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


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4

Author Topic

CCP Greyscale

Posted - 2011.08.15 10:53:00 - [1]
 

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: LARGE 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

Vice Admiral Spreadsheet
Caldari
Posted - 2011.08.15 11:37:00 - [2]
 

Edited by: Vice Admiral Spreadsheet on 15/08/2011 11:41:29
Each and every participant of a large fleet battle, on both sides, should feel important. Even if one side gets WTFPWNED!

One idea I'm thinking of are very, very large "warbarges" (Perhaps the very same warbarges present in Dust 514?) which could serve as a fleet command. Perhaps the same size and a large ehp, but with no fighters/guns. Perhaps, at max, one warbarge per fleet.

Basically, even if someone gets instapopped, they can access the warbarge and the dozens/hundreds/thousands of fitted ships within it, up to BS size. Lots and lots of ships. Even if they die, they can get right back into the fight with a different ship. The FC/sub-commanders could even micromanage and say over comms/fleet chat what they think dead pilots should undock in.
So if the fleet's logi chain is failing, they could tell the dead pilots to undock in logis. If the enemies suddenly switch the a whole blob of battleships, the FC will tell them to switch to stealth bombers. If the enemy are primarily using Amarr lasers, tell dead pilots to undock with armour tanked ships. Tactics over numbers, right? Wink

Perhaps a warbarge could only receive a maximum amount of damage per second, so it isn't blobbed and instapopped. This is important. Warbarges should be an ongoing part of the fight.


IMPORTANT EDIT: Maybe warbarges could only supply and undock a limited number of ships a time! This way, two large fleets will eventually become an extremely similar size, and any one stage of the battle will be completely dependant on tactics! One fleet will still, overall, be larger than the other and have a greater supply of ships, but both sides will be able to compete with each other equally except at the very beginning, and the very end.

Lady Kincaid
Gallente
BSX Industries
Posted - 2011.08.15 12:01:00 - [3]
 

Edited by: Lady Kincaid on 15/08/2011 12:45:46
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
This set of threads exist to collect feedback for the separate parts of the TThis Tthread is about: LARGE 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


Large combat means blob of supercaps

1. Make Supers use ALOT more fuel. Supercap mean super damage, super size and super production costs, make moving 200 supers from one side of map to other a bit harder. Take Carrier fuel consumption as determinant: SC is 20 times more expensive so should use at least 10 times more fuel to jump (not same amount like its now), titan maybe x20.

2. Prevent Supers (both SC and Titans) from jumping into Low-Sec. This will make Low-Sec ground a bit more fun to live and fight. Maybe Dreadnoughts would find their role then (good old days).

3. Make SuperCarriers a Fighter Bomber only ship, or at least disallow them to use regular fighters. This would prevent SC of being Solo PWN mobile capable of destroying every ship in game (this wont change anything in their primary role: killing structures and other supers).
This (fighter bomber only version) would force supercap pilots to work in team with smaller ships as in real life (one Carrier moves in a convoy with more than 10 smaller ships as guard).

4. Make DD a capital only weapon, add variable to all non cap ships (simmilar like ew invulnerability on supers) disallowing activation of DD on targeted ship.

5. Lower tracking and explosion radius of Titan turrets and launchers by 25%.

Selak Zorander
Posted - 2011.08.15 12:06:00 - [4]
 

Another thing that could be done is to look at how signature radius and signature resolution of guns work.

This one could be a potentially tough thing to balance right but it could help bring about diversity in fleets.

Make it so that different ships really have defined roles in combat while making it so they don't get instantly popped particularly if they don't have high amounts of effective hit points.

Frigates and Interceptors should feel useful and no instantly die just because the opposite fleet is only Battleships that are insta-popping the frigates and interceptors first.

Though really to see if this fix would work, each ship class should get a clearly defined role and then make 2 tech versions have specific roles.

For instance, Frigates should be all about killing frigates, and be deadly in numbers to larger ships (numbers scaling to ships size so maybe 4 or 5 should be deadly to cruisers/battlecruisers and 10 to 12 should be deadly to a single battleship). Then Assault Frigates should trade off speed for more firepower and defense so that few numbers are needed when dealing with larger ships, but they have a harder time catching frigates (especially interceptors). Interceptors should gain speed but at the expense of defense or firepower. Meaning more are needed to destroy battleships and larger vessels, but the interceptors should be ideal for catching up to and killing enemy frigates, or assault frigates in small groups.

Come up with the same kind of roles for every major ship class and then give tech 2 versions more specific variations of the general roles you came up with. At the same time, no ship class no matter the size should have a clear advantage over every other ship class or you end up with everyone flying that one class.

I hate to say it, but maybe game design should come closer to a rock - paper - scissors approach. Every class of ship should have a counter class other than itself (be it something like battleships are weak to groups of frigates). This is about the only way to promote diversity in the fleet and make every class useful. You just have to be careful in how you balance it out.

Another idea to go along with this is maybe specialize the guns available to. Then it becomes possible to fit guns for specific targets as well. So maybe those smaller caliber battleship auto-cannons become great at taking out cruisers and maybe frigates while not being the best thing to use on battleships. Again this would take lots of thought and discussion and would be tricky to get it just right.

Rhinanna
Minmatar
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2011.08.15 13:03:00 - [5]
 

Main problem is lack of a sub-cap counter for super-caps or even caps.

Something like the heavy bombers is probably the best solution. Make super-caps fear to take the field without protection from sub-caps. The anti-cap ships are weak vs other sub-caps but very strong vs super-caps, to the point they would be unbalanced if it wasn't for them been so weak vs sub-caps.

Nieero
Posted - 2011.08.15 13:35:00 - [6]
 

Quote:
It should always be the case that inferior numbers can win with superior decision-making.

Formations?

Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
Important Internet Spaceship League
Posted - 2011.08.15 13:59:00 - [7]
 

I believe the huge combats are seemingly fine except 2 things:
  • Lag

  • super rich alliances with tons of near unbeatable supercarriers and titans


Fix lag and supercapitals and people will enjoy these battles.
All hail for people managing to grow that big - it's just very difficult to counter with anything except more supers/titans. I was recently part of a 200 man hurricane fleet engaging a group of 40-60 supercarriers/titans with no support.
Battle started fine but then the supercarriers launched drones and lag made Eve stand still.

Suggestions:
  • Make supercarriers have same amount of drones/fighters as a normal carrier (10 with carrier 5) and double the damage of fighterbombers to match. Being able to use fighterbombers should be reward enough in itself.

  • Consider reducing the hitpoints of supercarriers and titans

  • Supercarriers don't deserve Ewar Immunity - just give them a super high scan resolution, lock range and eccm strength instead as well as a built in WCS strength of 10 or higher

  • The guns from a Titan should not be able to track things smaller than a carrier


Pinky

Black Dranzer
Caldari
Posted - 2011.08.15 14:12:00 - [8]
 

I have very little large scale fleet experience, so I'll keep this extremely brief and more reflective than instructive.

Fights in Eve, both large and small, strike me as a very formulaic game of focus fire. Shoot something 'till it dies, then shoot something else 'till it dies, then something else, etc. The "what do I shoot" thing usually comes from a higher order, so it turns into a game of menu navigation. There isn't a lot of individual choice, not on a pilot level.

Perhaps the biggest issue is one of density. As fleets in Eve scale, they don't really get bigger so much as denser.

This is an ideological thing which may be conflicting, but to me, the idea of a big fleet fight is less about a single conflict between two big entities, and more about a hundred small conflicts taking place in a very small area. You're involved in a tiny little pocket fight, but there's chaos and fire all around you. I'm not sure what would help eve become more like this, or even if it's the direction that anybody wants it to be taken. Even if it were, I'm not sure how exactly you'd go about implementing it. Penalties for too many targets on one ship? Splash damage? I don't know.

Just some food for thought.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.08.15 14:19:00 - [9]
 

Hmm… I suppose this should go in here instead:

Just one thing…
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
  • Decisions beat numbers
    • It should always be the case that inferior numbers can win with superior decision-making. Large fleets should be much less about who has the most ships and much more about who has the smartest commanders and sub-commanders.

…good luck. For this to happen, you're going to need to implement a pretty sophisticated damage stacking penalty or equivalent mechanic, so you can actually have to apply your force tactically to get the most out of it. Otherwise, larger numbers = more DPS on target + more HP to chew through, and no amount of smarts will change that simple fact.

There must be a good reason to split your fire so people start doing that, and only then can it become a matter of how to split it intelligently.

freshspree
Caldari
Dissonance Corp
Posted - 2011.08.15 14:26:00 - [10]
 

Edited by: freshspree on 15/08/2011 14:39:31
Originally by: Lady Kincaid
Edited by: Lady Kincaid on 15/08/2011 12:45:46
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
This set of threads exist to collect feedback for the separate parts of the TThis Tthread is about: LARGE 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


Large combat means blob of supercaps

1. Make Supers use ALOT more fuel. Supercap mean super damage, super size and super production costs, make moving 200 supers from one side of map to other a bit harder. Take Carrier fuel consumption as determinant: SC is 20 times more expensive so should use at least 10 times more fuel to jump (not same amount like its now), titan maybe x20.

2. Prevent Supers (both SC and Titans) from jumping into Low-Sec. This will make Low-Sec ground a bit more fun to live and fight. Maybe Dreadnoughts would find their role then (good old days).

3. Make SuperCarriers a Fighter Bomber only ship, or at least disallow them to use regular fighters. This would prevent SC of being Solo PWN mobile capable of destroying every ship in game (this wont change anything in their primary role: killing structures and other supers).
This (fighter bomber only version) would force supercap pilots to work in team with smaller ships as in real life (one Carrier moves in a convoy with more than 10 smaller ships as guard).

4. Make DD a capital only weapon, add variable to all non cap ships (simmilar like ew invulnerability on supers) disallowing activation of DD on targeted ship.

5. Lower tracking and explosion radius of Titan turrets and launchers by 25%.


No to oversized dreadnoughts and CCP should continue to work on improving the flow of large engagements.

Originally by: Pinky Denmark
I believe the huge combats are seemingly fine except 2 things:
  • Lag

  • super rich alliances with tons of near unbeatable supercarriers and titans


Fix lag and supercapitals and people will enjoy these battles.
All hail for people managing to grow that big - it's just very difficult to counter with anything except more supers/titans. I was recently part of a 200 man hurricane fleet engaging a group of 40-60 supercarriers/titans with no support.
Battle started fine but then the supercarriers launched drones and lag made Eve stand still


You guys just had to engage didn't you? Smile

ThisIsntMyMain
Posted - 2011.08.15 15:03:00 - [11]
 

Edited by: ThisIsntMyMain on 15/08/2011 15:05:53
For the love of God, please please please rebalance capital ships ...

* Supercaps i.e Fighter Bombers, should NOT be able to shoot structures, at lest not effectively. They should be anti support weapons effective against Cruiser/BS sized ships.
* Dreads should kill structures and slow moving ships like Titans, SC, Triage Carriers and other Dreads

If you intend to get rid of structure bashing altogether, you need to refocus the dread into an anti capital weapon. The Dread is usually the first capital ship players can get into (even if they skip it and wait for carrier skills) and is the "entry level". Its the equivalent of the frigate in sub cap warfare. It needs a proper role.


Edit: +1 to Pinky. Fix the lag and the SC imbalance and we will enjoy these fights just fine.

Thur Barbek
Posted - 2011.08.15 16:23:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Tippia
For this to happen, you're going to need to implement a pretty sophisticated damage stacking penalty or equivalent mechanic.
There must be a good reason to split your fire so people start doing that, and only then can it become a matter of how to split it intelligently.


Everyone, fire you civilian laser at the titan. It needs more tank, those lasers will buff its damage resists.

CCP Greyscale

Posted - 2011.08.15 16:39:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Tippia
Hmm… I suppose this should go in here instead:

Just one thing…
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
  • Decisions beat numbers
    • It should always be the case that inferior numbers can win with superior decision-making. Large fleets should be much less about who has the most ships and much more about who has the smartest commanders and sub-commanders.

…good luck. For this to happen, you're going to need to implement a pretty sophisticated damage stacking penalty or equivalent mechanic, so you can actually have to apply your force tactically to get the most out of it. Otherwise, larger numbers = more DPS on target + more HP to chew through, and no amount of smarts will change that simple fact.

There must be a good reason to split your fire so people start doing that, and only then can it become a matter of how to split it intelligently.


Yup, it's a non-trivial exercise, for sure, but there are other avenues we can explore as well. Sensor noise, ways to strip off elements of other fleets, new tools that force new tactics, that sort of thing. Honestly I have a suspicion that the way fleet combat is conducted today is already pretty inefficient in principle, it's just that the tools don't exist to delegate properly and there's only so much a single FC can think about at once.

Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Posted - 2011.08.15 17:00:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Tippia
Hmm… I suppose this should go in here instead:

Just one thing…
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
  • Decisions beat numbers
    • It should always be the case that inferior numbers can win with superior decision-making. Large fleets should be much less about who has the most ships and much more about who has the smartest commanders and sub-commanders.

…good luck. For this to happen, you're going to need to implement a pretty sophisticated damage stacking penalty or equivalent mechanic, so you can actually have to apply your force tactically to get the most out of it. Otherwise, larger numbers = more DPS on target + more HP to chew through, and no amount of smarts will change that simple fact.

There must be a good reason to split your fire so people start doing that, and only then can it become a matter of how to split it intelligently.




Yup, it's a non-trivial exercise, for sure, but there are other avenues we can explore as well. Sensor noise, ways to strip off elements of other fleets, new tools that force new tactics, that sort of thing. Honestly I have a suspicion that the way fleet combat is conducted today is already pretty inefficient in principle, it's just that the tools don't exist to delegate properly and there's only so much a single FC can think about at once.


I'm not sure what sensor noise implies, but if you can incentive target calling at the squad or wing level, fleet battle will really improve into awesome and more destructive activities.

Zirse
Minmatar
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2011.08.15 17:03:00 - [15]
 

Edited by: Zirse on 15/08/2011 17:31:49
If you're serious about sub-commanders, you need to remove the 'primary target' for 500 people. Maybe through locking time penalties that stack or something.

This would also lead into more varied fleets, as each sub commander could fill a different role because now all 500 players don't need the same engagement range.

However, if you're going to do this you'll need to make logistics less effective when stacking as well.

Valtis Thermalion
Caldari
Posted - 2011.08.15 17:15:00 - [16]
 

One of the commonly proposed solutions to blobbing has been possibility of friendly fire - hitting targets that are between you and your target. This isn't really feasible due to problems with aggression rules and server load, but how about if you'd nevertheless simulate its effects.

If there is too many ships nearby, this would lower your tracking speed. RP explanation would be that having more ships around would require you to aim more carefully in order to prevent you hitting friendly targets (which wouldn't actually never happen though). If the number of ships was immense, your tracking speed would drop down to unmanageable levels. Different gun types and sizes would have different threshold on number of ships and how close they would have to be to cause any penalties; short range small guns would have almost no issues with this while long range (extra) large guns would have severe issues with tracking if there was hundreds of ships around the ship using them.

This obviously doesn't work with missiles, but you probably could introduce similar mechanics that lower missile speed\flight time\explosion radius.

GeeShizzle MacCloud
Caldari
Posted - 2011.08.15 17:21:00 - [17]
 

Edited by: GeeShizzle MacCloud on 15/08/2011 17:21:50

im appalled that this hasn't been re-posted yet so im going to have to start it off!

nb - this is not my idea, but one of the best ideas ive seen for a while!

Originally by: Mioelnir
[Continue...]

Supercaps: While I am biased as the owner of half a supercarrier (or a full Hel in this case), I do not think supercaps can ever be truly balanced in a rock/paper/scissors/lizard/spock fashion. From the background alone, they will either not live up to them at all and be close to worthless from a game tactics standpoint (leaving players disappointed), or they will pronounce their arrival on the battlefield in confident, bold letters. The last set of changes made supercap use explode, yes. But only because it stagnated for years. As players got older, numbers should have continually increased but did not.
The only people that got into them were basically doing it for the looks and the fluff (kind of similar to the reasons behind my Hel). So right now, we are seeing a big rebound to what the numbers should have been all along, meaning we should not overreact.

But, there are certainly tweaks that could and/or need to be made. Personally, I always find it incredible that you put a generic module on a frigate, and *boom* instant wormhole big enough for 250 Titans. Orly?! Often proposed is powering the jump drives up, but I think that is the right idea on the wrong side of the equation. Not the source should need to power up, but the target - the cyno.

So why not introduce a third cyno harmonic for supers, activated not by a feeble module, but a ship (event horizon style)?
This ship powers up and creates a cyno that needs cap with mechanics similar to w-space wormholes. Upon activation, and on its own cap, it can't sustain a cyno worth anything but could eventually be enough for one supercarrier if it survives long enough to increase its mass limit sufficiently. Now, if you want to move 40 supercarriers through it, you need to power it up. Feed it cap. Protect it. You need to run it for 7 minutes and constantly pump the output of 8-10 large energy transfer array IIs into it, to swell it to sufficient levels. You need an actual fleet protecting it, defending it, summoning the might of your fleet onto the battlefield. It is hard. It should be hard.
And if you succeed, it does have an impact. Your enemies' counter escalation is not instant either but needs to go through the same, and you can disrupt them like they tried to disrupt you. It is also a lot harder to have an escape cyno in place, so if you actually run into a trap, there is only fight and no flight.

Cyno Harmonic 1 (regular cyno): Dread, Carrier, JFreighter, Rorqual, BlackOps, Titan bridge
Cyno Harmonic 2 (covert cyno): BlackOps
Cyno Harmonic 3 (cyno ship): Supercarrier, Titan itself

Rrama Ratamnim
Posted - 2011.08.15 19:23:00 - [18]
 

Edited by: Rrama Ratamnim on 15/08/2011 19:26:52

Originally by: GeeShizzle MacCloud
Edited by: GeeShizzle MacCloud on 15/08/2011 17:21:50

im appalled that this hasn't been re-posted yet so im going to have to start it off!

nb - this is not my idea, but one of the best ideas ive seen for a while!

Originally by: Mioelnir
[Continue...]

Supercaps: While I am biased as the owner of half a supercarrier (or a full Hel in this case), I do not think supercaps can ever be truly balanced in a rock/paper/scissors/lizard/spock fashion. From the background alone, they will either not live up to them at all and be close to worthless from a game tactics standpoint (leaving players disappointed), or they will pronounce their arrival on the battlefield in confident, bold letters. The last set of changes made supercap use explode, yes. But only because it stagnated for years. As players got older, numbers should have continually increased but did not.
The only people that got into them were basically doing it for the looks and the fluff (kind of similar to the reasons behind my Hel). So right now, we are seeing a big rebound to what the numbers should have been all along, meaning we should not overreact.

But, there are certainly tweaks that could and/or need to be made. Personally, I always find it incredible that you put a generic module on a frigate, and *boom* instant wormhole big enough for 250 Titans. Orly?! Often proposed is powering the jump drives up, but I think that is the right idea on the wrong side of the equation. Not the source should need to power up, but the target - the cyno.

So why not introduce a third cyno harmonic for supers, activated not by a feeble module, but a ship (event horizon style)?
This ship powers up and creates a cyno that needs cap with mechanics similar to w-space wormholes. Upon activation, and on its own cap, it can't sustain a cyno worth anything but could eventually be enough for one supercarrier if it survives long enough to increase its mass limit sufficiently. Now, if you want to move 40 supercarriers through it, you need to power it up. Feed it cap. Protect it. You need to run it for 7 minutes and constantly pump the output of 8-10 large energy transfer array IIs into it, to swell it to sufficient levels. You need an actual fleet protecting it, defending it, summoning the might of your fleet onto the battlefield. It is hard. It should be hard.
And if you succeed, it does have an impact. Your enemies' counter escalation is not instant either but needs to go through the same, and you can disrupt them like they tried to disrupt you. It is also a lot harder to have an escape cyno in place, so if you actually run into a trap, there is only fight and no flight.

Cyno Harmonic 1 (regular cyno): Dread, Carrier, JFreighter, Rorqual, BlackOps, Titan bridge
Cyno Harmonic 2 (covert cyno): BlackOps
Cyno Harmonic 3 (cyno ship): Supercarrier, Titan itself



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ THIS THIS THIS AND THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh ya, also Nerf Supercap range, and BUFF DREAD RANGE, tada now you have tag team Carriers and Dreads for attacking and force projection, while supers are more confined to home spaces for defensive operations.

And for the love of god get us an update on TIME DILATION :D

Make sure there are not equal ships between races, as inequality makes the game wicked, but make sure thers counters so that strategically anything can be countered, how do you counter a 100 supercap fleet? a 101 supercap fleet thats not a counter thats stupid... How do you counter a 400 man BS gang with logistics... 40 well trained bombers .... See the difference?

Fix EPIC FAIL logoffski titans and supercaps... its just stupid that if a small gang does manage to get a supercap pinned down all he has to do is log off and all that 30 man BS gangs hard work capturing the super is for naught... supers and titans should have massively extended logoff timers to counter there high EHP

Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
Important Internet Spaceship League
Posted - 2011.08.15 19:37:00 - [19]
 

If you remove the possibilities of focus fire, then you will create many other issues like invincible supers, titans, T3's due to logistics and RR carriers.

Being able to target super capital and titan jumpdrives and weapons (maybe also on battleships) - only with ships smaller than battlecruisers - Then you might give small ships a huge advantage and implement some sort of multiple things happeneing on the battlefield instead of the current slugfest primary battles.

But the battles being done is just a matter of human nature and common sense - Besides it's good for business I guess...

Pinky


Zenith Intaki
Gallente
Federal Defence Union
Posted - 2011.08.15 19:44:00 - [20]
 

One thing.

In eve 200 man fleet represents an army in real life. Where do you have a army, that is lead by single commander?

You should be able to divide your fleet into real squads, instead of one huge megablob.

Right now battle starts when A gets warp in to B's fleet. One messy blob lands into second messy blobs and then there is fight. Then A or B drops capitals, and if so, A or B leaves or drops their capitals. Then perhaps, A or B drops their super capitals. Then A or B leaves or drops their own super capitals.

But what happens during that fight?

Usually, your zoom is maxed OUT. Everything else is turned OFF, except overview. Only thing you do, is that you listen FC, who calls out targets. Then you pick one, shoot one, one by one untill your fleet is dead or their fleet is dead or leaves. Or node dies.

Why in hell, in so pretty and visually great game, actual battle is overview online?

Ships are stationary or aligned to something.

We never do any maneuvers while fighting, or well, sometimes you might align into something else. Whee.

I think it would be good, if fights would be more cinematic. More about player skills, than just numbers. More maneuvers, specially with smaller ship types.

Of course LAG should be gone.

It's awhile since I have been in fleet fight, but all fleet fights where I have been, it has been just huge blobs that have landed on each other. Boring, laggy, not fun.

Warping being the only maneuver in fleet combat isn't fun. We should be doing maneuvers inside grid.

Taedrin
Gallente
Kushan Industrial
Posted - 2011.08.15 20:52:00 - [21]
 

Large fleet combat needs to be MORE than simply focus firing on the primary target. Large fleet combat shouldn't necessarily take place with all ships on the same grid, or even in the same system (BONUS: having combat occur on multiple solar systems (and hopefully different server nodes) helps fight the lag monster! A win-win situation!)

YOu can encourage this behavior by giving fleets multiple objectives which must be attained simultaneously, in different solar systems. Make it so that both the attacking and the defending fleets need to try to control as many of these objects as possible. Whoever holds on to the most objectives for long enough, wins - similar to WoW's Arathi Basin battleground. It's dirty to even mention this, but it could work.

This achieves multiple goals for CCP:
1) Large fleet combat can occur, while only consuming the resources of several small gang combat events taking place on separate nodes. This also gives players the ability to make tactical decisions, as they no longer have to fight against the lag monster in order to do things like tactical warps, hit and run strikes, etc...
2) Strategy becomes more important than simply fleet size and composition.
3) Smaller, mobile fleets with competent FCs have a chance to win against a superior fleet with an incompetent FC.
4) Individuals feel more important, as they are part of a smaller section of the fleet which accomplishes some important goal/objective instead of being just another gun to fire on the primary target.

Stranger Danger Jr
Posted - 2011.08.15 21:35:00 - [22]
 

Lets face it eve it a game of numbers , If you numbers are better than your targets you win. The only way i see the game of number dying off is to deploy the ability of shooting and damaging specific sub systems of a ship. I.E. taking out a vagas mwd or a curses abilty to nuet. At that point its a game of decisions and not my epeen is bigger than your epeen.

I do like the idea of a heavy bomber class though , something that fires capital sized turrets or torps but keeps the same tracking as regular caps. Maybe a good idea for the tier 2 class of battle cruisers. There by reducing the ability to hit smaller sig ships. This would effectivly kill off the my SC blob is bigger than yours. While keeping the ability of wrecking someones station in a matter of minutes for the sc.

I would also like to see the hel get its bonus changed. It was a good thing back when it could triage buts its a down right stupid one now that it is no longer used for reps.

Crexa
Star Mandate
Posted - 2011.08.15 22:49:00 - [23]
 

Bring back the space mines. Minefields as a counter to super-caps or in conjunction with the cyno idea as posted previously. Just a thought. But, I do miss the minefields of old.

Harqia Arbosa
Posted - 2011.08.16 01:27:00 - [24]
 

Edited by: Harqia Arbosa on 16/08/2011 01:27:43
Originally by: Gizznitt Malikite
I'm not sure what sensor noise implies, but if you can incentive target calling at the squad or wing level, fleet battle will really improve into awesome and more destructive activities.


Sensor noise sounds to me like penalties (lower effective scan resolution seems an obvious one, but I can see others) might be the result of many people locking/locked on to the same target at the same time. Something like that (along with more responiblities/option for wing/squad commanders) would go a long way towards expanding fleet engagements beyond 200+ ships shooting the same target till in explodes and then repeats.

Herping yourDerp
Posted - 2011.08.16 01:53:00 - [25]
 

so how do u plan to kill the coalitions and MAKE them fight each other? it sounds all good haveing a large battle every day somewhere but why should they?

xp3ll3d
Posted - 2011.08.16 05:02:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Zenith Intaki
In eve 200 man fleet represents an army in real life. Where do you have a army, that is lead by single commander?
You should be able to divide your fleet into real squads, instead of one huge megablob.
...
We never do any maneuvers while fighting, or well, sometimes you might align into something else. Whee.
...
It's awhile since I have been in fleet fight, but all fleet fights where I have been, it has been just huge blobs that have landed on each other. Boring, laggy, not fun.
Warping being the only maneuver in fleet combat isn't fun. We should be doing maneuvers inside grid.


I think this is the main problem of large flights. They are just blobs and then focus firing down.
But in all movies / TV it is always made up of smaller squads that have their own objectivces. I think the Battlestar Galactica series had the best example of fleet flights.
The large super capital ships are blasting away at each other, while all of the small squadrons focus on taking each other out.
There needs to be a way to break the "blob" into smaller skirmishes that are all happening, and spread over a larger area of the same grid.

As CCP said, having more FCs in each fleet (through the smaller squads) would allow more to get experience, which can only improve EVE overall.

Naradius
DEATHFUNK
Posted - 2011.08.16 05:21:00 - [27]
 

Along time ago, I was involved in a huge fleet fight (1000 in local, if I remember rightly) when trying to push out Red Alliance when it seemed that it was the World vs Atlas

Any way, the lag was insane at times, it was the typical - warp in, select primary, secondary, fight with module lag, try to get on a kill, warp back to safe POS, wait 5 mins and hope the screen would load up in the POS while still in your ship, rinse/repeat....but it was intense, very intense as large, laggy blobs go...and the reason why?- I put it down to this:

  • We were balked by max fleet size, so we were forced to create fleets for different roles, each with their own FC and target callers. The only joint communication was in the Command Channel. This was before Sov Blockades and when Stealth bomber bombing runs became a fad, although I do believe that the Stealth bomber boost was good for fleet variation.

  • The fight lasted a long time, with CONSTANT action, thus building up the tension.

  • The feeling of being outnumbered, but somehow being able to hold the ground.


Maybe my points mean nothing, but what I am trying to say is, just forcing variation, by maybe lowering the amount of members in one fleet, could make the world of difference and make people think differently about how they approach a large fleet battle...making the whole process, not only more enjoyable, but almost insanely intense. That is what EVE players live for - "Insanely Intense".

EI Digin
Caldari
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2011.08.16 06:28:00 - [28]
 

The current metagame involves racing through DPS ships either ignoring logistics, trying to break through logistics, or having to change another target and lose 30 seconds of shooting time (worst case). It isn't viable to bring anything other than a battleship if you're fighting battleships if it's an even fight because battleships (such as Abaddons, which are REALLY popular) have a nice long close up range and can dismantle any smaller fleet if it's close up, and can tank through most longer ranged fleets.

My suggestion would be to improve the ability of the support classes (logistics, ECM, long point/webs) to create a stalemate until they are dead before you go have to through DPS. This would involve having a wing or two of lesser priority ships such as battlecruisers or HACs or maybe even assault frigates available to hit ECM, logistics and other cruiser-sized force multipliers while the rest of the fleet tries vigorously to break through the support wall. This would drag out large fleet battles and make things such as individual player ability and player movement much more prevalent. The hero tackle on a straggling Scimitar or Rook could make the difference between victory and defeat!

Instead of quick and dirty smackdowns over and over again, we can have battles where a few people screw up dearly but a large portion gets out alive in the end, you can lose a bunch of ships but are still able to come back with the same fleet if you are skilled enough, and reshipping via carriers and "gate supply lines" becomes vital as the loss of important support characters can mean the loss of your fleet if you aren't careful.

A couple of other quick suggestions would be to slightly reduce the range on logistics so they would have to stay with the fleet a little bit more (40-50k), and possibly to increase cycle time but also to increase the amount of reps given to make it easier to save someone, but harder to keep someone up. If there are more reps on a single target, they will be put to full quicker, but there will be more wasted reps.

PanKrolik
Posted - 2011.08.16 09:58:00 - [29]
 

Just my 0.1c.

For supers i would increase their fuel bay and modify their jump drive consumption soo after certain distance fuel cost would scale rapidly up. You can still throw a super bloob across the map but if you want to do it fast be ready to spend bilions in fuel.

I would change super and carrier bonuses to put hard limit of 5 Fighters/Fighter bombers to reduce lag. Extra fighters will be replaced with extra hp/drone damage same with drone links. ECM burst might needs to be replaced with different ability due to its efficiency in lag. Maybe a direct ECM with like 30s duration 1m cd that can bypas normal limits of ECM. (yes it could be able to jamm supers and carriers/dreads in siege/triage)

Titans: I owuld add small aoe to DD like 2-3km radious and make it modified by sig of target. AOE would be added to compensate for change in titan guns. Those guns should not be able to track subcapitals efficently. Maybe even put a hard block on firing at subcaps like that you guns are not able to calculate firing solution for such small targets. Titan bridges should have its spread radious increased.

Agresion timers for supers should be increased by 25%.

Dreds: Should be able to get reps when in siege. Its HP should be increased. This way its possible for dread to remain competitive in supercaps enviroment. To offset ability to be repaired in siege i would add hardcoded inability to engage subcaps when in siege.


Takashi Halamoto
Mercurialis Inc.
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.16 11:23:00 - [30]
 

i liked the idea that it takes cap on the cyno ship to open the door for ships to come through and make it that supers and titans are expensive in cap costs so one tiny litle merlin isnt going to insta cyno in 40 supers, it might be able to bring in two carriers or one with a protective gang while it tries to cyno in more, (im thinking the dominion trailer, pilgrim lights a cyno, a capital and a few ships manage to get in before the pilgrim pops, the carrier opens the door and pumps its cap out getting in the dreads and aeon and support


i also agree beyond anything else done, dreads to get a jump range equal to their carrier brothers,

i also agree supers and titans more expensive fuelwise, 10X would be right meaning the capitals get streamed into two groups

Dreads and Carriers are Damage and Support at long range, able to quickly counter a surprise or strike deep behind the lines

Titans and Supers are Damage and Support at close range able to hammer the enemy across a border due to limited range (leaving them near the front themselves so vulnerable to their staging posts being hit) or mainly for defence, so that in a war where alliance X is attacking Y, if Y stages its capitals near the front and so does X, if X throws its carriers and dreads out they can jump well past the range of Y's supers and titans to quickly respond giving them a chance to bug out if they hear that the supers are on their way back behind the lines to get them


Pages: [1] 2 3 4

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