These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
d0cTeR9
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1081 - 2015-03-08 01:31:13 UTC
Azazel The Misanthrope wrote:
I think that "skynetting", just like "hyperdunking" is a legitimate player-made tactic and should remain available to the players. Removing tactical options for people never seems like a good idea. Instead of removing this, a better option seems to lie in making the tactic a riskier practice. Examples of this include, making fighters scrammable, giving them a limited warp range, giving them a fuel time, increasing the distance that this can be done from POSes and stations, and/or decreasing or even removing any bonuses fighters receive from from carriers or supercarriers when not on grid with that carrier.


Very true.

But you know... infinite bumping freighter's is fine... ceptors that are near-untackable is fine...

Roll

Been around since the beginning.
Oguma
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#1082 - 2015-03-08 03:55:48 UTC
Remove offgrid assist
DO NOT Remove Fighter Warp

Fighter warp is the only thing that makes fighers unique.




Don't be so eager to swing the nerf bat that you break the game we love.
Cardano Firesnake
Fire Bullet Inc
#1083 - 2015-03-08 11:44:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Cardano Firesnake
Dreadnaughts, Carriers, Super Carriers, Titans...
All these ships are losing all their interest.
It is important to give a function to all these ships.

CCP created a special UI for Relics and Hecking Sites. Even if I think that the mini game is not very interestening because of it's lacks of strategy (the game is more a matter of luck and skill than tactical refelxion) I think that the idea is excellent.

Titans should have a special command UI. The Fleet cammander in the mothership could give his orders from this UI and attribute special bonuses for players that follows the ordders.

Dreadnaughts could have its own UI that give them the power to shoot at a bookmark with area effect weapons. The time between shoot and impact depend on the range were the dreads are.

Super carriers and Carriers could have a special UI to use their fighters and bombers to engage targets that are not on their grid. Smaller ships could design a target that the carriers could attack.

Posted - 2010.07.01 11:24:00 - [4] Erase learning skills, remap all SP. That's all.
Amerreto Wafer
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1084 - 2015-03-08 12:17:03 UTC
“SKYNET”

"Therefore our proposal is to simply remove fighter assist."


I would like to propose the creation of a new "warfare link" that could only be used on "Battle cruiser" sized ships that allows a carrier pilot to assist his fighters to the ship which has this link fitted .
This would be trained as normal lvl 1-5 , each lvl allowing one fighter to be assisted to the battle cruiser which has this warfare link in its high slot.

This warfare link could only be used by Battle cruisers:
This warfare link would allow one fighter per lvl to be assisted.

This link would still allow fighter's to be assisted and does not mean having to change the mechanic on the captal ships,
it also stop's fighters being assisted to very fast ships of smaller classes and will promote the use of battle cruiser sized ships on field.


Kazaheid Zaknafein
Zaknafein Tactical Reconnaissance
#1085 - 2015-03-08 13:05:03 UTC
\

CCP created a spacail UI for Relics and Hecking Sites. Even if I think that the mini game is not very interestening because of it's lacks of strategy (the game is more a matter of luck and skill than tactical refelxion) I think that the idea is excellent.

Titans should have a special command UI. The Fleet cammander in the mothership could give his orders from this UI and attribute special bonuses for players that follows the ordders.

Dreadnoughts could have its own UI that give them the power to shoot at a bookmark with area effect weapons. The time between shoot and impact depend on the range were the dreads are.

Super carriers and Carriers could have a special UI to use their fighters and bombers to engage targets that are not on their grid. Smaller ships could design a target that the carriers could attack.[/quote]

This sounds good in theory, but in practice would be fairly hard to code; with the exception of the dreadnought one. Being able to bombard off-grid while in siege would be amazing.

Carriers should get a module that allows them to receive broadcasted targets, or give a module that allows ships to broadcast targets to fleet after a cycle; requiring cap and a high-slot the whole time. If module is deactivated the lock is lost for all fleet members. Make it function like boosting, where only the leaders can do it. (Huzzah for an on-grid only booster)
Hunter Anubis
50 Shades Of Blaster
#1086 - 2015-03-08 14:49:27 UTC
Panther X wrote:
Hunter Anubis wrote:
Rroff wrote:
Hunter Anubis wrote:

Also regarding carriers fighters they should work while carrier is in triage theres no logical reason for them to stop moving when their PILOTED unlike drones.


Is a bit silly they just stop responding the moment the carrier goes into triage - they should return to the carrier automatically - but understandable you can't use triage and fighters at the same time as in triage mode ostensibly all the ships capabilities are repurposed for triage operation hence the huge boost in local/remote tank.


but fighters are self suficient warp capable ships with their own pilots. No reason for them to get powered down or return to base


It's the way they are; triage requires all drones return to the ship.

Fighters are not drones

main diference between fighter and drone
Fighter - man piloted
Drone - remote control

So theres no real reason for fighters to stop working moment ship goes in to triage. Carrier requireing bandwith from drones for them to stop working should not affect individual fighter pilots
egyhenger
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1087 - 2015-03-08 20:41:07 UTC
Dart Aurel
Space Roar
#1088 - 2015-03-08 20:55:36 UTC
>Would you prefer that we ... left warping in, despite the absence of assist?

This. Even nerfed to the ground fighters should keep something that differs them from being just 'x-large drones'
Ramases Purvanen
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1089 - 2015-03-09 04:34:32 UTC
egyhenger wrote:
how it's started a long, long time ago...
http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/carriers-and-motherships-and-also-titans/



Hey lets introduce these awesome ships with all these awesome features and after years of enjoying the use of these ships and features we will take them off you!

Enjoy...

CCP as usual giving us the finger! EvilEvilEvilEvilEvilEvilEvilEvilEvil
Captain Luke Lonestar
Jarlhettur's Drop
United Federation of Conifers
#1090 - 2015-03-09 07:22:08 UTC
Admittedly, my stance on this may seem selfish, but understand that I've trained numerous characters for the better part of 12-15 months to have high skills in carriers, BECAUSE THEY WERE UNIQUE! Because they had abilities other ships did not. I understand if you want risk but it's a real crappy play on people that invest time and ISK for expensive skillbooks. Not to mention, if fighter ASSIGNMENT goes away, what about ASSIST? That is not currently an option even while on grid. Are we going to at least be given the option of utilizing a drone bunny like every other drone? Because that's what you're doing. Whether you like to admit it or not. Carriers might as well be sub-capital ships with sub-capital drones. There's ZERO differentiation once this change occurs.
Jessy Andersteen
In Wreck we thrust
#1091 - 2015-03-09 14:30:48 UTC
Best idea of the year CCP!
Alia Ravenswing
DARK HAT
#1092 - 2015-03-09 22:21:27 UTC
Nobody is using capital ships anyways, because of the Cyno nerf, and now you are making them even more useless?
Ramases Purvanen
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1093 - 2015-03-10 04:48:08 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
As announced last night on the o7 show, we have a list of high-impact balance changes planned for Scylla.

This thread is for discussing the proposed removal of fighter assist for carriers and super carriers.

This change being largely driven by 'skynetting' which is a tactic where carriers and super carriers can sit in near perfect safety at the edge of starbase shields and assign thousands of DPS worth of fighter drones to their fleet mates who can fly whatever ship they want *) , while wielding an enormous amount of damage. We feel this is not meeting our standards for risk vs reward and therefor would like to remove the ability to assist fighters. More details are covered in this dev blog.

A particular point of feedback that we are interested in surrounds the ability of fighters to warp. We know that in some circumstances it can be frustrating to have your fighters warp off grid to chase a target when you would rather have them move to another target on grid with you instead. We also know that fighter warping is unique and provides some interesting gameplay in some scenarios. Would you prefer that we removed the ability for fighters to warp or that we left warping in, despite the absence of assist?

Look forward to your feedback.



*) *snip* Posting of kill reports outside of the Crime & Punishment forum channel is prohibited. ISD Ezwal.


""looks forward to our feedback but doesn't respond to any in game mails""

yeah totes bro
azzimoth
batshitCrzy
#1094 - 2015-03-10 08:48:47 UTC  |  Edited by: azzimoth
as i read the dev blog I was sure the end result would be some sort of proximity rule .... you're removing gameplay not adding it .... your decision is bad and you should feel bad
Chanina
ASGARD HEAVY INDUSTRIES
#1095 - 2015-03-10 09:39:39 UTC
keeping the ability to warp is a good decision, its a unique point of fighters and makes them pretty handsome for having a carrier in PvE where you don't want to scoop drones every time.

So removing drone assignment entirely just because too small ships get too big DPS? Couldn't we just balance it? Make a fighter assignment use 10 Mbit/s of the receiving ship for each fighter. This would keep the availability for PvE use and limit the number of fighters a non drone boat can control.
Holly Hardcore
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1096 - 2015-03-10 11:07:47 UTC
Chanina wrote:
keeping the ability to warp is a good decision, its a unique point of fighters and makes them pretty handsome for having a carrier in PvE where you don't want to scoop drones every time.

So removing drone assignment entirely just because too small ships get too big DPS? Couldn't we just balance it? Make a fighter assignment use 10 Mbit/s of the receiving ship for each fighter. This would keep the availability for PvE use and limit the number of fighters a non drone boat can control.



1. As far as i know you can only delegate 5 fighters to an sub capital ship....
2. Oh no, i want scoop my drones after each site, cause i will do only
60Mill ticks not 70Mill like i do atm... lol

So, that's your problem and ccp is doing right if they care a s..t about that.

But it's an fact that skynet was never a problem before they gave module bonuses
to fighters. So ccp maybe you should see it as a mistake and remove that buff as
It was before.

You cant do that? Ok, than refund the players, give them their invested
Money back and remove the moms entierely from the Game.

Cause skill an super pilot and make the money for a soon worthless multi billion isk ship is a waste of money
and time that many subscribers invested for it.
Moccasin Bob
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1097 - 2015-03-10 13:09:19 UTC
So what's the status?
Where do carrier pilots stand?
Can we get details as to what's coming?
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#1098 - 2015-03-10 16:34:55 UTC
Holly Hardcore wrote:
2. Oh no, i want scoop my drones after each site, cause i will do only
60Mill ticks not 70Mill like i do atm... lol

The only way you're getting 60-70m ticks is if you're running with a buddy, or if you have a webbing / painting Huginn or Loki with you (which would result in a calculated 30-35m tick for two characters).
K 004
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1099 - 2015-03-10 16:47:38 UTC
Make assist dependable on ship's bandwidth (the one receiving assist) and make them (fighters) pointable.
XinPan Zeeh
Doomheim
#1100 - 2015-03-10 17:51:02 UTC
As usual, Eve-on-nerf is back. If you remove fighter's warping, carriers use will drop 99% and no one want this.