Player Features and Ideas Discussion

And think Grath's point is talking about carriers fighting subcaps. Where it does really change. Because I know several time on this thread he has said that its all about tools for the job and if you're talking about cap on cap fights then that is what supers and dreads are for.

Tools for the job, subcaps fighting carriers. Right now with drone assist a domi fleet can alpha a carrier off the field and yes, a carrier fleet can alpha a domi off the field but which is the better outcome.

In an ideal world Dreads and Supers would be the ideal tool for the job of killing carriers. Right now that is not the case, 3 of 4 dreads just got a considerable nerf, supers on field worry less about carriers than they do Titans & Dreads.

*Read my post, I was actually using the scenario of subcaps vs carrier, not carrier vs carrier. Drone assist for carriers will become even more complex as you can only have 5 carriers assigning in each group. Domi fleet will need 1 drone bunny per squad, Carriers will need 2.

I didn't read everybody else's reasoning to the whole 'but what about the carriers' bit but like, here's mine:


Carriers have the hp to survive for a really long time against sub caps. Regardless of if they're doing damage to said sub caps at all its hard for just sub caps to kill a fleet of carriers.

I mean tis a Fleet

of

Carriers.

(this opens a side conversation about how to reward people for a broader and more diverse coverage of ship types to avoid full fleets of one ship type)

Anyway the carriers, even when damped fully, will still have more than enough buffer to survive the lock times, and damps which will only be able to damp them down so far.

The result is the ability to 'eventually' have everybody lock a target, or short of that the auto aggro mechanics of drones means that eventually these no tanked all damp celesti will begin to have problems, either from the massed lock that will kill them, the assign from 5 carriers, or the auto aggro will do enough damage to the overall Celesti structure that I feel pretty confident in the ability of the slow cat to weather this change.

And if theres caps on the field we're in a different ballgame entirely so who cares what the sentry drones are doing.


And thats the point, the change wont amount to much in the end, the people that field sentry carriers will still field sentry carriers. The people that field Domis can and should still field Domis because they'll still obliterate most comps that rely in sig tanking to surive as well as hit amazingly far with a fairly astounding punch.

So what does the change actually accomplish then other than appeasement, and is appeasing a group of players the right reason to move a thing up in the developmental que past something like the Drone UI thats been a complaint of a much broader spectrum of players?

Why put a bandaid on something and walk away when you can spend a bit longer actually fixing the overall package, because as a good deal of us know, CCP is a serious repeat offender for never finishing what they start.

May as well just lock it mate. It is clear this "discussion" has run its course 3 days ago.

Then for your troubles I shall keep you in my prayers. It was a terrible journey through the thread, I can't imagine going backwards.

Generally you do that by making it so one ship can't do everything.
HTH

Says the guy who thinks the worst idea ever is removing off grid boosting.

Did the CTA to troll the EVEO forums only include drone assist as a passive mechanic?

Stop eating the DBRB spluge m8 it isn't healthy. Archons cant do everything.

Celestis fleet can kill ships too now?

I don't think it's the worst idea ever. I think it's a bad idea. A bad idea that puts more power into the hands of people who can field larger fleets. In other words, us. So I'm against it because I think it's one of those reasonable force multipliers that gives people a better chance against us.

POS boosting is bad though. POS boosting got removed. T3 boosting was bad. T3 boosting got nerfed (greater security from T3 OGB is offset now by reduced bonuses, and generally people don't boost 3 types of links from one ship anyway, just 1-2).
None of these have anything to do with however passive the mechanic is, but more to do with risk vs. reward.

I never actually said, that I can recall, that passive mechanics were inherently bad. There are an awful lot of them in the game. Probably the most important mechanic in the game is so much better than in other MMOs simply because it's passive. Yeah, I'm talking about skill training. You cannot paint passive mechanics with a wide brush and say they're all bad. Is PI bad because it's passive? Manufacturing? Market trading?

My argument against drone assist had nothing to do with its passivity.

it seems like a very sensible number to me

Q: How many pilots are there in a full squad
A: 10

Q: How many Drones can a non-carrier pilot control
A: 5


now does a cap at 50 make more sense ?


think of it as a distributed Drone Area Network, where you assign 1 person as the Administrator
That admin issues drone commands, which are then broadcast to the 9 clients under his control
each individual client is controlling 5 drones, but they are slaved to the admin until such time as they as take on independent command.

possibly not worded very well, but I hope you can understand what I mean