These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Scylla] Skynet - Removing Fighter Assist

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#861 - 2015-03-03 13:40:52 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Hello

Appreciate all the feedback very much.

Based on what you've said here we are planning to leave Fighter warping in, but stick with removing assist.

We hear the concerns about the state of capitals and loss of return on investment from training towards them and we absolutely want to make sure that caps of all kinds are not only viable but exciting and powerful. We still feel this change is necessary, but we are looking into ways to improve on the state of capitals and capital balance. No news on that front for now but it's something we are committed to improving.

Thanks again.


I really wish you actually meant assist.

Good job on ignoring everything said here and going along with what you originally planned all along.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#862 - 2015-03-03 13:42:03 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Hello

Appreciate all the feedback very much.

Based on what you've said here we are planning to leave Fighter warping in, but stick with removing assist.

We hear the concerns about the state of capitals and loss of return on investment from training towards them and we absolutely want to make sure that caps of all kinds are not only viable but exciting and powerful. We still feel this change is necessary, but we are looking into ways to improve on the state of capitals and capital balance. No news on that front for now but it's something we are committed to improving.

Thanks again.


boo!!! , always relenting on the tougher decisions, things that just need deleting like drone assist and fighter warping, i mean seriously they are just drones aren't they? why should they warp? what is the point of them being able too warp?

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#863 - 2015-03-03 13:44:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Phoenix Jones
Nolak Ataru wrote:
afkalt wrote:
I'm still waiting for even one of these risk averse cowards to explain why, in a world where people are against off grid boosting, they think off grid DPS is somehow "ok"....Cost and training time are not a reason.
Man up, put it on grid. If you don't have the fortitude for that risk, stop flying it.
Hell you get change out 1.5b for an archon these days. People lose ships worth that on a daily basis.


It has been explained countless times in this thread, but we forgive you for not reading.
All one has to do is look at the Revenant KM to be able to laugh at anyone saying skynetting is 100% safe, but we are willing to sacrifice a bit; namely, have a bubble around a POS from which you cannot delegate fighters from.


Yup. I'll just make sure to have my 700,000,000,000 worth of Titans around to camp the guys log off spot with bubbles and yolo him :-).

Also it was a revenant. Skynet or not people want to kill those.

100% is an absolute, nothing is 100%. 99.9 is the correct option :-)

Yaay!!!!
Necharo Rackham
The Red Circle Inc.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#864 - 2015-03-03 13:46:11 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Hello

Appreciate all the feedback very much.

Based on what you've said here we are planning to leave Fighter warping in, but stick with removing assist.


What about being able to point Fighters to prevent them warping?
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#865 - 2015-03-03 13:47:49 UTC
disappoint
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#866 - 2015-03-03 13:47:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Phoenix Jones
Harvey James wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Hello

Appreciate all the feedback very much.

Based on what you've said here we are planning to leave Fighter warping in, but stick with removing assist.

We hear the concerns about the state of capitals and loss of return on investment from training towards them and we absolutely want to make sure that caps of all kinds are not only viable but exciting and powerful. We still feel this change is necessary, but we are looking into ways to improve on the state of capitals and capital balance. No news on that front for now but it's something we are committed to improving.

Thanks again.


boo!!! , always relenting on the tougher decisions, things that just need deleting like drone assist and fighter warping, i mean seriously they are just drones aren't they? why should they warp? what is the point of them being able too warp?


I can understand why CCP would bend on that. It's a smaller issue to be honest and beyond this sole point, nobody's really complained about it. One side wanted to keep it because it saves them a few hundred million, the otherside saw it as a way to get a few hundred million of lost fighters. Really it's semantics atm. The bigger issue was addressed.

If an abusive issue can be found with warping fighters, say your piece (or it should have been said already). We didn't hear it. The only thing I would request is to slow fighter warp if they are warping at the speed of a frigate (battle cruiser warp speed would work for these). That would be the only thing I would change. They keep warp, just warp slower.

Yaay!!!!
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#867 - 2015-03-03 13:54:37 UTC
Necharo Rackham wrote:
Kane Carnifex wrote:

The removal of this feature will not increase the amount of battles as the most small gangs are totally unable to kill a carrier or even get through the active tank. So they will run away once they see a capital on Dscan or badphone for more people.


I think there are plenty of small gangs that could kill a full gank fit carrier on grid - i mean, if they are unable to kill it, why have it in/near the POS to start with?


Also means with this change you've gone from having a usually safe carrier (that can occasionally be caught if the user gets lazy/messes up) to the carrier not being there at all with the feature removed... some of the options give a bit more balance where people would continue to use carriers for this kind of thing but with reduced effectiveness and a higher chance of being caught by the prepared :S
Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#868 - 2015-03-03 13:54:56 UTC
I love that people are complaining about Rise not removing fighter warping when literally no good arguments have been presented for doing so.

I'd wager that for most of these people, the real reason they want it removed is to spite carrier/supercarrier pilots.
Cpt Patrick Archer
I HAVE THE POWER OF GOD AND ANIME ON MY SIDE
Blue Eyes and Exodia Toon Duelist Kingdom Duelers
#869 - 2015-03-03 13:59:38 UTC
It's obvious that something needed to changed, but CCP clearly doesn't have the funds/priority/isn't pro-acitve towards fixing a feature. It's better to remove it completely because that saves a lot of hours/days of programming, and people will stay subscribed nontheless..


It's a damn ******* shame, but at least we've got pretty much 43 pages of people protesting this 'improvement'. If subscriptions decade we can just say "I told you so" even though it probably won't be the cause P

In any case; remote sebo and tracking/dmg thanny's here we come! Add a triage archon and all the infidels coming into my system will still go out in pods.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#870 - 2015-03-03 14:00:47 UTC
Nolak Ataru wrote:
afkalt wrote:
I'm still waiting for even one of these risk averse cowards to explain why, in a world where people are against off grid boosting, they think off grid DPS is somehow "ok"....Cost and training time are not a reason.
Man up, put it on grid. If you don't have the fortitude for that risk, stop flying it.
Hell you get change out 1.5b for an archon these days. People lose ships worth that on a daily basis.


It has been explained countless times in this thread, but we forgive you for not reading.
All one has to do is look at the Revenant KM to be able to laugh at anyone saying skynetting is 100% safe, but we are willing to sacrifice a bit; namely, have a bubble around a POS from which you cannot delegate fighters from.


So because bad players are bad; unbalanced broken mechanics should stay?

I assume you're well aware of the deadspace method of protecting supers?
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#871 - 2015-03-03 14:02:02 UTC
Nolak Ataru wrote:
afkalt wrote:
I'm still waiting for even one of these risk averse cowards to explain why, in a world where people are against off grid boosting, they think off grid DPS is somehow "ok"....Cost and training time are not a reason.
Man up, put it on grid. If you don't have the fortitude for that risk, stop flying it.
Hell you get change out 1.5b for an archon these days. People lose ships worth that on a daily basis.


It has been explained countless times in this thread, but we forgive you for not reading.
All one has to do is look at the Revenant KM to be able to laugh at anyone saying skynetting is 100% safe, but we are willing to sacrifice a bit; namely, have a bubble around a POS from which you cannot delegate fighters from.


Yeah we should totally all setup logoff traps over a week and then wait for our watchlist to go blinky a few days later to hot drop some titans so a roaming gang can jump a gate after their scout got wrecked by assisted fighters...
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#872 - 2015-03-03 14:04:03 UTC  |  Edited by: afkalt
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Nolak Ataru wrote:
afkalt wrote:
I'm still waiting for even one of these risk averse cowards to explain why, in a world where people are against off grid boosting, they think off grid DPS is somehow "ok"....Cost and training time are not a reason.
Man up, put it on grid. If you don't have the fortitude for that risk, stop flying it.
Hell you get change out 1.5b for an archon these days. People lose ships worth that on a daily basis.


It has been explained countless times in this thread, but we forgive you for not reading.
All one has to do is look at the Revenant KM to be able to laugh at anyone saying skynetting is 100% safe, but we are willing to sacrifice a bit; namely, have a bubble around a POS from which you cannot delegate fighters from.


Yeah we should totally all setup logoff traps over a week and then wait for our watchlist to go blinky a few days later to hot drop some titans so a roaming gang can jump a gate after their scout got wrecked by assisted fighters...


None of which matters a single iota if the super is 5000km deep in deadspace.

But bless, they're really trying to show that because people not doing it properly die, it is therefore balanced.
Cpt Patrick Archer
I HAVE THE POWER OF GOD AND ANIME ON MY SIDE
Blue Eyes and Exodia Toon Duelist Kingdom Duelers
#873 - 2015-03-03 14:16:44 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:

Appreciate all the feedback very much.

We still feel this change is necessary, but we are looking into ways to improve on the state of capitals and capital balance. No news on that front for now but it's something we are committed to improving.

Thanks again.


I think we are all looking forward to that day.
Chi'Nane T'Kal
Interminatus
#874 - 2015-03-03 14:19:32 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:

Based on what you've said here we are planning to leave Fighter warping in, but stick with removing assist.


So, Fighters warping in to do ... WHAT?
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#875 - 2015-03-03 14:21:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Well I am glad to see fighter warping still in which means carriers will still be viable for PvE, I would have face palmed for 10 minutes if you had removed fighter warping, and my face has only just recovered from the D-scan immunity on combat recons....

EDIT: For those of you who do not understand the issue carriers often warp in and align and the fighters are quite slow and often end up being many KM away, so if you get someone come for you you warp out. Without the warp you would lose 300m of fighters each time which means using a carrier is stupid based on the amount of times that you will have to warp out in the majority of 0.0 space.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Kane Carnifex
Duty.
Brave Collective
#876 - 2015-03-03 14:22:04 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Hello

Appreciate all the feedback very much.

Based on what you've said here we are planning to leave Fighter warping in, but stick with removing assist.

We hear the concerns about the state of capitals and loss of return on investment from training towards them and we absolutely want to make sure that caps of all kinds are not only viable but exciting and powerful. We still feel this change is necessary, but we are looking into ways to improve on the state of capitals and capital balance. No news on that front for now but it's something we are committed to improving.

Thanks again.


Hello CCP Rise,

I didn't saw any good point against it but many for it. Is it a real problem which small/medium gangs get raped when they search for juice ganks? As this was my first time in a Forum trying to raise my voice i am disappointed neither i got a good discussion running or good feedback about my points. I have the feeling my voice just died under all these small scale pvp player which have a problem with fighters as they search for easy kills.

Why does CCP always thinks in grey zones and in this time you go Black or White and nothing between....

This is the 3rd nerf i see in my capital time and i still don't have the feeling which my capitals are OP.

Thank you for opening this Thread, unfortunately it doesn´t has any impact if you write in it or not.

http://vesuvi.de - EVE & Food Porn in German...
Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
#877 - 2015-03-03 14:26:20 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Hello

Appreciate all the feedback very much.

Based on what you've said here we are planning to leave Fighter warping in, but stick with removing assist.

We hear the concerns about the state of capitals and loss of return on investment from training towards them and we absolutely want to make sure that caps of all kinds are not only viable but exciting and powerful. We still feel this change is necessary, but we are looking into ways to improve on the state of capitals and capital balance. No news on that front for now but it's something we are committed to improving.

Thanks again.


Removing it compeletely is not the right solution. Please spend some actual effort in solving the risk-free aspect of POS skynet, and go ahead with rebalancing capital ships. No reason to wait with that.



Ncc 1709
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Pandemic Horde
#878 - 2015-03-03 14:29:07 UTC
Make sure you remove cloaking too
Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#879 - 2015-03-03 14:29:53 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Hello

Appreciate all the feedback very much.

Based on what you've said here we are planning to leave Fighter warping in, but stick with removing assist.

We hear the concerns about the state of capitals and loss of return on investment from training towards them and we absolutely want to make sure that caps of all kinds are not only viable but exciting and powerful. We still feel this change is necessary, but we are looking into ways to improve on the state of capitals and capital balance. No news on that front for now but it's something we are committed to improving.

Thanks again.

Yes, yes, I'm sure you are quite committed towards giving capital ships viable, interesting roles.
But it's concerning to me that the word "soon" appears nowhere in that post.
Dean Dewitt
Universal Force Army
Neutral Lands Association
#880 - 2015-03-03 14:30:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Dean Dewitt
I don't need more carrier pilot, they will be useless.

CCP you nerf and you upgrade? why not just modifi everything once?