These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#301 - 2015-01-06 21:21:39 UTC
the funny thing is all the people who somehow manage to twist "remove all supercapitals from the game in one fell swoop" into "only remove supercaps from one targeted group" when "d2supers" is obviously the former
Angelique Duchemin
Team Evil
#302 - 2015-01-06 21:22:54 UTC
Marlona Sky 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 guess that blog by your leader not log ago ordering all goons to NOT sell their super capitals is a figment of my imagination?


No Goon can order any other Goon to do anything.

The very sun of heaven seemed distorted when viewed through the polarising miasma welling out from this sea-soaked perversion, and twisted menace and suspense lurked leeringly in those crazily elusive angles of carven rock where a second glance shewed concavity after the first shewed convexity.

Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#303 - 2015-01-06 21:31:08 UTC
Angelique Duchemin wrote:
Marlona Sky 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 guess that blog by your leader not log ago ordering all goons to NOT sell their super capitals is a figment of my imagination?


No Goon can order any other Goon to do anything.


How about "Never stop posting" ?

:D
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#304 - 2015-01-06 21:32:42 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
How about "Never stop posting" ?

there are some acceptable times to stop posting

e.g.: being asleep, or dead
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#305 - 2015-01-06 21:44:38 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:

I guess that blog by your leader not log ago ordering all goons to NOT sell their super capitals is a figment of my imagination?


what better way to ensure death 2 supers than by having as many goons in supers as possible
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#306 - 2015-01-06 21:48:12 UTC
the only real way that goons have to affect change in the game is to abuse every single broken aspect of the game in order to force action by the sole dint of our particular organization abusing said mechanic

it's well established that as long as we aren't using (INSERT GAME MECHANIC) it is allowed to exist tacitly (though this particular thread, afaik, is an exception to this rule)

see: why our primary fleet comps are tengus and dominixes
Panther X
Destructive Influence
Northern Coalition.
#307 - 2015-01-06 21:50:47 UTC
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
Tykonderoga wrote:

Whatever you are on, can I please have some?


We never fight outnumbered, we are blue with everyone, no one dogpiles any fight we're in.


Edit: It's pretty obvious what mechanics are "best" in the current meta. We're going to keep utilizing them until CCP makes a change.

1: Sentry Drones (ishtar/domi)
2: Tengus
3: Goonswarm Developers at CCP


I have to agree with this. Especially #3.

Cool

My Titan smells of rich Corinthian Leather...
Arkady Romanov
Whole Squid
#308 - 2015-01-06 22:06:08 UTC
Kind of interesting to see the basic attitude towards this depending on which bloc is posting.

Goons: meh or Yay.
NC. Kadeshi: waah aaaaa!
PL: *silence*

As to why Goons are still stockpiling supers; it's no secret. Jump range nerfs/fatigue notwithstanding the best (and often only) way to kill a large blob of supers is with a bigger blob of supers. Until that changes (probably because goons do their damndest to use a stupid mechanic to the nth degree deliberately to get things changed) goons will fly supers.

Whole Squid: Get Inked.
LtCdr S Ivanova
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#309 - 2015-01-06 22:17:50 UTC
I want my cash back, Goon DEV's altering the game for their goon players moderated by goon ISD.

yeah only been in this game a month and reading all these forum threads leads me to the above conclusion.

Right to the topic...

Drones should match the ship they are being launched from frigs = lights and so on
Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#310 - 2015-01-06 22:25:48 UTC
Promiscuous Female wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
How about "Never stop posting" ?

there are some acceptable times to stop posting

e.g.: being asleep, or dead


or being Mr Omniblivion
Alexis Nightwish
#311 - 2015-01-06 23:19:08 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
The primary goal of this change is to ensure that rapidly scooping and relaunching fighters and fighter bombers never gives a dps advantage.

So instead of, you know, preventing the rapid scooping and relaunching of fighters and fighter bombers by either adding a cooldown to such actions or by tracking drones' cycle time while in the drone bay, you change the scan resolution?

I can only see three possibilities here. Laziness, incompetence, or deception.

CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge

EVE Online's "I win!" Button

Fixing bombs, not the bombers
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#312 - 2015-01-06 23:42:07 UTC
we need drone bay fatigue

make it happen
Yuri Thorpe
Volatile Restability
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#313 - 2015-01-07 00:01:48 UTC
Promiscuous Female wrote:
we need drone bay fatigue

make it happen

Don't give them ideas, they will make docking fatigue a thing too
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#314 - 2015-01-07 00:06:41 UTC
Yuri Thorpe wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:
we need drone bay fatigue

make it happen

Don't give them ideas, they will make docking fatigue a thing too

sorry but this just sounds dirty
Panther X
Destructive Influence
Northern Coalition.
#315 - 2015-01-07 00:08:30 UTC
Arkady Romanov wrote:
Kind of interesting to see the basic attitude towards this depending on which bloc is posting.

Goons: meh or Yay.
NC. Kadeshi: waah aaaaa!
PL: *silence*

As to why Goons are still stockpiling supers; it's no secret. Jump range nerfs/fatigue notwithstanding the best (and often only) way to kill a large blob of supers is with a bigger blob of supers. Until that changes (probably because goons do their damndest to use a stupid mechanic to the nth degree deliberately to get things changed) goons will fly supers.



Well you could say that about Tykonderoga, but I'm more of an inquisitive sort. I just want to understand the whys and wherefores of this. I want to know what the DIRECT correlation is between the so called "exploit" and reducing fighter bombers scan resolution over 90%.

This exploit just seems a bit hokey. Nothing to do with Goons vrs. NC DOT/Kadeshi Coalition politics.

It just happens that like an old married couple, we can never really agree on anything, even just on principle.

My Titan smells of rich Corinthian Leather...
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#316 - 2015-01-07 00:30:53 UTC
Panther X wrote:

Well you could say that about Tykonderoga, but I'm more of an inquisitive sort. I just want to understand the whys and wherefores of this. I want to know what the DIRECT correlation is between the so called "exploit" and reducing fighter bombers scan resolution over 90%.

nice fishing expedition cochise
Sootsia
HIgh Sec Care Bears
Brothers of Tangra
#317 - 2015-01-07 00:39:10 UTC
Angelique Duchemin wrote:
Panther X wrote:
If they are an extension of the ship, shouldn't they have a scan res equal to that of the ship that launched them?


Maybe?

Before this change a Bomber had a scan res 5 times higher than the ship that launched them. After this change they will have about half the scan res of the ship that launched them.


Kuosu wrote:
Please explain how exactly this addresses stated exploit...


In the old system the fighter-bombers had the lock time of a cruiser. This meant that you could scoop and launch them and they would instantly lock their target and begin applying DPS.

With these changes the bombers will have to lock the target again every time you launch them and the time lost on applying a new lock will nullify the benefit of scooping and re-launching them.


It will also add a delay between switching targets since the bomber now need around 14 seconds to lock a battleship and even as much as 30 seconds to lock smaller Cruisers.

So if a Super has say.... 2 hictors locked then switching from one to the other will have a bomber lock time of about 15 seconds even if the super itself already has both of them locked. This will also make the hictors see the drones yellow boxing them far in advance of the actual damage. Giving the Hictor team time to switch points and alert logi support.


Edit: something, something, death to supers.


I respectfully disagree... unless the target, AND the fighters/fighter bombers AND the ship that deployed them are at such a range in which that becomes true (Range = less than 4000 meters of the drone in question). the only drone to which all this hullabaloo is more apt to be true of, is not fighters, not Fighter bombers, not heavy drones, not medium drone, nor light drones, but virtually solely the Provence of sentries. This war-cry against fighters, and fighter bombers, is very similar to the propaganda used by J
Joseph Goebbels

"It would not be impossible to prove with sufficient repetition and a psychological understanding of the people concerned that a square is in fact a circle. They are mere words, and words can be molded until they clothe ideas and disguise.”
― Joseph Goebbels
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#318 - 2015-01-07 00:51:06 UTC
Sootsia wrote:
This war-cry against fighters, and fighter bombers, is very similar to the propaganda used by J
Joseph Goebbels

"It would not be impossible to prove with sufficient repetition and a psychological understanding of the people concerned that a square is in fact a circle. They are mere words, and words can be molded until they clothe ideas and disguise.”
― Joseph Goebbels

:siren: NAZI REFERENCE DETECTED :siren:
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#319 - 2015-01-07 00:52:02 UTC
thread is now initiating Godwin lockdown protocol Eta Eta One Four
Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#320 - 2015-01-07 00:55:42 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
Primary This Rifter wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:
Thats cute, but its not my problem if CCPs spaghetti code makes it hard for them to implement a new timer, that is CCP's problem and I can still expect them to actually fix what they claim they want to fix. Perhaps if they didn't spend the last 5 years kicking cans down the road they would have been able to streamline their code a bit more so they could overhaul aspects of the game they believe necessary to change. Keep in mind that this change is not only about DPS, but also avoiding server load. That server load is just as easily spiked with subcap drone usage as it it is with Capital drone usage. HED-GP?

I too would enjoy living in this fantasy world where "bad code" is the only thing preventing computers from doing everything you want them to.


Making Abandon/Scoop/Recall to Drone bay trigger a timer is perfectly possible within the game. We see this already occurring in a broad spectrum of commands in game already (reload weapons for example). In fact we just saw them implement a new timer tied to Jump to Beacon commands, that didn't exist before. So the computer can be told to function to have a command also begin a timer.

We also know that timers can be made to prevent someone from issuing commands again across a wide array of things. Which means locking drone commands based on a timer, is also a possible process in the game.

If for any reason this can not be implemented due to code structure, than it is an issue with the code, not the process capability of the game. So yes, if it can not be implemented, it is because of bad code, period.

It's not about code structure, it's about computing resources.
Keeping track of these timers would increase server load, which goes against part of CCP's intent for this change.