| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
I'm Down
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
32
   |
Posted - 2012.03.28 03:48:00 -
[1] - Quote
I've said for the past 3-4 years that logistics are a huge issue in game since there's very little about logistical warfare that promotes strategic combat. So I've devised a way to keep the intent of logistics, but boost active tanking, and determine more about fitting decisions
The 2 big problems
Currently, active tanking has little role in the game. Everything in game is buffer with no incentive to fit active tank modules.
Logistics are odd in their performance as they require no skill for the person receiving the logistics other than a timely request
So how would I change the concept
Remove the direct transfer of armor and shields from logistics to receiver. Instead, call it a nanobot (armor) or plasma (shield) transfer system.
Here's how it works:
In order to utilize logistics I must have an active repair system on my ship. A small armor repairer can receive the equivalent of a small armor transfer amount per module per cycle. Obviously, it can have multiple remote repair modules working at once, and each module can transfer more armor. But no one remote armor transfer can send more than what the small repairer can receive. However, my active repairer must actually apply the transfer, meaning a cycle time and application.
Essentially, the logistics ships/mods boost the performance of my repairer within respect to my ship size. However, I must have the capacitor, and the cycle time to apply the repair
The same works for shield
- How do you prevent stockpiling logistics repairs on a ship over time?
It's always cycle based. So whatever logistics support you got during that cycle, is applied. For armor, it's applied at the end of the cycle, for shields, you always get that initial base boost, then collect plasma during the cycle time to be used on the next boost.
- Why is this better?
There are going to be obvious gaps in repairs since it's only your active repairers that apply. No more consistent unbreakable stream of repairs, but rather questions of can you out damage the cycle of repair
It also means there are ways to break up logistics networks besides just ECCM
The active repairer takes up a slot that would normally be dedicated to buffer tank
- Why is this needed?
Combat over the past few years has devolved quite a bit to very lopsided affairs far to often. Fights are skewing so badly that it's frequently true for one side to hardly take any losses (5-10) in a fight where 100s of ships are on either side. It develops a sense of hopelessness when one side can be so logistically strong that you can't break the chain of their ships and fights devolve to: bring more people.
The goal is to provide more ways to break up and reduce logistical efficiency, bring back some incentive and reasons to fit active repairers, and reduce the very large buffers a lot of ships fitting.
I'm probably going to heavily refine this idea as I think more about it and see reply, but the overall goal is to make combat less about that initial alpha strike to overwhelm a logistics team, and more about tactical decisions and adjustments in real time. |
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
134
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 05:09:00 -
[2] - Quote
Hey I'm Down,
An interesting idea, but alas, i'm sorry but I disagree.
First off there is the fitting issues. Several ships are designed to be used in a fleet. Consider for example the Abaddon, a ship that isn't meant to fit an active tank, which is why it gets 5% armor resist bonus. Then consider say a Hyperion which does get an active tank bonus - a ship you rarely see in fleets for exactly that reason. You'd have to change several ships to really make this work.
In addition, many fleet ships already have capacitor issues, and by further increasing the reliance on an active tank as well - you will just end up with everyone fitting way more cap drain on their fleet ships and rolling out Bhaalghorns.
In addition logistics ships can happily be countered by more than just ECM. Cap draining is a real issue if done properly, and if they are at range, sensor dampening, as well as shooting them with good switching shot calling.
Two of the logistics only work while cap shared so removing one causes real issues in a fleet. And ships like Scimitar and Oneiros can be jammed by non Minmitar ECM racials because they don't typically have fitting space and capacitor for ECCM. It's not hard to do, and scimitars themselves are easy to kill if you bring the right tools for the job - i.e. long range webbing and assault frigates, which will happily tear them a new one.
Logistics are already quite time intensive to train properly in themselves - how many people bother to get Logistics V?
Players already have skills that effect logistics - both resistances and buffer are defining factors in how successful logistics ships can be in their role, so pilot fits and skill points truly matter.
In terms of a pilot being more active in a repair scenario, how many pilots actually overload their hardeners properly when being shot at? This changes the repair amount significantly, but not all pilots are savvy enough to do it in the heat of battle or in time, let alone use nanite repair paste mid combat successfully. That's quite a bit of micro management right there, when you're also trying to follow shot calling.
Personally, after flying with Rooks and Kings, I would suggest that bringing more people is not really the solution, but looking at tactics that will cause confusion and break how the logistics team work. I've seen this happen time and time again. There are also clever ways to overload the broadcast stream if you use DPS properly shot calling properly. Quite simply logistics pilots can't keep up, but alas, most shot calling is fairly rigid and predictable.
I think the real issue here is, tactics. And how they are used in fleets. Most fleets are run in a fairly rigid way, which is not how you will break a logistics backed fleet. The trouble isn't in the mechanics of EvE, but in how fleets are working as a team to counter them properly.
Consider the historical differences in infantry tactics between the two great wars. In the first world war, tactics were rigid and inflexible, relying on sheer numbers - exactly as you are suggesting and I guess seeing as a way of 'breaking' the opposition.
By the end of that war, tactics had started to change, to small teams of soldiers working in a far more flexible way, the tactics of which were evolved in the second world war, so that it was no longer about sheer numbers, but how small teams worked together.
We are still in a situation where fleets are run in exactly that same, inflexible, rigid way. To win against logistics you have to think differently than most EvE corps and alliances are currently capable of.
I would suggest the solution is in adapting how fleet leadership, organisation and tactics and brought together in fleets, rather than problems with EvE itself. It is just a matter of FCs and corps evolving, which is why EvE is so brilliant, that it can create this sort of challenge.
Caldari focused fleet PvP
Fly Caldari and want to fly them in Fleet PvP? We are recruiting:
www.thedeadrabbitsociety.com |
Drake Draconis
Nexus Advanced Technologies
Fidelas Constans
421
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 14:41:00 -
[3] - Quote
"Logistics are odd in their performance as they require no skill for the person receiving the logistics other than a timely request"
Stopped reading here.
Not supporting.
================
Get PAID FOR SPAM!
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=78152 |
admiral root
Red Galaxy
Persona Non Gratis
47
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 14:48:00 -
[4] - Quote
Never mind, you edited your post just before I hit the quote button. |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
51
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 15:26:00 -
[5] - Quote
Instead of forcing people to fit otherwise useless (niche enough to be mostly true) modules to get some love, why not limit the amount of reps a given ship can benefit from?
Introduce yet another attribute for ships: Nanobot adaptability.
Differentiate it based on hull size (obviously), Meta level (ex. Navy hulls may be better at managing incoming nanobots), race and lastly specific hulls. Fitting an active unit could then signify that the ship is already prepared to funnel bots through its systems, thus gaining a bonus to said attribute.
Extra Fluff: With a separate attribute like that, individual ships like the Myrm and Hype for example can be given a truly unique tank potential .. been mantioned a lot that their active bonuses be swapped for incoming RR ditto.
No to forcing specific fits, YES to mixing things up. |
Wrik Hoover
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
1
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 16:21:00 -
[6] - Quote
on behalf of pl,
shut up yaay |
KSUDruid
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
10
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 16:21:00 -
[7] - Quote
I'm Down wrote:Alot of useless words
The idea is completely useless and irrelevant just like most of your suggestions.
|
Tertiacero
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 16:24:00 -
[8] - Quote
Wrik Hoover wrote:on behalf of pl,
shut up yaay
Not emptyquoting |
BlueMajere
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
4
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 16:44:00 -
[9] - Quote
Tertiacero wrote:Wrik Hoover wrote:on behalf of pl,
shut up yaay Not emptyquoting
indeed
|
Rebnok
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
5
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 16:58:00 -
[10] - Quote
BlueMajere wrote:Tertiacero wrote:Wrik Hoover wrote:on behalf of pl,
shut up yaay Not emptyquoting indeed
good poast |
|
|
Phoenus
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
25
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 17:18:00 -
[11] - Quote
Rebnok wrote:BlueMajere wrote:Tertiacero wrote:Wrik Hoover wrote:on behalf of pl,
shut up yaay Not emptyquoting indeed good poast
Quoting dis. |
Drake Draconis
Nexus Advanced Technologies
Fidelas Constans
422
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 17:22:00 -
[12] - Quote
this thread is full of win..... PL bashing one ot their own. Hillarious.
Def. Made my Morning here.
================
Get PAID FOR SPAM!
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=78152 |
Ravelin Eb
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 17:52:00 -
[13] - Quote
Yaay certainly isn't counted as one of us. |
Max Butched
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
3
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 17:58:00 -
[14] - Quote
Yaay has never been accepted into PL as one of our own |
I'm Down
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
42
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 22:20:00 -
[15] - Quote
Max Butched wrote:Yaay has never been accepted into PL as one of our own edit: one of the ********* fc from defeated alliance for shadoo's private collection for sure
GOT YO TITANS
|
Hinkledolph
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
11
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 06:56:00 -
[16] - Quote
Wrik Hoover wrote:on behalf of pl,
shut up yaay
|
StainLessStealRat
Blood Covenant
Pandemic Legion
2
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 08:58:00 -
[17] - Quote
Hinkledolph wrote:Wrik Hoover wrote:on behalf of pl,
shut up yaay
I support Hinkledolph's proposal. |
Gallinae
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 12:38:00 -
[18] - Quote
Wrik Hoover wrote:on behalf of pl,
shut up yaay
I like this post. |
Bernadictus
S.A.S
Pandemic Legion
5
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 14:27:00 -
[19] - Quote
Wrik Hoover wrote:on behalf of pl,
shut up yaay
Supporting this idea. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
969
|
Posted - 2012.03.31 12:41:00 -
[20] - Quote
Bernadictus wrote:Wrik Hoover wrote:on behalf of pl,
shut up yaay Supporting this idea.
Not empty quoting
Edit: we need more chamans in space |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |