These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next page
 

Get rid of Vulnerability Kiting

Author
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
#1 - 2015-07-20 09:54:34 UTC
Once the Vulnerability window closes any further entosis cycles should automatically fail.

The presence of this vulnerability "kiting" defeats the purpose of the vulnerability window: to allow groups to actually sleep/work/live life.

Cloaking is the closest thing to a "Pause Game" button one can get while in space.

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#2 - 2015-07-20 11:01:06 UTC
Or you could you know, actually defend the structure. It shouldn't magically go from 90% captured to invulnerable without you doing the work.
Chase them off, Entosis the structure yourself and they cease being vulnerable.
Lim Hiaret
Hiaret Family
#3 - 2015-07-20 13:41:55 UTC
Petrified wrote:
Once the Vulnerability window closes any further entosis cycles should automatically fail.

The presence of this vulnerability "kiting" defeats the purpose of the vulnerability window: to allow groups to actually sleep/work/live life.


Please explain: Vulnerability Kiting == starting entosis short before end of vulnerability window?
Tabyll Altol
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#4 - 2015-07-20 14:28:58 UTC
Please explain what you mean with that. And second of all have you tried to fight them ? they should be slower than you because of the mass. You can use ewar on everything subcapital. But that would mean you need to be active and risk something.

-1 for the idea
Poranius Fisc
State War Academy
Caldari State
#5 - 2015-07-20 22:36:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Poranius Fisc
Tabyll Altol wrote:
Please explain what you mean with that. And second of all have you tried to fight them ? they should be slower than you because of the mass. You can use ewar on everything subcapital. But that would mean you need to be active and risk something.

-1 for the idea

I think, what he is saying is that if A alliance attack B alliance towards the end of an vulnerability window, it keeps an "open session" with that entosis that will exist past the vulnerability window. and with a brute force attack, A alliance can swap active entosis links, therefore increasing the window. so, whole B alliance has their window from 00:00 - 04:00, A alliance can shift it well out of B alliance's active window.

People spend months using agents to track people and supercap's to kill, so it is easily feasible that they might find a time when no one is on to defend, or maybe they get a lucky break and find a window and activate this tactic. Moving a vulnerability window a couple hours can seriously affect everyone except the power blocs.

As for the Ewar works on everything sub-capitol; if you set this up, you just need enough ships to alpha Ewar before they can lock and stop your entosis pilot.
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
#6 - 2015-07-20 23:11:45 UTC
Poranius Fisc wrote:
Tabyll Altol wrote:
Please explain what you mean with that. And second of all have you tried to fight them ? they should be slower than you because of the mass. You can use ewar on everything subcapital. But that would mean you need to be active and risk something.

-1 for the idea

I think, what he is saying is that if A alliance attack B alliance towards the end of an vulnerability window, it keeps an "open session" with that entosis that will exist past the vulnerability window. and with a brute force attack, A alliance can swap active entosis links, therefore increasing the window. so, whole B alliance has their window from 00:00 - 04:00, A alliance can shift it well out of B alliance's active window.

People spend months using agents to track people and supercap's to kill, so it is easily feasible that they might find a time when no one is on to defend, or maybe they get a lucky break and find a window and activate this tactic. Moving a vulnerability window a couple hours can seriously affect everyone except the power blocs.

As for the Ewar works on everything sub-capitol; if you set this up, you just need enough ships to alpha Ewar before they can lock and stop your entosis pilot.

An excellent explanation. Thank you.

Cloaking is the closest thing to a "Pause Game" button one can get while in space.

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#7 - 2015-07-20 23:47:26 UTC
Poranius Fisc wrote:

I think, what he is saying is that if A alliance attack B alliance towards the end of an vulnerability window, it keeps an "open session" with that entosis that will exist past the vulnerability window. and with a brute force attack, A alliance can swap active entosis links, therefore increasing the window. so, whole B alliance has their window from 00:00 - 04:00, A alliance can shift it well out of B alliance's active window.

People spend months using agents to track people and supercap's to kill, so it is easily feasible that they might find a time when no one is on to defend, or maybe they get a lucky break and find a window and activate this tactic. Moving a vulnerability window a couple hours can seriously affect everyone except the power blocs.

As for the Ewar works on everything sub-capitol; if you set this up, you just need enough ships to alpha Ewar before they can lock and stop your entosis pilot.

At which point alliance A has fairly solid control of the grid and this isn't a single troll entosis link but a significant attack, and alliance B needs to get their ass into gear and defend.
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
#8 - 2015-07-21 01:37:51 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Poranius Fisc wrote:

I think, what he is saying is that if A alliance attack B alliance towards the end of an vulnerability window, it keeps an "open session" with that entosis that will exist past the vulnerability window. and with a brute force attack, A alliance can swap active entosis links, therefore increasing the window. so, whole B alliance has their window from 00:00 - 04:00, A alliance can shift it well out of B alliance's active window.

People spend months using agents to track people and supercap's to kill, so it is easily feasible that they might find a time when no one is on to defend, or maybe they get a lucky break and find a window and activate this tactic. Moving a vulnerability window a couple hours can seriously affect everyone except the power blocs.

As for the Ewar works on everything sub-capitol; if you set this up, you just need enough ships to alpha Ewar before they can lock and stop your entosis pilot.

At which point alliance A has fairly solid control of the grid and this isn't a single troll entosis link but a significant attack, and alliance B needs to get their ass into gear and defend.


Or the attacker should get their act together an not attack at the end of the vulnerability period.

Main issue is that the "overtime" period can be extended indefinitely, thus kitted, to the point that the defender cannot effectively defend simply because life takes precedence over the game. Sort of the reason the vulnerability window was created to begin with. While it might not be an issue for alliances with players in everytime zone, it is an issue for alliances that are more time-zone specific.

If anything there needs to be a hard limit to the overtime period CCP added to prevent abuse of it.

Cloaking is the closest thing to a "Pause Game" button one can get while in space.

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.

McChicken Combo HalfMayo
The Happy Meal
#9 - 2015-07-21 01:46:14 UTC
The Entosis links are 35m/135m depending on the tech level. If you have a problem with this tactic keep killing them. No one is going to spend billions of ISK to troll you.

Wait... nevermind.

There are all our dominion

Gate camps: "Its like the lowsec watercooler, just with explosions and boose" - Ralph King-Griffin

Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2015-07-21 02:04:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Invulnerability should be enforced once the minimum capture time beyond the vulnerability window has passed. This allows anyone attacking late to still get one in before the deadline, but requires them to hurry or fail.

edit: see post #20

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#11 - 2015-07-21 03:07:38 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Invulnerability should be enforced once the minimum capture time beyond the vulnerability window has passed. This allows anyone attacking late to still get one in before the deadline, but requires them to hurry or fail.

And then the situation is reversed and all a defender has to do is troll kite the attacker for 15 minutes and there is no way they can possibly win.
So no, there should be no limit once a capture is started unless it's fully reversed at which point it goes invulnerable per normal. If you can't get control of the grid and finish the fight fast enough, the attacker deserves to win if you all have to log off and go home.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2015-07-21 04:19:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
And then the situation is reversed and all a defender has to do is troll kite the attacker for 15 minutes and there is no way they can possibly win.
So no, there should be no limit once a capture is started unless it's fully reversed at which point it goes invulnerable per normal. If you can't get control of the grid and finish the fight fast enough, the attacker deserves to win if you all have to log off and go home.

The attackers could have avoided that situation by attacking earlier in the window. If they commit to a fight right at the end of the invulnerability window, they should be prepared to hurry that fight along, just as the defenders are prepared to hurriedly force them away so they can get back to their normal life.

edit: see post #20

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#13 - 2015-07-21 04:23:55 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:

The attackers could have avoided that situation by attacking earlier in the window. If they commit to a fight right at the end of the invulnerability window, they should be prepared to hurry that fight along, just as the defenders are prepared to hurriedly force them away so they can get back to their normal life.

You are just advocating for a shorter vulnerability window. Since that's what it really means. 'Sorry, you can't attack during this time because you can't complete it anyway, and if you attack with 15 minutes to spare all they need to do is troll you for 15 mins'. Despite the fact that it can require over an hour of Entosis in some situations.
Yea no.
If they commit to holding the grid with enough alpha to take your Ewar ships off the grid instantly they are no longer dropping a single troll ship but a real fleet and you can either man up and fight them or lose the timer.
If they just have a single troll ship it's easy as pie to use an Ewar frigate or something light to stop their cycles and defensively entosis it back into invulnerability.

Neither situation requires a change to the mechanics.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2015-07-21 04:28:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
You are just advocating for a shorter vulnerability window.

I didn't say much about how long a group should be allowed to go over, I only said that it should be limited. It should be limited to a reasonable amount of time. An hour seems reasonable, even two hours. Even four hours isn't entirely outside reason. If there's a four hour window to start the attack and an additional four hours after that window to finish it, then any attacking group has a maximum of eight hours and a minimum of four hours to complete the attack. That's plenty. No more is necessary.

edit: see post #20

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#15 - 2015-07-21 04:30:17 UTC
So if they can stop you getting defensive control of the grid back for FOUR HOURS they should lose anyway? Sorry, this all sounds like a bad argument based on 'we can't defend our stuff'.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#16 - 2015-07-21 11:27:04 UTC
Doesn't this just mean a shorter vulnerability window?


I have already had fights that go on for more than two hrs and that would mean max systems just have to wait you out not actively hold control over the needed grids

-1
Tabyll Altol
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#17 - 2015-07-21 14:13:32 UTC
If you stay active in your space and defend it an attacker won´t be able to kite it longer than 10 min.
If you aren´t ative at the last minutes, your fault.

still

-1
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
#18 - 2015-07-21 19:37:39 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Doesn't this just mean a shorter vulnerability window?

Absolutely not. They have, at a minimum, 4 hours to establish grid control. Past that, it simply gets into bad planning on the attackers part.

There is no shortening of the vulnerability window. At present, the way the situation stands, the vulnerability window can be extended to the point that there are no defenders left on the field because, well, they might have to go to work.

I think people are forgetting the purpose of the vulnerability window: a compromise to allow an attacker to attempt to take space from a defender during a predictable time period. The Defender will really need to be on to defend their space while actually not having to live and breathe EVE online 24/7 - which is what vulnerability kiting effectively will force anyone to do to defend their space - even if it is one system they control.

Cloaking is the closest thing to a "Pause Game" button one can get while in space.

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.

159Pinky
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#19 - 2015-07-21 20:18:21 UTC
Nope, just get control of the grid. And get rid of the opposing team. If you can't form in the last 15 minutes of your vulnerability window than that's your problem. They put effort into into it. So should you.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2015-07-21 23:34:10 UTC
I have changed my stance on the issue and I now believe the system is fine as-is. If the defenders can prevent the aggressors from having entosis links running even for a moment outside the vulnerability window, the structure should go invulnerable. If the defenders cannot do this, they have essentially lost the fight anyway.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

123Next page