open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Nullsec design goals feedback: Small combat
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7

Author Topic

Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation
RONA Directorate
Posted - 2011.08.17 20:38:00 - [91]
 

Originally by: Ugleb
Originally by: Obsidian Hawk

Nerf titan bridges

Like in the lore is says they make a mini wh to transport people. put a weight limit on the wormholes it generates, and after so many jump the bridge naturally collapses.


I like the idea of Titans dropping little wormholes around the places, in theory an enemy fleet could hijack them to come through and attack the titan. ;)



ok ok so I thought about it.

I like that more. Titan bridges open an actual wh, kind of described in the lore, it would have a mass limit of X. But like any other wh, its a double edged sword and can be used both ways, so the fleet that they are bridging too, can send forces in and lock down the titan as the other fleet leaves. This would put titans at greater risk themselves for being hot dropped and being destroyed by roaming bs gangs.

ON THE ISSUE OF LOCAL

I remember back when black ops were new and on the test server there was a ping module to be used on them to decloak cloakers. it had a 60 km range on it and a small activation cost. Like a smart bomb it would be non discriminatory and decloak everything within that 60km range. for 10 seconds. Why cant we get that module again. It would make black ops more useful and afk cloakers/ cloakers in general would be harder pressed to stay alive.

John McCreedy
Caldari
Eve Defence Force
Posted - 2011.08.17 20:43:00 - [92]
 

Originally by: SATAN
Edited by: SATAN on 15/08/2011 20:14:14
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
This set of threads exist to collect feedback for the separate parts of the devblog "Nullsec Development: Design Goals", which can be found here.


This thread is about: Small Combat


Please read the blog and give specific feedback on this area of the blog. The more precise, reasoned and comprehensive you can be, the better we can utilize your feedback Smile


This must be some sort of troll attempt on CCP's behalf you have no clue what small is or what is needed to make it viable again. Since 7 years ago you guys keep making posts about promoting small scale pvp and then do the complete opposite and make the fight s even larger.

But just in case you are serious this is what you need to do.

1)Remove local(Like you have been promising 5 years now)
2)Boost all the things you nerfed in the past which made small scale pvp possible.
3)Nerf probing or allow ships to be un-probable again.
4)Make looting items a worthy way of making isk, you have nerfed the eve market to the point that its not possible to stay in the black even with our k/d ratio.
5)Force people to have to protect their assets, right now there is no reason for someone to undock and defend them selves without a CTA called 2 days ago.

Being the only people in this game that made a living from small scale stuff I can tell you the following. Nerfing anything will not have the goals you speak off. Super caps/caps/numbers don't mean anything to a well run small gang they are just more targets and don't need to be nerfed.

The most important aspect of small scale pvp is to allow out of the ordinary tactics, and ships that will allow such combat. At the moment small scale pvp means the 10 of you vs 100 of them, which is fine but when those 100 are given game mechanics which allow them to control every aspect of the fight means the 10 have no choice but to disengage or escalate the fight by calling in backup.


I agree with some of your points but if you remove local and nerf probing then how is a small roaming fleet going to find any targets? It'll be hellish, sitting there probing systems looking for targets then moving on to the next. Local and probing work in favour of the aggressor as well as defender.

WoodieRens Garemoko
Posted - 2011.08.17 21:35:00 - [93]
 

one off the biggest problems is the grid its self
and trying to get an angle for an attack.

what if the grid had certain number of points u dont need to bookmark you can just warp to.

it would make for faster moveing positions rather than
"do we have a prober" and the " launch probes enemy leaves".

removing local is silly idea. i like to see other ppl actually play this game rather than bam ur dead. haha

Sigras
Gallente
Conglomo
Posted - 2011.08.17 23:14:00 - [94]
 

I have two thoughts on the issue of hotdrops:

1. Create a Mobile Cyno Jammer - I envision this working like the heavy dictor does now:
unscripted, it projects a 50-100 KM field around itself which prevents new cynos from being opened, old cynos would remain open to prevent exploitation
Scripted, it would be a targeted module which prevents any ships from coming through the cyno of the ship being targeted.

Advantages
Adds strategy to small fleet battles
Allows for the tactical decision to trap half the fleet on the other side of the cyno in large fleet battles.

Disadvantages
Creates a ship/module that is mandatory for small fleets
Requires a lot of coding.


2. Add a Jump Drive Calibration Time - This would be a short (1-5 second) delay added for each light year to be traveled before the capital ship leaves its launching system.
1 Second Jump Freighter
2 Seconds Carrier
3 Seconds Dreadnaught
5 Seconds Supercapital

This means a carrier jumping 5 light-years would only have a 10 second wait, where a supercarrier hotdropping from 6 light-years away would have a 30 second delay.

Advantages
Easier to program and execute
Always the same for everyone, no surprises

Disadvantages
May be too harsh of a nerf
Requires lots of balance
Adds no tactics to the game in fact it removes some (hotdropping)


My favorite is the idea of a mobile cyno jammer, what say you?

EvilBunny DeathSpore
Posted - 2011.08.17 23:17:00 - [95]
 

Originally by: fukier
PLEASE OH PLEASE IF YOU WANT TO MAKE MORE SMALL COMBAT MAKE ALL 0.0 STATIONS KICK OUT STATIONS...

THIS WILL FIX DOCKING GAMES AND MAKE LOGISTICS MORE DANGEROUS/FUN!!!!



thisYARRRR!!

Woulvesbaine
Posted - 2011.08.18 00:12:00 - [96]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Kaar
Huuuuuuuuuuuuuge list of interesting things to discuss about 0.0 mechanics and combat...but not a single word on local chat?

Really??
ugh


Local isn't a nullsec problem, it's an EVE problem. This blog is mostly about things specific to nullsec.


I hope this statement does not evidence an intent not to address local. And local is particularly a nullsec issue. There is not that much pvp in empire. In addition, arguments for keeping local are likely made by carebears and the like who should have less influence as to pvp which this thread directed to.

Will you please address local? So much to gain. Reward thinking, not density.

Messoroz
AQUILA INC
Posted - 2011.08.18 01:16:00 - [97]
 

Edited by: Messoroz on 18/08/2011 01:16:13
Edited by: Messoroz on 18/08/2011 01:16:02
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Kaar
Huuuuuuuuuuuuuge list of interesting things to discuss about 0.0 mechanics and combat...but not a single word on local chat?

Really??
ugh


Local isn't a nullsec problem, it's an EVE kspace problem. This blog is mostly about things specific to nullsec.


Fixed that for you. Wink

Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
Posted - 2011.08.18 02:20:00 - [98]
 

Edited by: Fon Revedhort on 18/08/2011 02:22:11


All these talks about small-scale PvP are very desceptive without us focing on current cyno mechanics.

I'll point out few problems:

- no indication what so ever that a given ship is equipped with a cyno
- ease of fitting a cyno
- no penalty what so ever for fitting a cyno
- no actual cost for cyno
- no delay between the decision made to hot-drop and the moment the multitude of blobbers getting in
- the fact that the cyno activation doesn't break current locks and allows to lock other targets
- no limit what so ever on the numbers of those getting in

And sure thing, all this stuff applies to Titan Bridge as well.

It's high time you admit your current mechanics absolutely SUCKS in this regard.

Jack Tronic
Posted - 2011.08.18 02:52:00 - [99]
 

Edited by: Jack Tronic on 18/08/2011 02:58:21

Originally by: Fon Revedhort

- no actual cost for cyno


Requires fuel which requires cargo space, I would however call it a WEAK cost, rather than no cost.

The target lock breaking would be interesting, it certainly would fit in a RP sense where igniting a cynosural field causes momentarily sensor disruptions. If anything there should be a capacitor penatly, the current ability to fit cynos on everything just makes capital ships work.

However a capacitor penalty either like the MWD but much much greater or maybe a percentage of capacitor required to activate the module(just like onlining modules on a ship in space) so that all ships can use it but say all ships need 80% of their capacitor to light it or more. Maybe start it at 90% and have a skill that will reduce it by 2% each level to 80% at level 5.

DIsposible Hero
Posted - 2011.08.18 03:06:00 - [100]
 

Edited by: DIsposible Hero on 18/08/2011 03:06:46
RE: Small fleets being able to disrupt larger fleets:

What if fleets above a certain size / number of capships needed support ships in order to function properly? These could be logistics ships, haulers, or maybe a whole new type of ship... but something fairly squishy. If a fleet has more caps / supercaps than their "supply" can manage, they begin to take penalties to their combat effectiveness.

The idea would be that a small gang with no capships needs no "supply", a medium gang with mostly BSes and 1-2 capships might need a single supply ship, and a massive fleet with 50+ titans would need dozens of them, maybe even as much as 1 "support" ship per titan.

The idea here is twofold:

1. Fleets with large numbers of capships will be harder to put / keep together due to them requiring enough supply to support themselves, if they don't want to fight at a disadvantage.

2. Small fleets can effectively disrupt larger ones by running in and taking out the supply ships.

What do you think?

CCP Greyscale

Posted - 2011.08.18 10:50:00 - [101]
 

Originally by: Woulvesbaine
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Kaar
Huuuuuuuuuuuuuge list of interesting things to discuss about 0.0 mechanics and combat...but not a single word on local chat?

Really??
ugh


Local isn't a nullsec problem, it's an EVE problem. This blog is mostly about things specific to nullsec.


I hope this statement does not evidence an intent not to address local. And local is particularly a nullsec issue. There is not that much pvp in empire. In addition, arguments for keeping local are likely made by carebears and the like who should have less influence as to pvp which this thread directed to.

Will you please address local? So much to gain. Reward thinking, not density.


Yes, we will address local at some point.

Originally by: Messoroz
Edited by: Messoroz on 18/08/2011 01:16:13
Edited by: Messoroz on 18/08/2011 01:16:02
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Kaar
Huuuuuuuuuuuuuge list of interesting things to discuss about 0.0 mechanics and combat...but not a single word on local chat?

Really??
ugh


Local isn't a nullsec problem, it's an EVE kspace problem. This blog is mostly about things specific to nullsec.


Fixed that for you. Wink


...yeah, good point Smile

Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
Important Internet Spaceship League
Posted - 2011.08.18 11:40:00 - [102]
 

Removing local will benefit the cloakers, the campers and the gankers... The even battles will suffer and the cloakers will cause more paranoia than they do now.
That said delayed local won't be an issue. Maybe 10 minutes default delay minus 60-90 seconds pr level dedicated upgrade installed

Pinky

Jack Tronic
Posted - 2011.08.18 12:40:00 - [103]
 

Edited by: Jack Tronic on 18/08/2011 12:44:51
Edited by: Jack Tronic on 18/08/2011 12:43:27
Edited by: Jack Tronic on 18/08/2011 12:42:07
Originally by: Obsidian Hawk


I remember back when black ops were new and on the test server there was a ping module to be used on them to decloak cloakers. it had a 60 km range on it and a small activation cost. Like a smart bomb it would be non discriminatory and decloak everything within that 60km range. for 10 seconds. Why cant we get that module again. It would make black ops more useful and afk cloakers/ cloakers in general would be harder pressed to stay alive.


seems like a module that DOES NOT go after afk cloakers, afk cloakers just hide in safes if they are smart enough because you can get randomly decloaked these days by even the smallest bit of fake dust floating in the air. (The decloaking bugs have been getting ridiculous, I could be a 200 au warp and smack in the middle I get decloaked).

Originally by: Pinky Denmark
Removing local will benefit the cloakers, the campers and the gankers... The even battles will suffer and the cloakers will cause more paranoia than they do now.
That said delayed local won't be an issue. Maybe 10 minutes default delay minus 60-90 seconds pr level dedicated upgrade installed

Pinky

And yet billions are being made in an environment where cloakies are everywhere and its not uncommon to suddenly see 60 proteuses uncloak to **** face. But yet there are carebears....yet they make isk...maybe you are just afraid of change?

Though it would be nice if dscan was more like sonar constantly refreshing by itself at a fixed rate if its enabled instead of button spamming all day. So that players would just need to pay attention to it.

Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
Important Internet Spaceship League
Posted - 2011.08.18 14:01:00 - [104]
 

Not at all - But the insecurity of numbers will likely result in less pvp'ers against pvp'ers in return for more pvp'ers against PvE'ers which I believe is a shame...

As it is today many small scale battles happen when enemies are probing into your territory and you form up to fight against them. The important factor of intel is not how many is in local but what kind of ships they are flying so you may have a chance to beat them. Then you go out and duke it out unless the enemy decides to run away.

Limiting local might be okay and add to the game if done properly but straight out removing it may have boring consequences beyond ratters having less reasons to live in nullsec as it becomes the gankers paradise...

James Duar
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.08.18 14:35:00 - [105]
 

Originally by: Pinky Denmark
Not at all - But the insecurity of numbers will likely result in less pvp'ers against pvp'ers in return for more pvp'ers against PvE'ers which I believe is a shame...

As it is today many small scale battles happen when enemies are probing into your territory and you form up to fight against them. The important factor of intel is not how many is in local but what kind of ships they are flying so you may have a chance to beat them. Then you go out and duke it out unless the enemy decides to run away.

Limiting local might be okay and add to the game if done properly but straight out removing it may have boring consequences beyond ratters having less reasons to live in nullsec as it becomes the gankers paradise...


I would agree with all of this. In the intel thread I posted a rather sizeable amount on the issue, but the gist of it was that you can't just straight up nerf-local in k-space back to being like w-space is.

W-space has a number of factors which keep things somewhat manageable - system entrances and exits are somewhat random, the population is very low, and the rewards are (potentially) very high. And yet only 3% of EVE bother with it, because frankly hitting D-scan every second for hours on end is not my idea of fun and evidently does not appeal to many others either.

fukier
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
Flatline.
Posted - 2011.08.18 23:21:00 - [106]
 

Edited by: fukier on 18/08/2011 23:36:11
3 steps to make small pvp more viable

1. make all 0.0 stations "kick out" this means you cant travel 100 km from the station and still insta dock...

2. make local delayed/removed with replaced metric for detecting ships

3. nerf the hell out of afk cloaking... personally cover ops cloaks should not be able to be detected... but regular/tech II should have whats known as techion emmisions which over time (if the mod is active for a while) should build up high enough to be detected by probes... maybe 1 hour for tech I and 2 hours for Tech II...

another idea would be make rr and attacking ships stack...

that way there would be a force multiplier limit on practicality of 1. bringing more ships. 2 attacking more then one primary...

you could make it sig radius based... so you have a titan which has no real limit on how many players can shoot it... to something like a inty where it would not make sence to have more then 2-3 people shooting it... this could also improve ships that have internal rep bonuses...


Cronides
Posted - 2011.08.19 03:24:00 - [107]
 

Interfere with larger ops = add the explosion radius of missals and signature resolution of turrets from the ships that attacking a targeted ship and add the total value, then apply a penalty when the total signature resolution of all the ammunitions exceed the given signature of combine radius, think of it in 3D the battleship with 400 radius X6 =2400 if all the ammunitions exceed this radius then penalty is applied

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.19 09:02:00 - [108]
 

Edited by: Furb Killer on 19/08/2011 09:02:42
Quote:
And yet billions are being made in an environment where cloakies are everywhere and its not uncommon to suddenly see 60 proteuses uncloak to **** face. But yet there are carebears....yet they make isk...maybe you are just afraid of change?

Well duh, it is easy to make billions if your income is 10 times higher than in large parts of 0.0 (and sadly I am not exaggerating). Aditionally you get NPCs which do omni damage and target switch, making solo/with few people ganking a PVE'er very hard instead of absolutely trivial. So if you want to gank a PVE operation you actually need a sizable fleet, which is easier to notice than a few players. Even if you need in normal space a sizable fleet, for example because for some stupid reason they decided to bring escort, local really isnt going to hinder you in any way: open cyno, proceed to loot.

Then the actual finding of opponents (ready: easy risk free targets). Not only is it alot easier in 0.0 (open dotlan, look at npc kills, go there. Or alternatively just check upgraded systems), which combined with no chance in hell to survive an attack on your pve ship in 0.0 if you get tackled makes it stupid to make tackling them trivial, the population density in 0.0 is waaaaaaayyyyyyyy higher than in WH space. WH dwellers can keep telling how much of a success WH space is so all local should be like that, but fact is the population density is simply alot lower in WH space than in 0.0, making pve saver.

And finally in adition to the lack of cynos and no simply setting AP for nearest pve concentration, you also got mass limitations. Which means you always get a homeadvantage that you have not in 0.0.


And finally the TL;DR, if WH space is so good and a shining example of why everyone should have no local (but strangely shouldnt have the other features of WH space), why doesnt everyone who want that simply go to WH space and everyone is happy.

zljuka
Posted - 2011.08.19 11:16:00 - [109]
 

Disconnecting AFK ships every 30 minutes isn't a solution. Some basic program that moves your mouse every 20 minutes or can accomplish other actions so it will seem to client you are not afk, is easy to find/write.

Removing local. Hundreds pages have already been written on this topic. And if you come with a bright idea to remove local, go and read first what already has been written in many years, this is in no way a new issue.

Newt Rondanse
Posted - 2011.08.19 11:50:00 - [110]
 

Originally by: zljuka
Disconnecting AFK ships every 30 minutes isn't a solution. Some basic program that moves your mouse every 20 minutes or can accomplish other actions so it will seem to client you are not afk, is easy to find/write.


But then you are botting, in violation of the TOS.
Do you really think nobody would report it?

Mind you, there is absolutely no way they would put in an idle timer like that, the outcry would make the Monacle Riot look like just another quiet day in Jita.

zljuka
Posted - 2011.08.19 13:19:00 - [111]
 

Originally by: Newt Rondanse
Originally by: zljuka
Disconnecting AFK ships every 30 minutes isn't a solution. Some basic program that moves your mouse every 20 minutes or can accomplish other actions so it will seem to client you are not afk, is easy to find/write.


But then you are botting, in violation of the TOS.
Do you really think nobody would report it?

Mind you, there is absolutely no way they would put in an idle timer like that, the outcry would make the Monacle Riot look like just another quiet day in Jita.


Program that moves your cursor or types few words in chat every 20 minutes doesn't require client intervention. No way you can check if it's a program or a player alt-tabing every 20 min.

Newt Rondanse
Posted - 2011.08.19 13:43:00 - [112]
 

Originally by: zljuka
Originally by: Newt Rondanse
Originally by: zljuka
Disconnecting AFK ships every 30 minutes isn't a solution. Some basic program that moves your mouse every 20 minutes or can accomplish other actions so it will seem to client you are not afk, is easy to find/write.


But then you are botting, in violation of the TOS.
Do you really think nobody would report it?

Mind you, there is absolutely no way they would put in an idle timer like that, the outcry would make the Monacle Riot look like just another quiet day in Jita.


Program that moves your cursor or types few words in chat every 20 minutes doesn't require client intervention. No way you can check if it's a program or a player alt-tabing every 20 min.

If it goes on for 23 hours straight you can make a pretty ^$#@ good guess, however.

Just saying.

fukier
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
Flatline.
Posted - 2011.08.19 18:38:00 - [113]
 

Originally by: Cronides
Interfere with larger ops = add the explosion radius of missals and signature resolution of turrets from the ships that attacking a targeted ship and add the total value, then apply a penalty when the total signature resolution of all the ammunitions exceed the given signature of combine radius, think of it in 3D the battleship with 400 radius X6 =2400 if all the ammunitions exceed this radius then penalty is applied


i like this

Messoroz
AQUILA INC
Posted - 2011.08.19 21:07:00 - [114]
 

Originally by: fukier
Originally by: Cronides
Interfere with larger ops = add the explosion radius of missals and signature resolution of turrets from the ships that attacking a targeted ship and add the total value, then apply a penalty when the total signature resolution of all the ammunitions exceed the given signature of combine radius, think of it in 3D the battleship with 400 radius X6 =2400 if all the ammunitions exceed this radius then penalty is applied


i like this


This would essentially ruin bombers, torpedos have large explosion radius and it will add up and nerf them fast. This is a BAD idea, it will break black opsing/covert ops.

Korvin
Gallente
Shadow Kingdom
Best Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.19 22:19:00 - [115]
 

Edited by: Korvin on 19/08/2011 22:47:38
While Big fleets are mostly for the sov warfare goals, small fleets are mostly for fun and mostly not supported by big coalitions by reimbursements ets.

Why does people do small roaming fleets?

1. Training for the basic PVP skills for new alliance pilots.
2. Loot the enemy and make some small profit while having fun.
3. Challenge and outsmart the enemy with close chances, but superior tactics and grow the e-pen.

What obstacles does this goals meet?
1. I see no obstacles here, mostly supported by alliances and corps.

2.
- Loot of an enemy is more dull in 0.0, than in low-sec or high-sec. The reasons are - more risk, harder logistics, poor local markets.
- The natural small fleet pray, the isk farmer - can easily avoid the battle, sitting in 1 system with a bunch of friends and alot of security channels. Isk farmers should have to move from system to system to restore the natural hunting environment for small fleets. Small fleets camping their pray are for the other small fleets. Once you give players the reason to camp carebears on gates and roam the space for the easy chance-based money, you will give the reason the other players to form their own small fleets and patrol the space to encounter those 1st wave.

3.
- like was said 100 times above - hotdrops of a cap fleet is another reason not to risk, its also hard to kill a carrier/mothership farming isk with a small fleet.
- high alpha is an enemy of a skilled PVP. Why you will buy a 200mil ship, fit it with a 2bil setup, if you will be insta-popped during the first fight? It was an issue before, now it's a real trouble. That's why you see so many drakes. The balance tuning is needed. I remember some words about "fights should last longer, so players will have more time to enjoy them" spoken by CCP long time ago. What happened with that idea? Why you did the opposite with a speed nerf and Dominion?
- rock/paper/scissors sounds like drake/cane/drake in EVE. Some ships are just useless in PVP, less choice, less tactics options, less challenge, predictable result of a battle. All this leads to the logic result - FC hear the scout report, FC turns away and avoid the battle, or gather numbers and try to hotdrop, or see the enemy avoid the battle. Predictable fleets are bad things.


p.s. The good example of a small fleet roamings with a scene are static deadspaces spread in some regions the way they can be chained. You have to move. No need for a big fleet to scout, you can make them solo on a frigate if there is no ambush. No reason for a blob, you and your enemy see each-other on a direct scan and can make decision to take the fight or not. A reasonable amount of time to wait there to get a reward, so you still have to fight if you want the loot. The chance to get a reward even if you had no fight at all.

Same can be done in 0.0 by a lot of ways, connected to the sov system or not.

Examples are - small encounters you can meet and have to stay there for a while to have a chance of a loot.
System boosters placed by enemy players, easy to kill, dropping some loot, encouraged by your alliance. (look here)
Station hacking profession, or other similar professions, available for a small group of players and encouraged by the alliance in a global war. They should give a small reward of have a clear KPI to be rewarded by the alliance.

And for the god sake, please add the 1 minute aggression timer for the remote repairers. Why they still can jump and dock during the battle? Is that so hard?




fukier
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
Flatline.
Posted - 2011.08.19 23:07:00 - [116]
 

Originally by: Messoroz
Originally by: fukier
Originally by: Cronides
Interfere with larger ops = add the explosion radius of missals and signature resolution of turrets from the ships that attacking a targeted ship and add the total value, then apply a penalty when the total signature resolution of all the ammunitions exceed the given signature of combine radius, think of it in 3D the battleship with 400 radius X6 =2400 if all the ammunitions exceed this radius then penalty is applied


i like this


This would essentially ruin bombers, torpedos have large explosion radius and it will add up and nerf them fast. This is a BAD idea, it will break black opsing/covert ops.


no it would not... it would make mods like target painters and ex velocity rigs more usefull...

i would also advocate the indroduction of a mod that increases the velocity and explosion velocity of missles (like a tracking comp but for missles)

Ashina Sito
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2011.08.20 01:56:00 - [117]
 

A small thing that can help small gang PvP is to make it so that a Titan must use the bridge it opens. When the bridge closes, for whatever reason, the Titan jumps to the bridged system.

This will reduce the tactical use of Titan Bridges and make them more of a strategic weapon. I think the results of this change are fairly obvious.


fukier
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
Flatline.
Posted - 2011.08.20 02:08:00 - [118]
 

Edited by: fukier on 20/08/2011 02:07:54
Originally by: Ashina Sito
A small thing that can help small gang PvP is to make it so that a Titan must use the bridge it opens. When the bridge closes, for whatever reason, the Titan jumps to the bridged system.

This will reduce the tactical use of Titan Bridges and make them more of a strategic weapon. I think the results of this change are fairly obvious.




or how about the titan jumps when it goes up and leaves a residual worm hole with that can be traversed both ways and be forced closed with ecm... but when the bridge is up the titan goes into siege mode...

Lolion Reglo
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2011.08.20 02:26:00 - [119]
 

Edited by: Lolion Reglo on 20/08/2011 02:29:30
Back awhile ago there was an idea that a few people in my corp threw out that i thought was interesting that would be perfect for small gang PvP. implement Ship Formation bonuses. Now to out line a few ideas as to how this would work a few points need addressed.

Make the ability to fly in formations based upon leadership skills. - this ensures that the values of bonuses aren't cut and dry black or white, but also lets more experienced players lead some smaller sized fleets that can go up against larger fleets, and makes players rely more on skill and ship type, than blobs or numbers.

Make a bonus for diversity. - You could have a bonus that upgrades a small gangs ability to fight overall, such as a boost to defensive capacities like shields for caldari based fleets, or armor for gallente and amarr. Maybe even a small bonus to DPS or volley damage if a battleship or 2 are included. But the main caveat for this bonus would possibly be the need for a Logistics ship, an interceptor, and 3 other styles of ships.

A bonus for a single type. - Lets say you have a wing that wants a certain type of ship. well if you group your logistics together they get a bonus on defense and output of their support modules. Interceptors gain a bonus on webbing or warp jamming, while battleships get a "ships o the line" bonus to firepower.

The list can go on and on... - You can think of any combination of ideas for small gang fighting. but the main idea is that each kind of formation has strengths and weaknesses. diversity is great but up against a fleet with specialized formations its not as strong. Where as the specialized wing can lose some sort of bonus or stat. this idea is completely open ended and new formations can be added down the line as the idea comes up, or tossed into a idea forum page.

Make a bonus for a formation that is centered around a single or small number of capital ships. This will bring about the age of skirmishes of larger size but not blob proportions that are balanced in terms of ship diversity and require ships to rely on skills and tactics than sheer numbers. For example, require the formation to be centered around a carrier or two. The other ships in the fleet would have to make up a certain percent of logistics, tech 1, Ewar, and tech II ships. the bonuses here could be increased firepower if there are more Tech II, increased logistics capabilities if logistics counts are higher, and defense if Tech I are the majority (that way people can still be effective in tech I ships)

These are just my ideas and support them or tear them apart but i really think this idea can really help the desire for smaller gangs than larger fights.

[Edit] to chime in on the local chat dialogue i think in null sec you could even limit it to constellation chat and remove local. that way you can see who all is in the general area but its over 5 or so systems... not one system in general. that way you never know who exactly is in your system and yet you can still know who is on the way.

Cassandra Drumheller
Posted - 2011.08.20 09:34:00 - [120]
 

I was originally thinking about this for small groups in W space but I can see the use for small groups in K space as well. Create a new transport class vessel that surrenders all of it's cargo space for a small corp hanger and provides a fitting service. The ships main job will be to hide at a safe and provide storage for ammo, modules, and salvage while allowing fitting services for on the fly fleet modification. The ship should not slow the group down to much as they move from area to area.



Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only