agree completely. That's why I feel a change that affects so many boxes of gameplay shouldn't happen. Small tweaks, not sledgehammers. They changed the release cycle so they could do this.
This is a small change.
I'm not sure what you would define as a big change. Removing all ship movement commands eventually with the exception of go this way, stop, and go really far... that seems like a big change to me. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16244
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 02:19:23 -
[1664] - Quote
A55 Burger wrote:
I'm not sure what you would define as a big change. Removing all ship movement commands eventually with the exception of go this way, stop, and go really far... that seems like a big change to me.
Thats not what this change is.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
36
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 02:21:52 -
[1665] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:While I commented on the hilarity of the intended effect vs the real effect, I must say this change is minor, and part of some bells and whistles that there was a time we never had. When things are too easy it just isn't fun, and dropping an armada right on top of someone at will is probably a bit too easy.
There's more than one way to skin a cat, even if I agree with you. Approach, keep at range, and orbit don't affect that armada landing all at once though.
|
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
36
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 02:25:16 -
[1666] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:A55 Burger wrote:
I'm not sure what you would define as a big change. Removing all ship movement commands eventually with the exception of go this way, stop, and go really far... that seems like a big change to me.
Thats not what this change is.
This change is a part of a set, envisioned to improve things. The discussion was about the set when I started posting in the thread. While you are correct that the beginning of the thread addressed only the fleet warp changes, I and others, including you have talked about the set. Conversations are fluid.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16244
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 02:30:09 -
[1667] - Quote
A55 Burger wrote:baltec1 wrote:A55 Burger wrote:
I'm not sure what you would define as a big change. Removing all ship movement commands eventually with the exception of go this way, stop, and go really far... that seems like a big change to me.
Thats not what this change is. This change is a part of a set, envisioned to improve things. The discussion was about the set when I started posting in the thread. While you are correct that the beginning of the thread addressed only the fleet warp changes, I and others, including you have talked about the set. Conversations are fluid.
This thread is just about this one change when those other changes come, if they ever do, we can kick up a stink about them then. Right now there are no plans to get rid of orbit as they have nothing to replace it.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus Blades of Grass
86
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 02:30:42 -
[1668] - Quote
A55 Burger wrote:baltec1 wrote:A55 Burger wrote:
I'm not sure what you would define as a big change. Removing all ship movement commands eventually with the exception of go this way, stop, and go really far... that seems like a big change to me.
Thats not what this change is. This change is a part of a set, envisioned to improve things. The discussion was about the set when I started posting in the thread. While you are correct that the beginning of the thread addressed only the fleet warp changes, I and others, including you have talked about the set. Conversations are fluid.
For those of us too lazy to read all 80 some odd pages, where is this "greater change" source material coming from? I have been RL busy and seemed to have missed that twist (though I have to say, I rather like the idea, anything that makes piloting the ship more directly makes me happy, remember, the change effects us all, so it's not like the other fleet won't be any less unwieldy in their maneuvering). |
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
36
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 02:32:42 -
[1669] - Quote
^^^ http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3a8pss/recording_of_ccp_fleet_warp_meeting_with_wormhole/
baltec1 wrote:A55 Burger wrote:baltec1 wrote:A55 Burger wrote:
I'm not sure what you would define as a big change. Removing all ship movement commands eventually with the exception of go this way, stop, and go really far... that seems like a big change to me.
Thats not what this change is. This change is a part of a set, envisioned to improve things. The discussion was about the set when I started posting in the thread. While you are correct that the beginning of the thread addressed only the fleet warp changes, I and others, including you have talked about the set. Conversations are fluid. This thread is just about this one change when those other changes come, if they ever do, we can kick up a stink about them then. Right now there are no plans to get rid of orbit as they have nothing to replace it.
That's not how I read "CCP Larrikin: I agree, I want anchoring taken out of the game. " |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16244
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 02:42:16 -
[1670] - Quote
A55 Burger wrote:
That's not how I read "CCP Larrikin: I agree, I want anchoring taken out of the game. "
Perhaps my reading of this is askew, but orbit, approach, and keep at range are all methods to anchor. There's no anchor command, so....
Saying he would like it gone does not mean it is going to happen. Its something he would like to happen, he did not say it is going to happen.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
38
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 02:42:43 -
[1671] - Quote
Baltec is right in principle though, it isn't strictly on topic, and I'm going to give it a rest on those matters so that I'm not derailing things any more. I just don't feel that there will be a sufficient time for discussion when the rest of this stuff becomes apparent. I also probably won't invest much more until CCP backs away from the ledge. |
Midnight Hope
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
178
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 04:06:56 -
[1672] - Quote
You could have every member play a minigame when they activate warp...like hacking. Two outcomes:
- if they get it right, then Aura says "Warp Drive Active" - if they fail Aura says "Thank you for your participation, keep trying", while half the fleet warps off.
See? Keyword *participation*. |
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2239
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 06:23:20 -
[1673] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Zappity wrote: To tackle? Lol
Why not? We use just as flimsy interceptors, t1 frigates and Ewar frigs. "Just as flimsy"? You have got to be kidding. Covops are PAPER thin and clearly not designed for tackle. Interceptors are designed specifically for tackle.
But perhaps you are confused. After all, you seem to think interceptors are for scanning, too.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
beakerax
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
167
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 07:13:09 -
[1674] - Quote
Late to the posting party, but setting up or participating in a well-executed punt is just about the most fun I have had in pvp and if it gets removed because of [reason not found] that's a damn shame. |
Faren Shalni
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
148
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 08:01:36 -
[1675] - Quote
A55 Burger wrote:^^^ http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3a8pss/recording_of_ccp_fleet_warp_meeting_with_wormhole/ baltec1 wrote:A55 Burger wrote:baltec1 wrote:A55 Burger wrote:
I'm not sure what you would define as a big change. Removing all ship movement commands eventually with the exception of go this way, stop, and go really far... that seems like a big change to me.
Thats not what this change is. This change is a part of a set, envisioned to improve things. The discussion was about the set when I started posting in the thread. While you are correct that the beginning of the thread addressed only the fleet warp changes, I and others, including you have talked about the set. Conversations are fluid. This thread is just about this one change when those other changes come, if they ever do, we can kick up a stink about them then. Right now there are no plans to get rid of orbit as they have nothing to replace it. That's not how I read "CCP Larrikin: I agree, I want anchoring taken out of the game. " Perhaps my reading of this is askew, but orbit, approach, and keep at range are all methods to anchor. There's no anchor command, so....
Context is really important you know. This was part of the things he would like to do but not necessarily able to do.
So Much Space
|
Tau Onyeka
Krusual Syndicate
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 08:27:40 -
[1676] - Quote
This change a logical next step from the change to drone assignment: less zombie fleets, less F1 fleet cattle. I can see why so many people rage about it
I'm all for it. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
91
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 08:34:34 -
[1677] - Quote
Tau Onyeka wrote:This change a logical next step from the change to drone assignment: less zombie fleets, less F1 fleet cattle. I can see why so many people rage about it I'm all for it.
How does it ensure less "F1 fleet cattle"? The alt you will land on will very probably be the FC's, as it is now.
Only guaranteed change is "F1 fleet cattle" going from bored to slightly more bored.
|
Dun'Gal
Myriad Contractors Inc.
257
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 08:42:29 -
[1678] - Quote
Midnight Hope wrote:You could have every member play a minigame when they activate warp...like hacking. Two outcomes: - if they get it right, then Aura says "Warp Drive Active" - if they fail Aura says "Thank you for your participation, keep trying", while half the fleet warps off. See? Keyword *participation*. Honestly if they want to remove fleet warp then yea im all for this. Should apply to all warps though, so even warping about solo you should be forced into this mini-game. Want to leave Jita, play mini-game, if you fail, you get to sit where you are on the Jita undock. Should also apply it to jumping gates, passing through wormholes, activating guns, active tanking mods, etc. Eve would be the most interactive game EVER. |
Tau Onyeka
Krusual Syndicate
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 08:47:53 -
[1679] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Tau Onyeka wrote:This change a logical next step from the change to drone assignment: less zombie fleets, less F1 fleet cattle. I can see why so many people rage about it I'm all for it. How does it ensure less "F1 fleet cattle"? The alt you will land on will very probably be the FC's, as it is now. Only guaranteed change is "F1 fleet cattle" going from bored to slightly more bored.
less ability for an FC to control it all = more requirements on the fleet to be active and prepared => less viability for non-effort cattle fleets who's only effort was to actually log in and do as they're told.
That whole sound cloud is nothing but this:
"CCP, this change that you're proposing has a side effect, it's hurting our fleet backbone"
"well, yeah"
"that can't possibly be the reason to do it, are you going to change or compensate for that?
"err, no"
"Y U DO DIS!"
"because we want to nerf your lol fleets :reasons:"
"YOU'RE SO STUPID!"
|
Lim Hiaret
Hiaret Family
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 09:55:08 -
[1680] - Quote
Suggestion for the removal of the fleet warp mechanic:
- Fully remove fleet warp mechanic! If a group wants to warp to a certain spot together all have to click warp in a synchronized way (for example 3 GǪ 2 GǪ 1 GǪ warp).
- To allow a fleet to arrive all at the same time, which is important for fleet tactics, allow users to set warp speed to a value less than the ship max warp speed.
- To allow a fleet to warp to the same spot, add a broadcast warp to coordinates. Available for ANY coordinates the broadcaster has.
Additional ideas: Add an on-screen countdown timer initiated by FC. Add a nice big green arrow which points towards the broadcasted coordinates. Explore the possibility to overheat the warp drive.
The protection of sniper fleets is a totally different issue and should not be tackled this way. For that a new bubble for interdictors that greatly increases the scan deviation for ships and objects inside. High-skilled probers should still be able to get a warp in, but even with pre-positioned probes generally not on first try. The bubble should be time limited of course, same time as the existing ones. The analogy to an existing mechanic is of course interdictor probes vs. mobile warp disruptor field.
p.s.: not sure if that is still the right place to post this |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16246
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 10:37:46 -
[1681] - Quote
Zappity wrote:baltec1 wrote:Zappity wrote: To tackle? Lol
Why not? We use just as flimsy interceptors, t1 frigates and Ewar frigs. "Just as flimsy"? You have got to be kidding. Covops are PAPER thin and clearly not designed for tackle. Interceptors are designed specifically for tackle. But perhaps you are confused. After all, you seem to think interceptors are for scanning, too.
Anathema 2.3k ehp base
crusader 2.16k ehp base
Yea, just as flimsy.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2240
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 10:55:59 -
[1682] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Zappity wrote:baltec1 wrote:Zappity wrote: To tackle? Lol
Why not? We use just as flimsy interceptors, t1 frigates and Ewar frigs. "Just as flimsy"? You have got to be kidding. Covops are PAPER thin and clearly not designed for tackle. Interceptors are designed specifically for tackle. But perhaps you are confused. After all, you seem to think interceptors are for scanning, too. Anathema 2.3k ehp base crusader 2.16k ehp base Yea, just as flimsy. Don't be silly. Fit some tank on the Crusader. Check. Not to mention it comes with built in sig reduction.
Fit some tank on the Anathema. Oh wait you can't because there is no fitting left after the Expanded probe launcher. And there's no sig reduction either.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
189
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 13:41:48 -
[1683] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:A55 Burger wrote:
That's not how I read "CCP Larrikin: I agree, I want anchoring taken out of the game. "
Perhaps my reading of this is askew, but orbit, approach, and keep at range are all methods to anchor. There's no anchor command, so....
Saying he would like it gone does not mean it is going to happen. Its something he would like to happen, he did not say it is going to happen. You guys should listen to the recording, he absolutly want them all to be removed, align, keep at range, orbit,... . The main idea is that you should be manualy piloting your ship so that means align, ,move and warp out would be done all manualy
No local in null sec would fix everything!
Fleet warp proposal = the rubix cube is back into eve especialy the second part of the saying.
|
Winter Archipelago
Furtherance.
393
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 13:44:17 -
[1684] - Quote
Zappity wrote: Don't be silly. Fit some tank on the Crusader. Check. Not to mention it comes with built in sig reduction.
Fit some tank on the Anathema. Oh wait you can't because there is no fitting left after the Expanded probe launcher. And there's no sig reduction either.
You aren't going to fit much of a tank to an Interceptor after putting on an expanded launcher. Even the expanded Sisters' launcher is 210 CPU, and the highest any interceptor has (at all V's) is the Crow, at 206, followed by the Raptor, at 200. The rest are similar or lower (with several of the combat-oriented Interceptors being in the 150's).
You aren't going to have fittings for a tank after the expanded launcher and a MWD.
Planning a trip to Thera? Check out http://eve-scout.com/ for a list of the current connections.
Once you've made your choice, join the channels EVE-Scout or Furtherance Public and request a scout to make sure your connection is clear!
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31928
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 13:46:43 -
[1685] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:baltec1 wrote:A55 Burger wrote:
That's not how I read "CCP Larrikin: I agree, I want anchoring taken out of the game. "
Perhaps my reading of this is askew, but orbit, approach, and keep at range are all methods to anchor. There's no anchor command, so....
Saying he would like it gone does not mean it is going to happen. Its something he would like to happen, he did not say it is going to happen. You guys should listen to the recording, he absolutly want them all to be removed, align, keep at range, orbit,... . The main idea is that you should be manualy piloting your ship so that means align, ,move and warp out would be done all manualy I'm with him, I think drones are **** ideas too. It's basically five of my alts in T1 frigates, messing up Tidi on autopilot.
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
|
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
227
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 14:13:32 -
[1686] - Quote
(Reposting my comment from an other thread as I'm not sure CCP is reading that other thread.)
As a small-gang PvP participant, I see this negatively impacting our ability to get fights. We use punting to get on to hostiles. Sometimes it's our FC, sometimes it's somebody else in a T3D we put into a squad/wing command position. We can't send just a single covops, SB, T3 or T3D to the combat scan result; they'd surely die (and/or the hostiles would be forewarned enough to move out of tackle range) before the rest of the fleet could land. I guess we could use a cloaky scanner who warps to the scan result at range, then wait ten minutes for it to slowboat to the opposite side of the target so we could warp the fleet to the cloaky at range, twiddling our thumbs in the meantime, hoping the hostiles don't notice us and dock up.
Of course, the other small gangs we encounter wouldn't be able to use punting against us either.
So if the goal is to reduce PvP combat in EVE, I guess this is a good way to go about it.
(Maybe a tanked-to-the-gills Hecate with a couple scrams could do the trick though, of scanning down and landing in a hostile fleet, and be able to survive long enough to do it again. That's an expensive "maybe," however.) |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
91
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 14:30:48 -
[1687] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Anathema 2.3k ehp base
crusader 2.16k ehp base
Yea, just as flimsy.
LOL.
|
Nevil Kincade
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 15:16:45 -
[1688] - Quote
I was almost going to say that fleet warp should be removed entirely because of scenarios where people being afk or multiboxed accounts could be fleet warped. But then there is the issue with ships warping at different speeds. So unless the goal is to emphasize utterly choatic and bloody engagements escalating from nano skirmishes to hot drops - even though i'd like that very much - i would suggest implementing at least an afk check for fleet warps. It could be implemented as a message box with an 'OK' button or as a less visually obstructive indicator prompting to press a hotkey (as im not a big fan of popups and radial menus because of the slow input speed to say the least). Anyway, any form of AFK gameplay needs to be fought. Where AFK miners/pvp'ers suffer the active players will profit. And that's the real point of this change, right ?
There are however concerns remaining regarding the role of CovOps as combat Scanners. My experience with combat probing is in line with other posters here, the reaction time for your target is already long enough, in fact anybody paying Attention to d-scan won't ever be probed out and tackled i swear it, simply because aligning takes so much less time than scanning and warping. It may be because im an experienced prober but i never got caught like that in 3 years. That being said it would be a bad idea to add another Interceptor warp (from outside d-scan range) to the targets reaction time. The only solution i can come up with from the top of my hat is an extensive CovOps rebalance. Im leaning towards speed tanking and a point range bonus here just because CovOps could also make good use of more speed fulfilling their role as cloaky warpins. When it comes to tackling MJD battleships you would need a completely different set of bonuses though, probably active tanking. I think CCP have got their work cut out for themselves here.
As for the Wormholers: You guys are the ones who have the necessary ships for warpins in your fleet anyways. What kind of WH corp does not have cloaky eyes on the holes ? WH chains are either scanned down in advance so you can bookmark them or you will have your scanner in place for the warpin. The WH faction seems to be trying very hard to give the impression that this change is harder on them than on anybody else. I just hope CCP does not give into that because the whole point again is to promote certain roles.
P.S. And yea i think the whole bomber argument was a reach down the toilett and should be left out of the discussion from this point on. A well prepared and properly executed bomb run will not be affected by this change. Though they might become a less common occurence due to the hinderence emposed on them now. This is not a balancing effect at all and it was probably unnecessarily emphasized in the Initial post. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16246
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 16:11:27 -
[1689] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:baltec1 wrote:A55 Burger wrote:
That's not how I read "CCP Larrikin: I agree, I want anchoring taken out of the game. "
Perhaps my reading of this is askew, but orbit, approach, and keep at range are all methods to anchor. There's no anchor command, so....
Saying he would like it gone does not mean it is going to happen. Its something he would like to happen, he did not say it is going to happen. You guys should listen to the recording, he absolutly want them all to be removed, align, keep at range, orbit,... . The main idea is that you should be manualy piloting your ship so that means align, ,move and warp out would be done all manualy
Again, saying he would like to get rid of them is not the same as saying they are removing them.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16246
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 16:15:41 -
[1690] - Quote
Zappity wrote:baltec1 wrote:Zappity wrote:baltec1 wrote:Zappity wrote: To tackle? Lol
Why not? We use just as flimsy interceptors, t1 frigates and Ewar frigs. "Just as flimsy"? You have got to be kidding. Covops are PAPER thin and clearly not designed for tackle. Interceptors are designed specifically for tackle. But perhaps you are confused. After all, you seem to think interceptors are for scanning, too. Anathema 2.3k ehp base crusader 2.16k ehp base Yea, just as flimsy. Don't be silly. Fit some tank on the Crusader. Check. Not to mention it comes with built in sig reduction. Fit some tank on the Anathema. Oh wait you can't because there is no fitting left after the Expanded probe launcher. And there's no sig reduction either.
You can fit as much tank on a probe fitted cov ops as a tackle fitted crusader. As for the sig just slap an afterburner on the cov-ops.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
340
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 17:05:12 -
[1691] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Zappity wrote:Don't be silly. Fit some tank on the Crusader. Check. Not to mention it comes with built in sig reduction.
Fit some tank on the Anathema. Oh wait you can't because there is no fitting left after the Expanded probe launcher. And there's no sig reduction either. You can fit as much tank on a probe fitted cov ops as a tackle fitted crusader. As for the sig just slap an afterburner on the cov-ops.
Not quite. The difference does get noticeable - roughly a 25% increase in tank, all the way to 6500 ehp. So, you know, if anything you're tackling is bigger than you and can actually hit you...
Yeah, you're still dead.
BTW, the sig on the ab Anathema's roughly half that of the mwd Crusader, so it lives longer just in terms of how long it takes to target it. And if you're setting up on something slow, like battleships, it's moving 3x their speed while cloaked, so that's no problem. If it's something like cruisers, and you're trying to get in to lock up a slippery pete, it can also carry a pair of target painters, just to add insult to injury.
While still having that 5k ehp tank, and the covops cloak, and the expanded probe launcher.
IOW, while he's not perfectly right on the tank, yes, Baltec has clearly done the math on this better than Zappity has. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
92
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 17:38:46 -
[1692] - Quote
Nevil Kincade wrote:To prevent AFKers from being warped i would suggest implementing at least an afk check for fleet warps. There's the exempt from warp button. Use it. Otherwise, people who are afk in an active fleet deserve to die.
Nevil Kincade wrote: It could be implemented as a message box with an 'OK' button or as a less visually obstructive indicator prompting to press a hotkey (as im not a big fan of popups and radial menus because of the slow input speed to say the least). Anyway, any form of AFK gameplay needs to be fought. Where AFK miners/pvp'ers suffer the active players will profit. And that's the real point of this change, right ?
You realize "AFK PvP" is an oxymoron, right? If you're AFK in a PvP fleet, you're as good as dead.
Nevil Kincade wrote:That being said it would be a bad idea to add another Interceptor warp (from outside d-scan range) to the targets reaction time. The only solution i can come up with from the top of my hat is an extensive CovOps rebalance. Im leaning towards speed tanking and a point range bonus here just because CovOps could also make good use of more speed fulfilling their role as cloaky warpins. When it comes to tackling MJD battleships you would need a completely different set of bonuses though, probably active tanking. I think CCP have got their work cut out for themselves here. One word - recons.
Nevil Kincade wrote:As for the Wormholers: You guys are the ones who have the necessary ships for warpins in your fleet anyways. What kind of WH corp does not have cloaky eyes on the holes ? WH chains are either scanned down in advance so you can bookmark them or you will have your scanner in place for the warpin. The WH faction seems to be trying very hard to give the impression that this change is harder on them than on anybody else. I just hope CCP does not give into that because the whole point again is to promote certain roles. I don't think you know what you are talking about. Let alone understand what the WHers are saying. Those BMs of yours - yeah they aren't going to be warpable to after this change. WHers are a tough bunch, and far from self-entitled cry babies. Don't dismiss their concerns so readily.
Nevil Kincade wrote:P.S. And yea i think the whole bomber argument was a reach down the toilett and should be left out of the discussion from this point on. A well prepared and properly executed bomb run will not be affected by this change. Though they might become a less common occurence due to the hinderence emposed on them now. This is not a balancing effect at all and it was probably unnecessarily emphasized in the Initial post. Yes, this change will slightly nerf bombers - you cannot neatly warp to 30 on your target blob anymore. However, that nerf does not justify the degradation of gameplay for so many other roles in game. |
Brewmeron
Duke of the Day Hard Knocks Citizens
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 17:53:18 -
[1693] - Quote
The main breaking point for me in this that will affect whether I am fine with it or pissed off at the change is how it will affect probe results, I understand the reasoning for the changes, and I am somewhat supportive of this, however I am concerned about the impact it will have on hunting complex runners or people in sites in w-space, I believe it was suggested in the WH CSM meeting to discuss this the idea of the prober being able to broadcast a probe result for tacklers to instantly warp to. This way it involves the tackler pilot being awake and not just taking a squad warp, and doesn't seriously harm our ability to get tackle onto a target in what is generally a highly time limited activity.
Failing this, I feel the only other solution to this is to give interceptors and interdictors at minimum a fitting bonus to be able to fit expanded probe launchers, even if they don't get a bonus to strength, that or giving covert ops alot more capability to survive holding tackle on something awaiting support, because right now they're paper thin. |
Arla Sarain
503
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 19:09:35 -
[1694] - Quote
You won't be using Anathemas and Cheetahs for tackle. Prolly not even a buzzard. No fitting space and no defense. So much for giving these twats combat bonuses or any role beyond a interacting with a somewhat clever PVE.
This has 4k EHP, more if you lose the nanos for overdrives.
[Helios, Tackle] Type-D Restrained Nanofiber Structure Damage Control II Type-D Restrained Nanofiber Structure
5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive Warp Disruptor II Small Capacitor Booster II, Navy Cap Booster 200 Scan Acquisition Array I F-90 Positional Sensor Subroutines, Scan Resolution Script
Sisters Expanded Probe Launcher, Sisters Combat Scanner Probe Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I
You can decloak midst warp, about 1AU out and will land with no calibration timer. Not that's a clever idea in its own right, because cloaked allows you to position. You could try recalibration rigs, this drops the timer down to 3.7s with Cloaking V, and rely on victims poor align time to tackle him/her/it.
Still, you cannot compare this to an interceptor because it is "Just as flimsy". This has no drone protection, no practically replenishable tank, and it has to use the sisters launcher, so its a 70mill ships + 10 mill cargo of probes and boosters.
Also, cannot understand where the whole "combat scanning is easy lol" is coming from. On-grid scanning is easy, sure. As a consequence of knowing where your enemy is, you can land probes on top of them, which isn't that much different as to what it was before the changes, you just deploy multiple probes in one go, before you'd need ~40s setup time.
But offgrid scanning is not easy, and rarely doable in a single scan cycle, after which your chances of getting a hit are slim. The fastest scans are 4 seconds and that's with T2 scan speed module which are out of reach of common probers getting into the role, and implants which are even further out of reach. And this is still easily detected on d-scan.
So, what, you use these to tackle, which require 70mill ISK to set up, 1bil+ in headplants, several months of training (excluding the skills required to pilot the hull), are utterly defenseless with no real competition with T1/ewar/ceptor frigs? I doubt it. This isn't exactly a reasonable set up to fly and tackle with regularly.
I'd like combat probing to become more common and with reasons not to divert it to alts, I'd enjoy the role myself, but this change is no motivation for me to do that - worthwhile prober pilots are about as expensive as pirate frigs. |
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
190
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 19:17:45 -
[1695] - Quote
In a sleeper site that helios will be 2 shoted by the sleepers npc's .
No local in null sec would fix everything!
Fleet warp proposal = the rubix cube is back into eve especialy the second part of the saying.
|
Arla Sarain
503
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 19:22:02 -
[1696] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:In a sleeper site that helios will be 2 shoted by the sleepers npc's . Cool. |
Kaerakh
Obscure Joke Implied
517
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 19:35:48 -
[1697] - Quote
CCP, I really thought more of you. Glad I'm not resubbing, this thread embodies why I've lost interest in what was once my favorite game.
All this serves to do is punish smaller gang warfare where snap decisions from the FC are of vital importance. Seeing as how that was all I ever did in the past, I really have no reason to play if this is going to continue to be the current trend.
It used to be fun CCP.
o7
Schrodinger's Hot Dropper
The Fate of Forum Alts
Guaranteed Success
|
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
311
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 20:45:27 -
[1698] - 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. |
Zeetchmen
Lowsey Pirates Inc. Easily Excited
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 21:15:24 -
[1699] - Quote
BadAssMcKill wrote:Have you considered making the game more fun for a change
Best post I've ever seen regarding these kinds of changes
|
Kinete Jenius
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
38
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 21:15:31 -
[1700] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:You guys should listen to the recording, he absolutly want them all to be removed, align, keep at range, orbit,... . The main idea is that you should be manualy piloting your ship so that means align, ,move and warp out would be done all manualy Well that would certainly make me become uninterested in flying logistics post change.
Awful idea.
baltec1 wrote:unimatrix0030 wrote:baltec1 wrote:A55 Burger wrote:
That's not how I read "CCP Larrikin: I agree, I want anchoring taken out of the game. "
Perhaps my reading of this is askew, but orbit, approach, and keep at range are all methods to anchor. There's no anchor command, so....
Saying he would like it gone does not mean it is going to happen. Its something he would like to happen, he did not say it is going to happen. You guys should listen to the recording, he absolutly want them all to be removed, align, keep at range, orbit,... . The main idea is that you should be manualy piloting your ship so that means align, ,move and warp out would be done all manualy Again, saying he would like to get rid of them is not the same as saying they are removing them. Did you miss fozzie saying he wanted to remove fleet warp a while back? I'm pretty sure this change might have been the result... |
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2241
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 21:21:22 -
[1701] - Quote
Regarding, this Crusader vs Anathema issue, the problem is that we currently have ships fit for role perfectly - interceptors intercept and probers probe. The changes greatly reduce the utility of entire ship classes in certain usage cases with the result that you need to shoehorn fits that are actually quite ridiculous.
If combat probing is the core problem (and I accept this may be the case) then I would strongly prefer a direct nerf to combat probing without messing with the downstream ship uses.
Delay probe results or make them fuzzy. But still allow us to launch appropriate tackle at the result.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31931
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 21:23:31 -
[1702] - Quote
Wouldn't mind seeing Hictors get some love.
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
|
Irya Boone
Never Surrender.
466
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 22:19:08 -
[1703] - Quote
good
give it some work again , time to remove the ability of FC/squad commander to make people warp to gate/stations
let the F1 monkeys die slowly !!
CCP it's time to remove Off Grid Boost and Put Them on Killmail too, add Logi on killmails
.... Open that damn door !!
you shall all bow and pray BoB
|
Verlyn
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
40
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 23:41:30 -
[1704] - Quote
THIS IS ******* DUMB.
Dont do it. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16246
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 00:11:13 -
[1705] - Quote
Kinete Jenius wrote: Did you miss fozzie saying he wanted to remove fleet warp a while back? I'm pretty sure this change might have been the result...
We can still fleet warp after this change.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16246
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 00:15:19 -
[1706] - Quote
Arla Sarain wrote:You won't be using Anathemas and Cheetahs for tackle. Prolly not even a buzzard. No fitting space and no defense. So much for giving these twats combat bonuses or any role beyond a interacting with somewhat clever PVE.
This Helios has 4k EHP, more if you lose the nanos for overdrives. It's sole merit is the 1k hull.
[Helios, Tackle] Type-D Restrained Nanofiber Structure Damage Control II Type-D Restrained Nanofiber Structure
5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive Warp Disruptor II Small Capacitor Booster II, Navy Cap Booster 200 Scan Acquisition Array I F-90 Positional Sensor Subroutines, Scan Resolution Script
Sisters Expanded Probe Launcher, Sisters Combat Scanner Probe Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I
You can decloak midst warp, about 1AU out and will land with no calibration timer. Not that's a clever idea in its own right, because cloak allows you to position favoruably. You could try recalibration rigs, this drops the timer down to 3.7s with Cloaking V, and rely on victims poor align time to tackle him/her/it.
Still, you cannot compare this to an interceptor because it is "Just as flimsy". This has no drone protection, no practically replenishable tank, and it has to use the sisters launcher, so its a 70mill ships + 10 mill cargo of probes and boosters.
And your average ceptor fits no tanking mods at all so when it gets caught it dies even faster. If you want something tanky then use an assault frigate or upgrade to a cruiser hull. We used to tackle stuff just fine with cov-ops.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2241
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 01:14:14 -
[1707] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Arla Sarain wrote:You won't be using Anathemas and Cheetahs for tackle. Prolly not even a buzzard. No fitting space and no defense. So much for giving these twats combat bonuses or any role beyond a interacting with somewhat clever PVE.
This Helios has 4k EHP, more if you lose the nanos for overdrives. It's sole merit is the 1k hull.
[Helios, Tackle] Type-D Restrained Nanofiber Structure Damage Control II Type-D Restrained Nanofiber Structure
5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive Warp Disruptor II Small Capacitor Booster II, Navy Cap Booster 200 Scan Acquisition Array I F-90 Positional Sensor Subroutines, Scan Resolution Script
Sisters Expanded Probe Launcher, Sisters Combat Scanner Probe Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I
You can decloak midst warp, about 1AU out and will land with no calibration timer. Not that's a clever idea in its own right, because cloak allows you to position favoruably. You could try recalibration rigs, this drops the timer down to 3.7s with Cloaking V, and rely on victims poor align time to tackle him/her/it.
Still, you cannot compare this to an interceptor because it is "Just as flimsy". This has no drone protection, no practically replenishable tank, and it has to use the sisters launcher, so its a 70mill ships + 10 mill cargo of probes and boosters.
And your average ceptor fits no tanking mods at all so when it gets caught it dies even faster. If you want something tanky then use an assault frigate or upgrade to a cruiser hull. We used to tackle stuff just fine with cov-ops. Covops die ridiculously fast to light drones. I've got a medium ASB on my Stiletto - I assumed everyone would want at least some tank.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
340
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 01:49:02 -
[1708] - Quote
Zappity wrote:And your average ceptor fits no tanking mods at all so when it gets caught it dies even faster. If you want something tanky then use an assault frigate or upgrade to a cruiser hull. We used to tackle stuff just fine with cov-ops. Covops die ridiculously fast to light drones. I've got a medium ASB on my Stiletto - I assumed everyone would want at least some tank. [/quote]
They can be fitted to Cheetahs and Buzzards, too. |
Kinete Jenius
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
38
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 02:50:08 -
[1709] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Kinete Jenius wrote: Did you miss fozzie saying he wanted to remove fleet warp a while back? I'm pretty sure this change might have been the result...
We can still fleet warp after this change. With several caveats..
Point still stands. |
Mourn LeBlade
Jupiter Roughriders
126
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 03:53:13 -
[1710] - Quote
Can we please decouple the douchebaggery of nullsec from wormholes?
For ratting or hitting wormholes this is really going to blow. Thanks nullsec whiners.
LTCOL LeBlade
177 Division
Live Free or Die
|
|
Soko99
Repercussus Goonswarm Federation
77
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 04:23:51 -
[1711] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Hi Gentle Space Foke, As announced on the o7 show we are making some changes to fleet warp. Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders & Squad Commanders will no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own. This includes GÇô
- Probe Results
- Bookmarks
- Any private deadspace item (missions, etc.)
Commanders will still be able to warp their fleet to other fleet members, and all other GÇÿpublicGÇÖ objects.The goal of these changes is to encourage more individual fleet member participation and reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets (e.g bombers). Q&AsQ: When is this being implemented? A: Aegis (July) Q: What if every member of the fleet has the bookmark? A: Nope, sorry, no go. Q: Can I still fleet warp to planets/moons/stations/cynos/anoms? A: Yes! Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members. Q: CCP, will there be more fleet warp changes in the future? A: Probably, yes. [UPDATE 2015-06-12] Q: CCP, this unduly effects people who live in wormholes! A: Yes, and we're not happy about that. We have some systems and ideas we're working on to mitigate these effects. However we're not ready to announce those yet. Q: CCP, why are you nerfing fleet warp just to nerf bombers!? A: This change is not solely aimed at bombers. we expect bomber fleets to require a lot more pilot involvement and skill. But a highly skilled bomber fleet can still be just as effective as they are now. This runs true for all fleets. Q: CCP, this change doesn't create more pilot engagement / participation, the FC will just run another alt that he fleet warps too! A: That would work sure. But fleets who have members assisting the FC by setting up warpin's, getting tackle, etc. are going to be a lot more effective. We can't force you to participate in the fleet, but we can give an advantage to those that do. Good Internet Space People of New Eden, its going to take us some time to digest all the feedback you've given. You can expect to see more information about this and other changes next week.
So since this will essentially eliminate the reason ISKboxer was banned.. Are you guys going to re-allow iskboxer? |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
340
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 05:53:32 -
[1712] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: Q: CCP, this change doesn't create more pilot engagement / participation, the FC will just run another alt that he fleet warps too! A: That would work sure. But fleets who have members assisting the FC by setting up warpin's, getting tackle, etc. are going to be a lot more effective. We can't force you to participate in the fleet, but we can give an advantage to those that do.
This bit, by the way? The bit that's everything other than setting up warp-ins? This change doesn't affect at all. The people being warped to a covops on a perch to get tackle will be the same folks who are already getting warped to probe results. And since they'll have exactly as much idea (none) when the covops is in position as they currently have of when the probe results come in, they can't be any more pro-active about it than they were. |
Karti Aivo
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
21
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 11:06:43 -
[1713] - Quote
Hello,
i dont think this a well thought out change, i do think that you want to nerf combat probing instead. Please rethink this change and really take into account the feedback by the way better written posts than mine.
TIA. |
X4me1eoH
AirGuard LowSechnaya Sholupen
214
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 11:50:33 -
[1714] - Quote
now, many peoples mining with many windows. And warp all their windows using fleetwarp.Do you expect an increase in ore prices after the patch? Because I think many miners disable their subscriptions. I for sure disable 1-2 my alts. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16246
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 13:18:04 -
[1715] - Quote
X4me1eoH wrote:now, many peoples mining with many windows. And warp all their windows using fleetwarp.Do you expect an increase in ore prices after the patch? Because I think many miners disable their subscriptions. I for sure disable 1-2 my alts.
No you won't.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Zhul Chembull
Universalis Imperium The Bastion
105
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 13:21:55 -
[1716] - Quote
Bad idea gents, this just increases some tedious things in game. I do not support this at all. Quit trying to drive off subscriptions. There are some of the people I know that are on the edge of just finding another game from some of these "wonderful" changes. |
Lisa Sophie d'Elancourt
Empusa.
17
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 13:22:57 -
[1717] - Quote
Nice changes. +1 |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16246
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 13:38:27 -
[1718] - Quote
Zhul Chembull wrote:Bad idea gents, this just increases some tedious things in game. I do not support this at all. Quit trying to drive off subscriptions. There are some of the people I know that are on the edge of just finding another game from some of these "wonderful" changes.
Fun fact, back before we got the fleet broadcasting tools EVE was growing at its fastest rate.
Nobody it going to quit over this.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1112
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 13:59:54 -
[1719] - Quote
Zhul Chembull wrote:Bad idea gents, this just increases some tedious things in game. I do not support this at all. Quit trying to drive off subscriptions. There are some of the people I know that are on the edge of just finding another game from some of these "wonderful" changes.
Eve does just fine without those special snowflakes. |
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1112
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 14:03:20 -
[1720] - Quote
Soko99 wrote: So since this will essentially eliminate the reason ISKboxer was banned.. Are you guys going to re-allow iskboxer?
Err, no. This is not the reason ISBoxer was banned. Being able to control 2 squads of perectly synced purifiers was one, and running 34 nightmares and 6 basis on one screen in perfect sync was another. Input broadcasting allows for a single individual to outperform seperate players massively in certain situations, and therefore should remain banned. Rollover is not much better, but at least something is eating a couple of commands so it isn't nigh-perfect. |
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
341
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 15:33:10 -
[1721] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Fun fact, back before we got the fleet broadcasting tools EVE was growing at its fastest rate.
Rocket wrote:That is true.
baltec1 wrote:Nobody it going to quit over this.
Rocket wrote:That is also true.
It's still not a change that actually does what they want it to do.
CCP, If you want fleet members more engaged, give them reason to be engaged. Right-clicking a name when someone XXs in fleet chat and selecting 'fleet - > warp to member' isn't any more 'engagement' than ctrl-clicking a broadcast and pressing F1.
Give people things to do. Give them reasons to do them. And do it in a way that doesn't pile additional burdens onto the fleet members who are already engaged and already active and busy. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1125
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 15:42:25 -
[1722] - Quote
Lloyd Roses wrote:Zhul Chembull wrote:Bad idea gents, this just increases some tedious things in game. I do not support this at all. Quit trying to drive off subscriptions. There are some of the people I know that are on the edge of just finding another game from some of these "wonderful" changes. Eve does just fine without those special snowflakes.
I'm not one of the "Eve is dying" crowd, but Eve could use every person it can get. Anyone willing to log in and participate in Eve is just fine in my book.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1125
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 15:43:42 -
[1723] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:
CCP, If you want fleet members more engaged, give them reason to be engaged. Right-clicking a name when someone XXs in fleet chat and selecting 'fleet - > warp to member' isn't any more 'engagement' than ctrl-clicking a broadcast and pressing F1.
Give people things to do. Give them reasons to do them. And do it in a way that doesn't pile additional burdens onto the fleet members who are already engaged and already active and busy.
This is my fundamental issue with this proposal. I can find workarounds for the annoyances and tedium imposed by this change. I just don't think this change will actually achieve any measurable gains in terms of participation in fleets and gangs.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
342
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 16:20:58 -
[1724] - Quote
Here, just to throw out a few general ideas for 'things to do' - not one of these ideas, it should be noted, are guaranteed to be any good, I haven't had any caffeine yet.
Make positioning matter for more than just range / transversal - it's a massive conceptual change, but introduce firing arcs. Introduce damage arcs. Right now, we're basically fighting with 18th century line-of-battle tactics. Point everyone in the same direction until it's time to relocate, open fire.
In concert with damage arcs, give us actual microgravity orientations. Which way is 'up'? 'Up' is the direction in most perfect opposition to the local aggregate gravitational acceleration. That's all 'up' is. I'm taking fire on my left side and the armor's almost gone... lemme frippin' roll to put that fire coming in from my untouched right side. Look! the pilot's got to do something now! he's got to pay attention to the enemy fleet's positioning! he's got to know how his ship moves and how quickly it rolls.
Shield regeneration on different shield arcs means rolling with incoming damage can spread it out across 4-6 (depending on quadrant or hex-grid) different arcs and maybe let your passive regen handle it - or reinforce shield arcs 5 and 6 w/power from 2 and 3. (hex grid, 1 is the bow, 4 is the stern, primary arcs run clockwise in this example). Look! More things for pilots to do and be aware of about how their ship works - more risks to take, too! Do I flip my shields to double-up in the direction of the enemy fleet pre-emptively? What if I get bombed or attacked along the open arc(s)?
BREAK. MY. SHIPS.
I fly logi. I fly logi almost exclusively. We're ridiculously overpowered, and everyone knows it. You know it. There's a reason you don't allow teams of 100% Basilisks or Guardians to enter the AT - they'd be damned near unkillable. DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. Make us a viable and useful part of the fleet, but don't make us the 'I WIN' button we really are right now.
2 fleets of 50+ battleships pounding on a fleet w/70 logistics cruisers, unable to kill a bloody thing. Why? Because we're too good. Fix us. Break my damned ships, please. And don't just do some lame direct nerf that just means we bring even more logi. Don't do some lame thing that just means 'well, now the meta is alpha people off the field... again'. Figure out a way to make us useful without making us able to shut the enemy down completely. We're smegging tenders, man. Remote repair drones are basically damage control parties being sent to repair friendly ships.
Replace the remote shield/armor boosters with remote boost amplifiers, maybe. Or resistance amplifiers. Heck, why not both? Both of them can be subject to diminishing returns, both of them mean the dps pilot's got to be on his toes to activate local reps... right now, heck, half of them barely wake up in time to broadcast for reps. Probably a full 10% of them never wake up enough, and just die.
Because that's what you're up against, devs - it's not that there's nothing to keep them engaged, it's that what's there to keep them engaged is sporadic, with vast wastelands of broadsiding men-o-war in between that don't have to care about which direction the fire is coming from, or where the enemy fleet is, other than speed and distance. And fleet warping will not change that.
Give the ships of the line more to do in the fight. and break my bloody ship. PLEASE. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
343
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 17:29:05 -
[1725] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Replace the remote shield/armor boosters with remote boost amplifiers, maybe. Or resistance amplifiers.
A thought on the remote armor/shield hardener idea: this can be further tweaked to use ammo. Oh, I don't mean something stupid like 'you get to cycle the module 2000 times and then it's done because you ran out of healy-bullets'. I mean similar to scripts, really - unscripted, each one's a very small boost to all 4 resists. Scripted/crystalled/whatevered, all of that focuses on a single resistance. If you're prepared and you know what you're enemy's using, you can set your remote resistance boosters to a perfect mix. And then when they change damage types, you scramble to keep up.
Will that make things a little more complicated for the already often-overworked logi pilots? Eh, a little, maybe. But more, it'll mean the line pilots need to be paying attention to what they're being hit with.
So, you know, providing them that information in a more accessible manner than rummaging through the combat log in the middle of a fight? That might also help them stay 'more engaged'. I mean, really, we're talking about massive ships with the computational power to calculate the precise way to warp through a planet without destroying it and everyone on it.
They can't, you know, provide real-time damage analysis beyond '53: Elo Knight [MEN] graze.' ? |
Murkar Omaristos
The Alabaster Albatross Eternal Pretorian Alliance
114
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 20:10:59 -
[1726] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:
This is my fundamental issue with this proposal. I can find workarounds for the annoyances and tedium imposed by this change. I just don't think this change will actually achieve any measurable gains in terms of participation in fleets and gangs.
^^ This exactly. People will find workarounds, all this change will accomplish is making fleet movements more annoying and tedious rather than smooth, as it has been in the past. With each of these nerfs making the game less fun one after the other, elite dangerous looks more and more attractive to me every day. |
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
192
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 22:01:10 -
[1727] - Quote
Kinete Jenius wrote: Well that would certainly make me become uninterested in flying logistics post change.
Awful idea.
Everything about this idea is terrible, it is like changing the stearingwheel of a car while driving without any replacement or other thing to stear with.
No local in null sec would fix everything!
Fleet warp proposal = the rubix cube is back into eve especialy the second part of the saying.
|
Saffoo
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 22:51:25 -
[1728] - Quote
You might like to remove the current awesome 'This is EVE' video from the website when/if you make this mad change. Why? I hear you say, simple the fleet action filmed was with fleets using Fleet warps
Yarr i know pedantic ain't I :)
RIP the fun of getting everyone in a fleet to align for warp, oh im sorry that was pilot involvement was it :) |
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus Blades of Grass
89
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 22:51:39 -
[1729] - Quote
So the reasoning for the change was stated to be to hamper bombers as one of the primary goals. The "hampering' translates to CCP essentially forcing a safety feature to a bomber fleet, by making a scanning cloaked ship warp to the scan and then have the whole bomb group warp to him and then commence run. All it really did was get rid of quick blind warping, and forced a spot inspection by just one dude as opposed to the whole fleet. So in other words, bomb runs are barely touched, and only the fringe extreme efficient cases are effected, and only by a few seconds.
....However, this playstyle has been totally obliterated.... https://youtu.be/VP8mctMHcaI ...the rapid mobility fleets bouncing to on the fly bookmarks and scan results.
I can't say that I care too much, as I agree with the premise that fleets should be directed by an FC, not wholly and literally navigated by him/her, but I just find it extremely ironic and telling the way CCP does logic. They state a change's purpose is to slow a thing but yet an "unintended" side effect is to completely stop another thing.
So either they don't logic all that gewd, or they are just really bad about stating actual motive, either way, it's mildly humorous when you don't care about an issue, and maddening when you do. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16248
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 22:52:04 -
[1730] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:Kinete Jenius wrote: Well that would certainly make me become uninterested in flying logistics post change.
Awful idea.
Everything about this idea is terrible, it is like changing the stearingwheel of a car while driving without any replacement or other thing to stear with.
It more like taking away the satnav from the rally driver so he has to use the navigator.
Harry Saq wrote:So the reasoning for the change was stated to be to hamper bombers as one of the primary goals.
Wrong.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus Blades of Grass
89
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 23:05:40 -
[1731] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Hi Gentle Space Foke... ... The goal of these changes is to encourage more individual fleet member participation and reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets (e.g bombers).
... Q: CCP, why are you nerfing fleet warp just to nerf bombers!? A: This change is not solely aimed at bombers. we expect bomber fleets to require a lot more pilot involvement and skill. But a highly skilled bomber fleet can still be just as effective as they are now. This runs true for all fleets.
Regardless of "primary", the message had bombers as an example, and the second answer indicates "not solely aimed" meaning they were in the AOE of whatever the hell they were actually aiming at....so saying primary is more overstating than actually wrong...
Semantic arguments aside, my point stands, that while trying to message one aspect, they wiped out another entirely. It so happens to be one I agree with, but that doesn't make the logic better ;)
They did also state "individual fleet member participation", which you could argue the effectiveness of that premise as well when taking this change as the only change, where the intended affect is more attentive fleet members, which in the spectrum of effects, that one is way on down there in actual practice and likely outcome. |
Louanne Barros
Hole Violence Whole Squid
96
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 04:33:20 -
[1732] - Quote
How about letters on screen we have to follow along with, a la "Typing of the Dead", to increase interactivity? It's so easy to warp around and launch drones and dock and stuff right now. |
Lane Wyeth-XXVI
Aurora Security
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 05:21:27 -
[1733] - Quote
honestly for people to say bombers are dead and wh space is now much harder to traverse i actually see how this is going to open things up for a few ships this is actually going to improve the usefulness of combat recon ships to stay hidden (applys to bombers) as for wormhole hunting same logic applys you would just need 1 on the entrance grid for moving people through a chain and warping to a cloaked scout would work just as well they would still be a viable asset just slightly more vulnerable until the fleet fully arrived
people will always argue with a change that being said having a clear head about it will result in there being better tactics and new uses for under valued ships |
Eternal Cruiser
Peoples Liberation Army Fidelas Constans
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 12:47:15 -
[1734] - Quote
If you make this change, I will unsubscribe, because you are no longer selling a product I am interested in purchasing. |
Dmitry Kuvora
WAR TEAM Flex Point
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 12:50:28 -
[1735] - Quote
remove approach, keep at range and orbit on fleet members ! it would be much funnier |
Brokk Witgenstein
Extreme Agony
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 17:34:30 -
[1736] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Your post brought a smile to my face :) Even in a thread with this much emotion and misunderstanding, debate and righteous indignation, constructive criticisms and knee-jerk reactions, your words stand out like a blinding beacon of ignorance. Dude points out EveWiki.. read the damn 72 pages you lazy muppet
But why? Half of those 72 pages is You! Still didn't hear any game-breaking fundamentals except maybe "comfort". I shall dull it down for you: you need scouts. Scouts is where it's at. And, when on familiar terrain, corp bookmarks. Granted there are still some issues with instant-propagation of bookmarks and alliance bookmarks... but please.
Have a little faith in CCP -- there is definitely a plan behind all this and the way the plan seems to be going, it's in favour of smaller gangs and puts more emphasis on each individual's capabilities. Not to mention the Grand Masterplan seems to favour one *real* person per spaceship, as opposed to "I am a one-man fleet flying eight vessels, because I'm cool like that".
Now, please respond to what I said instead of "he's a beacon of ignorant trololololl" for it does not reflect well on your cognitive abilities either. Write a proper response or don't bother at all. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
346
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 19:57:47 -
[1737] - Quote
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:And, when on familiar terrain, corp bookmarks. Granted there are still some issues with instant-propagation of bookmarks and alliance bookmarks... but please.
Corp bookmarks - which you still won't be able to warp a fleet to, so they won't be useful for warping in on a target, propogated or not. For wormholes? Sure, they'll be useful... but not more or less useful than they are now - really, if you're warping blind to a WH that you don't have eyes already on, watching both sides... you're asking to get caught.
Quote: Have a little faith in CCP -- there is definitely a plan behind all this and the way the plan seems to be going, it's in favour of smaller gangs and puts more emphasis on each individual's capabilities.
No, there's a general idea behind all of this. A plan would have the details worked out in advance, and clearly, they're not. If they were, there wouldn't be all of those 'uhm, I don't know, that's a good point' in Larrikin's soundcloud. There'd be more 'this is how we plan to adjust things', more 'this is our intention for new systems that actually increase fleet member engagement and responsibility', not just some grand concept of 'removing fleet warp gives people more to do!' - because it really doesn't. Traveling will be just the same in k-space - the FC can still warp the fleet to gates, and the fleet members still have to jump through on their own. woo. Such engagement.
Not that having to warp yourself to each new system is much better. One person per spaceship is lovely, if they have something to do. Right now, the combat model for 90% of dps ships is not going to get much more 'engaging' than 'lock up the guy you were told to lock up, and shoot him'. Because most of the dps ships in any significant fleet are just dps ships. Now, how much of that will change w/the sov changes on the 14th remains to be seen - but changing fleet warp and looking to create 'MOAR ENGAGEMENTZ!' while everyone is figuring out that they need a larger number of smaller fleets for node control... that's bad. That's bad, and it's sloppy. Change one aspect of fleet combat at a time - in this case, the organizational model - and make sure that has the effect you want it to, rather than changing 2-4 aspects and then wondering which change produced which result.
Bad, bad practice, that. |
ManLee
Intentionally Dense Easily Excited
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 19:59:54 -
[1738] - Quote
seems logical, I mean Im all for the changes to slow down targets to stop the brainless blobs that occur without true pilot skill, but there is one flaw in this logic if a fleet is comprised of one Corporation and that corp has a BM A in Corp BM's technically every player in that fleet is then viable for that "BM A" so explain why cant they warp as fleet "Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders & Squad Commanders will no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own." well they can warp to said "BM A" because its in their corp BM's? but seriously I do agree with it too many brainless F1 warriors who have no initiative, Good Times.. |
GankYou
Redshield Holding Company
614
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 22:07:25 -
[1739] - Quote
Joran Jackson wrote: I think this change is more about encouraging the small gang playstyle. I just love the new direction of all these balances, from the sov changes to this, to half a dozen other things that have been switched up, I think you are making the game more exciting for the average player. Don't let the salt get you down, Larrakin, the direction Eve is moving is a good one, and I think people will realize it eventually.
Zloco Crendraven wrote:This will bring another role for the scouts in the fleets and it will differentiate good from the bad ones. Interceptors, cloaky probers will have a much more important role in fights. the more variables are in the fight the better gameplay is.
Fleets require more skill. To warp on a certain spot when told...ohhh so hard!
Will slow down and make harder bomber runs (positive)
Will slow down (a bit) projection in WHs. Probe > warp > fleet warp instead of probe > fleet warp. It will add some 30 sec more which is not really that bad for all the other gains
Only negative thing i heard is it will be almost impossible catching boosting alts. But i think capsuleers will find a way to fit a ship that will be able to do it. also i can live with it especially if CCP plans to remove offgrid boosting.
Name any negative point of this change.
These two gentlemen understand what built EVE, and CCP is working in the right direction here.
I still remember the days when I used to deal in WTZ bookmark sets.
X4me1eoH wrote:now, many peoples mining with many windows. And warp all their windows using fleetwarp.Do you expect an increase in ore prices after the patch? Because I think many miners disable their subscriptions. I for sure disable 1-2 my alts.
-= I always laugh here. =-
baltec1 wrote:Zhul Chembull wrote:Bad idea gents, this just increases some tedious things in game. I do not support this at all. Quit trying to drive off subscriptions. There are some of the people I know that are on the edge of just finding another game from some of these "wonderful" changes. Fun fact, back before we got the fleet broadcasting tools EVE was growing at its fastest rate. Nobody it going to quit over this.
And we had a minimum of Warp to 15 km desinations. And there were no anchors on my memory, nor drone assist/assign. Nor such logi proliferation. Nor the current MLG pro probing system.
...And They All Crave One Thing - ISK. Gÿ+
Nullsec Ore Changes - Lowend Mineral Price Tracking [2015]
|
Madbuster73
C.Q.B Snuffed Out
139
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 23:32:36 -
[1740] - Quote
Did I mention that all that this change will do is make KITING superior to everything? Its virtually impossible to land your fleet on the kiters if you cant do a fleet warp.
This change will make kiting-fleets the only viable option.
RIP good brawlfights. |
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
95
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 02:18:23 -
[1741] - Quote
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:But why? Half of those 72 pages is You! Still didn't hear any game-breaking fundamentals except maybe "comfort". I shall dull it down for you: you need scouts. Scouts is where it's at. And, when on familiar terrain, corp bookmarks. Granted there are still some issues with instant-propagation of bookmarks and alliance bookmarks... but please.
Have a little faith in CCP -- there is definitely a plan behind all this and the way the plan seems to be going, it's in favour of smaller gangs and puts more emphasis on each individual's capabilities. Not to mention the Grand Masterplan seems to favour one *real* person per spaceship, as opposed to "I am a one-man fleet flying eight vessels, because I'm cool like that".
Now, please respond to what I said instead of "he's a beacon of ignorant trololololl" for it does not reflect well on your cognitive abilities either. Write a proper response or don't bother at all.
You flatter me, but it's not half me - else some ISD would prob muzzle me by now.
Think of it more as "death by a thousand paper cuts". Such as: - FCs now having to get another prober alt, if they don't have one already - People sitting on their butts as scouts (read FC) gets into position - WH travel takes a little over 2x as long and removes people form doing fun stuff and transforms them to a mobile bookmark - Long range kiting fleets now become even more uncatchable
I typed all that cause you asked nicely, even though these points are exactly what we've been talking about for the last 80ish pages. Now, please listen to the two recordings with CCP Larrikin, and hear: a) all the concerns of other people who are going to suffer through it, and b) how clueless he sounds in terms of the side effects that outweigh the supposed benefits by orders of magnitude.
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
95
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 02:24:32 -
[1742] - Quote
ManLee wrote:seems logical, I mean Im all for the changes to slow down targets to stop the brainless blobs that occur without true pilot skill, but there is one flaw in this logic if a fleet is comprised of one Corporation and that corp has a BM A in Corp BM's technically every player in that fleet is then viable for that "BM A" so explain why cant they warp as fleet "Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders & Squad Commanders will no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own." well they can warp to said "BM A" because its in their corp BM's? but seriously I do agree with it too many brainless F1 warriors who have no initiative, Good Times..
Care to explain how adding one more scout, who will prob be the FC's alt if it doesn't exist already, increase participation for the other 200+ fleet members?
And how you can guarantee that the opposite won't happen - that they will just sit around and get bored for longer as the second warp is set up to the primary warped prober?
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
95
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 02:25:43 -
[1743] - Quote
Madbuster73 wrote:Did I mention that all that this change will do is make KITING superior to everything? Its virtually impossible to land your fleet on the kiters if you cant do a fleet warp.
This change will make kiting-fleets the only viable option.
RIP good brawlfights.
Dunno if you mentioned it, but it's been discussed a few times earlier in the thread :)
|
Evan Giants
Plundering Penguins
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 02:46:17 -
[1744] - Quote
I dont like this idea at all, when I first read this fleet warp changes I groaned.
Please dont go through with it :(
|
Commander Spurty
Dimension Door We need wards.
1469
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 03:58:21 -
[1745] - Quote
This is like the don't be "average" patch.
People will have to not be 'rubbish" at the basics of their role.
As for Alliance level bookmarks, why do you need that?
Corp Manag 20 members per level, @ V = 100 Mega Corpo100 members per level, @ V =500 Empire Control 400 members per level, @ V =2000 Sovereignty2000 members per level, @ V =10000
a Corp can already serve 12,600 people.
How's about you just make a corp of 12,601 first.
There are good ships
And wood ships
And ships that sail the sea
But the best ships are
Spaceships
Built by CCP
|
dhunpael
48
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 07:50:50 -
[1746] - Quote
Congrats CCP,
Even after talking with the wormhole community you are still going forward with this change, without any forthcoming to the wormhole dwellers.
May by you still want your original plan to become reality: wormhole space is not for permanent inhabitants
Anyhow: this change is forcing a lot of wormhole people out of the wormholes they live in. Wormhole space will become a very quiet place after this change.
for any nullbear: we don't live in stations, we don't have gates. The only way of moving is through bookmarks and scan results! So basically they are taking away our means to navigate anywhere!
|
White Don
Iris Covenant The Gorgon Empire
23
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 09:07:20 -
[1747] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Hi Gentle Space Foke,
As announced on the o7 show we are making some changes to fleet warp. [b]Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders & Squad Commanders will no longer be able to warp to anything a fleet member couldnGÇÖt warp to on their own.
Why is that option chosen over increasing combat probes scan cycle combined with little change of probes mechanic, e.g. getting coordinates of where ship was exactly at time of clicking "Scan" button and not when scan ended? If you ever considered this of course. |
Lucius Kalari
Limited Power Inc It Must Be Jelly Cause Jam Don't Shake
14
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 09:59:02 -
[1748] - Quote
I have faith that CCP will listen to it's community because this change will affect everyone, rather than just one part of it. I won't lie, I am a wormholer and I play EVE for wormhole space because of what it offers, and I just don't like low/null, and probably vice versa for null/low players. All players from all parts of EVE have had their say on what they think of this change, and I believe most of it to be negative about the change, but there has been a lot of counter proposals. Broadcast the bookmark to have a limited window of fleet warp, squad leaders warping their squads, and even the very detailed reddit post from Soldari Orion/jokeres:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3a90hi/ccpls_root_cause_analysis_or_how_to_fix_what_you/
I know that CCP have always said that they never wanted wormholes to be occupied, but the fact that they made changes to the jump spawn range, added shattered wormholes and gave c4's dual statics shows that they don't want wormholes to go anywhere, I don't believe CCP want wormholers to go anywhere, but the proposed fleet warp change will cripple the way wormholers play and how they operate. This change just isn't good for anyone really, I think that if this really is just a way to prevent bombers from being effective, why not just give them a debuff role of unable to accept fleet warp?
Squad warps sounds the best to me because instead of everyone jumping into the same fleet, you'd have to have a squad composed of ships that can hold the field long enough for the rest of the fleet to arrive, depending on the situation, which to me seems like more interaction from people as you'd have to rely on each other more. Example of what I mean is this:
Proteus <- Squad Leader Proteus Proteus Legion Legion Tengu Loki Loki Guardian Guardian
I hope CCP don't go through with their warp changes and listens to their community.
Hi, I'm Lucius Kalari and I'm .LIMP
LichReaper - according to zkill they probably wont make it past the undock
|
poerkie
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
14
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 10:28:10 -
[1749] - Quote
Cant you make probes invisible in wormholes in that case. Then we atleast have a chance to get our so to speak cloacky scout in positiion |
Countess Ayanna
ICE is Coming to EVE Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 10:35:33 -
[1750] - Quote
CCP Larrikin, you should get an account and start playing the game... I realy hope it will help you realize the stupidity of your ideas and how they will kill this game in the future. |
|
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
389
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 11:24:30 -
[1751] - Quote
Countess Ayanna wrote:CCP Larrikin, you should get an account and start playing the game... I realy hope it will help you realize the stupidity of your ideas and how they will kill this game in the future. I think he has been playing star citizen and didn't realize it wasn't eve or something. Some of the other suggestion on increasing maximum tedium are far worse than this change.
Making people click an extra time is *not* increasing fleet participation.
For example, a double sided bomb run 2 squads each side. Need two ppl to get into position in a good perch each side. Fleet members warps to their respective perch. Proceed as normal. That is not more participation. How the hell is "warp to fleet member" some kind of challenge.
May as well add a random popup mini game every 20 secs.
What i am now worried about is dumb things he said in the sound cast. Like removing align, keep at range, orbit etc. So what eve is going to be a twitch pilot simulator with 1 second server tics? CCP Larrikin is out of touch.
Death and Glory!
Well fun is also good.
|
Kasia en Tilavine
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 11:51:34 -
[1752] - Quote
This is not the way to increase player participation. This puts useless strain on players and FC's. Want a good way to increase participation?
Step 1: Create fleet bookmarks ( that update every 30 seconds, not 5-10 minutes )
Step 2: Allow 'fleet warp to x' Broadcasts ( any set of spacial coordinates FC or members have for in system )
Step 3: Extend the warp information bar with a speed toggle. ( set warp speed from .1 to ship max in .1 increments )
Step 4: Completely remove fleet warp.
After steps 1-3 EVERY fleet in EVERY situation will have all the tools they need to move and fly. With every non-afk person participating and paying attention. With fleet bookmarks, and a broadcast option for warp to coordinates, FCs and Movement players/alts will have all the tools they need to create perches, prep coordinates for their FC, storing them in fleet bookmarks named and accurate. A well timed fleet will be able to land on probed opponents with maybe 1-3 seconds more lag than they can now, with EVERY SINGLE person participating in the system to system, perch to perch movement. Players will be punished for not listening or paying attention to the FC, and multiboxers will have a harder time ensuring the survival of their ships. |
Ryno Caval
House of Praetor Fidelas Constans
28
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 12:12:25 -
[1753] - Quote
OMG SOMETHING IS CHANGING AND WE HAVE TO ADAPT AND OVERCOME
Whatever will we do, how will we go on playing a game that has been evolving since it was released and has spawned it's own community of space nerds who are so against change when it's announced, then in some miraculous way either find a way to exploit the hell out of it or just work around it. Hmmmmm...... I wonder what's next
"stop adding new and interesting dynamics CCP all we want is to not have to use our brains anymore make it so FC's can broadcast target and it cause all the fleet to lock and presses f1 for them"
Get over it and learn to play with the new dynamic.
Solution to all complaints use a cloaky prober ie the Cov Ops Frigs that have basically been used as a throw away ship in almost everything that they do, its cheap, easy to fit, and not too skill intensive. Also be good at it it shouldn't take entirely too long to scan something down if you are decent enough at it.
Oh and what a good way for a newbie to learn to be part of a fleet than to be a warp in dingle berry or better yet if you have a bookmark and you want someone to warp to it IE Probing results, you all do remember you can trade and loot bookmarks right
I mean seriously -Scan something down - 1-2 min if skills and technique are good -Save location- 1 sec -Open people & location submenu -1sec -Find your location you wish to share -1sec -Shift click and drag into your cargo -1sec -Jettison can -1sec -Tell fleet member designated as warp in to loot can -1 sec (more if you didn't designate warp in or they are not paying attention) -Tell warp in to to warp selves to BM -based on warp time and system size 10-30+ sec (for largest system in BS fleet comp takes 95 sec) -Fleet warp to member -based on warp time and system size 10-30+ sec (for largest system in BS fleet comp takes 95 sec)
total time 3 min 6 sec total time that is added to the regular process maybe 35+ sec and at most 100 sec
35+ whole seconds what ever are we going to do (and mind you 30 sec warp for BS is approx 90 AU give or take a few seconds for acceleration and deceleration)
It even takes talented FC's around this time to get set up in a system anyways or to get a fleet's head out of their asses when they do find something with their prober. This will simply make people pay closer attention to what the FC's say and not be bad.
You all are so terrified of change you didn't even bother to look into how this will really effect anything.
Yes this puts more pressure on the FC to be better at his job and makes them rely on other people.
WH'ers and Miners you can apply the same thing and do the math yourself.
Also Boo Hoo you can't land all the bombers on a perch cloaked together but that's just it you are cloaked and you can get a warp in off of whomever you are bombing and then warp back out just as easily you just have to not be bad.
If you fly a specialized type of ship and you don't know how to use it than learn and quit relying on everyone else to do everything for you.
If you are a good bomber, you have any spacial reasoning skills, and a basic understanding of trajectory and three dimensional triganometry; you can hit moving targets and don't have to rely on the FC to do everything for you. Yes it sucks having to have responsibility in a fleet cause all you F1 monkeys and KM whores only care about padding your killboards which doesn't show anything about your actual skill in EVE as a PVP'er. When someone else has to literally tell you to remember to cycle your guns and has to remind people what their job in the fleet is there is something fundamentally wrong with you claiming to be good at PvP. The person who is good at PvP is the FC and you are just riding his coat tails.
That was my rant some of you will TL:DR it some will read it and agree, some will disagree. I don't care either way just stop bitching so, dam much and learn to adapt to things. |
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
389
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 12:39:08 -
[1754] - Quote
You clearly have never shared BMs via jet cans. It can take a whole minute to "cut and paste" even longer. And you have only ONE BM. You need to do that 30 times for a fleet of 30!
And if its taken you 1-2mins to scan someone down, your not going to catch anything where we hunt. You got 30 seconds. Tops. And yea a good dscaner prober can scan someone down in a single probe scan with probes on dscan measured in seconds.
Death and Glory!
Well fun is also good.
|
Khan Wrenth
Hedion University Amarr Empire
170
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 13:09:49 -
[1755] - Quote
Behold! I found the REAL reason and driving force behind this change. This quote comes from another thread so I'll link it. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5124164#post5124164
Moraguth wrote:elitatwo wrote: Funny observations of the last weeks:
We say Ishtar op!
CCP comes: Nerf missiles!
We say bombs too strong!
CCP comes: Nerf cloaks!
Got me thinking, if we can determine the right pattern here we could ask for the right nerf or buff to occure. I am usually very observant and good at this but this pattern still eludes me..
I have no idea what your agenda or desired nerf would be, but for the sake of SCIENCE, i think you should try organizing a huge effort to scream "NERF MINING DRONES!" just to see what would happen. We need more data points to discover the pattern!
So for the record, this change was brought to you by a concerted effort to nerf mining drones.
Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
|
Ryno Caval
House of Praetor Fidelas Constans
28
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 13:38:05 -
[1756] - Quote
Delt0r Garsk wrote:You clearly have never shared BMs via jet cans. It can take a whole minute to "cut and paste" even longer. And you have only ONE BM. You need to do that 30 times for a fleet of 30!
And if its taken you 1-2mins to scan someone down, your not going to catch anything where we hunt. You got 30 seconds. Tops. And yea a good dscaner prober can scan someone down in a single probe scan with probes on dscan measured in seconds.
I was basing it off of the majority not the minority and it is super easy to share J-canned BM's it's just a bit of a UI kung-fu but it can be done quickly
I was able to J-can 15 copies of a BM to my fleet in a matter of seconds because I was properly prepared
Also if you are catching someone generally it's not a bad idea to put a tackle on your prober cause sometimes you're not so great PvP'er in fleets are bad and aren't aligned properly or have burned off grid like fail-hards. Yes it will affect people who play with a higher level of accuracy and in WH pvp for sure cause you never not have you dscan window open but, WH is a niche just like people who run Incursions are a niche or mission runners are a niche but a majority of the population of EVE lives in K-space and the sad truth is that when CCP makes changes it is to effect the majority not the minority
So the just ,of what I am saying is that CCP is being kinda racist against WH'ers but I mean WH space is weird and foreign and meh.
You can't please everyone but you can try to please some and I think this is also just another way CCP is trying to make EVE new player friendly.
I'm not at all saying I am happy with this just simply making some suggestions about ways to stop QQ'ing about it cause they've already decided they are doing it regardless of how much people complain.
HTFU
|
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
42
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 14:16:11 -
[1757] - Quote
I see a lot of complaints in this discussion that seem to center on the idea that Eve is a better game when it is difficult.
It's rather strange that many of the people with this opinion write as if clarity is a secondary concern, while how angry they are at those that disagree with them is more important. You have to ask yourself... if what sets Eve apart in a demographic fashion is the age of the players, and their intelligence, how do you expect to convince people in the discussion that yours is the right idea, when your communication is so unrefined?
Anyone can change my mind with a well reasoned argument, yet it is very difficult to interpret an argument as well reasoned when the supporting facts are either attacks, or clearly haven't been given a second look by the writer. Perhaps the ability to understand a perspective other than your own would aid you in making these arguments. |
Lt Shard
Team Pizza Good at this Game
49
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 16:28:15 -
[1758] - Quote
Soooo, any updates? Its on the feature page now. That has me a bit worried they're just going to ignore cc. |
Jack Hayson
Atztech Inc. Ixtab.
186
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 17:38:05 -
[1759] - Quote
Ryno Caval wrote:-Scan something down - 1-2 min if skills and technique are good Dafuq?! If that's how long it takes you to scan someone down you should be very VERY quiet regarding anything that involves probing. |
Dermeisen
20
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 17:50:32 -
[1760] - Quote
dhunpael wrote:Congrats CCP,
Even after talking with the wormhole community you are still going forward with this change, without any forthcoming to the wormhole dwellers.
May by you still want your original plan to become reality: wormhole space is not for permanent inhabitants
Anyhow: this change is forcing a lot of wormhole people out of the wormholes they live in. Wormhole space will become a very quiet place after this change.
for any nullbear: we don't live in stations, we don't have gates. The only way of moving is through bookmarks and scan results! So basically they are taking away our means to navigate anywhere!
Honestly it won't, and not really you exaggerate. However I would have thought the new structures take much of the fun out of wormholes! Unless Mooring is revisited for smaller structures the old pos, with all it's problems, made wormholes a much more strategic game.
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
192
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 18:44:29 -
[1761] - Quote
It is clear that you never scanned a thing in your eve life from your post : -Scan something down, 1-2 minutes if you are good(anyone with 3 scanning skills to 5), else target is gone -save location, 2 seconds(need to select the correct map for corp bm's first) -wait 5 minutes for corp mate to get bm -Open people & location submenu -1sec -Find your location you wish to share -1sec -drag location to personal bm's, 3 seconds(we have a lot of scrolling to do, and so will you after the changes) -Shift click and drag into your cargo -3 sec multiply by number of corps in your alliance (lets say 3) -Jettison can with all bm's -1sec -distribute bm's to corps (10-60 seconds depending on how they land on grid) -wait 5 minutes to have bm's propagate to all corps in alliance -start moving fleet to target lets say the average of wh space is 3 down the chain so lets take you 95s *3
So that is about 15 minutes and 52 seconds just to get a fleet into position. And seige/triage/bastion only last 5 minutes. Besides most pve sites can be done in 15 minutes before you can get a fleet down the chain to get the carebears.
This change will only slow down bomberfleets and will only fix on grid combat probing while breaking the rest of eve.
It seems like everyone of us needs to adapt except null sec, they just get the rules changed.
No local in null sec would fix everything!
Fleet warp proposal = the rubix cube is back into eve especialy the second part of the saying.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
351
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 18:48:17 -
[1762] - Quote
A55 Burger wrote:I see a lot of complaints in this discussion that seem to center on the idea that Eve is a better game when it is difficult.
[...]
Anyone can change my mind with a well reasoned argument, yet it is very difficult to interpret an argument as well reasoned when the supporting facts are either attacks, or clearly haven't been given a second look by the writer. Perhaps the ability to understand a perspective other than your own would aid you in making these arguments.
And yet, absolutely nobody in the discussion is actually saying 'EVE is a better game when it is difficult'. The proposed changes don't reduce 'difficulty' at all - nor, for that matter, do they improve 'clarity'.
The intent of the changes is to increase active participation and distribute responsibility for a fleet's success or failure across more actors. The changes do nothing to actually achieve this goal. Instead, all they do is promote the use of an additional, dedicated probing and 'warp to me @10' alt for the FC. That point's been made over and over, and the whys and wherefores of it explained both succinctly and in great detail.
The average fleet member will not see their 'active participation' increase. They will not shoulder any additional responsibility. How do we know? Because they already don't. The people who are willing to shoulder responsibility already do so. They're the ones who do the things that need to be done, instead of flying a ship that has a bunch of guns and pads its killboards. They're already actively participating. They're flying logistics, or fast tackle, or EWAR ships, or point Proteii and webbing Lokis. They're doing things, and when everything goes to Hek, they're the ones who're already holding it together.
The regular fleet members? The ones who don't have any 'active participation' over 'lock target, press F1'? They're choosing to be that. They're actively deciding 'I want to just shoot something and get my kills, and to hell with all of the things that need doing'. That's why FCs have to call for more logi, call for boosters, actively ask people to get into the specialized, active roles - not because there's nothing to do, but because people don't want to do it.
The only way you change that is by making the 'I am the guy who does dps' role into something more active. There's ways to do that. There's even ways to do it without overloading the people who are already doing plenty. Changing fleet warp... ain't it. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
96
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 19:00:39 -
[1763] - Quote
Ryno Caval wrote: I mean seriously -Scan something down - 1-2 min if skills and technique are good -Save location- 1 sec -Open people & location submenu -1sec -Find your location you wish to share -1sec -Shift click and drag into your cargo -1sec -Jettison can -1sec -Tell fleet member designated as warp in to loot can -1 sec (more if you didn't designate warp in or they are not paying attention) -Tell warp in to to warp selves to BM -based on warp time and system size 10-30+ sec (for largest system in BS fleet comp takes 95 sec) -Fleet warp to member -based on warp time and system size 10-30+ sec (for largest system in BS fleet comp takes 95 sec)
total time 3 min 6 sec total time that is added to the regular process maybe 35+ sec and at most 100 sec
35+ whole seconds what ever are we going to do (and mind you 30 sec warp for BS is approx 90 AU give or take a few seconds for acceleration and deceleration)
First, you take 2-4x longer to scan someone down than a seasoned prober. Than you are 3-5x faster at doing the other stuff. What kinda drugs are you on?
Ryno Caval wrote:That was my rant some of you will TL:DR it some will read it and agree, some will disagree. I don't care either way just stop bitching so, dam much and learn to adapt to things. TL;DR for folks: Dude buys original argument but couldn't be bothered to read up on the objections in the previous 80+ pages. Or reading comprehension skills are sub-mid-school level.
|
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
42
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 19:23:13 -
[1764] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:A55 Burger wrote:I see a lot of complaints in this discussion that seem to center on the idea that Eve is a better game when it is difficult.
Anyone can change my mind with a well reasoned argument, yet it is very difficult to interpret an argument as well reasoned when the supporting facts are either attacks, or clearly haven't been given a second look by the writer. Perhaps the ability to understand a perspective other than your own would aid you in making these arguments. And yet, absolutely nobody in the discussion is actually saying 'EVE is a better game when it is difficult'. The proposed changes don't reduce 'difficulty' at all - nor, for that matter, do they improve 'clarity'.
This is a great example of that well reasoned argument. The concepts are explained, there isn't any needless flamebait, and an alternative is presented.
It beats "This game used to be harder, suck it up" by far. Giving a logistics pilot something to do other than watch the broadcast window would be amazing. Giving a dps ship more to do than lock target, fire, switch target, fire, reload would make fleets less like work, and more like play. Making fleet positioning more dynamic would make commanding a fleet much more rewarding, and feel more like a victory than a failure to follow a flowchart.
|
Libby Tazinas
In Utter Darkness United Systems of Aridia
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 19:40:28 -
[1765] - Quote
At first I was on the fence about these changes but seeing how many whiny baby elite pvpers that are so fond of these changes I say bring on more changes.
Remember kids, its adapt or die.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out, we don't want ass prints on the new door!
|
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
42
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 19:47:11 -
[1766] - Quote
A55 Burger wrote:Arrendis wrote:A55 Burger wrote:I see a lot of complaints in this discussion that seem to center on the idea that Eve is a better game when it is difficult.
And yet, absolutely nobody in the discussion is actually saying 'EVE is a better game when it is difficult'. The proposed changes don't reduce 'difficulty' at all - nor, for that matter, do they improve 'clarity'. [...] The only way you change that is by making the 'I am the guy who does dps' role into something more active. There's ways to do that. There's even ways to do it without overloading the people who are already doing plenty. Changing fleet warp... ain't it. This is a great example of that well reasoned argument. The concepts are explained, there isn't any needless flamebait, and an alternative is presented.
Libby Tazinas wrote:At first I was on the fence about these changes but seeing how many whiny baby elite pvpers that are so fond of these changes I say bring on more changes.
Remember kids, its adapt or die.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out, we don't want ass prints on the new door!
And this is a great example of a not so well reasoned argument. Thanks for your insightful contribution.
|
Dermeisen
20
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 20:06:58 -
[1767] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:A55 Burger wrote:I see a lot of complaints in this discussion that seem to center on the idea that Eve is a better game when it is difficult.
[...]
Anyone can change my mind with a well reasoned argument, yet it is very difficult to interpret an argument as well reasoned when the supporting facts are either attacks, or clearly haven't been given a second look by the writer. Perhaps the ability to understand a perspective other than your own would aid you in making these arguments. [...] The regular fleet members? The ones who don't have any 'active participation' over 'lock target, press F1'? They're choosing to be that. They're actively deciding 'I want to just shoot something and get my kills, and to hell with all of the things that need doing'. That's why FCs have to call for more logi, call for boosters, actively ask people to get into the specialized, active roles - not because there's nothing to do, but because people don't want to do it. The only way you change that is by making the 'I am the guy who does dps' role into something more active. There's ways to do that. There's even ways to do it without overloading the people who are already doing plenty. Changing fleet warp... ain't it.
Experience is compelling isn't it, but institutional processes in a large alliance such as yours inevitably lead their members into passivity, reward risk averse behaviour and punish non-conformance. If you expect creativity or initiative you won't find it, the culture abhors it. You'd be much more likely to find anger at the suggestion that 'they' take a lead, after all mixed messages are intensely frustrating. Your membership will prefer to make heroes of their fc to explain their complacency, and the FCs just want them to hit F1, like Henry Ford put it "Why is it that every time I ask for a pair of hands, they come with a brain attached?"
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
42
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 20:19:20 -
[1768] - Quote
Dermeisen wrote: Experience is compelling isn't it, but institutional processes in a large alliance such as yours inevitably lead their members into passivity, reward risk averse behaviour and punish non-conformance. If you expect creativity or initiative you won't find it, the culture abhors it. You'd be much more likely to find anger at the suggestion that 'they' take a lead, after all mixed messages are intensely frustrating. Your membership will prefer to make heroes of their fc to explain their complacency, and the FCs just want them to hit F1, like Henry Ford put it "Why is it that every time I ask for a pair of hands, they come with a brain attached?"
Wait, you're saying that a large alliance inevitably makes for a passive, boring game? That how many people fly under a banner is the reason for these problems, and not how the game is designed?
Seems a bit of a stretch.
|
Fango Mango
University of Caille Gallente Federation
133
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 20:20:06 -
[1769] - Quote
Only read about 40 pages of this threadnough so not sure if this has been mentioned (and pretty sure CCP will never read it), but anyway here we go.
How does removing the the ability to fleet warp to mission locations improve the game? What problem are you trying to fix. How is fleet warp being abused by mission runners?
Who runs missions in fleets? 1) Incursions - This will have no effect because you can still fleet warp to incursion beacons. 2) "Vets" running missions with newbros - Sure lets make it harder for our newer members. 3) L5 missions gangs (me!!!). Will make running some missions a real pain.
If you run L5s with a gang as opposed to a solo carrier, you need your logi to land at about the same time as your other ships. If logi lands first it dies. If logi is too late everything else dies. The window is small in some missions (about 15 seconds). Because most L5s are un-gated you can't just warp to the gate then set up there. The only real option for a gang will be to bookmark the mission before accepting the mission, share the bookmarks (hopefully everyone is in the same corp), then accept the mission and run. While that is certainly doable it's crap gameplay. I will be the first to say the L5s are unbalanced with their insane payout (and have posted many time to this affect), but the solution is not to force a crap mechanic onto your customers.
-FM |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
354
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 22:17:06 -
[1770] - Quote
Dermeisen wrote: Experience is compelling isn't it, but institutional processes in a large alliance such as yours inevitably lead their members into passivity, reward risk averse behaviour and punish non-conformance. If you expect creativity or initiative you won't find it, the culture abhors it. You'd be much more likely to find anger at the suggestion that 'they' take a lead, after all mixed messages are intensely frustrating. Your membership will prefer to make heroes of their fc to explain their complacency, and the FCs just want them to hit F1, like Henry Ford put it "Why is it that every time I ask for a pair of hands, they come with a brain attached?"
I won't say that there's isn't a degree of that, sure, but I do think it's overstated. Both Goonswarm, and the Imperium as a whole, have programs for people who want to do more. To say the 'culture' abhors initiative is patently false - it rewards it. It just doesn't reward initiative that's counterproductive. If you want to be the guy who's doing X important task, there are programs in the Imperium's structure that are available to folks in all of the member-alliances (not just CONDI) to help them learn that job, help them get better about it, and give them an avenue to practice. Tackle and Dictors can cut their teeth in any of the high-activity, small-gang SIGs. Logi pilots can hook up w/RepSwarm. FC-candidates can sign up for the Skirmish Commander program. Cloaky eyes can join Scouts, etc etc. The list goes on and on, and includes things like Miniluv and Hole Squad.
However, for the majority of people who choose not to take on a specialized role... that's still a choice. It may be the most passive choice they've ever made, but they're making it. They're the ones joining the fleet in a battleship or dps cruiser, not a more specialized ship where initiative is rewarded. And if they're going to choose to fly a ship whose purpose in the fleet is 'shoot who you are told to shoot'.. then they're going to be expected to do that. That's not punishing people for initiative, it's accepting their decision and saying 'if that's what you want to do, that's what we'll expect you to do.'
and A55...
A55 Burger wrote: Giving a logistics pilot something to do other than watch the broadcast window would be amazing.
Sometimes, it would. When you're taking sustained incoming fire that switches targets rapidly and has you trying to lock up 20 targets in 25 seconds on a ship that locks at max 10... yeah, no. :) I don't mind giving my guys ways to not be bored. I don't want 'em bored. I want them alert and engaged... but at the same time, when the shooting starts, I want them to be able to focus on those broadcasts, and deliver max reps as efficiently and quickly as possible. Making sure they can do that - worrying about the positioning and range to our fleet, making sure we're not needlessly at risk from the enemy fleet... that's my job, and I do it precisely to reduce the amount of distractions they have. Because in big fights... there's a lot of them. ;) |
|
Libby Tazinas
In Utter Darkness United Systems of Aridia
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 23:44:13 -
[1771] - Quote
Considering I was making a comment and not an argument. You should maybe keep your insight to yourself until you can tell the difference between the two?!
Remember no ass prints on my door!
A55 Burger wrote:A55 Burger wrote:Arrendis wrote:A55 Burger wrote:I see a lot of complaints in this discussion that seem to center on the idea that Eve is a better game when it is difficult.
And yet, absolutely nobody in the discussion is actually saying 'EVE is a better game when it is difficult'. The proposed changes don't reduce 'difficulty' at all - nor, for that matter, do they improve 'clarity'. [...] The only way you change that is by making the 'I am the guy who does dps' role into something more active. There's ways to do that. There's even ways to do it without overloading the people who are already doing plenty. Changing fleet warp... ain't it. This is a great example of that well reasoned argument. The concepts are explained, there isn't any needless flamebait, and an alternative is presented. Libby Tazinas wrote:At first I was on the fence about these changes but seeing how many whiny baby elite pvpers that are so fond of these changes I say bring on more changes.
Remember kids, its adapt or die.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out, we don't want ass prints on the new door!
And this is a great example of a not so well reasoned argument. Thanks for your insightful contribution.
|
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
42
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 01:04:39 -
[1772] - Quote
Libby Tazinas wrote:Considering I was making a comment and not an argument. You should maybe keep your insight to yourself until you can tell the difference between the two?!
Remember no ass prints on my door!
You're entirely right. A poorly reasoned argument would have been a more worthwhile contribution.
Carry on! |
Lugh Crow-Slave
1140
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 02:44:25 -
[1773] - Quote
Quote: Q: CCP, why you do this? A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members.
by members you mean fc alts right?
Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3? Corp Stasis
|
Lelob
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
198
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 03:19:20 -
[1774] - Quote
Good, but more nerfs are needed. I'm tired of every scrublord getting by because his FC is holding his hand for every single bit of a fight and being able to execute things that require actual skill to pull off, without actually doing anything. Keep on nerfing bad pilots tyvm for this small, but great change. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
97
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 08:28:47 -
[1775] - Quote
Lelob wrote:Good, but more nerfs are needed. I'm tired of every scrublord getting by because his FC is holding his hand for every single bit of a fight and being able to execute things that require actual skill to pull off, without actually doing anything. Keep on nerfing bad pilots tyvm for this small, but great change.
How, exactly, does this change cause your desire to come true?
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31944
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 09:35:05 -
[1776] - Quote
The simple answer to your question, Awkward, is fleet warp and other fleet functions allow players to handhold others so they can come along, participate, and play. As sexy as it is to be capable as an individual pilot and in a group of similar quality nerds, it's callous for players to let other players be damned on this issue.
For CCP to say players be damned, I think, is downright irresponsible. To yank a gameplay tool without compensating by making it easier to make the same choices. I'm talking about the UI.
Because EVE is difficult for a few reasons. First is learning what things are, then there's learning what things do, then finally being able to interpret what's in space with you. Fleet functions are one of the things that allow a lot of players to participate without fully grasping what is going on around them. Removing this crutch places more of the piloting burden onto individual players even if they have an FC.
The barrier to gameplay is getting a bit higher, and that's assuming people will stick around. In other words, EVE is about to suck more.
It's apropos the opinion comes from someone in Elitist Ops, because basically this change is good for elitist reasons. But it's bad for a game's popularity and it's a shame when EVE doesn't have to be so confounding.
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
|
Adriana Shi
Original Sinners The Bastion
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 10:00:19 -
[1777] - Quote
im game for this change to nullsec fleets but missions should be left alone its not like thats a huge problem? unless you're attempting to hit multiboxers if so then ...good job? OP SUCESS?? its going to be more of an annoyance then anything. BUT! WORMHOLES! this this is where my issue is, Getting to Relic\Data's without a cloaky scout is going to be EXTREAMLY difficult. you're going to have to build a ship (unless you use a cloaky scout...which should be on a hole not being you're warpin...) speficly to tank any and all inital alpha from ANY Relic\Data you're fleet deside's to run till the rest of the fleet can get there or at least logi.
i think Wh's need to be addressed before you implemnt this at least for bookmarks\probe results. which kinda defeats the perpose? cuz you know not to mention 90% of Wh space is BOOOOOKKKKMMMMMAAARRRRRKKKKKKSSSSSS
|
Cypherous
Liberty Rogues Aprilon Dynasty
134
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 12:16:29 -
[1778] - Quote
So, where was that update you mentioned would be coming "next week" in your post on the 12th :P |
Zakatka Night
858
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 13:12:51 -
[1779] - Quote
very good idea! |
Dermeisen
20
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 13:18:41 -
[1780] - Quote
A good piece in CZ by the deadly but adorable Apothne. He does a good job of exploring the implications. Listen to a spirited discussion between Chessur and Dunk Dinkle on CZ TV.
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
|
highonpop
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
529
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 14:02:36 -
[1781] - Quote
CCP makes change to game that only INCREASES the already difficult gameplay CCP makes thread detailing these changes asking for feedback CCP gets overwhelmingly negative feedback CCP says players are wrong, devs know better, changes coming anyway
Why even have this thread at all? Why not just say you're making changes that will make it more difficult and confusing to navigate fleets regardless of what the community thinks and then go ahead and implement them..
Warp Drive Acti... wait, where are we going?
|
Dermeisen
20
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 14:21:10 -
[1782] - Quote
highonpop wrote:CCP makes change to game that only INCREASES the already difficult gameplay CCP makes thread detailing these changes asking for feedback CCP gets overwhelmingly negative feedback CCP says players are wrong, devs know better, changes coming anyway
Why even have this thread at all? Why not just say you're making changes that will make it more difficult and confusing to navigate fleets regardless of what the community thinks and then go ahead and implement them..
I'm not convinced that the feedback is overwhelmingly negative. The feedback has contained a good deal of back and forth. Some of the criticism has been poor, but much of it has been considered and constructive - there will be concessions made; believe in the value of the process.
However, to the Cassandras of this thread have faith, faith that if this does have the dire consequences you predict that they are but six weeks or less away from modification.
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
Brother Mercury
Fire on the Mountain
29
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 14:34:48 -
[1783] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Arrendis wrote:
CCP, If you want fleet members more engaged, give them reason to be engaged. Right-clicking a name when someone XXs in fleet chat and selecting 'fleet - > warp to member' isn't any more 'engagement' than ctrl-clicking a broadcast and pressing F1.
Give people things to do. Give them reasons to do them. And do it in a way that doesn't pile additional burdens onto the fleet members who are already engaged and already active and busy.
This is my fundamental issue with this proposal. I can find workarounds for the annoyances and tedium imposed by this change. I just don't think this change will actually achieve any measurable gains in terms of participation in fleets and gangs.
Please read this and understand it CCP.
What you're changing doesn't accomplish the stated goal your'e seeking, rather, it just creates tedium and circumstances that make it harder to get fleet engagements.
After reading nearly all of this thread, I can say that most people here are absolutely willing and DO desire changes that create more participation. Furthermore, we can adapt to changes. Thus, we aren't negative about this change just for the fact that it is a change. It's because THIS change is not a good change. Please look at the many other good suggestions in this thread. |
James Zimmer
Furtherance.
30
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 15:32:36 -
[1784] - Quote
How does this increase participation for the average player? FCs will still be able to fleet warp their fleets to members so if I'm an F1 damage dealer, I'm still pretty mindless. What it does change is the balance of a lot of tactics, particularly for mixed-corp fleets. Here are some of the most concerning issues
1. Slippery Petes are going to get stupid powerful. In a SP fleet, I just warp 1 ship ahead to a bookmark or send an interceptor forward and then warp my fleet on top of them. My tactics barely change, but now I force my opponent to commit a ship with billions in implants to maybe catch the 1 Tengu it can scram. If you can't bum-rush the Tengu blob with a ton of super-fast frigs, you're pretty much screwed.
2. Pipebombs are going to get painful. First off, hats off to Rooks and Kings for inventing such an ingenious tactic. Second, hats off to the FCs who painstakingly went and bookmarked perches all over the place to avoid them. Going from gate, to perch, to gate already slowed down fleets. This is just adding another step to safe fleet movement. This will be somewhat preventable in a corp (though it will make corp spies even more deadly), but mixed-corp fleets are going to get hit pretty hard by every form of bubble-related mechanic if they try to move at any speed other than slow. That's not too big of a deal for small gangs that are roaming just to roam, but bigger gangs with objectives are going to be penalized.
3. Hotdrops are going to get relatively much more powerful. They'll be faster than warping your fleet to an enemy fleet, so if you don't have to, why do it. I already think hotdrops are a kind of gimicy tactic, and I don't support making them any stronger.
This barely does anything to weaken bombers, since they manuever cloaked and don't have nearly the need of other ships for their fleet to arrive immediately, and it only makes F1 damage dealers slightly more involved, in a very finite number of situations. The biggest issue, however, is that this seemingly came out of nowhere. If you look at the "Features and Ideas Discussion" we're talking about all sorts of things.
Here's an example of some of the recent topics I've noticed have recieved a lot of attention: - More engaging mining - Changes to logistics - T3 balance - Changes to warp prevention (shameless plug for my own thread) - Battlecruiser buffs - Cynos - Bomb mechanics
I understand that there are big concept changes to the game that players really can't invent, such as the recent sov changes and proposed new structures (which both generally seem really good, and if CCP keeps up the community involvement, will probably be fairly polished right off the bat), but little stuff like fleet warps? Listen to the community. There are a lot of ways to make non-FCs more involved, and due to the massive changes to sov, CCP is already doing it. Fleet sizes will get smaller, and small fleets already put a higher premium on individual involvement. There are other things to address that haven't been addressed, and id CCP has the time for this, they certainly have the time to change some of those. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1135
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 18:18:00 -
[1785] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:A55 Burger wrote:I see a lot of complaints in this discussion that seem to center on the idea that Eve is a better game when it is difficult.
[...]
Anyone can change my mind with a well reasoned argument, yet it is very difficult to interpret an argument as well reasoned when the supporting facts are either attacks, or clearly haven't been given a second look by the writer. Perhaps the ability to understand a perspective other than your own would aid you in making these arguments. And yet, absolutely nobody in the discussion is actually saying 'EVE is a better game when it is difficult'. The proposed changes don't reduce 'difficulty' at all - nor, for that matter, do they improve 'clarity'. The intent of the changes is to increase active participation and distribute responsibility for a fleet's success or failure across more actors. The changes do nothing to actually achieve this goal. Instead, all they do is promote the use of an additional, dedicated probing and 'warp to me @10' alt for the FC. That point's been made over and over, and the whys and wherefores of it explained both succinctly and in great detail. The average fleet member will not see their 'active participation' increase. They will not shoulder any additional responsibility. How do we know? Because they already don't. The people who are willing to shoulder responsibility already do so. They're the ones who do the things that need to be done, instead of flying a ship that has a bunch of guns and pads its killboards. They're already actively participating. They're flying logistics, or fast tackle, or EWAR ships, or point Proteii and webbing Lokis. They're doing things, and when everything goes to Hek, they're the ones who're already holding it together. The regular fleet members? The ones who don't have any 'active participation' over 'lock target, press F1'? They're choosing to be that. They're actively deciding 'I want to just shoot something and get my kills, and to hell with all of the things that need doing'. That's why FCs have to call for more logi, call for boosters, actively ask people to get into the specialized, active roles - not because there's nothing to do, but because people don't want to do it. The only way you change that is by making the 'I am the guy who does dps' role into something more active. There's ways to do that. There's even ways to do it without overloading the people who are already doing plenty. Changing fleet warp... ain't it.
Great post.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
1737
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 19:55:03 -
[1786] - Quote
Worthless complexity is not adding depth to the game.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
Dermeisen
20
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 22:04:39 -
[1787] - Quote
Another look at the Fleet warp change, an exchange of views. This was quite balanced - shock horror so far the salty wine is confined mainly to this thread.
All I can say is it's going to be much more fun following fleets and picking off that guy who keeps getting caught on the gate :-( bless!
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
Dermeisen
20
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 22:44:17 -
[1788] - Quote
A55 Burger wrote:A55 Burger wrote:Arrendis wrote:A55 Burger wrote:I see a lot of complaints in this discussion that seem to center on the idea that Eve is a better game when it is difficult.
And yet, absolutely nobody in the discussion is actually saying 'EVE is a better game when it is difficult'. The proposed changes don't reduce 'difficulty' at all - nor, for that matter, do they improve 'clarity'. [...] The only way you change that is by making the 'I am the guy who does dps' role into something more active. There's ways to do that. There's even ways to do it without overloading the people who are already doing plenty. Changing fleet warp... ain't it. This is a great example of that well reasoned argument. The concepts are explained, there isn't any needless flamebait, and an alternative is presented. Libby Tazinas wrote:At first I was on the fence about these changes but seeing how many whiny baby elite pvpers that are so fond of these changes I say bring on more changes.
Remember kids, its adapt or die.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out, we don't want ass prints on the new door!
And this is a great example of a not so well reasoned argument. Thanks for your insightful contribution.
Agreed, but I think it's irony isn't it!
However this comment made by Arrendis is interesting. Does making Eve more difficult make it a better game, or indeed what makes for a good game, it's a very interesting question.
A big part of me wants to say yes, if Eve wasn't difficult I would have outgrown it years ago.
I suggest that the ingredients of a good game are: goals, challenge, reward, balance and decisions. You might want to elaborate the rubric as a set of heuristics. I am shamelessly cherry picking one for each of the five attributes of a good game.
i.e. that a game should:
Provide purpose and direction;
Be easy to learn and hard to master;
Reward skill and achievement: i.e. amplify the completive challenge;
Avoid simple or trivial winning strategies;
Provide players with provocative choices and consequences.
I feel the guys who don't want this change have to be more persuasive or loose fleet warp.
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
1738
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 01:53:42 -
[1789] - Quote
Dermeisen wrote:... All I can say is it's going to be much more fun following fleets and picking off that guy who keeps getting caught on the gate :-( bless! Do not worry. There is quite a few disabled people who struggle along to play EVE, one arm, missing fingers, some playing with their mouths, probably even feet. This change should make it easier to kill them off and rub it in.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
360
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 02:49:43 -
[1790] - Quote
Dermeisen wrote: However this comment made by Arrendis is interesting. Does making Eve more difficult make it a better game, or indeed what makes for a good game, it's a very interesting question.
A big part of me wants to say yes, if Eve wasn't difficult I would have outgrown it years ago.
I suggest that the ingredients of a good game are: goals, challenge, reward, balance and decisions. You might want to elaborate the rubric as a set of heuristics. I am shamelessly cherry picking one for each of the five attributes of a good game.
i.e. that a game should:
Provide purpose and direction;
Be easy to learn and hard to master;
Reward skill and achievement: i.e. amplify the completive challenge;
Avoid simple or trivial winning strategies;
Provide players with provocative choices and consequences.
I feel the guys who don't want this change have to be more persuasive or loose fleet warp.
Well, let me begin with the disclaimer that I am a horrible, horrible, unrepentant pedant. 'Lose', not 'loose'.
Ok, with that out of the way...
I don't think anything anyone in this thread or any other is going to have any effect on these changes. Not in the slightest. When was the last time a Dev responded to any of the statements in here, even to say 'we're still listening'? So I doubt any argument, no matter how persuasive, is going to have any effect whatsoever.
But the reality is, they say this change is to increase the amount of engagement among fleet members, that this change is supposed to increase the amount of responsibility on the shoulders of regular fleet members. But does it? Does it even begin to achieve those goals? If this change doesn't actually further those goals, then why proceed with it? Change for the sake of change, in the face of significant and reasonable objections, in the face of the devs making the change telling the W-space community 'yes, you're right, the things this will do to you are unfair and not what we're after' is insane.
If it's not going to do what you want it to do, and it's going to have a number of side-effects you don't intend for a not-insignificant plurality of your customers... don't do it. At the very least, back off from the immediate decision and re-think things. Re-evaluate how to achieve your goals, and how to avoid the unintended consequences. That's one of the big strengths of the 6-week release cycle, isn't it? If a change isn't ready, if it's not what it's supposed to be, then you can push it back and keep working to make it right?
We've seen the full Entosis Link functions get pushed back a cycle, then another week. Why can't this stand to be pushed back and re-evaluated, or even just delayed until other systems to deal with those unintended w-space consequences go in? There hasn't been even a murmur of 'well, if it's not ready, we can push it back' - everything we've heard has been 'full speed ahead and maybe we'll figure out a way around the issues, or maybe we'll get that later'. Why the rush? Why the need to put this out before the full Entosis Link mechanic changes the way we even use fleets?
We all know that the 'engagement' level on average is higher in small fleets than large fleets - large fleets have more space for dedicated dps ships that don't have to do anything else. Smaller fleets, small gangs, a higher percentage of the fleet is tackle, or logistics, or scouts, or ewar as a baseline. When Fozziesov hits, with timers requiring fighting in as many as ten or more multiple locations simultaneously across a constellation for one timer, we all know we're looking at a higher number of smaller fleets. Which means we're already looking at higher levels of engagement and personal responsibility.
So why the obsession with this change? Why can't this be pushed back until we know if we even still need to raise engagement in a month? What's the rush?
Especially since, as I and others have said: this change doesn't do what they say it's needed to do. It doesn't. There are plenty of other ways to increase individual engagement and responsibility. Fixing logi would by necessity put more responsibility on the individual line pilot to watch his status and be more engaged in his own survival. Giving the line pilot more options for what they're doing, more options as to how to perform their role in a fleet - that would increase engagement and shift more responsibility onto the line member. Making them wait for a covops to land on a probed-down perch before the FC fleet warps... doesn't.
So why do it? Why do it now? Why the obsessive rush to implement it regardless of its unintended consequences? |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16284
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 03:51:53 -
[1791] - Quote
Brother Mercury wrote:
What you're changing doesn't accomplish the stated goal your'e seeking, rather, it just creates tedium and circumstances that make it harder to get fleet engagements.
So its working as intended.
The point of this change is to force FCs to stop doing the scouting in their FC ship and use more than one ship for this job and thus more people. Can the FC use an alt? Sure. Can the FC use said alt as effectively as a dedicated player? No. The attrition rate for FC alt cov-ops is abysmal. Dedicated scanner alts will be needed with this change so the goals of this change will be met.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Dermeisen
20
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 06:35:43 -
[1792] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Dermeisen wrote:... All I can say is it's going to be much more fun following fleets and picking off that guy who keeps getting caught on the gate :-( bless! Do not worry. There is quite a few disabled people who struggle along to play EVE, one arm, missing fingers, some playing with their mouths, probably even feet. This change should make it easier to kill them off and rub it in.
How patronising - derpy and disability may begin with the same letter but that's it.
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
Dermeisen
20
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 07:30:53 -
[1793] - Quote
Your pedantry does you credit, I very much enjoy reading your articles at TMC. I on the other hand find typing a bit of a chore.
Ok, Arrendis (dispensing with a long quote); there are very likely less intrusive ways to achieve increased interactivity, but the prerogative of the designer is not only to design but also to determine how changes will fit into a larger whole, parts of which may not yet be fully apparent (as suggested by the intriguing comment concerning changes to wormholes).
I think the rhetorical value of stating that CCP often pays us lip-service is well made, one would have to be a little starry-eyed to overestimate our influence, but I'm hopeful. I would certainly like to see squad warp retained, but not for cloaked ships.
I have heard it said again and again, and you make the point yourself, rapid iteration is key feature of this new release cadence. Few changes will survive their first encounter with the eve player base unbroken, so let's prototype, this is a courageous change that imo will have much less impact on us than we believe. It is possible to remain in an alliance and improve very little even if you are unashamedly casual in your play style.
On an adjacent point, we have seen the speed at which an unencumbered null sec alliance may entosis regions in duality, I feel that 'this' is part of a subtle game balance equation to ameliorate these kind of problems, but this is merely speculation.
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
699
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 07:46:09 -
[1794] - Quote
Fango Mango wrote:Only read about 40 pages of this threadnough so not sure if this has been mentioned (and pretty sure CCP will never read it), but anyway here we go.
How does removing the the ability to fleet warp to mission locations improve the game? What problem are you trying to fix. How is fleet warp being abused by mission runners?
Who runs missions in fleets? 1) Incursions - This will have no effect because you can still fleet warp to incursion beacons. 2) "Vets" running missions with newbros - Sure lets make it harder for our newer members. 3) L5 missions gangs (me!!!). Will make running some missions a real pain.
If you run L5s with a gang as opposed to a solo carrier, you need your logi to land at about the same time as your other ships. If logi lands first it dies. If logi is too late everything else dies. The window is small in some missions (about 15 seconds). Because most L5s are un-gated you can't just warp to the gate then set up there. The only real option for a gang will be to bookmark the mission before accepting the mission, share the bookmarks (hopefully everyone is in the same corp), then accept the mission and run. While that is certainly doable it's crap gameplay. I will be the first to say the L5s are unbalanced with their insane payout (and have posted many time to this affect), but the solution is not to force a crap mechanic onto your customers.
-FM This could have an easy fix, by making mission beacons available to all members in fleet. This could be a configurable setting.
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
Brother Mercury
Fire on the Mountain
30
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 12:36:47 -
[1795] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Brother Mercury wrote:
What you're changing doesn't accomplish the stated goal your'e seeking, rather, it just creates tedium and circumstances that make it harder to get fleet engagements.
So its working as intended. The point of this change is to force FCs to stop doing the scouting in their FC ship and use more than one ship for this job and thus more people. Can the FC use an alt? Sure. Can the FC use said alt as effectively as a dedicated player? No. The attrition rate for FC alt cov-ops is abysmal. Dedicated scanner alts will be needed with this change so the goals of this change will be met.
When I say that it will make fleet engagements harder, I'm saying that it will just increase the time for two fleets to fight, OR in the case that one slippery fleet wants to run -- run and no fights will happen.
Scenario 1) Two fleets want to fight but are trying to get good positioning on each other. The fight is going to happen, they just have to find their warp-in. Without this change: FC 1 combat probes a bit and finds the fleet and lands X km from the FC 2 and they fight. FC 2 is defensively waiting at an objective. They now fight. With this change: FC 1 combat probes a bit, warps to where he wants the fleet to warp to, then warps his fleet to his prober. FC 2 is defensively waiting at the objective. They now fight.
In this first scenario, LITERALLY, the only "added" fleet member participation is that the FC's alt prober (95% of the time it will be the FC's alt prober) has to warp to his results. This is not added involvement, it is straight up just added tedium and another process before a fight can happen.
Scenario 2) Two fleets are moving around a system looking to engage, but the fight isn't inevitable because there is no objective to be taken. FC 1 has a slower fleet than FC 2s faster fleet. Without this change: While FC 1's prober alt is trying to chase down FC 2's fleet, FC 2's fleet is on the move and keeps warping off right as FC 1 warps his fleet to FC 2's location. This goes on for awhile, and FC 1's fleet manages finally to catch a couple of FC 2's ships with his prober. FC 2's prober meanwhile is trying to get a ranged location on the FC 1's fleet because FC 2's fleet is the faster, ranged fleet. FC 2's prober finds a decent spot and they alpha a couple of FC 1's ships. At this point the fight is pretty even -- both sides have a lost a few ships and they are more happy because there was content. You can make up in your mind who wins. With this change: FC 1 will now NEVER have a chance to probe down FC 2's fleet because, before this change he was barely getting there in time. Meanwhile FC 2 can't get a good location at range on FC 1's fleet because of the delay as well. Both fleets lumber around a bit until FC 2's fleet gets bored and leaves. No fights happen and everyone is annoyed and bored. Let's even assume that there are "dedicated scanners" on both fleets. This doesn't change the result that no fights happen and people are left bored because the FC's warping to the dedicated scanners creates a great enough delay for the two fleets to just dance around each other, in a mind-numbing occasion.
OK, so there are plenty of more scenarios that one could make up but the point I'm trying to make is that this change only makes the game LESS fun for everyone. And for what? MAYBE in SOME instances a fleet will have another dedicated prober besides the FC using one. That's literally it -- 1 or 2 members having a mandatory, non-fun role, which by the way just adds an arbitrary step before we can fight. But you're forgetting that fleet members are already doing things in fleets that CCP for some reason thinks will change and have value added -- i.e. fleets already often have prober's, or interceptors, or sabres that are trying to tackle enemy targets and provide warp-ins. This is value that is already added to individual members, without this change required. Their roles won't magically be increased just because there's an added step that the FC has to warp to a member. You honestly believe that MAYBE ONE "dedicated scanner" is added fleet participation, considering the massive impact it has on other parts of EVE? Again, people are open to change in this thread. It's just that this change doesn't do what CCP wants, but their being bull-headed about it anyway. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16284
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 13:08:02 -
[1796] - Quote
Brother Mercury wrote:baltec1 wrote:Brother Mercury wrote:
What you're changing doesn't accomplish the stated goal your'e seeking, rather, it just creates tedium and circumstances that make it harder to get fleet engagements.
So its working as intended. The point of this change is to force FCs to stop doing the scouting in their FC ship and use more than one ship for this job and thus more people. Can the FC use an alt? Sure. Can the FC use said alt as effectively as a dedicated player? No. The attrition rate for FC alt cov-ops is abysmal. Dedicated scanner alts will be needed with this change so the goals of this change will be met. When I say that it will make fleet engagements harder, I'm saying that it will just increase the time for two fleets to fight, OR in the case that one slippery fleet wants to run -- run and no fights will happen. Scenario 1) Two fleets want to fight but are trying to get good positioning on each other. The fight is going to happen, they just have to find their warp-in. Without this change: FC 1 combat probes a bit and finds the fleet and lands X km from the FC 2 and they fight. FC 2 is defensively waiting at an objective. They now fight. With this change: FC 1 combat probes a bit, warps to where he wants the fleet to warp to, then warps his fleet to his prober. FC 2 is defensively waiting at the objective. They now fight. In this first scenario, LITERALLY, the only "added" fleet member participation is that the FC's alt prober (95% of the time it will be the FC's alt prober) has to warp to his results. This is not added involvement, it is straight up just added tedium and another process before a fight can happen. Scenario 2) Two fleets are moving around a system looking to engage, but the fight isn't inevitable because there is no objective to be taken. FC 1 has a slower fleet than FC 2s faster fleet. Without this change: While FC 1's prober alt is trying to chase down FC 2's fleet, FC 2's fleet is on the move and keeps warping off right as FC 1 warps his fleet to FC 2's location. This goes on for awhile, and FC 1's fleet manages finally to catch a couple of FC 2's ships with his prober. FC 2's prober meanwhile is trying to get a ranged location on the FC 1's fleet because FC 2's fleet is the faster, ranged fleet. FC 2's prober finds a decent spot and they alpha a couple of FC 1's ships. At this point the fight is pretty even -- both sides have a lost a few ships and they are more happy because there was content. You can make up in your mind who wins. With this change: FC 1 will now NEVER have a chance to probe down FC 2's fleet because, before this change he was barely getting there in time. Meanwhile FC 2 can't get a good location at range on FC 1's fleet because of the delay as well. Both fleets lumber around a bit until FC 2's fleet gets bored and leaves. No fights happen and everyone is annoyed and bored. Let's even assume that there are "dedicated scanners" on both fleets. This doesn't change the result that no fights happen and people are left bored because the FC's warping to the dedicated scanners creates a great enough delay for the two fleets to just dance around each other, in a mind-numbing occasion. OK, so there are plenty of more scenarios that one could make up but the point I'm trying to make is that this change only makes the game LESS fun for everyone. And for what? MAYBE in SOME instances a fleet will have another dedicated prober besides the FC using one. That's literally it -- 1 or 2 members having a mandatory, non-fun role, which by the way just adds an arbitrary step before we can fight. But you're forgetting that fleet members are already doing things in fleets that CCP for some reason thinks will change and have value added -- i.e. fleets already often have prober's, or interceptors, or sabres that are trying to tackle enemy targets and provide warp-ins. This is value that is already added to individual members, without this change required. Their roles won't magically be increased just because there's an added step that the FC has to warp to a member. You honestly believe that MAYBE ONE "dedicated scanner" is added fleet participation, considering the massive impact it has on other parts of EVE? Again, people are open to change in this thread. It's just that this change doesn't do what CCP wants, but their being bull-headed about it anyway.
It does exactly what they want, It stops the fc from being the scout in their fc ship. All this change does is return us to what we used to do back in 2007 and we got just as many fights then as today.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
258
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 14:50:21 -
[1797] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:It does exactly what they want, It stops the fc from being the scout in their fc ship. All this change does is return us to what we used to do back in 2007 and we got just as many fights then as today.
That can be accomplished with a much less disruptive change: disallow fleet warping to probe results and bookmarks less than one minute old (bookmark age is already in the database). |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16284
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 15:12:24 -
[1798] - Quote
Masao Kurata wrote:baltec1 wrote:It does exactly what they want, It stops the fc from being the scout in their fc ship. All this change does is return us to what we used to do back in 2007 and we got just as many fights then as today. That can be accomplished with a much less disruptive change: disallow fleet warping to probe results and bookmarks less than one minute old (bookmark age is already in the database).
CCPs change is more effective and easier to do.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
362
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 15:25:07 -
[1799] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:It does exactly what they want, It stops the fc from being the scout in their fc ship. All this change does is return us to what we used to do back in 2007 and we got just as many fights then as today.
Which is not what they say they want. |
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
258
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 15:44:34 -
[1800] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Masao Kurata wrote:baltec1 wrote:It does exactly what they want, It stops the fc from being the scout in their fc ship. All this change does is return us to what we used to do back in 2007 and we got just as many fights then as today. That can be accomplished with a much less disruptive change: disallow fleet warping to probe results and bookmarks less than one minute old (bookmark age is already in the database). CCPs change is more effective and easier to do.
More effective at pissing everyone off and one line of code less. |
|
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
43
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 16:43:42 -
[1801] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
It does exactly what they want, It stops the fc from being the scout in their fc ship. All this change does is return us to what we used to do back in 2007 and we got just as many fights then as today.
Ahhhh... the good old days.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16284
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 16:44:44 -
[1802] - Quote
A55 Burger wrote:baltec1 wrote:
It does exactly what they want, It stops the fc from being the scout in their fc ship. All this change does is return us to what we used to do back in 2007 and we got just as many fights then as today.
Ahhhh... the good old days.
This show what exactly with regards to the way fleets worked back then?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16284
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 16:46:56 -
[1803] - Quote
Masao Kurata wrote:
More effective at pissing everyone off and one line of code less.
You being irritated at a change is no basis on the effectiveness of a change. I bet you also kicked up a stick with the warp speed changes and lots of people went off the deep end with the nano nerf. This change is needed, it is far too easy to control a fleet with one person in one ship.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
43
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 16:48:03 -
[1804] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:A55 Burger wrote:baltec1 wrote:
It does exactly what they want, It stops the fc from being the scout in their fc ship. All this change does is return us to what we used to do back in 2007 and we got just as many fights then as today.
Ahhhh... the good old days. This show what exactly with regards to the way fleets worked back then?
I don't think I'm debating how fleets worked back then. I'm pointing out that if you want to improve a game, regression isn't the way to do it, regardless of what people think due to nostalgia.
|
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
1666
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 17:12:04 -
[1805] - Quote
Masao Kurata wrote:That can be accomplished with a much less disruptive change: disallow fleet warping to probe results and bookmarks less than one minute old (bookmark age is already in the database).
That preserves near-instant on-grid warping, which leaves entire classes of doctrines confined to history and forgotten hangars, and entire weapons systems--cruise missiles, large beams--confined to PVE.
Just incidentally, they're all doctrines which could effectively counter sentry Ishtars and Domis and also Petes (well, maybe not cruise missiles...).
If the problem is that ad hoc multi-corp fleets of -10s are going to take a hard nerf in high sec, maybe backing Jayne Fillon's idea of extra-corporate player organizations is a good idea.
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
I voted in CSM X!
|
Naglerr
Sanguine Penguin Rote Kapelle
46
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 17:47:30 -
[1806] - Quote
Wow, 91 pages. It would be nice if CCP could come around and provide a status update on this subject. I remember something about them offering an updated status by the end of last week... |
Dermeisen
20
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 17:51:46 -
[1807] - Quote
A55 Burger wrote:baltec1 wrote:A55 Burger wrote:baltec1 wrote:
It does exactly what they want, It stops the fc from being the scout in their fc ship. All this change does is return us to what we used to do back in 2007 and we got just as many fights then as today.
Ahhhh... the good old days. This show what exactly with regards to the way fleets worked back then? I don't think I'm debating how fleets worked back then. I'm pointing out that if you want to improve a game, regression isn't the way to do it, regardless of what people think due to nostalgia.
Why not, are you relying of an approach to the history of eve that presents only an inevitable progression towards a better game, or can good things be lost only to be rediscovered with the benefit of hindsight?
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
Lamhoofd Hashur
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
27
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 17:52:32 -
[1808] - Quote
Naglerr wrote:Wow, 91 pages. It would be nice if CCP could come around and provide a status update on this subject. I remember something about them offering an updated status by the end of last week...
http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/fleet-warp-changes-coming-in-august-release/ |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
363
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 17:55:53 -
[1809] - Quote
Yup. Pushed back a release. I am pleasantly surprised. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1144
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 17:58:37 -
[1810] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Yup. Pushed back a release. I am pleasantly surprised.
They still won't implement a system that is actually significantly better.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
|
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
44
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 18:03:17 -
[1811] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: After feedback and discussion, weGÇÖve done some magic on our code and now a wider range of objects will be broadcastable as a Warp-To:
Mission locations Bookmarks (newly created bookmarks will have a delay before being broadcastable) Fleet members Along with all existing broadcastable items
Thank you, Larrikin and Co.
|
Dermeisen
20
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 18:12:38 -
[1812] - Quote
A partially satisfactory outcome.
I don't think it will have much impact on bombers which is a shame! But code was obviously a consideration.
"Not the Boreworms!"
|
James Zimmer
Furtherance.
37
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 19:39:56 -
[1813] - Quote
This takes the worst out of it. Now it's just a nerf to combat probing, which isn't a terrible thing in my opinion. Thanks CCP for listening! |
Lt Shard
Team Pizza Good at this Game
53
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 19:51:48 -
[1814] - Quote
James Zimmer wrote:This takes the worst out of it. Now it's just a nerf to combat probing, which isn't a terrible thing in my opinion. Thanks CCP for listening!
Its already hard enough to catch someone in a sig, why make it harder |
Naglerr
Sanguine Penguin Rote Kapelle
47
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 22:18:23 -
[1815] - Quote
I guess this thread was too long for CCP so they made another one where it will be easier to steer the narrative. My comments are here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5843635#post5843635 |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
104
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 23:09:00 -
[1816] - Quote
baltec1 wrote: You being irritated at a change is no basis on the effectiveness of a change. I bet you also kicked up a stick with the warp speed changes and lots of people went off the deep end with the nano nerf. This change is needed, it is far too easy to control a fleet with one person in one ship.
How is one person in two ships any better? More tedious for the one person, more time wasted sitting on one's hands for the rest of the fleet..
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
104
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 23:11:23 -
[1817] - Quote
baltec1 wrote: The point of this change is to force FCs to stop doing the scouting in their FC ship and use more than one ship for this job and thus more people. Can the FC use an alt? Sure. Can the FC use said alt as effectively as a dedicated player? No. The attrition rate for FC alt cov-ops is abysmal. Dedicated scanner alts will be needed with this change so the goals of this change will be met.
FCs do this all the time. Why would they change their behavior now? |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
104
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 23:19:52 -
[1818] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:It does exactly what they want, It stops the fc from being the scout in their fc ship. All this change does is return us to what we used to do back in 2007 and we got just as many fights then as today.
That's a terrible red herring, and you should know better. Or .. read the dev blog better. |
Naglerr
Sanguine Penguin Rote Kapelle
50
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 00:09:29 -
[1819] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:baltec1 wrote:Troll words. That's a terrible red herring, and you should know better. Or .. read the dev blog better.
Baltec1 has been trolling this tread for almost every individual page of all the 91 pages that this thread is. I'm both really impressed with his dedication and surprised that people are still replying to his posts. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
105
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 00:22:57 -
[1820] - Quote
Naglerr wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:baltec1 wrote:Troll words. That's a terrible red herring, and you should know better. Or .. read the dev blog better. Baltec1 has been trolling this tread for almost every individual page of all the 91 pages that this thread is. I'm both really impressed with his dedication and surprised that people are still replying to his posts.
And he does it so well too! It's an easy way to keep harping on how bad the changes are though.. so hard to let them pass by.
|
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
1742
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 01:04:06 -
[1821] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Brother Mercury wrote:What you're changing doesn't accomplish the stated goal your'e seeking, rather, it just creates tedium and circumstances that make it harder to get fleet engagements.
So its working as intended. The point of this change is to force FCs ... The result of the change is that FCs are less likely fight at all and more likely to stay +2 systems or more away.
I told you guys not to give CCP ideas for compromising. Now look; they are doing that broadcast bookmarks nonsense.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
Shuckstar
Taking Inc
325
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 01:47:37 -
[1822] - Quote
Like these new changes, go the whole hog and remove the anchoring ability, still hate the icons tho
CCP Greyscale wrote:"OK, I've read every post up to page 200, and we're getting to a point in this thread where there's not a lot of new concerns or suggestions being brought up. There will be future threads (and future blogs) as we tune details, but for now I want to thank you for all of your constructive input, and wish you a good weekend :)"
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16287
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 04:31:25 -
[1823] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:Naglerr wrote:Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:baltec1 wrote:Troll words. That's a terrible red herring, and you should know better. Or .. read the dev blog better. Baltec1 has been trolling this tread for almost every individual page of all the 91 pages that this thread is. I'm both really impressed with his dedication and surprised that people are still replying to his posts. And he does it so well too! It's an easy way to keep harping on how bad the changes are though.. so hard to let them pass by.
The pair of you have no idea what the current fleet doctrines are, the tactics used or that FC ships fit probe launchers on them. Notice that by far the bulk of the whining about this change is coming from NPC alts and pve players and not FCs. The very idea that you think getting the fleet members to do more is "tedious" just goes to show how lazy some people have become. You are literally arguing that you should not have to play EVE while you play EVE.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
106
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 05:22:27 -
[1824] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:The pair of you have no idea what the current fleet doctrines are, the tactics used or that FC ships fit probe launchers on them. Notice that by far the bulk of the whining about this change is coming from NPC alts and pve players and not FCs. The very idea that you think getting the fleet members to do more is "tedious" just goes to show how lazy some people have become. You are literally arguing that you should not have to play EVE while you play EVE.
Red herring dead, so let's mischaracterize, shall we? I said it would make the FC's job more tedious. And the grunts' job more boring as they wait. Please, learn to read.
Feel free to assume whatever you need to to feel good; sadly most of it is not consistent with reality. |
Nuvia
Exit-Strategy Exit Strategy..
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 05:49:19 -
[1825] - Quote
The last update with the relaxation of what can be warped to sounds more effective - but CCP I argue you miss the point of an MMO it's for people to have fun with other people creating a bench mark where you have to be 'good' or 'participate' creates barriers to entry / limits enjoyment if people want to fly and operate F1 - let them |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1150
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 07:53:32 -
[1826] - Quote
Nuvia wrote:The last update with the relaxation of what can be warped to sounds more effective - but CCP I argue you miss the point of an MMO it's for people to have fun with other people creating a bench mark where you have to be 'good' or 'participate' creates barriers to entry / limits enjoyment if people want to fly and operate F1 - let them
You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink. The people who simply want to join a fleet, be told where to go and what to do, are still Eve players. They still have subscriptions. They still provide content. There is ample opportunity for those people to volunteer for more active roles in fleets - in fact, every successful community encourages people to step up and be more active. Especially Imperium.
Making fleet operations take longer to get from Point A to Point B will not improve the game experience. Making each fleet member prepare more bookmarks ahead of a fight will not improve the game experience. Those things make Eve more tedious. More of a chore.
I do not want to be part of an Eve where there are 15K people online, but they are the most masochistic, bitter, and elitist pricks on the planet. I want to be part of an Eve where there are 50-100K people online, and they are fun-loving folks with whom I enjoy hanging out. Raising the barrier to fun will not accomplish this goal.
The challenges in Eve need to come primarily from the other players, secondarily from the complex and engaging environment, but NEVER from the interface and controls available to the player.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
|
CCP Larrikin
C C P C C P Alliance
142
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 10:48:17 -
[1827] - Quote
Hi All,
Please see the new devblog. Please post your feedback in the new feedback thread.
Cheers, CCP Larrikin |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 61 :: [one page] |