These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Lt Shard
Team Pizza
Good at this Game
#261 - 2015-06-12 02:26:08 UTC
Manfred Sideous wrote:
I support measures , mchanics , changes that will make eve more exciting more dynamic more balanced and more deadly.


Maybe in null. But its a whole layer of bullshit in other parts of space.

Who is the w-space csm member now that corbex no longer lives in w-space? Who do you talk to about it?
Kujun Nashja
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#262 - 2015-06-12 02:26:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Kujun Nashja
It´s a step in the right direction.

Might promote roles of fleet probers/scouts/inties for giving warpins. Also there would be additional room for people to screw up if they don´t pay attention (which is a good thing).

Combat probing isn´t as ridiculously oversimplified anymore. Also an indirect nerf to badly executed and Isboxer bomb runs. The only issues i see are actually WH related.

Now remove anchoring, fleet warps in general and drone assist an we are golden. Twisted
Manfred Sideous
H A V O C
Fraternity.
#263 - 2015-06-12 02:29:40 UTC
Miner Hottie wrote:
Manfred Sideous wrote:
Budrick3 wrote:
Manfred Sideous wrote:
+1 this is a excellent change that will help to open up combat/fleet tactics. I supported and pushed hard for this.


Good luck getting re-elected.



I am not a politician. I am not here to kiss anyones ass. If I run and I don't get re-elected so be it. I support measures , mchanics , changes that will make eve more exciting more dynamic more balanced and more deadly. Destruction is the lifeblood of Eve. Nearly every profession and activity in Eve is fueled by things exploding. More explosions means people in space doing things playing the game. More interaction which is the foundation of a MMORPG.


I'LL GIVE YOU DEATH AND YOU WILL LOVE ME FOR IT.


So by making life much harder for fcs, especially newer FCs and new bros in general. More stuff will explode?



Bombers were retardedly op and combat probing was very op. They strangled tactics and doctrines. Ideally id like to see those things nerfed or rebalanced but this change has the effect that it hits both of those things at the same. To put this into context drone assign was largely removed as we know it. CCP said that they think it is bad when other people play the game for you. Fleet Warping falls under the same rationale. This change will actually help FC's as they will have more choices on tactics and viable doctrines to put to the field. Currently everything has to be low/sig & bomb proof . This is why you don't see many shield tanked BS doctrines or more kiting or sniping doctrines. This change will help open up the battlefield to something more than Eagles , Tengus , Ishtars and Domis.

@EveManny

https://twitter.com/EveManny

Miner Hottie
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#264 - 2015-06-12 02:29:52 UTC
Rowells wrote:
Miner Hottie wrote:
Manfred Sideous wrote:
Budrick3 wrote:
Manfred Sideous wrote:
+1 this is a excellent change that will help to open up combat/fleet tactics. I supported and pushed hard for this.


Good luck getting re-elected.



I am not a politician. I am not here to kiss anyones ass. If I run and I don't get re-elected so be it. I support measures , mchanics , changes that will make eve more exciting more dynamic more balanced and more deadly. Destruction is the lifeblood of Eve. Nearly every profession and activity in Eve is fueled by things exploding. More explosions means people in space doing things playing the game. More interaction which is the foundation of a MMORPG.


I'LL GIVE YOU DEATH AND YOU WILL LOVE ME FOR IT.


So by making life much harder for fcs, especially newer FCs and new bros in general. More stuff will explode?

There's a word in FC, starts with a 'C'. And it happens to deal A LOT with delegation and control, not 'micromanagement'.


I had the emphasis on new players and FCs for a reason. But sure, making the game harder and more boring is an improvement correct?

It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.

Pyralissa
Ministry of War
#265 - 2015-06-12 02:30:23 UTC
Manfred Sideous wrote:
I am not a politician. I am not here to kiss anyones ass. If I run and I don't get re-elected so be it. I support measures , mchanics , changes that will make eve more exciting more dynamic more balanced and more deadly. Destruction is the lifeblood of Eve. Nearly every profession and activity in Eve is fueled by things exploding. More explosions means people in space doing things playing the game. More interaction which is the foundation of a MMORPG.


I'LL GIVE YOU DEATH AND YOU WILL LOVE ME FOR IT.


You are not a politician, but you sure talk like one. You're asked to explain why you think this change is good for the game and you offer a bunch of nonsense platitudes by way of response.

How does this lead to "more explosions"? It makes Slippery Petes, the most cowardly block-level doctrine in the game, almost impossible to engage. It reduces the power of bombers, literally the most 'explosive' ship in the game. It makes combat probing more difficult, meaning that kiting shoot-and-run tactics (Garmur and Orthrus pilots will love this change) even more powerful because they can obliterate tackle, roll safes and be assured that they'll never have to worry about being outnumbered when the counter-attack comes. And of course it makes life more tedious, boring and unnecessarily difficult for wormholers, explorers and mission runners.

Who it will benefit, especially once alliance bookmarks are deployed, is tightly nit organizations composed of single alliances that frequently engage coalition fleets composed of multiple alliances, who will still have to come up with annoying work arounds. You've championed a change that benefits cowards, hinders literally every facet of the benefit of the game all for the benefit of making bombing slightly more difficult. Well done, you really should consider running for office.
Aussitot Apres
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#266 - 2015-06-12 02:30:30 UTC
What a Stupid Change!
You should make EVE
more and more coollllllll !!!
not more and more stupid !!!

I will unsubscribe if you make this change happen
Because you are no longer selling a product I am interested in purchasing.
Xavier Thorm
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#267 - 2015-06-12 02:31:01 UTC
Kujun Nashja wrote:
Now remove anchoring, fleet warps in general and drone assist an we are golden. Twisted


Oh god the chaos of large fleet battles with everyone piloting instead of anchoring. I love it.
Texty
State War Academy
Caldari State
#268 - 2015-06-12 02:31:14 UTC
VENUS XY wrote:
No one will want to fly a useless probing ship and not get on any killmails,


You're right. Kill mails must die.
Manfred Sideous
H A V O C
Fraternity.
#269 - 2015-06-12 02:33:46 UTC
Crazy Candy wrote:
Manfred Sideous wrote:
Budrick3 wrote:
Manfred Sideous wrote:
+1 this is a excellent change that will help to open up combat/fleet tactics. I supported and pushed hard for this.


Good luck getting re-elected.



I am not a politician. I am not here to kiss anyones ass. If I run and I don't get re-elected so be it. I support measures , mchanics , changes that will make eve more exciting more dynamic more balanced and more deadly. Destruction is the lifeblood of Eve. Nearly every profession and activity in Eve is fueled by things exploding. More explosions means people in space doing things playing the game. More interaction which is the foundation of a MMORPG.


I'LL GIVE YOU DEATH AND YOU WILL LOVE ME FOR IT.


have fun when major FCs quit because the dont want to juggle more accounts than they already do

or when aspiring FCs don't want to try because they aren't space rich to own multiple accounts

good **** dude



Maybe just maybe you can get dudes in your alliance to help scout and probe instead of doing it all yourself. Crazy Idea I know ( using teamwork and all that crazy whippity dippity stuff).

@EveManny

https://twitter.com/EveManny

Manfred Sideous
H A V O C
Fraternity.
#270 - 2015-06-12 02:37:45 UTC
Pyralissa wrote:
Manfred Sideous wrote:
I am not a politician. I am not here to kiss anyones ass. If I run and I don't get re-elected so be it. I support measures , mchanics , changes that will make eve more exciting more dynamic more balanced and more deadly. Destruction is the lifeblood of Eve. Nearly every profession and activity in Eve is fueled by things exploding. More explosions means people in space doing things playing the game. More interaction which is the foundation of a MMORPG.


I'LL GIVE YOU DEATH AND YOU WILL LOVE ME FOR IT.


You are not a politician, but you sure talk like one. You're asked to explain why you think this change is good for the game and you offer a bunch of nonsense platitudes by way of response.

How does this lead to "more explosions"? It makes Slippery Petes, the most cowardly block-level doctrine in the game, almost impossible to engage. It reduces the power of bombers, literally the most 'explosive' ship in the game. It makes combat probing more difficult, meaning that kiting shoot-and-run tactics (Garmur and Orthrus pilots will love this change) even more powerful because they can obliterate tackle, roll safes and be assured that they'll never have to worry about being outnumbered when the counter-attack comes. And of course it makes life more tedious, boring and unnecessarily difficult for wormholers, explorers and mission runners.

Who it will benefit, especially once alliance bookmarks are deployed, is tightly nit organizations composed of single alliances that frequently engage coalition fleets composed of multiple alliances, who will still have to come up with annoying work arounds. You've championed a change that benefits cowards, hinders literally every facet of the benefit of the game all for the benefit of making bombing slightly more difficult. Well done, you really should consider running for office.



FWIW I am pushing to see unprobeable™ ships destroyed as a thing forever. I have suggested to CCP that they limit 1 eccm per ship hull. But however allow people to fit as many remote eccm's as they want. That way you could still achieve really high sensor strength. However you would first have to land , lock , activate the module. During this time those ships are all very probeable.

@EveManny

https://twitter.com/EveManny

Lyra Gerie
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#271 - 2015-06-12 02:38:57 UTC
I like this change as much as I hate it. I love the idea of individuals being more responsible, but it KILLS quality of living at the same time. Unfortunately the two are fairly closely linked.

This issue goes double in wormholes where bookmarks are used almost more often for logistics than killing or fleet fights.

Perhaps a new deployable anchors and or anchor probes?

An anchor probe would show up on D-scan when launched at a 100% signal before showing on grid. They would have a warp of 4.5 AU/s and EHP around 10-25k depending on meta level and balance. After landing on grid it would auto deploy over 5-15 seconds again based on meta level and balance.

The attackers can now still warp to a target however it gives the target fair warning and time to destroy the probe before the scouts fleet can warp in.

As for deployable anchors they would stay in space for a certain amount of time or require some kind of fuel to stay anchored. There could be those that are short term used in single battles, or long term/more global anchors.

Manfred Sideous
H A V O C
Fraternity.
#272 - 2015-06-12 02:39:16 UTC
Xavier Thorm wrote:
Kujun Nashja wrote:
Now remove anchoring, fleet warps in general and drone assist an we are golden. Twisted


Oh god the chaos of large fleet battles with everyone piloting instead of anchoring. I love it.


IKR

@EveManny

https://twitter.com/EveManny

Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#273 - 2015-06-12 02:40:03 UTC
Miner Hottie wrote:

I had the emphasis on new players and FCs for a reason. But sure, making the game harder and more boring is an improvement correct?

Emphasis on newer FC's for what reason? You say it makes it harder for them, when in reality it's a false requirement you are imagining.

And you may say 'hard' and 'boring', where someone else might say 'interesting' and 'fun'. Who needs good pilots in ships putting their skills on the line when you have an FC with probes and an F1 button?
Moac Tor
Cyber Core
Immediate Destruction
#274 - 2015-06-12 02:40:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Moac Tor
I'm not really sure what the intended consequences of this change are meant to be. If it is to hurt bomber wings, then I don't really see it achieving that, as bomber wings can still just warp individually to a corp bookmark.

If the effect is to make probers have more to do, then I guess it will achieve that, as they will have to warp to the target which they just probed down, whereas before they could just fleet warp the squad. So in effect this is a nerf to combat probing; I didn't realise that was required.

Other than annoying mission runners and wormholers, I'm not sure what else this will practically achieve, although it is pretty late so hopefully the wisdom of this decision will become apparent tomorrow morning. *chuckles*

Also bear in mind, fleet warp is a very nice feature in the game, and I'd want you to head more in the direction of making fleet management more complex with more fleet tools at our disposal. A lot of people who see a fleet warp for the first time are blown away by how inspiring it is to see the fleet warp and then land in sync with each other.

https://youtu.be/yFTUazuGdTw?t=1m58s
SilentAsTheGrave
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#275 - 2015-06-12 02:40:56 UTC
I'll vote for you Manny. ♥
Xavier Thorm
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#276 - 2015-06-12 02:41:06 UTC
Manfred Sideous wrote:
Xavier Thorm wrote:
Kujun Nashja wrote:
Now remove anchoring, fleet warps in general and drone assist an we are golden. Twisted


Oh god the chaos of large fleet battles with everyone piloting instead of anchoring. I love it.


IKR


Then we'd just need collision damage Twisted.
Winter Archipelago
Autumn Industrial Enterprises
#277 - 2015-06-12 02:41:31 UTC
Manfred Sideous wrote:

Maybe just maybe you can get dudes in your alliance to help scout and probe instead of doing it all yourself. Crazy Idea I know ( using teamwork and all that crazy whippity dippity stuff).

What about smaller groups? Groups that don't have thousands of people? Who don't even have hundreds? What about when you're in fleets of 6-8 people (and fewer)? Do we have to now dedicate someone to probing? Are we to be limited to D3's and T3's so each person can fit both a probe launcher and their combat fit? Does the answer once again become "use an alt?"

Large nullsec groups aren't the only players out there, and not everybody wants to be just another F1-pusher, or just another number in a TIDI slug-fest. This change affects everybody, but it doesn't affect everybody equally.
Foodpimp
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#278 - 2015-06-12 02:41:54 UTC
Well....I am displeased....
Manfred Sideous
H A V O C
Fraternity.
#279 - 2015-06-12 02:41:57 UTC
Lyra Gerie wrote:
I like this change as much as I hate it. I love the idea of individuals being more responsible, but it KILLS quality of living at the same time. Unfortunately the two are fairly closely linked.

This issue goes double in wormholes where bookmarks are used almost more often for logistics than killing or fleet fights.

Perhaps a new deployable anchors and or anchor probes?

An anchor probe would show up on D-scan when launched at a 100% signal before showing on grid. They would have a warp of 4.5 AU/s and EHP around 10-25k depending on meta level and balance. After landing on grid it would auto deploy over 5-15 seconds again based on meta level and balance.

The attackers can now still warp to a target however it gives the target fair warning and time to destroy the probe before the scouts fleet can warp in.

As for deployable anchors they would stay in space for a certain amount of time or require some kind of fuel to stay anchored. There could be those that are short term used in single battles, or long term/more global anchors.



So the guy in the wormhole warps to the bookmark and WWWWWW's up. Then everyone gets fleet warped OMG THE TRAVESTY THAT THOSE EXTRA FEW SECONDS WILL CREATE. THINK OF ALL THE BELLY LENT YOU COULD HAVE PICKED IN THOSE FEW PRECIOUS SECONDS. DAMN YOU CCP DAMN YOU!!!!!!!111ON1E

@EveManny

https://twitter.com/EveManny

Angelic Tallbrooke
Redemption Road
Affirmative.
#280 - 2015-06-12 02:43:18 UTC
Manfred Sideous wrote:
Budrick3 wrote:
Manfred Sideous wrote:
+1 this is a excellent change that will help to open up combat/fleet tactics. I supported and pushed hard for this.


Good luck getting re-elected.



I am not a politician. I am not here to kiss anyones ass. If I run and I don't get re-elected so be it. I support measures , mchanics , changes that will make eve more exciting more dynamic more balanced and more deadly. Destruction is the lifeblood of Eve. Nearly every profession and activity in Eve is fueled by things exploding. More explosions means people in space doing things playing the game. More interaction which is the foundation of a MMORPG.


I'LL GIVE YOU DEATH AND YOU WILL LOVE ME FOR IT.


I have a feeling that this is going to get a lot of criticism because it changes the major game mechanics that we have all grown to love. Could be interesting.

I also have a feeling that this is going to make FC'ing for public fleets (which is what groups like Bomber's Bar, Redemption Road, Spectre Fleet, and pretty much any NPSI group) an absolute pain in the rear end as far as maneuverability goes. Fleet warping across already-scouted systems will be easy, since nothing is going to change, but it's really going to make running from other fleets a lot harder when you have stuff in front of you. And disabling scouts by forcing them to sit at tacticals for people to warp to/for the FC to warp to.

Example: Say you have a group of 30 T1 & T2 frigates/dessies roaming Curse/Catch/Provi. At any given time, your scouts could report that there's a drag bubble on a gate. Previously, you could warp the entire fleet to a ping off the gate. Now, you either have to get a "public warpin" that may or may not be aligned with the bubble, your scout has to do more work (and thus giving your fleet less information) in finding a "publicly-available" un-aligned celestial body OR sitting there for the whole fleet to individually warp to. That's easily fixed by the players.

But let's say, the same fleet gets intel from a +1 scout that an enemy gang of 50 T3 cruisers just jumped into system and is warping to the other side of the gate that you're sitting on. In the current system, an FC would simply warp their fleet up to a tactical and wait out the gang. In the proposed fleet warping situation, either we need more scouts (which are spread out farther, for a better information network) or we sit at tacticals all the time. Then, each fleet member needs to individually warp up to a "tactical holder" player. I know under the current system, as a new FC, I've been able to save fleets from a firey death at the hands of a PL T3 gang by simply fleet warping everyone up to a tactical seconds before a bubble managed to go up on the gate by a sabre.

It's much more complicated, and it makes a coordinated FC agressor able to take out unprepared fleet members. I kind of like it because the entire fleet needs to pay attention, not just the FC, but it does raise some questions about the new player experience and how "fast" a newbro can actually get into fleet battles. This encourages every member of a fleet to be on their toes, paying attention to recon, and I like that idea. But with extended ops, I feel like this might prove a hassle. Guess we'll just have to see where the meta of fleets swing with this new change.