These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Scylla] Skynet - Removing Fighter Assist

First post First post First post
Author
Chronos Anneto
Capital Fusion.
WE FORM BL0B
#841 - 2015-03-03 08:41:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Chronos Anneto
Just to eccho someone else who thought the same thing. Make it impossible to delegate fighters/fighter bomberinos near pos. For supers that would be very effective. Smile That would mean that supers would have to be at a safe 1000km off aligned to pos. and we all know how easy it would be for a hictor to probe can andd bubble before it got it's fighter bombers back into drone bay.
VolatileVoid
Viking Clan
#842 - 2015-03-03 08:42:22 UTC
No you can't because they don't exist anymore.
Kane Carnifex
Duty. Joint Harvesting
WE FORM BL0B
#843 - 2015-03-03 08:51:08 UTC
OFFTOPIC


VolatileVoid wrote:
No you can't because they don't exist anymore.


Ok, than i was lucky for unknown reason.

But i was scared as eve tired to tell me my 15 Fighters are gone and i actually scanned them 3 AU of the Station.
I also saw on the forums which you will not get them back through an support Ticket.

http://vesuvi.de - EVE & Food Porn in German...

afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#844 - 2015-03-03 08:52:55 UTC
I'm still waiting for even one of these risk averse cowards to explain why, in a world where people are against off grid boosting, they think off grid DPS is somehow "ok"....Cost and training time are not a reason.

Man up, put it on grid. If you don't have the fortitude for that risk, stop flying it.

Hell you get change out 1.5b for an archon these days. People lose ships worth that on a daily basis.
Kane Carnifex
Duty. Joint Harvesting
WE FORM BL0B
#845 - 2015-03-03 09:11:02 UTC
afkalt wrote:
...in a world where people are against off grid boosting, they think off grid DPS is somehow "ok"....



I personally don´t see a problem with any kind of offgrid support.

But (always wait for the but :P)



CCP don't provide tools against it. Following are Ideas which solving the problem from another side.
These Ideas are ideas and maybe very very OP on their clear facts


    Stuff which may "help" to solve the "none" existing skynet problem.
  • A anti-drone Module, either by disabling the ability of a single ship to use drones or limit the bandwidth.

  • I have really no idea as i still unable to locate the Problem
    Other Problems
  • A anti-boosting bubble, all boosts are disabled in this area. (Friendly and unfriendly)
  • Counter Boosts, against other fleets by interfering with something the ship has a malfunction which increase X


The point i want to reach with this is there are stuff in the game which you cannot counter and this is maybe good.
But as i love complexity i want more features, more tactics possibilities etc..

http://vesuvi.de - EVE & Food Porn in German...

Kazaheid Zaknafein
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#846 - 2015-03-03 09:20:36 UTC
Like it has been said before, Removing the ability to assist drones near a pos or station would fix the problem of skynet.

Carriers have never been a line of sight weapons platform, historically and for the most part in eve. The advantage a carrier provides is the ability to project damage while staying out of harms way. And the carrier's inherent weakness is its vulnerability without its fighters to protect itself.



And for those who complain that there is no counter to the off grid carrier, watch how quickly they dock or run to pos when you launch probes in system. And if that doesn't work, just kill the ship serving as a drone anchor; no more fighter dps then.
Suitonia
Order of the Red Kestrel
#847 - 2015-03-03 10:35:10 UTC
Kazaheid Zaknafein wrote:
Like it has been said before, Removing the ability to assist drones near a pos or station would fix the problem of skynet.

Carriers have never been a line of sight weapons platform, historically and for the most part in eve. The advantage a carrier provides is the ability to project damage while staying out of harms way. And the carrier's inherent weakness is its vulnerability without its fighters to protect itself.



And for those who complain that there is no counter to the off grid carrier, watch how quickly they dock or run to pos when you launch probes in system. And if that doesn't work, just kill the ship serving as a drone anchor; no more fighter dps then.


There is still many exploits you can do without being next to a POS force field.

Contributer to Eve is Easy:  https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos

Solo PvP is possible with a 20 day old character! :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvOB4KXYk-o

Cpt Patrick Archer
I HAVE THE POWER OF GOD AND ANIME ON MY SIDE
Blue Eyes and Exodia Toon Duelist Kingdom Duelers
#848 - 2015-03-03 10:51:01 UTC
Suitonia wrote:

There is still many exploits you can do without being next to a POS force field.


Such as?

If CCP would make it so that assigning fighters stops your carrier from warping/jump/cloaking and needs to be at least 50km from the pos shield (edit: or station or gate etc), it can easily be killed.

Risk vs. Reward...
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#849 - 2015-03-03 11:52:58 UTC
afkalt wrote:
I'm still waiting for even one of these risk averse cowards to explain why, in a world where people are against off grid boosting, they think off grid DPS is somehow "ok"....Cost and training time are not a reason.

Man up, put it on grid. If you don't have the fortitude for that risk, stop flying it.

Hell you get change out 1.5b for an archon these days. People lose ships worth that on a daily basis.


I don't think there is anyone here who supports the mechanics that allow for the skynet thing or a very small number if there is, most people don't want to see another huge feature nerf/removal that affects a wider spread of uses including non-pvp use due to the actions of a few.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#850 - 2015-03-03 12:12:17 UTC
Nope, but the problem is that game mechanics exist which prevent the carrier ever being at risk even if POS and station did not exist.

Fixing all the edge cases that may be manufactured by clever players is probably not even possible much less practical.

There have been a great many things in the history of eve destroyed due to the actions of a few - caps are not unique in this respect. Usually I have sympathy for those who lost, but in this case, I've none. Just like I'll have none when links are forced on grid.

At the end of the day, people put faction fit marauders/T3/battleship on the line on field on a regular basis, but people are too scared to do the same with a capital which doesnt cost significantly more*....because why? Hell people fly in pods with multiple billions in low sec.

People need to get over the mental hurdles of committing caps to a fight, on grid.





*supers being stupid not withstanding
Kane Carnifex
Duty. Joint Harvesting
WE FORM BL0B
#851 - 2015-03-03 12:28:02 UTC
Rroff wrote:

I don't think there is anyone here who supports the mechanics that allow for the skynet thing or a very small number if there is, most people don't want to see another huge feature nerf/removal that affects a wider spread of uses including non-pvp use due to the actions of a few.



I don´t see skynet as an problem. Also the mentioned Risk / Reward is totally ok, as if you want to kill a carrier you either bring a titan,super or a bigger subcap fleet which again comes to the point if nobody of the involved parts sees an advantage where no advantage is there will be no battle.

To be clear:

The removal of this feature will not increase the amount of battles as the most small gangs are totally unable to kill a carrier or even get through the active tank. So they will run away once they see a capital on Dscan or badphone for more people.

Unfortunately only a view people try to address the issue which it looks like there is a huge problem with the POS Mechanics and the Factor to be brave and make a drive by with a titan.

Still i have problems to understand the problem with skynet as all features are given to kill a carrier... I think there are much more features which are unreasonable accepted regarding the risk / reward scheme.


http://vesuvi.de - EVE & Food Porn in German...

Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#852 - 2015-03-03 12:28:21 UTC
afkalt wrote:

At the end of the day, people put faction fit marauders/T3/battleship on the line on field on a regular basis, but people are too scared to do the same with a capital which doesnt cost significantly more*....because why? Hell people fly in pods with multiple billions in low sec.

People need to get over the mental hurdles of committing caps to a fight, on grid.





*supers being stupid not withstanding


Somewhat its due to the logistics of replacing a capital and/or for some people a capital is the product of years of training and investment which is generally a higher order than even a pimp marauder.

You get over it a bit after losing the first capital - but I've still got my first thanny (survived 5-6 fights) and a bit of attachment to that particular one and while I'm not afraid to risk it on grid and have done so won't just throw it away.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#853 - 2015-03-03 12:37:12 UTC  |  Edited by: afkalt
Rroff wrote:
afkalt wrote:

At the end of the day, people put faction fit marauders/T3/battleship on the line on field on a regular basis, but people are too scared to do the same with a capital which doesnt cost significantly more*....because why? Hell people fly in pods with multiple billions in low sec.

People need to get over the mental hurdles of committing caps to a fight, on grid.





*supers being stupid not withstanding


Somewhat its due to the logistics of replacing a capital and/or for some people a capital is the product of years of training and investment which is generally a higher order than even a pimp marauder.

You get over it a bit after losing the first capital - but I've still got my first thanny (survived 5-6 fights) and a bit of attachment to that particular one and while I'm not afraid to risk it on grid and have done so won't just throw it away.


There is also the proclivity of the ENTIRE sector to dogpile - which no-one does for a mere pirate battleship. But that's because they are so rare, it becomes self-fulfilling.

The problems are psychological. I mean, let's take for example a common RnK hotdrop: 3 nestors, probably deadspace/faction fit. Half a dozen vindis in the same position, various other bits and bobs. I'd be willing to bet that the nestors alone would have an almost comparable cost to "cheaper" (i.e. not pimped) archons but are far squisher.

The barriers are purely in players minds - though you're right to mention the logistics of replacement, but that's not the end of the world.

I'd understand it more if there was skill point loss, nobody wants to retrain carrier V!

For me, I'm looking at it objectively, ignoring the cost and train (because that's NEVER a balance point - perhaps more specifically never a justification to something being broken) - imagine the reaction if high sec mission bears asked to project DPS from offgrid in essentially complete safety (given sufficient planning)? It would be an outrage - and rightly so.

The other acid test is - if these didn't exist today but people proposed adding them - what would the reaction be? You and I both know the answer to that.
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#854 - 2015-03-03 12:58:13 UTC
afkalt wrote:

The other acid test is - if these didn't exist today but people proposed adding them - what would the reaction be? You and I both know the answer to that.


You'd never get an objective response to that proposal today anyhow a good bulk of players have no intention of flying capitals and/or only play eve in a disposable or flavour of the month manner and wouldn't be for anything that wasn't easy prey for an ishtar or stealth bomber.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#855 - 2015-03-03 13:06:24 UTC
Very much so, if you consider it a carrier only thing.

However....."Gecko V2.0 - Super heavy drone 50m3, can be assigned to off grid fleet mates, battleship only drone".

Same mechanic, cost and skill time irrelevant (as they ought to be)...you honestly think people would go for that? I seriously doubt it.
Necharo Rackham
The Red Circle Inc.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#856 - 2015-03-03 13:23:27 UTC
Kane Carnifex wrote:

The removal of this feature will not increase the amount of battles as the most small gangs are totally unable to kill a carrier or even get through the active tank. So they will run away once they see a capital on Dscan or badphone for more people.


I think there are plenty of small gangs that could kill a full gank fit carrier on grid - i mean, if they are unable to kill it, why have it in/near the POS to start with?
Cpt Patrick Archer
I HAVE THE POWER OF GOD AND ANIME ON MY SIDE
Blue Eyes and Exodia Toon Duelist Kingdom Duelers
#857 - 2015-03-03 13:24:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Cpt Patrick Archer
afkalt wrote:
Very much so, if you consider it a carrier only thing.

However....."Gecko V2.0 - Super heavy drone 50m3, can be assigned to off grid fleet mates, battleship only drone".

Same mechanic, cost and skill time irrelevant (as they ought to be)...you honestly think people would go for that? I seriously doubt it.


That discussion is not very relevant I don't think.

The fact is that we have this awesome feature, had it for years. Sure it's not very balanced and definitely needs tweaking, but removing is not the answer. As I hope to God, CCP can guess if they count the replies to this thread.

The problem with the figher assists is that the carrier can't be killed, apart from a very lucky and welltimed drive-by.
If this is changed I think the feature is perfectly balanced.
Sure the fighters will still be powerful, but that is no different than a frigate being less powerful than a well-fit/well-flown destroyer or cruiser that is specifically designed to kill those frigates.
CCP Rise
C C P
C C P Alliance
#858 - 2015-03-03 13:33:11 UTC
Hello

Appreciate all the feedback very much.

Based on what you've said here we are planning to leave Fighter warping in, but stick with removing assist.

We hear the concerns about the state of capitals and loss of return on investment from training towards them and we absolutely want to make sure that caps of all kinds are not only viable but exciting and powerful. We still feel this change is necessary, but we are looking into ways to improve on the state of capitals and capital balance. No news on that front for now but it's something we are committed to improving.

Thanks again.

@ccp_rise

Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#859 - 2015-03-03 13:39:16 UTC
*Grabs popcorn and waits for the crying*

Yaay!!!!

Nolak Ataru
Singularity Expedition Services
Singularity Syndicate
#860 - 2015-03-03 13:39:23 UTC
afkalt wrote:
I'm still waiting for even one of these risk averse cowards to explain why, in a world where people are against off grid boosting, they think off grid DPS is somehow "ok"....Cost and training time are not a reason.
Man up, put it on grid. If you don't have the fortitude for that risk, stop flying it.
Hell you get change out 1.5b for an archon these days. People lose ships worth that on a daily basis.


It has been explained countless times in this thread, but we forgive you for not reading.
All one has to do is look at the Revenant KM to be able to laugh at anyone saying skynetting is 100% safe, but we are willing to sacrifice a bit; namely, have a bubble around a POS from which you cannot delegate fighters from.