open All Channels
seplocked Jita Park Speakers Corner
blankseplocked Remote Reps: A litmus test for some voters.. Candidates?
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.

Author Topic

Dungar Loghoth
Gank Bangers
Posted - 2008.05.16 15:17:00 - [1]

I have noted that many of the candidates don't find that remote rep tanking is a hot-button issue according to their quick cards, yet my experience in the game is that many pvpers find it to be a hot-button issue. This single topic could swing a significant count of voters, so I think it deserves its own posting and individual responses.

The problem is, largely, that there isn't a good way to counter remote rep gangs except with other remote rep gangs or, in certain circumstances, or race-specific recons. Heavy neuts come to mind as do a few other things, all of which end up nerfing your typical setup just in case you come across some other remote rep ships. The other side of the coin also is that remote rep gangs can do the very thing that CCP tried to engineer out of the game: they have the capacity to leave a fight once begun.

Remote rep tanking is possible because the game mechanics permit ship-class vessels to hug a gate or a station and jump out or dock faster than drones or missiles can fly and faster than turrets can track. The very same remote repping making these ships immune to conventional ship setups also gives them the power to leave a fight that turns against them.

There aren't a lot of places for a candidate to go with this one. Either a) there is no problem or b) some combination of remote repping aggro and/or docking/jumping penalty mechanisms should be examined seriously by CCP or c) come up with some other way to prevent remote repping ships from leaving a fight that has begun (and address whether or not a stale mate should be an acceptable outcome and, if not, how should things be different to allow one side or the other to prevail).

Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2008.05.16 15:34:00 - [2]

Edited by: Jade Constantine on 16/05/2008 15:49:05

I see what you did there too Cool (but the answer is A/B).

On the whole remote-repping battleships are fine in open space warfare, but yes there is an issue with station-hugging remote repping gangs and the issue is that while effective hit-points have been radically increased across the board for all ships - the redock after aggression timer has not been increased commensurately - this has made it disproportionately easier to de-aggress and dock out of fights while the reminder of the gang continue to rep you. (similar problem for stargates on 0.0/secure space transitions particularly). I'd have to think seriously about whether remote repping should be something that generates aggression timer but in principle since it does actively allow an aggressing ship to stay in the fight longer then its probably fair to make it so. Very interested in other points of view on that specific issue though.

Posted - 2008.05.16 15:48:00 - [3]

Originally by: Jade Constantine


I think there are two problems here. But they aren't specific to RR gangs. They are more specific to re-docking in general.

The first is as you mentioned that there have been 3-4 hit point increases[2 flat 25% increases, 1 change in damage controls to make a larger structure buffer, + rigs] and no increases in the amount of time it takes to leave a fight after aggressing.

The second thing you mention is almost right. Remote repping should not create an agression timer, it should transfer the current timer onto the repairer. Otherwise there is no ability to defend and jump through rather than a reduced ability to defend and jump through.

This could create some problems where a RR gang that is legitimately able to defend itself, but not able to hit its attackers[say a fast long range HAC gang that has left the RRs engagement range but is still able to project points/bubbles to keep them on the gate] cannot de-aggress and jump through without losing ships.

If aggression just transfered they would only be kept there if they were shooting someone.

This also has beneficial effects for empire war dedicated RR ships in alt-corps. Since the transferring aggression means you cannot simply redock the ship and never have it vulnerable.

Dungar Loghoth
Gank Bangers
Posted - 2008.05.16 16:34:00 - [4]

As someone fully specialized in skirmish warfare mindlinks the counters to remote-rep battleship gangs are not nearly prevalent enough. I had 25m SP before i got tech 2 large guns [Amarr specced], which means i fly ships with high damage and great tracking [or bonuses to cap so I can sustain fire longer] pretty much exclusively and its still not a realistic counter, because i cannot be around all the time. And hedging a counter on a single person or few people who have trained the anti remote-repping ships is just not productive.

You should not need Falcons and Rooks to begin to compete and the requirement to have them is very damaging to the game.

I suppose the best way to describe it would be a tech 1 cruiser litmus test. Ask the question. "How many tech 1 or tech 2 fit tech 1 cruisers would it take to kill the above ship if it engaged instead of tanking and jumping?"

For regular battleships and battlecruisers the number is low. A thorax with ECM drones, rupture with damage drones, both with big plates, an arbitrator tracking disrupting, a celestis lock time damening, and a blackbird jamming can expect to kill pretty must any Battleship in the game if it chooses to engage.

A plated, RRing Battleship? Nothing, you would need enough cruisers that you could alpha the ship because otherwise its going to jump or dock. In the current remote rep environment there are now four useful cruisers[I said in my recent interview, 3, but i left one out]. The Blackbird and Arbitrator[defensive via TD's/Jamming], the stabbler[disposable fast web that won't explode immediately if looked at by a single remote repping BS, like inties will], and the Maller[the only cruiser able to fit a 1600mm plate and remote rep like battleships, and still fit tech 2 guns].

That isn't to say tanking is bad, but people need to be realistic about the advantages that tanking bring. Remote-rep battleships ships are and ought to be "the blob". They win by overwhelming their opponents. The question is "why can they overwhelm their opponents and why it it reasonable?". And the answer is "because tanking and remote repping allows players to bring more forces more safely, where nano gangs cannot"[A pretty standard tactic is to ball up in a circle and remote rep eachother until aggro timers wear off and then jump through a gate or dock up, leaving the other side aggressed and your side to run away as fast as they can. this doesn't work with nano gangs because they have no tank or ability to rep eachother].

Originally by: Hardin
However, I do feel that small tweaks can be made which gives specifically prepared 'anti-remote rep' forces (not blobs) more ability to force engagements and cause pain to the remote-reppers!

Clearly as it stands the 'remote rep' issue is percieved by many to be majorly imbalanced. However I would rather see dedicated 'anti-remote repers' given a boost (encouraging more people to dedicate themselves to that field) than 'remote reppers' given a nerf.

You do not counter neutralizers with guardians/basilisks where if your opponent fits neutralizers you must have multiple guardians/basilisks in your gang in order to have a chance to kill them just as you do not counter nano-fit HAC/Recon gangs with specific ships where you can't kill the targets without them. At least, you don't if you want the game to be balanced with advantages and disadvantages to bringing different sizes of ships.

Ma Zhiqiang
Huang Yinglong
Posted - 2008.05.16 18:07:00 - [5]

Edited by: Ma Zhiqiang on 16/05/2008 18:09:47
There are many ways to attack a problem or possible flaw in the game mechanics.

Say, what would happen if you introduced smart bomb effects on exploding ships, so that they damage all ships within a certain area? You'd at least see less of remote repping BSs in that case. Would also introduce a lot of problems for close range ships, so maybe not a great idea. But an idea Cool

Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.05.16 18:22:00 - [6]

Dungar I have already stated my opinion on my quick card sir.


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


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to

These forums are archived and read-only