These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Proteus - January] Recon ships

First post First post First post
Author
Lvzbel Ixtab
Dark Venture Corporation
Kitchen Sinkhole
#1581 - 2014-12-22 22:39:18 UTC
Niskin wrote:
hellokittyonline wrote:
Niskin wrote:
As a true solo player

I don't usually do this but
https://zkillboard.com/character/367797693/solo/
...


You don't usually link old loss mails that have nothing to do with the current conversation? I can see why.

Seriously though. I used to fly with others, from about a month into playing the game in 2006 all the way up to a few years ago. Since then I've been operating on my own, because I don't have the time to commit to a group the way I'd like to.

Most of the kills I've been involved in were not solo, but the few I've managed to get myself were before zkillboard existed. I'm not much of a solo PvP'er, my last attempt was in a Myrmidon if you want to look for that lossmail. I do have to do solo PvE in wormholes as that is where I currently live and have done both grouped and solo FacWar before.

Basically I've been all over this game and have seen the many areas and aspects of it. I'm solo now, but have always only had one account. So what are you trying to accuse me of here anyway?



lol you even said it "As a true solo player" and they you said, "I'm not much of a solo PvP'er "

get rekt, you are proposing unrealistic tactics for people that go to LS to look for fair fights and fast pace pvp that is one reason why most people fly frigates, not because is cheap but challenging
MRietfors
Lumen et Umbra
#1582 - 2014-12-22 23:11:58 UTC

  • Dscan immunity is staying. We understand a lot of the concerns raised, but for most of them you guys are doing a great job making strong counter-arguments and I think it will be very interesting to see how this mechanic plays out on TQ. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that.


  • Make D-scan immunity valid only if you are farther than 1Million KMs or so.

    Otherwise you goona lose most PVE players as you are already losing and exploration will suffer a lot.

    My 2 cents, MRi
    Landrik Blake
    Sebiestor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #1583 - 2014-12-22 23:17:07 UTC
    Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners

    This is way too strong an ability for Combat Recons. You're basically giving them a free cloak.

    Sure, there are some drawbacks, like the inability to hide on grid, but there are benefits too, like being invisible while undocking and using gates. It's effectively as good as a Cov-Ops cloak but on a stronger combat ship and without using a high slot. You're crazy if you don't think that's a big deal.
    Kyle Yanowski
    Malevelon Roe Industries
    Convocation of Empyreans
    #1584 - 2014-12-22 23:21:37 UTC
    80 pages on this thread...

    CCP Rise dropped by the High Drag Podcast to talk about Recon Ships. You can listen to it here. (Rises commentary starts at 42:40)

    Host of the High Drag Eve Online Podcast ( http://highdrag.wordpress.com). Director of Aideron Robotics.

    Niskin
    League of the Lost
    #1585 - 2014-12-22 23:22:01 UTC
    Lvzbel Ixtab wrote:
    lol you even said it "As a true solo player" and they you said, "I'm not much of a solo PvP'er "

    I only have one account, that makes me a solo player, that is a fact. I'm not very good at solo PvP, that is a fact.

    Lvzbel Ixtab wrote:
    get rekt, you are proposing unrealistic tactics for people that go to LS to look for fair fights and fast pace pvp that is one reason why most people fly frigates, not because is cheap but challenging


    I'm telling you what I would do if I was back doing solo FacWar with these proposed changes. You can do whatever you want. I like to do whatever gives me the most chance of survival without paying for a second account. How hard is it to dock up and pod-scout a few complexes? Or log on the alt on the same account who is already in a probe-capable ship nearby?

    It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog

    Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship.

    -MooMooDachshundCow

    Vargo Shahni
    Pizza Delivery Express
    #1586 - 2014-12-22 23:26:42 UTC
    Having just a flat ability of D-scan immunity seems a bit strange to me as one of Eve's great strengths is the amount of variability in outfitting of ships you come across. Would it not be better to give combat recons an extra utility high slot and create a new module that only they can fit which grants D-scan immunity. if the module needs to be activated then the recons would be briefly visible on D-scan like Covert-Ops.
    Lvzbel Ixtab
    Dark Venture Corporation
    Kitchen Sinkhole
    #1587 - 2014-12-22 23:39:50 UTC
    Niskin wrote:
    Lvzbel Ixtab wrote:
    lol you even said it "As a true solo player" and they you said, "I'm not much of a solo PvP'er "

    I only have one account, that makes me a solo player, that is a fact. I'm not very good at solo PvP, that is a fact.

    Lvzbel Ixtab wrote:
    get rekt, you are proposing unrealistic tactics for people that go to LS to look for fair fights and fast pace pvp that is one reason why most people fly frigates, not because is cheap but challenging


    I'm telling you what I would do if I was back doing solo FacWar with these proposed changes. You can do whatever you want. I like to do whatever gives me the most chance of survival without paying for a second account. How hard is it to dock up and pod-scout a few complexes? Or log on the alt on the same account who is already in a probe-capable ship nearby?


    Ill give you a scenario

    Im on my duo rep ishkur i found a merlin, incursus and rifter, I know i can take them but there is no way to know if a recon is there, i usually roam about 10-15 system so lets say my prober is 5 jump out.

    I log out and log back in bring my prober to that system, those guys move on to a different system while i was moving my prober, fight is gone do you really need Eve to be slower than it already is?
    Barrett Fruitcake
    Doomheim
    #1588 - 2014-12-22 23:44:56 UTC
    Vargo Shahni wrote:
    Having just a flat ability of D-scan immunity seems a bit strange to me as one of Eve's great strengths is the amount of variability in outfitting of ships you come across. Would it not be better to give combat recons an extra utility high slot and create a new module that only they can fit which grants D-scan immunity. if the module needs to be activated then the recons would be briefly visible on D-scan like Covert-Ops.



    You could say that about bubble immunity.

    No, I'm not saying bubble immunity should be moved to a high slot mod. I'm saying that eve shouldn't be only about modules on the ships. There should be things called "role bonuses", things that are just inherent to the ship hull, as they have been for many years.

    Barrett Fruitcake
    Doomheim
    #1589 - 2014-12-22 23:50:35 UTC
    Madner Kami wrote:
    Barrett Fruitcake wrote:
    I hope CCP doesn't cave on a great new step in getting rid of perfect intel due to a bunch of players unwilling to adapt to such changes.


    So D-Scan is perfect intel nowadays? Seriously?



    It's one of the tools that gives you far too much information for free, like local.

    You either know someone is in local or not.
    On D-scan, you either know they ship type, name and if they are on grid or not.

    There should be a point where their are more unknowns, than knowns.

    D-Scan should act more like scan probes and show unknown contacts at extreme ranges instead of always returning perfect information when you are in range.

    There should be a range of uncertainty.



    2D34DLY4U
    Brutor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #1590 - 2014-12-22 23:50:54 UTC
    CCP Rise wrote:
    Quote:

    I can tell you what will happen most likely:
    - Less fights because people are risk averse
    - A 2nd account with a Prober at all times will be must, not an option.


    I think this is a complex debate and I'm sure that none of us understand player behavior completely, but my experience is actually the opposite of what you're saying.

    Yes, people are risk averse, they want to make good decisions when they're taking risks and that often leads being conservative. That's exactly why I like this kind of mechanic. People want to do the fun thing and take more engagements, but when they have enough information to know that they aren't the favorite they shy away from fighting. However, when some information is obscured they become optimistic and take more risks. I've seen players so willing to make decisions that are likely too risky simply because they lack perfect information. Jumping into gate camps where positional information isn't guaranteed, engaging on stations with people docked, fighting in systems with more in local than can be accounted for, etc. These mechanics that obscure information give people the excuses needed to take risks. Take the example given somewhere in this thread of a low sec camp with 2 Vexors and 2 Rooks. Before these changes, the gang considering fighting them never would because they know they can't deal with the Rooks. After, they won't see them and so they will probably engage. That's more fights because people are risk averse.

    The negative side for me is your other bullet point. Because people don't want to take unnecessary risk they will work very hard, sometimes doing something very boring or difficult, just to get at those last pieces of information. And they should. But we would want to avoid mechanics that obligate people to this kind of behavior too heavily without enough positive side to make the mechanic worthwhile.

    I would be more worried with this mechanic that people have to spend a lot of time running probe scans when they really don't want to be than that they are avoiding engagements because of the possibility of Recons. I don't think this will be a problem but we'll have to wait and see.


    I don't know what player behavior will be like, however this is my intuition:

    Agree that risk aversion is a huge problem in terms of preventing engagements and/or forcing players to perform tedious tasks to a great length in order to gain an advantage / feel "safe", thus promoting uninteresting game play as opposed to fun fights which is what everyone wants.

    Agree that less information may lead players to accept there is a certain degree of risk in what they do and therefore lead them to take "leaps of faith" into the unknown, thus fighting risk aversion and generating good fights.

    Do not agree this will work since it acts in a one sided manner by benefiting campers (sitting on a beacon with 2 invisible to dscan friends ganking nerds) more than explorers (willing to venture into unknown by roaming).

    It seems to me you are thinking correctly and have the correct intention but you are acting in a way that does not benefit what you intend to do.

    Unless the lack of information is equal to everyone I don't think this will foster risk taking, instead it may promote risk averse behaviors even further - the issue of forcing everyone to bring a combat prober should be small when compared with the amount of players that will camp sites by sitting idly while waiting for easy kills, I suspect we will have much more of these than players that out of this change become willing to engage by accepting some degree of risk.

    I don't have a solution to this problem, one way to do it seems to be treat dscan and local as enemies of more engagements and force everyone to play with less information, another way to do it would be allow everyone to see everything but rework the engagement commitment/escape mechanics, however it seems a rethink of the engagement model / intel+visibility tools available to players is required in order to nail it and that by using this incremental approach you may actually be taking a step backwards.

    In general my gut feeling around this it that the more people roam around the better, since roaming is for sure a driver of engagements (it acts as a matchmaking queue of engagement possibilities); either you remove all information and then people will roam in the dark (what it seems to me you want to happen and will promote more engagements) or if you employ a piecemeal approach you may end up not achieving your desired objective or even worse, cornering players into the very same behaviors you wish to prevent (bad gameplay centered on defenders sitting idly, roamers docked and less overall fights).

    Unless you already did the rethink of the engagement model and this is just a first step...

    PS: please fix Pilgrim, it's slow armor ship that fights at close range so the neut range is kinda useless, even with MWD+point instead of AB+scram it will still be slower than everything else except what it cannot fight. Think U boat warfare in WW2 :)
    Barrett Fruitcake
    Doomheim
    #1591 - 2014-12-22 23:58:03 UTC
    hellokittyonline wrote:
    Barrett Fruitcake wrote:
    I hope CCP doesn't cave on a great new step in getting rid of perfect intel due to a bunch of players unwilling to adapt to such changes.
    Most of what has made Eve strong is the constant re-invention of the game. Don't lose sight of that.

    Oh yeah; adapt or cry in your bear threatening to unsub, only to adapt later once you realize your threatening to unsub has been used more than "crying wolf" and has lost its apparent effect.

    Do you even read bro? Clearly another scrub looking for ez kills. Most of the issued raised are from actual PvPers looking for changes that encourage skillbased, gimmick-free PvP instead of the war of alts we have right now.



    Sorry, I didn't know I was going to run into the "real pvper's" of Eve when stating my opinion. Roll

    Reducing the information available and creating more situations where you are unsure of what you are up against is not gimmick gameplay. Its taking Eve in more of a direction it should be.

    There should be less perfect information in all tools that we use to interact with other ships in space; Local, D-Scan, Probes, Map Statistics, and etc.

    Player skill should determine how good the intel we gain is. It shouldn't just be handed out. Removing some ships from d-scan gets us to stop using it as a crutch with perfect information.

    Stan Durden
    Deaths Consortium
    Intrepid Crossing
    #1592 - 2014-12-23 00:02:47 UTC
    Eve is hard. Most of us accept that.

    If you die it should be because you are doing it wrong. Adding the immunity to d-scan means in many more cases of choosing to take the fight or take the acceleration gate, will be doing it wrong. Many situations which used to give us PvP will turn from a manageable risk into a bad decision.

    Initially I like the sound of the new recon changes. However, consider the steps that will be necessary now to gather good intel and decide to take a fight... I think you will see a lot less fights happen in all areas of PvP, because people will be a lot less willing to engage.

    Of course a lot more ganks will happen. There are plenty of PvPers who only take ganks, and who don't really want to find good fights. For them these changes will really improve the game. For those of us who will also take fights which are risky, but manageable... those of us who chose to try to turn up the difficulty when we can... it will make it even more difficult to find a good fight imo.

    So in the end do you think this change will lead to more good fights, or more ganks? I will never say no to a free kill, but I would prefer changes that help generate good fights. I don't think this change will do that.

    Barrett Fruitcake
    Doomheim
    #1593 - 2014-12-23 00:03:44 UTC
    2D34DLY4U wrote:


    PS: please fix Pilgrim, it's slow armor ship that fights at close range so the neut range is kinda useless, even with MWD+point instead of AB+scram it will still be slower than everything else except what it cannot fight. Think U boat warfare in WW2 :)


    Note: Many want range bonus on Pilgrim's energy warfare in order to be able to use it in new ways. A speed boost might help it though.
    Barrett Fruitcake
    Doomheim
    #1594 - 2014-12-23 00:09:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Barrett Fruitcake
    Stan Durden wrote:
    Eve is hard. Most of us accept that.

    If you die it should be because you are doing it wrong. Adding the immunity to d-scan means in many more cases of choosing to take the fight or take the acceleration gate, will be doing it wrong. Many situations which used to give us PvP will turn from a manageable risk into a bad decision.

    Initially I like the sound of the new recon changes. However, consider the steps that will be necessary now to gather good intel and decide to take a fight... I think you will see a lot less fights happen in all areas of PvP, because people will be a lot less willing to engage.

    Of course a lot more ganks will happen. There are plenty of PvPers who only take ganks, and who don't really want to find good fights. For them these changes will really improve the game. For those of us who will also take fights which are risky, but manageable... those of us who chose to try to turn up the difficulty when we can... it will make it even more difficult to find a good fight imo.

    So in the end do you think this change will lead to more good fights, or more ganks? I will never say no to a free kill, but I would prefer changes that help generate good fights. I don't think this change will do that.




    I have found that truly, good fights, have been a rarity in Eve mainly due to its sand box non-instanced no rules gameplay.

    We are not playing a space version of football, American or that other one. We are simulating a space struggle where there is great risk of being overwhelmed, and sometimes great reward for those willing to take that risk.

    It's a cold hard game, and it is rarely fair, and probably never should be.
    Lug Muad'Dib
    Funk'in Hole
    #1595 - 2014-12-23 00:09:17 UTC
    Barrett Fruitcake wrote:
    hellokittyonline wrote:
    Barrett Fruitcake wrote:
    I hope CCP doesn't cave on a great new step in getting rid of perfect intel due to a bunch of players unwilling to adapt to such changes.
    Most of what has made Eve strong is the constant re-invention of the game. Don't lose sight of that.

    Oh yeah; adapt or cry in your bear threatening to unsub, only to adapt later once you realize your threatening to unsub has been used more than "crying wolf" and has lost its apparent effect.

    Do you even read bro? Clearly another scrub looking for ez kills. Most of the issued raised are from actual PvPers looking for changes that encourage skillbased, gimmick-free PvP instead of the war of alts we have right now.



    Sorry, I didn't know I was going to run into the "real pvper's" of Eve when stating my opinion. Roll

    Reducing the information available and creating more situations where you are unsure of what you are up against is not gimmick gameplay. Its taking Eve in more of a direction it should be.

    There should be less perfect information in all tools that we use to interact with other ships in space; Local, D-Scan, Probes, Map Statistics, and etc.

    Player skill should determine how good the intel we gain is. It shouldn't just be handed out. Removing some ships from d-scan gets us to stop using it as a crutch with perfect information.



    Except that won't happen, people will just take more times to get same intel, take time to send covert ops, take time to probe (boring for lot of player), at the end it just mean less fight. End of story.
    Barrett Fruitcake
    Doomheim
    #1596 - 2014-12-23 00:15:05 UTC
    Lug Muad'Dib wrote:
    Except that won't happen, people will just take more times to get same intel, take time to send covert ops, take time to probe (boring for lot of player), at the end it just mean less fight. End of story.



    I know players want to use this "creates less fights" as the new "I'll unsub if you do" complaint, but I don't think it will gain you much in the end.

    At some point there is a critical mass of intel that say's we got most of what we need and you engage or you don't. Some want perfect information, which many of our tools give them now.

    It should be more about of imperfect intel and the willingness to take a gamble, not about waiting for the perfect intel. The perfect intel should never come.

    Lvzbel Ixtab
    Dark Venture Corporation
    Kitchen Sinkhole
    #1597 - 2014-12-23 00:19:54 UTC
    People that say that D-scan gives perfect intel are wrong, you can always hide the rest of a fleet in a different system or in a wh and many tactics to hide you true numbers
    Edward Olmops
    Gunboat Commando
    #1598 - 2014-12-23 00:25:35 UTC
    Lvzbel Ixtab wrote:
    People that say that D-scan gives perfect intel are wrong, you can always hide the rest of a fleet in a different system or in a wh and many tactics to hide you true numbers


    True!
    But imagine you want to hide your fleet in a wormhole. You warp there - you jump in and...

    then...

    OMG, it's full of Recons!!!11
    Hard Carnt
    Barney Gumble Combat Club
    End of Life
    #1599 - 2014-12-23 00:37:58 UTC
    An interesting point is that of getting to much info for free from dscan - I can see the logic in this point so rather than op a class of ship by completely removing then why not change the de an mechanic - ie passively watching d scab gives you an unknown ship type return at an unknown distance in a vague direction. Actively scanning gives you much more detail such as ship type, range and direction but also alerts the contact that you're looking for him. Kind of like a Radar Warning Receiver style thing
    Giribaldi
    State War Academy
    Caldari State
    #1600 - 2014-12-23 01:59:54 UTC
    CCP Rise wrote:
    Hopefully no typos or weirdnesses but its always possible so just let me know if something looks funny.

    15:02 - I have to step out for a meeting. Back in an hour to start responding.
    15:49 - fixed typos in Huginn and Curse slot layout =/
    16:51 - heading out for the day, will keep reading and post responses to your feedback tomorrow
    Friday - 11:16 - update post: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5322500#post5322500



    Can we get another updat3. For the love of jesus, we want resist profiles. We want to know specifics about wet her we will see them in overview if ongrid. We want increased EHP because the givenue bonus uve given them are so marginal you will not notice it in pvp. 50 hp? That is nothing compared to the damage application of medium guns. Reasonably we need to see a 400 to 500 he
    P I crease on respective tank hp.