Player Features and Ideas Discussion

By this point, pretty much everyone accepts that logistics in general (remote reps, remote cap) are more effective at keeping ships alive that combat ships are at killing them.

The problem with fixing logistics is that we need to balance it, not nerf it into oblivion, and I don't think there's a consensus yet on how to do that. One advantage that remote reps have over weapons is a complete disregard for the size of the target relative to the size of the logistics module. The smaller your target is relative to you weapon, the harder it is to apply damage to it, but this is not the case for logistics.

My proposal is three-part:

1. Add a "signature resolution"-like term to remote armor reppers and shield boosters. Values would be based on the corresponding values for turrets: 40m for small modules, 125m for medium modules, 400m for large modules, and 2000m for capital modules. This would make oversize logistics modules have a hard time scaling down just like DPS does. (I did specifically exclude remote capacitor transmitters from this change. Neuts and NOS don't have any kind of signature term, so I figured their corresponding counter shouldn't either. Maybe it should get added to all three at a later date, but one thing at a time.)

2. Modify Triage modules to provide a hefty bonus to the "signature resolution" of capital remote armor reppers and capital shield boosters. Triaged carriers were meant to support small fleet actions, and I don't think anyone wants that to change. Non-triaged carriers, however, would have a rather hard time supporting subcapital assets.

3. Add capital class energy neutralizers and energy vampires. I know that this is not specifically related to signature resolution, but currently capital remote energy transfers have no class-equivalent counter, and I feel it's time for this to change.

I realize that these are small steps in and of themselves and won't properly balance logistics. But given CCP's recent approach of multiple, small balance passes instead of large, sweeping ones, I think they fit.



Thoughts?

Fleet won't counter logi being more efficient by bringing more logi.

They totally won't...

What you want fixed isn't broken.

Logistics is a fleet tool. It's meant to keep one or more ships in the fight against enemy fleets. There is no cap or reduction of incoming fire, which means the counter to logi is more dps, the counter to more dps is more logi. There just isn't a way around that.

If you nerf logi, fleets will simply bring more of them, because fleet sizes aren't practically limited until your fleets get very large. The people that won't be able to just run you over with logi under the new system aren't doing it now either.

In fact, several ways of essentially nullifying the effect of logi exist already. ECM and Sensor Damps can all but remove them from the fight, and simply using enough Alpha to kill ships before reps can land works just fine. These are fleet options used to counter a fleet tool. Working as intended.

Now, if your intent is to limit the use of logi on a smaller scale, then you need to go back to the drawing board. What is needed first is a way to limit fleet sizes. Once you establish some limits on "just bring more" you can adjust other elements so that a certain level of DPS vs. a certain level of Logi becomes a tactical choice that impacts other elements of the fight.

Oh it is very broken.

We are effectively immune to small alliances and forget about doing any damage to a boot fleet with subcaps.

Problem is that this is working as intended. You bring more, and thus you win.

Only way to fix that is to find a way to limit the ability to simply bring more. Until that is fixed, nothing else matters.

I am not even advocating any sort of change to limit fleet engagements... it's just the cold reality of the situation.


Personally, I think the answer to the blob is AOE damage weapons. These hurt large groups more than small groups by their nature, as you take more damage if you have more targets getting hit. If Logi stayed limited to helping one ship at a time, but fleets were being damaged en masse, then you have a situation that is low impact on smaller groups vs. larger groups.

Will It break on scale? yes it will, but it will continuously tip in favor of the smaller group, and attrition will cost the larger groups more in the long run.

RR mechanics aren't broken - period.

Doesn't mean the availability and fleet numbers, neutrals and so forth aren't balanced or even or or or or or or or ...

... now for what do you actually want to balance RR for ? Cause you can pick only one or two out of a listt of 30-50, but hey, then the X - 2 will scream again. °°

Fix your warfare, your 'majority rules', leave RR alone.

Absolutely correct ....

... and this has to do with the RR mechanics ?


Now this goes more into something I had in mind, yet not as simple as you put it; and with this condecending tone of it being bad just out of hand ...

... fairness had and will have nothing to do with it at all ... it should never be fair by any rules. If you mistake my comment for an Arena by numbers or fit idea, you would be wrong.

So how should 'majority rules' be interpreted then? You cannot implement a single change which doesn't impose an artificial limit on ships players can bring.

AOE inherently has less appeal to the blob, because with more ships on field, you take more damage from AOE as a fleet.

If standard ships could use bomb or bomb-like weapons that actually hit useful areas, tactics based on positioning become a thing, as well as tanking ships extremely well against a given damage type, and using the matching damage type while in close with your enemy.

The same considerations that go into using a fleet of disco smart bombing battleships to clear sleepers would be just as effective in the hands of smaller gangs against blobs, and even if the blob used the same tactics, those tactics would still favor the smaller group by requiring less Logi to keep ships in space longer.

My initial thought when I say "better" AOE is something that punishes a big blob orbiting/following a single anchor... Something like a grav bomb which would do damage proportional to the amount of mass in the blast radius when it went off, or maybe bombs that do far more damage but have no optimal only falloff, so they do more damage the closer you are to the center.

Im not really sure, but right now I know that Eve doesnt have enough focus on positioning, everything is simply "follow anchor, shoot primary" Adding more AOE to the game would improve the situation for pilots who can each operate independently instead of in a massive group.

What you want to do is make the FC have to work to properly utilize his people and not just get massacred. AOE would do this. Even if they just buffed the speed of a bomb to 6000 m/s and nerfed its flight time to 5 seconds, This would have a massive effect on fleet tactics and composition because right now you can basically warp anywhere and have your fleet align and be out before the bomb hits, that would not be the case with a 5 second delay instead of 10.

How would you as an FC call a warp in with super effective bombs on the field? you would have to say something like "everyone spread out in random directions" then youd have a group of people flying the same way, some flying into each other, some not paying attention, some still asking who the anchor is etc.