These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

Triage and Siege module needs to have a reduction to tactical refit
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cade Windstalker
#21 - 2017-02-10 15:42:56 UTC
D'Om K'vash wrote:
10 seconds was only a suggestion and nobody uses arty nags so your point is terrible. And if someone does use arty nag then they will be worthless once the fleet gets under their guns which will take abou 5 seconds for any competent fleet. Also they nerfed it before they added op'd capital neuts and gave carriers the ability to do 3k dmg while receiving reps and again ability to fit 2-3 cap neuts.


Except that, were we to implement your suggestion here, I could fire a salvo and then refit the arty off my Nag as soon as the cycle finished...

Shooting your own point in the foot much?

Also if you'll read the dev blog I linked above you'll note that the added capital modules were, in fact, something to mitigate the effects of these changes not an unrelated afterthought. The current state of the capital meta is entirely intentional. If you want to be neut resistant then fit to be neut resistant, if you want to deal more damage and **** the neuts then do that, but make the choice and live with it.

If you really want more levers to pull along the lines of combat refitting then ask CCP for more scriptable mods and similar things. That gets you some of the utility and ability of combat refitting without fully bringing back that horribly broken monster of a design choice.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#22 - 2017-02-10 16:01:17 UTC
with arty you keep the weapons timer until the cycle ends.

at least thats what happened to my nado last time i used it

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Lugh Crow-Slave
#23 - 2017-02-10 16:02:16 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:

If you really want more levers to pull along the lines of combat refitting then ask CCP for more scriptable mods and similar things. That gets you some of the utility and ability of combat refitting without fully bringing back that horribly broken monster of a design choice.



... its the gameplay that we are upset was lost scrips do not bring that back

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Cade Windstalker
#24 - 2017-02-10 20:02:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Cade Windstalker
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:

If you really want more levers to pull along the lines of combat refitting then ask CCP for more scriptable mods and similar things. That gets you some of the utility and ability of combat refitting without fully bringing back that horribly broken monster of a design choice.



... its the gameplay that we are upset was lost scrips do not bring that back


Yes, and I get that, but the gameplay that you want to bring back was kind of broken and removed almost all choice from fitting a ship. The people who were fine with it and want it back seem to be mostly larger capital focused organizations who mostly only fight capitals with other capitals, and for that there wasn't a huge problem with refitting. Everyone did it so everyone was on an even playing field and it created a very stressful and skill intensive form of gameplay.

Unfortunately when you get away from that Caps vs Caps style of engagement where "everyone's doing it" you end up with something that just removes most fitting choice from the game and creates a really toxic piece of gameplay.

That's all without getting into TiDi and how much buffer it can give you on refitting before something nasty hits you.

At that point my view is that trying to get back this old, fun, but kind of broken thing is both futile and bad for the game so best to move forward and try to find something that captures the fun aspects without the cesspool underneath. Scripts have the potential to do that by making fitting choices matter but still creating space for quick tactical thinking by a skilled player with good mechanical knowledge.

If you fundamentally disagree with me about the potential for scripted modules then I'm probably not understanding something that you're implying with that single sentence reply, and could you please explain more fully?
D'Om K'vash
Dead's Prostitutes
The Initiative.
#25 - 2017-02-10 20:14:54 UTC  |  Edited by: D'Om K'vash
Cade Windstalker wrote:
D'Om K'vash wrote:
10 seconds was only a suggestion and nobody uses arty nags so your point is terrible. And if someone does use arty nag then they will be worthless once the fleet gets under their guns which will take abou 5 seconds for any competent fleet. Also they nerfed it before they added op'd capital neuts and gave carriers the ability to do 3k dmg while receiving reps and again ability to fit 2-3 cap neuts.


Except that, were we to implement your suggestion here, I could fire a salvo and then refit the arty off my Nag as soon as the cycle finished...

Shooting your own point in the foot much?

Also if you'll read the dev blog I linked above you'll note that the added capital modules were, in fact, something to mitigate the effects of these changes not an unrelated afterthought. The current state of the capital meta is entirely intentional. If you want to be neut resistant then fit to be neut resistant, if you want to deal more damage and **** the neuts then do that, but make the choice and live with it.

If you really want more levers to pull along the lines of combat refitting then ask CCP for more scriptable mods and similar things. That gets you some of the utility and ability of combat refitting without fully bringing back that horribly broken monster of a design choice.


I did read what you said and responded. under your one circumstance of artillery .. which show me one kill mail of a nag using artiliary... if they were using artilary all you need is a few seconds to close in order to get under the guns of capital aritllary hence why noboday uses them and I believe you are wrong the timers doesn't start going down until the cycle ends. Also to act as if your one instance shoots down the entire argument is beyond ridiculous. Also like I said many many times the 10 seconds was a suggestion and like all changes debate and talking points about pros and cons is what I desire.. maye 15 is right or 20 or 30 but 1 minute is stupid.

also the previous no timer switching was broken because what are now combat carriers and supers could remote rep eachother and remote cap on top of switching. nobody was complaining about dreads ability or triage's ability to switch. it was entirely a nerf because of the tactic of pantheon carriers. just the creation of fax's alone solved the problem. Because if you had enough pantheon carriers you could kill anyting I gurantee that even if you have dreads and triage no refit timer again they would die the same. Because dps of dreads has increased by about 20-30% carriers now get almost 3 times the dps that they used to get. eg thanatos now gets almost 3k dps. Then you add capital neuts to the equation and even a dread or triage with ability to refit will only add a few seconds of survival in large scale fights and maybe get to where they can come out of triage or siege in low sec mid size fights which allows well skilled (NOT in game but actual pleayer skills) to make the difference in these fights.

the only way to truly get rid of N+1 is not thorugh any game balance or nerf or buff but to make ships as player skill intensive to fly as possible eg players that manually pilot vs ones that hit orbit. right now there is no player skill in capitals the N+1 is worse than when pantheon was around. Now it's just drop 10-50 faxs with combat carriers supers and dreads everyone sit in ball and hit f1. at least refitting would allow skill back and some excitement.

To your scriptable idea. there is a reason nobody uses them they are a good idea but horrible in practice. Armor you could maybe use it because if you couple it with the reactive armor module you can see what incoming damage is. but shield totally worthless and switching damage isn't the main problem. cap fights are all about capacitor warfare now so triage and dreads need ability to cap fit to tank fit. it is not as easy as all the people who talk about it but obviously have never done it say it is.
D'Om K'vash
Dead's Prostitutes
The Initiative.
#26 - 2017-02-10 20:20:54 UTC
[

Yes, and I get that, but the gameplay that you want to bring back was kind of broken and removed almost all choice from fitting a ship. The people who were fine with it and want it back seem to be mostly larger capital focused organizations who mostly only fight capitals with other capitals, and for that there wasn't a huge problem with refitting. Everyone did it so everyone was on an even playing field and it created a very stressful and skill intensive form of gameplay.

Unfortunately when you get away from that Caps vs Caps style of engagement where "everyone's doing it" you end up with something that just removes most fitting choice from the game and creates a really toxic piece of gameplay.

That's all without getting into

At that point my view is that trying to get back this old, fun, but kind of broken thing is both futile and bad for the game so best to move forward and try to find something that captures the fun aspects without the cesspool underneath. Scripts have the potential to do that by making fitting choices matter but still creating space for quick tactical thinking by a skilled player with good mechanical knowledge.

If you fundamentally disagree with me about the potential for scripted modules then I'm probably not understanding something that you're implying with that single sentence reply, and could you please explain more fully?[/quote]

I get what you are saying but you are being to polar with your thinking. I'm not saying that we should have no timer but no way you agree 1 minute is not just as broken. I suggest 10 seconds imo that would be more than enough lag to make ithard but still allow refitting to be effective. Maybe the real answer is somewhere else but to polarize the debate into it's either bring back the old which you say is broken or leave the new which I say is broken, is not what i'm saying. I want ore people to weigh in csm devs and roll back the nerf. again just like how they rolled back the jump range nerf
Cade Windstalker
#27 - 2017-02-10 20:46:04 UTC
D'Om K'vash wrote:
-snip- Artillery -snip-


The artillery was an example, and while I'm not certain about the refitting timer the aggression timer you get on damage or reps starts when the cycle starts and isn't refreshed on cycle end from what I can tell. I can poke around and do some more testing later.

The point was to point out how very little 10 seconds is. Even if we're only looking at fast firing guns you're not losing much more than 1-2 volleys by not shooting for 10 seconds. As you said, 10 seconds is just a base value, but at what point is it "too much" again? The whole point of this was to make combat refitting an ineffective tactic without taking yourself out of the fight.

D'Om K'vash wrote:
also the previous no timer switching was broken because what are now combat carriers and supers could remote rep eachother and remote cap on top of switching. -snip-


This is not correct.

As CCP pointed out in the blog post I linked, and quoted, above it wasn't any one thing that made this OP, and it wasn't even just capitals. CCP could have run around playing whack-a-mole on problem cases for years and we'd still have had the base problem which was combat refitting allowing way too much flexability in responding to situations. In Eve, if you bring a fit that gets hard countered, you're supposed to lose not just swap fits mid fight to something that works against your enemy's hard counter.

Also your Carrier DPS numbers are a bit off after the round of changes CCP made to Carriers a month or two after Citadel, IIRC the sustained DPS dropped to around 2k due to the changes to missiles.

D'Om K'vash wrote:
the only way to truly get rid of N+1 is not thorugh any game balance or nerf or buff but to make ships as player skill intensive to fly as possible eg players that manually pilot vs ones that hit orbit. right now there is no player skill in capitals the N+1 is worse than when pantheon was around. Now it's just drop 10-50 faxs with combat carriers supers and dreads everyone sit in ball and hit f1. at least refitting would allow skill back and some excitement.


N+1 is never going to truly go away because Eve is a Sandbox and "have more guys" is an advantage you can gain. All other things being equal it can be a decisive one but it's never the only decisive advantage, even with caps. I'm not diagreeing with you that Cap fights right now aren't very exciting, but CCP's goal here wasn't to "get rid of N+1" and I don't think it should be.

D'Om K'vash wrote:
To your scriptable idea. there is a reason nobody uses them they are a good idea but horrible in practice. Armor you could maybe use it because if you couple it with the reactive armor module you can see what incoming damage is. but shield totally worthless and switching damage isn't the main problem. cap fights are all about capacitor warfare now so triage and dreads need ability to cap fit to tank fit. it is not as easy as all the people who talk about it but obviously have never done it say it is.


So ask CCP to create scriptable modules that let you make tradeoffs between cap warfare and tank, or increase the power or utility of passive tank modules to mitigate the impact of cap warfare. Both are potentially viable options. Neither would risk breaking anything that isn't "ball of caps vs ball of caps" by re-introducing combat refitting to the game as a widespread tactic.


D'Om K'vash wrote:
I get what you are saying but you are being to polar with your thinking. I'm not saying that we should have no timer but no way you agree 1 minute is not just as broken. I suggest 10 seconds imo that would be more than enough lag to make ithard but still allow refitting to be effective. Maybe the real answer is somewhere else but to polarize the debate into it's either bring back the old which you say is broken or leave the new which I say is broken, is not what i'm saying. I want ore people to weigh in csm devs and roll back the nerf. again just like how they rolled back the jump range nerf


I think you're being too narrow with your thinking here. It's stuck squarely on "ball of caps vs ball of caps" and is completely ignoring every other place caps show up. Like Wormholes for example, where the standard number of caps in a fight is 3 or less and a good chunk of the time you're fighting them with sub caps. Same goes for small engagements of mixed caps and sub caps, both would be negatively impacted by a return to largely unrestricted combat refitting, and any timer that gives you enough breathing room to refit in a larger fight will make a smaller fight almost like the nerfs never happened.

They also didn't roll back the jump range changes, they adjusted jump range slightly to open up more options and the change they made was very small. The equivalent would be changing the current timer from 60 seconds to around 50 or 55, and that was for very clear and specific reasons that aren't really present here.

The problem you're looking to solve is stale and kind of boring cap warfare, there are a world of potential solutions that don't include this one with the inherent problems it has.
Kenrailae
Scrapyard Artificer's
#28 - 2017-02-11 01:41:45 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:

I think you're being too narrow with your thinking here. It's stuck squarely on "ball of caps vs ball of caps" and is completely ignoring every other place caps show up. Like Wormholes for example, where the standard number of caps in a fight is 3 or less and a good chunk of the time you're fighting them with sub caps. Same goes for small engagements of mixed caps and sub caps, both would be negatively impacted by a return to largely unrestricted combat refitting, and any timer that gives you enough breathing room to refit in a larger fight will make a smaller fight almost like the nerfs never happened.





I have to disagree with you here. The main example of how/why combat refitting was a problem when it was removed wasn't the small scale fights as you've described above. It was the large scale, where again, entire fleets of archons would fit max capacitor/damage until they got locked up, then quick switch to full tank to get reps, then immediately switch back. A small number of caps can, with even a little effort, be bumped out of that tiny refit circle, and then they can be isolated and killed. That was not the main problem with combat refitting. I'll even go one step further, and say that if memory serves correctly, I don't recall hearing much in the way of complaints about combat refitting in the small scale at ALL, just that it was broken on the large scale. It was, as with the jump nerfs, about the large scale and massed caps. Jump ranges weren't nerfed and fatigue added because a few guys moved from Metropolis to Syndicate over the weekend. They were nerfed/fatigued because Eve at the time didn't have little clusters of caps/supers here or there, just a few huge balls of them with cyno chains going to every corner of Eve. As soon as something happened, you could just watch the map, and without fail, the chain would light, and you'd know how long you had until PL/BL/CFC/Russians were there.


As this is Eve, Malcanis' Law always applies. OFC what helps the small scale is going to have larger implications on the larger scale. OFC there are more ways to get a refitting platform these days, true. But they are all limited in their own way as well, whether it be an easy to kill onlining depot, an unpiloted Nestor which again can be bumped or killed or stolen with a little quick thinking, or just bumping caps off each other, as was and still is done today.



The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal
Cade Windstalker
#29 - 2017-02-11 04:42:53 UTC
Kenrailae wrote:
I have to disagree with you here. The main example of how/why combat refitting was a problem when it was removed wasn't the small scale fights as you've described above. It was the large scale, where again, entire fleets of archons would fit max capacitor/damage until they got locked up, then quick switch to full tank to get reps, then immediately switch back. A small number of caps can, with even a little effort, be bumped out of that tiny refit circle, and then they can be isolated and killed. That was not the main problem with combat refitting. I'll even go one step further, and say that if memory serves correctly, I don't recall hearing much in the way of complaints about combat refitting in the small scale at ALL, just that it was broken on the large scale. It was, as with the jump nerfs, about the large scale and massed caps. Jump ranges weren't nerfed and fatigue added because a few guys moved from Metropolis to Syndicate over the weekend. They were nerfed/fatigued because Eve at the time didn't have little clusters of caps/supers here or there, just a few huge balls of them with cyno chains going to every corner of Eve. As soon as something happened, you could just watch the map, and without fail, the chain would light, and you'd know how long you had until PL/BL/CFC/Russians were there.


As this is Eve, Malcanis' Law always applies. OFC what helps the small scale is going to have larger implications on the larger scale. OFC there are more ways to get a refitting platform these days, true. But they are all limited in their own way as well, whether it be an easy to kill onlining depot, an unpiloted Nestor which again can be bumped or killed or stolen with a little quick thinking, or just bumping caps off each other, as was and still is done today.


Combat refitting was most prevalent at the large scale, but it absolutely happened all over the place in Eve. CCP's own post on the subject lists a pretty wide variety of examples:

Quote:
It's not simply about carriers refitting from tank to damage and back, or Macharials swapping autocannons and artillery, or ships fitting warp core stabs mid-combat, or switching racial jammers, or capitals fitting shield, armor and hull tanks to vastly increase their EHP. All of these issues are simply symptoms of the same underlying issue and if we were to deal with each of them individually more related problems would sprout up in their place.


Unless you've brought a pretty dedicated bumping ship it's almost impossible to bump a sieged Dread off station because the thing weighs as much as a small moon, at which point you've at least cost the enemy a ship for fairly minimal cost on your own side since you can simply refit back to a general purpose fit in the time before you're bumped. You'd also have plenty of time to fit for likely damage types, more tracking or damage, or any number of other things that you wouldn't need to refit away from to be effective.

Just because the Carrier tank-carousel was the most obvious and most talked about abuse of this doesn't mean it was the only one by a long shot.

Also, to clarify, my point about the smaller engagements is that the primary thing the refitting timer does is force you to stop shooting back for a long period of time. This matters less in a small engagement because since incoming DPS is lower relative to tank you have more time to refit.

At larger scale the counters to refitting you're talking about matter less because you can more easily afford to just have an over-tanked Orca or Nestor or whatever as opposed to a depot or unpiloted ship, and at that point you can't easily bump people away or disrupt their ability to refit.

Anyways, if we're going to pick at things I'd rather discuss potential alternatives to the return of a mechanic CCP nuked out of the game for some pretty solid reasons. If people want the good aspects of the gameplay then lets find a way to get that back without the unrestricted broken bits.
Kenrailae
Scrapyard Artificer's
#30 - 2017-02-11 05:14:57 UTC
No one said it didn't happen at all levels of PVP, in fact most our posts agree that it did. Suggesting that we're trying to contend it didn't happen at other levels of PVP suggests you've blatantly ignored what we've been writing. We're just not clouding the issue of 'Yes it also happened in these ways as well, and yes some of those are some valid points of view' with the 'yeah that's the super broken reason it was finally prioritized and removed' bit.




You're also not giving enough credit where due to bumping. A fleet of dudes in T3's can certainly bump a sieged dread. It'll take them a minute, but they're T3's, they really DGAF.



Your point with the weapons timer and refitting hasn't been misunderstood in any way, we know how it works.


Yes, again Malcanis' Law and scaling in Eve. Everyone is aware of it, and naturally any effort made to re-implement/revive combat refitting would have to be compliant to that as well. I don't think anyone is assuming that wouldn't be the case.



There were a few good reasons for removing it, but there was also ALOT of really, really good gameplay that got removed by doing it. And as has been pointed out already, a significant part of those reasons has already been addressed in the form of the massacring of spider tanking archons. We're also trying to get the great gameplay back, without having every single module in the game needing to have a script for this that or the other to be used.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal
Cade Windstalker
#31 - 2017-02-11 16:29:15 UTC
Kenrailae wrote:
No one said it didn't happen at all levels of PVP, in fact most our posts agree that it did. Suggesting that we're trying to contend it didn't happen at other levels of PVP suggests you've blatantly ignored what we've been writing. We're just not clouding the issue of 'Yes it also happened in these ways as well, and yes some of those are some valid points of view' with the 'yeah that's the super broken reason it was finally prioritized and removed' bit.


I'm not contending this either, I'm saying that bringing back in-combat refitting for deployed FAXes and Dreads will have an impact beyond just the ball-o-caps fights that you and OP seem to be focusing on.

Kenrailae wrote:
You're also not giving enough credit where due to bumping. A fleet of dudes in T3's can certainly bump a sieged dread. It'll take them a minute, but they're T3's, they really DGAF.


At which point your proposed counter to this is one of the most blatantly in need of a rebalance classes of ships in the game? Yes, that totally indicates that this is a balanced and fair mechanic...

Seriously though, Wormholes are just the easiest and quickest example to hold up. Small scale fights involving caps happen all the itme in Eve, and most of the ones outside of Wormholes (and even quite a few of the ones inside them) don't involve T3Cs.

Kenrailae wrote:
Your point with the weapons timer and refitting hasn't been misunderstood in any way, we know how it works.

Yes, again Malcanis' Law and scaling in Eve. Everyone is aware of it, and naturally any effort made to re-implement/revive combat refitting would have to be compliant to that as well. I don't think anyone is assuming that wouldn't be the case.

There were a few good reasons for removing it, but there was also ALOT of really, really good gameplay that got removed by doing it. And as has been pointed out already, a significant part of those reasons has already been addressed in the form of the massacring of spider tanking archons. We're also trying to get the great gameplay back, without having every single module in the game needing to have a script for this that or the other to be used.


It feels like you keep holding up the spider taking archons example as if volume of ships involved outweighs volume of 'incidents' (for lack of a better term). Reintroducing something like this, even just for Sieged Capitals, has the potential to affect a lot more than just balls of caps. Also the important thing to remember with Malcanis' Law is that things can snowball both ways which seems to be getting missed here a bit, it doesn't just mean that things that are fine on the small scale become OP at the large scale, the reverse can also be true, which is my big issue with a lot of the discussion here that keeps coming back to spider tanking Carriers as if they were the only real issue.

I guess if you're really intent on trying to boil down my point it would come down to this:

You're not going to get all of that 'great gameplay' back without also bringing back all of the fundamental brokenness and invalidation of fitting choice that was the root of the original issue. If that's what you're shooting for I don't think CCP are going to be inclined to oblige, they've already made very clear that they want fitting choice to matter for everyone at every level of ship type.

If you want some of that gameplay back you're going to have to find a compromise somewhere that mitigates the broken (which by definition means not everything gets a Script...) while giving back as much of that gameplay as possible. Scripts seem to be the most reasonable way to do that because they allow precise targeting of what is and isn't allowed, they're already in the game, CCP already seem to want them to play this sort of role, and basing things on scripts gives CCP more balance levers to pull and cap pilots more complexity to potentially learn.

This "reduce the timer!" nonsense though? I see that flying about as well as a cinderblock glued to the ground.
Kenrailae
Scrapyard Artificer's
#32 - 2017-02-11 18:56:16 UTC
Yeah so let's get a few things straight here buried in all your melodrama of a reply.


for the xth time, DUH, it will have impacts across all scales of PVP. Do you want to keep parroting/repeating this or come up with something useful to discuss?





As with your example of WH's being the 'easiest and quickest example to hold up' so are T3's and their usage in almost all scales of PVP. They are not the only thing capable of microwarping into the side of a sieged/triaged cap en masse and bumping it away.

TY again for providing reasonable discussion and not a load of 'waaaaahhhhh' as a counter discussion point.






You keep trying to muddy the waters. The fact remains, it was the massive balls of spider tanking archons that pushed CCP into removing combat refitting. Yes, there were some instances outside of that scenario, but they were all within tolerable emergent gameplay standards. SINCE CCP was addressing/removing it anyway(Because someone not gonna mention names *cou... PL... gh* entire war doctrine at that time was about massed carriers and super carriers to which the only counter was a bigger ball of supers and carriers. If CCP's intent were make you committed to that fit when you undocked they would have removed in space refitting altogether, except off a POS array. Instead they did their usual and bumbled around and added a weapons minute timer, ignoring how badly this affected the small/mid scale pilots, so whomever was shooting your carrier in the massive carrier ball had a fair opportunity of nuking you before you start refitting), they chose to include the small scale in the sweeping changes as well, not the other way around, because they couldn't come up with a better way, not because there wasn't a better way. It wasn't because 10 dudes complained that it took them longer to kill a dread cause he refit to bulkheads.




There is nothing to your point to boil down, it is the same 2 things over and over and over again, pitched in different shades of grey. Your 'point' so far has been 'CCP said so' and 'it affects all levels of PVP,' in a bunch of different wordings, while ignoring that we know it has affects across all levels of PVP, and that CCP has said alot over the years to justify alot of things, and they're not always right, nor do they always say exactly why they are doing something. Also 'I'm not saying scripts for everything.... but scripts for everything.'


I also think it's hilarious that you still don't understand Eve. It's always about how badly something is being exploited/warped. That's why Goons have a reputation of doing exactly that, abusing something into the ground until CCP has to change it(read excavator drones). That's why Ishtars were addressed, not because they were breaking the game 1 or 2 ishtars at a time, but because that is the only doctrine most people were using. It is always about a particularly better than it should be fit/ship being used en masse that causes CCP to change things, it's never because one guy way over in the corner finds a sacrilege that can out rep all the maruaders. Good for him. But if everyone is using that ship and it's clearly a problem, THAT is what prompts CCP to change things. Carriers weren't breaking the game because they could refit... they were breaking the game because they were an impenetrable ball of spider tanking with a horde of drones, and another small market full of them in their drone bays. Two of those elements have been removed from them, making it very difficult for them to rise again to the height they were. So let's open combat refitting back up and see if the carrier situation is still as problematic as it was, or if its been nerfed sufficiently to allow the gameplay to be valid again.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal
Cade Windstalker
#33 - 2017-02-11 20:38:49 UTC
Kenrailae wrote:
Yeah so let's get a few things straight here buried in all your melodrama of a reply.

for the xth time, DUH, it will have impacts across all scales of PVP. Do you want to keep parroting/repeating this or come up with something useful to discuss?

As with your example of WH's being the 'easiest and quickest example to hold up' so are T3's and their usage in almost all scales of PVP. They are not the only thing capable of microwarping into the side of a sieged/triaged cap en masse and bumping it away.

TY again for providing reasonable discussion and not a load of 'waaaaahhhhh' as a counter discussion point.


Nothing here is intended to be melodramatic, I'm just trying to state why I don't think "bring back combat refitting" is a going to fly with CCP (based largely on their own statements on the matter) as well as why I don't think it was particularly good for the game. Regardless I'll try to avoid the appearance of melodrama going forward.

T3s are still due for a tiericide pass, and most other ships don't have the combination staying power and bumping ability to do what you're talking about very easily. At the very least charging straight at a capital ship makes you a much easier target and provides the enemy a decent tactical advantage.

Regarding the impact, I should probably clarify that I don't really consider the impact to be positive. Capital ships are showing no signs of needing the buff that the return of combat refitting would provide at any stage, the argument in favor of this, as far as I can see, is one purely of fun gameplay on the part of the cap pilot and has nothing to do with the balance impact this would have.

Thanks.

Kenrailae wrote:
You keep trying to muddy the waters. The fact remains, it was the massive balls of spider tanking archons that pushed CCP into removing combat refitting. Yes, there were some instances outside of that scenario, but they were all within tolerable emergent gameplay standards. SINCE CCP was addressing/removing it anyway(Because someone not gonna mention names *cou... PL... gh* entire war doctrine at that time was about massed carriers and super carriers to which the only counter was a bigger ball of supers and carriers. If CCP's intent were make you committed to that fit when you undocked they would have removed in space refitting altogether, except off a POS array.
-snip-


I'm really not, the ball of spider tanking carriers was simply the straw that broke the camel's back and its removal doesn't remove the fundamental underlying issues with combat refitting both from a balance perspective and a game design one. Per CCP's own words on the matter. What you're claiming about CCP's intentions and objections flies directly in the face of their own statements on the matter.

If you have an alternative source somewhere that you can cite for all of that please do.

There's also no indication they wanted to remove in-space refits or felt that was the problem, they wanted to significantly hamper it during combat.

Kenrailae wrote:
There is nothing to your point to boil down, it is the same 2 things over and over and over again, pitched in different shades of grey. Your 'point' so far has been 'CCP said so' and 'it affects all levels of PVP,' in a bunch of different wordings, while ignoring that we know it has affects across all levels of PVP, and that CCP has said alot over the years to justify alot of things, and they're not always right, nor do they always say exactly why they are doing something. Also 'I'm not saying scripts for everything.... but scripts for everything.'


You can ignore the things CCP has said all you like but threads in PFaID don't need to convince other players, they need to convince the devs, which means when the devs have presented a case for removing something you need to present a counter argument, not just say "well but just because they said that doesn't mean they meant it!"

As to the scripts, that's just the best we've got so far from CCP and I don't have any better ideas. If you have a better one then by all means present it. As much as my debate on this matter might suggest otherwise

Kenrailae wrote:
I also think it's hilarious that you still don't understand Eve. It's always about how badly something is being exploited/warped. That's why Goons have a reputation of doing exactly that, abusing something into the ground until CCP has to change it(read excavator drones). That's why Ishtars were addressed, not because they were breaking the game 1 or 2 ishtars at a time, but because that is the only doctrine most people were using.


You and I are just going to have to disagree on this. Things that are causing a large problem will always be more of a priority, yes, and that's often how these things come to the attention of the devs, but that's not the only reason they make changes and those aren't the only things that get nerfed, those are just the ones we remember. When CCP makes some small tweak because they found something a bit OP that everyone wasn't exploiting yet no one really notices.

CCP have no particular reason to lie to us either, especially not in this case. When specific ships and fits, especially Carriers, have caused problems in the past CCP have been up front about it and tried to just remove the problem area. In this case their explanation didn't just target carriers but pointed out other places people had complained, just not as loudly or as visibly as the carrier-ball issue. It's that reasoning that CCP has presented that has to be argued against, and "but this was fun!" isn't going to do it. It might get caps some other things to be more fun, but it won't bring back something CCP already view as broken.
Previous page12