These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Discussion] Entosis Link Tactics and Ship Balance

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#661 - 2015-03-09 20:19:28 UTC
"my ships attacking sov should not be at risk at all", says the man currently mining in highsec on an alt that has a bio ranting against the idea that anyone can attack his mining barge without being banned from the game
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#662 - 2015-03-09 20:20:05 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:

The eagle has a 50-150km engagement range with thorium. Load Javelin and you can hit him down to 20km. Less then that and you have to deal with drones, webs, scrams, and medium neuts. That's a total engagement profile from 0 to 150km against your 110km-locking sebo fit malediction. Done.

Oh and the maulus? The maulus keeps you damped to **** at ANY range you can lock at and kills you with frigate turrets, or better yet, warrior II's (if you get within 45km) which you won't be able to lock because damps.

But you're CFC, you should know all about that from F*** You Fleet.


Stop thinking about this as a 1v1. Think of this as fleet versus fleet. How does an alliance defend even a single constellation against an equal or larger force?

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#663 - 2015-03-09 20:21:15 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
All these proponents of the system keep thinking in terms of a 1v1. "I counter your off-grid boosted trollceptor with my Cerberus and my cyno alt in a Maulus."

Yes, Dominion sovereignty might not be perfect, but it is a damn site better than the above. The offensive power of Fozzie Sovereignty is completely out of balance. The defender has to be able to defend everywhere, but has no opportunity to fortify or entrench his position.

Some might say, "but the same thing will happen now!" This is simply untrue. For one, in Dominion, the offense has to commit significant assets to stage an attack. Yes, if someone brings fifty supers to the fight, A may have a problem. But if fifty supers come to the fight, A can request help from friendly alliance C and we get a big fight, or a massive blue-ball fest (that at least has the advantage of only being once, not every day). In Fozzieland, if C tries to help A against B, D will entosis C's stuff. And don't forget that anyone who comes to help probably gets Space Aids. Thank you, Fozzie.


Your example is flawed for several reasons:

1.) Small alliance A doesn't hold space in the current sov system. Perhaps big brother coalition C gives them a system (for a fee), but they will never truly own space unless they themselves can bring a huge force to attack.

2.) Alliance A is the underdog, and will lose space against bigger B. So what. They can then attempt to take it back, especially if alliance B doesn't bother to utilize it. Currently, if Big Bad Alliance B takes your sov, you can't do **** about it.

3.) With the 48 hour reinforcement window, Alliance A can call in all the backup they want. It's only a minor change in tactics for them to have an alliance A member in each backup fleet.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#664 - 2015-03-09 20:21:32 UTC
Maybe the point is no one can hold sov at all.

It would sure shake up something

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#665 - 2015-03-09 20:21:53 UTC  |  Edited by: EvilweaselFinance
"those goons don't want to be orbiting a structure doing nothing for four hours, this is the same as our insistence on never having a single ship at risk of death"
MASSADEATH
MASS A DEATH
Scumlords
#666 - 2015-03-09 20:22:02 UTC



Alavaria Fera wrote:
MASSADEATH wrote:
fleet report of what the current SOV meta creates....

http://scanner.black-legion.us/index.php?ino=161760

it just rolled thru our home system of 5z and RF'd a bunch of structures a few min ago.

how is that meta anymore unfair than the fear of troll ceptors? and the possible new SOV mechanics that are being discussed?

at the end of the day..the old mechanics must die , and new ones at least given a chance...

If these large groups are as good as they say they are , they should be able to withstand anything... so why even worry?

But you live in npc, not sov space? Wait are you crying because things in your home are being shot?

You definitely want to troll sov, not hold it.



No I think it opens up options to smaller groups... perhaps on the level of... you roll thru our SOV with your blob fleet.... we RF 20 of your systems ..basically an eye, for 2 legs a hand and 2 ears

who knows what negotiation powers the new sov mechanics will open up...

scorched earth is a viable tactic...and can bring about change as well....
Mac Chicovski
Capts Deranged Cavaliers
#667 - 2015-03-09 20:22:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Mac Chicovski

  • There should be some kind of limitation for non-sovholders from just spending all their time bugging sovholders, but not actually planning to take sov. As it stands, there is no reason for either individuals or small roams, as well as BL or PL or a WH group to not just come and entos all some smaller organization's sov. There is presently little or no risk for the attacker: their losses are trivial compared to their potential gains, and the defender has to respond.

    • One way of dealing with the totally uncommitted attacker is to give the module reasonable fitting requirements or make them use a links slot:
    1) Making T1 Entosis links require CPU and PG similar to, say, a 10mn MWD, and T2 Entosis equal to a 100mn MWD would be a decent way to avoid unserious attackers disproportionately affecting sov battles.

    2) Another way to go would be making them use a command links capable ship. As I think about it, this seems to have several things going for it:
    * It would require the 'command links' subsystem on a T3 to fit, which helps limit the power of T3.
    * Maybe you could give command ships an Entosis bonus to CPU and PG would make them more used in sov fights.

  • The thing I expect to be a tactical and strategic issue with defending sov is spending 4 hours of prime time on defense across all systems, not because it generates 4 hours of good fights, but because if you ignore anything, all sov being equally vulnerable if not equally valuable, you just set yourself up for a more serious problems. I mean, for any smaller alliances, in their prime time, people have to do their PvP stuff (roams, sov stuff), and have to do their PvE (ratting, mining, anoms, sites, etc). You're essentially shutting down all PvE during the 4 hours every day to deal with non-committed attackers.

    • 1) Instead or in addition to taking longer to do, one way of dealing with this would be to decrease the window for 'central' systems (surrounded by sov) with high index to, say, 1 hour a day, and make partially connected systems (one but not all gates go to sov) to between 2-3 hours, and put disconnected systems at 4 hours window.

    2) How about spawning Defending rats on the capture points, depending on system index. So, you have to deal with any defending forces as well as rats to control a capture point.

    3) Or, spawning regular rats on a capture point in proportion to what's on field, so that defenders can get some PvE value out of it, at a 20-40m per tick per ship level.
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#668 - 2015-03-09 20:22:46 UTC  |  Edited by: PotatoOverdose
FT Diomedes wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:

The eagle has a 50-150km engagement range with thorium. Load Javelin and you can hit him down to 20km. Less then that and you have to deal with drones, webs, scrams, and medium neuts. That's a total engagement profile from 0 to 150km against your 110km-locking sebo fit malediction. Done.

Oh and the maulus? The maulus keeps you damped to **** at ANY range you can lock at and kills you with frigate turrets, or better yet, warrior II's (if you get within 45km) which you won't be able to lock because damps.

But you're CFC, you should know all about that from F*** You Fleet.


Stop thinking about this as a 1v1. Think of this as fleet versus fleet. How does an alliance defend even a single constellation against an equal or larger force?

A fleet of eagles dunks a fleet of ceptors trying to hold a grid. A fleet of cynabals dunks a ceptor fleet. A fleet of caracals dunks a ceptor fleet. For the full list, go here.
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#669 - 2015-03-09 20:22:52 UTC
MASSADEATH wrote:

No I think it opens up options to smaller groups... perhaps on the level of... you roll thru our SOV with your blob fleet.... we RF 20 of your systems ..basically an eye, for 2 legs a hand and 2 ears

you don't have sov, and still won't

that said it is hilarious how much you're whining over your pos getting sieged
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#670 - 2015-03-09 20:24:33 UTC
"those goonies should have to orbit everything they own all the time if they don't want to lose their sov"

"someone shot at our pos? with ships? well of course we don't dare fight, time to whine about it on eveo they shouldn't be allowed to do that"
Trinneth
Knights of Nii
The 20 Minuters
#671 - 2015-03-09 20:26:30 UTC
xttz wrote:

I'm curious to know if CCP have considered different sizes of Entosis Link. For example:

Small Entosis Link (frigates / destroyers): 25km-40km range
Medium Entosis Link (cruisers / BCs): 40km-75km range
Large Entosis Link (battleships): 75-125km range
XL Entosis Link (capitals): 125km+ range


This seems like a promising idea.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#672 - 2015-03-09 20:29:36 UTC
EvilweaselFinance wrote:
MASSADEATH wrote:

No I think it opens up options to smaller groups... perhaps on the level of... you roll thru our SOV with your blob fleet.... we RF 20 of your systems ..basically an eye, for 2 legs a hand and 2 ears

you don't have sov, and still won't

that said it is hilarious how much you're whining over your pos getting sieged

If moa can kick us out of our sov, then one doubts they can avoid being kicked out of it themselves...

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
MASSADEATH
MASS A DEATH
Scumlords
#673 - 2015-03-09 20:31:59 UTC
EvilweaselFinance wrote:
MASSADEATH wrote:

No I think it opens up options to smaller groups... perhaps on the level of... you roll thru our SOV with your blob fleet.... we RF 20 of your systems ..basically an eye, for 2 legs a hand and 2 ears

you don't have sov, and still won't

that said it is hilarious how much you're whining over your pos getting sieged



we dont care about structures..my point was the size of force being used ..blow em up....whoo hoo... its all you can do..

the real fear you have is how the new mechanics render your blob fleets useless...in the defence area

there still is no solution for the blob fleet when attacking

any small entity that "tries" (in futility) to hold sov...will just have it removed by one of these large blob fleets..we have no delusions about that. Other than the fun and fights taking and losing it.

what it does change however is we can at least at the minimum now disrupt and deny yours as well, where as the current system does not allow for that.. perhaps it will create negotiations for some groups
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#674 - 2015-03-09 20:32:40 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
All these proponents of the system keep thinking in terms of a 1v1. "I counter your off-grid boosted trollceptor with my Cerberus and my cyno alt in a Maulus."

Yes, Dominion sovereignty might not be perfect, but it is a damn site better than the above. The offensive power of Fozzie Sovereignty is completely out of balance. The defender has to be able to defend everywhere, but has no opportunity to fortify or entrench his position.

Some might say, "but the same thing will happen now!" This is simply untrue. For one, in Dominion, the offense has to commit significant assets to stage an attack. Yes, if someone brings fifty supers to the fight, A may have a problem. But if fifty supers come to the fight, A can request help from friendly alliance C and we get a big fight, or a massive blue-ball fest (that at least has the advantage of only being once, not every day). In Fozzieland, if C tries to help A against B, D will entosis C's stuff. And don't forget that anyone who comes to help probably gets Space Aids. Thank you, Fozzie.


Your example is flawed for several reasons:

1.) Small alliance A doesn't hold space in the current sov system. Perhaps big brother coalition C gives them a system (for a fee), but they will never truly own space unless they themselves can bring a huge force to attack.

2.) Alliance A is the underdog, and will lose space against bigger B. So what. They can then attempt to take it back, especially if alliance B doesn't bother to utilize it. Currently, if Big Bad Alliance B takes your sov, you can't do **** about it.

3.) With the 48 hour reinforcement window, Alliance A can call in all the backup they want. It's only a minor change in tactics for them to have an alliance A member in each backup fleet.



(1) Alliance A can hold space in the current system, with big brother coalition C's support. The fee is paid in military service.

(2) Then how are small alliances going to gain a foothold? They cannot. They will get roflstomped by anyone large enough to want to destroy their stuff.

(3) Alliance A calls for backup from Alliance C. Alliance C moves pilots over. Now honorable third parties D, E, and F, join the fun and hit C's space while they are away. D, E, and F risk nothing, because they come from NPC space or low sec. Or from a coalition so large that it can send off a bunch of pilots during prime time.

In short, you will have a lot of stuff burn after this patch. Nothing will be rebuilt. Coalitions will hold the money moons and one or two critical areas where they continue to build supercapitals. Everyone else will get burned out of space in short order. Low sec and NPC nullsec are the real beneficiaries of the new system. The existing coalitions will become larger and more powerful, but 0.0 space on the whole will be more empty.

Unless of course, 800k new subscribers suddenly decide to start playing tomorrow and the PCU goes up to 100k. Which all trends indicate won't happen.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

SilentAsTheGrave
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#675 - 2015-03-09 20:33:22 UTC
Arrendis wrote:
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:
Here is what I don't understand:

Why are people taking sov of a system they don't want to be active in during their prime time?

Someone please tell me the logic behind that.


There's a few reasons I can see - resource availability, like moons, or buffer zones, for example. Border Marches have a long history, after all, along with the 'good fences make good neighbors' idea.

Or constellation/region choke points. Just because you want to hold an area to exploit its strategic value and resources doesn't mean you want to live there - or that it's capable of supporting efforts to live there.

At the same time, there should be ways to make use of that space that actually count as making use of that space, if it's something you're holding for military/industrial value, not residential, if you will.

Paying the pilots from the war chest to be active in these systems is out of the question?
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#676 - 2015-03-09 20:34:16 UTC
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:

Paying the pilots from the war chest to be active in these systems is out of the question?

why would we want the game to reward unfun bore-offs where you have to pay people to play the game
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#677 - 2015-03-09 20:37:27 UTC
EvilweaselFinance wrote:
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:

Paying the pilots from the war chest to be active in these systems is out of the question?

why would we want the game to reward unfun bore-offs where you have to pay people to play the game

All it means is that to kill the coalitions you need to nerf their income so that the bore-offs will lead to their bankrupcy and then collapse

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
progodlegend
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#678 - 2015-03-09 20:41:17 UTC
Gorski Car wrote:
There are so many things you can do to counter trollceptors I cant help but think that this is a vocal minority overreacting and creating doomsday scenarios.


You're considering this from the perspective of an individual grid or even an individual engagement. But from the perspective of someone who most run an alliance, and choose how much daily stress to put their alliance under, it's an entirely different thought process.

There are counters to everything. There are counters to Ishtars, there are counters to tengu fleet, there were even counters to carrier assigned fighters which you seemed to hate so much. Just because something has a counter doesn't mean that the risk vs. reward aspect is balanced for both the attacker and the defender.
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#679 - 2015-03-09 20:43:59 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:

Ceptor orbits structure for 30 minutes. Maulus comes by, damps it to hell, leaves. Ceptor's got another 40 minutes to go.

Done.


yes, a bore-off

thank you for conceding you were wrong
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#680 - 2015-03-09 20:45:13 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
All these proponents of the system keep thinking in terms of a 1v1. "I counter your off-grid boosted trollceptor with my Cerberus and my cyno alt in a Maulus."

Yes, Dominion sovereignty might not be perfect, but it is a damn site better than the above. The offensive power of Fozzie Sovereignty is completely out of balance. The defender has to be able to defend everywhere, but has no opportunity to fortify or entrench his position.

Some might say, "but the same thing will happen now!" This is simply untrue. For one, in Dominion, the offense has to commit significant assets to stage an attack. Yes, if someone brings fifty supers to the fight, A may have a problem. But if fifty supers come to the fight, A can request help from friendly alliance C and we get a big fight, or a massive blue-ball fest (that at least has the advantage of only being once, not every day). In Fozzieland, if C tries to help A against B, D will entosis C's stuff. And don't forget that anyone who comes to help probably gets Space Aids. Thank you, Fozzie.


Your example is flawed for several reasons:

1.) Small alliance A doesn't hold space in the current sov system. Perhaps big brother coalition C gives them a system (for a fee), but they will never truly own space unless they themselves can bring a huge force to attack.

2.) Alliance A is the underdog, and will lose space against bigger B. So what. They can then attempt to take it back, especially if alliance B doesn't bother to utilize it. Currently, if Big Bad Alliance B takes your sov, you can't do **** about it.

3.) With the 48 hour reinforcement window, Alliance A can call in all the backup they want. It's only a minor change in tactics for them to have an alliance A member in each backup fleet.



(1) Alliance A can hold space in the current system, with big brother coalition C's support. The fee is paid in military service.

(2) Then how are small alliances going to gain a foothold? They cannot. They will get roflstomped by anyone large enough to want to destroy their stuff.

(3) Alliance A calls for backup from Alliance C. Alliance C moves pilots over. Now honorable third parties D, E, and F, join the fun and hit C's space while they are away. D, E, and F risk nothing, because they come from NPC space or low sec. Or from a coalition so large that it can send off a bunch of pilots during prime time.

In short, you will have a lot of stuff burn after this patch. Nothing will be rebuilt. Coalitions will hold the money moons and one or two critical areas where they continue to build supercapitals. Everyone else will get burned out of space in short order. Low sec and NPC nullsec are the real beneficiaries of the new system. The existing coalitions will become larger and more powerful, but 0.0 space on the whole will be more empty.

Unless of course, 800k new subscribers suddenly decide to start playing tomorrow and the PCU goes up to 100k. Which all trends indicate won't happen.


In the current system, there is only one way small alliances hold space: They are serfs to larger groups. They pay with military service, rental agreements, or whatever. But they have NO ABILITY to stand on their own with the current mechanics.

In the new system, small alliances can attack unused systems and break down an overstretched alliances hold. They might not even bother "claiming" the space, but simply live there and continually prevent big alliance form using it. Sure, they might periodically lose there space at the whims of big bully alliance B, but that's no different than now. The difference is they can actually attack sov without bluing half the galaxy.

Are you really complaining that alliance C has to weigh the risks of third partying a distant fight with their own home defense? That's a great thing for them to have to consider, and if alliance A has their space rolled because they can't bring in a big brother to help defend their space, that is also a good thing!