These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Rubicon 1.3] Drone Assist change

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Allison A'vani
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1221 - 2014-02-11 08:45:21 UTC
Xython wrote:
50 drones? Wow, that's going to make PVP in Nullsec require tactics and strategy again. Weiiird.

I'm honestly more excited at his subtle mention of an upcoming Drone overhaul, though. (The mention of how Drones - as they are now - are taxing on the hardware.)


Actually, correctly piloting a carrier in a slowcat fleet requires quite a bit more concentration and tactics than your "anchor on target and press f1," only bads just assisted drones mindlessly. If you are not constantly refitting depending on what is happening then you are really incompetent and should not be talking about tactics nor strategy.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1222 - 2014-02-11 08:50:12 UTC
You know what else I find interesting is that these cries of favoritism are over a change that was announced after the war was effectively over. If they're indeed catering to our side, they sure picked a bad time to go ahead with it.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1223 - 2014-02-11 08:58:02 UTC
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3463077#post3463077
CCP Rise wrote:
We are obviously aware of the conversation around drone assist and this change doesn't really aim to have a massive effect on sentry-doctrines as a whole. Drone assist is a much larger issue and we aren't looking to make any changes to it for [Odyssey] 1.1. We would love to do work on drones overall, but for now I can't make any promises about when that will happen or how it will look.

This indicates that CCP was aware of the problems around drone assist (it being "a much larger issue") in early August of last year.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Phox Jorkarzul
Deep Void Merc Syndicate
#1224 - 2014-02-11 09:18:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Phox Jorkarzul
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3463077#post3463077
CCP Rise wrote:
We are obviously aware of the conversation around drone assist and this change doesn't really aim to have a massive effect on sentry-doctrines as a whole. Drone assist is a much larger issue and we aren't looking to make any changes to it for [Odyssey] 1.1. We would love to do work on drones overall, but for now I can't make any promises about when that will happen or how it will look.

This indicates that CCP was aware of the problems around drone assist (it being "a much larger issue") in early August of last year.


Which is fine, but as Grath and Mario have been saying for the last 10 pages, this fix does not fix what CCP Rise said he was trying to fix. It does not fix AFK and it does not fix server issues.

EDIT: unless the goal was to get the CFC to change their fleet doctrines.

Blasters for life

https://neverpheedthetroll.blogspot.com
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1225 - 2014-02-11 09:23:03 UTC
Nobody is saying that drone assist causes server issues.
What they are saying is that drone assist led to an overusage of drone heavy doctrines, resulting in more drones being used, resulting in server issues.
Without drone assist, people won't use drone heavy doctrines, doctrines that do have drones but don't rely on them may elect not to launch them so as to avoid putting undue pressure on the server, etc.

It's really not that hard.
Rise also never said he wanted to fix AFK, he said "passive gameplay" which is definitely not the same thing.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Phox Jorkarzul
Deep Void Merc Syndicate
#1226 - 2014-02-11 09:28:52 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Nobody is saying that drone assist causes server issues.
What they are saying is that drone assist led to an overusage of drone heavy doctrines, resulting in more drones being used, resulting in server issues.
Without drone assist, people won't use drone heavy doctrines, doctrines that do have drones but don't rely on them may elect not to launch them so as to avoid putting undue pressure on the server, etc.

It's really not that hard.
Rise also never said he wanted to fix AFK, he said "passive gameplay" which is definitely not the same thing.


If it was solely Drone Assist that lead to the overuse of drones then it would have been taken out 7 years ago as Mario said. Which leads into Grath's point, make this change as part of a Complete drone overhaul and not a point patch, that still does not fix the issues of "passive gameplay" and server issues.

Blasters for life

https://neverpheedthetroll.blogspot.com
Fix Sov
#1227 - 2014-02-11 09:29:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Fix Sov
Phox Jorkarzul wrote:
If it was solely Drone Assist that lead to the overuse of drones then it would have been taken out 7 years ago as Mario said.

Drones weren't useful enough back then to become the sole offensive weapon used by a majority of a fleet.

The current sov system is too heavily reliant on the defender saving systems by stuffing as many people as possible into the system for the final timer, instead of incentivizing attacking (and defending) multiple systems at the same time by splitting their forces into multiple fleets and using actual intelligence/strategy. This must change.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#1228 - 2014-02-11 10:15:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Grath Telkin
Fix Sov wrote:
Phox Jorkarzul wrote:
If it was solely Drone Assist that lead to the overuse of drones then it would have been taken out 7 years ago as Mario said.

Drones weren't useful enough back then to become the sole offensive weapon used by a majority of a fleet.


Bullshit people have been assigning drones forever.

What caused the overuse of drones was the mega buff to the Domi and the Ishtar, because the drones themselves, Drone Link Augmentors, and Omindirection Tracking links have been the same for just about forever.

EDIT: Im trying to think if they (the mods) got a minor buff when they added DDA's but I know that the link augmentors are the same and I'm pretty sure the Omni's haven't ever changed too.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Fix Sov
#1229 - 2014-02-11 10:18:02 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
Fix Sov wrote:
Phox Jorkarzul wrote:
If it was solely Drone Assist that lead to the overuse of drones then it would have been taken out 7 years ago as Mario said.

Drones weren't useful enough back then to become the sole offensive weapon used by a majority of a fleet.


Bullshit people have been assigning drones forever.

What caused the overuse of drones was the mega buff to the Domi and the Ishtar, because the drones themselves, Drone Link Augmentors, and Omindirection Tracking links have been the same for just about forever.

Which increased the usefulness of the drones. :science:

The current sov system is too heavily reliant on the defender saving systems by stuffing as many people as possible into the system for the final timer, instead of incentivizing attacking (and defending) multiple systems at the same time by splitting their forces into multiple fleets and using actual intelligence/strategy. This must change.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#1230 - 2014-02-11 10:22:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Grath Telkin
Fix Sov wrote:

Which increased the usefulness of the drones. :science:


So that would mean that they over buffed those two ships (sentries on Geddons kinda suck balls) so why not just curb the problem ships a bit?


I know i know, any kind of sense like that wouldn't fit in with your grand narrative and all that

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Phox Jorkarzul
Deep Void Merc Syndicate
#1231 - 2014-02-11 10:22:49 UTC
Fix Sov wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
Fix Sov wrote:
Phox Jorkarzul wrote:
If it was solely Drone Assist that lead to the overuse of drones then it would have been taken out 7 years ago as Mario said.

Drones weren't useful enough back then to become the sole offensive weapon used by a majority of a fleet.


Bullshit people have been assigning drones forever.

What caused the overuse of drones was the mega buff to the Domi and the Ishtar, because the drones themselves, Drone Link Augmentors, and Omindirection Tracking links have been the same for just about forever.

Which increased the usefulness of the drones. :science:


Which as Grath said, had nothing to do with drone assist so :science:

Blasters for life

https://neverpheedthetroll.blogspot.com
Cor Six
The Northerners
Pandemic Horde
#1232 - 2014-02-11 10:35:45 UTC
I love the changes. But the problem in small/medium gangs are still there. Ishtars will still wreck everything small/medium size Ugh
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#1233 - 2014-02-11 10:39:26 UTC
Phox Jorkarzul wrote:


If it was solely Drone Assist that lead to the overuse of drones then it would have been taken out 7 years ago as Mario said. Which leads into Grath's point, make this change as part of a Complete drone overhaul and not a point patch, that still does not fix the issues of "passive gameplay" and server issues.

Because changing every aspect of drones at once is a great idea and means CCP will know exactly which change they made caused the player base to stop using drones entirely and cry that they are too weak now.

While changes implemented one by one in a drip feeding fashion will have no useful metrics over the player bases response to each change, for them to draw conclusions from as to how it fits with their intent of the change.
Phox Jorkarzul
Deep Void Merc Syndicate
#1234 - 2014-02-11 10:48:59 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Phox Jorkarzul wrote:


If it was solely Drone Assist that lead to the overuse of drones then it would have been taken out 7 years ago as Mario said. Which leads into Grath's point, make this change as part of a Complete drone overhaul and not a point patch, that still does not fix the issues of "passive gameplay" and server issues.

Because changing every aspect of drones at once is a great idea and means CCP will know exactly which change they made caused the player base to stop using drones entirely and cry that they are too weak now.

While changes implemented one by one in a drip feeding fashion will have no useful metrics over the player bases response to each change, for them to draw conclusions from as to how it fits with their intent of the change.


I see what you did there and I like it, hell I even approve it. my point still stands that a Drone OVERhaul would be preferable to a point patch, that doesn't fix a single thing they set out to fix.

On the side of metrics I want to see the Metric of the amount of "Fun" and "Enjoyment" that is being had in fleets that CCP seemed to have a good sense of.

Blasters for life

https://neverpheedthetroll.blogspot.com
Fix Sov
#1235 - 2014-02-11 12:01:01 UTC
I know the narrative is that it's all the CFC's fault, but I'm pretty certain James demonstrated in https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4221569#post4221569 that it was a concern well before "the CFC" started using it, they just weren't making any changes to them for 1.1.

We're beyond 1.1 territory now, and they're now looking to make changes.

The current sov system is too heavily reliant on the defender saving systems by stuffing as many people as possible into the system for the final timer, instead of incentivizing attacking (and defending) multiple systems at the same time by splitting their forces into multiple fleets and using actual intelligence/strategy. This must change.
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#1236 - 2014-02-11 12:55:10 UTC
Oh Takashawa wrote:
I'm all for having fun, but I'd like to see it be balanced and spread across the entire spectrum of the game. I've sat here and watched CCP buff the **** out of everything cheap and T1, barely improve T2, and talk widely about planning to nerf T3, and now give some indication (in this post) that they consider changes which nerf capitals more than subcapitals to be desirable.

"Everyone having fun" is all well and good as a slogan, but the reality is that force multipliers have and should remain a key part of EVE - if you don't have a big pile of dudes, your options are more restricted, but there have always been strategies you can pursue to punch above your weight. CCP is removing those, slowly but surely, and as a member of a group that enjoys not being blue to 70% of EVE, that's a bit frustrating to watch. I'm simply curious whether that's the direction CCP wants us to go - whoever has more dudes wins, end of discussion - or if it's simply an accident on their part?

How steep you want those force multipliers to be? And dont you afraid that EVE would be yet another pay-to-win trash, if you make it too steep? You buy 10 alts, uber ships and officer fit for them, multibox them and pwn everything. Is that the game you want to play?

You've just got used to the amount of power that slowcats provide. Give it a time, and you'll see that they still are very good. For example, in the battle at B-R5 Titans showed themselves very vialbe and worth their price, despite they were nerfed severely.
Mario Putzo
#1237 - 2014-02-11 13:01:18 UTC
Skia Aumer wrote:
Oh Takashawa wrote:
I'm all for having fun, but I'd like to see it be balanced and spread across the entire spectrum of the game. I've sat here and watched CCP buff the **** out of everything cheap and T1, barely improve T2, and talk widely about planning to nerf T3, and now give some indication (in this post) that they consider changes which nerf capitals more than subcapitals to be desirable.

"Everyone having fun" is all well and good as a slogan, but the reality is that force multipliers have and should remain a key part of EVE - if you don't have a big pile of dudes, your options are more restricted, but there have always been strategies you can pursue to punch above your weight. CCP is removing those, slowly but surely, and as a member of a group that enjoys not being blue to 70% of EVE, that's a bit frustrating to watch. I'm simply curious whether that's the direction CCP wants us to go - whoever has more dudes wins, end of discussion - or if it's simply an accident on their part?

How steep you want those force multipliers to be? And dont you afraid that EVE would be yet another pay-to-win trash, if you make it too steep? You buy 10 alts, uber ships and officer fit for them, multibox them and pwn everything. Is that the game you want to play?

You've just got used to the amount of power that slowcats provide. Give it a time, and you'll see that they still are very good. For example, in the battle at B-R5 Titans showed themselves very vialbe and worth their price, despite they were nerfed severely.



To be fair that is kind of the way the game is right now.
Aatrek's School Bus
#1238 - 2014-02-11 16:51:34 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
*Snip* Removed reply to a deleted post. ISD Ezwal.

drone assist nerf good
Fix Sov
#1239 - 2014-02-11 17:26:31 UTC
CCP have had what, 4 years now to fix the sov system, and I've yet to see even a glimmer of hope of them even touching it in any way, shape or form, so saying "don't touch drones, fix sov system", while probably a better solution in theory, is most likely just another way of saying "NO DON'T TOUCH IT EVER" in practice.

The current sov system is too heavily reliant on the defender saving systems by stuffing as many people as possible into the system for the final timer, instead of incentivizing attacking (and defending) multiple systems at the same time by splitting their forces into multiple fleets and using actual intelligence/strategy. This must change.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1240 - 2014-02-11 18:26:04 UTC
Or we could go with a 50 drone limit and deal with it.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)