These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1261 - 2015-03-11 19:33:10 UTC
Kristian Hackett wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:

A max speed garmur or dramiel is faster than any max speed ceptor under equivalent conditions. Fact.

If you can't warp, you're dead.


Actually, a Stiletto can just barely outrun a Garmur, but that's by less than 100 m/s assuming both ships are focusing on maximizing speed over everything else using T2 modules.

Fair point, but the stiletto won't be max speed fit anyway since it needs that patented "trollceptor" lock range of 110km.

And the max speed dram will win by a mile against a "trollceptor" fit.

But I expect Baltec to come back and say: No! That's not true because I said it's not true!
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#1262 - 2015-03-11 19:34:07 UTC
Eli Apol wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
So how do you plan to grab said trollcepter with a web when it is both faster than you by a large margin and has range on you?

When defending your own structure one would presume a cloaked ship could tell you which of your preprepared bookmarks would be a suitable warp in to allow for the current momentum of the target.


So, its not going to happen because what you just described would never work.

Because you say so?

Or because a ship moving at constant velocity in pretty much a circle isn't covered by trigonometric functions?

Sure it'll take some skill in converting warp time versus arc of the target and the inty pilot has some chance to change direction once the ship is within 14AU but sniper ships also have a fairly large range to account for a little fuzziness in accuracy.

lmbo

ah yes let me whip out my ti-89 so i can contest sov

also at what point in this entire thread was the interceptor orbiting like an idiot instead of pressing Keep At Range set to 999999km to make the ship fly in the most optimal path in the direction of Away without having to think
Kristian Hackett
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1263 - 2015-03-11 19:34:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Kristian Hackett
Jenn aSide wrote:
As is usual, getting caught up in minor details has obscured the big picture for everyone. Even if you restrict these things to cruisers and up you end up with the situation where THE GROUPS WITH MORE PEOPLE can overload on the groups with fewer. Even if you don't come back to contest the constellation beacons/whatever, you have a situation that is LESS freidnly to the 'smaller groups' than the one that exists right now.

aka Dominion Redux. The base 'goal' of changing the politics of null and 'making the larger groups contract' is the base of the stupidity that keeps happening. CCP is basically trying to short circuit human nature and it's not going to work.

And I'm not kidding, this discussion was the exact same before dominion, with people (like goons) telling everyone "we will use this to make your game experience suck" and legions of short-sighted utopians on the other side proclaiming "this will be great, those big alliances are gonna get what's coming to them!!".

It's all really stupid.

I think the point here is that the big fights are still going to be N+1, but the total escalation time will be shorter. Instead of monster 23 hour battles, you're looking at a much smaller fight that is better distributed over multiple nodes. Yea I can see how people think the mechanics here are going to suck, but I'd prefer a quicker capture time over 12 hours in 10% TiDi. This is one of those situations where CCP is going to have to take a heavy handed approach to the situation, because we're crushing their servers with large fights.

Aircraft Maintenance - Using a high school diploma to fix what a college degree just f***ed up. "Life is too short to drink cheap beer."
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1264 - 2015-03-11 19:39:50 UTC
Promiscuous Female wrote:

technically an ishtar fleet doesn't require its members to push F1 because drone assist still exists


You're welcome

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#1265 - 2015-03-11 19:39:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Eli Apol
Promiscuous Female wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
So how do you plan to grab said trollcepter with a web when it is both faster than you by a large margin and has range on you?

When defending your own structure one would presume a cloaked ship could tell you which of your preprepared bookmarks would be a suitable warp in to allow for the current momentum of the target.


So, its not going to happen because what you just described would never work.

Because you say so?

Or because a ship moving at constant velocity in pretty much a circle isn't covered by trigonometric functions?

Sure it'll take some skill in converting warp time versus arc of the target and the inty pilot has some chance to change direction once the ship is within 14AU but sniper ships also have a fairly large range to account for a little fuzziness in accuracy.

lmbo

ah yes let me whip out my ti-89 so i can contest sov

also at what point in this entire thread was the interceptor orbiting like an idiot instead of pressing Keep At Range set to 999999km to make the ship fly in the most optimal path in the direction of Away without having to think

Just because mathematics proves something doesn't mean you need to do the math step by step to predict it. A ball's trajectory through the air is subject to mathematical principles yet you don't need a calculator to catch it.

Also pressing keep at range makes you incredibly predictable, who's to say an experienced player won't use that to warp in at a BM 300 km away in the direction they predict you to move?

And of course we're assuming this afk-orbitting lolceptor pilot is actually pressing d-scan every second anyways.

Also I believe it's pretty easy to fit up a 10mn Tac Dessie which does double the speed of the ceptor before implants and boosts and will be able to close a distance of 100km in a fraction of the 2 minute cycle. (20s)

Or ya know, they're uncatchable, grrr ceptors.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
Kensai Aubaris
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1266 - 2015-03-11 19:50:14 UTC
The issue of whether trollceptors can be countered misses the point for me (off course they can, with some effort). What I'm worried about is a fleet of 50 of the things coming in and rf'ing every sov structure across two constellations over the course of an hour or two. That of course is also counterable but only at the cost of ruining your Eve experience during the 4 hour prime time window because you're running everywhere playing whack-a-mole rather than doing something enjoyable.

So, to add to the gazillion ideas out there, here's mine: Entosis link is not binary on/off, but rather has a required strength that scales with the level of the system. A bit like warp core points, but applied at the system level. A back-of-beyond system that no one ever uses should be able to be taken by a single T1 frigate. But should that same T1 frigate be able to take a highly developed hub/staging system? Surely the TCU/IHUB would be expected to stand up better to an attack.

If each sov structure had a number of 'Entosis points' that needed to be applied, and if different sizes of Entotsis modules applied different numbers of points, then a number of these issues would take care of themselves, and good sov holiding behavior would be incented. A theoretical example:

1. System A has very low usage, isn't actively 'owned'. Sov structures have a base Entosis strength of 1. Any ship capable of fitting an Entosis module can come in and rf the structures. Serves the sov holders right, because they weren't actively using the system.

2. System B is a highly developed staging system with a lot of sov owner activity. The sov structures have a maxed out Entosis strength of 10. If an attacker wants to rf a structure they either bring 10 frigates and apply them all to the structure, or they bring one 'XL' Entotsis link module (say it needs to be a Battlecruiser hull to fit it). Now an attacker needs to commit to an attack.

In this model the 50 trollceptor fleet can still come in, but only systems with low sov indices are actually vulnerable - better developed systems will require a significant part of the attacking fleet to commit. Sov owners are incented to improve their space since it will make it less vulnerable to the random troll fleets.

Looking forward to the explanations on why the idea is completely misguided.
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#1267 - 2015-03-11 19:52:46 UTC
50 ceptors x 80m mods x 0.5 loot drop rate = 2 billion isk. Sounds like a profitable 4 hours.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
Kristian Hackett
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1268 - 2015-03-11 19:55:41 UTC
Why everyone is so convinced they need to catch the Interceptor is beyond me. Just Sensor Damp it. It's going to be orbiting at max range in order to get the Entosis Link to cycle through, all you need to do is keep at your max sensor damp range inside of the interceptor's orbit (essentially you place yourself between the structure and the station). Long story short - I can use a Vexor Navy Issue, camp it on the structure, Sensor Damp the Interceptor and run my own Entosis Link to recapture the structure and the troll can't do anything about it because I just **** blocked him. Again, problem solved, troll frustrated.

Aircraft Maintenance - Using a high school diploma to fix what a college degree just f***ed up. "Life is too short to drink cheap beer."
Kristian Hackett
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1269 - 2015-03-11 19:58:43 UTC
Kensai Aubaris wrote:
The issue of whether trollceptors can be countered misses the point for me (off course they can, with some effort). What I'm worried about is a fleet of 50 of the things coming in and rf'ing every sov structure across two constellations over the course of an hour or two. That of course is also counterable but only at the cost of ruining your Eve experience during the 4 hour prime time window because you're running everywhere playing whack-a-mole rather than doing something enjoyable.

So, to add to the gazillion ideas out there, here's mine: Entosis link is not binary on/off, but rather has a required strength that scales with the level of the system. A bit like warp core points, but applied at the system level. A back-of-beyond system that no one ever uses should be able to be taken by a single T1 frigate. But should that same T1 frigate be able to take a highly developed hub/staging system? Surely the TCU/IHUB would be expected to stand up better to an attack.

If each sov structure had a number of 'Entosis points' that needed to be applied, and if different sizes of Entotsis modules applied different numbers of points, then a number of these issues would take care of themselves, and good sov holiding behavior would be incented. A theoretical example:

1. System A has very low usage, isn't actively 'owned'. Sov structures have a base Entosis strength of 1. Any ship capable of fitting an Entosis module can come in and rf the structures. Serves the sov holders right, because they weren't actively using the system.

2. System B is a highly developed staging system with a lot of sov owner activity. The sov structures have a maxed out Entosis strength of 10. If an attacker wants to rf a structure they either bring 10 frigates and apply them all to the structure, or they bring one 'XL' Entotsis link module (say it needs to be a Battlecruiser hull to fit it). Now an attacker needs to commit to an attack.

In this model the 50 trollceptor fleet can still come in, but only systems with low sov indices are actually vulnerable - better developed systems will require a significant part of the attacking fleet to commit. Sov owners are incented to improve their space since it will make it less vulnerable to the random troll fleets.

Looking forward to the explanations on why the idea is completely misguided.

Points still turns this into a long drawn out N+1 fight. By focusing on maintaining complete control of the grid and only needing 1 Entosis Link, you scale down the fight and (much to CCP's delight) you don't have a system bouncing right into 10% TiDi.

Aircraft Maintenance - Using a high school diploma to fix what a college degree just f***ed up. "Life is too short to drink cheap beer."
xttz
GSF Logistics and Posting Reserves
Goonswarm Federation
#1270 - 2015-03-11 19:58:47 UTC
The common litmus test when it comes to balance is to ask if something can only reliably be stopped by something else doing exactly the same job. For example, the original design for Dominion supercaps was unbalanced because past a certain critical mass, the only counter to them was more supercaps. When you argue that the counter to a very fast ship is to have more of a very slightly faster ship, it produces the same result.

It really doesn't matter the slightest bit if a single Interceptor can potentially be caught by some specialist fit faction ship. When an attacker is able to dictate both the time and location of an encounter, a defender has fewer options to react. When an attacker can coordinate scores or hundreds of ships across a wide area, during which a defender has to not only react quickly but react with at least an equal number of specialised ships, that's broken.

Remember that the underlying goal here is for people to live in their space to own it. What some of you are arguing is that the majority of null-sec players need to live in their space and constantly be within 5mins of swapping to a specialist-fit faction ship to own it. The barrier of entry for null-sec just shifts from Supercaps to faction ships.
xttz
GSF Logistics and Posting Reserves
Goonswarm Federation
#1271 - 2015-03-11 20:00:47 UTC
Kristian Hackett wrote:
Why everyone is so convinced they need to catch the Interceptor is beyond me.


The goal of the troll is to force a reaction and get out alive. They don't expect to capture anything, if they do it's a bonus. If the only viable counter is ECM the attacker is risking nothing and this violates the underlying risk versus reward aspect of EVE.
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#1272 - 2015-03-11 20:01:43 UTC
xttz wrote:
The common litmus test when it comes to balance is to ask if something can only reliably be stopped by something else doing exactly the same job. For example, the original design for Dominion supercaps was unbalanced because past a certain critical mass, the only counter to them was more supercaps. When you argue that the counter to a very fast ship is to have more of a very slightly faster ship, it produces the same result.

T3 dessies aren't nullified. So it's not stopped by something else doing exactly the same job.

Also it's completely countered by 2 types of EWAR forcing them to either move in closer or bring different ships.

Other than that +1 would read again.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
Veskrashen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1273 - 2015-03-11 20:04:42 UTC
Kensai Aubaris wrote:
The issue of whether trollceptors can be countered misses the point for me (off course they can, with some effort). What I'm worried about is a fleet of 50 of the things coming in and rf'ing every sov structure across two constellations over the course of an hour or two. That of course is also counterable but only at the cost of ruining your Eve experience during the 4 hour prime time window because you're running everywhere playing whack-a-mole rather than doing something enjoyable.

Aside from forcing you to be mobile and counter folks in multiple locations at the same time, how is this any different than any other attack on your sov? If PL decided to go knock around CVA instead of HERO, and decided to see how many hubs they could RF in Supers, you'd still be running around for hours trying to save your home.

We Gallente have a saying: "CCP created the Gallente Militia to train the Fighters..."
xttz
GSF Logistics and Posting Reserves
Goonswarm Federation
#1274 - 2015-03-11 20:05:35 UTC
What amazes me is how few people grasp the simple concept of the metagame and how basic game mechanics play into it. I'm finally starting to realise why we own most of the map.
Kristian Hackett
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1275 - 2015-03-11 20:05:58 UTC
xttz wrote:
The common litmus test when it comes to balance is to ask if something can only reliably be stopped by something else doing exactly the same job. For example, the original design for Dominion supercaps was unbalanced because past a certain critical mass, the only counter to them was more supercaps. When you argue that the counter to a very fast ship is to have more of a very slightly faster ship, it produces the same result.

It really doesn't matter the slightest bit if a single Interceptor can potentially be caught by some specialist fit faction ship. When an attacker is able to dictate both the time and location of an encounter, a defender has fewer options to react. When an attacker can coordinate scores or hundreds of ships across a wide area, during which a defender has to not only react quickly but react with at least an equal number of specialised ships, that's broken.

Remember that the underlying goal here is for people to live in their space to own it. What some of you are arguing is that the majority of null-sec players need to live in their space and constantly be within 5mins of swapping to a specialist-fit faction ship to own it. The barrier of entry for null-sec just shifts from Supercaps to faction ships.

Then what needs to happen is the amount of time to take a structure within a system needs to have modifiers depending on what other structures are in the system. For example, if an IHUB is active in the system, it should take 3x-5x as long to capture a station before the IHUB. That way it forces the attackers to either bring an overwhelming force, or it provides a nice single defense point for the system and makes IHUB investment all the more worthwhile. Make it so that capturing a system requires that you capture structures in a certain order for optimal time.

Aircraft Maintenance - Using a high school diploma to fix what a college degree just f***ed up. "Life is too short to drink cheap beer."
Veskrashen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1276 - 2015-03-11 20:06:06 UTC
Kristian Hackett wrote:
Why everyone is so convinced they need to catch the Interceptor is beyond me. Just Sensor Damp it. It's going to be orbiting at max range in order to get the Entosis Link to cycle through, all you need to do is keep at your max sensor damp range inside of the interceptor's orbit (essentially you place yourself between the structure and the station). Long story short - I can use a Vexor Navy Issue, camp it on the structure, Sensor Damp the Interceptor and run my own Entosis Link to recapture the structure and the troll can't do anything about it because I just **** blocked him. Again, problem solved, troll frustrated.

Because anything less than killing the Trollceptor allows the Trollceptor to go sovlaser something else, and is therefore not a solution to the problem according to Gewns. Not that it really matters, since you only get Trolled if you're unwilling to defend your stuff in the first place.

We Gallente have a saying: "CCP created the Gallente Militia to train the Fighters..."
Veskrashen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1277 - 2015-03-11 20:06:58 UTC
xttz wrote:
What amazes me is how few people grasp the simple concept of the metagame and how basic game mechanics play into it. I'm finally starting to realise why we own most of the map.

No, we fully get that TMC and the Gewn Trollposting Hordes are tools of the metagame to shape the future battlefield. Thanks though.

We Gallente have a saying: "CCP created the Gallente Militia to train the Fighters..."
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#1278 - 2015-03-11 20:08:16 UTC
xttz wrote:
The common litmus test when it comes to balance is to ask if something can only reliably be stopped by something else doing exactly the same job. For example, the original design for Dominion supercaps was unbalanced because past a certain critical mass, the only counter to them was more supercaps. When you argue that the counter to a very fast ship is to have more of a very slightly faster ship, it produces the same result.

It really doesn't matter the slightest bit if a single Interceptor can potentially be caught by some specialist fit faction ship. When an attacker is able to dictate both the time and location of an encounter, a defender has fewer options to react. When an attacker can coordinate scores or hundreds of ships across a wide area, during which a defender has to not only react quickly but react with at least an equal number of specialised ships, that's broken.

Remember that the underlying goal here is for people to live in their space to own it. What some of you are arguing is that the majority of null-sec players need to live in their space and constantly be within 5mins of swapping to a specialist-fit faction ship to own it. The barrier of entry for null-sec just shifts from Supercaps to faction ships.


*Jenn aSide is stockpiling Dramiel and Daredevil BPCs as we speak* Big smile

But yea, this kind of thing happens because people are too short-sighted to see it coming. The most obvious counter to the troll captor is a destroyer with a tank and it's own link. Thing is you will need a whole mess of them, and BIG alliances will use Entosis fleets to tie down allies while a real fleet (capable of on grid superiority) reinforces everything another nearby alliance holds. rince and repeat till the BLUE donut is a GOON donut lol.

The military has a saying: "No plan survives contact with the enemy". Well, no game mechanic survives contact with EVE players. The more convoluted and complicated (even if it sounds 'reasonable') the plan, the more it's just going to invoke Malcanis' Law.

That doesn't mean "don't make plans" it means "make plans with a pessimistic rather than optimistic eye, because Goons actually exist".
Kristian Hackett
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1279 - 2015-03-11 20:08:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Kristian Hackett
xttz wrote:
Kristian Hackett wrote:
Why everyone is so convinced they need to catch the Interceptor is beyond me.


The goal of the troll is to force a reaction and get out alive. They don't expect to capture anything, if they do it's a bonus. If the only viable counter is ECM the attacker is risking nothing and this violates the underlying risk versus reward aspect of EVE.

Yea that's understandable, but if the sole reaction is a single ECM ship telling the troll to **** off every time, the troll is going to get bored.

Seriously, it'd get to the point of:
Defender: Back again for another round, Troll?
Troll: Yep. Still trying to get a rise out of you guys.
D: Not happening, all we need is just me to counter you. You're not worth our time.
T: ... Thanks for the blow to my ego.
D: Any time. Now kindly GTFO.

Aircraft Maintenance - Using a high school diploma to fix what a college degree just f***ed up. "Life is too short to drink cheap beer."
GeeShizzle MacCloud
#1280 - 2015-03-11 20:09:21 UTC  |  Edited by: GeeShizzle MacCloud
For the record, and because i believe it is a related and important topic to what is being discussed, i would love to have it stated and clarified beyond all reasonable doubt what CCP's policy on Grid-Fu is.

(Grid-Fu being the manipulation of grid walls/boundaries to either artificially inflate, shrink or otherwise shape a grid in a way as to provide tactical benefits)