These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

People complaining about boosters

First post
Author
Ares Desideratus
UNSAFE SPACE
#81 - 2015-06-26 23:33:24 UTC
Haatakan Reppola wrote:


So your saying logistics dont help with the fights or that boosters dont help the fleet?
Logistics and boosters change the outcome of an equal fight, they dont to much for blobbers tho

They don't directly affect the ships that their fleet members fight against, no. So I don't see how anyone can claim they belong on killmails of ships which they did not directly affect. They passively help their fleet members. It would make more sense to put them on the lossmails of the fleet members they are boosting, but to put them on killmails of ships which they had no direct effect on is silly.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#82 - 2015-06-26 23:39:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Ares Desideratus wrote:
Haatakan Reppola wrote:


So your saying logistics dont help with the fights or that boosters dont help the fleet?
Logistics and boosters change the outcome of an equal fight, they dont to much for blobbers tho

They don't directly affect the ships that their fleet members fight against, no. So I don't see how anyone can claim they belong on killmails of ships which they did not directly affect. They passively help their fleet members. It would make more sense to put them on the lossmails of the fleet members they are boosting, but to put them on killmails of ships which they had no direct effect on is silly.


Dont think even a remotely a fair way to look at it.

Its called a battle report, not a loss report.
Ares Desideratus
UNSAFE SPACE
#83 - 2015-06-26 23:41:34 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
[quote=Ares Desideratus]As for killmail whoring, ill say yet again, any contribution, not matter how minor is useful. It isnt misrepresented, its very clear to see at a glance who were the main participants in an engagement.

If it were possible (which is probably isnt), id even go s far as to put specialist roles on the BR too. Perhaps someones roll is just to stay out of range and jam a loki to minimise the hostile fleets ability to apply damage. Somehow that griffin should be recorded even if that loki did not die since its role is very important.

They are misrepresented, and here's why,

A kill is a kill. But the way killmails work currently, you take one kill, and you have to multiply that kill by the amount of people who whor'ed on it, so that every single killmailwhore gets a "kill", while in reality there was only one kill.

So you take a single kill. And let's say 50 guys contributed to it. That automatically gets turned into 50 separate kills, according to the killboards, because every single one of those players who contributed to the kill (but didn't actually get the kill), technically gets the kill in terms of the killboard. It's actually quite sickening.

I won't argue that "any contribution, no matter how minor is useful." No rational player will deny this. But this absolutely does not mean that every single guy who whor's on a killmail should get it registered as a "kill" for his killboard statistics.

There are ways to reward and acknowledge a player's contributions to a kill without actually rewarding him with a kill. Simply put, you shouldn't get over 1,000 kills on your killboard simply because you did 1% of the damage on a thousand different killmails. A minor recognition of your participation in said killmails, however, would of course be acceptable.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#84 - 2015-06-26 23:42:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Ares Desideratus wrote:

A kill is a kill. But the way killmails work currently, you take one kill, and you have to multiply that kill by the amount of people who whor'ed on it, so that every single killmailwhore gets a "kill", while in reality there was only one kill.


That would only be misrepresenting, if there was a single player out there that wasnt aware of that fact.

it gets recorded as a single kill on 50 people board, but its just a single kill and no one is under any other impression.
Ares Desideratus
UNSAFE SPACE
#85 - 2015-06-26 23:43:24 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:


Dont think even a remotely a fair way to look at it.

Its called a battle report, not a loss report.

So we should put spy alts, , covert ops alts and anything else that may have a minor passive effect on a battle onto killmails too, then, right?
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#86 - 2015-06-26 23:45:11 UTC
Ares Desideratus wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:


Dont think even a remotely a fair way to look at it.

Its called a battle report, not a loss report.

So we should put spy alts, , covert ops alts and anything else that may have a minor passive effect on a battle onto killmails too, then, right?


Within reason, why not?
Ares Desideratus
UNSAFE SPACE
#87 - 2015-06-26 23:45:26 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Ares Desideratus wrote:

A kill is a kill. But the way killmails work currently, you take one kill, and you have to multiply that kill by the amount of people who whor'ed on it, so that every single killmailwhore gets a "kill", while in reality there was only one kill.


That would only be misrepresenting, if there was a single player out there that wasnt aware of that fact.

No, it is misrepresenting, because that's the way the killboards view it. If all the players are aware of the fact then there is no reason to keep it the way it is. It's simply a tool to build up blob-F1-players's killboard statistics.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#88 - 2015-06-26 23:48:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Ares Desideratus wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Ares Desideratus wrote:

A kill is a kill. But the way killmails work currently, you take one kill, and you have to multiply that kill by the amount of people who whor'ed on it, so that every single killmailwhore gets a "kill", while in reality there was only one kill.


That would only be misrepresenting, if there was a single player out there that wasnt aware of that fact.

No, it is misrepresenting, because that's the way the killboards view it. If all the players are aware of the fact then there is no reason to keep it the way it is. It's simply a tool to build up blob-F1-players's killboard statistics.


But there is no reason to change it. Everyone is already aware that some kills are solo and some are not. All the details are on the mail.

If you could clarify what problem you are trying to fix i could start understanding you.

As i undestand it, you want every kill to look like a solo fight?

How is it possible that someone with an IQ of more than 65 could thing that is an improvement over what we have now?
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Space-Brewery-Association
#89 - 2015-06-26 23:49:20 UTC
Ares Desideratus wrote:
Haatakan Reppola wrote:


So your saying logistics dont help with the fights or that boosters dont help the fleet?
Logistics and boosters change the outcome of an equal fight, they dont to much for blobbers tho

They don't directly affect the ships that their fleet members fight against, no. So I don't see how anyone can claim they belong on killmails of ships which they did not directly affect. They passively help their fleet members. It would make more sense to put them on the lossmails of the fleet members they are boosting, but to put them on killmails of ships which they had no direct effect on is silly.


I think the idea is to put icon's of the links on those handing out blows on the killmail.

There is a lot they could do with enhancing killmail data, depending on how it would affect performance.

Under the assumption that the killmail can theoretically be a delayed process run on a report from the game logs, it should be possible to add a number of items:

  • like a timestamp for each pilot's first agression
  • -ve HP damage for Logi that tried to save the target (wouldn't it be great to analyse Logi data?),
  • all ewar types used on the targets loss
  • timestamp for the first warp disrupt/scram/interdiction
  • booster affects (drugs)
  • gang link markers


I'm no engineer so I cannot comment on the practical stuff but for enhancing gameplay analysis and bragging rights, a lot could be added to enhance kill mail and battle report data.

Current km's and killboards do not a story tell, not even close.

"Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"

Ares Desideratus
UNSAFE SPACE
#90 - 2015-06-26 23:50:58 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Ares Desideratus wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:


Dont think even a remotely a fair way to look at it.

Its called a battle report, not a loss report.

So we should put spy alts, , covert ops alts and anything else that may have a minor passive effect on a battle onto killmails too, then, right?


Within reason, why not?

Because it is not within reason.

You might as well put the miners and industrialists who built your weapons onto the killmail, too, then.

No, I think that what's within reason, is that anyone who directly affects a ship with a module, should be put on the killmail. You can't start putting people on killmails who had literally no participation in the battle, and that includes the fleet booster. He's not in the battle, and he doesn't have to be anywhere near it. He's riding off to the sun smoking a cigar.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#91 - 2015-06-26 23:55:05 UTC
Ares Desideratus wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Ares Desideratus wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:


Dont think even a remotely a fair way to look at it.

Its called a battle report, not a loss report.

So we should put spy alts, , covert ops alts and anything else that may have a minor passive effect on a battle onto killmails too, then, right?


Within reason, why not?

Because it is not within reason.

You might as well put the miners and industrialists who built your weapons onto the killmail, too, then.

No, I think that what's within reason, is that anyone who directly affects a ship with a module, should be put on the killmail. You can't start putting people on killmails who had literally no participation in the battle, and that includes the fleet booster. He's not in the battle, and he doesn't have to be anywhere near it. He's riding off to the sun smoking a cigar.


Thats some crazy slippery slope fallacy there mate.

If you are performing a direct role in a fight (which includes boosters and logistics), then its a fair consideration to mention them on killmails. I understand you have a stupid idea of what killboards should be, i just dont understand your motivation.
Ares Desideratus
UNSAFE SPACE
#92 - 2015-06-26 23:58:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Ares Desideratus
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Ares Desideratus wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Ares Desideratus wrote:

A kill is a kill. But the way killmails work currently, you take one kill, and you have to multiply that kill by the amount of people who whor'ed on it, so that every single killmailwhore gets a "kill", while in reality there was only one kill.


That would only be misrepresenting, if there was a single player out there that wasnt aware of that fact.

No, it is misrepresenting, because that's the way the killboards view it. If all the players are aware of the fact then there is no reason to keep it the way it is. It's simply a tool to build up blob-F1-players's killboard statistics.


But there is no reason to change it. Everyone is already aware that some kills are solo and some are not. All the details are on the mail.

If you could clarify what problem you are trying to fix i could start understanding you.

As i undestand it, you want every kill to look like a solo fight?

The problem is players are rewarded with kills that they didn't get. You shouldn't be acknowledged as having destroyed a ship if you merely contributed to the destruction of the ship.

I don't want every kill to look like a solo fight. As I said, you can acknowledge player participation on the kill and contribution on the kill without stating on their killboard that they were the ones who got the kill.

You're right there's no reason to fix it. There's no reason to do anything actually. Might as well just kill ourselves then. Oh wait there's no reason to do that either. Oh well.

Oh wait, there is a reason. Yeah, the killboards don't make sense. We should probably try fixing things that don't make sense.
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Space-Brewery-Association
#93 - 2015-06-26 23:58:57 UTC
Ares Desideratus wrote:

There are ways to reward and acknowledge a player's contributions to a kill without actually rewarding him with a kill. Simply put, you shouldn't get over 1,000 kills on your killboard simply because you did 1% of the damage on a thousand different killmails. A minor recognition of your participation in said killmails, however, would of course be acceptable.



Killmails and killboards are completely separate entities and need to be treated as such.

However, it's pretty unfair to expect anyone to develop a killboard that is a better story teller than the current crop when the killmails are so restricted.

In addition, I'd be surprised if you've never been involved in a nice kill that took a very inventive cov-ops probing tackler to land the prey before the rest of a fleet blobbed it and did more than 1% damage. You can start filtering out single aspects and loose much of the story.

One of the skills I would celebrate most is the art of catching a target. They might not do any damage (eg: first interdictor on the field on a supercap kill).

"Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"

Yang Aurilen
The Mjolnir Bloc
Templis CALSF
#94 - 2015-06-27 00:00:20 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Ares Desideratus wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Ares Desideratus wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:


Dont think even a remotely a fair way to look at it.

Its called a battle report, not a loss report.

So we should put spy alts, , covert ops alts and anything else that may have a minor passive effect on a battle onto killmails too, then, right?


Within reason, why not?

Because it is not within reason.

You might as well put the miners and industrialists who built your weapons onto the killmail, too, then.

No, I think that what's within reason, is that anyone who directly affects a ship with a module, should be put on the killmail. You can't start putting people on killmails who had literally no participation in the battle, and that includes the fleet booster. He's not in the battle, and he doesn't have to be anywhere near it. He's riding off to the sun smoking a cigar.


Thats some crazy slippery slope fallacy there mate.

If you are performing a direct role in a fight (which includes boosters and logistics), then its a fair consideration to mention them on killmails. I understand you have a stupid idea of what killboards should be, i just dont understand your motivation.


It's just a case of sour grapes. Or just plain butthurt that their E-Bushido was not honoured. As much as I hate your linked garmur links are fine atm. It was fun making special snowflake fits trying to catch you.

Post with your NPC alt main and not your main main alt!

Ares Desideratus
UNSAFE SPACE
#95 - 2015-06-27 00:03:31 UTC
Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote:
Ares Desideratus wrote:

There are ways to reward and acknowledge a player's contributions to a kill without actually rewarding him with a kill. Simply put, you shouldn't get over 1,000 kills on your killboard simply because you did 1% of the damage on a thousand different killmails. A minor recognition of your participation in said killmails, however, would of course be acceptable.



Killmails and killboards are completely separate entities and need to be treated as such.

However, it's pretty unfair to expect anyone to develop a killboard that is a better story teller than the current crop when the killmails are so restricted.

In addition, I'd be surprised if you've never been involved in a nice kill that took a very inventive cov-ops probing tackler to land the prey before the rest of a fleet blobbed it and did more than 1% damage. You can start filtering out single aspects and loose much of the story.

One of the skills I would celebrate most is the art of catching a target. They might not do any damage (eg: first interdictor on the field on a supercap kill).

You can tell the story without lying about it, though. The killboards state that Random Player got a kill while in the actual game all he did was tracking disrupt the target for two seconds while somebody else got the kill. To say that the player who tracking disrupted him for two seconds got the kill is an outright lie, but that's what the killboards say, all of the time.

You can still show who contributed to the kill. Just don't give them a "kill" on their statistics that they didn't get.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#96 - 2015-06-27 00:07:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Ares Desideratus wrote:
Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote:
Ares Desideratus wrote:

There are ways to reward and acknowledge a player's contributions to a kill without actually rewarding him with a kill. Simply put, you shouldn't get over 1,000 kills on your killboard simply because you did 1% of the damage on a thousand different killmails. A minor recognition of your participation in said killmails, however, would of course be acceptable.



Killmails and killboards are completely separate entities and need to be treated as such.

However, it's pretty unfair to expect anyone to develop a killboard that is a better story teller than the current crop when the killmails are so restricted.

In addition, I'd be surprised if you've never been involved in a nice kill that took a very inventive cov-ops probing tackler to land the prey before the rest of a fleet blobbed it and did more than 1% damage. You can start filtering out single aspects and loose much of the story.

One of the skills I would celebrate most is the art of catching a target. They might not do any damage (eg: first interdictor on the field on a supercap kill).

You can tell the story without lying about it, though. The killboards state that Random Player got a kill while in the actual game all he did was tracking disrupt the target for two seconds while somebody else got the kill. To say that the player who tracking disrupted him for two seconds got the kill is an outright lie, but that's what the killboards say, all of the time.

You can still show who contributed to the kill. Just don't give them a "kill" on their statistics that they didn't get.



removing information from killmails doesnt help tell a wider story, by definition.

Only adding information does.

No one that has any experience in EVE is currently being mislead by killboard statistics and what they represent.

Your true motivations here are clearly hidden because what you have said has zero consistency.
Ares Desideratus
UNSAFE SPACE
#97 - 2015-06-27 00:12:29 UTC
You don't have to remove any of the information from the killmail. I never once said that.

What you can do is give players a "kill" on their killboard when they were the one who in fact got the kill. But not when they whored on the kill with some electronic module.
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Space-Brewery-Association
#98 - 2015-06-27 00:20:36 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Ares Desideratus wrote:
Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote:
Ares Desideratus wrote:

There are ways to reward and acknowledge a player's contributions to a kill without actually rewarding him with a kill. Simply put, you shouldn't get over 1,000 kills on your killboard simply because you did 1% of the damage on a thousand different killmails. A minor recognition of your participation in said killmails, however, would of course be acceptable.



Killmails and killboards are completely separate entities and need to be treated as such.

However, it's pretty unfair to expect anyone to develop a killboard that is a better story teller than the current crop when the killmails are so restricted.

In addition, I'd be surprised if you've never been involved in a nice kill that took a very inventive cov-ops probing tackler to land the prey before the rest of a fleet blobbed it and did more than 1% damage. You can start filtering out single aspects and loose much of the story.

One of the skills I would celebrate most is the art of catching a target. They might not do any damage (eg: first interdictor on the field on a supercap kill).

You can tell the story without lying about it, though. The killboards state that Random Player got a kill while in the actual game all he did was tracking disrupt the target for two seconds while somebody else got the kill. To say that the player who tracking disrupted him for two seconds got the kill is an outright lie, but that's what the killboards say, all of the time.

You can still show who contributed to the kill. Just don't give them a "kill" on their statistics that they didn't get.



removing information from killmails doesnt help tell a wider story, by definition.

Only adding information does.

No one that has any experience in EVE is currently being mislead by killboard statistics and what they represent.

Your true motivations here are clearly hidden because what you have said has zero consistency.



It is the story that is important.

If I can browse a killboard that has access to timestamps for actions and lists of effects on ships involved (not just the target) it gives me a quick overview on the story of the fight.

Why do you think so many people record and show their PvP footage - and even this is limited from a single POV?

Once again. Data on a killboard is down to the Killboard developer, not CCP.

However, I am all in favour of CCP improving killmail data that is API passed on. The current kill data feels like it's from the 2nd generation kill stats from 2006 or so.

Sometimes a single jam cycle from a Griffin is the only reason the only ship holding point was able to survive and kill the target. Just another example of lost story by using a filter (censor) on certain attributes.

"Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"

Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#99 - 2015-06-27 00:29:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Ares Desideratus wrote:
Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote:
Ares Desideratus wrote:

There are ways to reward and acknowledge a player's contributions to a kill without actually rewarding him with a kill. Simply put, you shouldn't get over 1,000 kills on your killboard simply because you did 1% of the damage on a thousand different killmails. A minor recognition of your participation in said killmails, however, would of course be acceptable.



Killmails and killboards are completely separate entities and need to be treated as such.

However, it's pretty unfair to expect anyone to develop a killboard that is a better story teller than the current crop when the killmails are so restricted.

In addition, I'd be surprised if you've never been involved in a nice kill that took a very inventive cov-ops probing tackler to land the prey before the rest of a fleet blobbed it and did more than 1% damage. You can start filtering out single aspects and loose much of the story.

One of the skills I would celebrate most is the art of catching a target. They might not do any damage (eg: first interdictor on the field on a supercap kill).

You can tell the story without lying about it, though. The killboards state that Random Player got a kill while in the actual game all he did was tracking disrupt the target for two seconds while somebody else got the kill. To say that the player who tracking disrupted him for two seconds got the kill is an outright lie, but that's what the killboards say, all of the time.

You can still show who contributed to the kill. Just don't give them a "kill" on their statistics that they didn't get.



removing information from killmails doesnt help tell a wider story, by definition.

Only adding information does.

No one that has any experience in EVE is currently being mislead by killboard statistics and what they represent.

Your true motivations here are clearly hidden because what you have said has zero consistency.



It is the story that is important.

If I can browse a killboard that has access to timestamps for actions and lists of effects on ships involved (not just the target) it gives me a quick overview on the story of the fight.

Why do you think so many people record and show their PvP footage - and even this is limited from a single POV?

Once again. Data on a killboard is down to the Killboard developer, not CCP.

However, I am all in favour of CCP improving killmail data that is API passed on. The current kill data feels like it's from the 2nd generation kill stats from 2006 or so.

Sometimes a single jam cycle from a Griffin is the only reason the only ship holding point was able to survive and kill the target. Just another example of lost story by using a filter (censor) on certain attributes.


Why are you replying to me? i already gave that exact example of how killboards could be imporved.

I think ares wants the total kills to represent final blows rather than kills participated in. If thats all then whatver. Seems like something someone who already puts too much credence into killboards would worry about. Also seems like a lot of fleet roles would never get a final blow so kill totals would only really represent those who only fly dps who might never get a final blow should other roles not be fulfilled.
Ares Desideratus
UNSAFE SPACE
#100 - 2015-06-27 00:37:08 UTC
I apologize for my unintelligible posts.

But yeah, that's basically what I was suggesting. Killboards shouldn't give players kills for things they did not kill.