These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Fleet formations
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Yak X
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2017-01-03 19:05:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Yak X
I was watching the battle of goonswarm versus stain fraggin and realize that altough the video is good there is always the blob (the ball of ships) wich leads to the +1 so here is a suggestion, maybe if the hit detection was made larger as in extra shield points but only for ship collisions the fleets will look better, the shield could be tied to speed so as to avoin removing ramming mechanics, this might also lead the way to fleet formations wich might be predefined by the fleet comander, allowing multiple fleets at different places and ranges, changing the +1 problem.


EDIT.- Link to the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POnEJgfESWw&feature=youtu.be
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#2 - 2017-01-03 19:49:15 UTC
FYI Stainwagon are our friends, we were fighting TESCO.

Now. What determines the speed of your fleet? Is it the lowest skilled pilot? What happens to the ships that are not part of the ball? The logi, the ewar, tackle, dictors, ceptors etc? Are they limited to the same speed as a double plated armour battleship? (This will essentually make them worthless by the way). What's wrong with the kind of positioning people in fleet fights currently use, and how is a formation going to be better?

Half those ships are armour tanked anyway, so what use is the extra shield HP going to be?

What, exactly, is stopping someone from having multiple fleets in multiple places? There were nigh on 4,000 people in that fight, that would be more than fifteen full fleets if that's how they were actually organised. I can assure you that the fleets were not all in the same place doing the same thing in the same way at the same speed.
Yak X
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2017-01-03 20:00:29 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
FYI Stainwagon are our friends, we were fighting TESCO.

Now. What determines the speed of your fleet? Is it the lowest skilled pilot? What happens to the ships that are not part of the ball? The logi, the ewar, tackle, dictors, ceptors etc? Are they limited to the same speed as a double plated armour battleship? (This will essentually make them worthless by the way). What's wrong with the kind of positioning people in fleet fights currently use, and how is a formation going to be better?

Half those ships are armour tanked anyway, so what use is the extra shield HP going to be?

What, exactly, is stopping someone from having multiple fleets in multiple places? There were nigh on 4,000 people in that fight, that would be more than fifteen full fleets if that's how they were actually organised. I can assure you that the fleets were not all in the same place doing the same thing in the same way at the same speed.



isorry didnt mean the speed of the fleet, i meant makin the ship hit detection bigger, as if the ship had a shield, however this shield will not be hit points, the speed of a ramming ship will determine if the shield is bypassed and the ship could be rammed.

the possitioning is that the ball of ships allow many ships to be within range, wich will not happend if there were fleet formations and they look bad.

multiple fleets in multiple places, are bound by the same ball problem, if ships werent able to group like that, multiple fleet will have to aproach from different angles, sort of creating batlle lines, that will not only be bound by range, but also by the ammount of ships you could put together within the same range of the enemy.
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#4 - 2017-01-03 20:26:49 UTC
I don't think you understand what n+1 means.

How did you Veterans start?
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#5 - 2017-01-03 20:32:06 UTC
I also do not think you understand that when in a fleet fight, function is ALWAYS more important that form.

Unless fleet formations offer an actual tactical advantage over anchoring on a single point, people will anchor up.

If you penalize anchoring on a single point, you will have to go back and revise quite a few other mechanics that pretty much require "anchoring" tactics.
examples: Logi ships, warfare boosts

How did you Veterans start?
Yak X
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2017-01-03 20:32:52 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:
I don't think you understand what n+1 means.



well whatever it means, the problem remains if you can make a ball of ships (that looks bad) and put them within range of the enemy it comes down to more ships, if you couldnt do that it will force you to use formations and different fleets from different positions, to attack a target, to do this seems to me a good solution is the hit detection increase, wich will create a formation by itself, adding to this you could make predefined fleet formations.
Yak X
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2017-01-03 20:35:27 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:
I also do not think you understand that when in a fleet fight, function is ALWAYS more important that form.

Unless fleet formations offer an actual tactical advantage over anchoring on a single point, people will anchor up.

If you penalize anchoring on a single point, you will have to go back and revise quite a few other mechanics that pretty much require "anchoring" tactics.
examples: Logi ships, warfare boosts



thats what im saying, the ball of ships all within range, to avoid moving other mechanics the hit detection suggestion might work,, as the ships will be spread out, unless ourposedly ramming another ship.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#8 - 2017-01-03 20:52:37 UTC
Yak X wrote:
ShahFluffers wrote:
I don't think you understand what n+1 means.



well whatever it means, the problem remains if you can make a ball of ships (that looks bad) and put them within range of the enemy it comes down to more ships, if you couldnt do that it will force you to use formations and different fleets from different positions, to attack a target, to do this seems to me a good solution is the hit detection increase, wich will create a formation by itself, adding to this you could make predefined fleet formations.


But people are already using different fleets in different positions, with different subgroups within those fleets also in different positions. What is the problem here?

How does a formation work when you have, say, a ship that does 400m/s and a ship that does 600m/s filling the same role in the same fleet? They won't be able to stay in a defined formation together if they're moving full speed, and in an AB fleet you are moving full speed or you are dying, but they can certainly orbit the same anchor.

Also your battle lines idea flat out doesn't work when fleets can simply warp to a more advantageous position if they have to.

I have to ask, have you ever actually been in a large engagement?
Yak X
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2017-01-03 21:02:19 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Yak X wrote:
ShahFluffers wrote:
I don't think you understand what n+1 means.



well whatever it means, the problem remains if you can make a ball of ships (that looks bad) and put them within range of the enemy it comes down to more ships, if you couldnt do that it will force you to use formations and different fleets from different positions, to attack a target, to do this seems to me a good solution is the hit detection increase, wich will create a formation by itself, adding to this you could make predefined fleet formations.


But people are already using different fleets in different positions, with different subgroups within those fleets also in different positions. What is the problem here?

How does a formation work when you have, say, a ship that does 400m/s and a ship that does 600m/s filling the same role in the same fleet? They won't be able to stay in a defined formation together if they're moving full speed, and in an AB fleet you are moving full speed or you are dying, but they can certainly orbit the same anchor.

Also your battle lines idea flat out doesn't work when fleets can simply warp to a more advantageous position if they have to.

I have to ask, have you ever actually been in a large engagement?



yes, but the ball of ships allows you to pile ships together and fire at the same range, so its multiple balls or a +1, wich will be less important if you could not pile them together, as only a certain number of ships will be capable to fire at the same place.

the formation will work by itself, as the hit detection will keep them from piling together, forcing you to make formations and fleets instead of relying on on the piling effect, that allows the to keep shooting and putting +1 ship in the blob.

warping to a more advantageous posiiton doesnt remove battle lines, as they will be bound by range and the ammount of ships that can fire to a single location.

i was field marshall at the emperor service.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#10 - 2017-01-03 21:09:43 UTC
That doesn't make the slightest bit of sense.

Please try participating in a large fleet fight before asking that they be removed.

Now, please calculate 4000*4000*4000 for the number of additional calculations the server will have to carry out every second in a fight like that one just to make your line of sight mechanic work. It's going to need to check every single ship against every other ship just to see if they can actually shoot.

Also a battle line is two dimensional while space is three, so...
Yak X
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2017-01-03 21:14:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Yak X
Danika Princip wrote:
That doesn't make the slightest bit of sense.

Please try participating in a large fleet fight before asking that they be removed.

Now, please calculate 4000*4000*4000 for the number of additional calculations the server will have to carry out every second in a fight like that one just to make your line of sight mechanic work. It's going to need to check every single ship against every other ship just to see if they can actually shoot.

Also a battle line is two dimensional while space is three, so...


im not asking for them to be removed, wich it should be clear.

the collision detection is alredy there what calculations do you mean? however you should calculate from those 4000 ships, how many will be capable to be at the same place.

a battle line is a way of sayung, the angles covered by the nemy, space being tridimensional, or in this case the gameplay makes them to be bound by range and the +1, with this they will be bound by the ammount of ships you can pile together at a single place, see the calculations above.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#12 - 2017-01-03 21:24:55 UTC
You are asking for them to be hard enough to manage that they will not happen, which is the same as asking for them to be removed.

And you cannot even explain how a fleet is supposed to keep formation when every ship is moving at a different speed and when fleet members with different roles need to be in different positions.

I mean the calculations you want to add to see if a ship can fire at a target. This is not calculated currently, and would require every ship to b checked against every other ship ever second. Which is very, very bad for the server.

Why, exactly, do you think that the way a fleet looks is the most important part of this game?
Cade Windstalker
#13 - 2017-01-03 21:28:35 UTC
This seems like a solution in search of a problem...

You seem to mostly dislike this because it "looks bad" not because this is what leads to "N+1" or whatever. You're also completely glossing over this "hit detection increase" you keep talking about. Collision damage would do horrible things to the game because it's not designed around having anything of the sort, so you'd need to redesign huge chunks of the game to incorporate that.

Even in real life combat isn't pretty. If you knew anything about old style naval warfare where things like the "Line of Battle" were used you'd know that even those weren't "pretty" they were functional, and the actual fights often devolved into messy skirmishes.

Other than that you're just not making much sense here. Again, you keep bringing up this collision detection thing, but ships already bump off each other just fine. You seem to want more space between ships but even that doesn't make sense. Why should a ship's collision sphere need to extend several ship-widths away from the vessel?
Yak X
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2017-01-03 21:28:52 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
You are asking for them to be hard enough to manage that they will not happen, which is the same as asking for them to be removed.

And you cannot even explain how a fleet is supposed to keep formation when every ship is moving at a different speed and when fleet members with different roles need to be in different positions.

I mean the calculations you want to add to see if a ship can fire at a target. This is not calculated currently, and would require every ship to b checked against every other ship ever second. Which is very, very bad for the server.

Why, exactly, do you think that the way a fleet looks is the most important part of this game?



would they be hard enough to manage? it will come down to numbers and modules, at its simplest will allow more advanced gameplay, is that for the first two?

coallision betwween ships are already there, the hit detection will only be bigger, and if enough speed and mass is added it could bypass this second shield, is all already there.

looks will be the extra,as everything else seems to enhace gameplay not reduce it.
Yak X
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2017-01-03 21:35:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Yak X
Cade Windstalker wrote:
This seems like a solution in search of a problem...

You seem to mostly dislike this because it "looks bad" not because this is what leads to "N+1" or whatever. You're also completely glossing over this "hit detection increase" you keep talking about. Collision damage would do horrible things to the game because it's not designed around having anything of the sort, so you'd need to redesign huge chunks of the game to incorporate that.

Even in real life combat isn't pretty. If you knew anything about old style naval warfare where things like the "Line of Battle" were used you'd know that even those weren't "pretty" they were functional, and the actual fights often devolved into messy skirmishes.

Other than that you're just not making much sense here. Again, you keep bringing up this collision detection thing, but ships already bump off each other just fine. You seem to want more space between ships but even that doesn't make sense. Why should a ship's collision sphere need to extend several ship-widths away from the vessel?



looks is part of it, but it does leads to n+1. im not saying collision damage altough with this it might be added, giving this second shield a higher push so it will require more mass to bypass.

in naval warfare you still had lines accordiing to the weapons, old naval warfare had it too but require ships to get closer.

a bigger collision sphere, will prevent ships from piling on to each other, unless done on pourpose(ramming) (most of this is already there), this will prevent fleets from puttin +1 in any blob as only a certain number of ships, depending on size will be capable to concentrate fire.
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#16 - 2017-01-04 03:43:47 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
Okay... this looks like a case of lost in translation / ignorant of game mechanics / I don't care about the repercussions, I want what I want.


"N+1" is the concept that if you bring "N" people to a fight, your opponent will bring more people to counter you ("+1")

It has nothing to do with actual game mechanics.
It is simply how players behave.


With regards to the rest of it...

Understand that the server does not see your ship as a "ship." It is a sphere with stats and trajectory lines.
What you see on your end is nothing more than the client (which handles all the "pretty" parts of the game) attempting to make sense of what the server is reporting.

Ergo... no ship has "secondary shields." At all.
When two ships "bump" it is because the spheres that represent the ships are too close to each other.

You could expand this sphere to do what you want it to do (prevent people from anchoring in one position)... but then you create a WHOLE BUNCH of other issues.
Some of these issues include, but are not limited to:

- inability to maneuver around an asteroid belt (miners will HATE this idea).
- getting caught and hung up on stargates and stations (traders will HATE this idea)
- Inability for Logistics ships to stay close to each other (which is MANDATORY, otherwise the ships will easily die).
- Inability for Logistics ships to reach as many people in the fleet as possible (you want people bunched up, no spread around... people that are spread around die easier).

Keep in mind that people in this game generally prefer "efficiency" over "pretty."

"Pretty" is nice and all... but if it prevents people from being "efficient," you will hear no end to the complaints.

Plus... your idea pretty much centers around the idea that "this situation does not look 'pretty'... so there should be a mechanic to force it to be more 'pretty.'"
And that kinda rubs me the wrong way.

War is messy. "Lines" as you see them are a little dated and does not actually exist... at least it hasn't for awhile now in modern warfare (hint: those "lines" you see on TV about how much territory so-and-so has claimed or "own" is pretty much graphical garbage. It should be more like two separate colors blending into one another).

How did you Veterans start?
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#17 - 2017-01-04 09:45:08 UTC
just take the long axis stat and apply it to a different axis. Problem solved, now all ships have 8x their previous collision sphere volume like FAXes.

Help, I can't download EVE

President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub

PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
Lugh Crow-Slave
#18 - 2017-01-04 11:52:35 UTC
i find the balls to look elegant. how do they look bad?

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Yak X
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#19 - 2017-01-04 18:05:32 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:
Okay... this looks like a case of lost in translation / ignorant of game mechanics / I don't care about the repercussions, I want what I want.


"N+1" is the concept that if you bring "N" people to a fight, your opponent will bring more people to counter you ("+1")

It has nothing to do with actual game mechanics.
It is simply how players behave.


With regards to the rest of it...

Understand that the server does not see your ship as a "ship." It is a sphere with stats and trajectory lines.
What you see on your end is nothing more than the client (which handles all the "pretty" parts of the game) attempting to make sense of what the server is reporting.

Ergo... no ship has "secondary shields." At all.
When two ships "bump" it is because the spheres that represent the ships are too close to each other.

You could expand this sphere to do what you want it to do (prevent people from anchoring in one position)... but then you create a WHOLE BUNCH of other issues.
Some of these issues include, but are not limited to:

- inability to maneuver around an asteroid belt (miners will HATE this idea).
- getting caught and hung up on stargates and stations (traders will HATE this idea)
- Inability for Logistics ships to stay close to each other (which is MANDATORY, otherwise the ships will easily die).
- Inability for Logistics ships to reach as many people in the fleet as possible (you want people bunched up, no spread around... people that are spread around die easier).

Keep in mind that people in this game generally prefer "efficiency" over "pretty."

"Pretty" is nice and all... but if it prevents people from being "efficient," you will hear no end to the complaints.



Plus... your idea pretty much centers around the idea that "this situation does not look 'pretty'... so there should be a mechanic to force it to be more 'pretty.'"
And that kinda rubs me the wrong way.

War is messy. "Lines" as you see them are a little dated and does not actually exist... at least it hasn't for awhile now in modern warfare (hint: those "lines" you see on TV about how much territory so-and-so has claimed or "own" is pretty much graphical garbage. It should be more like two separate colors blending into one another).



yes looks is part of this, but as you have mentioned the n+1 is the ability to bring one more, now this would be less of a problem if you couldnt put them all in the same place where they can concentrate fire, you can always put +1 in the ball of ships, instead you will have to move fleets to other positions.


i dont think efficiency is the problem, as this will apply to all sides, including logi certain ammount of ships depending on size, will requre certain ammount of logi, you are distributing this big ball of ships into different fleets you can always bring +1 but they will be restricted to where you can put it.

similar concept for other ship sizes, bumbing already happends to traders, however to bump the ship you will require mass and speed to bypass tthis "second shield" lets call it a magnetic bumper, so nothing changes, for miners it will also depend on ship size and its not like mining ships are manovrable enugh for it to matter.

lines of battle is a concept used to explain the territory someone controls, in this case being space and gamemecanucs, they are the range and ammount of firepower a fleet has and can concentrate on a single target, so its the ball of ships of alwasy being able to put +1 in it.
Yak X
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2017-01-04 18:07:05 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
just take the long axis stat and apply it to a different axis. Problem solved, now all ships have 8x their previous collision sphere volume like FAXes.



yeah...well the size of the collision sphere might vary from ship to ship, a frigate might be able to cross this second shiel if orbiting a battleship due to speed, but thats the idea.
12Next page