|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
Syeven Reed
T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K
992
|
Posted - 2014.11.18 19:58:00 -
[1] - Quote
Great change, something thats has been needed for a long time. My one grief though is that AV is going to become increasingly hard. Reasoning follows,
Many people, myself included carry remotes around to kill vehicles at least 2 for an LAV and 3 for a badly tanked tank. We won't be able to do this anymore as we are going to have to detonate after the first drop, alerting the tank before we can get off the other 2.
I know we have proxies but there really not that good and I'm not in that much control of the situation when using them.
I have a solution which may or may not be possible (I will leave this up to your brain). Could it be like this,
Assuming I'm a scout (because I always am). We can place however many remotes we like but only retaining control over one. Meaning that chain reactions would work but not separate remotes placed in separate areas.
TL;DR I don't want to loose the ability to place all remotes in a bunch together.
SCAN ATTEMPT PREVENTED
EvE - 21 Day Trial
|
Syeven Reed
T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K
995
|
Posted - 2014.11.19 11:42:00 -
[2] - Quote
Ekrano Fergus wrote:Could the bandwidth be expressed in Mb instead of MHz. An amount of data makes a bit more sense than the frequency it would be transmitted on when discussing limits. When it talks about frequency it means to total range available. ;)
SCAN ATTEMPT PREVENTED
EvE - 21 Day Trial
|
Syeven Reed
T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K
998
|
Posted - 2014.11.20 18:19:00 -
[3] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:el OPERATOR wrote:Mister Goo wrote:
Equipment spam is the problem that BW is supposed to fix. I think BW is NOT the answer, there are much better ways to do this and the ideas in Cross's Logistics thread are the most solid I have seen. I know that there are no comments by a dev there, but I also know that you have been reading it.
OMG, YES! I totally forgot about Cross's equipment revamp yesterday! THAT idea works without unduly penalizing tactical play! wtf, Rat? Why the push for BW, but not even a COMMENT about the other? Because Cross' logi revamps are compatible with BW changes and BW can be adjusted up or down to allow logis greater play and flexibility without indirectly buffing other suits since BW is a suit-specific stat. Exactly, BW is less binary than "let's stop stuff being placed here".
SCAN ATTEMPT PREVENTED
EvE - 21 Day Trial
|
Syeven Reed
T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K
1002
|
Posted - 2014.11.21 10:18:00 -
[4] - Quote
el OPERATOR wrote:Syeven Reed wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:el OPERATOR wrote:Mister Goo wrote:
Equipment spam is the problem that BW is supposed to fix. I think BW is NOT the answer, there are much better ways to do this and the ideas in Cross's Logistics thread are the most solid I have seen. I know that there are no comments by a dev there, but I also know that you have been reading it.
OMG, YES! I totally forgot about Cross's equipment revamp yesterday! THAT idea works without unduly penalizing tactical play! wtf, Rat? Why the push for BW, but not even a COMMENT about the other? Because Cross' logi revamps are compatible with BW changes and BW can be adjusted up or down to allow logis greater play and flexibility without indirectly buffing other suits since BW is a suit-specific stat. Exactly, BW is less binary than "let's stop stuff being placed here". wtf does " binary" have to do with it? Except that BW WON'T stop or limit bitches from dropping equipment all over supply depots to initiate lag? Binary - Yes or No, 1 or 0, True or False.
Your right it won't stop them, thats the point. However when they move to a different suit the equipment is going to go poof.
SCAN ATTEMPT PREVENTED
EvE - 21 Day Trial
|
Syeven Reed
T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K
1010
|
Posted - 2014.11.22 21:54:00 -
[5] - Quote
el OPERATOR wrote:SO, new idea.
I am already a declared fan of Cross' proposed equipment revamp, the one Shayz is talking about, I see it reinforcing Logistics (rightfully) as THE equipment use role and while it will have some adverse effects on certain playstyles it doesn't outright nullify others the way BW does.
I am against BW in its entirety, because at it's core it address SPAM (very worthwhile endeavour) but as a collateral cost it also completely eliminates certain Combat Logistics gameplay (which I oppose).
SO, since SPAM is the problem AND evidently switching usage of a Logi suit is the method, why not institute some code that tracks the SPAMming actions themselves and once the algorithm recognizes the spammer it a) kicks their ass out of the match completely b) insta-pops ALL equipment they've deployed c) deducts fully from their wallet all associated suit and fitting costs including the frame they were attampting to switch into and d) ALSO calculates up to that point in the match how many SP they would have received and deducts it from their current available SP pool! If their current available is 0 or less than what they would have gotten then they go negative until they generate proper WP to balance the deficit.
SO, we already know CCP is more than capable to track player action vs. game result (FW friendlyfire negative points, vehicle driving and acceleration cues moving vehicles around etc.) and script appropriate reponses for the cues. Script a piece of code that when it sees [drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-SWITCH OR SUICIDE-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-SWITCH] all in one particular area it frikin' kicks that ass to the curb and leaves a nice fat CCP bootprint on it.
CCP Glinda, now that she's no longer in denial about equipment spamming and the inherent lag it produces, can track and calculate roughly how much equipment it takes, set a worthwhile time limit to the "drop drop drop" element and quantify the algorithm/coding so it can't be broken by [drop-drop-drop-drop-(x action, say squatting down or firing a weapon)-SWITCH-drop-drop...] but still allows for active LOGISTICS which can be very much drop-drop-drop sometimes.
Playtesting would be required. Analytics on existing and predicted Logistics use play metrics would be required. Coding would be required. BUT, this is the **** being done anyway to institute BW already and if composed correctly PENALIZES SPAMMERS without victimizing gameplayers.
I'm all for growth, balancing and improvement and neccessary changes, especially those that cut down or eliminate exploitation. I'm not for the monthly Calvin and Hobbes comicstrip "New Rule!" method of addressing issues.
btw, I am at work again (if I'm going to spend time doing game design, I'm getting paid dude) so if it takes me a bit to respond to responses that's what's up.
*douses self in gasoline* Flame On! I'm sorry, I don't know how else to put across my feelings towards this so don't take this the wrong way. This idea is stupid. I'll follow this reasoning up.
Create a code that tracks spammers and kicks them from matches? Do you have any idea how much trial and error would be involved in doing this? This would create so many more problems than solve them. Aside from that the amount of effort required on what I asume is a very small team would be astronomical.
BW is happening, no matter what people have to say about it, so let's leave the new crazy workload ideas out and try to build on what's there lol
SCAN ATTEMPT PREVENTED
EvE - 21 Day Trial
|
|
|
|