These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Rubicon 1.3] Drone Assist change

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#821 - 2014-02-07 23:21:52 UTC
i mean it was taxing enough to juggle the HP of my fighter bombers, the cycling of my reps on the titans next to me, continuously resetting my fighter bombers to keep them applying damage, and the fps monitor to ensure that my client was actually working

being an incursion runner must be hard

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Dave Stark
#822 - 2014-02-07 23:23:08 UTC
Andski wrote:
i mean it was taxing enough to juggle the HP of my fighter bombers, the cycling of my reps on the titans next to me, continuously resetting my fighter bombers to keep them applying damage, and the fps monitor to ensure that my client was actually working

being an incursion runner must be hard


i'll go and get my rain coat. I guess now i know why half of england is flooded.
Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#823 - 2014-02-07 23:24:18 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
i'm sorry, are you here to give feedback on the proposed changes or am i going to go and have to get my rain coat while you continue to cry and whine?


if you haven't noticed i'm calling you out on your BS about your life as an incursion runner being so hard because oh no CCP lapsed in their constant coddling of players that don't even pay their own subscriptions because as it turns out they have to occasionally act with other interests in mind than yours

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#824 - 2014-02-07 23:24:43 UTC
Andski wrote:
i mean it was taxing enough to juggle the HP of my fighter bombers, the cycling of my reps on the titans next to me, continuously resetting my fighter bombers to keep them applying damage, and the fps monitor to ensure that my client was actually working

being an incursion runner must be hard


So basically sitting there anf making sure stuff you already clicked was clicked...

Totally see the high amount of attention is needed for a capital tidi brawl

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#825 - 2014-02-07 23:27:47 UTC
Andski wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
i'm sorry, are you here to give feedback on the proposed changes or am i going to go and have to get my rain coat while you continue to cry and whine?


if you haven't noticed i'm calling you out on your BS about your life as an incursion runner being so hard because oh no CCP lapsed in their constant coddling of players that don't even pay their own subscriptions because as it turns out they have to occasionally act with
other interests in mind than yours


The ponit is incursion runners dont use domi and dont cause lag. Rise said those are the only reasons for the nerf.

So again why should the majority of eve players have to pay for unbalanced 0.0 warfare?


There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Dave Stark
#826 - 2014-02-07 23:28:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
Andski wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
i'm sorry, are you here to give feedback on the proposed changes or am i going to go and have to get my rain coat while you continue to cry and whine?


if you haven't noticed i'm calling you out on your BS about your life as an incursion runner being so hard because oh no CCP lapsed in their constant coddling of players that don't even pay their own subscriptions because as it turns out they have to occasionally act with other interests in mind than yours


i've noticed you've started attacking an argument i never made because you and the rest of the goons like to whine about whatever topic its that you've been told to whine about this month.

the only thing i've posted about is asking for clarification on the contradiction generated by the OP, nothing more nothing less.

since when were goons so pathetic and whiney? i'm sure you never used to be this.. well, pathetic.
Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#827 - 2014-02-07 23:32:49 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
The ponit is incursion runners dont use domi and dont cause lag. Rise said those are the only reasons for the nerf.

So again why should the majority of eve players have to pay for unbalanced 0.0 warfare?




i can turn that around and ask why 0.0 players, who are routinely responsible for the content that matters and attracts new players, should be penalized because CCP doesn't wish to trivially inconvenience the farming subset of the playerbase?

also goddamn your assumption that incursion runners are the "majority" screams entitlement and i am quite sure that more players regularly partake in 0.0 warfare than in incursion running

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#828 - 2014-02-07 23:51:26 UTC
Andski wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
The ponit is incursion runners dont use domi and dont cause lag. Rise said those are the only reasons for the nerf.

So again why should the majority of eve players have to pay for unbalanced 0.0 warfare?




i can turn that around and ask why 0.0 players, who are routinely responsible for the content that matters and attracts new players, should be penalized because CCP doesn't wish to trivially inconvenience the farming subset of the playerbase?

also goddamn your assumption that incursion runners are the "majority" screams entitlement and i am quite sure that more players regularly partake in 0.0 warfare than in incursion running


You said high sec incursion runners. High sec supports 80 percent of eve players you are damn right they are entitled not to have thier **** ****** with because of a war in 0.0

Imo nothing is wrong with drone assist. What is wrong is ease of power projection and lack of multiple grids for a fight.

If there were strategic items that all had to caught at the same time this would greatly reduce lag as 4k ships would be spread on multiple grids and systems.

Fix the symptoms or else we'll just end with with game killing lag due to the un restricted blob.

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Fix Sov
#829 - 2014-02-07 23:54:50 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
You said high sec incursion runners. High sec supports 80 percent of eve players you are damn right they are entitled not to have thier **** ****** with because of a war in 0.0

Nice slippery slope argument. All of hisec aren't running incursions, in fact it's a fairly small minority of hisec which run incursions.

The current sov system is too heavily reliant on the defender saving systems by stuffing as many people as possible into the system for the final timer, instead of incentivizing attacking (and defending) multiple systems at the same time by splitting their forces into multiple fleets and using actual intelligence/strategy. This must change.
Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#830 - 2014-02-08 00:03:37 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
You said high sec incursion runners. High sec supports 80 percent of eve players you are damn right they are entitled not to have thier **** ****** with because of a war in 0.0


Oh, are the hisec incursion runners the ones keeping Jita stocked with the ships we need? Or the modules? Are they the ones keeping Jita stocked with minerals for the large-scale industrialists who build the ships and for the supercapital builders?

No, they're not, so let's dispense with that silly notion.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Sala Cameron
Free-Space-Ranger
#831 - 2014-02-08 00:12:40 UTC
small post from me to even out the retardedness in this thread ATLEAST a little bit:

Pretty much all 14 of the CSM were in favor of a drone assign nerf for OBVIOUS gameplay reasons, there were only a few differences in how the nerf should look like. In the end, CCP decided to go with a hard cap of 50. It might not be the prettiest option, but exceptions are never pretty. Why they went with it? You can read that in goddamn post #1 and it makes sense. If someone could link me the post explaining the particular problem with Incursions and the hardcap, I would be thankful as I am not interested into reading through of 40 pages of uselessness.

Almost nobody used sentries for PvP 2+ years ago with their current stats because of their obvious disadvantages. Drone Damage Amplifiers got released - some ships became somewhat useful, especially shield tanked drone ships like the Gila. Slowcats were possible all the time, but the concept was underdeveloped like most fleet concepts are in their first stage. Then the Dominix change came. We even had a goddamn entire tournament centered around this change and how it causes problems, I can't figure out why everyone is bringing this up again and again ESPECIALLY after 6+ months even though this problem like multiple others (DAMPS, BOMBERS etc.) are known to CCP, the CSM and pretty much all players for a long time already. Do I want those changes quickly? Sure I do, especially when 1-2 things are no-brainers for me. If you're playing for some time already, you know that CCP devs take their time for changes, it will be no different here and I have no clue why anyone thinks it would be different.

But hey, stay classy guys. Based on dev reactions I am sure ranting about drones and other stuff in the ESS and other threads is surely gonna work out well for everyone and will speed up the process, lmao.
Junkie Beverage
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#832 - 2014-02-08 00:14:00 UTC
Desert Ice78 wrote:
Sipphakta en Gravonere wrote:
Desert Ice78 wrote:
Read: Make it so that goons win every time.


We won the war even with the current mechanics.

No. No you didn't. This war is still very much on. Whats going to happen now is the CFC is going to sit and ship spin and blue ball every chance they get until eventually your pet dev's give you exactly what you've been crying for since the start of this year.

Then you'll come out and fight.

been rollin' caps and subcaps ever since about 16-18 hours a day shooting pos and roaming gangs

when might we expect you?
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#833 - 2014-02-08 00:53:41 UTC
Sala Cameron wrote:
small post from me to even out the retardedness in this thread ATLEAST a little bit:

Pretty much all 14 of the CSM were in favor of a drone assign nerf for OBVIOUS gameplay reasons, there were only a few differences in how the nerf should look like. In the end, CCP decided to go with a hard cap of 50. It might not be the prettiest option, but exceptions are never pretty. Why they went with it? You can read that in goddamn post #1 and it makes sense. If someone could link me the post explaining the particular problem with Incursions and the hardcap, I would be thankful as I am not interested into reading through of 40 pages of uselessness.

Almost nobody used sentries for PvP 2+ years ago with their current stats because of their obvious disadvantages. Drone Damage Amplifiers got released - some ships became somewhat useful, especially shield tanked drone ships like the Gila. Slowcats were possible all the time, but the concept was underdeveloped like most fleet concepts are in their first stage. Then the Dominix change came. We even had a goddamn entire tournament centered around this change and how it causes problems, I can't figure out why everyone is bringing this up again and again ESPECIALLY after 6+ months even though this problem like multiple others (DAMPS, BOMBERS etc.) are known to CCP, the CSM and pretty much all players for a long time already. Do I want those changes quickly? Sure I do, especially when 1-2 things are no-brainers for me. If you're playing for some time already, you know that CCP devs take their time for changes, it will be no different here and I have no clue why anyone thinks it would be different.

But hey, stay classy guys. Based on dev reactions I am sure ranting about drones and other stuff in the ESS and other threads is surely gonna work out well for everyone and will speed up the process, lmao.


Sentries themselves got adjusted a good bit just by the omni-changes.
Just a small thing: Isn't a single Domi some 2.1-2.4k volley with gardes? So that would limit the max alpha of a drone bunny to <125k therm Bear
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#834 - 2014-02-08 01:02:08 UTC
Sala Cameron wrote:
small post from me to even out the retardedness in this thread ATLEAST a little bit:

Pretty much all 14 of the CSM were in favor of a drone assign nerf for OBVIOUS gameplay reasons, there were only a few differences in how the nerf should look like. In the end, CCP decided to go with a hard cap of 50. It might not be the prettiest option, but exceptions are never pretty. Why they went with it? You can read that in goddamn post #1 and it makes sense. If someone could link me the post explaining the particular problem with Incursions and the hardcap, I would be thankful as I am not interested into reading through of 40 pages of uselessness.

Almost nobody used sentries for PvP 2+ years ago with their current stats because of their obvious disadvantages. Drone Damage Amplifiers got released - some ships became somewhat useful, especially shield tanked drone ships like the Gila. Slowcats were possible all the time, but the concept was underdeveloped like most fleet concepts are in their first stage. Then the Dominix change came. We even had a goddamn entire tournament centered around this change and how it causes problems, I can't figure out why everyone is bringing this up again and again ESPECIALLY after 6+ months even though this problem like multiple others (DAMPS, BOMBERS etc.) are known to CCP, the CSM and pretty much all players for a long time already. Do I want those changes quickly? Sure I do, especially when 1-2 things are no-brainers for me. If you're playing for some time already, you know that CCP devs take their time for changes, it will be no different here and I have no clue why anyone thinks it would be different.

But hey, stay classy guys. Based on dev reactions I am sure ranting about drones and other stuff in the ESS and other threads is surely gonna work out well for everyone and will speed up the process, lmao.


BASED on previous times rise and fozz rebalance they end up more then not with a version 2.0

Why not iterate and amend The idea like make it Mb based so per pilot you can only get max 1250Mb which is 50 heavy or sentries or 250 lights.

There is always room for amendment bro

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Madhero
Forsaken Forge
#835 - 2014-02-08 01:09:17 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Why 50? That still seems too much.
I can only control 5 drones from my ship natively, but for some reason I can use 50 from others?


At least is gives each Squad Commander something to do.
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
#836 - 2014-02-08 01:33:40 UTC
Zwo Zateki wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Zwo Zateki wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
There is no contradiction, simply the fact that the potential harms to incursions, while undesirable, were of considerably lower importance than the decided balance point for drone assist. In the end any negative effect is still negligible, at worse making a second drone bunny, so it really hold no weight against the primary goal.


the fact that there is a negative effect, regardless of negligibility is the exact contradiction.

What makes it infuriating is that they're bowing to nullsec grunts and break highsec playstyle at the same time. Why can't just CCP realise that nullsec is just a vocal minority, irrelevant for the most subscribers?


12,000 trials were started in the week after B-R.

No doubt this was because they all heard Incursions are so awesome and wanted to run them one day.

We'll see how many of those trials actually stay in EVE after they learn that pressing F1 in TiDi is utter bullshit.


With how much the Small population of Incursion Runners Cry, I expect most to eventually quit out of the game opening up more Bandwidth for those newer players to keep them out of TiDi. So this change solves two things... Lag induced by Drones and Wasted Bandwidth used by a group of people that have no affect on the game.... I support this.
dei'ro
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#837 - 2014-02-08 02:08:44 UTC  |  Edited by: dei'ro
dem drone assist tears

afraid of actually having to sit at your pc's?



edit:
i dont see how this changes anything, except that instead of someone firing your weapons for you, you actually have to lock something and press F1, making it nothing different to locking something and shooting it with any other weapon system.



edit2:
what if drone based doctrines didn't refer to the weapons you mainly use, but the pilots flying in said doctrines being mere drones slavishly following every order without having to think for themselves


***** getting pretty deep
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#838 - 2014-02-08 02:22:29 UTC
Lloyd Roses wrote:
Sala Cameron wrote:
small post from me to even out the retardedness in this thread ATLEAST a little bit:

Pretty much all 14 of the CSM were in favor of a drone assign nerf for OBVIOUS gameplay reasons, there were only a few differences in how the nerf should look like. In the end, CCP decided to go with a hard cap of 50. It might not be the prettiest option, but exceptions are never pretty. Why they went with it? You can read that in goddamn post #1 and it makes sense. If someone could link me the post explaining the particular problem with Incursions and the hardcap, I would be thankful as I am not interested into reading through of 40 pages of uselessness.

Almost nobody used sentries for PvP 2+ years ago with their current stats because of their obvious disadvantages. Drone Damage Amplifiers got released - some ships became somewhat useful, especially shield tanked drone ships like the Gila. Slowcats were possible all the time, but the concept was underdeveloped like most fleet concepts are in their first stage. Then the Dominix change came. We even had a goddamn entire tournament centered around this change and how it causes problems, I can't figure out why everyone is bringing this up again and again ESPECIALLY after 6+ months even though this problem like multiple others (DAMPS, BOMBERS etc.) are known to CCP, the CSM and pretty much all players for a long time already. Do I want those changes quickly? Sure I do, especially when 1-2 things are no-brainers for me. If you're playing for some time already, you know that CCP devs take their time for changes, it will be no different here and I have no clue why anyone thinks it would be different.

But hey, stay classy guys. Based on dev reactions I am sure ranting about drones and other stuff in the ESS and other threads is surely gonna work out well for everyone and will speed up the process, lmao.


Sentries themselves got adjusted a good bit just by the omni-changes.
Just a small thing: Isn't a single Domi some 2.1-2.4k volley with gardes? So that would limit the max alpha of a drone bunny to <125k therm Bear


Off by a factor of 5.

It's not 50 Domis, with 5 drones each. It's 10 Domis with 5 drones each.


Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
WK XI
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#839 - 2014-02-08 03:29:30 UTC
Maybe we can add a kind of new ships which can do drone assist, all other ship can not assist. Maybe new ships has all kind of sizes.
Chorianda
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#840 - 2014-02-08 03:44:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Chorianda
Sala Cameron wrote:
If someone could link me the post explaining the particular problem with Incursions and the hardcap, I would be thankful as I am not interested into reading through of 40 pages of uselessness.

Sala, Fleets for incursion HQ sites typically consist of 30 or so battleships, 6-10 logistics cruisers, and a t3 cruiser. The battleships assign their drones to the t3, which uses them to kill frigates while the battleships work on the larger ships. Typically, the t3 is controlling about 175 light drones. That's the use-case which CCP Rise says he wants to preserve. Surely you can see how a 50-drone limit would cause a problem here, right? It's not insurmountable, of course, but it IS a problem. Some may think that incursions SHOULD be made less efficient, and this change would certainly do that, but that's not what we're here to discuss, is it?

It seems that changing the limit based on the types of drones being controlled, while certainly more complicated to implement, would preserve this use-case while addressing the problem with massed sentry drones that needs fixing. Is it really that much more complicated to implement?