These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Venetian Tar
State War Academy
Caldari State
#101 - 2014-02-06 14:59:50 UTC
Honest Blob wrote:
I am starting to see a big time trend here thats gone back several years.

If the CFC or Goons encounter somthing that decimates thier fleets they yell for nerf, they yell for changes and qq whine and complain and stomp thier feet untill ccp doesnt somthing that will benifit them. A way for a inferior amount of numbers to counter a much larger group was invented, and while it let the small group counter the much larger one the smaller one put more risk in isk and ship out there. CFC didnt like this and much like titan tracking screamed for nerf.

Did you stop and think how this would negativly effect mining fleets? As it is youv allready nerfed mining in non empire to ****, making mining sites not need to be scanned, putting null ice fields on a 4 hour cycle, letting ceptors warp through bubbles. Now one of the last things that miners had to defend with and that was a cloud of drones is gone.

Please ccp keep fixing the things that Goons dont like. instead of working on things that would reduce your server load, likeeeee after 50 drones on are field they generate no model.


You're a special kind of stupid.

The models may not create lag or Tidi if you've got them turned off, but the server needs to calculate damage, drone location and probably more factors than I know.

Think before you type, Mr. N3 Coward Alt.

I don't hate you, I'm just not necessarily excited about your existance.
Dorijan
W-Space IT Department
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#102 - 2014-02-06 15:00:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Dorijan
Olaf Erikkson wrote:
THIS is bullshit!

but Init. and Darkness. CSM... so ... yeah whatever

You really ought to check which character you're logged into the eve online forums before posting. Thanks for revealing yet another N3PL spy in a CFC alliance.
yogizh
GSF Logistics and Posting Reserves
Goonswarm Federation
#103 - 2014-02-06 15:00:05 UTC
I can fly my ship again.Cool
Rhes
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#104 - 2014-02-06 15:00:26 UTC
This is fantastic news but it's too bad that instead of just listening to the CSM directly you had to wait for us to illustrate how broken drone assist was before you did anything about it.

EVE is a game about spaceships and there's an enormous amount of work to do on the in-space gameplay before players (or developers) are ready to sacrifice it for a totally new type of gameplay - CCP Rise
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#105 - 2014-02-06 15:00:49 UTC
Honest Blob wrote:


Did you stop and think how this would negativly effect mining fleets? As it is youv allready nerfed mining in non empire to ****, making mining sites not need to be scanned, putting null ice fields on a 4 hour cycle, letting ceptors warp through bubbles. Now one of the last things that miners had to defend with and that was a cloud of drones is gone.


We put a lot of thought into those kinds of use cases, which is why we settled on capping at 50 instead of removing drone assist or using a lower cap.

After a lot of thought and discussion, we decided that a cap of 50 provides a very good balance that continues to allow tactics like the ones you are describing while discouraging the use of drone assist as a "primary" role for ships in large fights.

I think you'll find that if you can't kill that interceptor with 50 warriors, 100 or 1000 won't be much better.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Veng3ance
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#106 - 2014-02-06 15:00:54 UTC
Oh Takashawa wrote:

I'm all for having fun, but I'd like to see it be balanced and spread across the entire spectrum of the game. I've sat here and watched CCP buff the **** out of everything cheap and T1, barely improve T2, and talk widely about planning to nerf T3, and now give some indication (in this post) that they consider changes which nerf capitals more than subcapitals to be desirable.

"Everyone having fun" is all well and good as a slogan, but the reality is that force multipliers have and should remain a key part of EVE - if you don't have a big pile of dudes, your options are more restricted, but there have always been strategies you can pursue to punch above your weight. CCP is removing those, slowly but surely, and as a member of a group that enjoys not being blue to 70% of EVE, that's a bit frustrating to watch. I'm simply curious whether that's the direction CCP wants us to go - whoever has more dudes wins, end of discussion - or if it's simply an accident on their part?


You do realize any "side" can use a force multiplier. If one type of ship is vastly preferred over any others (and in this case more like 1 specific ship) then after time ALL people will be using them, and we will all be staring at each other while our FC's fire for us. Maybe you should think more about the health of the game and state of balance then protecting your flavor of the month (or year).
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#107 - 2014-02-06 15:02:01 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Quote:
Please clarify yourself here. What do you mean "if this doesn't work" ?


I can't put a number on it, but currently Dominixes are responsible for somewhere in the ballpark of 5 times the PVP damage dealt of the next most popular fleet battleship, if that's still the case in a few months this will have 'not worked'.


i don't see how just making a couple people more in fleet having to target ships is going to change the reason people use these sentry setups.... the answer comes more in the form of the performance of the drones themselves and the exploitability of this mechanic in general..

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#108 - 2014-02-06 15:02:16 UTC
Oh Takashawa wrote:
Veng3ance wrote:
Demotress wrote:
While you are at it, why not switch the name of the game to goons get what they want online. After all every time they tell you to change something, you do it. Nerf needed or not.


Everyone knew drone assist to carriers was insanely broken. It made carriers dps, tank and logistics all at once while having instant lock and immune to EWAR. If you can't see that is was one of the most OP things in the game then you sir are an idiot.

Did you just say carriers were immune to ewar? My sides.


When you assign their drones to a Supercarrier... but then you are far from instant lock...

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Veng3ance
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#109 - 2014-02-06 15:03:16 UTC
Oh Takashawa wrote:
Veng3ance wrote:
Demotress wrote:
While you are at it, why not switch the name of the game to goons get what they want online. After all every time they tell you to change something, you do it. Nerf needed or not.


Everyone knew drone assist to carriers was insanely broken. It made carriers dps, tank and logistics all at once while having instant lock and immune to EWAR. If you can't see that is was one of the most OP things in the game then you sir are an idiot.

Did you just say carriers were immune to ewar? My sides.


Yes i did just say that. But obviously you don't understand anything about drone assist, remote ECCM, remote sensor boosters or hell anything to do with the fleet you actually fly in. Learn to eve.
Ali Aras
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#110 - 2014-02-06 15:03:18 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Harvey James wrote:


so aren't the CSM at all concerned with the frigate abuse of drone assist?


No we aren't. Not even slightly.



WOW!!! so you think a condor controlling the alpha of 50 sentries with a lock time of what 2 secs is balanced?

Dude, just shoot the condor.

http://warp-to-sun.tumblr.com -- my blog
Olaf Erikkson
State War Academy
Caldari State
#111 - 2014-02-06 15:03:41 UTC
Dorijan wrote:
Olaf Erikkson wrote:
THIS is bullshit!

but Init. and Darkness. CSM... so ... yeah whatever

You really ought to check wihch character you're logged into the eve online forums before posting. Thanks for revealing yet another N3PL spy in a CFC alliance.


I think you don't understand what i tried to say.
In this case the CSM do not speak for all players...just for their alliance

At my point of view
HVAC Repairman
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#112 - 2014-02-06 15:04:03 UTC
Goons cry when their ships get wrecked until CCP nerfs whatever got them blown up

yo fozzie/rise please nerf dbrb

Follow me on twitter
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#113 - 2014-02-06 15:04:10 UTC
Ali Aras wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Harvey James wrote:


so aren't the CSM at all concerned with the frigate abuse of drone assist?


No we aren't. Not even slightly.



WOW!!! so you think a condor controlling the alpha of 50 sentries with a lock time of what 2 secs is balanced?

Dude, just shoot the condor.



missing the point entirely here.......

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
handige harrie
Vereenigde Handels Compagnie
#114 - 2014-02-06 15:04:24 UTC
And so eve returns to the same old blob wins at everything game design CCP thinks is best.

Baddest poster ever
Oh Takashawa
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#115 - 2014-02-06 15:05:01 UTC
HVAC Repairman wrote:
you can still do the same thing, you just need more people as triggers :(((((((((((((((((((((

Unfortunately, the math on that simply doesn't work due to the pervasive presence of dampeners and the need to refit ~40% of your carriers away from tracking in order to find even 50km lock range and 100 scan res vs 1 celestis damping a trigger.
Kalissa
Sacred Templars
Fraternity.
#116 - 2014-02-06 15:05:25 UTC
Thank god for that. CCP nailed exactly how nearly everyone I know feels about Dominix's and drone assist, it's boring as hell, requires no effort or skill. They cannot bring this change in soon enough as far as I'm concerned.
502 Bad Gateway
Doomheim
#117 - 2014-02-06 15:05:31 UTC
Thank you CCP!
Proletariat Tingtango
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#118 - 2014-02-06 15:05:44 UTC
handige harrie wrote:
And so eve returns to the same old blob wins at everything game design CCP thinks is best.

Maybe you missed the part where drone assist doctrines didn't change this and in fact only made it exponentially worse. Unless you think a game of "who can field more drones in a fight" isn't somehow blobbing too.
Ryan Draxxry
Russian SOBR
#119 - 2014-02-06 15:05:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Ryan Draxxry
GOOD CHANGE

a good idea is:

  • capital - 50 drones in assist
  • battleship - 40 drones in assist
  • battlecruiser - 30 drones in assist
  • cruiser - 20 drones in assist
  • frigate - 10 drones in assist
greiton starfire
Accidentally Hardcore
#120 - 2014-02-06 15:06:22 UTC
A quick look shows that you recognized a problem in the game

looked at various solutions to said problem

spoke to players and the csm about said solutions

recognized and addressed any issues that may come up as a result of the change

and gave us something we want.


this was a perfect execution of a game change, and while i wish it had come sooner i am glad you took the time to think out all the effects on diverse group's game play from a fundamental level. now you guys should put together a seminar for the other devs on how to make game changes. (maybe things like ess would have been proposed at the state it's currently in and not the hot mess it was).