These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Harry Saq
Of Tears and ISK
ISK.Net
#1181 - 2015-03-11 16:53:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Harry Saq
@CCP Fozzie
Would it be feasible to have the Entosis module activate an interface as suggested in my prior post here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5570599#post5570599

All of the balance issues mentioned would be answered if the pilot were fully engaged while running the laser, and it would require teamwork, as multiboxing support ships would also not be ideal or feasible.

Ninja Edit Below:

The idea is to avoid any and all punitive modifications, or unnecessary changes to ships AND create something engaging and challenging for the person actually running the link to do.

Push Button to activate module and wait is the fundamental design flaw/stagnation to most of eve activities that lead to both boredom and innovative mechanic breaking/bending gameplay, as you have nothing else to do.

The aspects of the game that are fun and engaging are when you activate a module and have to monitor various things and make many corrections to avoid an unhappy fate. Such as maintaining optimal, while shield boosting and managing cap all while trying to hold someone down and overheating without burning modules up. While that example is multiple modules, each module requires some level of diligence to employ, and focus cannot be ideally split away from the task at hand.

Since the idea of the entosis module is to be used once battlefield supremacy is achieved, the entosis module should require active engaging diligence and action to engage during the entirety of the cycle. If this is achieved we won't be talking about all the workarounds and ninja tactics, as ideally the pilot will be too busy just trying to keep the module on target/calibrated/focused or whatever, and may not even be able to keep track of his immediate surroundings or local intel. Much like the "stay on target" mantra we all hear in our heads when we think of nuking the deathstar, you don't have time for anything else yada yada.

This solution avoids punitive corrections, and instead creates something new, exciting, and challenging to do what the punitive corrections would be trying to do anyway, since the real problem is push a button and wait.
Philip Ogtaulmolfi
We are not bad. Just unlucky
#1182 - 2015-03-11 16:53:42 UTC
John McCreedy wrote:

I completely agree. I'm just against saying that players during a certain period of the day can't mine, can't rat, can't do anything other than camp up to three structures in a system in order to prevent a single Interceptor from disrupting the sov.



Not exactly. During this 4 hour period you rat, mine or do whatever you like. Then, one of the several alliance members that are in the system jumps to the structure jumps to it, breaks his lock by any available method.,nd carry on with your own business.
If he insist, 40 minutes later rinse and repeat.

I expect the interceptor will get bored before you.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1183 - 2015-03-11 16:54:50 UTC
Harry Saq wrote:
@CCP Fozzie
Would it be feasible to have the Entosis module activate an interface as suggested in m prior post here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5570599#post5570599

All of the balance issues mentioned would be answered if the pilot were fully engaged while running the laser, and it would require teamwork, as multiboxing support ships would also not be ideal or feasible.


We'd much rather allow the Entosis Link ship to continue fighting and maneuvering to stay alive while it captures.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#1184 - 2015-03-11 17:03:30 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Harry Saq wrote:
@CCP Fozzie
Would it be feasible to have the Entosis module activate an interface as suggested in m prior post here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5570599#post5570599

All of the balance issues mentioned would be answered if the pilot were fully engaged while running the laser, and it would require teamwork, as multiboxing support ships would also not be ideal or feasible.


We'd much rather allow the Entosis Link ship to continue fighting and maneuvering to stay alive while it captures.

This is at odds with your stated objective that capture be predicated on controlling the field. If one side controls the field, then there is no need for the Entosis Link ship to do anything but run the laser. If the Entosis Link ship needs "to continue fighting and maneuvering to stay alive" then obviously his/her side does not control the field.

MDD
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#1185 - 2015-03-11 17:04:00 UTC
Now if we could get this sort of back-and-forth from you on the ISBoxer thread...
Borachon
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1186 - 2015-03-11 17:06:24 UTC
Eli Apol wrote:

The issue is then assuming that the attackers only turn up with their ceptors for the RF timer AND that the defence is unable to cope with the event with the 2 day advance notice (after only a small percentage of 'mistakes')


The defender *does* have an advantage, but with scheduled events, there's a significant risk that someone big player shows up with something a modest alliance can't handle. Even so, I'd probably target breaking even when you win 66-75% of ihub reinforces and 90-95% of sov pings. If you remove the frieghter costs from ihubs and upgrades (set freighter/jump freighter cost to 0) and do something to up the chance of losing an interceptor running an entosis link to around 25% (limit them to T1 or small-sized links with short range?), things seem to break even at a reasonable place.
Duffyman
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1187 - 2015-03-11 17:07:33 UTC
Let me start by sayinvv that most of us want sov to be easier to contest. The on
ly thing we are requesting is to be able to fight whoever is attaking us. The current design pretty much allows anyone to go in, contest the sov and moonwalk out at will. There are several ideas out there. Restrict by class, make the attacking ship stand still... Just pick one so that we don't spend hours chasing guys who have no interest in having sov at all...
Harry Saq
Of Tears and ISK
ISK.Net
#1188 - 2015-03-11 17:08:55 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Harry Saq wrote:
@CCP Fozzie
Would it be feasible to have the Entosis module activate an interface as suggested in m prior post here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5570599#post5570599

All of the balance issues mentioned would be answered if the pilot were fully engaged while running the laser, and it would require teamwork, as multiboxing support ships would also not be ideal or feasible.


We'd much rather allow the Entosis Link ship to continue fighting and maneuvering to stay alive while it captures.


@CCP FOzzie

I ninja edited, can you address the below:

"The idea is to avoid any and all punitive modifications, or unnecessary changes to ships AND create something engaging and challenging for the person actually running the link to do.

Push Button to activate module and wait is the fundamental design flaw/stagnation to most of eve activities that lead to both boredom and innovative mechanic breaking/bending gameplay, as you have nothing else to do.

The aspects of the game that are fun and engaging are when you activate a module and have to monitor various things and make many corrections to avoid an unhappy fate. Such as maintaining optimal, while shield boosting and managing cap all while trying to hold someone down and overheating without burning modules up. While that example is multiple modules, each module requires some level of diligence to employ, and focus cannot be ideally split away from the task at hand.

Since the idea of the entosis module is to be used once battlefield supremacy is achieved, the entosis module should require active engaging diligence and action to engage during the entirety of the cycle. If this is achieved we won't be talking about all the workarounds and ninja tactics, as ideally the pilot will be too busy just trying to keep the module on target/calibrated/focused or whatever, and may not even be able to keep track of his immediate surroundings or local intel. Much like the "stay on target" mantra we all hear in our heads when we think of nuking the deathstar, you don't have time for anything else yada yada.

This solution avoids punitive corrections, and instead creates something new, exciting, and challenging to do what the punitive corrections would be trying to do anyway, since the real problem is push a button and wait."
Freedom Nadd
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#1189 - 2015-03-11 17:14:02 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Harry Saq wrote:
@CCP Fozzie
Would it be feasible to have the Entosis module activate an interface as suggested in m prior post here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5570599#post5570599

All of the balance issues mentioned would be answered if the pilot were fully engaged while running the laser, and it would require teamwork, as multiboxing support ships would also not be ideal or feasible.


We'd much rather allow the Entosis Link ship to continue fighting and maneuvering to stay alive while it captures.


Would it be possible to stack defending E-Links to allow a defender who does actually control the field to reverse the timer?
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1190 - 2015-03-11 17:24:52 UTC  |  Edited by: afkalt
Appreciate the response. I'll edit them into post #2 so it's obvious.

Thanks Fozzie.

Ed: Turns out there are too many quotes so I just linked it.
John McCreedy
Eve Defence Force
#1191 - 2015-03-11 17:26:15 UTC  |  Edited by: John McCreedy
CCP Fozzie wrote:

ADMlNlSTRATOR wrote:
Is it true that using a Entosis Link on a sovereignty structure will NOT display any notifications to the players of the alliance owning the structure unless they are in the system under attack? Because, if so, it would highly disengage players from defending their space rather than engage them to undock and go defend their space.
Some big alliances will used their existing IT infrastructure to query the API for such events, but even so, this information will probably be 10 minus late, if even available to normal players (think FC, Directors, CEO only). While there is the question whether you want small scale sovereignty attacks to be dependable with or without FCs, in order to get more people engaged, the attack notifications should be instantaneous and to all players in the alliance owning the structure under attack.


The current plan is indeed to have the notifications instantaneously sent to all alliance members.


With respect Fozzie, that's not what he asked. You skilfully sidestepped the question. Does it or does it not require members to be in the system under attack? Yes or no?

You have also still not clarified whether the module requires one cycle or multiple cycles to achieve what its designed to achieve? Please answer this question because the answer can fundamentally change the discussion.

13 years and counting. Eve Defence Force is recruiting.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1192 - 2015-03-11 17:30:12 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
John McCreedy wrote:
With respect Fozzie, that's not what he asked. You skilfully sidestepped the question. Does it or does it not require members to be in the system under attack? Yes or no?

What part of "all alliance members" isn't clear? You don't need to be in any specific system to receive the notification in our current plan.

John McCreedy wrote:
You have also still not clarified whether the module requires one cycle or multiple cycles to achieve what its designed to achieve? Please answer this question because the answer can fundamentally change the discussion.


When you activate the Entosis Link, it uses one complete cycle to warm up. During that first cycle you are afflicted with all the negative effects of the Link on your own ship, but you do not make any capture progress.

Then once that first cycle is complete you begin capturing. Capture time at this point depends on the occupancy defense bonus of the system, but will always take at least 5 minutes (which is two and a half cycles for the T2 module and one for the T1 module). The cycle speed of the module doesn't have any impact on the speed at which the actual capture completes.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Harry Saq
Of Tears and ISK
ISK.Net
#1193 - 2015-03-11 17:31:22 UTC
Harry Saq wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Harry Saq wrote:
@CCP Fozzie
Would it be feasible to have the Entosis module activate an interface as suggested in m prior post here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5570599#post5570599

All of the balance issues mentioned would be answered if the pilot were fully engaged while running the laser, and it would require teamwork, as multiboxing support ships would also not be ideal or feasible.


We'd much rather allow the Entosis Link ship to continue fighting and maneuvering to stay alive while it captures.


@CCP FOzzie

I ninja edited, can you address the below:

"The idea is to avoid any and all punitive modifications, or unnecessary changes to ships AND create something engaging and challenging for the person actually running the link to do.

Push Button to activate module and wait is the fundamental design flaw/stagnation to most of eve activities that lead to both boredom and innovative mechanic breaking/bending gameplay, as you have nothing else to do.

The aspects of the game that are fun and engaging are when you activate a module and have to monitor various things and make many corrections to avoid an unhappy fate. Such as maintaining optimal, while shield boosting and managing cap all while trying to hold someone down and overheating without burning modules up. While that example is multiple modules, each module requires some level of diligence to employ, and focus cannot be ideally split away from the task at hand.

Since the idea of the entosis module is to be used once battlefield supremacy is achieved, the entosis module should require active engaging diligence and action to engage during the entirety of the cycle. If this is achieved we won't be talking about all the workarounds and ninja tactics, as ideally the pilot will be too busy just trying to keep the module on target/calibrated/focused or whatever, and may not even be able to keep track of his immediate surroundings or local intel. Much like the "stay on target" mantra we all hear in our heads when we think of nuking the deathstar, you don't have time for anything else yada yada.

This solution avoids punitive corrections, and instead creates something new, exciting, and challenging to do what the punitive corrections would be trying to do anyway, since the real problem is push a button and wait."


Here is even further logic, and bringing in the topic that this other dude wants to talk about, ISBoxing.

No matter what you do with the entosis link, as long as the base mechanic is push button and wait, you will be able to multiply the activity to as many alts as you care to pay for. If someone had 5 alts it would be very simple to multibox all 5 accounts, find all 5 command things, and activate the entosis module on each. Since the base activity involved requires incredibly little actual interaction, a single player can capture all necessary sov things solely.

The troll cepter ships and various other ideas being tossed are leaving out one fundamental factor, it is possible for a single pilot to multibox a whole fleet of them. Multiboxing is a reaction to unengaging game design, in other words, the activity is so easy and lacking in interaction you can scale the task across multiple alts to your hearts content. That is a great identifier for where to focus change, as the only reason it is possible, is because it doesn't meet a threshold of interaction that makes it not possible or worth it. This is also the reason you have people farming mining alts, as mining is also push a button and wait (it has gotten progressively more so with all the "innovations" to the ships that have ever increasingly bigger holds, and simply MORE WAITING).

The idea is to focus the activity into a skill or challenge that is consuming enough to require the complete attention of the player. The ship running the module will not be effected, and still maintain it's entire potential for combat, or whatever its primary duties may be, and the activity IS NOT scalable across multiple alts, and would require BOTH battlefield superiority and real teamwork (not imagined teamwork, like lighting cynos).

I do not see how this does not meet all of the stated objectives put forth for this module and the mechanic.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1194 - 2015-03-11 17:34:50 UTC
Veskrashen wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
So what exactly do you find fun about having to deal with attacks on your sov from ships you cant catch for 4 hours every day of every year? Zero fights, zero kills and no fun to be had at all.

THIS is what is so bad about the trollcepter, it means wars in the future will be mostly nothing but uncatchable interceptors sapping the willpower of the enemy for months on end. Defenders should actively fight to keep their space but the same needs to apply to the attackers too.

I have every confidence in my ability to catch and kill Interceptors with no tank and meager DPS who are unable to warp off grid for 2-5 minutes at a time. Especially on my home turf, where I can bring links and use Snakes far more easily than they can. I understand that a culture where solo / small gang PvP is looked down upon and folks don't bother to log in and play the game unless there's a rage ping to sit on a titan and gank some poor idiot on the other side of the map might not breed the kind of pilots that can handle that kind of challenge, but that's a cultural failing on your part that CCP shouldn't cater to with easy mechanics.

In addition, FW is essentially all about defending your sov - or attacking sov - that's vulnerable 23/7 from these kinds of threats. You all will have it far easier than we do - limited window of vulnerability, no need for the defender to work 2x as hard to undo the work of an attacker, no deadspace to worry about, etc etc etc - especially since the attacker can't disengage at will due to the Entosis Link preventing him from warping off.

Look, I know you want to build a really high wall to keep all the rampaging hordes out, and thereby avoid having to be active in your space all over rather than just at a few strategic systems. Since that's directly counter to CCP's goal with these sov changes, and since Interceptors are pretty much the only reliable way to ensure you can't pull that kind of tactic off with ease, I think it's fair to say that we can expect Interceptors to be able to use Entosis Links, even (and perhaps especially) the T2 versions.

It would probably be a lot more productive if folks started talking about what kind of limiting factors - cap use, fitting requirements, etc - that would force said Interceptors to make "interesting choices" to use them. While, of course, keeping in mind they still need to be able to be used on T1 frigates like Atrons.


Everything you said is rubbish.

I want small gangs not an endless swarm of cepters that you will not catch with any sniper that a defender would be forced to waste 4 hours of their playtime chasing around. Its not fun, it wont generate fights and it will make sov even worse than it is today. The defender has no advantage at all in this situation and after a few months of this you will see a mass burnout. Its a ****** tactic that cannot be allowed to happen.
Harry Saq
Of Tears and ISK
ISK.Net
#1195 - 2015-03-11 17:37:26 UTC
Furthermore, pilots are free to choose between focusing on maintaining the Entosis module, or surviving attacks long enough to flee. The fight or flight is still there, just the objective is not being furthered and can be abandoned while waiting out the cycle. Which also meets your statement "We'd much rather allow the Entosis Link ship to continue fighting and maneuvering to stay alive while it captures." as the ship is not locked down or impinged in any way, SIMPLY the player is otherwise actively engaged, but can choose to fail in order to fight and survive, and by definitions MEETS your BATTLEFIELD SUPERIORITY requirement.
Yroc Jannseen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1196 - 2015-03-11 17:37:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Yroc Jannseen
Fozzie

Can you give us any information on the production of these modules?

Will you be opening another thread for discussion around the occupancy side IE indices? And also the expense/size of ihubs and the production of their upgrades?
Falin Whalen
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1197 - 2015-03-11 17:38:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Falin Whalen
Freedom Nadd wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Harry Saq wrote:
@CCP Fozzie
Would it be feasible to have the Entosis module activate an interface as suggested in m prior post here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5570599#post5570599

All of the balance issues mentioned would be answered if the pilot were fully engaged while running the laser, and it would require teamwork, as multiboxing support ships would also not be ideal or feasible.


We'd much rather allow the Entosis Link ship to continue fighting and maneuvering to stay alive while it captures.


Would it be possible to stack defending E-Links to allow a defender who does actually control the field to reverse the timer?

No. Then we have another n+1 problem on our hands. While nice in theory, it will only reinforce the current meta of large alliances in large coalitions waiving their supercaps around, and enforcing a "You must be this tall in order to ride the sov train." mentality that is being played out presently.

"it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves." The Trial - Franz Kafka 
Valterra Craven
#1198 - 2015-03-11 17:43:09 UTC
MailDeadDrop wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Harry Saq wrote:
@CCP Fozzie
Would it be feasible to have the Entosis module activate an interface as suggested in m prior post here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5570599#post5570599

All of the balance issues mentioned would be answered if the pilot were fully engaged while running the laser, and it would require teamwork, as multiboxing support ships would also not be ideal or feasible.


We'd much rather allow the Entosis Link ship to continue fighting and maneuvering to stay alive while it captures.

This is at odds with your stated objective that capture be predicated on controlling the field. If one side controls the field, then there is no need for the Entosis Link ship to do anything but run the laser. If the Entosis Link ship needs "to continue fighting and maneuvering to stay alive" then obviously his/her side does not control the field.

MDD


Glad someone else caught that too.
Veskrashen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1199 - 2015-03-11 17:48:12 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Everything you said is rubbish.

Your ignorance and nullbear blinders are showing.

baltec1 wrote:
I want small gangs not an endless swarm of cepters that you will not catch with any sniper that a defender would be forced to waste 4 hours of their playtime chasing around. Its not fun, it wont generate fights and it will make sov even worse than it is today. The defender has no advantage at all in this situation and after a few months of this you will see a mass burnout. Its a ****** tactic that cannot be allowed to happen.

If you can't handle solo Interceptors with no tank who can't disengage at will, you're completely blind to the advantages you have as a defender. Try talking to folks who actually have to deal with similar mechanics today - i.e. FW pilots - and you'll get a bazillion ideas on how to leverage the defensive advantages you have.

I really really hope that CCP continues to allow Entosis Links on Interceptors. It will result in the biggest buckets of nullbear tears since Pheobe.

Querns wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
There's a balance to be found between the two extremes. I think we'd be losing something significant if border control was strong enough to allow people to ignore their interiors. Having some ships move through gatecamps more easily and others less easily is a pretty helpful tool in getting that balance.

Definitely — I understand the concerns. I just wanted to keep it fresh in everyone's minds, since it's pretty obvious where I was going with that line of thought. Some serious deliberation on the current state of interdiction nullification is called for, I think; especially in the face of things like covert ops cloaking ships, Black Ops Battleship bridging, titan bridging (as useful as these are with a 5LY range, at any rate,) and wormholes already allowing attackers to circumvent static gate camps.

Part of the reason it's so important for Interceptors - and other fast aligning interdiction nullified ships - is that mobility within "defended space" is just as important as being able to penetrate the borders in the first place. The reason that we've had 250ish pages plus multiple TMC articles worth of Gewn propoganda railing against Trollceptors is because literally EVERY OTHER SHIP PLATFORM can be interdicted with bubblecamps. This includes both the static wall o' bubbles already common in nullsec, as well as the impromptu camps that get thrown up using 'Dictors and HICs. The fact that a defender can easily "bottle up" a group of BLOPS boats or SBs or folks coming in through a wormhole is precisely the reason that Interceptors need to continue to have the ability to fit Entosis Links without additional penalty over other hulls.

We Gallente have a saying: "CCP created the Gallente Militia to train the Fighters..."
Harry Saq
Of Tears and ISK
ISK.Net
#1200 - 2015-03-11 17:48:38 UTC
...and to illustrate my point even more...when you are doing data sites and relic sites, you are engaged in the mini-game (which is terrible and what I would not advise here, but rather the concept of having an interface that requires your complete attention....AND IS FUN) and can either decide to focus your efforts on furthering your objective or focus on watching local and intel and be diligent about your surroundings at the expense of your objective.

The mechanics are already there, and even the precedent. It would only require a mini-game like thing, that maintains the Entosis progress during the cycle. This could be as simple as keeping a randomly moving target in your cross-hairs (I won't waste my time on more imaginative things, if the concept cannot even be agreed upon).