| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 .. 14 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Zarthan
   |
Posted - 2003.12.09 15:01:00 -
[361]
Edited by: Zarthan on 09/12/2003 15:10:32
changing the targeting speeds like this does make me wonder if tomb actually plays the game he's balancing. No offense but if you want to make frigates harder to target, them make frigates and smaller ships harder to target. I may have missread but you basically just made it so that a battleship cant stop anything from just flying right past it. PVP is dieing in this game and things like this only make it worse. It's almost to the point you can only do combat with huge fleets who feel in the mood to fight. You can 100% forget pirates bothering to attack miners in belts if this patch goes down like this as there will be no chance at all of targeting. Keeping frigates alive in large fleets is rather silly. They are so small they truly have no place nor should they.
To clarify though, the idea seems sound to an extent, however the times are far to long. because with the invul timmer you have to add 10 seconds to all of those times. so your talking 34 seconds to target a frigate and 25 to target a battleship?
_______________________________________________________
Get custom sigs and graphics done here
Unforgivn Website
|
Zarthan
|
Posted - 2003.12.09 15:01:00 -
[362]
Edited by: Zarthan on 09/12/2003 15:01:30
dble post
_______________________________________________________
Get custom sigs and graphics done here
Unforgivn Website
|
Estios
|
Posted - 2003.12.09 15:50:00 -
[363]
Ive been guilty of it in the past but quote:
"because with the invul timmer you have to add 10 seconds to all of those times"
Please test on Chaos where this supposed be tested - The Invun Timer you talk about has been removed.
Im still not convinced by it all atm but its coming along
So HMV consider Andy Williams and Dean Martin to be "easy listening" do they? Tell that to my mate Dave, he's been deaf for 20 years.
|
NGRU Rix
|
Posted - 2003.12.09 17:27:00 -
[364]
Edited by: NGRU Rix on 09/12/2003 17:42:58
Edited by: NGRU Rix on 09/12/2003 17:28:55
 Quote:
I see the big problem is why should a bs take longer to lock than a frig Vs the same target. Way l see it, both may well lock in the same time frame, but a frig pilot simply squeezes his virtual trigger to start firing, a BS captain has to inform and co-ordinate his staff, bring massive guns to bear on the target etc..
e.g. Capt Picard "fire photon torpedoes fire control" Weapons officer passes order along to crew who carry out task, internal communication on BS will take longer. Otherwise, what exactly are those 1000's of other staff doing on the ship in the first place eh??
Nuff said.
Not so, an excerpt from 'The Jovian Wet Grave':
Quote:
Pirkotan thought about the propulsion system. Nothing happened. Then he thought about controlling the ship. And then, before him and overlaying the ship, a menu appeared. Pirkotan navigated himself through the menu with his mind and found the shut down action for the propulsion system. He activated the action and the menu disappeared. Pirkotan now saw the propulsion glow fade out and the constant humming slowly died out. Pirkotan now repeated the process, turning the propulsion system back on.
Notice that there is no mention of the pilot calling down to engineering to order the propulsion shut down. He thought it and it hapened. The same goes for missiles and all other ships functions. The pilot thinks "Fire FOF Missiles" and shwooosh, they are off whether it is a Frigate or a Battleship.
All pilots are in Capsules. All actions are instantaneous from the pilot's thoughts regardless of ship size. That 1000 other staff are there to cook for, clean up after, and talk to each other - maybe to do ship repairs and reload the guns.
To me a Battleship has State of the Art Equipment and that includes the Sensors and targeting arrays. A battle ship should have faster lock times than any other ship, barring modules, as it has the most advanced equipment and the space for more of it! The tracking is what needs to be fixed and that should also cover ECM, Sensor Dampners and anything else that involves targeting and hitting another ship. A Sensor Dampner should not be a 100% hit item, it should miss and have bad locks. It should be almost impossible for BS to do serious damage to a frigate, but when it does hit... ka boom.
This is just a bad move IMO and with the current market and Megacyte issues - I won't be flying my BS anytime soon in battle which is a lot of fun for me and my people in general.
Also, all ships that are heavy on the mid-slots have once again become GodLike with this plan. It will promote multiple ship-type fleets and I have always said that a Battleship was never meant to fly without Cruiser or Frigate escort. It just seems like it's too much at once.
As long as you bring out Elite Frigates at the same time - it may work and if you don't, please don't make us wait 6 more months.
On a side note - being that this will make Frigate Fast Attack Wings a very attractive part of PvP, can we get a Gang Lock option? Where the Gang Leader can choose Gang Target and then everyone in that gang will lock the same target at the same time? What about formation options as well? Any Frigate Attack Wing should be in a formation and not just radomly grouped. I can see that as being a lot of fun.
|
Ana Khouri
|
Posted - 2003.12.09 19:16:00 -
[365]
Edited by: Ana Khouri on 09/12/2003 19:22:20
Quote:
Ok Ana, I'm not in game right now so will not flame you again here. I just don't feel their is a need to call someone an ass to prove a point even if Jash does seem a little 'all knowing' some of the time.
I was calling him that way because there are times where he is wrong - but I've never ever seen him admit it. In this case I had shown him that he was wrong without any chance for him to escape by a argumentation hole - but he still was insisting that he was right. And because this I said he was making himself an ass.
Quote:
I still don't think you have a valid point. I'm still pretty sure that Nav skill boosts base speed and doesnt Min Frig skill on most frigs boost speed ? We are getting way off topic here so I will stop.
Try it if you don't believe me. Nav Is only applied after base speed + hull mods.
(base speed + hull mod boni/mali) * nav bonus * ab * ab *...
You are right with the minmatar frig skill speed boni, though. I forgot that one at that time - someone else reminded me of it in this thread 1-2 days after that particular discussion. You can "couter" that one by using 3 instead 2 overdrives, though (and it's 1 ab +2 OD for all other races frigs vs BSs. minmatar ships are the exeption there). A typhoon can still be faster than a virgil without using MWDs on TQ. Which was the whole point of my statement - MWDs were not "the" cause that BS were faster than frigs. A fact which didn't please MWD-hater Jash at all.
Not on chaos anymore, of cource, but this discussion took place before those changes happened.
Quote:
Edited by: Zyrla Bladestorm on 09/12/2003 13:35:04ok this thread is about a future version of eve .. as a result you really have to take into acount the future environment .. this includes the speed changes which you yourself have also posted about
to wit different ships get different amounts of speed out of items such as afterburners, typically the slowest frigate gets a lot more % out of an AB than an battleship now
Yes, but this part of the discussion happened before the AB & MWD changes on chaos. I wasn't predicting anything, just stated a fact.
free speech not allowed here |
Jash Illian
|
Posted - 2003.12.09 19:54:00 -
[366]
TomB:
Lock timers seem to have swung too far in the wrong direction. With a Typhoon + 2 F90 Positionals + Signature Analysis 2 (I think), locking a Badger Mk 2 takes less than 3 seconds. Targetting the badger pilot's pod, 20m signature radius I believe, took about 6 seconds. I'll try getting some firmer numbers on Chaos after work (the countdown moves a little fast at times).
But I'm pretty weak skilled when it comes to targetting times compared to others. And given the setup I had on the Typhoon and the range I intended to fight her at, the loss of 2 out of 4 midslots for F90 Positionals wasn't a sacrifice at all.
I mean its like you want corporations to oblige each other like its sex or something. Pffft I would rather **** my enemy.- Rohann
Be careful out there. That other guy waiting in the queue for the gate MIGHT be a baby-munching frock-burner, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW!- Lallante |
CoolSprog
|
Posted - 2003.12.10 17:53:00 -
[367]
Forgive me if this sounds like a flame, because it isnt, or if im just being a dumbass (because i sometimes am :))
Dosent this mean that the scorpion (with the upcoming EW Nerf, the amount of times its gonna take to lock etc) will be good for nothing exept tanking up to the max? I personally own a scorp and am concerned that it will be rendered obsolete with these changes.
Opinions
Thanks
CoolSprog :)
-----
|
SUNscatcher
|
Posted - 2003.12.10 19:12:00 -
[368]
from a realizm point of view these changes make no sense. from a programming point of view it may be the only feasible way to balance.
races which share technology should all target at about the same speed. your more modern ships should have improved equipment and thus improved performance.
targeting speed should be based upon three things:
1) your equipment
2)the size of the object you are targeting
3)the relative speed and distance that your target is from you.
If its just a programming issue that has driven the changes to be made in the intended fashion we'll live with it.
If you can catch me you can have me. |
SUPER GROVER
|
Posted - 2003.12.10 22:26:00 -
[369]
I think someone has brought this up, but a BS setup as frigatekiller (with full load of small guns). Will this setup take just as long to target a frigate the a setup with large guns? Becaus small is fast and big is slow!
I hope you took this in review
CU in EvE
|
Thrak
|
Posted - 2003.12.11 10:32:00 -
[370]
Quote:
I think someone has brought this up, but a BS setup as frigatekiller (with full load of small guns). Will this setup take just as long to target a frigate the a setup with large guns? Becaus small is fast and big is slow!
Target acquisition is done by the ship's sensor arrays not the turrets. Small turrets will just track faster- the type of weapons fitted has no effect on locking speed. Basically if you want to make a frigatekiller, use a cruiser. Thorax for example - drones plus 5 turrets = rawr.
I still say it should be that all ships have the same locking speed (i.e. a battleship and a frigate both take the same time to lock another frigate). However if you're gonna do it this way...
Make it so frigates can only lock 1-2 targets. Explain it so that by having fixed direction sensors and a fully manual pilot lock, it is possible for a frigate to lock much faster.
Similarily, limit cruisers to 3 targets, citing the fact that they generally use a crew-driven targetting system, which locks faster but is much harder to maintain for mulitple targets.
Battleships use huge, fully automated, omni directional sensor arrays. Although they can hold and lock 7+ targets with ease, the bulkiness of the equipment used combined with the need to filter interferance from the huge power systems present means locking time is greatly reduced unless additional equipment is used.
To go into more detail - stations can lock faster becuase although they also have huge sensor arrays, space is not at such a premium and they can afford to shield systems so that the energy signatures don't interfere.
Race bonuses:-
The shape and design of minmatar ships is conducive to faster locking- the arrays are often larger and have more coverage/exposure than comparable ones (Tempest has huge sensor vanes)
Amarr ships fair well in locking speed as the high power grids present forced the designers to almost over-insulate power systems to reduce dangerous emissions. This resulted in a nice side effect - faster locking times due to less intereferance.
Gallente ship designers put a high value on protecting critical systems - to this end the sensor arrays are also reinforced and armored, resulting in a slightly less than average locking speed.
Caldari ships are built for brute effectiveness and as such emit a huge amount of radiation- it is a testament to the high tech expertise of the caldari that their locking speeds are this low (even tho they are the longest times of all races)
Sorry about the long post 
|
Gan Howorth
|
Posted - 2003.12.11 11:59:00 -
[371]
NGRU Rix said:
All pilots are in Capsules. All actions are instantaneous from the pilot's thoughts regardless of ship size. That 1000 other staff are there to cook for, clean up after, and talk to each other - maybe to do ship repairs and reload the guns.
Sorry thats not the way l see it. The capsule gives you enhanced senses. "One with the ship" and all that. It does not necessarily follow that you are hard-wired into every control system. To say that the 1000's of staff are there to cook and clean up...(what after eachother?) is plain silly. If they werent there at all then they wouldn't need to cook and clean. In any case l'm sure that in your vision of a one man battleship, the guns would have perfectly able automated reloading systems that could be triggered by the man in a pod scenario.
So no, l think that the 1000's of staff do more than just talk to eachother...
|
Darkwolf
|
Posted - 2003.12.12 11:27:00 -
[372]
Quote:
To say that the 1000's of staff are there to cook and clean up...(what after eachother?) is plain silly. If they werent there at all then they wouldn't need to cook and clean.
Ah, that would be logical, but militaries aren't known for using good sense.
Reminds how for a VERY long time, mobile artillery units were composed of three men: A gunner, a reloader, and a third man.
Nobody could really remember what the third man was for (on these MOTORIZED artillery units), and then somebody looked it up in the manuals.
He was there to hold the horses. Horses they hadn't used for decades :)
|
Siphol Kalarth
|
Posted - 2003.12.12 14:55:00 -
[373]
Quote:
To say that the 1000's of staff are there to cook and clean up...(what after eachother?) is plain silly.
I recon they're all there on their exercise bikes pumping out power to provide the natural recharge to shields. Cap relays are just a con, you could get the same effect with a little three core wire and some crocodile clips.
I keep faith, it's only what I believe in that changes.
|
Al Kaline
|
Posted - 2003.12.12 15:47:00 -
[374]
Quote:
from a realizm point of view these changes make no sense. from a programming point of view it may be the only feasible way to balance.
races which share technology should all target at about the same speed. your more modern ships should have improved equipment and thus improved performance.
targeting speed should be based upon three things:
1) your equipment
2)the size of the object you are targeting
3)the relative speed and distance that your target is from you.
If its just a programming issue that has driven the changes to be made in the intended fashion we'll live with it.
Aye - definately, what possible reason could there be that Battleships (BATTLESHips) take longer to target a cruiser or frigate than another cruiser or frigate does. why not just tune the tracking speeds or ranges of the larger guns that battleships are like to use to account for balancing? Should be able to fit out a battleship as a frigate killer I reckon, if you want - will make you a lot more vulnerable to attack by cruisers/ other BS.
|
Siphol Kalarth
|
Posted - 2003.12.12 15:57:00 -
[375]
Edited by: Siphol Kalarth on 12/12/2003 15:58:53
Quote:
Aye - definately, what possible reason could there be that Battleships (BATTLESHips) take longer to target a cruiser or frigate than another cruiser or frigate does. why not just tune the tracking speeds or ranges of the larger guns that battleships are like to use to account for balancing? Should be able to fit out a battleship as a frigate killer I reckon, if you want - will make you a lot more vulnerable to attack by cruisers/ other BS.
While I agree with the sentiment you show I doubt it would work from a gameplay perspective. Having a quick lock time for battleships due to the super sensitive and highpowered sensors could make sense from a realism perspective, within eve this would only work if there were large and hard to destroy carriers. These carries would have to be capable of carrying a large fleet of smaller ships close to their optimal attack range before launching them into the field of battle. I for one think that the concept they have worked out for target aquisition works quite well.
I'm holding my breath for modules that effect your signature radius and scan resolution, they seem to be the next obvious step. (At last check these didn't exist so if "dampners" etc now effect this please forgive me)
Edit, paragraph length sentence cut in half
I keep faith, it's only what I believe in that changes.
|
Jash Illian
|
Posted - 2003.12.12 23:03:00 -
[376]
Quote:
Edited by: Siphol Kalarth on 12/12/2003 15:58:53
Quote:
Aye - definately, what possible reason could there be that Battleships (BATTLESHips) take longer to target a cruiser or frigate than another cruiser or frigate does. why not just tune the tracking speeds or ranges of the larger guns that battleships are like to use to account for balancing? Should be able to fit out a battleship as a frigate killer I reckon, if you want - will make you a lot more vulnerable to attack by cruisers/ other BS.
While I agree with the sentiment you show I doubt it would work from a gameplay perspective. Having a quick lock time for battleships due to the super sensitive and highpowered sensors could make sense from a realism perspective, within eve this would only work if there were large and hard to destroy carriers. These carries would have to be capable of carrying a large fleet of smaller ships close to their optimal attack range before launching them into the field of battle. I for one think that the concept they have worked out for target aquisition works quite well.
I'm holding my breath for modules that effect your signature radius and scan resolution, they seem to be the next obvious step. (At last check these didn't exist so if "dampners" etc now effect this please forgive me)
Edit, paragraph length sentence cut in half
People seem to be looking for a fictional explanation to explain why their battleship shouldn't take longer to lock onto another ship.
In our reality of a bunch of people playing a game across the internet, it's because it has to happen.
If people want a fictional excuse behind it here:
Quote:
NGRU Rix-
All pilots are in Capsules. All actions are instantaneous from the pilot's thoughts regardless of ship size. That 1000 other staff are there to cook for, clean up after, and talk to each other - maybe to do ship repairs and reload the guns.
Fine, we plug your mind into all these sophisticated computer systems. And now instead of the hundred or so yards you're generally aware of, your awareness now covers a couple hundred kilometers. So it takes time for you the pilot to focus your awareness onto a target. The smaller the size to the sensors of your ship, the longer it take you focus onto it to direct a lock.
That's why training Signature Analysis speeds up the time it take to lock onto a ship. You damn sure aren't improving your ship's equipment. You're improving your mind, enabling it to distinguish a target quicker from all the other information your perception is being flooded with by the ship's sensors.
There. Fictional excuse provided. Can we please get back to the fact that the lock times for battleships may be a bit too short when locking onto smaller ships? 
I mean its like you want corporations to oblige each other like its sex or something. Pffft I would rather **** my enemy.- Rohann
Be careful out there. That other guy waiting in the queue for the gate MIGHT be a baby-munching frock-burner, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW!- Lallante |
Filve Tantiss
|
Posted - 2003.12.14 11:30:00 -
[377]
Will the 'Signature Analysis' skill be changed now? i got that on lvl5 and i wonder if the skill changes something different then 'targeting speed', because that is obviously not important anymore.
|
Jash Illian
|
Posted - 2003.12.14 15:11:00 -
[378]
Quote:
Will the 'Signature Analysis' skill be changed now? i got that on lvl5 and i wonder if the skill changes something different then 'targeting speed', because that is obviously not important anymore.
It still affects how quickly you lock a target. Which is helluva important now, even for frigates
I mean its like you want corporations to oblige each other like its sex or something. Pffft I would rather **** my enemy.- Rohann
Be careful out there. That other guy waiting in the queue for the gate MIGHT be a baby-munching frock-burner, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW!- Lallante |
Arain
|
Posted - 2003.12.14 21:33:00 -
[379]
What its done is make it impossible for those who perfer to just do solo or paired adventureing. Personal opinion is this game has made the same mistake some other games have made. They assume everyone wants to play PvP and try and make it work. EQ proved beyond a doubt that 95 percent of the people playing MMORPG's are disinterested in playing in a PvP enviorment all the time. Already talked to a friend of mine and as far as our circumstances go its going to cost Eve our 3 accounts at least and I suspect there will be more people that feel the same. Road to ruin, Nerf Nerf Nerf you have followed it very well. Oh well Horizons will be out soon along with EQ2 and a few other games I am sure I can find something to spend my cash on.
|
Artean
|
Posted - 2003.12.14 22:51:00 -
[380]
Quote:
What its done is make it impossible for those who perfer to just do solo or paired adventureing. Personal opinion is this game has made the same mistake some other games have made. They assume everyone wants to play PvP and try and make it work. EQ proved beyond a doubt that 95 percent of the people playing MMORPG's are disinterested in playing in a PvP enviorment all the time. Already talked to a friend of mine and as far as our circumstances go its going to cost Eve our 3 accounts at least and I suspect there will be more people that feel the same. Road to ruin, Nerf Nerf Nerf you have followed it very well. Oh well Horizons will be out soon along with EQ2 and a few other games I am sure I can find something to spend my cash on.
Im sure u can. And, your rigth: not everyone is interested in playing in a PvP environment. Though, no one has ever said EVE should attract everyone either; perhaps only the ones that find PvP in combat, economy etc challenging. Ive been in the EQ-swamp and didnt like it. |
Matrin III
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 16:12:00 -
[381]
I 100% agreee wit hthe new target changes. It really is not a problem. If you fit the right mods on a BS, it can target and destroy a frigate before it can even warp (from comming out of stargate cloak).
|
Hakera
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 16:14:00 -
[382]
thanks for your opinion, your only a year and a half late in providing it 
/me whispers to check the post dates next time 
Dumbledore - Eve-I.com |
3GG H34D
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 16:15:00 -
[383]
teeheheh
----------------------------------------------
Think u know 1337?, you dont know nuffink!
Û_±ý+´Åõk*Áu/°÷_¸Ã=5ò@Q@Q@M_?ZåñIîbåÈT~p¶4y+ðÊ% £= p¶4ÀiÔmZã!À©ì¦:BãÌ6xi Ö |
Malken
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 16:27:00 -
[384]
Originally by: Hakera
thanks for your opinion, your only a year and a half late in providing it
/me whispers to check the post dates next time
lol better never then late 
Originally by: Graelyn
"We're at war with you, and you FIRED on us! I am so telling CONCORD!"
Quote:
[18:46:36] Weebear > WTS Electric Golf Cart, 1 careful owner. Phone Rome 555 6567
|
ALTNAME
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 16:34:00 -
[385]
I never understood why small ships always get the break that they do, simply for being small. Their is no advantage to being a battleship, especially against more than one interceptor. Im not sure how this changes much anyways.
|
Meridius
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 16:39:00 -
[386]
Originally by: ALTNAME
I never understood why small ships always get the break that they do, simply for being small. Their is no advantage to being a battleship, especially against more than one interceptor. Im not sure how this changes much anyways.
It's just Interceptors that are overpowered in most ways.
Look at tech 1 frig scan res and compare that to there interceptor counterparts scan res. Tech2 cruisers still have the same ****ty scan res of there tech 1 hulls, it's stupid.
(this thread is old and smelly)
________________________________________________________
|
ALTNAME
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 16:42:00 -
[387]
Persistent pvp is for the rich, and for those using bought isk/accounts. For those that earn our money, eliminating invulnerability, so that you may have the 'right' to destroy everything that passes through the gate, for you stupid fun, is a ridiculous idea.
|
Sadist
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 16:50:00 -
[388]
Originally by: ALTNAME
Persistent pvp is for the rich, and for those using bought isk/accounts. For those that earn our money, eliminating invulnerability, so that you may have the 'right' to destroy everything that passes through the gate, for you stupid fun, is a ridiculous idea.
Not nesceserily...you know before SOMEONE buys an account with several billion isk in it, someone must earn those billions, yes? Older players who did smart investments are now rich enough to afford all the PvP they want.
_______________________________________________
|
aeti
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 17:22:00 -
[389]
TomB as amarr 
|
Philyus
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 17:37:00 -
[390]
Quit bumping your bumper!
And btw, this is a perfect example of how a change was going to "kill" something but in the end it all worked out.
--------------------
I am easily confused. Leave me alone! |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 .. 14 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |