|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
4174
|
Posted - 2016.05.02 05:04:34 -
[1] - Quote
Pearl Necklace Badasaz wrote:I didnt see the fight, did the defending station have weapons or did it get taken down too fast for subcap launchers, rigs, and whatnot They just tanked it.
The defenders didn't put out a fleet of any kind and a medium citadel doesn't have that much firepower. Vendetta lost some stuff initially because their logistics chain went suspect because of reasons however they fixed that problem, came back and reinforced it unopposed by anything except the station.
As it turns out that putting up a citadel if you have no capacity to defend it is not actually a good idea. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
4174
|
Posted - 2016.05.02 06:24:19 -
[2] - Quote
Large citadels will probably be an entirely different affair. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
4176
|
Posted - 2016.05.02 11:18:10 -
[3] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:They had some ships in space which died, three Navy Domi's.
EDIT: The defences look chickenshit to me which is rather sad, what's wrong in having a challenge in this game, must everything be easy? inaccurate, they lost 2 navy domies in transit much earlier while the citadel was still invulnerable, I have no idea what the hell that third one was doing. The defenses are absolutely non-trivial, throwing random junk at it isn't going to work out well for you, but it's no a substitute or an actual organized defense. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
4176
|
Posted - 2016.05.02 11:35:29 -
[4] - Quote
Also broken in regard to citadels in that the anchoring timer is the same length as the timer for wars becoming active, making it basically impossible for anyone to attack a citadel when it enters its first vulnerability window when it finishes anchoring.
The obvious solution would be to either increase the anchoring timer or reduce the timer for wars becoming live. Obviously carebears would totally lose their **** at the idea of either of those things, because like usual they don't really care about balance or actual gameplay considerations, they just want things. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
4179
|
Posted - 2016.05.02 12:34:58 -
[5] - Quote
In the time scale we're talking about you'd have to suicide on it over and over again for hours to "bump" the repair timer. That would be a frankly vomit inducing abuse of the mechanic and I'm not even 100% certain it would actually work (citadel mechanics are pretty fruity).
|
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
4180
|
Posted - 2016.05.02 13:10:47 -
[6] - Quote
They aren't weak, though. They're actually pretty powerful, their EWAR is very effective, they neut a ton, are completely immune to electronic and capacitor warfare, do more dps than any sub capital ship that exists and they don't require any skills to use. The problem being experienced by this defender is that strength is relative to the threat.
When the threat is twenty guys with a coherent fleet of battleships and logistics who know what to expect. It's like sitting in space in a capital and expecting to be able to solo a twenty man subcapital fleet unsupported.
|
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
4180
|
Posted - 2016.05.02 13:34:38 -
[7] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:For me a Citadel should be a force multiplier for a defending fleet and my initial feeling was that it was about right, people gave the impression it was easy which is why I called it chickenshit level, but if it requires 5 BS and three logi then that is the correct level to me. That's exactly what it is. Fighting that and an actual competent defense fleet at the same time would be horrendous without having a huge numerical advantage.
|
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
4186
|
Posted - 2016.05.02 13:51:13 -
[8] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:There is another problem in that there is absolutely no value in putting a Medium up period, unless you want it as a a force multiplier. I mean I would do it for that if all my corp mates were active that is... They're pretty much only useful for refining as far as I'm aware, that and getting people to declare war on you. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
4186
|
Posted - 2016.05.02 13:59:13 -
[9] - Quote
I am always right about war decs.
SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
4186
|
Posted - 2016.05.02 14:13:23 -
[10] - Quote
I saw you explode it was the funny. |
|
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
4187
|
Posted - 2016.05.02 15:46:41 -
[11] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:CCP made a gross error in making these Medium Citadels useless. The failure of CCP to provide either content driving objects and resources in highsec or mechanics that enable content creation is pretty legendary at this point.
There's two distinct factors there, things that create conflict and mechanics that enable it. CCP is worse at the later, the general desire to blow things up compensates for the former to some extent.
The problem is there's the more than one group of people who perceive anything pertaining to PVP in highsec as being inherently bad for various ridiculously ill-conceived reasons. So when someone says something like "CCP should remove faction police because that would actually enable a massive amount of anti-ganking/criminal hunting player-enforcement gameplay like people keep saying they want" all the people who don't actually care about highsec PVP gameplay and just want characters who have low security status for whatever reason to have as many penalties stacked on them as possible all whine relentlessly about it. And that's before you even get to the people who think all highsec gameplay should just be straight up bad (I've literally seen people straight up state that it's good for highsec to have bugged, intuitive gameplay), because they're elitists about the kind of space they live in and think everybody should be there.
Heaven forfend that all types of space might have good gameplay opportunities.
Even if there were more things of value to shoot you'd still be limited by the fact that the only way to do anything whatsoever to structures is war declarations, which are a rich man (and his friends) game. A better highsec PVP environment would require more mechanics facilitating PVP and those ideas won't gain traction because they always face huge amounts of opposition from people who don't have or want to have any involvement in highsec PVP, but think it shouldn't exist. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
4191
|
Posted - 2016.05.02 18:33:26 -
[12] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote: I have seen people getting upset because the old mechanics which often resulted in a confused carebear being shootable for no explainable reason were replaced by crimewatch 2.0. I saw a lot of people completely bemused how they ended up being shot or got CONCORDED. And people bemoand that change, are they serious...
The idea that the old aggression system was hard to understand is just a talking point CCP Greyscale shat out to justify him leading a big project he could brag about and was supported by the ignorance of non-highsec players and carebears who had literally zero understanding of the system and still don't understand the current one.
The old system was actually extremely simple. If you steal from a can you get flagged to the corp, if you rep someone who stole from a can you get flagged the corp too. Same goes if you remotely assist someone at war, you inherent the flag the person you're assisting has. Timers related to individual characters were identical to limited engagements but lasted 15 minutes. All flags have the same duration and work the same way.
That's seriously the whole thing. The only part that was worse was the fact that criminal flags could propagate through a rep chain without warning, which was a bug because there was meant to be an dialog box which didn't always trigger before the flag propagated.
Whereas new crimewatch added multiple different flagging types of different function and duration and which interact with each other and with the safety system in unexpected ways. My favorite is how allies in a war can't remotely assist the people they're allied with or vice versa without becoming suspect flagged. It also didn't even bother to fix logistics repping awoxers not becoming flagged, which is not a bug and is still normal gameplay. Also it eliminated clan flipping from the game, which was a great low-investment way to introduce new players to PVP in a controlled environment and actually generated conflict (my first war against an alliance much larger than my corp happen when they declared war on us because I was can flipping them) and replaced it with suspect baiting which is far less interesting and accessible.
It's worse in pretty much every respect with regards to its stated goals. It didn't eliminate edge cases at all, in fact they failed to realize that in the first version there was no way for neutral logistics involved in a war to gain any kind of flags at all and there was a period of about 30 days post patch where neutral RR could not be legally attacked at all. This was a glaring logical error that illustrates the total lack of thought and care put into the system. CCP didn't consider the "edge case" called "wars". It's also not easier to understand, see everyone BAW has ever killed because suddenly all of their logistics shut off in the middle of a fight because they don't know what is and is not considered "neutral logistics" or what happens if you remotely repair any character that has an LE with anyone.
It doesn't affect me negatively because I'm not new or inexperienced and am generally the one in a position to leverage it's bizarre behavior to screw over people who are, but I absolutely hate the design of the whole system, it behaves very strangely and has a distinct anti-combat flavor to it. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
4192
|
Posted - 2016.05.02 19:51:32 -
[13] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:I recall the days of "Aggro Fu", when an alliance called TEARS was active.
On the surface it just plain looked bad. It was a gotcha game, "Oh you don't know this one loophole to the addendum of the agro rule that was updated then patched then changed and patched again last week" and blap goes the space ship.
Crime Watch and the ability to abandon loot (and set drones to passive) was the end of that. It did not fix Aggro Fu, just made it avoidable.
And out of anger the Aggro Fu black belts started bumping miners. The rest is history. But sometimes I wonder why CCP does not just start teleporting people past a certain SP out into the middle of nullsec as a means of getting a point across.
The "aggro fu" was literally just that you could shoot a drone or anchorable owned by a person and it would extend a timer against someone indefinitely. It was patched out long before crimewatch was implemented.
Pretty much all of the "strange stuff" with old aggression was fixed prior to crimewatch. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
4192
|
Posted - 2016.05.02 23:48:32 -
[14] - Quote
Shayla Etherodyne wrote:Someone still remember how it was possible to put a criminal flag on a miner grabbing the ore in a jetcan but not moving it to your bay. It become "owned" by the player grabbing it, but he didn't received a flag as he hadn't moved it, but as soon as the miner or the hauler removed it they got the flag, for removing their ore from their can. Sorry, but the old system was full of bugs.
All of the bugs were fixed significantly prior to the implementation of the current crimewatch system which also was full of bugs on introduction, the obvious one being the fact that neutral logistics literally could not become suspect flagged, another is that neutral characters in fleet with someone with a timer could spontaneously gain that timer on session change without actually doing anything at all. Most of these bugs have, three years later, been fixed.
There was no sudden massive improvement in highsec PVP gameplay related to crimewatch that rained down like manna from heaven, the basic design of the system was so logically unsound that it didn't include a way for neutrals remotely assisting participants in wars from becoming engageable. This wasn't some accidental mechanical quirk, the basic design just didn't consider that participants in wars don't get LE timers and remotely assisting someone with a LE or suspect timers was the only way someone could gain a flag via remote assistance. It took CCP a month to fix it and in order to fix it they had to implement the kind of "edge case" exception that the entire system was specifically intended to avoid.
The entire thing from its concept to its deployment was badly done and has only reached a point of usability after a ton of additional work by other people. It's another item on the laundry list of greyscale failures. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
4192
|
Posted - 2016.05.03 00:54:49 -
[15] - Quote
d0cTeR9 wrote:They are quite weak. People are easily killing them left and right, without even trying hard. That's because the owners aren't defending them. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
4193
|
Posted - 2016.05.03 06:13:31 -
[16] - Quote
Also fighters are bugged, that's not actually a big deal in this specific situation since even working correctly you can still tank them with 3 logi (we checked). |
|
|
|