These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 page123Next page
 

Why have leadership skills and fleet bonus'?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mole Guy
Bob's Bait and Tackle
High Bear Nation.
#21 - 2013-08-23 13:36:15 UTC
Taoist Dragon wrote:
[quote=Mole Guy]
All very true.

However a good NFL coach/leader cannot physically make his team run faster or hit harder than they have the ability to do. What he can do is ensure that they use their abilities to the maximum effectiveness they are capable of.


you're right.
there ARE some aspects of a fake internet spaceship game that are....fake.
but, the point of leadership is to get folks to fleet up and not go solo. this IS a "group game" and to encourage that, they give bonuses.

some are a little powerful. but hey. its a game that A LOT of people play for free.

maybe 3500 years from the time we achive space flight to this extent, they might have imaginary superchargers or fairy tale turbos.
cant ever tell.
Reese Armgo
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#22 - 2013-08-23 15:29:01 UTC
Vartan Sarkisian wrote:

...Boosts that provide extra armour etc are ridiculous


Armor isnt just a block of Metal slapped on the Ship, its a combination of Alloys, Nanites and Forcefields. Thats why Armorplates need Powergrid and Cpu (well, that and Balancing reasons).
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2013-08-23 17:05:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Mournful Conciousness
Reese Armgo wrote:
Vartan Sarkisian wrote:

...Boosts that provide extra armour etc are ridiculous


Armor isnt just a block of Metal slapped on the Ship, its a combination of Alloys, Nanites and Forcefields. Thats why Armorplates need Powergrid and Cpu (well, that and Balancing reasons).



Don't forget the rubber, to ensure that 100 million Kg spaceships bounce off each other at combined speeds of 2000m/s without converting one joule of their combined kinetic energy into thermonuclear levels of heat...

Just saying...

Calculation is as follows:
Ke = 0.5 * mv^2
= 0.5 * 100,000,000 * 2000 * 2000 = 2,000,000,000,000,000 j

divide by 4.182Gj to convert to megatons of TNT...
~= 500,000 megatons
= enough energy to split a small moon in half...

:-)

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Mole Guy
Bob's Bait and Tackle
High Bear Nation.
#24 - 2013-08-23 17:24:27 UTC
Reese Armgo wrote:
Vartan Sarkisian wrote:

...Boosts that provide extra armour etc are ridiculous


Armor isnt just a block of Metal slapped on the Ship, its a combination of Alloys, Nanites and Forcefields. Thats why Armorplates need Powergrid and Cpu (well, that and Balancing reasons).


not only alloys and whatnot, but as they learned in WWII, angling your ship just right can deflect blows that would otherwise shred.
the same can be applied to shields. a leader would tell you how to do all this.
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
#25 - 2013-08-24 06:30:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Mayhaw Morgan
Mole Guy wrote:
not only alloys and whatnot, but as they learned in WWII, angling your ship just right can deflect blows that would otherwise shred.
the same can be applied to shields. a leader would tell you how to do all this.


A leader would tell me how to do all this . . . over EVE Voice or Teamspeak. And if he didn't or if I didn't listen or understand, then my armor would not be X% more effective. In the EVE fleets I've been in, usually leaders will say things like "activate your damage controls and hardeners" and "orbit the gate, don't stand still" and "overheat your modules" and "warp out if you're taking too much damage" and "broadcast for reps if you're taking damage". Saying these things, reminding the group of how to fly effectively, makes the group more effective overall. That is a patently different dynamic than "Your 10,000 EHP ship now has 12, 500 EHP." or "Your 24km Warp Disruptor is now a 30km Warp Disruptor.".

In the first instance, you still have to play the game. In the second, the game is sort of playing itself to a certain extent.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#26 - 2013-08-24 08:30:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Infinity Ziona
I agree the links are really stupid. This is coming from someone that has a highly trained leadership alt (which I only ever use in PvE).

Consider the following:

For simplicity adding 30% boosts to dps, ehp only. Assuming equally skilled pilots.

Scenario 1:

Gang X of 10 people lets say they have 7000 dps, 700,000 EHP without links.
Gang Y of 7 people lets say they have 5000 dps, 500,000 EHP without links.

1 Small gang pwned.



Scenario 2:

Gang X of 10 people lets say they have 9100 dps, 910,000 EHP combined with links.
Gang Y of 7 people lets say they have 6500 dps, 650,000 EHP combined with links.

Small gang pwned.


Scendario 3:

Gang X of 10 people lets say they have 9100 dps, 910,000 EHP with links.
Gang Y of 7 people lets say they have 5000 dps, 500,000 EHP combined.

Small gang pwned.


Scenario 4:

Gang X of 10 people lets say they have 7000 dps, 700,000 EHP without links.
Gang Y of 7 people lets say they have 6500 dps, 650,000 EHP combined with links.

Small gang pwned.


Scenario 5:

Gang X of 10 people lets say they have 9100 dps, 910,000 EHP with llinks.
Gang Y of 10 people lets say they have 9100 dps, 910,000 EHP with links.

No change.



Scenario 6:

1 pilot they have 1000 dps, 100,000 EHP with all level 5 gang skills trained, links fitted.
Gang Y of 2 pilots 2600 dps, 260,000 EHP with all level 5 gang skills, links fitted.

Pilot 1 pwned.



As you can see links only really ever benefit the people with the numbers or they cancel out each others bonuses. Which is crazy. Given the prevalence of links almost all gangs / fleets fit them so really there's rarely going to be a situation where the bigger gang didn't bring their own boosts and got pwned by the smaller gang who did.

They're pointless except for boosting your already existing numbers advantage or cancelling out the other gangs boosts in numbers equal gangs / fleets.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Mole Guy
Bob's Bait and Tackle
High Bear Nation.
#27 - 2013-08-26 13:27:52 UTC
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:
Mole Guy wrote:
not only alloys and whatnot, but as they learned in WWII, angling your ship just right can deflect blows that would otherwise shred.
the same can be applied to shields. a leader would tell you how to do all this.


A leader would tell me how to do all this . . . over EVE Voice or Teamspeak. And if he didn't or if I didn't listen or understand, then my armor would not be X% more effective. In the EVE fleets I've been in, usually leaders will say things like "activate your damage controls and hardeners" and "orbit the gate, don't stand still" and "overheat your modules" and "warp out if you're taking too much damage" and "broadcast for reps if you're taking damage". Saying these things, reminding the group of how to fly effectively, makes the group more effective overall. That is a patently different dynamic than "Your 10,000 EHP ship now has 12, 500 EHP." or "Your 24km Warp Disruptor is now a 30km Warp Disruptor.".

In the first instance, you still have to play the game. In the second, the game is sort of playing itself to a certain extent.

a leader can tell you, but not all people use TS and we dont have the actual capabilities to angle out ship with these limited mouse controls. a leader can increase your targeting range by pasting what he sees over your screen.

they had to come up with something to get us to fleet. this is the best.

what do you want? better production bonuses? "im in a fleet, that means i just made 1 extra large crystal in my batch?"
Balthazar Lestrane
Dirt 'n' Glitter
Local Is Primary
#28 - 2013-08-26 13:41:08 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
I agree the links are really stupid. This is coming from someone that has a highly trained leadership alt (which I only ever use in PvE).

Consider the following:

For simplicity adding 30% boosts to dps, ehp only. Assuming equally skilled pilots.

Scenario 1:

Gang X of 10 people lets say they have 7000 dps, 700,000 EHP without links.
Gang Y of 7 people lets say they have 5000 dps, 500,000 EHP without links.

1 Small gang pwned.



Scenario 2:

Gang X of 10 people lets say they have 9100 dps, 910,000 EHP combined with links.
Gang Y of 7 people lets say they have 6500 dps, 650,000 EHP combined with links.

Small gang pwned.


Scendario 3:

Gang X of 10 people lets say they have 9100 dps, 910,000 EHP with links.
Gang Y of 7 people lets say they have 5000 dps, 500,000 EHP combined.

Small gang pwned.


Scenario 4:

Gang X of 10 people lets say they have 7000 dps, 700,000 EHP without links.
Gang Y of 7 people lets say they have 6500 dps, 650,000 EHP combined with links.

Small gang pwned.


Scenario 5:

Gang X of 10 people lets say they have 9100 dps, 910,000 EHP with llinks.
Gang Y of 10 people lets say they have 9100 dps, 910,000 EHP with links.

No change.



Scenario 6:

1 pilot they have 1000 dps, 100,000 EHP with all level 5 gang skills trained, links fitted.
Gang Y of 2 pilots 2600 dps, 260,000 EHP with all level 5 gang skills, links fitted.

Pilot 1 pwned.



As you can see links only really ever benefit the people with the numbers or they cancel out each others bonuses. Which is crazy. Given the prevalence of links almost all gangs / fleets fit them so really there's rarely going to be a situation where the bigger gang didn't bring their own boosts and got pwned by the smaller gang who did.

They're pointless except for boosting your already existing numbers advantage or cancelling out the other gangs boosts in numbers equal gangs / fleets.


Are you that incapable of determining which engagements to fight in and which to take flight? A good FC knows when he is outgunned, he will either YOLO the fleet and hope that they can win the ISK war through superior tactics (curt nod to BL., PIZZA) or he will fall back and blueball the enemy fleet, denying them of their fun.

CCP has already made it clear that there is a lot of coding issues with removing OGB and that they are working on it. HTFU and find FCs you can rely on to make smart choices.
Grauth Thorner
Vicious Trading Company
#29 - 2013-08-26 15:50:59 UTC
I agree with the OP and tbh, using the NFL/military examples as an argument against the OP is just plain stupid. Yes, a team without a coach or a bunch of soldiers without a commander can be taken quite easily by the same team that does have a leader (even if the leader isn't actually playing/fighting with the team), but this is because of the training those teams have had and because of strategic decisions made before and on the spot.

Say, for instance, the coach/commander can only give his decisions over the phone (perhaps even with a webcam, so his physical-expressions are also shown towards the team), would this result in a team that can achieve 30% less compared to the coach being physically present? No...

Leadership skills should be part of the player, not the character... This will lead to more unexpected outcomes of fights, simply because a fleet actually had a leader that knew what he was doing rather than a leader that only knows 1 command, charge, but he just won because their enemies didn't have as much fleet-boosts

View real-time damage statistics in-game

>EVE Live DPS Graph application forum thread

>iciclesoft.com
Doddy
Excidium.
#30 - 2013-08-26 17:00:24 UTC
Taoist Dragon wrote:
I have done a lot of leadership training in RL and the 'leadership' skills are at odds with every other skill in eve.

The skills in eve generally affect a stat for which a game mechanic is base around but the the leadership skills are effectly 'soft skills' that affect stats of others. Kinda out of touch with the rest of the skills imo.

This then brings me to fleet bonuses (?). Why do they exist? Surely the bonus of have fleet mates should be enough? The leadership shown in application by the FC will allow the fleet to 'perform' better than a rag tag bunch doing their own thing. The fllet bonuses are the root cause of the whole OGB's controversy atm. Just remove them alltogether and give the players those SP back.

The only fleet/leadership bonuses that work in a similar fashion to the rest of the eve skills are the mining ones, kinda, but I'd get rid of them as well.

Get back to eve being a sandbox where the skills of a character directly affect stats that are used in game mechanics and keep the 'soft' skills player focussed and allow them to utilise there character skills through team building and good tactics/fleet management.

And to counter the solo'ers who whine that they wouldn't be able to take on gangs etc in ther triple boosted/deadspace fitted faction frig. Aww boo hoo, get over it. The vast majority of people using boosters are not doing it to fight to blob (this has always happened, even before the whole boosts) but to give themselves an almost risk free '1v1' ability.


The real question is why? I mean leadership skills is no more out of place than any of the other skills. Surely motion prediction is dumb, it should be down to the player to aim etc. The leadership skills work exactly the same as any of the other skills, it is just you for some reason think differently. Really if you don't like the core game mechanics maybe play a different game? A fps maybe.

Clearly there would be no benefit from having c+c kit in a fleet of hundreds of ships each with thousands of crew and limited AI drones, the fc can just do it through clear speaking. Roll
Doddy
Excidium.
#31 - 2013-08-26 17:05:33 UTC
Grauth Thorner wrote:
I agree with the OP and tbh, using the NFL/military examples as an argument against the OP is just plain stupid. Yes, a team without a coach or a bunch of soldiers without a commander can be taken quite easily by the same team that does have a leader (even if the leader isn't actually playing/fighting with the team), but this is because of the training those teams have had and because of strategic decisions made before and on the spot.

Say, for instance, the coach/commander can only give his decisions over the phone (perhaps even with a webcam, so his physical-expressions are also shown towards the team), would this result in a team that can achieve 30% less compared to the coach being physically present? No...

Leadership skills should be part of the player, not the character... This will lead to more unexpected outcomes of fights, simply because a fleet actually had a leader that knew what he was doing rather than a leader that only knows 1 command, charge, but he just won because their enemies didn't have as much fleet-boosts


Except the leader who knew what he was doing would have brought the fleet boosts .....

Simple truth is eve is entirely simulated. You play as a ship with crews of thousands and umpteen ais and have no control over any of the ships performance except highly limited manual flying and a few activation times. You do not aim the weapons, reload the weapons, fly the ship, manage the engines, control the reactor, operate the sensors, lock targets, anything. To simulate all that but decide not to simulate performance bonuses from leadership skills/equipment/organisation makes literally no sense whatsoever. I could see the ops point if players actually had input to the performance of the ship but they don't, it is not that sore of game.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#32 - 2013-08-26 17:40:44 UTC

The concept of giving people a "bonus" when they fleet up is fine by me.

My only contention with leadership bonuses is the "amount' they boost. This is a game of small gains, and fleet boosts are simply too powerful. Fleet boosts should boost on the order of 5-10%, not on the order of 25-50%.



Doddy
Excidium.
#33 - 2013-08-26 17:46:37 UTC
I personally have thought that giving fleet boosts diminishing returns would actually be quite a nice balancing factor and in keeping with reality (far easier to co-ordinate 5 guys compared to 500).

For example the fc booster is applied to the whole fleet, while the squad booster is applied to 10 guys, for sure the squad booster should be more effective on a per ship basis. At the very least this would force the perfectionists to bring more boosting ships (1 per squad) and everyone else to at least make hard choices over which boost comes from where (is that damnation best at fc giving a small ehp buff to the entire fleet or as a logi squad commander greatly improving the effectiveness of 9 guys?).
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2013-08-26 18:21:20 UTC
Doddy wrote:
I personally have thought that giving fleet boosts diminishing returns would actually be quite a nice balancing factor and in keeping with reality (far easier to co-ordinate 5 guys compared to 500).

For example the fc booster is applied to the whole fleet, while the squad booster is applied to 10 guys, for sure the squad booster should be more effective on a per ship basis. At the very least this would force the perfectionists to bring more boosting ships (1 per squad) and everyone else to at least make hard choices over which boost comes from where (is that damnation best at fc giving a small ehp buff to the entire fleet or as a logi squad commander greatly improving the effectiveness of 9 guys?).


That seems to make sense to me.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Ubat Batuk
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#35 - 2013-08-26 18:29:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Ubat Batuk
This game needs some more features, not lesser. Any new excuse you create will be converted into a new isk sink and nerf. You know what let's convert the game into a system where everybody is the same, same SPs, same ships, same DPS, same tank, etc. That way will be fairer, and very balanced, right? Boo! Balance... just another word for nerf. There you go.
Taoist Dragon
x Never Regret x
#36 - 2013-08-26 20:50:21 UTC
The OP was not about making everyone the same etc that is not balance that is homogenization and a very bad thing for eve.

Balance is about having equal 'relative' power not being setup the same to the the same with the same outcomes.

Now as to why the leadership skills are 'out of whack' with the other skills. Well ALL the other skills directly affect that player and that player ALONE. And this effectively auto balances out what a single player can achieve. Now the leadership skills & modules/implant affect multiple players not just the one with them trained. Now this actually goes against what a lot of the eve advertising says when it is your decisions affecting the game world not some mechanic. The more you analyse the leadership skills/modules/implants to more out of phase their effects are with the rest of eve.

Now if you can't see how this is inconsistant with the rest of eve I suggest you do a basic course in system analysis.

So given the amount of arguements for/and against the fleet boosting effects this show that there is a big issue with them. Even CCP have stated that they would like to see them on grid to give some balancing to them. My proposal would actualy remove them from the equation and allowing eve to 'auto balance' using the player only affecting skill set. No other skills have had such a division among the player base (and I've been playing since day 1) than these skills. Sure there are some arguments around shield/amour, turrets/missiles etc but those are more to do with player preferences than any actual mechanical issues.

The leadership skills/modules/implants are actually a deminishing returns process as is. As a solo/small gang gets much better bonuses and increase their overall effectiviness by a much greater % of their power than they do in a large fleet.

That is the Way, the Tao.

Balance is everything.
Grauth Thorner
Vicious Trading Company
#37 - 2013-08-26 21:21:35 UTC
Doddy wrote:
Grauth Thorner wrote:
I agree with the OP and tbh, using the NFL/military examples as an argument against the OP is just plain stupid. Yes, a team without a coach or a bunch of soldiers without a commander can be taken quite easily by the same team that does have a leader (even if the leader isn't actually playing/fighting with the team), but this is because of the training those teams have had and because of strategic decisions made before and on the spot.

Say, for instance, the coach/commander can only give his decisions over the phone (perhaps even with a webcam, so his physical-expressions are also shown towards the team), would this result in a team that can achieve 30% less compared to the coach being physically present? No...

Leadership skills should be part of the player, not the character... This will lead to more unexpected outcomes of fights, simply because a fleet actually had a leader that knew what he was doing rather than a leader that only knows 1 command, charge, but he just won because their enemies didn't have as much fleet-boosts


Except the leader who knew what he was doing would have brought the fleet boosts .....

Simple truth is eve is entirely simulated. You play as a ship with crews of thousands and umpteen ais and have no control over any of the ships performance except highly limited manual flying and a few activation times. You do not aim the weapons, reload the weapons, fly the ship, manage the engines, control the reactor, operate the sensors, lock targets, anything. To simulate all that but decide not to simulate performance bonuses from leadership skills/equipment/organisation makes literally no sense whatsoever. I could see the ops point if players actually had input to the performance of the ship but they don't, it is not that sore of game.

Well that's the thing, someone who wins just by bringing fleet boosts can't be called a leader since it's merely a booster. Someone who calls the targets, tells the fleet to get close, get back or completely drawback, knows who is being the main target and calls out moves for the fleet to make sure this person will get the least damage, calls targets for certain modules, anything pre and during the fight, that's what I call a leader. About the points you do not do according to you:

Aim weapons - well you gotta shoot them at the right target
Reload weapons - well there are certain spots in a battle where reloading is good/bad (especially in big fleets)
Fly the ship - well manual flying can be a big advantage, especially against players who only use the commands, let alone range control
Manage engines - depending on your weapons and the enemie's weapons, there are situations where it's better to fly slow/fast
Control reactor - well since not all ships are capstable, especially not in all situations, cap-control can be quite important
Operate sensors - well as stated above, the modules have to be pointed at the right ship - using a tracking disruptor on a logistic ship ain't gonna help
Lock targets - well as stated above, there are shot-callers so yeah, you have to lock the right targets

View real-time damage statistics in-game

>EVE Live DPS Graph application forum thread

>iciclesoft.com
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#38 - 2013-08-27 00:07:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
No to removing them. The skills have been used to blow up many spaceships and it would be an injustice to allows those skill points to be used elsewhere. Yet you can't just remove them and not allow it to happen. Gonna go with OGB is a reality in EVE, deal with it.
Taoist Dragon
x Never Regret x
#39 - 2013-08-27 00:26:14 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
No to removing them. The skills have been used to blow up many spaceships and it would be an injustice to allows those skill points to be used elsewhere. Yet you can't just remove them and not allow it to happen. Gonna go with OGB is a reality in EVE, deal with it.


I don't disagree that the likely course of event will just have them on grid and I'll adapt to that as I have the off grid crap as well. This was mearly a thought exercise.

That is the Way, the Tao.

Balance is everything.
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#40 - 2013-08-27 07:36:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Schmata Bastanold
Well, if they would just go for removing boosters instead of trying to balance them out and put on grid maybe we could get some realistic ETA on interesting stuff like more player influence on universe, POSs and industry that is actually interesting to everybody not only to masters of Excel and Rain Men of this world :)

Maybe even we could get expansions instead of service packs.

Invalid signature format
Previous page123Next page