Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Maceross
MicroFunks
|
Posted - 2009.02.02 23:54:00 -
[1]
So we know that a large reason behind blobbing is that lots of ships shooting at 1 ship is best, rather than spreading fire out or running smaller gangs with seperate targets. I have a few ideas here which may or may not have been aired before...
1. remote barrier generation
several ships in a fleet can direct these highslot modules to effectively make a static defensive bubble (or ideally a directional wall altho i realise this may be difficult) these modules have a 30second cycle rate and all involved ships are immobile while it is in effect.
2. directed ECM
a module which can be directed at a primary target to disrupt any ships lock on to that target, so if a whole fleet is locked on, this will cause them all to or have a chance to lose lock
3. Sacrifice
ok so i saw this while playing red alert, and basically some units had a power to attract fire meant for other units. cool idea and basically makes it very tough to call a primary as your fire is gonna be spread out anyway.
basically i think that just making a blanket nerf to people all locking to the same target just sounds unrealistic and there should either be bonuses to spreading fire or something the victim or his fleet can do to make it less effective for the enemy to have their entire fleet focus fire on one ship.
|
Dregek
Pilots Of Honour Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2009.02.03 00:43:00 -
[2]
No
/thread
|
Rogerano
Minmatar Einherjar Rising Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2009.02.03 02:21:00 -
[3]
Artificially hindering focus fire in such ways is not ideal. It feels wrong.
Imagine 5 tempests stacked up like a stack of books. They all want to shoot a target above them. In reality, only the top most tempest could do that. The others would have to blow up their buddies to get a line of sight (LOS) to the target.
So some sort of LOS thing could happen.
This might in turn lead to fleet formations (like wedge, line abreast, etc), which can be number-limited - naturally - due to spatial limitations. For example a congo line of AC tempests stretching for 40km might all be able to attain LOS and shoot at something, but only those close to the something will hit it, so it would be natural to split that congo line up into two or three smaller lines.
Provided formations could be adequately managed, LOS might introduce some interesting tactical situations and break things up a bit. This all comes about as a result of forcing sensible spatial mechanics upon ship deployments. This has to happen in RL and so people are used to it and it feels natural.
--- Not happy with something in EVE? An emo whine will doubtless help your cause. |
Hesod Adee
KDS Navy
|
Posted - 2009.02.03 06:22:00 -
[4]
The problem with implementing LOS on weapons is the extra load it would place on the server as whenever a shot is fired the server would need to check if it would collide with every other object on grid.
If you have x people fighting at a location, LOS would require approximately x^2 extra calculations performed. Meaning more lag. ---------------------------------------------- I support skill queues |
Talio ZomB
|
Posted - 2009.02.03 08:21:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Talio ZomB on 03/02/2009 08:25:12 I would suggest something less obstructive, less intrusive, less of a breach to your freedom.
For ever 10 ships over 60 (for examples sake) The group lose 10% scan res, scan range, The group lose 10% agility and take 10% longer to achieve warp,
lets say up to a maximum of 30% loss, or let the penalty have a stacking penalty so as to not leave a group with no targeting(does that makes sense?? lol)
Excuses could be something along the lines of constructive/destructive interference on sensers, and warp bubbles. |
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.03 08:58:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Dasfry on 03/02/2009 08:58:46 The problem comes down to the game making it far to easy to call a target.
In a RL war, for example when tanks where fighting other tanks.
The military didn't call out and say everyone attack the tank driver, Mohammed Abrahem. They said attack that T-80 tank group. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation
Military Tactics |
Severice
Crushed Ambitions
|
Posted - 2009.02.03 09:41:00 -
[7]
Remote barrier generation is just stupid. A you're asking for abuse. B. Pick another target, most ships can target 5 at least C. In large blobs you can pretty much insta pop a ship before anything can be done to help him out. So all it will do is allow people to abuse it. Good job.
2. ECM all ready exists. It doesn't work like that. An ECM that did work like would be called an "ECM BURST" which all ready exists. The closest you could get would be an "ECM FEED BACK PULSE" which would break a lock. However, that is the point of the "ECM BURST".
3. Forcing a ship to lock you does not force it to shoot at you. Even if you had enough ships forcing locks to break up cohesion they would just get shot first. Also what happens if i've allready targetd my max number of targets? your modules do nothing. So we all target up everyone kill him and target the next guy before you can force us to target you. negated. ECM is bad enough without forcing us to watch other players control our ships completely. Next thing you know you'll be wondering why your heavy drones and guns are all trying to kill the septer with a sacrifice module while concord shows up to ask what the hell you were thinking.
As far as LOS goes, have you actually looked at the eve interface and the game while fighting? Spaceships are small and space is big. I have never been in a fight in which i felt LoS was an issue. 300 man fleet fights are done in staggered columns with both sides aligned to a pos. You have 3 dimentions to place ships in to avoid shooting each other. They remind me of musketeers in a lot of ways. They line up and shoot at eachother. Not a lot of problems there.
|
Maceross
MicroFunks
|
Posted - 2009.02.03 09:53:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Maceross on 03/02/2009 09:53:55
Originally by: Severice
2. ECM all ready exists. It doesn't work like that. An ECM that did work like would be called an "ECM BURST" which all ready exists. The closest you could get would be an "ECM FEED BACK PULSE" which would break a lock. However, that is the point of the "ECM BURST".
3. Forcing a ship to lock you does not force it to shoot at you. Even if you had enough ships forcing locks to break up cohesion they would just get shot first. Also what happens if i've allready targetd my max number of targets? your modules do nothing. So we all target up everyone kill him and target the next guy before you can force us to target you. negated. ECM is bad enough without forcing us to watch other players control our ships completely. Next thing you know you'll be wondering why your heavy drones and guns are all trying to kill the septer with a sacrifice module while concord shows up to ask what the hell you were thinking.
Thanks for the feedback guys negative or otherwise! Sevrice I get the feeling you misunderstood me here:
2. ECM like this doesnt exist, i mean it as something a friendly ship can direct at a friendly ship to break the locks of a fleet targetting him from x km away. Not ECM burst which is completely different.
3. With regards to this i never said youd get a forced lock on the diverting ship, just it would take some damage in leiu of the one you are shooting at.
I had another idea for people to slaughter too :)
4. Sensor Ghosting, your ship can generate sensor ghosts (with a module) which have a very small chance of making any ship targetting you target the ghost instead. This chance is increased significantly the more ships that target you. so if your up against a small gang of 5-10 its almost not noticable but when you have a 80 people targetting you a good proportion of that will be shooting at nothing and will have to manually retarget once they realise they have been duped.
Also i think Dasfry has a very good point, but I honestly cant think of a way of getting round it without making the overview crappy.
|
Hugh Ruka
Exploratio et Industria Morispatia
|
Posted - 2009.02.03 10:21:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Dasfry Edited by: Dasfry on 03/02/2009 08:58:46 The problem comes down to the game making it far to easy to call a target.
In a RL war, for example when tanks where fighting other tanks.
The military didn't call out and say everyone attack the tank driver, Mohammed Abrahem. They said attack that T-80 tank group.
now forget WWII for a while and come to the modern age of JDAMs and laser designated targets ... that's actualy a step up from actual EVE options for target calling. --- SIG --- CSM: your support is needed ! |
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.03 11:18:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Dasfry on 03/02/2009 11:18:51
Originally by: Hugh Ruka come to the modern age of JDAMs and laser designated targets ...
JDAM's are more for Airforce bombers with specific mission targets, as opposed to Navy gang/fleet warfare where the target is another Navy gang/fleet. |
|
Hugh Ruka
Exploratio et Industria Morispatia
|
Posted - 2009.02.03 15:03:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Dasfry Edited by: Dasfry on 03/02/2009 11:18:51
Originally by: Hugh Ruka come to the modern age of JDAMs and laser designated targets ...
JDAM's are more for Airforce bombers with specific mission targets, as opposed to Navy gang/fleet warfare where the target is another Navy gang/fleet.
word play ...
the main theme is remote target designator ... and all that is possible with our science. space **** however have to rely on target name calling ... I mean "target painter" is the right name for such a module, it just does crap nothing usefull in the game
|
Maceross
MicroFunks
|
Posted - 2009.02.03 15:52:00 -
[12]
a bit off topic but I gotta say it would be handy just to have a quick drag and drop style firing list that updates realtime to the rest of the fleet. Especially if you can assign a couple of categories like heavy and support and designate where each element of your fleet should be prioritising their firepower... actually so perhaps not offtopic afterall, just a tangent.
so itd work by dragging contacts off the overview into their relevant columns. youd still have to be on the ball to catch warpin/outs and enemy ships getting range etc. but itd make it more intuitive.
|
Psihius
Caldari Atomic Scrapyard
|
Posted - 2009.02.03 16:16:00 -
[13]
Hm, target painter, especially when 2 fitted, takes down frigs with Heavy Missiles, especially Assault Heavy Missiles, pretty easy (I don't know what I would do without target painters). So just train missiles and see for your self :) |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |