These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
xHxHxAOD
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#901 - 2014-02-08 19:38:31 UTC
imo u should make drones be assignable to wing members or wc. now it will be 5-10 more drones than what is proposed now but they will still be useable in large fleet fights and small and med gang stuff. this will allow carriers to still be able to counter sub caps which ccp states should and do. as it is now drones are the weakest weapon system that we have, if u take sentrys out u can run any drone comp u want and said comp will get spanked by any other comp. sentrys are not op never have been but they are the only system that u have to keep track of drone control range, the drones range optimal/falloff, and the range u are from said target. as is this is just a half ass change which is ment to help some people who cant find a counter to sentrys.

as is now this change does nothing but nerf/ break any reason to use sentrys outside of small gang. this change also does nothing to change help the stress that drone put on the server why dont u stop beating around the bush with some change that does nothing really but break the sandbox and go after the really problem which is how drones stress the sever not drone assists.also u rise can say that u listen to us all u want but for ex. rlm did u not have to change the reload time on them after they launched bc it was too high like everyone and there mother said in the thread in the 1st place, or when u wanted to break the market with ur margin trading change, or the fact u have to a some bpc drops to make people have a reason to get one as its overpriced for what it does. ps just bc u or ccp thinks and idea is good or makes things better does not mean it does.
Ali Aras
Nobody in Local
Of Sound Mind
#902 - 2014-02-08 20:07:50 UTC
2D34DLY4U wrote:
This is useless.

Devs are doing a quick fix to large battles by the cheap path, what is needed is a proper engine change, code rewrite or whatever is wrong that never gets fixed while CCP does vampires/FPS/Valkirye/Monuments/TV Series.

Man, it really sucks when devs efficiently use their time to address pressing gameplay issues, allowing them to use the rest of their time for something else while still being responsive to the playerbase.

http://warp-to-sun.tumblr.com -- my blog

MMak
State War Academy
Caldari State
#903 - 2014-02-08 20:21:34 UTC
Assisting drones (guns) is not fare. Condemn it or allow to assist guns!

TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#904 - 2014-02-08 20:24:15 UTC
Ali Aras wrote:
2D34DLY4U wrote:
This is useless.

Devs are doing a quick fix to large battles by the cheap path, what is needed is a proper engine change, code rewrite or whatever is wrong that never gets fixed while CCP does vampires/FPS/Valkirye/Monuments/TV Series.

Man, it really sucks when devs efficiently use their time to address pressing gameplay issues, allowing them to use the rest of their time for something else while still being responsive to the playerbase.


efficient would be just doing what needs to be done, rather than being afraid to upset people and doing all these little half-assed nerfs.
Dave Stark
#905 - 2014-02-08 20:43:52 UTC
it wasn't really a gameplay issue. it has been fine for 10 years until some people started to whine for no reason what so ever.

if the basis of this change is "it's boring" why hasn't mining been changed?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#906 - 2014-02-08 21:08:09 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
it wasn't really a gameplay issue. it has been fine for 10 years until some people started to whine for no reason what so ever.

if the basis of this change is "it's boring" why hasn't mining been changed?


There was a pretty good reason.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Gimme more Cynos
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#907 - 2014-02-08 21:16:04 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Quote:
rise, are you going to increase the limit to 200 or are you going to just let it negatively impact incursion runners, contrary to your original post?


Unfortunately, we can't raise it. We wanted to have as little impact on incursions as possible, but if the cap was any higher we would probably not be able to achieve the main goal of limiting assist use in large fleets. There is a lot of pressure to lower it to 25 but we hope that 50 will get the job done, as I'm sure 25 would feel quite a bit worse for you guys.


Any chance that a cap in bandwith is possible? It would certainly solve most of the issues incursion runners are having with the proposed cap. Wouldn't it be possible to screw the "easy to explain" part for a lesser impact on people not blobbing with sentries? Too hard to code?
Dave Stark
#908 - 2014-02-08 21:16:08 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
it wasn't really a gameplay issue. it has been fine for 10 years until some people started to whine for no reason what so ever.

if the basis of this change is "it's boring" why hasn't mining been changed?


There was a pretty good reason.



can't be that good if it took 10 years to change it.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#909 - 2014-02-08 21:29:00 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
it wasn't really a gameplay issue. it has been fine for 10 years until some people started to whine for no reason what so ever.

if the basis of this change is "it's boring" why hasn't mining been changed?


There was a pretty good reason.



can't be that good if it took 10 years to change it.


Because nothing else has changed that might have made drone assist a problem in the last 10 years c/d?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#910 - 2014-02-08 21:29:46 UTC
I mean 300 man archon fleets were pretty routine in 2004

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Dave Stark
#911 - 2014-02-08 21:33:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
Malcanis wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
it wasn't really a gameplay issue. it has been fine for 10 years until some people started to whine for no reason what so ever.

if the basis of this change is "it's boring" why hasn't mining been changed?


There was a pretty good reason.



can't be that good if it took 10 years to change it.


Because nothing else has changed that might have made drone assist a problem in the last 10 years c/d?


no, i don't think goons whining constantly is a sufficient change that requires the change in drone assist.
also considering how long drone assist has been used in incursions without an issue; it's quite clear drone assist in itself really isn't the issue and the things that have changed are more likely to be the issue.
CCP Nullarbor
C C P
C C P Alliance
#912 - 2014-02-08 21:53:58 UTC
Ulani Iaam wrote:
Does this cap also reflect when someone uses drones to guard another player?


Yes the 50 drone limit applies to guarding or assisting, they are counted together. For example, you cannot have 50 guarding and 50 assisting, however you could have 25 and 25.

CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones

MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#913 - 2014-02-08 22:46:16 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
I mean 300 man archon fleets were pretty routine in 2004


you mean 250 man archon fleets unless something has changed about how big a fleet can be

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#914 - 2014-02-08 22:47:02 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Ulani Iaam wrote:
Does this cap also reflect when someone uses drones to guard another player?


Yes the 50 drone limit applies to guarding or assisting, they are counted together. For example, you cannot have 50 guarding and 50 assisting, however you could have 25 and 25.


did you guys consider doing a 1250Mb limit for drone assist?

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Chorianda
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#915 - 2014-02-08 23:04:27 UTC
A number of people have been suggesting varying the cap with bandwidth or drone type, but really, isn't this just very simple? Prohibit assist for sentry drones, don't touch other types. Doesn't that solve the broken gameplay without affecting the use-cases which are not broken?
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#916 - 2014-02-08 23:38:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Grath Telkin
CCP Rise wrote:

We think entire fleets of assisted drones is not good gameplay and so we are making a change to address that.


But entire fleets of missiles are fine, entire fleets of Artillery are fine, entire fleets of interceptors are fine.


What you mean to say is that the 0.0 player base is so incredibly bored with the craptastic wonder that is SOV warfare that we're willing to endure what you consider 'not good gameplay' because it makes the life sucking experience of 0.0 sov fights (you know, the ones that make you all your money in the news) remotely tolerable.

My next question would be if your player base does something, in mass, who are you to decide its not good game play? Perhaps taking a look at WHY something is done that way and fixing that instead will have a greater impact than just shoving your player bases face back in the pile of donkey **** that is Sov Warfare and telling them to deal with it.


The rest of your post is just self righteous garbage. You 100% do NOT listen to your player base, most changes that hit these forums are fairly set in stone regardless of player feedback. You ignored their statements about the Nestor, and look at that thing, your ship rebalancing has largely just been shuffling slots and bonuses with zero creativity at all and despite being told what won't work (by other people that know the game) you put in changes that you are told ahead of time by massive number of people will suck. The ESS is a joke, hated from day one. Instead of meaningful change to things like POS's and SOV that your players want we get deployable crap that clutters up the grid because entire fleets now drop mobile depot's during fights. Thanks for that. I could go on for days about what you were told wasn't going to work with HAC's and how that failure played out because of what you did to t1 cruisers.

In fact, the very best ship redo you've done is the inty, and in a non shocker the main idea for that one came from, wait for it, not you or your office but a player who wasn't on the CSM.

So go on and ride your calm high horse Rise but your design changes and ideas on balance are laughably poor. You and yours knew you were breaking damps and people didn't cry about the geddon being stronger, they outright TOLD you that you were breaking the Domi. That and the CFC (you know, half the CSM) has outright stated a public goal that they will use sentry fleets with the express purpose of you nerfing them (Its on just about every player site and this one) leads one to believe that you just typed that up because you were mad a player (you know what you used to be) pointed out the **** poor job at game balance you'd been doing.

Glad we have a Dev so easily manipulated by 1/2 of the games 0.0 player base that he would interfere directly in a war on their behalf.


So this is me outright telling you Kil2 that your player base already has figured out how we'll handle drone assign going forward, the fix was simplistic in nature, and that we'll keep coming up with new ways to afk the 0.0 game until you fix it because its garbage in the worst possible way

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#917 - 2014-02-08 23:47:48 UTC
I have removed a rule breaking post.

The rules:
4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#918 - 2014-02-08 23:51:43 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
I mean 300 man archon fleets were pretty routine in 2004


Stop being manipulative with your data Malcanis fleets can't reach 300 people and we all know that.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

Vann Flyheight
Van Diemen's Demise
Northern Coalition.
#919 - 2014-02-08 23:51:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Vann Flyheight
GG CCP caving into CFC again.
Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#920 - 2014-02-09 00:02:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Andski
Grath Telkin wrote:
Glad we have a Dev so easily manipulated by 1/2 of the games 0.0 player base that he would interfere directly in a war on their behalf.


unless the next rubicon point release hits within the next couple of weeks, no, they didn't interfere in a war

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar