These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[AEGIS] Fleet Warp Changes - Please see devblog!

First post First post First post
Author
Valterra Craven
#181 - 2015-06-12 00:19:53 UTC
This seems like a rather silly change just to nerf bombers.

You're hurting people in WH, Highsec, and lowsec just so the fleet bombers get on grid 10-30 seconds slower than before.

I don't understand why everyone must suffer when the desired outcome won't be all that much to begin with. You still have bomber fleets, you still have all of the problems with bomber fleets, with just a medicore delay to target?

I have two accounts with which I use to run missions in highsec, a tanky bs for killing big targets, and high dps quick shooting bc/bs to kill things like frigs and cruisers more quickly. Yet I now have to suffer so that in the end you achieve barely noticeable changes to fleet bombers?

I really think you need to come up with a way not to throw the baby out with the bath water. Not everybody plays in large groups of fleet metas that unbalance the game.
Alundil
Rolled Out
#182 - 2015-06-12 00:21:16 UTC
Black Canary Jnr wrote:
Much moaning, most of it not justified, lacking real criticism, and can be solved by using a cloaky scanner alt as the warpin.

Alts Online..... intensifies

I'm right behind you

VENUS XY
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#183 - 2015-06-12 00:22:43 UTC  |  Edited by: VENUS XY
IMO this will lead to mainly 2 things, unkillable ogb t3's and FC's continuing to run a "1 man show". No one will want to fly a useless probing ship and not get on any killmails, you are just making the FC run one more account. Small gang pvp takes a hit as well as you are just reducing the amount of fights that can be forced, and you need to force fights in this game. This change directly reduces content for a significant playerbase while further aggravating other issues in the game.
-1
Syrias Bizniz
some random local shitlords
#184 - 2015-06-12 00:22:46 UTC
This will not change much.
The list of people carrying responsibility in a Fleet will rise from 2 (FC + Scout) to 4: FC, Scout, and 2 moving perches in ceptors, repositioning themselves on grid as needed and functioning as a warpable beacon moving at 6km/s.

Harkin Issier
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#185 - 2015-06-12 00:24:43 UTC
CCP tell me, what is the lifeblood of group PVP?

It's the FCs.

Now, what is the position in all of EVE most prone to burnout?

FCing.

Now, why would you ever think that making an FC's life harder as an (ineffective) side-swipe at nerfing bomber pilots would be a good idea?
Villa Deaver
The Anoikis Project
#186 - 2015-06-12 00:25:10 UTC
Airi Cho wrote:
Scott Ormands wrote:
There HAS to be a solution that isn't more alts.


They are called other players doing that role.


That's a tiny, tiny bit optimistic. Chances that it's going to be another player doing that and not an alt of a player that really wants to be doing something other than being the "warpin guy" are about 0%.
Two FistTom
Badly Disfigured Slave Midgets
#187 - 2015-06-12 00:26:33 UTC
Here is an idea CCP:

Stop wasting time coming up with dumb "little" changes like this that will take away game play and focus on things that are far more important like new "good" content. Taking a knife to fleet warping is not good content. If you are trying to make the underdog have a chance in large bulb fights there are several more logical methods. All I see this doing is making playings go inactive for the summer until you guys also realize this idea is dumb.
Elenahina
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#188 - 2015-06-12 00:26:39 UTC
Tim Nering wrote:
fleet warps arent harming anything. does life have to get harder?

as someone who multi boxxes.......UGH.


Op success.

Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno

Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort
#189 - 2015-06-12 00:27:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Nasar Vyron
What the serious 'F'? What part of the game play tied to this felt so stagnating that it deserved such a nerf?

I hate bomber wings as much as the next man, but this literally changes nothing! Even for brawler fleets this changes NOTHING!!!!


Bomber wing:
1) FC gets a hit, warps in @30/40 and swings to proper position for wing.
2) Wing then warps to him, cloaks don't break cloaks so element of surprise remains, just slows down each wave until they get some practice then nothing changes.
3) Bomb and warp off like normal.

Brawler (EVERY OTHER) fleet:
1) Prober gets a hit, warps in ~0-30 depending on angle. Will likely be on grid just like they are now - cloaked- to see angle of approach to direction of enemy fleet movement.
2) Wing is already aligned to hostile fleet. Prober lands, fleet warp to cloaked member. Prober quickly warps back to ping to avoid decloak.
3) Engage as per the norm.

Even for PLEXes, player with journal entry/probe hit goes in first, other warp to him. Exactly as we do now.



So I ask again, why are you wasting our dev's time with these worthless side projects? Whatever team you had working on this could have easily been working on something more valuable than this. Such as:
- Interactive mining system - keep us awake!
- Anom/plex overhaul - give us something new!
- True sec balance/removal/rework - fozzie, your sov mechanics makes this a must...
- Anything from THIS thread.
- Making coffee


EDIT:
PS: You want to actually nerf bomber wings here's a few ideas for you:
-clocked ships decloak each other like they used to (causes a ceptor burning a line on grid and individuals taking turn swapping to them or warping 10/20/30 off each other like in days of ol')
-bomb damage/effect determined by speed also, not just sig
-bomb damage/effect determined by distance from center
-bomb resistances removed and base damage increased
Winter Archipelago
Autumn Industrial Enterprises
#190 - 2015-06-12 00:28:04 UTC
So, two serious questions as I'm thinking more about this:

First, this is an absolutely massive buff to the defenders. Having to essentially sit and wait compared to having to coordinate warps to land at the same time is such a different beast that it's not even fair trying to compare them. Is this an intended outcome despite the past changes that were more oriented towards /weakening/ defenders?

Secondly, how much speculation has been put into how this will affect mixed-size fleets? Battleships and Battlecruisers were already seeing significantly less use, but with their slow warp speed, they'll be landing a significant amount of time after the faster ships. Even if everyone is just off-grid from the intended warp-to and is already aligned, the slower start-up and slow-down that larger ships have mean that frigs and cruisers will have been on-grid and vulnerable for a fair amount of time. Combined with latency issues and missed voice commands, I'm concerned that a change like this will end up homogenizing fleets even more than they already are.
Scott Ormands
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#191 - 2015-06-12 00:29:38 UTC
Airi Cho wrote:
Scott Ormands wrote:
There HAS to be a solution that isn't more alts.


They are called other players doing that role.


As far as I can tell you've never lived in a WH (quick corp history and KB check) we generally don't have spare corp members that I can just leave sitting cloaked watching, I need them in their best ship ready to fly.
Ransu Asanari
Perkone
Caldari State
#192 - 2015-06-12 00:30:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Ransu Asanari
I appreciate the goals this change is trying to accomplish - reducing the effectiveness of mass bomber wings, making sniping fleets a bit more effective, and making fleet combat more interactive and dynamic on the part of the individual pilots. All good things. Making your T1 Tackle Frigate, or Interceptor feel as important as in the "I Was There" video is a good thing.

I'm glad to see some of the concerns already acknowledged - catching and holding Slippery Petes and Off Grid Boosters. The Tactical Destroyers having the ability to fit Expanded Probe Launchers helps a bit with this, as they can tank much better than a Covops Frigate. Scanning down a Pete should be possible with a T3 Destroyer - if you have to use a Covops frigate with Virtues, it will just get melted, or they'll move before you can land on grid and provide a warp-in. Otherwise you're relegated to only Probing T3 Cruisers which is a pretty high bar to set.

My main concern is with high-end wormhole sites. You absolutely have to warp your entire fleet in together, because you need to put up cap chain and get logistics up as fast as possible, or you'll lose ships. This is the same as with some missions and Incursions, but in most of those cases there are acceleration gates you can all warp to and prepare to take the gate together. This isn't the case in W-Space - even with the scanned sites, frequently we have to make warp-in bookmarks closer to the Sleepers to warp the fleet to.

Because of the current POS mechanics, in W-Space, it is beneficial to have multiple smaller corps to restrict access to assets. This change will hurt them more, as well as NPSI groups.

Sharing corp bookmarks is already incredibly painful - copying them from corp to personal, then dragging them a few at a time into vouchers and storing in a can is horrible busywork.

Instead, I would suggest the following:


  • As listed above by Phoenix Jones, rather than the proposed changes, instead limit fleet warps to Squad Leaders.
  • Give us a way to manually sync corp bookmarks - currently it takes up to 5 minutes and/or a session change to update. Give us a "Sync" button so we can speed this up.
  • Give us Alliance and/or Fleet bookmarks - we can create a folder, and designate it to share to an entire fleet. Even if pilots have to manually warp to the bookmarks (they will be more engaged), it won't slow down combat as much.
  • Make it MUCH easier to share bookmarks - currently pulling a few bookmarks out of 25,000 manually is incredibly painful.
Lt Shard
Team Pizza
Good at this Game
#193 - 2015-06-12 00:31:28 UTC
Krops Vont wrote:
Please run with this idea. No one liked wormhole changes but they came and came hard. W-space is still teaming with life.

EVE always needs change no matter how much players grog about it. Smile


The wormhole changes added content and I have thoroughly enjoyed catching rolling capitals because of it. Sparks fights.


I cant see what this change adds. It only takes away. Someone please tell me.
Long Muppet
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#194 - 2015-06-12 00:31:37 UTC
CCP Larrikin wrote:

Tatsuj Khan wrote:
Suggestion:
Make corporate wormhole BMs "public" just as gates are, and allow fleets to warp from WH to WH in a coherent group. Otherwise as the Dev proposal stands now, the fleet can't work together as they land because ships are strung out throughout the system. This allows the enemy to pick off small faster ships first as the landing fleet straggles in.

If wormhole BMs are made "public", it should significantly lessen the damage this nerf does to WH corp membership and fleet ops. I recall somewhere in the sov changes thread, devs stated that changes should enhance game play rather than add unnecessary difficulties and tedium.

This is a great suggestion. Building on it - allowing fleet warping to WH probe results could also work.
There are a couple of questions we'd like to thrash out and get more feedback on relating to power projection in WH space before we make a change like this.


Maybe you should get more feedback relating to power projection in WH space before you make the fleet warp changes? K-Space residents have the benefit of fleet warping cohesively to gates, WH residents do not.

CCP Larrikin wrote:

Quiggle Queue wrote:
[Is it really "power projection", just to be able to warp as a group to a "stargate"? That seems pretty much standard travel outside of wormholes.

You still can fleet warp a group to a stargate =)


This is the point Quiggle was trying to make. Is it really considered WH "power projection" if K-space residents can do the same thing with stargates.

Ultimately I feel like this is yet another idea which only negatively impacts small gang PVP, but does nothing to impact super large fleets. Large coalition fleets will have no problem dedicating a scout 1 of their 255 to be a scout. To those of us who fly with 4 or 5 people .. that's a large sacrifice.
Syrias Bizniz
some random local shitlords
#195 - 2015-06-12 00:32:16 UTC
Winter Archipelago wrote:
So, two serious questions as I'm thinking more about this:

First, this is an absolutely massive buff to the defenders. Having to essentially sit and wait compared to having to coordinate warps to land at the same time is such a different beast that it's not even fair trying to compare them. Is this an intended outcome despite the past changes that were more oriented towards /weakening/ defenders?

Secondly, how much speculation has been put into how this will affect mixed-size fleets? Battleships and Battlecruisers were already seeing significantly less use, but with their slow warp speed, they'll be landing a significant amount of time after the faster ships. Even if everyone is just off-grid from the intended warp-to and is already aligned, the slower start-up and slow-down that larger ships have mean that frigs and cruisers will have been on-grid and vulnerable for a fair amount of time. Combined with latency issues and missed voice commands, I'm concerned that a change like this will end up homogenizing fleets even more than they already are.




No idea why your fleet would get seperated, tbh, since you can still Fleetwarp them. You just need 1 (one) other fleetmember as your warpin first. Or warp to celestials.
Darth Bex
Boundless Exploration
#196 - 2015-06-12 00:32:40 UTC
From a purely selfish wormholer perspective, this change is just going to double my travel time while I wait for alliance members to warp to me, bookmark, repeat.

If we had Alliance bookmarks, however...
Tyr Dolorem
State War Academy
Caldari State
#197 - 2015-06-12 00:33:47 UTC
Jeremiah Cole wrote:


There is already a severe lack of content in wormhole space, and this change only works to drive out smaller entities and those looking to establish a foothold in W-Space.


There might be more if you hadn't blued everyone lol.
Valterra Craven
#198 - 2015-06-12 00:34:24 UTC
I just had a thought. If this whole change is really to nerf time on grid for bombers, why don't you ya know do something slightly simpler like nerfing their warp accl and speed?
Teeva Nakisti
In Your Base Killin Your Doods
#199 - 2015-06-12 00:34:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Teeva Nakisti
CCP, this change is bad and you should feel bad.

I regularly use fleet warps to bookmarks(I always bookmark probe results before warping), to get in and out of wormholes. I am not warping a fleet of people around, only my own alts. You are removing the ability for me to effectively move myself around in non-combat situations.

Players use fleet warps to bookmarks and probe results for all sorts of reasons, not simply to engage in pvp combat.

And as far as pvp goes, this change goes against the idea of doctrine, where all players in the same class of ship, with the same fittings, who have trained the same skills in order to fly, all must warp and land at the same time at a specific range from the enemy.

If you want to look at a mechanic that is garbage and needs changing or removing, take a hard look at the Regroup command that FCs have. And if this change you are making is to work, hot drops must also be nerfed, or that will become the preferred method of engaging an enemy.

Stop nerfing mechanics that are only 'related' to the problems you face. If you have a problem with bomber fleets, then MAN UP and nerf specifically the bomber class of ships, not game mechanics that everyone uses for purposes far broader than you can see(your own dev responses in this thread show this to be a fact).

As a final note, since you(CCP) seem to have the ideal way to play the game already in your mind, can you enlighten us with your vision of what eve should be? Because it certainly seems, as of late, that you are specifically forcing changes(nerfs) on us that the broad community isn't asking for.
Digiblast
Nebula Systems
#200 - 2015-06-12 00:34:48 UTC
Can we protest this change?

Atleast part of it..

Can we ask the president of Iceland to give us the option to vote on this???