Warfare & Tactics

Ok so the problem: They alpha me too quickly.

Your solution: Change game mechanics so people lock slower, at which point once they all have me locked, I can still get alphad down.

My solution: I'm getting yellow boxed by 60 duders.. align out and broadcast for shields, possibly warp depending on what's firing at me. All of this happens before I'm even red boxed.

Your fix: lot of computing power, doesn't actually address alpha (even though that isn't really a problem,) and doesn't actually help small gang vs larger gang warfare, which is more about countering their fleet comp with what ships/tactics your fielding.

My fix: Works 9 out of 10 times, unless I'm tackled. And in any competent fleet you (a) clear light tackle off the field asap (b) warp the fleet off to reposition if a heavy dictor starts landing on you and (c) primary their lachesis/huginns (d) reposition out of light dictors bubbles. So the only times it doesn't work is if they are sorting by name and Im one of the first guys primaried.

In large fleet fights you also can ALREADY mitigate damage to your EWAR by having them setup in their own wing or fleet, and warp in well off of optimal range of the enemy, while still being able to apply their affects to opponents.

I LOL'd

Hmmm... So your suggesting that if 50 people target ship X, then those 50 people receive some kind of sensor damp penalty to their targeting when they attempt to target their next ship. I see several issues with this, which I'll compare and contrast to a much simplier method B that just increases the lock time on Target X based on the number of ships, Z, currently targeting the target X:

1.) Your penalty is delayed. As leadership becomes more granular, Wing B doesn't know exactly what Wing A is doing, it becomes very easy for both leaders to call the same target. In doing so, the entire fleet will suffer your penalty. In method B, Wing Commander B will soon recognize an abnormal lock time, and can instruct the Wing B to target another target. This allows for realtime alterations of orders, while your suggestion will blindside fleets by suddenly imposing an enormous SG penalty to anything they target next.

2.) The Mechanics of Implementation. Imagine 100 ships target X and receive a serious SG dampening penalty. How long does this penalty last? Is it on all ships they attempt to target next? Since the penalty lasts beyond the phenomena that cause the penalty (i.e. the penalty last long after 100 ships targeting X), the mechanics of implementation become much more difficult. A more state-oriented approach based, will be much easier to implement.

3.) I just don't understand the reason for associating the penalty with the a new target Y rather than target X. This essentially hurts/annoys support ships. For example, I've been in Munnin/Lachesis squads whose purpose was to kill stealth bomber threats to the fleet. When no SB's are pressent, you shoot the primary target. Now, if suddenly a few SB's show up to drop Lockbreaker & Void bombs on your logi-train, I'm severely gimped by the SG penalty. If the penalty is associated with target X only, then these ships are still able to fullfill their specialized role, and participate in the general fleet action when that role is not needed.

Do you have any idea how many times this has been suggested before? Devs please move this to F&I where it can die the death it deserves with all the other threads.

Fly support then. If it's a BS gang, fly a BC or smaller. If it's a BC gang, fly a Rifter. Fly ewar or logistics. Primary call is for main DPS boats, if you're flying support you're responsible for your targets.

Actually this is counter to anything logical.

If you have something targetted and know its location, you'd share that information with your fleet, allowing for FASTER target acquisition, not slower.

Also to the comparison of flashlights, thats not how it works, you dont point and light in space and hope to find your target, you bounce a signal off it that your sensors pickup and fine tune. Thus with multiple ships all using the same frequency you would find targets FASTER not slower.

Everything about this smells of ******.

Yes I get your point that it is meant to create better fleet dynamics, however your examples and comparisons to reality are so ignorant its appauling.

Your concept is fine, its just your reasoning for why it would be this way is something the shallow end of the gene pool would produce.

All I see here is someone crying about the fact that he gets primaried often and doesnt like "blobs" because he is in a terrible alliance that cant get people to pvp.

Or something like that

I'm not sure if I agree with this proposal, but do all you leet PVPers calling him out as a whiner REALLY enjoy blob warfare that much? I mean, the results are effective, but is it really fun to go around with 50 of the exact same ship fighting 50 other of the exact same ship?

Problem is, results are far more important then 'Fun.' when it comes to Sov warfare. If I had a personal stake in some territory, you better believe I will use the most effective set up in a completely identical fleet to defend it.

Perhaps its overlooked because everyone else saw what a gimmick it was.