These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Anti-Alpha mechanic?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#1 - 2017-03-20 18:35:36 UTC
No idea if this is a good idea or bad... feel free to trash it. Just a random thought I had.

Alpha fleets are boring. Target the broadcast, count down, the fleet hits them with a broadside and the target vanishes in a ball of fire. Rinse and repeat until one side loses.

What if you couldn't break more than two layers of tank OF A PLAYER SHIP (shield, armor, hull) within a single tick? I separate npcs out because they're already pointlessly easy to kill, and it means we can finance our pvp with less pain.

That would mean at best you could kill any player in 2 volleys (across two ticks). This would of course necessitate a nerf of logistics. I'm also quite confident that alpha fleets would just get split down the middle, with half doing the first volley and half doing the second volley. At the least it would require slightly more coordination, making them a bit more annoying and thus less desirable.

Small ships would become even more powerful against larger ones (no longer being able to volley a destroyer off the field with a single battleship).

It would also be a buff to shield tanking, as your primary buffer would not go poof at the same time as your structure the same way armor tanking would. Perhaps that would be good, perhaps it would be bad.

Thoughts? Criticisms? Keeping it constructive, explain why you like alpha fleets, opposed to people flying their own ships and doing their own thing in a more sustained and engaging pvp experience.
Cade Windstalker
#2 - 2017-03-20 18:48:01 UTC
Couple of things here.

First off, it's fairly rare that everyone in a salvo *actually* lands within one tick. It sounds simple but between the way the server splits hairs, coms delay, latency, that one idiot who goes on "two", and everything else this wouldn't do that much for large fleet alpha. At worst you make FCs say "everyone with a name above 'L' go on 1, everyone else on zero" and we're back to about the same for most really large fleet fights.

Also this wouldn't significantly affect Armor vs Shield tanking. On two fits with about the same buffer you'd still be out of your shields and armor and sitting at 100% hull. If you get saved then the 'secondary tank' is still gone and you're gonna poof on the next full salvo.

The only thing this would really affect is fleets that are on the edge of being able to alpha a target, at which point you've just made the difference between space dust and largely wasted damage the timing of the server tick, which would be *really* frustrating to deal with. At that point you're basically deciding whether someone lives or dies based on a really arbitrary and disconnected RNG system.

Oh and you haven't accounted for any reps that land on the same tick as damage being counted against the damage after resists.

Also any nerf to Logistics to account for this would likely just push people *more* towards alpha setups with less Logi since nerfing Logi to account for alpha would make them almost worthless the rest of the time.

Personally it's not that I'm terribly in favor of alpha setups, if we could incentivize fights to largely take place below that threshold I'd be pretty happy, I just think this is a horrible ham-fisted solution akin to dropping a 500lb bomb on a fly. It's messy, needlessly destructive, has tons of collateral damage in the form of Logi and larger ships that don't currently need a nerf, and probably won't even fix the problem because damage rarely happens all on one tick anyway.
Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#3 - 2017-03-20 19:10:02 UTC
A fair and valid criticism.

Ultimately... I wish Eve pvp was more like TV. Groups of ships splitting off to engage each other, while the battle rages on, each a cog in a massive clock of death.

Frigates dogfighting each other for superiority so as to harass larger ships (destroyers and up, assuming sufficient quantities of frigates)

Destroyers and cruisers offering fire support for their frigates, or harassing larger ships (battlecruisers+)

Battlecruisers offering fire support against dessies and cruisers, or harassing battleships

Battleships offering fire support for BCs

Capitals fighting capitals (and then wiping the floor with subcaps once the enemy capitals are gone)

Supercapitals demolishing everything in their path, so long as they're properly supported.

Then you've got the more specialized ships, T2 cruisers, T3 cruisers, etc, wreaking havoc on the enemy to disrupt and throw the whole mess into complete chaos.

The only way I can see it happening is if it's no longer a valid strategy for the FC to broadcast one or two or three targets and then just tell the fleet to blap them. I mean, even sieged dreads can go poof very quickly. That's just no fun.

Maybe how I want to see PVP end up (in a perfect world where it just is that way "because") is not a view supported by the majority. It just feels more interesting than "okay, everyone hop into machs, I want this many people to X up and fly logi". Ready, set, F1. Ready, set, F1. Ready, set, F1.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#4 - 2017-03-20 19:55:49 UTC
Old Pervert wrote:
A fair and valid criticism.

Ultimately... I wish Eve pvp was more like TV. Groups of ships splitting off to engage each other, while the battle rages on, each a cog in a massive clock of death.

Frigates dogfighting each other for superiority so as to harass larger ships (destroyers and up, assuming sufficient quantities of frigates)

Destroyers and cruisers offering fire support for their frigates, or harassing larger ships (battlecruisers+)

Battlecruisers offering fire support against dessies and cruisers, or harassing battleships

Battleships offering fire support for BCs

Capitals fighting capitals (and then wiping the floor with subcaps once the enemy capitals are gone)

Supercapitals demolishing everything in their path, so long as they're properly supported.

Then you've got the more specialized ships, T2 cruisers, T3 cruisers, etc, wreaking havoc on the enemy to disrupt and throw the whole mess into complete chaos.

The only way I can see it happening is if it's no longer a valid strategy for the FC to broadcast one or two or three targets and then just tell the fleet to blap them. I mean, even sieged dreads can go poof very quickly. That's just no fun.

Maybe how I want to see PVP end up (in a perfect world where it just is that way "because") is not a view supported by the majority. It just feels more interesting than "okay, everyone hop into machs, I want this many people to X up and fly logi". Ready, set, F1. Ready, set, F1. Ready, set, F1.


There is nothing in the game preventing this "awesome" battle. Well except the fact that it's highly inefficient.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#5 - 2017-03-20 20:00:07 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
that one idiot who goes on "two",


One........

Gotta make sure they get on those dank kill mails.
Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#6 - 2017-03-20 21:00:06 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:

There is nothing in the game preventing this "awesome" battle. Well except the fact that it's highly inefficient.


I agree, awesome battles are inefficient. It makes more sense to ball up on an anchor and alpha things off the grid.

What I'm saying is that not only is it boring, and that there's no counter-play, is that it's TOO efficient. It's not fun when all you do is press F1 until you magically find yourself in a pod.
Ajem Hinken
WarFear Gaming
#7 - 2017-03-20 21:18:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Ajem Hinken
Old Pervert wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:

There is nothing in the game preventing this "awesome" battle. Well except the fact that it's highly inefficient.


I agree, awesome battles are inefficient. It makes more sense to ball up on an anchor and alpha things off the grid.

What I'm saying is that not only is it boring, and that there's no counter-play, is that it's TOO efficient. It's not fun when all you do is press F1 until you magically find yourself in a pod.

It's not boring if you find watching countless explosions fun. Which just about no one does.

Edit:

Here's an idea... why not let Alpha's be the only ones to be alpha'd? It's in the name...

And yes, I know I'm an Alpha.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6875494#post6875494 - Ship mounted explosives. Because explosions and Jita chaos.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#8 - 2017-03-20 21:28:05 UTC
Old Pervert wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:

There is nothing in the game preventing this "awesome" battle. Well except the fact that it's highly inefficient.


I agree, awesome battles are inefficient. It makes more sense to ball up on an anchor and alpha things off the grid.

What I'm saying is that not only is it boring, and that there's no counter-play, is that it's TOO efficient. It's not fun when all you do is press F1 until you magically find yourself in a pod.


So don't do mass fleet pvp, do smaller gang stuff.
Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#9 - 2017-03-20 21:39:56 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
So don't do mass fleet pvp, do smaller gang stuff.


Do you then say that you enjoy alpha fleets? Do you enjoy sitting in a mach with 50-100 other people, playing the -1 game with the enemy fleet?

I'd love to do more smaller gang stuff (and it is something that I do). It's definitely more fun. But I am in an alliance that has to take part in larger scale fights too, that particular kind of fight is not optional.

On the basis that said fights happen because they "need" to happen (need is perhaps not accurate... they "simply will happen because alliances want to win"), and that participants will be there, it makes sense that it should at least be fun.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#10 - 2017-03-20 21:42:55 UTC
Old Pervert wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
So don't do mass fleet pvp, do smaller gang stuff.


Do you then say that you enjoy alpha fleets? Do you enjoy sitting in a mach with 50-100 other people, playing the -1 game with the enemy fleet?

I'd love to do more smaller gang stuff (and it is something that I do). It's definitely more fun. But I am in an alliance that has to take part in larger scale fights too, that particular kind of fight is not optional.

On the basis that said fights happen because they "need" to happen (need is perhaps not accurate... they "simply will happen because alliances want to win"), and that participants will be there, it makes sense that it should at least be fun.


Actually, I usually fly a recon when I go on the big fleets. Or sometimes a logi, or an antisupport boat, or on very rare occasions I'll even fly a dictor. I only occasionally fly the mainline DPS boat in whatever big fleet is out. (Medium sized gangs are another matter.)

Really, just fly something other than the f1 monkey boat in a big fight.
Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#11 - 2017-03-20 21:59:07 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:

Actually, I usually fly a recon when I go on the big fleets. Or sometimes a logi, or an antisupport boat, or on very rare occasions I'll even fly a dictor. I only occasionally fly the mainline DPS boat in whatever big fleet is out. (Medium sized gangs are another matter.)

Really, just fly something other than the f1 monkey boat in a big fight.


So by your actions, one could safely assert that you would support a diversified fleet, outside of some logi and enough alpha to wipe "something" off the grid?

We're quite fond of telling the F1 monkeys to F1 the special snowflakes who bring ships that weren't called for. As I'm far from a position of authority, calling for more diversification isn't something I can do. The powers-that-be know that an alpha fleet is the most efficient way to win, so that's what they call for. Like any good F1 monkey, I bring what they tell me to bring.

I don't fault any FC for calling for that kind of fleet... the goal is to win, so you choose the most efficient strategy. What I seek with this thread is discussion on means of making it not the most efficient strategy.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#12 - 2017-03-20 22:09:40 UTC
Every fleet is a diversified fleet.

For example, since you mentioned a machfleet, I just looked at our mach doctrine. Twelve different hulls, not including dictors, interceptors or tackle. Or newbie frigates, but everyone loves those. Or special snowflakes, since you're accusing me of that. (Seriously, do your fleets not have any form of tackle or ewar?)

If there is a problem with your alliance's doctrines, maybe the problem is your alliance's doctrines?
Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#13 - 2017-03-20 22:18:35 UTC
While we do have things like dictors and tackle, for those major alpha fleets, there's generally only 2 hulls... dps and logistics. Most common time for us to use alpha fleets is for citadel defense timers... op success if they warp off.

A few dictors, a few tackle, and a few command ships, amid 100+ people... most of the time, unless you know and blow the guy making the fleet assignments, you won't get to fly the fun stuff.

And no, not accusing you of being a special snowflake... it sounds like your FC authorizes those ships in its machfleets. Were I to bring something fun, like a recon, I would be a special snowflake.

We don't generally lose our engagements, though we have wins and losses just like any other alliance. Usually we are able to bring enough numbers that when alpha fleets happen, we simply out-number them and win almost by default. At least... the fleets that've been on personally are usually quite successful.

Specifically EWAR, no, none. And it makes me sad because I LOVE flying EWAR... any of it would be wicked fun. But again, if you became a notable threat you'd just get vaporized by a shower of artillery after the enemy FC makes you primary.
A8ina
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#14 - 2017-03-20 22:49:26 UTC
Another approach in reducing the use of Alpha tactic, is to use the total signature resolution of all the ammunitions fired on a particular target against the signature radius of the targeted Ship and reducing the damage taken by an X percentage.
Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#15 - 2017-03-21 15:50:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Old Pervert
That would certainly stop alpha volleying, but I dunno... it feels "cheaty" in the sense that there's really no good reason for doing it other than to stop volleying.

I mean, you could say "it makes sense" that a shield becomes impenetrable until it's not. Kind of like reactive armor plating on a tank, that is destroyed during the hit but totally negates the incoming hit (ignoring counter-countermeasures).

Not sure how the target's sensor signature gets any smaller the more howitzers you have flying at it, from a "this makes sense" category. Maybe I'm just being picky.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#16 - 2017-03-21 17:15:36 UTC
A8ina wrote:
Another approach in reducing the use of Alpha tactic, is to use the total signature resolution of all the ammunitions fired on a particular target against the signature radius of the targeted Ship and reducing the damage taken by an X percentage.


The more guns fire at my ship, the stronger it gets.

Makes sense...

Roll
Cade Windstalker
#17 - 2017-03-21 17:26:00 UTC
Old Pervert wrote:
A fair and valid criticism.

Ultimately... I wish Eve pvp was more like TV. Groups of ships splitting off to engage each other, while the battle rages on, each a cog in a massive clock of death.

Frigates dogfighting each other for superiority so as to harass larger ships (destroyers and up, assuming sufficient quantities of frigates)

Destroyers and cruisers offering fire support for their frigates, or harassing larger ships (battlecruisers+)

Battlecruisers offering fire support against dessies and cruisers, or harassing battleships

Battleships offering fire support for BCs

Capitals fighting capitals (and then wiping the floor with subcaps once the enemy capitals are gone)

Supercapitals demolishing everything in their path, so long as they're properly supported.

Then you've got the more specialized ships, T2 cruisers, T3 cruisers, etc, wreaking havoc on the enemy to disrupt and throw the whole mess into complete chaos.

The only way I can see it happening is if it's no longer a valid strategy for the FC to broadcast one or two or three targets and then just tell the fleet to blap them. I mean, even sieged dreads can go poof very quickly. That's just no fun.

Maybe how I want to see PVP end up (in a perfect world where it just is that way "because") is not a view supported by the majority. It just feels more interesting than "okay, everyone hop into machs, I want this many people to X up and fly logi". Ready, set, F1. Ready, set, F1. Ready, set, F1.


The biggest problem with this is it's based entirely off Hollywood's idea of what a battle/war looks like, not anything realistic. Even just looking at WW2 naval battles you basically had Carriers and Battleships dominating everything. The few times a Battleship got half a piece of a smaller ship they basically one-shot them, and they didn't have a significant problem getting those hits.

That's without even getting into Carriers whose planes pretty much wrecked everything and changed the face of naval combat completely from what people thought it would be like in 1938.

Even in terms of ground combat actual war isn't particularly cinematic. More tactical, sure, because massed infantry is an arty/grenade/bomb magnet, but not particularly like what Hollywood thinks it's like.

I'd also like to point out that your vision wouldn't be particularly fun for the majority of pilots. You say you want Supers and Titans to basically wreck everything. Then we're back to ~2014 where that was the case and major Alliances started using them like Battleships, just balling them up with a little support and blapping everything. Same goes for if Carriers and Dreads wreck everything, what you'll get is people only bringing what works.

The only way to get the sort of fights you want is to basically remove player choice from the equation and force them to be like that, because a real fight where players get to pick and choose what they bring is only ever going to involve what works, whether that's Alpha-Machs, DPS Drakes/Caracals/Talos/Megas, or just balls of Caps and Supers.

This isn't even a case of your opinion being different than the majority, what you want is just unrealistic to expect out of anything other than a largely scripted and single-player experience or a Hollywood movie.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#18 - 2017-03-21 17:29:01 UTC
Old Pervert wrote:

A few dictors, a few tackle, and a few command ships, amid 100+ people... most of the time, unless you know and blow the guy making the fleet assignments, you won't get to fly the fun stuff.

And no, not accusing you of being a special snowflake... it sounds like your FC authorizes those ships in its machfleets. Were I to bring something fun, like a recon, I would be a special snowflake.



That's an alliance problem more than anything. We can't ALL go in long webs Huginns during a shield fleet of course but there usually is a lot of people who are in mainline DPS ships to let everyone who want a slightly different play style to roll with the doctrine's support ships. Our FC check the fleet comp while it's being assembled so he knows if for some reason he is getting an imbalanced fleet where there will be no DPS and only support roles. What usually happen from my memories is waiting for more logis much more often than more DPS.

Actual "special snowflakes" in ships not designed to actually support the doctrine are pretty rare and a few of them end up getting flak for doing it.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#19 - 2017-03-21 17:37:01 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Old Pervert wrote:
A fair and valid criticism.

Ultimately... I wish Eve pvp was more like TV. Groups of ships splitting off to engage each other, while the battle rages on, each a cog in a massive clock of death.

Frigates dogfighting each other for superiority so as to harass larger ships (destroyers and up, assuming sufficient quantities of frigates)

Destroyers and cruisers offering fire support for their frigates, or harassing larger ships (battlecruisers+)

Battlecruisers offering fire support against dessies and cruisers, or harassing battleships

Battleships offering fire support for BCs

Capitals fighting capitals (and then wiping the floor with subcaps once the enemy capitals are gone)

Supercapitals demolishing everything in their path, so long as they're properly supported.

Then you've got the more specialized ships, T2 cruisers, T3 cruisers, etc, wreaking havoc on the enemy to disrupt and throw the whole mess into complete chaos.

The only way I can see it happening is if it's no longer a valid strategy for the FC to broadcast one or two or three targets and then just tell the fleet to blap them. I mean, even sieged dreads can go poof very quickly. That's just no fun.

Maybe how I want to see PVP end up (in a perfect world where it just is that way "because") is not a view supported by the majority. It just feels more interesting than "okay, everyone hop into machs, I want this many people to X up and fly logi". Ready, set, F1. Ready, set, F1. Ready, set, F1.


The biggest problem with this is it's based entirely off Hollywood's idea of what a battle/war looks like, not anything realistic. Even just looking at WW2 naval battles you basically had Carriers and Battleships dominating everything. The few times a Battleship got half a piece of a smaller ship they basically one-shot them, and they didn't have a significant problem getting those hits.

That's without even getting into Carriers whose planes pretty much wrecked everything and changed the face of naval combat completely from what people thought it would be like in 1938.

Even in terms of ground combat actual war isn't particularly cinematic. More tactical, sure, because massed infantry is an arty/grenade/bomb magnet, but not particularly like what Hollywood thinks it's like.

I'd also like to point out that your vision wouldn't be particularly fun for the majority of pilots. You say you want Supers and Titans to basically wreck everything. Then we're back to ~2014 where that was the case and major Alliances started using them like Battleships, just balling them up with a little support and blapping everything. Same goes for if Carriers and Dreads wreck everything, what you'll get is people only bringing what works.

The only way to get the sort of fights you want is to basically remove player choice from the equation and force them to be like that, because a real fight where players get to pick and choose what they bring is only ever going to involve what works, whether that's Alpha-Machs, DPS Drakes/Caracals/Talos/Megas, or just balls of Caps and Supers.

This isn't even a case of your opinion being different than the majority, what you want is just unrealistic to expect out of anything other than a largely scripted and single-player experience or a Hollywood movie.


Comparison with real life also have one more problem. Lots of stuff IRL only really need 1 good it to be the equivalent fo a wreck. As cool as "realism" in game sounds, it lose it's cool factor once you end up on the wrong end of a one-shot festival in all your engagement because that's how reality is. HP is a soft version of "all or nothing" where your ship perform at 100% until it gets destroyed. IRL, the first penetrating hit would probably damage some major system leaving you crippled on the battlefield.
Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#20 - 2017-03-21 18:09:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Old Pervert
There's a TV series out right now called The Expanse. And their version of space warfare is by and large the best I've seen... it's incredible to watch. The physics involved in maneuvering the ships could use a little work, but the concepts are sound.

Gunships with swivel mounted miniguns (or a time-appropriate version therein) basically maneuver around each other punching holes left and right.

They even go so far as to depressurize the ship before combat and wear pressurized suits, because bullets realistically just pass right through the ship, messing up everything in their path.


In reality yes, one-shots are very present.. ask a tank driver how likely he is to survive a direct hit. Or ask someone in the navy how fun it would be to take a missile to the hull. Back in WW2 days, yes, a battleship could absolutely obliterate something.. but they did have trouble actually hitting smaller ships... they didn't have sensors. They had radar sure, but it was very primitive compared to even our time.

This game is not reality. One-shots are not fun for the person being one-shot.



Regarding my earlier comment about supers holding the field, I must clarify that I meant "with support" of the fleet below them. I wouldn't expect them to be even remotely alarmed about frigates, but battleships, hictors, dreads, etc, those should be problematic. I would expect an unsuported super to go pop, and I would expect a super fighting a proper fleet to be one of the many cogs in said clock of death, not its own wrecking ball trashing anything and everything in the fleet.


Frostys Virpio, being permitted to fly more interesting stuff is certainly nice, but it doesn't solve the issue at hand in this thread. Alpha mechanics are not fun. Your Huginn being called primary will still go pop inside of a single volley, assuming they have enough webs or painters to make you hit-able. I seek to make it so that a single volley will never be enough.


Edit:
The Expanse, one heck of a ship battle:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhKWeGXduzs
12Next page