| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Zam Branes
   |
Posted - 2007.01.13 00:57:00 -
[1]
this ties into the seemingly inevitable goal of CCP to stop blobbing
focus firing, while effective, reaches overkill at certain points
what if after a certain level of focus fire it actually nerfed the attackers for overkill
if you have 400 ammo rounds and 80 missiles in space shooting the same target - the physical volume of those projectiles would bump into each other
so my proposal is after x amount of excessive force is used an alogrithm that reduces the amount of inflicted damage goes into effect
additionally you could co-incide racial focusing as well ... example for this would be that too many lasers near missiles would cause the heat signature read wrong and the missiles do less damage
too many railgun rounds create a magnetic field that repels the chunks of metal that are projectile rounds ... etc
|
Valandril
Caldari
Resurrection
R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 06:03:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Valandril on 13/01/2007 05:59:41
 Originally by: Zam Branes
this ties into the seemingly inevitable goal of CCP to stop blobbing
focus firing, while effective, reaches overkill at certain points
what if after a certain level of focus fire it actually nerfed the attackers for overkill
if you have 400 ammo rounds and 80 missiles in space shooting the same target - the physical volume of those projectiles would bump into each other
so my proposal is after x amount of excessive force is used an alogrithm that reduces the amount of inflicted damage goes into effect
additionally you could co-incide racial focusing as well ... example for this would be that too many lasers near missiles would cause the heat signature read wrong and the missiles do less damage
too many railgun rounds create a magnetic field that repels the chunks of metal that are projectile rounds ... etc
Where u read that ccp want to remove blobs, especialy after adding us new blob toys ? (new gang)
-----------------
My english bad, F1, F2, F3, F4...
|
CrestoftheStars
Deviance Inc
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 06:44:00 -
[3]
http://myeve.eve-online.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=412
there:
i have made a topic on this one too:)
here
:
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=447510
___________________________________________
come on..
stop thinking about YOU.
and start thinking about All of us... how do we get a more fun and enjoyable game for all of us. |
vinnymcg
Vendetta Underground
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 07:36:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Valandril
Edited by: Valandril on 13/01/2007 05:59:41
Originally by: Zam Branes
this ties into the seemingly inevitable goal of CCP to stop blobbing
focus firing, while effective, reaches overkill at certain points
what if after a certain level of focus fire it actually nerfed the attackers for overkill
if you have 400 ammo rounds and 80 missiles in space shooting the same target - the physical volume of those projectiles would bump into each other
so my proposal is after x amount of excessive force is used an alogrithm that reduces the amount of inflicted damage goes into effect
additionally you could co-incide racial focusing as well ... example for this would be that too many lasers near missiles would cause the heat signature read wrong and the missiles do less damage
too many railgun rounds create a magnetic field that repels the chunks of metal that are projectile rounds ... etc
Where u read that ccp want to remove blobs, especialy after adding us new blob toys ? (new gang)
New blob toys? i thought the point in the new gangs were to split up the blobs by letting us make smaller groups in a large gang meaning that each small gang can have separate goals.
|
Valandril
Caldari
Resurrection
R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 08:18:00 -
[5]
Hmm i just read that devblog, and personaly this is enroute for ccp from fixing software. In simple words - instead of fixing client and server to allow big fights, they direct pvp to small lvl :/
And for me yea, that new gang is awesome thingy to improove your blobing by squading (like 2x20man squad so u still instapop anyone) but ah well that is ccp, we can't fix bug we enroute it :P
As you may guess, i don't like idea of damage stacking penalty, u got outnumbered you die - nuff said.
-----------------
My english bad, F1, F2, F3, F4...
|
Erim Solfara
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 17:04:00 -
[6]
Valandril shut up complaining or stop playing. CCP are always working hard on new improvements and content, we only just got another two battlecruisers and battleships per race, and not to mention everything that's coming out with Kali 2 and 3.
Frankly I don't know many other developers that'd actually commit to getting a game running with two seperate graphics engines, let alone three.
----------------------------------------
Proposed new ship class |
CrestoftheStars
Deviance Inc
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 17:39:00 -
[7]
Edited by: CrestoftheStars on 13/01/2007 17:40:06
this is the kind of thought a low skilled pvp'er would have...
why do you think in the most popular pvp games that some people can own a whole team alone? it is not about numbers, but about skills... (which as you so clearly said, eve is not about AT ALL... it takes no skill to put on a module when your low in shield/armour and to press on all fire on one target becouse this is always the most effective way... and the only skill it takes is to come up with a good setup which you can just find on the forum or get from your corp/alliance... it's really sad that there is No pvp skill requered in eve...)
Originally by: Valandril
Hmm i just read that devblog, and personaly this is enroute for ccp from fixing software. In simple words - instead of fixing client and server to allow big fights, they direct pvp to small lvl :/
And for me yea, that new gang is awesome thingy to improove your blobing by squading (like 2x20man squad so u still instapop anyone) but ah well that is ccp, we can't fix bug we enroute it :P
As you may guess, i don't like idea of damage stacking penalty, u got outnumbered you die - nuff said.
why is it that there is always some idiot like this?! i mean seriusly, the whole point of the forum idears and features is to tell what you think is good and what you think is bad...
it is Because people "whine" that changes are made at all.
and i think what ccp do with deviding the fights to smaller gruops is really good for the game, but i do not flame or say "quit if you don't like it", maybe when i was 14years that would have been my intolerent and idiotic answer for these thing, but i highly doubt it... so stop saying stupid things like that.. argu if you do not agree and convince people with logic.
Originally by: Erim Solfara
Valandril shut up complaining or stop playing. CCP are always working hard on new improvements and content, we only just got another two battlecruisers and battleships per race, and not to mention everything that's coming out with Kali 2 and 3.
Frankly I don't know many other developers that'd actually commit to getting a game running with two seperate graphics engines, let alone three.
___________________________________________
come on..
stop thinking about YOU.
and start thinking about All of us... how do we get a more fun and enjoyable game for all of us. |
Reggie Stoneloader
eXceed Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 18:25:00 -
[8]
I don't see a problem with focus fire and superior numbers giving an advantage. An organized force that can maintain discipline and focus fire well should enjoy more success than a disorganizaed force that can't set up their overview and can't communicate effectively. I'm guessing that the focus-haters here have never been in a 200-ship fleet battle. It's extremely difficult to get 70 battleships to all target the same enemy ship. It takes practice, drilling, and effective communication. Blobs aren't linked telepathically. The fleet commander has to take intel from a half-dozen sources at once, prioritize targets, delegate responsibilities and keep his subordinates from logging off to go to the pub halfway through a four-hour gate camp.
It's hard, thankless work.
If focus fire were made useless, fleet battles would be senseless melees, with everyone picking their own targets and engagement ranges and then warping out when they start taking damage. It would be chaos. With good training and hard work, you could organize into gank squads within the fleet and have each unit picking targets to tackle and kill, but it would be a clumsy, senseless brawl.
We saw in the second Caldari tournament that a well-equipped battleship or command ship with good skills can tank five enemy ships for a very long time. I don't want fleet battles to turn into hour-long marathons with no clear winner.
|
Dr Shameless
Skull Soft
The Sundering
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 19:05:00 -
[9]
no more then 5-10 hostile locks on a ship and problem is solved
|
Mar Idoun
Aurora Empire
Fuzzy Nut Attack Squirrels
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 21:52:00 -
[10]
the problem is already solved. If an FC knows that if 10 of his ships focus firing on target A can kill it in 3 seconds, then why use 30 ships to kill it in 2.5 seconds? why not kill 3 ships in 3 seconds? The problem is pre-solved -- if an FC has the patience and organization to do this then they will. Why are people worried about that half second difference? Now if you said that focus fire should stack so that 4-5 BS would be optimal then now you're going to be killing the blob and making it so that fleet warfare is then going to be 10 small gangs against another number of small gangs and changing tactics. I'm not going to say if that's bad or not but it's certainly a change.
|
Valandril
Caldari
Resurrection
R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.01.14 00:34:00 -
[11]
10 ships wont instapop fleettanking ship, 20 should go for it (poping 35k shield on 50% resist anyone ?). If no ppl will be just tanking fleets because of stupid penalty.
Also dear Erim Solfara, if you got balls to call me an idiot on forum, i won't comment that.
-----------------
My english bad, F1, F2, F3, F4...
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |