These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Fighters and Off Grid assist

First post
Author
Petrified
Grimm Hounds
SONS of BANE
#201 - 2015-01-06 13:02:31 UTC
I suppose for any off-grid support issues to be fixed CCP will have to redefine the grid itself since the grid is of fixed size but can be extended via adding additional grids. That or simply apply control/assignment range to a fixed distance from the ship. That could also apply to boosting ships.

CCP could also ensure a force field for a POS goes up with the on lining of the POS. If a password is not supplied, some hilarity could be had with applying a default of 1234. ;)

Of course, that may ultimately be part of changing how POSes operate in the near future anyways. Imagine a POS without a force field.

Before you continue hounding CCP regarding assignment of fighters, do recall they are lowering the scan resolution for fighters and bombers. Read: longer lock periods - especially noticeable against small craft.

Cloaking is the closest thing to a "Pause Game" button one can get while in space.

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.

Penna Bianca
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#202 - 2015-01-06 13:10:51 UTC
Petrified wrote:
I suppose for any off-grid support issues to be fixed CCP will have to redefine the grid itself since the grid is of fixed size but can be extended via adding additional grids. That or simply apply control/assignment range to a fixed distance from the ship. That could also apply to boosting ships.

CCP could also ensure a force field for a POS goes up with the on lining of the POS. If a password is not supplied, some hilarity could be had with applying a default of 1234. ;)

Of course, that may ultimately be part of changing how POSes operate in the near future anyways. Imagine a POS without a force field.

Before you continue hounding CCP regarding assignment of fighters, do recall they are lowering the scan resolution for fighters and bombers. Read: longer lock periods - especially noticeable against small craft.


A simple session timer for onlining the pos will fix that. Want to be stupid and take down pos shield just to raise it up than add timer something like 3-5min.
Petrified
Grimm Hounds
SONS of BANE
#203 - 2015-01-06 13:36:47 UTC
Penna Bianca wrote:
Petrified wrote:
I suppose for any off-grid support issues to be fixed CCP will have to redefine the grid itself since the grid is of fixed size but can be extended via adding additional grids. That or simply apply control/assignment range to a fixed distance from the ship. That could also apply to boosting ships.

CCP could also ensure a force field for a POS goes up with the on lining of the POS. If a password is not supplied, some hilarity could be had with applying a default of 1234. ;)

Of course, that may ultimately be part of changing how POSes operate in the near future anyways. Imagine a POS without a force field.

Before you continue hounding CCP regarding assignment of fighters, do recall they are lowering the scan resolution for fighters and bombers. Read: longer lock periods - especially noticeable against small craft.


A simple session timer for onlining the pos will fix that. Want to be stupid and take down pos shield just to raise it up than add timer something like 3-5min.


Actually, If the POS is already online, it has gone through the onlining process. But the force field will automatically come back up even if you offline then online the POS. From memory I think you have to take the POS down first then go through the anchoring process again before you can get away with an onlined POS having no shield.

It means that, unless your opponent has several POSes just sitting there anchored, onlined, and never having the POS shield up, their strat works that initial time you warp to their POS and you have exhausted their ability to 'safely' assist another player.

Things like this are what make EVE so interesting: you don't know what you might be facing. You can fit for one set of circumstances and then find yourself prodded because of another set that intrudes on you.

Quite frankly I think the assignment of fighters/bombers is simply one of those extensions and seeing it removed would a further smothering and homogenizing of the game.

Cloaking is the closest thing to a "Pause Game" button one can get while in space.

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.

Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#204 - 2015-01-06 13:45:17 UTC
Penna,

First, please, chill the **** out. Stop calling us bads, shitlords, gankers and all that crap. We're just raising something that we think is a problem with the game, and frankly I did it pretty maturely. If you can't discuss it like an adult you're in the wrong game.

Next, re this:

Quote:
In addition you mention this is a problem on a large scale. It's not I can think of 2 times in one year that we had massive number of people assign fighters from pos and since you could assist fighters from carriers I maybe once ran into someone having assigned fighters and I PVP all across EVE.


This is a problem people encounter daily. It will of course depend on your style of PvP whether you are affected by it; it's us small gang and solo pilots that bear the brunt. Don't believe me? Go check some killboards. From the amount of you in this thread opposing it, I'm guessing if I look up Kadeshi on eve-kill, Einherji is gonna be pretty high on the list of weapon systems used.

All the rest of your points, about the time it takes to get a super, about bumping them of the POS and simply leaving system have been addressed in the thread already. Although I will say that this:

Quote:
The only rational fix and even that is pretty crippling has been posted by colera deldios. Simply have assigned fighters only have base stats instead and not get bonuses from active modules while assigned meaning no boosts in dps or tracking or speed from the mods only what the hull gives..


Would also be acceptable to me. I don't think Fighters should be able to be assigned off grid, but given that before those modules affected them they were defanged to the point that this wasn't a problem I'd be happy to go back to that situation instead.
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#205 - 2015-01-06 13:48:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Rroff
Petrified wrote:

Actually, If the POS is already online, it has gone through the onlining process. But the force field will automatically come back up even if you offline then online the POS. From memory I think you have to take the POS down first then go through the anchoring process again before you can get away with an onlined POS having no shield.

It means that, unless your opponent has several POSes just sitting there anchored, onlined, and never having the POS shield up, their strat works that initial time you warp to their POS and you have exhausted their ability to 'safely' assist another player.

Things like this are what make EVE so interesting: you don't know what you might be facing. You can fit for one set of circumstances and then find yourself prodded because of another set that intrudes on you.

Quite frankly I think the assignment of fighters/bombers is simply one of those extensions and seeing it removed would a further smothering and homogenizing of the game.


You can also do *things* with fuel - though the setup time after a reset isn't insignificant but most of the people doing this have a few POSes scattered around a region/system and bounce between them anyway so as to minimise the risk of ever being caught or ambushed (which is pretty much non-existent unless they screw up badly or get lazy).

Warping to their POS is easier said than done - though you do have a chance with a covert ops or similar but generally they'll see that and adjust for it, sure once you've got a cloaky bouncing around the system they are more likely not to engage your other ships with fighters and safe up the super/carriers but that is easier to write on a forum than do in day to day roaming.

Most of the other things about jumping back out again, warping off, outrunning fighters, etc. just shows plain ignorance of what is being done or an attempt to shift focus from the issue.

The fighters themselves aren't the problem (though some people don't like them and/or crying about them) the problem is that people are able to contribute significant capabilities to the field without realistically putting themselves in harms way at all. Just having a few minutes delay on the FF coming up while not ideal from knock on effect perspective would go a long way towards resolving that issue - sitting on the edge of the FF isn't much better but atleast there is a realistic albeit slim chance of catching carriers that way, though most supers would get back inside the FF easily before stuff that could bump or web them could turn up.
Daide Vondrichnov
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#206 - 2015-01-06 13:50:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Daide Vondrichnov
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Daide Vondrichnov wrote:


Carriers's fighters dps are "fine", super's aren't, but throwing fighters without risks is already a broken mechanic so...


there is no case where you can do this with out risk. thats not me saying i don't think there is a problem just not as big of one as people seem to think


Well the main fact is that those carriers / supers are assining their drones at the edge of a forcefield, it means that you'll never be able to catch them.

So yeah there is no risks.

So actually most of the guys which don't want to see this change happen are low balls which are happy to have this i win button in case of aggressors in their systems, for exemple you can see the kadeshits complaining and calling us bad when can't undock while they haven't their fighters supports.
Petrified
Grimm Hounds
SONS of BANE
#207 - 2015-01-06 14:10:26 UTC
Rroff wrote:
Petrified wrote:

Actually, If the POS is already online, it has gone through the onlining process. But the force field will automatically come back up even if you offline then online the POS. From memory I think you have to take the POS down first then go through the anchoring process again before you can get away with an onlined POS having no shield.

It means that, unless your opponent has several POSes just sitting there anchored, onlined, and never having the POS shield up, their strat works that initial time you warp to their POS and you have exhausted their ability to 'safely' assist another player.

Things like this are what make EVE so interesting: you don't know what you might be facing. You can fit for one set of circumstances and then find yourself prodded because of another set that intrudes on you.

Quite frankly I think the assignment of fighters/bombers is simply one of those extensions and seeing it removed would a further smothering and homogenizing of the game.


You can also do *things* with fuel - though the setup time after a reset isn't insignificant but most of the people doing this have a few POSes scattered around a region/system and bounce between them anyway so as to minimise the risk of ever being caught or ambushed (which is pretty much non-existent unless they screw up badly or get lazy).

Warping to their POS is easier said than done - though you do have a chance with a covert ops or similar but generally they'll see that and adjust for it, sure once you've got a cloaky bouncing around the system they are more likely not to engage your other ships with fighters and safe up the super/carriers but that is easier to write on a forum than do in day to day roaming.

Most of the other things about jumping back out again, warping off, outrunning fighters, etc. just shows plain ignorance of what is being done or an attempt to shift focus from the issue.

The fighters themselves aren't the problem (though some people don't like them and/or crying about them) the problem is that people are able to contribute significant capabilities to the field without realistically putting themselves in harms way at all. Just having a few minutes delay on the FF coming up while not ideal from knock on effect perspective would resolve most of that issue - sitting on the edge of the FF isn't much better but atleast there is a realistic albeit slim chance of catching carriers that way, though most supers would get back inside the FF easily before stuff that could bump or web them could turn up.



Editing on an iPad can be annoying....

Nothing should ever be risk free. I agree there. But perhaps the issue is not so much in drone assignment than in POS FF mechanics. Perhaps that is what needs to be changed - I've always found the force field mechanic annoying given its lack of use on Stations.

In the end, if you are trailing a fleet designed to address carriers/suppers then once the issue with POS FF is addressed your only limitation is finding that carrier.

Think of it this way: your issue is similar to hobo jamming. The fix was not overly complicated and did little to impact dictors - the warp probe dies when they dock. CCP just really needs to fix the POS to prevent the equivalent of hobo jamming via carrier and FF. It would also fix boosting of any kind from a POS (rorqual pilots won't like it). Essentially you have to dock at a POS to have the benefit of it's shields and any aggression timer will prevent you from so doing.

Cloaking is the closest thing to a "Pause Game" button one can get while in space.

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.

Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
#208 - 2015-01-06 14:47:45 UTC
Petrified wrote:
Rroff wrote:
Petrified wrote:

Actually, If the POS is already online, it has gone through the onlining process. But the force field will automatically come back up even if you offline then online the POS. From memory I think you have to take the POS down first then go through the anchoring process again before you can get away with an onlined POS having no shield.

It means that, unless your opponent has several POSes just sitting there anchored, onlined, and never having the POS shield up, their strat works that initial time you warp to their POS and you have exhausted their ability to 'safely' assist another player.

Things like this are what make EVE so interesting: you don't know what you might be facing. You can fit for one set of circumstances and then find yourself prodded because of another set that intrudes on you.

Quite frankly I think the assignment of fighters/bombers is simply one of those extensions and seeing it removed would a further smothering and homogenizing of the game.


You can also do *things* with fuel - though the setup time after a reset isn't insignificant but most of the people doing this have a few POSes scattered around a region/system and bounce between them anyway so as to minimise the risk of ever being caught or ambushed (which is pretty much non-existent unless they screw up badly or get lazy).

Warping to their POS is easier said than done - though you do have a chance with a covert ops or similar but generally they'll see that and adjust for it, sure once you've got a cloaky bouncing around the system they are more likely not to engage your other ships with fighters and safe up the super/carriers but that is easier to write on a forum than do in day to day roaming.

Most of the other things about jumping back out again, warping off, outrunning fighters, etc. just shows plain ignorance of what is being done or an attempt to shift focus from the issue.

The fighters themselves aren't the problem (though some people don't like them and/or crying about them) the problem is that people are able to contribute significant capabilities to the field without realistically putting themselves in harms way at all. Just having a few minutes delay on the FF coming up while not ideal from knock on effect perspective would resolve most of that issue - sitting on the edge of the FF isn't much better but atleast there is a realistic albeit slim chance of catching carriers that way, though most supers would get back inside the FF easily before stuff that could bump or web them could turn up.



Editing on an iPad can be annoying....

Nothing should ever be risk free. I agree there. But perhaps the issue is not so much in drone assignment than in POS FF mechanics. Perhaps that is what needs to be changed - I've always found the force field mechanic annoying given its lack of use on Stations.

In the end, if you are trailing a fleet designed to address carriers/suppers then once the issue with POS FF is addressed your only limitation is finding that carrier.

Think of it this way: your issue is similar to hobo jamming. The fix was not overly complicated and did little to impact dictors - the warp probe dies when they dock. CCP just really needs to fix the POS to prevent the equivalent of hobo jamming via carrier and FF. It would also fix boosting of any kind from a POS (rorqual pilots won't like it). Essentially you have to dock at a POS to have the benefit of it's shields and any aggression timer will prevent you from so doing.



The issue there is POS's have needed a change and CCP has admitted they do for years now and nothing has changed. It easier to go about it a different way than ask for POS's to be changed Those poor mechanics and functions will out live the game.
Tung Yoggi
SnaiLs aNd FroGs
#209 - 2015-01-06 16:01:58 UTC
I'm a forum fighter and i've been assigned to Daide to add some dps to his claim. Sadly my scan res has been nerfed very recently and can't lock HiFi posters fast enough; knowing them a wee bit, they are either docked or will form up 35 posters and then accuse you of running away from a perfectly decent forum fight.
Daide Vondrichnov
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#210 - 2015-01-06 16:05:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Daide Vondrichnov
Tung Yoggi wrote:
I'm a forum fighter and i've been assigned to Daide to add some dps to his claim. Sadly my scan res has been nerfed very recently and can't lock HiFi posters fast enough; knowing them a wee bit, they are either docked or will form up 35 posters and then accuse you of running away from a perfectly decent forum fight.


CSM Corbexx is already doomsdaying this in island, i guess that our job here is over.
Korenchkin
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#211 - 2015-01-06 16:07:37 UTC
Hicksimus wrote:
Capital ships are already VERY blob oriented, removing the feature that makes them appeal to the small guys is NOT a healthy change. Yeah, I've used my Archon a few times lately and fair enough call bias but my Talos costs half my flight of fighters, applies DPS to subcaps better and has more overall DPS than the 5 I'm delegating to my alt.....almost as much raw DPS as 10 fighters.

Edit: Also worth mention is that I have a 2400m/s VNI with 850DPS and 40k ehp that can assist from on grid and not fear capture by the types of ships I'm fighting. I fail to see the problem with my carrier.


That's fine, that's using a carrier as it's intended. I don't think people are really up in arms about that, in fact quite the opposite for us. We've had pvp fit carriers enter engagements in null before, either on the wormhole or further away. They usually make for great fights, whether we've won, lost or it just got to be a standoff. We even had a great fight when mutliple carriers AND a Nyx got dumped on our small gang and stood our ground: http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/1kra05/br_when_a_solo_caracal_roam_turns_into_a_nyx_gank/ (granted, we called for help when they brought more capitals than we had cruisers on field)

It's when you start gank fitting it with a paper tank and parking it so you can use a "lol, nope" insta-forcefield-invulnerability-I-win button that it starts to smell a bit..... exploity. I imagine if something similar happened in an online FPS, say, camping in a closet with a sniper rifle able to shoot all the way across the level without needing line of sight, and you could make yourself invulnerable simply by shutting the closet door, it would get patched out prettty fast.
Ikslagor
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#212 - 2015-01-06 16:17:02 UTC
How is this even still a discussion? You want to apply your DPS, you should be on grid with the target. Period. End of Story.
Daide Vondrichnov
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#213 - 2015-01-06 16:20:39 UTC
Ikslagor wrote:
How is this even still a discussion? You want to apply your DPS, you should be on grid with the target. Period. End of Story.


They dont want to let their "I win" button go away so they're bitching and we're trolling them, pretty fun when u're probing you should try.
Samuel Wess
Doomheim
#214 - 2015-01-17 22:35:31 UTC
It's same as offgrid boosting, people will just stop using those accounts if the feature will be removed, cause nobody
will bring a solo super on the gate into a small gang.

Walk into the club like "What up? I got a big cockpit!"

Jolly Archer
Perkone
Caldari State
#215 - 2015-01-18 14:52:18 UTC
Nerf assist fighters
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#216 - 2015-01-18 15:44:02 UTC
Jolly Archer wrote:
Nerf assist fighters


As far as fighters go just give em titan style sig scaling on weapons so they can't out damage the appropriate sized drones easily when used against sub battleship sized ships. (Sure they are frigate/cruiser sized vessels but they don't have a pod pilot at the helm directing gunnery ;)).

The main issue isn't fighters themselves its more the fact that someone can PVP ongrid in this manner while the investment that is putting the significant resources into the fight is pretty much immune to repercussion for all realistic intents and purposes.
Ghaustyl Kathix
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#217 - 2015-01-18 16:02:12 UTC
Adrie Atticus wrote:
But they did put 200M of assets on the field
That amount of money is basically a HAC, and is quite a lot more effective than a single HAC.

Regarding similarities to an off-grid booster, that doesn't really compare. My corp's has occasionally used a properly-tanked booster for small-gang roams (and is usually on-grid for fights on gates). It's usually the tankiest thing in the fleet and doesn't attract as much attention as a capital would. If off-grid boosts were removed, then people would just properly tank their boosters and put them on-grid.
Suitonia
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#218 - 2015-01-18 22:14:59 UTC
Against an attentive Carrier/Super pilot you can't kill fighters anyway, they disappear even if you have fighters tackled/scrammed. The super just recalls them and reassigns them, doing so costs 15 seconds of DPS~ roughly from that fighter (around 225 DPS) but saves the 20 million isk investment, the best way to think of each fighter is a max gank Taranis with no tackle, that has infinite warp strength and 10x the EHP. For 20 million isk I would love a Taranis that goes twice as fast, can't be tackled with 3x large shield extenders worth of extra HP.

There aren't many small roaming gangs that have the ships with the potential to alpha a 6km/s Einherji with 100m sig (Which is about as hard to hit as most Interceptors in the game), while also not getting one-shot by said Einherjis. You can track them when they are shooting some guy, but good luck having any ship in your small gang tank 3k DPS and 11.6k Alpha. they one-shot almost every single frigate/destroyer hull in the game, and gank-fit cruisers/attack BCs, while being fast enough to catch them, and able to track them, you require about 3-4 Scimitars to perma tank fighters (If you can survive the alpha). This is a stock T2 fit Thanatos we are talking about which costs only 800 million isk after insurance, including the fighters, should you, in the incredibly unlikely case, lose it. The reality is that a Skynet Thanatos actually costs about the same as a Tech 3 OGB booster alt does. While being significantly safer than one.

Here is a p. Cheap (for a super) Skynet Nyx Which gives over 2k DPS to up to 3 ships, which normally are dirt cheap disposable Stiletto/Hyena/Atron etc. Nyx Einherjis have the same effective hitpoints of a tanked battlecruiser, while being harder to hit than an interceptor until they're on a target, they can alpha almost every single nano Cruiser and below in the game, and 2 shot HACs and Recons, with almost 25k Alpha.

The risk of these ships dying is incredibly low. A properly fit POS hugging Skynet Carrier sits on the edge of the POS Force Field with a good bookmark, You have Agility rigs and MWD on, If anything comes in to tackle you, you reapproach the POS shields, and with a good bookmark you only have to clear about 40m or so, which takes about 4-5 seconds for a Thanatos in a gang. I have been part of a group who did this extensively in lowsec, and even had titans dropped on the Carriers multiple times, the Thanatos made it back into the forcefield and survived, the chance of anything realistically stopping you and killing you is incredibly low, even a Triple Web, Triple scan res rigged, triple signal amplifier Daredevil landing on your carrier and webbing you within 1-2 sec is not enough to stop you because of the Carriers high mass will allow you to slowboat into the POS, and again, carriers that the group I have been a part of have easily survived in this scenario with Cyno web daredevil which dropped 4 dreads (The daredevil died in about 10 seconds to the POS guns).

In null-sec this is even safer because you can cynojam the system, (I have seen multiple supers in dead-end ratting pockets in Delve/Querious/Esotoria) assigning fighters in this manner. A properly fit tower will shred almost any gang without capitals. Especially if they don't have 20 logis and <100 dudes which is normally what is required to take down a tower like this.

I would again, like to iterate, that even if you go through incredibly high effort, high risk (You are risking your own capitals to be esclated on at a hostile tower) for most likely little to no reward (The lowsec group I run with have never lost a Thanatos even though we have had it dropped on about 5 times, twice with titans). Then the cost of the Thanatos pilot after insurance is 800 million isk, which is equilvilant to a Faction Ratting Battleship, an Off-grid booster including mindlink, most semi-pimped T3 Cruisers, or a single Plex. And it only leaves about 400 million isk in the best case (Fighters+DCUs drop) for the enemy.

I think the fighter assist mechanic has to go because it's too easy to exploit it. Even if you add POS restrictions, it's possible to make this Thanatos Unprobable, just swap MWD for 1 ECCM, roll with HG Spurs, An unprobable Tengu with RECCM and Xinstinct booster. this adds an extra ship into the mix, and about another 1.2b of cost (Tengu + HG Spurs), but requires anyone to find you to need full set of MG Virtues on maxed T3/Covert Ops, which almost the entirety of small gangs don't have at their disposal, and would probably only bring if they can be assed to kill you if you used this unprobable trick many times and had you on their radar, the enemy needs to spend more on implants than for your loss in the worst case, and they must risk those implants, especially in 0.0, and still have the right gang/ships to kill the Thanatos.

You can also exploit this in another cheaper way, although it requires more effort. By probing a Signature, or easier, a mission (although this is limited to lowsec and NPC 0.0 constellations), burning in a 10mn MWD Confessor or a fast interceptor to the edge of the deadspace, about 15,000-20,000 off. You can test by just having gang mate/alt inside the plex/mission cloaked try to warp to you, if they get message about not being able to warp then you are not far enough, check this at 15,000km every 500km or so, once you are able to be warped too, bookmark the spot and burn back towards the mission, checking until you have a bookmark about 3-4km off the edge off the deadspace area, then, you bring your carrier alt into the bookmark, and slowboat it towards the mission/plex area, once inside, just do preliminary check to make sure if a gangmate trys to warp to it they land in the plex, then you're good to go. Even if a Snaked Linked 10mn Confessor/Malediction or something finds your mission/plex it takes them over 20 mins

Contributer to Eve is Easy:  https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos

Solo PvP is possible with a 20 day old character! :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvOB4KXYk-o

Suitonia
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#219 - 2015-01-18 22:30:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Suitonia
Also more risk free tactics, slowly edge your way out of a POS shield in your Thanatos, assign your fighters, then warp to friendly POS that is a long warp away, assisted fighters will continue to perform even while your carrier is in-warp and invulnerable! a 50 au warp will take around 60 seconds in a Thanatos allowing your fighters to continue to assist your gang while you are invulnerable in your warp tunnel landing in a Friendly POS, where you can then eek your way out, recall, reassign, then warp back to the friendly POS you started from, with your fighters fighting, and again, completely invulnerable and risk free!

I think I've provided enough evidence why fighter assign has to go and completely breaks Risk:Effort:Reward

Make it on-grid only, still allow fighters to follow into warp. Fixed.

Contributer to Eve is Easy:  https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos

Solo PvP is possible with a 20 day old character! :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvOB4KXYk-o

afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#220 - 2015-01-18 22:55:40 UTC
Excellent posts above.