Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Azazel The Misanthrope
Proioxis Assault Force Exodus.
73
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 10:21:33 -
[1] - Quote
I am bringing this back again.
Webs are a bad game mechanic, there are a plethora of better ways to accomplish its goal. No one will ever support getting rid of them though so instead I am suggesting:
"Reduce the effectiveness of propulsion systems by 60%" instead of "Reduce maximum velocity by 60%". |

Kasia en Tilavine
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
48
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 10:29:10 -
[2] - Quote
Reduce their effect to 50% at the t2 level while industry model has 40% and meta is 45%.
Give them falloff equivalent to their optimal. Industry at 6 km, meta at 7, and t2 at 8 km.
When I. Falloff, a new speed reduction value is calculated based off distance into falloff, every time the module completes a cycle. Cycle time 5s with cap brought down to keep the same cap/s |

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3909
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 10:29:20 -
[3] - Quote
Why?
You state they're a bad mechanic. Now back that statement up. |

Azazel The Misanthrope
Proioxis Assault Force Exodus.
73
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 10:31:31 -
[4] - Quote
Kasia en Tilavine wrote:Reduce their effect to 50% at the t2 level while industry model has 40% and meta is 45%.
Give them falloff equivalent to their optimal. Industry at 6 km, meta at 7, and t2 at 8 km.
When I. Falloff, a new speed reduction value is calculated based off distance into falloff, every time the module completes a cycle. Cycle time 5s with cap brought down to keep the same cap/s
I can not say that I agree with that or think that it is a good idea even. |

Ix Method
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
473
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 10:45:39 -
[5] - Quote
Azazel The Misanthrope wrote:Webs are a bad game mechanic [red pen] You need to show your working [/red pen]
Travelling at the speed of love.
|

Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
205
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 10:54:49 -
[6] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Why?
You state they're a bad mechanic. Now back that statement up.
never thought i would agree with a goons post for the full 100% but i do so TS why?
[u]Carpe noctem[/u]
|

Mag's
the united
20427
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 11:08:39 -
[7] - Quote
If anything, one could argue webs were over nerfed the last time round. So your assertion that they need a further nerf is quite frankly, ludicrous.
Destination SkillQueue:-
It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
|

Azazel The Misanthrope
Proioxis Assault Force Exodus.
73
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 11:26:29 -
[8] - Quote
Offering clarity as to "Why" specifically; the concept of flatly slowing ships down is sort of "unnatural". There is no precedent for this kind of mechanic in any similar game. It serves to flatly decrease the range of movement options that the opponent has while under it effect. While that does have its explicitly intended purpose, it becomes a sort of staple in much of brawling in general and reduces many of brawling engagements to straight up slugfests where mobility is essentially negated.
Because of their line as a "staple" weapon they create an artificial commitment range where, once entered, combat slows to a near halt and in many cases can be inescapable. This directly contributes to the awkward place of brawling in general and the kite heavy meta in the current iteration of EVE. It is largely non-interactive like most forms of EWAR (which are equally bad in many cases) :however, unlike many other forms of EWAR webbing pertains a much higher prevalence on the battlefield and is not locked in its effectiveness to specific ships.
Instead of trailing on, ultimately, it is usually makes for a far more entertaining, immersive, and interactive engagement if damage application and interdiction revolved more around actual movement, positioning, velocity, and the calculation of these things; rather than simply slowing down the opponent as much as possible in a way that is very awkward to respond to. |

Azazel The Misanthrope
Proioxis Assault Force Exodus.
73
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 11:32:10 -
[9] - Quote
Mag's wrote:If anything, one could argue webs were over nerfed the last time round. So your assertion that they need a further nerf is quite frankly, ludicrous.
Regardless, they are very boring objects. If they were limited in effectiveness to exclusive ships I could understand, but with the prevalence they have now is ridiculous.
90% Webbing power is a ludicrously powerful effect. Why equip propulsion at all in that case? That sort of thing only encourages kiting even more. |

Azazel The Misanthrope
Proioxis Assault Force Exodus.
73
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 11:37:17 -
[10] - Quote
Azazel The Misanthrope wrote:I am bringing this back again.
I am suggesting:
"Reduce the effectiveness of propulsion systems by 60%-90%" instead of "Reduce maximum velocity by 60%".
|
|

Rivr Luzade
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
2004
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 11:43:48 -
[11] - Quote
90% webs are limited to exclusive ships.
As long as there is no end to bumping, I am against any changes to webs because freighters do not have prop mods and require webs.
UI Improvement Collective
My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
|

Celthric Kanerian
Ascendance Of New Eden Workers Trade Federation
518
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 11:48:49 -
[12] - Quote
Not allowed to post killboard, but could your reasoning be because you recently died to close-range pvp?
|

Azazel The Misanthrope
Proioxis Assault Force Exodus.
73
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 11:48:53 -
[13] - Quote
My suggestion is intended so that the module can't lower ship velocities lower than their base value for the hull. Currently fitting a propulsion module and activating it under webs is actually to the detriment of the ship being webbed in a lot of cases seeing as the ship is still suffering the mass penalties of the prop, but without gaining any of the benefits; however it is still unwise to deactivate the module because then your ship would be moving even slower than without it. This creates the slow, awkward and clunky combat that brawling usually is.
This suggestion simply allows the pilot to turn the prop mod off so as not to be a brick in space, but not be at a standstill either, with that kind of flexibility you can make the web mod more powerful even. The point is just to make it a more interactive, more tactical item that forces that opponent to make a decision. |

Azazel The Misanthrope
Proioxis Assault Force Exodus.
73
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 11:53:10 -
[14] - Quote
Celthric Kanerian wrote:Not allowed to post killboard, but could your reasoning be because you recently died to close-range pvp?
This is a very typical response to this kind of post, and I understand why you would say that; however this is not why I am posting this. I am posting this because I have a lot of experience with brawling, largely in frigates, but when I fight another brawler or other ship in general, the fight is always more entertaining when webs are not involved. I like being able to move and mitigate dps, pull a juke maneuver, boom and zoom, and do a variety of maneuvers in space, like one would if they were in a kiting ship; however when webs are involved, usually both ships are just sitting there. Doing nothing interesting but shooting.
|

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3911
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 12:09:56 -
[15] - Quote
Azazel The Misanthrope wrote:My suggestion is intended so that the module can't lower ship velocities lower than their base value for the hull. Currently fitting a propulsion module and activating it under webs is actually to the detriment of the ship being webbed in a lot of cases seeing as the ship is still suffering the mass penalties of the prop, but without gaining any of the benefits; however it is still unwise to deactivate the module because then your ship would be moving even slower than without it. This creates the slow, awkward and clunky combat that brawling usually is.
This suggestion simply allows the pilot to turn the prop mod off so as not to be a brick in space, but not be at a standstill either, with that kind of flexibility you can make the web mod more powerful even. The point is just to make it a more interactive, more tactical item that forces that opponent to make a decision.
But why do so many different things need such a heavy nerf? I mean, you want to hit:
Battleships/battlecruisers engaging anything smaller than they are Cruisers vs frigates Missile boats Incursion ratting Wormhole ratting Kiting Moving freighters/caps/DSTs Gatecamps Recons
Just so you can buff the hell out of brawly frigates and T3Ds? |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16754
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 12:21:43 -
[16] - Quote
OP, why do you want to stop my turret battleship from having any chance at all with hitting something small, fast and close?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|

Azazel The Misanthrope
Proioxis Assault Force Exodus.
73
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 12:29:52 -
[17] - Quote
Same people, same comments, same arguments as before. Totally different OP. Seriously, the suggested change leaves the webs just as strong as they are now minus the ability to effect non propped ships. Which in many cases is fairly slow enough anyway to target anyway. Nobody actually reads the OP they just read the title and/or what they dislike about the paraphrasing, and then comments on that. |

Azazel The Misanthrope
Proioxis Assault Force Exodus.
73
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 12:30:39 -
[18] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:OP, why do you want to stop my turret battleship from having any chance at all with hitting something small, fast and close?
Bring support. |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16754
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 12:32:40 -
[19] - Quote
Azazel The Misanthrope wrote:
Bring support.
So now I cant solo in the ships I enjoy and have enjoyed for the last decade?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3913
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 12:33:55 -
[20] - Quote
Azazel The Misanthrope wrote:Same people, same comments, same arguments as before. Totally different OP. Seriously, the suggested change leaves the webs just as strong as they are now minus the ability to effect non propped ships. Which in many cases is fairly slow enough anyway to target anyway. Nobody actually reads the OP they just read the title and/or what they dislike about the paraphrasing, and then comments on that.
I gave you a big list of things you'd be nerfing. You chose to ignore it.
And how does bringing support help if the webs the support ships are using aren't going to slow the target down either? |
|

Azazel The Misanthrope
Proioxis Assault Force Exodus.
73
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 12:48:43 -
[21] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Azazel The Misanthrope wrote:Same people, same comments, same arguments as before. Totally different OP. Seriously, the suggested change leaves the webs just as strong as they are now minus the ability to effect non propped ships. Which in many cases is fairly slow enough anyway to target anyway. Nobody actually reads the OP they just read the title and/or what they dislike about the paraphrasing, and then comments on that. I gave you a big list of things you'd be nerfing. You chose to ignore it. And how does bringing support help if the webs the support ships are using aren't going to slow the target down either?
I ignored your response because you ignored the OP. Your list of "nerfs" would effectively be reduced by half. The OP suggestion implies that the speed loss remain the same, but not so that the velocity lost reaches a negative. The thing as a whole accomplishes the same objective.
Effecting the targets propulsion bonus so that it is essentially negated forces the target to either turn off their propulsion or keep it on, use cap unnecessarily, and suffer the mass penalty for nothing. Ultimately the target is slow enough to be tracked by a variety of things. Not to mention in that range they are likely to be under neut pressure and drones.
PvE is a valid counter argument though. |

Azazel The Misanthrope
Proioxis Assault Force Exodus.
73
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 12:57:41 -
[22] - Quote
You mean to tell me that a guy needs help fighting a frigate, so his support brings something else that can't track the frigate either? Great Idea.
Battleships were forced into obsolescence after WWII because they were big and expensive and they were often sunk by smaller vessels (primarily Destroyers) and fighter-bombers that would be "out-track" their guns and deliver torpedoes and other explosives. I really think that Battleships should be things that are supported by things like they were realistically. |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16755
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 13:15:22 -
[23] - Quote
Azazel The Misanthrope wrote:You mean to tell me that a guy needs help fighting a frigate, so his support brings something else that can't track the frigate either? Great Idea.
Battleships were forced into obsolescence after WWII because they were big and expensive and they were often sunk by smaller vessels (primarily Destroyers) and fighter-bombers that would be "out-track" their guns and deliver torpedoes and other explosives. I really think that Battleships should be things that are supported by things like they were realistically.
This isn't real life.
My point stands, turret battleships will be made all but helpless with this nerf vs small, fast ships at close range no matter what they do.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|

Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1278
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 13:21:17 -
[24] - Quote
You are aware that putting something like optimal+falloff to web mechanics, something like *no webs* or even *reduce only propped speed* would severely harm the fighting outnumbered gameplay many of us enjoy, that defensive webbing would take a shot to the head and blobbing people to death would see a buff in the end?
No, web mechanics are in a fine place, don't meddle with critical tools for rangekeeping unless you want melee slugfests. |

Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
793
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 13:23:15 -
[25] - Quote
Azazel The Misanthrope wrote:Offering clarity as to "Why" specifically; the concept of flatly slowing ships down is sort of "unnatural". There is no precedent for this kind of mechanic in any similar game. It serves to flatly decrease the range of movement options that the opponent has while under it effect. While that does have its explicitly intended purpose, it becomes a sort of staple in much of brawling in general and reduces many of brawling engagements to straight up slugfests where mobility is essentially negated.
You must not have rolled melee dps or been up against those that used it properly. Changing of speed is a common melee dps cast/call/action/etc. Either they slow you down or they get a speed boost to be faster.
Eve is an space MMO rpg. This carried over. It can't have the term melee dps since its eve (want to bust balls use the many forms of healz or healer to an eve purist when talking about reps/logi, this bait always works), but same principals apply to tackle, fast response dps, etc. end result the same....you are moving as if in molasses in January and they are buzzing around really fast.
Want to get more modern.....here is how I "webbed" in WoT. I'd shoot out tracks. Only got 1 the repair kit. Use it up on that...well me or someone else would track you again. Game kind of enforced this. My gun sans gold ammo not doing a damn thing otherwise I will cripple your tracks all day long since its the only thing I could hit worth a damn. Sometimes double tracking for the added fun. Turnabout is fair play....this done to me quite often as well.
Don't like webs know or predict what may run them and avoid them. If a brawler...well that running them is cheesy is your pov. Others its not.
The bs bringing support bit...sometimes your support is busy if actually brought along. Nice to have the self help there in that case. |

Arla Sarain
671
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 13:44:02 -
[26] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Azazel The Misanthrope wrote:You mean to tell me that a guy needs help fighting a frigate, so his support brings something else that can't track the frigate either? Great Idea.
Battleships were forced into obsolescence after WWII because they were big and expensive and they were often sunk by smaller vessels (primarily Destroyers) and fighter-bombers that would be "out-track" their guns and deliver torpedoes and other explosives. I really think that Battleships should be things that are supported by things like they were realistically. This isn't real life. My point stands, turret battleships will be made all but helpless with this nerf vs small, fast ships at close range no matter what they do. They will go from double web to web+TP+tracking rigs.
Who the hell uses tracking rigs otherwise?
Some numbers might have to be adjusted. But you also can't ignore the fact that turret tracking in general is the only mechanic that can be exploited both ways (application or mitigation) through piloting alone.
Although all in all, I don't think webs need a nerf. I think small turret tracking needs a nerf, small drones need a sig increase to compensate, and perhaps webs could get a max velocity cap same way Entosis links have/had. The former will allow sig tanking for frigates V frigate when scrammed/webbed, the latter will finally kick the kite meta in the ballsack it deserves, without making further speed upgrades irrelevant (since it will basically add resistance to being slowed by multiple webs before further speed decreases can be noticed) |

Azazel The Misanthrope
Proioxis Assault Force Exodus.
73
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 13:45:36 -
[27] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Azazel The Misanthrope wrote:You mean to tell me that a guy needs help fighting a frigate, so his support brings something else that can't track the frigate either? Great Idea.
Battleships were forced into obsolescence after WWII because they were big and expensive and they were often sunk by smaller vessels (primarily Destroyers) and fighter-bombers that would be "out-track" their guns and deliver torpedoes and other explosives. I really think that Battleships should be things that are supported by things like they were realistically. This isn't real life. My point stands, turret battleships will be made all but helpless with this nerf vs small, fast ships at close range no matter what they do.
Well as it stands battleships are defenseless versus the small fast ships that stick to you from long range. It doesn't defeat the fact that you are helpless versus the small ships regardless, it just changes the way that that is applied. |

Azazel The Misanthrope
Proioxis Assault Force Exodus.
73
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 13:46:46 -
[28] - Quote
Arla Sarain wrote:baltec1 wrote:Azazel The Misanthrope wrote:You mean to tell me that a guy needs help fighting a frigate, so his support brings something else that can't track the frigate either? Great Idea.
Battleships were forced into obsolescence after WWII because they were big and expensive and they were often sunk by smaller vessels (primarily Destroyers) and fighter-bombers that would be "out-track" their guns and deliver torpedoes and other explosives. I really think that Battleships should be things that are supported by things like they were realistically. This isn't real life. My point stands, turret battleships will be made all but helpless with this nerf vs small, fast ships at close range no matter what they do. They will go from double web to web+TP+tracking rigs. Who the hell uses tracking rigs otherwise? Some numbers might have to be adjusted. But you also can't ignore the fact that turret tracking in general is the only mechanic that can be exploited both ways (application or mitigation) through piloting alone. Although all in all, I don't think webs need a nerf. I think small turret tracking needs a nerf, small drones need a sig increase to compensate, and perhaps webs could get a max velocity cap same way Entosis links have/had. The former will allow sig tanking for frigates V frigate when scrammed/webbed, the latter will finally kick the kite meta in the ballsack it deserves, without making further speed upgrades irrelevant (since it will basically add resistance to being slowed by multiple webs before further speed decreases can be noticed)
I am fine with this.
|

Azazel The Misanthrope
Proioxis Assault Force Exodus.
73
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 13:50:00 -
[29] - Quote
Zan Shiro wrote:Azazel The Misanthrope wrote:Offering clarity as to "Why" specifically; the concept of flatly slowing ships down is sort of "unnatural". There is no precedent for this kind of mechanic in any similar game. It serves to flatly decrease the range of movement options that the opponent has while under it effect. While that does have its explicitly intended purpose, it becomes a sort of staple in much of brawling in general and reduces many of brawling engagements to straight up slugfests where mobility is essentially negated. You must not have rolled melee dps or been up against those that used it properly. Changing of speed is a common melee dps cast/call/action/etc. Either they slow you down or they get a speed boost to be faster. Eve is an space MMO rpg. This carried over. It can't have the term melee dps since its eve (want to bust balls use the many forms of healz or healer to an eve purist when talking about reps/logi, this bait always works), but same principals apply to tackle, fast response dps, etc. end result the same....you are moving as if in molasses in January and they are buzzing around really fast. Want to get more modern.....here is how I "webbed" in WoT. I'd shoot out tracks. Only got 1 the repair kit. Use it up on that...well me or someone else would track you again. Game kind of enforced this. My gun sans gold ammo not doing a damn thing otherwise I will cripple your tracks all day long since its the only thing I could hit worth a damn. Sometimes double tracking for the added fun. Turnabout is fair play....this done to me quite often as well. Don't like webs know or predict what may run them and avoid them. If a brawler...well that running them is cheesy is your pov. Others its not. The bs bringing support bit...sometimes your support is busy if actually brought along. Nice to have the self help there in that case.
Shooting out treads on a tank is something you actively do webbing just happens, melee range in other games can be effectively exited by moving out of melee range, by running other than dota's intrinsic slowing elements confined to specific characters this does not occur anywhere else in this fashion. |

Azazel The Misanthrope
Proioxis Assault Force Exodus.
74
|
Posted - 2015.10.11 13:57:10 -
[30] - Quote
Lloyd Roses wrote:You are aware that putting something like optimal+falloff to web mechanics, something like *no webs* or even *reduce only propped speed* would severely harm the fighting outnumbered gameplay many of us enjoy, that defensive webbing would take a shot to the head and blobbing people to death would see a buff in the end?
No, web mechanics are in a fine place, don't meddle with critical tools for rangekeeping unless you want melee slugfests.
I fight largely outnumbered a significantly large portion of the time. I even avoid using webs not only because of my aversion for them, but also because they are less effective defensively than dual prop. Trust me, this wouldn't be hurting the asymmetrical warfare it would probably help it seeing as kiting wouldn't be the only way to engage in it if webs didn't exist. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |