These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#221 - 2015-01-06 17:22:21 UTC
Tykonderoga wrote:
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.


They were a bad idea. They deserve to be hated. They will never be removed with compensation. If CCP were to remove and reimburse caps, the economy would be utterly decimated by trillions upon trillions of isk being suddenly and instantaneously introduced into the system. A similar thing would happen if they were compensated in minerals.

Imagine if your alliance suddenly had 20 trillion isk. How much of Jita could you buy?

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#222 - 2015-01-06 17:27:25 UTC  |  Edited by: EvilweaselFinance
Mario Putzo wrote:

They didn't seem to have an issue adding a whole new timer mechanic to the use of jump drives, portals and bridges though.

yes because in that case they made the decision that the engine changes were the way to go

are you incapable of understanding that different problems may have different solutions, i dislike the spaceaids solution but this is a dumb response
Mario Putzo
#223 - 2015-01-06 17:33:06 UTC
Soldarius wrote:
Tykonderoga wrote:
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.


They were a bad idea. They deserve to be hated. They will never be removed with compensation. If CCP were to remove and reimburse caps, the economy would be utterly decimated by trillions upon trillions of isk being suddenly and instantaneously introduced into the system. A similar thing would happen if they were compensated in minerals.

Imagine if your alliance suddenly had 20 trillion isk. How much of Jita could you buy?



I doubt they will reimburse Isk for anything but perhaps the skillbook cost for removed skills and of course SP related to the usage of that ship.

So
any SP in Titans. + Cost of Titan Book
any SP in FB's. + Cost of FB Book.

Anything SP wise that is usable by other ships in the game wouldn't be reimbursed, Carrier skills for example.

For the ships and the FBs...Refund the minerals for the ships not the isk.

Player logs in and gets to choose which station his pile of minerals that used to be an Avatar go to.
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#224 - 2015-01-06 17:35:19 UTC
they're not going to reimburse anything

they have no reason to do so
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#225 - 2015-01-06 17:38:05 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
EvilweaselFinance wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:

Fix the actual issue if there is an issue.

people keep saying this and not really 'getting' it

ccp has a limited number of people who are good enough at the engine code to tinker with it in the ways completely fixing this would require

in addition, we have no idea of the amount of work this would require and it's probably relatively considerable


They didn't seem to have an issue adding a whole new timer mechanic to the use of jump drives, portals and bridges though.

Moreover we should not be willing to accept what is a terrible change because CCP is either to inept, or to lazy to code an actual fix to the problem.

Again if this is a problem, why are only Fighters and Bombers being targeted. If this is a clear cut issue of Drones being abused by skirting cycle timer delays, then why are ECM drones not on this list?


Cycle time not that long (I maintain fighters are a mystery) to be worth it on ECM. AND they don't give the dps boost. Escaping and doubling (or more) a supers dps are quite seperate things.
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#226 - 2015-01-06 17:38:39 UTC
hell, as a supercap haver myself, i know that when they are eventually castrated, i will receive no compensation and the very idea will be the butt of jokes for years to come

this is a bargain one implicitly accepts when chasing the fotm
Anton Menges Saddat
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#227 - 2015-01-06 17:39:51 UTC
EvilweaselFinance wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:

They didn't seem to have an issue adding a whole new timer mechanic to the use of jump drives, portals and bridges though.

yes because in that case they made the decision that the engine changes were the way to go

are you incapable of understanding that different problems may have different solutions, i dislike the spaceaids solution but this is a dumb response

i personally feel that it is intellectually dishonest to claim it i is a response to an 'exploit' and then only make the change affect 2 very specific types of drones. as stated earlier, launching drones, having them travel to target, fire once, and then return, recall, and relaunch, particularly under TIDI, is not very practical in terms of actual applied damage, especially for fighters which have a shorter cycle time. because of this i have a hard time believing said exploit is even the real reason for this nerf, as there are other solutions and furthermore this change doesn't affect any other type of drone or boat. just call it what it is, a nerf to locking and switching between subcapital targets. one could argue this is perhaps needed for fighter bombers (although who the hell uses fighterbombers against subcaps to begin with?) but this change is particularly odious in regards to fighters because it is yet another nerf to super capabilities especially in defensive situations. i mean, god forbid i have a chance of killing those hics pointing me, rite?
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#228 - 2015-01-06 17:40:46 UTC
Anton Menges Saddat wrote:
EvilweaselFinance wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:

They didn't seem to have an issue adding a whole new timer mechanic to the use of jump drives, portals and bridges though.

yes because in that case they made the decision that the engine changes were the way to go

are you incapable of understanding that different problems may have different solutions, i dislike the spaceaids solution but this is a dumb response

i personally feel that it is intellectually dishonest to claim it i is a response to an 'exploit' and then only make the change affect 2 very specific types of drones. as stated earlier, launching drones, having them travel to target, fire once, and then return, recall, and relaunch, particularly under TIDI, is not very practical in terms of actual applied damage, especially for fighters which have a shorter cycle time. because of this i have a hard time believing said exploit is even the real reason for this nerf, as there are other solutions and furthermore this change doesn't affect any other type of drone or boat. just call it what it is, a nerf to locking and switching between subcapital targets. one could argue this is perhaps needed for fighter bombers (although who the hell uses fighterbombers against subcaps to begin with?) but this change is particularly odious in regards to fighters because it is yet another nerf to super capabilities especially in defensive situations. i mean, god forbid i have a chance of killing those hics pointing me, rite?

ncdot parachute detected
Mario Putzo
#229 - 2015-01-06 17:45:16 UTC
EvilweaselFinance wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:

They didn't seem to have an issue adding a whole new timer mechanic to the use of jump drives, portals and bridges though.

yes because in that case they made the decision that the engine changes were the way to go

are you incapable of understanding that different problems may have different solutions, i dislike the spaceaids solution but this is a dumb response


So if this is an actual problem with the game, why shouldn't we expect CCP to actually fix the problem.
Nac Lac
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#230 - 2015-01-06 17:46:05 UTC
Let's look at this from the code perspective.

-A redeploy timer on each drone adds one more thing for the server to remember. Now, remember the lag from TiDi battles? It is now worse.
-Scan res is already used to lock ships for drones. Increasing this delay means the server needs to do nothing new. No extra load, no extra lag.


Lets look at the redeploy from a drone pilot perspective.

-By focusing drones and preventing a redeploy for x seconds, all drone boats are useless for PvP, and the battleships/battlecruisers are now easy targets for frigates. Why? Because their dps from drones is now crippled if you recall drones to change out which you are deploying or because a drone is being focused.
-Is the delay triggered from one drone recall? Great, now I lose 25% to 20% damage because I'm recalling one drone to remove aggression on it, pvp or pve.


So, knock it off with the "redeployment timer" stuff. Think about the reprecussions of adding it in. No, recoding it won't fix it, because again, another variable to keep track of. The scan res fix is the best fix for a server optimization perspective. No new code, no extra lag, no nerfing of drone boats.



Now, let's look at why only fighters and fighter bombers are targeted in this nerf, specifically.

-Sentries, heavies, mediums, and lights have a fire rate of 4 seconds, lock time 2 seconds. Let's see you scoop and deploy in under 2 seconds. Which is the cut off point for any improvement in dps.

-A super or carrier sitting at 0 on a target will see a dps gain by scooping and redeploying, this isn't up for debate. General use scenarios aren't a factor in fixing an exploit. The majority of exploits are fixing edge cases, game or field notwithstanding.

-ECM drones do have an argument for being affected by the scan res fix as well, due to the 20 second cooldown. However, my thoughts are, if CCP is considering an ECM rebalance, why change the drones now and again later? The gains from redeploying ECM drones are much smaller than the gains of redeploying 150,000 alpha damage faster than intended.


If you want a more elegant fix than just doing scan res nerf, why not change Drone Damage Amps to a rate of fire bonus instead of flat damage? Higher boosted damage means less gains from redeploying, since the window for positive damage gains is much smaller. Also, as a happy coincidence, will nerf Ishtar volley damage. Everybody wins!
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#231 - 2015-01-06 17:48:13 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
EvilweaselFinance wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:

They didn't seem to have an issue adding a whole new timer mechanic to the use of jump drives, portals and bridges though.

yes because in that case they made the decision that the engine changes were the way to go

are you incapable of understanding that different problems may have different solutions, i dislike the spaceaids solution but this is a dumb response


So if this is an actual problem with the game, why shouldn't we expect CCP to actually fix the problem.

lowering drone scan res fixes the problem
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#232 - 2015-01-06 17:48:42 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:

So if this is an actual problem with the game, why shouldn't we expect CCP to actually fix the problem.

because there's loads of problems, who cares what you 'expect'

the correct thing to do is to prioritize scarce resources. once resources become infinite or time becomes infinite all problems will be addressed, until one of those happens fix the problems that get the best return on effort first
Daide Vondrichnov
French Drop-O-Panache
Snuffed Out
#233 - 2015-01-06 17:48:54 UTC
So many tears here uglaglagla, GJ CCP !
Mario Putzo
#234 - 2015-01-06 17:53:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Mario Putzo
Or you just make Abandon/Scoop/Return to drone bay an overriding command that functions like "reloading" on other weapons platforms. Once you click abandon/scoop/return to drone bay you are locked out of issuing a command to your drones for 20 seconds.

*Return and Orbit will not start this timer.

Poof now you only have 1 timer to track, and it applied to all drones within that ship. No more spooky lag than reloading turrets cause.

and probably not that much to code...**** they managed to make 3 different "jump to beacon options" give everyone 2 timers im sure they can take 3 inputs and generate one timer.

Maybe they can't, but they should.

Here is even a message you can display

"The Drone Bay will be cleared in approximately 20 seconds"
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#235 - 2015-01-06 17:59:42 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
Or you just make Abandon/Scoop/Return to drone bay an overriding command that functions like "reloading" on other weapons platforms. Once you click abandon/scoop/return to drone bay you are locked out of issuing a command to your drones for 20 seconds.

*Return and Orbit will not start this timer.

Poof now you only have 1 timer to track, and it applied to all drones within that ship. No more spooky lag than reloading turrets cause.

and probably not that much to code...**** they managed to make 3 different "jump to beacon options" give everyone 2 timers im sure they can take 3 inputs and generate one timer.

Maybe they can't, but they should.

Here is even a message you can display

"The Drone Bay will be cleared in approximately 20 seconds"

they don't want to saddle subcap drone boats with this sort of timer and want to focus the scoop/relaunch deterrent on a specific class of drones on a certain class of ships without creating Yet Another God Damn Exception Case

using scan res to affect the change on the specific drones in question solves the issue with almost no collateral damage to other parts of eve
Mario Putzo
#236 - 2015-01-06 18:12:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Mario Putzo
Promiscuous Female wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:
Or you just make Abandon/Scoop/Return to drone bay an overriding command that functions like "reloading" on other weapons platforms. Once you click abandon/scoop/return to drone bay you are locked out of issuing a command to your drones for 20 seconds.

*Return and Orbit will not start this timer.

Poof now you only have 1 timer to track, and it applied to all drones within that ship. No more spooky lag than reloading turrets cause.

and probably not that much to code...**** they managed to make 3 different "jump to beacon options" give everyone 2 timers im sure they can take 3 inputs and generate one timer.

Maybe they can't, but they should.

Here is even a message you can display

"The Drone Bay will be cleared in approximately 20 seconds"

they don't want to saddle subcap drone boats with this sort of timer and want to focus the scoop/relaunch deterrent on a specific class of drones on a certain class of ships without creating Yet Another God Damn Exception Case

using scan res to affect the change on the specific drones in question solves the issue with almost no collateral damage to other parts of eve



Why not? Also where did CCP say this, or are you just assuming this?
Sure you aren't going to get the DPS benefit, but since this change is also attempting to nip server load in the bud, 1000 dudes deploying and scooping drones in subcaps repeatedly is going to also cause a lot of server load.

Not to mention it still leaves my ECM drones capable of being scooped and deployed until I get a jam cycle.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#237 - 2015-01-06 18:20:33 UTC
I wonder how easy it might be to have damage drones fire at the END of the cycle...?

Solved. Instantly.
Mario Putzo
#238 - 2015-01-06 18:22:52 UTC
afkalt wrote:
I wonder how easy it might be to have damage drones fire at the END of the cycle...?

Solved. Instantly.


Or this.
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#239 - 2015-01-06 18:25:13 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
Or you just make Abandon/Scoop/Return to drone bay an overriding command that functions like "reloading" on other weapons platforms. Once you click abandon/scoop/return to drone bay you are locked out of issuing a command to your drones for 20 seconds.

*Return and Orbit will not start this timer.

Poof now you only have 1 timer to track, and it applied to all drones within that ship. No more spooky lag than reloading turrets cause.

and probably not that much to code...**** they managed to make 3 different "jump to beacon options" give everyone 2 timers im sure they can take 3 inputs and generate one timer.

Maybe they can't, but they should.

Here is even a message you can display

"The Drone Bay will be cleared in approximately 20 seconds"

basically your idea is bad because you have not thought it through and make common errors made by people who don't know anything about what they're talking about

specifically, you clearly know nothing about coding, so you do not understand what makes problems potentially difficult. you are the walking example of the dunning-kruger effect: you do not know enough to know how little you know. your change is basically "what if we entirely rewrite fundamental assumptions about how this system works, that will be easy" you don't know the code, you don't know how it interfaces with other code, you don't know what testing and debugging even are, basically you're just sort of babbling incoherently. the core nugget from your post is that you don't have any idea what you're talking about and can be safely ignored

as for the mechanical merit: it's poorly thought out because you don't appear to realize that ships changing drone types is currently allowed and not-exploititive behavior and you are heavily nerfing that without any apparent knowledge you're doing so

now just because there are side effects doesn't make something bad - but you have to explain that you're aware of them and ok with them. here, ccp's solution admits the side effects and why they're ok with them (because death to supers they're overpowered ****). you didn't even realize your idea had a side effect

but really it's that you don't understand anything about what computer code is and probably think you just speak to a computer and it writes code that does what you told it to do and that's the fundamental issue here, so we're not likely to make much progress
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#240 - 2015-01-06 18:26:48 UTC
afkalt wrote:
I wonder how easy it might be to have damage drones fire at the END of the cycle...?

Solved. Instantly.

this is the sort of intelligent thinking that creates actually useful solutions

question would be if you'd break ewar drones (really ecm drones, the rest might as well not exist) which is sort of a code issue