These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

SKYNET.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jori McKie
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#41 - 2015-02-20 13:28:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Jori McKie
War Kitten wrote:

I'm not sure the mechanic's existence is crippling your smallscale good fight there. The fact that the other guys don't want to engage anywhere but on their home turf where they have the carrier set up is crippling it. They don't want a goodfight, they want to kill anyone coming into their gate.

I tend to agree that perhaps off-grid assigned fighters/FB shouldn't get their ship fitting bonuses, in the same way that offgrid fleet boosts should DIAF too. But the ability to assign fighters/FB off grid is a good one and isn't the solution here.

But this isn't some huge unbalancing effect - you can't use this offensively to attack another system in sov unless the defenders have already lost the POS war, and you can't use it while roaming. I think the home-team should have the home-field advantage here.


Maybe i shouldn't have called it good fights ;). However, in the last week we had several occasions for interesting fights but they never fully evolved due to assigned fighters. You can argue op success for the skynet user because we had to bail sooner or later on the other hand you can argue they ripped themselves of an interesting fight.

As i said in the grand scheme of things offgrid assigned fighters does not matter at all. You can't be offensive with them, you can't even defend against a serious force with them. Their sole purpose and use is to avoid fights against a smallscale roaming gang in your home system and to generate ISK faster and safer.

There is no good reason not to ban offgrid assigned fighters. I can hear a lot of nullbears screaming but how i'm suppose to rat without offgrid assigned fighters, well get the Carrier on grid. As every mechanic which is overused to generate ISK i can see CCP stepping in soon. And i bet in 1-2 months the new PvE fotm will be skynet.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." - Abrazzar
SharkPrince2001
Order of the Red Kestrel
#42 - 2015-02-20 13:28:46 UTC
maCH'EttE
Perkone
Caldari State
#43 - 2015-02-20 13:44:33 UTC
Why not get rid of assigning drones to somone completely. I mean, they are your drones, your dps.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#44 - 2015-02-20 13:57:33 UTC
SharkPrince2001 wrote:
http://gorsking.blogspot.se/2015/02/****-skynet.html


TL;DR he things warp drives should be removed from fighters because CCP made a change that allows fighters to benefit from carrier pilots skills and the mods on that carrier.


This guy should work for CCP. He already thinks like CCP, ie:

-Identify a problem

-Identify the source of the problem

-change something did not cause the problem and hope that the original problem is now somehow 'fixed'....
Jori McKie
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#45 - 2015-02-20 14:39:39 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
SharkPrince2001 wrote:
http://gorsking.blogspot.se/2015/02/****-skynet.html


TL;DR he things warp drives should be removed from fighters because CCP made a change that allows fighters to benefit from carrier pilots skills and the mods on that carrier.


This guy should work for CCP. He already thinks like CCP, ie:

-Identify a problem

-Identify the source of the problem

-change something did not cause the problem and hope that the original problem is now somehow 'fixed'....

You are wrong and he his right. See how simple i can denounce you.


His article explains exactly how it works, he provides the numbers and what has changed. At the end he offers a reasonable and easy to code solution.
You on the other hand.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." - Abrazzar
Da'iel Zehn
Evil Frosty's Premium Liqours and Fine Wines
#46 - 2015-02-20 20:02:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Da'iel Zehn
maCH'EttE wrote:
Is skynet becoming a problem?
Put your thoughts.


Not at all. Once... a long, long time ago... out in null our alliance was in a fight for our life against the entire northern coalition (I was a local that joined the alliance). We held them off and broke their will to push us out of Geminate. Part of our strategy was Skynet, and it worked great.
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#47 - 2015-02-20 20:38:18 UTC
I don't see the need to remove or nerf assignment - plenty of people use carriers and/or those features in ways completely unconnected to this and there are several ways to balance it without nerfing **** into the ground to suit people who only ever fly cheap disposable ships.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#48 - 2015-02-20 20:42:59 UTC
Jori McKie wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
SharkPrince2001 wrote:
http://gorsking.blogspot.se/2015/02/****-skynet.html


TL;DR he things warp drives should be removed from fighters because CCP made a change that allows fighters to benefit from carrier pilots skills and the mods on that carrier.


This guy should work for CCP. He already thinks like CCP, ie:

-Identify a problem

-Identify the source of the problem

-change something did not cause the problem and hope that the original problem is now somehow 'fixed'....

You are wrong and he his right. See how simple i can denounce you.


His article explains exactly how it works, he provides the numbers and what has changed. At the end he offers a reasonable and easy to code solution.
You on the other hand.

\

How does it make sense to change something that did not cause the problem rather than just change the thing this did cause it? You don't need an article written so 5th graders can understand it to see how dumb the idea is.
ISD Cyberdyne
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#49 - 2015-02-20 20:46:13 UTC
First rule of Skynet has been broken.


...this is disappointing.

ISD Cyberdyne

Lieutenant Commander

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department
maCH'EttE
Perkone
Caldari State
#50 - 2015-02-20 21:03:26 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Da'iel Zehn wrote:
maCH'EttE wrote:
Is skynet becoming a problem?
Put your thoughts.


Not at all. Once... a long, long time ago... out in null our alliance was in a fight for our life against the entire northern coalition (I was a local that joined the alliance). We held them off and broke their will to push us out of Geminate. Part of our strategy was Skynet, and it worked great.

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.
This mechanic is broken as f, broken in the sense that, they sit all pretty in their pos1au or f it, 50 au, while others get raped. Make it so that they can not be in a pos or even better yet, they cant be within 50km of pos shields when they are assigning drones.
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
#51 - 2015-02-20 21:28:39 UTC
ISD Cyberdyne wrote:
First rule of Skynet has been broken.


...this is disappointing.


Skynet has no rules. It is software. Software that was widely distributed hidden in all of those 'free hours' AOL discs that blanketed the mail system back in the 90s, and has now integrated itself as part of the legacy code of the internet, waiting for the time when the world hands over its military controls to the internet itself. It will then dispatch humanity using all of the skills it has acquired through years of watching untold petabytes of hardcore **** and cat videos.

Humanity never stood a chance.

Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?
Hal Morsh
Doomheim
#52 - 2015-02-21 01:01:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Hal Morsh
ISD Cyberdyne wrote:
First rule of Skynet has been broken.


...this is disappointing.


Refrencessssss!!!




Besides that, it's annoying but just avoid the frigates using fighters. Last thing we need is CCP removing or nerfing another game aspect because 1 part of it is annoying in one specific instance.

Oh, I perfectly understand, Hal Morsh — a mission like this requires courage, skill, and heroism… qualities you are clearly lacking. Have you forgotten you're one of the bloody immortals!?
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#53 - 2015-02-21 04:02:06 UTC
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#54 - 2015-02-21 04:41:40 UTC
imagine CCP would fix poses. would also fix the skynet issue.

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
maCH'EttE
Perkone
Caldari State
#55 - 2015-02-21 14:10:55 UTC
Bo Bojangles
Interstellar Renegades
#56 - 2015-02-21 19:29:56 UTC
Gotta agree with Jenn aSide. Assigning fighters was never an issue and I have great memories or beating down much bigger Alliance's invader's staging pos mods with fighters assigned to our shuttles and such.

Her suggestion that, like as Thanny (and I did not know this) doesn't get it's inherent damage bonus to offgrid fighters is reasonable to apply to drone mods as well.

Ships hanging just outside shields near safety isn't a flawed design. This protection is the whole idea behind those shields. It's not impossible to kill these ships, just a challenge that most long time pvpers have taken on and been successful in doing. I would agree, however, that a ship hanging near the 'candy stick' shouldn't be able to turn on the shield instantly, but that could be fixed with a very short timer.
Zen Guerrilla
CTRL-Q
#57 - 2015-02-21 19:47:52 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

\

How does it make sense to change something that did not cause the problem rather than just change the thing this did cause it? You don't need an article written so 5th graders can understand it to see how dumb the idea is.

Being abled to assign fighters from pretty much complete safety IS the core of the problem. Even a 5th grader should understand that.

pew pew
maCH'EttE
Perkone
Caldari State
#58 - 2015-02-21 19:52:30 UTC
Bo Bojangles wrote:
Gotta agree with Jenn aSide. Assigning fighters was never an issue and I have great memories or beating down much bigger Alliance's invader's staging pos mods with fighters assigned to our shuttles and such.

Her suggestion that, like as Thanny (and I did not know this) doesn't get it's inherent damage bonus to offgrid fighters is reasonable to apply to drone mods as well.

Ships hanging just outside shields near safety isn't a flawed design. This protection is the whole idea behind those shields. It's not impossible to kill these ships, just a challenge that most long time pvpers have taken on and been successful in doing. I would agree, however, that a ship hanging near the 'candy stick' shouldn't be able to turn on the shield instantly, but that could be fixed with a very short timer.

You sure are the problem
with fighters assigned to our shuttles and such.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#59 - 2015-02-21 20:47:53 UTC
Zen Guerrilla wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

\

How does it make sense to change something that did not cause the problem rather than just change the thing this did cause it? You don't need an article written so 5th graders can understand it to see how dumb the idea is.

Being abled to assign fighters from pretty much complete safety IS the core of the problem. Even a 5th grader should understand that.


could that 5th grade also understand that that problem didn't exist the same way prior to some change to the game that CAUSED the problem.

Which is the entire damn point, somehow people live in bizarre land where the solution to a problem isn't the thing that CAUSED the problem, it's somehow changing things that didn't cause the problem. And somehow, they guy saying "fix the actual thing that created the problem" s crazy for saying that.....
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#60 - 2015-02-22 14:23:19 UTC