These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Discussion] Entosis Link Tactics and Ship Balance Part 2

First post First post First post
Author
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#261 - 2015-04-08 20:29:17 UTC
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
I dont get it... e link makes rr not work... so whats this panteon loki thing?


for control of the grid.


What i would do to counter this design wise... make rr stack and based on sig radius. Make sentry drones 50mb and make it so carries can't use sub capital drones. I would then add fittings for fighters and make tech two fighters.


those are some ridiculously huge changes to the game as a whole let alone just to alleviate a pantheon loki doctrine. Considering there are still many many ways of defeating that in game without touching game mechanics or balance.

if you're going to pitch into a discussion about game design then please don't post reactively with such insanely OP suggestions until you exhaust all other avenues of countering WITHIN the confines of the games combat systems.


TBH RR in its current form is way to big of a force multiplier. its one of the main reasons behind apex forces. Though if you were to make RR more tame it would go along long way to make the meta healthy.

As you point out you can have 50 archons all RR a Loki to make the only viable way to kill it is with alpha. This then causes you to bring enough dps to alpha threw a loki. though when you bring that much dps you need to tank dps and it just becomes a who can bring more ships game.

Now if RR had sig resolution built into the effectiveness of the mod it would to wonders to the game.

Lets use Capital RR as an example. Lets say now all RR has sig resolution built into it and the average sig resolution of a capital RR is 1000m or 1km.

now most capital ships have a sig radius greater then 1km so a capital ship will rep another capital ship for 100% of potential rep. but if that archon wants to rep its buddy in the battleship which has a sig radius of 400m this would mean that RR from that archon only applies at 40% effectiveness or in real numbers we go from 1500 armor repped per cycle to 600...

so now you would need over 2 capital reps on the loki to eq the amount repped on another archon.

THis would do wonders as typically RR mixed with crusiers which have low sig radius are the current meta. Though if Logistics ships and carriers could no longer rep a crusier for full amount this would then have drastic changes on the meta and might force bigger ships like BC and BS into the mix.

Also this is not a reactionary post to one fleet setup... its something i felt should have been added to the game when CCP increased the EHP of all ships and boosted Logistics ships back in 2007. That one change pushed pvp to escalate to the current meta we have today

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#262 - 2015-04-08 20:34:14 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:

Lets use Capital RR as an example. Lets say now all RR has sig resolution built into it and the average sig resolution of a capital RR is 1000m or 1km.

now most capital ships have a sig radius greater then 1km so a capital ship will rep another capital ship for 100% of potential rep. but if that archon wants to rep its buddy in the battleship which has a sig radius of 400m this would mean that RR from that archon only applies at 40% effectiveness or in real numbers we go from 1500 armor repped per cycle to 600...


This idea is good idea.
Fredric Wolf
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#263 - 2015-04-08 21:07:28 UTC
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:

Lets use Capital RR as an example. Lets say now all RR has sig resolution built into it and the average sig resolution of a capital RR is 1000m or 1km.

now most capital ships have a sig radius greater then 1km so a capital ship will rep another capital ship for 100% of potential rep. but if that archon wants to rep its buddy in the battleship which has a sig radius of 400m this would mean that RR from that archon only applies at 40% effectiveness or in real numbers we go from 1500 armor repped per cycle to 600...


This idea is good idea.


So I like where this is going. Now I will show you a few ways in which this would not work. 1 Armor ships would not have an equal leg because Shield ships tank increase sig size. Also MWD on anything not a frig or AHAC you are at or over 1k. These are just a couple easy hole in this. I do think there could be some ideas to make logi work but not make it the n+1. Maybe when you are receiving RR your resists are lowered. That could be tied into lore somehow. It would also make stacking reps make your ship very vulnerable as after so many reps your resists reach zero. Not a very fleshed out idea but an idea.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#264 - 2015-04-08 21:54:23 UTC  |  Edited by: MeBiatch
Fredric Wolf wrote:
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:

Lets use Capital RR as an example. Lets say now all RR has sig resolution built into it and the average sig resolution of a capital RR is 1000m or 1km.

now most capital ships have a sig radius greater then 1km so a capital ship will rep another capital ship for 100% of potential rep. but if that archon wants to rep its buddy in the battleship which has a sig radius of 400m this would mean that RR from that archon only applies at 40% effectiveness or in real numbers we go from 1500 armor repped per cycle to 600...


This idea is good idea.


So I like where this is going. Now I will show you a few ways in which this would not work. 1 Armor ships would not have an equal leg because Shield ships tank increase sig size. Also MWD on anything not a frig or AHAC you are at or over 1k. These are just a couple easy hole in this. I do think there could be some ideas to make logi work but not make it the n+1. Maybe when you are receiving RR your resists are lowered. That could be tied into lore somehow. It would also make stacking reps make your ship very vulnerable as after so many reps your resists reach zero. Not a very fleshed out idea but an idea.


Two oprions. You make a new metric on unmodified sig radius . Example all bs for rr calc will have hard sig of 400m.

or the fact that making your ship larger will increase rr effectiveness but at the same time make it easier to hit.

Personally i would prefer option 1 as its simple to understand and implement

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights
#265 - 2015-04-08 22:43:17 UTC
One, I disagree that RR is broken. Since it's not the point of the thread I won't elaborate.

Two. I'm a little worried about all structures being flippable with the entosis link. I'm not sure if this is covered, but you're going to kill casual HS industrialists that set up a couple days of production. They'll show back up, and they'll have to play collect my cans in space, and try to flip the asset they bought back into their possession.

Maybe I'm missing something but that sounds screwed up. There should be some onus on the attacker to have to bring a decent sized force to dislodge an asset I've purchased and am using - rather than 1 dude noticing that there's no one at a structure and throwing 10 minutes of time at it.

This is especially multiplied in wormholes where logistics is already a huge pain in the ****. You have a slow weekend (i.e. people are traveling, doing yardwork, whatever) and you log in Sunday night - bam now you don't own any assets. Hope you logged off in a probing ship, so you can scout a hole and return with an entosis link.

Flipping Sov? Sure, go for it - it is what it is. Flipping personal/corporate structures? The disruption to game play this will cause to such a huge piece of the player base is just annoyingly large. There has to be a better way here, I thought the thought behind POS mechanics was it should be semi difficult require some time and assets to wipe out a tower. This puts everything on the defender, which is a complete reverse.

So if I grab an entosis link and throw it on an SOE ship I can troll wormhole corps during their prime time should they not log in and force them to play capture the flag with me or forfeit their assets
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#266 - 2015-04-08 23:19:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Rowells
Noxisia Arkana wrote:
One, I disagree that RR is broken. Since it's not the point of the thread I won't elaborate.

Two. I'm a little worried about all structures being flippable with the entosis link. I'm not sure if this is covered, but you're going to kill casual HS industrialists that set up a couple days of production. They'll show back up, and they'll have to play collect my cans in space, and try to flip the asset they bought back into their possession.

Maybe I'm missing something but that sounds screwed up. There should be some onus on the attacker to have to bring a decent sized force to dislodge an asset I've purchased and am using - rather than 1 dude noticing that there's no one at a structure and throwing 10 minutes of time at it.

This is especially multiplied in wormholes where logistics is already a huge pain in the ****. You have a slow weekend (i.e. people are traveling, doing yardwork, whatever) and you log in Sunday night - bam now you don't own any assets. Hope you logged off in a probing ship, so you can scout a hole and return with an entosis link.

Flipping Sov? Sure, go for it - it is what it is. Flipping personal/corporate structures? The disruption to game play this will cause to such a huge piece of the player base is just annoyingly large. There has to be a better way here, I thought the thought behind POS mechanics was it should be semi difficult require some time and assets to wipe out a tower. This puts everything on the defender, which is a complete reverse.

So if I grab an entosis link and throw it on an SOE ship I can troll wormhole corps during their prime time should they not log in and force them to play capture the flag with me or forfeit their assets

If no one in your wh can be bothered to check on it once every 24hrs that is your own prerogative. Also, structure guns. Use them. Also, seeing as it took one person to set it up, I don't see how a minimum of one to take it down is that bad.

Speaking of which, did anyone find out if the notifications will be api?
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#267 - 2015-04-08 23:28:29 UTC
I was thinking about this too. I think the onus should be on the attacking alliance not the defending alliance . Let me explain. One of the things i hate about the current system is you have to rep structures. In the new system even if the other side doesn't show ypu still have to do the 10 annoms per reinforced structure . This imo is bad design. I think if the attacking alliance does not show for the fight you shouldn't be forced to rep/elink stuff.

I would make the first 5 capture annoms have a 30 min lifetime If no elink from the opposing alliace is initiated in any 5 annoms.

This way you only have to active defense when the enemy shows and limits the other side of the grind

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#268 - 2015-04-08 23:31:39 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
I was thinking about this too. I think the onus should be on the attacking alliance not the defending alliance . Let me explain. One of the things i hate about the current system is you have to rep structures. In the new system even if the other side doesn't show ypu still have to do the 10 annoms per reinforced structure . This imo is bad design. I think if the attacking alliance does not show for the fight you shouldn't be forced to rep/elink stuff.

I would make the first 5 capture annoms have a 30 min lifetime If no elink from the opposing alliace is initiated in any 5 annoms.

This way you only have to active defense when the enemy shows and limits the other side of the grind

Will there even be capture points in wh space?
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#269 - 2015-04-08 23:41:10 UTC
Rowells wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
I was thinking about this too. I think the onus should be on the attacking alliance not the defending alliance . Let me explain. One of the things i hate about the current system is you have to rep structures. In the new system even if the other side doesn't show ypu still have to do the 10 annoms per reinforced structure . This imo is bad design. I think if the attacking alliance does not show for the fight you shouldn't be forced to rep/elink stuff.

I would make the first 5 capture annoms have a 30 min lifetime If no elink from the opposing alliace is initiated in any 5 annoms.

This way you only have to active defense when the enemy shows and limits the other side of the grind

Will there even be capture points in wh space?


Not from what i understand unless they group wh systems into constellations.

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Nolak Ataru
Worm Holers Anonymous
Hole Control
#270 - 2015-04-08 23:51:39 UTC
How is it off topic to point out what the new FOTM would be after this change goes into play, and to reply to the incorrect points you attempted to bring up? I will wager you 500m that Boot Domis and Pantheons will be FOTM for Entosis Sov.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#271 - 2015-04-09 01:15:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Nevyn Auscent
Nolak Ataru wrote:
How is it off topic to point out what the new FOTM would be after this change goes into play, and to reply to the incorrect points you attempted to bring up? I will wager you 500m that Boot Domis and Pantheons will be FOTM for Entosis Sov.

You did notice you can't RR someone using the Entosis, you seem to have missed that small issue in your theories.
And so people will field BS's and Capitals in Entosis Sov, that's a 'bad' thing having people field full fleets? And here I thought most people were complaining that no-one will field anything of value.
Nolak Ataru
Worm Holers Anonymous
Hole Control
#272 - 2015-04-09 02:24:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Nolak Ataru
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Nolak Ataru wrote:
How is it off topic to point out what the new FOTM would be after this change goes into play, and to reply to the incorrect points you attempted to bring up? I will wager you 500m that Boot Domis and Pantheons will be FOTM for Entosis Sov.

You did notice you can't RR someone using the Entosis, you seem to have missed that small issue in your theories.
And so people will field BS's and Capitals in Entosis Sov, that's a 'bad' thing having people field full fleets? And here I thought most people were complaining that no-one will field anything of value.

The Domis and Pantheons would be used to control the grid, not necessarily to hold the Entosis link itself.
It's a "bad thing" when it's "Whoever manages to deploy their Archons first gets the system". There's a reason the Pantheon doctrine was so powerful that BL or whoever was going to drop sniper Alpha Naglfars instead of DPS Moros: Serious EHP coupled with capital RR and 1100 DPS Sentry Drones (if my math's correct), the ability to refit on-the-spot, two pickles, ketchup, hold the onions, on a sesame seed bun.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#273 - 2015-04-09 02:26:46 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Nolak Ataru wrote:
How is it off topic to point out what the new FOTM would be after this change goes into play, and to reply to the incorrect points you attempted to bring up? I will wager you 500m that Boot Domis and Pantheons will be FOTM for Entosis Sov.

You did notice you can't RR someone using the Entosis, you seem to have missed that small issue in your theories.
And so people will field BS's and Capitals in Entosis Sov, that's a 'bad' thing having people field enveloping fleet sizes resulting in an Apex force? And here I thought most people were complaining that no-one will want to fight in tidi forever.


FYP

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#274 - 2015-04-09 02:29:12 UTC  |  Edited by: MeBiatch
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Nolak Ataru wrote:
How is it off topic to point out what the new FOTM would be after this change goes into play, and to reply to the incorrect points you attempted to bring up? I will wager you 500m that Boot Domis and Pantheons will be FOTM for Entosis Sov.

You did notice you can't RR someone using the Entosis, you seem to have missed that small issue in your theories.
And so people will field BS's and Capitals in Entosis Sov, that's a 'bad' thing having people field full fleets? And here I thought most people were complaining that no-one will field anything of value.

The Domis and Pantheons would be used to control the grid, not necessarily to hold the Entosis link itself.
It's a "bad thing" when it's "Whoever manages to deploy their Archons first gets the system". There's a reason the Pantheon doctrine was so powerful that BL or whoever was going to drop sniper Alpha Naglfars instead of DPS Moros: Serious EHP coupled with capital RR and 1100 DPS Sentry Drones (if my math's correct), the ability to refit on-the-spot, two pickles, ketchup, hold the onions, on a sesame seed bun.


how about this the extra drone or fighter per level for the carrier bonus gets changed to fighter per level. that way you can only use 5 sentries or 10 if you use 5 drone control units. so take that 1100 dps and change it to 550

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Nolak Ataru
Worm Holers Anonymous
Hole Control
#275 - 2015-04-09 02:34:36 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
how about this the extra drone or fighter per level for the carrier bonus gets changed to fighter per level. that way you can only use 5 sentries or 10 if you use 5 drone control units. so take that 1100 dps and change it to 550


OK..... that's still ~5000 DPS assigned to each Loki. 255 / fleet, call it 230 for actual people non-boosting (i dont know the actual numbers) that's 23 "squads" of 9 carriers + 1 loki, which equals 115,000 DPS / 255 man fleet.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#276 - 2015-04-09 03:23:42 UTC  |  Edited by: MeBiatch
Nolak Ataru wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
how about this the extra drone or fighter per level for the carrier bonus gets changed to fighter per level. that way you can only use 5 sentries or 10 if you use 5 drone control units. so take that 1100 dps and change it to 550


OK..... that's still ~5000 DPS assigned to each Loki. 255 / fleet, call it 230 for actual people non-boosting (i dont know the actual numbers) that's 23 "squads" of 9 carriers + 1 loki, which equals 115,000 DPS / 255 man fleet.


yeah and you are going to have 1020 pilots for each structure capture? remember you need to take 10 annoms over the constellation and you get 5 annoms at a time.

example you have a system with an ihub an outpost and a tcu... each come out around the same time you now have 15 active capture annoms around 5 systems.... you have to figure out how to divide your forces...

now lets say that all 5 systems have all been reinforced and everything comes out at the same time now you have 5x3= 15 x 5 =75 capture annoms over the constallation.

so that 115,000 dps is really 1533dps per annom.

moreover if ccp added my ideas on RR then those loki's would be meat and your carriers would have to self target. and at that point a bunch of celestis will shut the fleet down... which will mean you need a fleet to clear the celestis. which means they need to a fleet to counter that and so on...

its simple fix RR and the new system is promising... if you dont then you are just replacing structure grind with elink grind only difference is the use of the apex force.

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Nolak Ataru
Worm Holers Anonymous
Hole Control
#277 - 2015-04-09 04:31:51 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
yeah and you are going to have 1020 pilots for each structure capture? remember you need to take 10 annoms over the constellation and you get 5 annoms at a time.
example you have a system with an ihub an outpost and a tcu... each come out around the same time you now have 15 active capture annoms around 5 systems.... you have to figure out how to divide your forces...
now lets say that all 5 systems have all been reinforced and everything comes out at the same time now you have 5x3= 15 x 5 =75 capture annoms over the constallation.
so that 115,000 dps is really 1533dps per annom.
moreover if ccp added my ideas on RR then those loki's would be meat and your carriers would have to self target. and at that point a bunch of celestis will shut the fleet down... which will mean you need a fleet to clear the celestis. which means they need to a fleet to counter that and so on...
its simple fix RR and the new system is promising... if you dont then you are just replacing structure grind with elink grind only difference is the use of the apex force.

No, you just need 1x fleet per gate, really, with a smattering of insta-locking ceptors and a handful of bubbles in a cargo container or two. And you're assuming there's only 1x 255-man fleet in system. We pushed 6-700 last system, and I don't know how many we crammed into ZXB.
Additionally, a seriously tanked Loki has 500K+ EHP with Mid Slaves, IIRC. You can swap to 1m EHP long-point Proteii easily. It doesn't matter how small it's sig is if 9x archons are sending 1x Capital Repper (1500 / cycle) his way; he'll get his reps and eat his cake too.

As for Celestis: Remote Sensor Boosters are a thing. Same with Falcons and Projected ECCM.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#278 - 2015-04-09 09:13:36 UTC
And? If you want to push that much into a system/constellation you should win, and obviously you care about that location.
You are trying to argue that superior numbers of heavy fleets shouldn't win.

The point of the Entosis link is that you don't have to escalate that high just to structure grind, not that you can't.
Nolak Ataru
Worm Holers Anonymous
Hole Control
#279 - 2015-04-09 12:26:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Nolak Ataru
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
And? If you want to push that much into a system/constellation you should win, and obviously you care about that location.
You are trying to argue that superior numbers of heavy fleets shouldn't win.
The point of the Entosis link is that you don't have to escalate that high just to structure grind, not that you can't.


Except that they *will* escalate 100% of the time. For the last five blockade bashes I was on, we moved into position at least a half-hour early with Boot Domis and Napocs and parked our fleets on each gate, with a Harpy fleet patrolling outside and a supercap fleet inside ready to backup whichever Domi fleet got attacked. The Harpies dealt with anything sub-BC, the Domis dropped their drones and went to watch football, and the supercaps did the structure grind. What makes anyone here think that this combined force will not continue to happen? Combined arms has been military tactics since donkeys years, and it used to be the thing in EVE as well until carriers became so prevalent. CCP's wishing themselves back before capital proliferation, back to when a titan kill was talked about for the rest of the month. Unfortunately, it won't work.

e: And we pushed so much into a system that Darkness / Kadeshi didn't dare attempt to contest us.
Xe'Cara'eos
A Big Enough Lever
#280 - 2015-04-09 13:18:55 UTC
I think the idea of entosis is to cause a state where it's relatively easy to go round the side of big fleets, and start harassing their home systems, so the attackers also need to consider their own defense, if only from small nuisances

For posting an idea into F&I: come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it..... If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.