These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
First pagePrevious page8910
 

The Best Feature Idea I've ever read

Author
FeralShadow
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#181 - 2012-01-11 19:34:22 UTC
It's funny, most of the posters who claim they don't support the idea all sound in their reasoning like: "HERP I DONT LIKE THINKING FOR MYSELF! THE BLOB IS PERFECT bECAUSE THE FC TELLS US WHAT TO SHOOT AND EVERYBODY SHOOTS IT THERES NO THINKING EXCEPT FOR FC. IF THE TACTICS WERE CHANGED TO BE MORE FUN AND ENGAGING I WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE TO DO SOMETHING AND I DONT LIKE IT DUURRRRR".

Ok well maybe not that many words.

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia

Mirima Thurander
#182 - 2012-01-12 03:20:05 UTC
WOW 5 hours wiht out a soul saying why this idea is TEH FAIL AND WONT FIX ARE BLOBS or someone trying to play dev and come up with a FLAWLESS IDEA,








so ever ones agrees to stick this out till the devs do something to curb the blobs are the answer to everything?

even if you don't like this idea and you don't like the blob you still need to put your support behind reducing the affect of
1000 VS 1

All automated intel should be removed from the game including Instant local/jumps/kills/cynos for all systems/regions.Eve should report nothing like this to the client/3rd party software.Intel should not be force fed to players. Player skill and iniative should be the sources of intel.

Jenshae Chiroptera
#183 - 2012-01-12 03:57:59 UTC
The zerg tactic combined with tank and spank is pretty lame. I hope something like this will be implemented and give rise to more tactics and maybe some actual strategy. Smile
Dare I say that squads and individuals might even begin to see their impact again? Shocked

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Bernadea
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#184 - 2012-01-12 05:03:54 UTC
Pinaculus wrote:
After a little thought, it would probably be more effective to incrementally reduce a ship's effective sig based on the number of ships firing weapons at it such that after X number of attackers the aggregate dps is reduced to negate the rough dps of everything over X. This would mitigate the power of super blobs, but reward intelligent fleet composition, and still allow target painters to counteract the blob penalty to a degree.


Now you're moving in the right direction.Smile
IDN 20060377
Gone with the Wind
#185 - 2012-01-12 10:01:05 UTC  |  Edited by: IDN 20060377
I wrote up a long and exhaustive post about how this could work (with some additional lag), but i got distracted and it refreshed the page on me. Ugh

I think the basic formula on how it could calculate it was like so

Base = Ship sensor strength * fleet status (1 alone, 2 fleet)
Target time = (ship sig radius /10) * {[#locking(100)+#locked(50)] + [#Drone Locking(10)+Drone locked(5)]}* target fleet status (0.5 same fleet, 0.7 same alliance/corp, 1 alone, 2 fleet) / base

Calculates in Deciseconds

laggy, but worked more or less like so:

If your alone, and you target someone, you get a longer time if you were targeting something at the same time as something/someone else, then if you were targeting it alone. if you were in a fleet, it would take less time overall, but the more people that target one object, the more time it would take. if the target was in a fleet, but you weren't, it would take longer overall, with more time per target. if you were both in fleets, the benefits would balance out, but it would still take more time for every lock on the same target. if you were targeting someone in your fleet, the normal signals that pass between the ships would aid you in targeting, causing a shorter lock on time. With alliance/corp members outside a fleet, the bonus would carry, but be slightly reduced when out of fleet.

This would boost co-operative nature, while also encouraging people to make only one fleet, as the bonuses for not doing so are lessened for in alliance/corp, and dropped to nothing if not related. It would also discourage everyone targeting one target, unless they had a passive targeting module, which should allow them to bypass the target's locked/locking status, at the cost of greatly decreased range. The only negatives I could see to this would be someone using smart bombs, which would damage both sides indiscriminately, or people using a lot of sensor boosters, which would take from med slots.

The time would also be affected by things like target painters and such, but those usually require someone having targeted them in the first place.

As a note, math isn't my greatest subject, and thats just an example of how it could work. Also, it needs a bit of modification to calculate for ship size going up and down, as I had battleships in mind when I thought it up. (EX: easier to target a titan then a frigate while in a BS.) Also probably could use a mod to add in additional time for every additional target you, well, target.



tl;dr the summary would probably be longer, so read above


EDIT: I get the odd feeling I'm going to come back here with a more refined formula...
EDIT2: I also seem to keep finding grammar errors in my post.
seany1212
Drunkendis Order
#186 - 2012-01-12 10:54:51 UTC
Mirima Thurander wrote:
WOW 5 hours wiht out a soul saying why this idea is TEH FAIL AND WONT FIX ARE BLOBS or someone trying to play dev and come up with a FLAWLESS IDEA,








so ever ones agrees to stick this out till the devs do something to curb the blobs are the answer to everything?

even if you don't like this idea and you don't like the blob you still need to put your support behind reducing the affect of
1000 VS 1


Until they cant fit 1000 in system there will always be 1000vs1, you can reduce alliance size, corp size or even the amount in fleet but you'll always end up with blobs, its what wins space unfortunately. Also, slowing down lock time for everyone just drags out the battle, FC's will just call primary's, secondary's, tertiary's, etc. so that people will have the next target pre-locked and it still wont mean you wont get alpha'd, you can have 10 (insert logi of choice here) repping you but when everyone eventually locks, 1000 maelstroms will still alpha you Roll
Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#187 - 2012-01-12 10:56:54 UTC
seany1212 wrote:
Mirima Thurander wrote:
WOW 5 hours wiht out a soul saying why this idea is TEH FAIL AND WONT FIX ARE BLOBS or someone trying to play dev and come up with a FLAWLESS IDEA,








so ever ones agrees to stick this out till the devs do something to curb the blobs are the answer to everything?

even if you don't like this idea and you don't like the blob you still need to put your support behind reducing the affect of
1000 VS 1


Until they cant fit 1000 in system there will always be 1000vs1, you can reduce alliance size, corp size or even the amount in fleet but you'll always end up with blobs, its what wins space unfortunately. Also, slowing down lock time for everyone just drags out the battle, FC's will just call primary's, secondary's, tertiary's, etc. so that people will have the next target pre-locked and it still wont mean you wont get alpha'd, you can have 10 (insert logi of choice here) repping you but when everyone eventually locks, 1000 maelstroms will still alpha you Roll


And that is the marvel of it .. It does not nef anyone anywhere .. It just provides more complex code for engagements..
Wacktopia
State War Academy
Caldari State
#188 - 2012-01-12 11:18:38 UTC
This is an awful idea. It really is. Putting in a mechanic like this will just introduce extra overheads on the server and annoy the hell out of everyone.

I'm not saying I'm against what this is trying to solve but no this way, really not this way.

Kitchen sink? Seriousy, get your ship together -  Fleet-Up.com

Roosterton
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#189 - 2012-01-12 16:05:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Roosterton
Jaroslav Unwanted wrote:


And that is the marvel of it .. It does not nef anyone anywhere .. It just provides more complex code for engagements..


Basically, this.

Not only is the idea fundamentally flawed - people are for some reason crying out to make the tactical element of the game more fun, while nerfing the strategic element - but it's not even going to succeed in its set goal to make the tactical element of the game more fun. Having a bigger fleet is still going to carry major advantages. People are still going to blob. You're still not going to take down 200 with 50 just because they're locking you at half the speed, unless you've won the strategic part of the game and arrived with a fleet composition that trumps theirs.

Strategy - the pre-battle preparation of fitting your ships and choosing your fights - always has and always will prevail over any weird tactical limitations that get imposed.
First pagePrevious page8910