These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Proteus] Reduction in Fighter and Fighter Bomber scan resolution

First post First post First post
Author
Panther X
Destructive Influence
Northern Coalition.
#61 - 2015-01-05 22:34:37 UTC
Primary This Rifter wrote:
"Ishtars are fine, but fighters definitely need a scan res nerf."


Really? Sheesh, here comes the short bus.

My Titan smells of rich Corinthian Leather...

Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#62 - 2015-01-05 22:38:33 UTC
Panther X wrote:
Primary This Rifter wrote:
"Ishtars are fine, but fighters definitely need a scan res nerf."


Really? Sheesh, here comes the short bus.

The quotation marks imply that that was CCP's thought process. I figured that was obvious.
Panther X
Destructive Influence
Northern Coalition.
#63 - 2015-01-05 22:39:59 UTC
Primary This Rifter wrote:
Panther X wrote:
Primary This Rifter wrote:
"Ishtars are fine, but fighters definitely need a scan res nerf."


Really? Sheesh, here comes the short bus.

The quotation marks imply that that was CCP's thought process. I figured that was obvious.


Nothing is obvious. There is only Zuul.

You forgot to put up the Dr Evil quotation marks meme. Lol

My Titan smells of rich Corinthian Leather...

Sarah Nahrnid
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#64 - 2015-01-05 22:40:01 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
*Snip* Removed a reply to a deleted post. ISD Ezwal.

Also your reasoning on touching Bombers is half baked at best. Seriously, it's foolish.

Has anyone ever tried to shoot scrubcaps with Bombers? I haven't and wouldn't.
Why? A 15s cycle time is a great start then there's damage application and how abysmal it is for bombers to hit anything that's not the size of a moon (See capitals and structures)

Also, an Aeon shooting a rattlesnake on TQ as of 2 minutes ago did 83 damage per bomber (after the Rattlesnake had 2 Faction TPs applied)

Lets look at another viewpoint.

Using your "exploit" that was explained earlier, say me and 3 other bros decide to warp to an SBU at 0 and use your tactic then enemies warp straight to us (at range because they're not stupid) they drop bombers and goto town on us. Well, it's going to take us 30 years to align and warp off if they don't have tackle. If they do, we're dead.

If we're not using said exploit you'd at least have a chance of survival (see what we do today).

Like Tykonderoga said, please tell me where post-phoebe Supers have destroyed everything? All I'm seeing is dead supers here and there. ****, even BRAVE killed some PL supers!
Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#65 - 2015-01-05 22:43:48 UTC
I'm not entirely sure what the reasoning is for this change even having read the OP, but I'm pretty confident it has nothing to do with nerfing FB effectiveness against subcaps.
Yarda Black
The Black Redemption
#66 - 2015-01-05 22:44:42 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Yarda Black wrote:
So prevent relaunch within 20 seconds of scooping/returning drones.


They're trying to lower server load caused by drones, not increase it. The system would have to track each individual drone's lowered timer.



Timer on the pilot, can't launch any drone for 20 seconds after launching some others. But that is also server load technically...


Yeah, you got it. I'm referring to the message you get when you try to reconnect with drones more than once a minute. Which does indeed come from a pilot based timer. The message I'm proposing would look something like:

"You cannot deploy drones for another X seconds" or "Please wait X seconds before launching drones".

Although you could bypass this by abandoning drones, fighters and fighterbombers are not the type of drones you easily do that with. Furthermore you could count abandoning as a similar action as scooping or returning them for the purpose of this launch timer.
Panther X
Destructive Influence
Northern Coalition.
#67 - 2015-01-05 22:45:10 UTC
Lord Takani wrote:
Remove the assignment of fighters. Problem of inties with fighter support solved(Not the primary issue but still a good update IMO). On to the stated issue. Re-launch fighter delay. Easy to implement, as with re-entering wormholes.


Someone mentioned to me the "problem" of assigned fighters. How is it a problem?

1> Launch dickstar pos in hostile territory

2>Jump in 50 supers

3>Bring in 100 man interceptor gang

4>Assign 500 fighters to 100 interceptors.

5>WIN

No problem.

My Titan smells of rich Corinthian Leather...

ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#68 - 2015-01-05 22:46:37 UTC
I have removed a rule breaking post. Please keep it civil people!

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)

Tykonderoga
Black Omega Security
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#69 - 2015-01-05 22:47:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Tykonderoga
The premise behind this nerf is dishonest. It makes no sense. This is the last thing that needs rebalanced in this game.


There has been no major engagement post-Phoebe where supers or fighters have destroyed everything. It is a lie. This is clearly an obfuscation on the dev's part.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#70 - 2015-01-05 22:49:11 UTC
Lord Takani wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Tykonderoga wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Brace yourselves, NC DOT superwaggon arriving.



Brace yourself, you use drones too, friend. And your bears do too.


We dont care. Death to all supers.


I don't get why you guys dont want to improve the game. So there are issues, and instead of complaining on your in-game enemy posting that it might be better to go back to the drawing board, your bashing complete nonsense totally not related to the subject and totally not constructive.

I hope this is not the level of CSM, as if it does then EVE will not get better and CCP should just ditch the entire CSM concept, as they will be destroying there company value.


It hasnt escaped everyones notice that there is only one block getting upset over this change. Frankly, the nerfs we want to see happen will make your toes curl. Sentries need a good whacking and RR is all kinds of overpowered.
Panther X
Destructive Influence
Northern Coalition.
#71 - 2015-01-05 22:49:36 UTC
Primary This Rifter wrote:
I'm not entirely sure what the reasoning is for this change even having read the OP, but I'm pretty confident it has nothing to do with nerfing FB effectiveness against subcaps.



I can't see fighter bombers ever hitting subcaps for anything more than 50 damage, ever.

And that has nothing to do with scan resolution to begin with.

Why should fighters have their scan res neutered when they are frigate class drones. They are designed to hit sub capital vessels, and therefore should be able to lock them, fairly effectively. At least with the scan resolution of the launching vessel or better.

Fighter bombers are designed to hit capital vessels and deployables/structures. Where did this whole thing go sideways?

My Titan smells of rich Corinthian Leather...

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#72 - 2015-01-05 22:50:22 UTC
Tykonderoga wrote:
The premise behind this nerf is dishonest. It makes no sense. This is the last thing that needs rebalanced in this game.


I would think that cap and supercap balance have been an issue for more than a few years, personally. It's long past due if you ask me.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Lord Takani
The Northerners
Northern Coalition.
#73 - 2015-01-05 22:50:26 UTC
Firefox4312 Yatolila wrote:
As the "exploit" has already been explained on how it works, I don't need to explain it here.

So, if scooping and redeploying is an exploit, why even have that mechanic in the game? The exploit just comes from the laziness of CCP's coding. If they decided to just make the ROF a global timer per drone. So if you pulled and redeployed that timer never got reset, then this exploit would never have existed nor would be an issue today.

The bottom line is that, CCP would rather just nerf something to fix an issue, rather than look at the coding and be like "Oh, we screwed up, and this exploit is our fault for bad coding, we should probably fix this." But instead of doing that, they'd rather go "Oh, we screwed up, but let's not admit it, and just change scan res so that we kinda fixed the exploit without actually fixing our terrible coding."


Just make each fighter and fighter bomber's ROF work on a global timer than doesn't reset when you scoop and deploy and everything is fixed. There's no legitimate reason to nerf the scan res of Fighters and FBs unless CCP would rather just make supercarriers used less and less than they already are.



Amen. Your code is the fault of 80% of the issues. Re-factor, improve, re-factor, improve. Continues integration. Don't complain about server-lag, its 2015 and there are BIG DATA apps out there proccesing 1000x more data without much hassle, and if there is a issue they re-factor and improve.
Tykonderoga
Black Omega Security
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#74 - 2015-01-05 22:53:01 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Lord Takani wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Tykonderoga wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Brace yourselves, NC DOT superwaggon arriving.



Brace yourself, you use drones too, friend. And your bears do too.


We dont care. Death to all supers.


I don't get why you guys dont want to improve the game. So there are issues, and instead of complaining on your in-game enemy posting that it might be better to go back to the drawing board, your bashing complete nonsense totally not related to the subject and totally not constructive.

I hope this is not the level of CSM, as if it does then EVE will not get better and CCP should just ditch the entire CSM concept, as they will be destroying there company value.


It hasnt escaped everyones notice that there is only one block getting upset over this change. Frankly, the nerfs we want to see happen will make your toes curl. Sentries need a good whacking and RR is all kinds of overpowered.



You never answered if you would self destruct all your supers and titans first if you are so ideologically devoted to them being destroyed or made useless.
Lord Takani
The Northerners
Northern Coalition.
#75 - 2015-01-05 22:53:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Lord Takani
baltec1 wrote:
Lord Takani wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Tykonderoga wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Brace yourselves, NC DOT superwaggon arriving.



Brace yourself, you use drones too, friend. And your bears do too.


We dont care. Death to all supers.


I don't get why you guys dont want to improve the game. So there are issues, and instead of complaining on your in-game enemy posting that it might be better to go back to the drawing board, your bashing complete nonsense totally not related to the subject and totally not constructive.

I hope this is not the level of CSM, as if it does then EVE will not get better and CCP should just ditch the entire CSM concept, as they will be destroying there company value.


It hasnt escaped everyones notice that there is only one block getting upset over this change. Frankly, the nerfs we want to see happen will make your toes curl. Sentries need a good whacking and RR is all kinds of overpowered.



Then why aren't you providing that criticism here? Post it, post your ideas, explain them and get a healthy discussion going instead of flaming each other. If you want to flame, go to redit, this forum is as the title says for Features & Ideas Discussion
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#76 - 2015-01-05 22:58:07 UTC
Reddit isn't really flaming over this one, dude. They're still trying to figure out exactly which drone/capital ship related exploit this is about.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Panther X
Destructive Influence
Northern Coalition.
#77 - 2015-01-05 23:01:55 UTC
In b4 Grr Goons.

Still awaiting a response on why FBs are getting a scan res nerf of more than 90%. It makes no sense.
Why 90%? Why not 25% or 50% or 66.666667%?

What does the scan resolution in fighter bombers have to do with an exploit that it requires a 90%+ reduction?

Can you at least do the maths fer me and explain the whys and wherefores?

My Titan smells of rich Corinthian Leather...

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#78 - 2015-01-05 23:04:14 UTC
Quote:

Then why aren't you providing that criticism here? Post it, post your ideas, explain them and get a healthy discussion going instead of flaming each other. If you want to flame, go to redit.


This isnt the thread for those things and plans are afoot. This thead is about changes to stop a bad thing from becoming a terrible thing. If NC DOT dont want to be seen as the target of this nerf you are not exactly helping yourselves by dogpiling the thread with the flailing masses.
Mario Putzo
#79 - 2015-01-05 23:04:47 UTC
Panther X wrote:
In b4 Grr Goons.

Still awaiting a response on why FBs are getting a scan res nerf of more than 90%. It makes no sense.
Why 90%? Why not 25% or 50% or 66.666667%?

What does the scan resolution in fighter bombers have to do with an exploit that it requires a 90%+ reduction?

Can you at least do the maths fer me and explain the whys and wherefores?



Because 90% is bigger than the other % you listed, and bigger is always better!

Tykonderoga
Black Omega Security
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#80 - 2015-01-05 23:05:15 UTC
Panther X wrote:
In b4 Grr Goons.

Still awaiting a response on why FBs are getting a scan res nerf of more than 90%. It makes no sense.
Why 90%? Why not 25% or 50% or 66.666667%?

What does the scan resolution in fighter bombers have to do with an exploit that it requires a 90%+ reduction?

Can you at least do the maths fer me and explain the whys and wherefores?



They wont because it is a purely ideologically made decision. Basically, some at CCP hate supers and titans and think they were a bad idea in the first place. So instead of being upfront about that and removing them from the game with compensation, they want to make them useless.