Skip to main content

CSMX - Post #13 - Fleet Warp

Let's just dive into fleet warp, shall we?

First: Go post your responses. I need you to give feedback on this. I cannot cover all of the usages of bookmarks that people have. This is fine detail play style stuff. I need your help in how this is hurting you. I've gotten really, really good feedback so far. I need more.

Post on the feedback thread. Write to me.

Second: Corbexx getting a soundboard with CCP Larrikin together for this upcoming week. Look for a date/time on my Sunday post. It should be Wednesday or Thursday of next week.

This one was not one I could figure out how to glean information from people without making it rather clear that a potential change was on the horizon. I like some of the change and I dislike other parts of it. I also spoke and speak from my background as small gangs and low sec combat. This is one of those topics that it was greatly important to say, "my experience," and "for me" because the results are very different across groups.

I am not a fan of fleet warp. I like making people fly their ships. Warping huge fleets full of people who pay no attention to what they are doing and just start hitting the fire buttons when they get there bother me. I think responsibility is important. Paying attention and shutting up are not hard. However, I also function in low sec groups in k-space. This is not everyone elses world.

One immediate problem is social PvE content. I just don't like anything that makes it harder for people to do PvE content together right now. Outside of incursions the PvE system is anti-sharing and changes like this make it more so. I am incredibly frustrated by this. One of my goals since I joined the CSM has been to improve and smooth the PvE system because it is one of the largest and most neglected things that all of our players interact with.

I cannot speak of wormhole usage but their reliance on bookmarks for the very basics in their movement is enormous and will be greatly effected. I can only point out that this is going to be a problem. There I spent my time attempting to support Corbexx with the little knowledge that I do have as he laid out all the areas that will most affect wormholers. It is terribly affecting them. He has been working on this for weeks.

Now, we need more help.

Constructive help.

Post, respond, join our soundboard. Give us all of it, good and bad.

Comments

  1. I already highlighted my concerns about catching and killing OGB's (so did Aebe Amraen from TEST) in the thread so I won't go over that again.

    I have few questions that you may not be able to answer but CCP should be. How viable is it to instantly propagate corp bookmarks? That would remove much of the automation, people would still have to act in order to warp themselves. While that is a none perfect solution (doesn't help coalition fleets) it would likely mitigate/soften much of the problems for smaller corps and wormhole people.

    The other one people often mention is limiting it to squads which I personally would be fine with, but if this is an attempt by CCP to also reduce the effectiveness of bombers (is it? did they say that?) bombers are already limited to group smaller then a squad to make all their bombs go off so I'm not sure how useful that would be.

    Another idea I had it that we currently have to option to flag yourself exempt from fleet warp. Would it be possibly to do the reverse? A mechanic where by ***a limited number*** say 5 or so people can flag or be flagged to take warps to things they can't warp too? Basically you could have a few people in specialist tackle ships who can sort of act as the fleet 'vanguard' then and become the ships that the rst of the fleet can warp too :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Fleet warp is absolutely essential when you're dealing with fleets made of multiple alliances, or even multiple corps within an alliance (we desperately need alliance bookmarks before any changes to fleet warp).

    Fleet warp is one of those simple changes that just makes an FC's life easier. In many cases, it results in more deaths of your fleet, not less, as afk players are dragged into combat situations without being aware.

    I get wanting players to be active participants, but this runs contrary to large fleet combat, and always will. Small gang is a completely different animal from trying to coordinate battles where each side has multiple 256-man fleets.

    It's one of those things that is necessary because of the interface, not thinking.
    If we had real spaceships fighting each other, the commander's ship would slave the navigation systems to his consol so he could coordinate when and where the fleet lands; fleet warp is our tool to do just that.

    Leave it alone. Don't change it. (Comment made at work before I can check the link, so I'm not sure what the "issue" or the "pain" is.)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Fleet warp is absolutely essential when you're dealing with fleets made of multiple alliances, or even multiple corps within an alliance (we desperately need alliance bookmarks before any changes to fleet warp).

    Fleet warp is one of those simple changes that just makes an FC's life easier. In many cases, it results in more deaths of your fleet, not less, as afk players are dragged into combat situations without being aware.

    I get wanting players to be active participants, but this runs contrary to large fleet combat, and always will. Small gang is a completely different animal from trying to coordinate battles where each side has multiple 256-man fleets.

    It's one of those things that is necessary because of the interface, not thinking.
    If we had real spaceships fighting each other, the commander's ship would slave the navigation systems to his consol so he could coordinate when and where the fleet lands; fleet warp is our tool to do just that.

    Leave it alone. Don't change it. (Comment made at work before I can check the link, so I'm not sure what the "issue" or the "pain" is.)

    ReplyDelete
  4. If you could warp to co-ordinates like in the old days that would help but I can see this causing major problems for our militia fleets where they are various alliances and for npsi groups

    ReplyDelete
  5. From my point of view fleet warp is a workaround the bookmark system. If we get rid of fleet warp to bookmarks then we need some way to share bookmarks effectively with people outside your corp. We can talk to one another over light years of space but have to print out hard copies of positional data? Alliance bookmarks would be great but being able to post bookmarks and copy them in chat would be amazing.

    ReplyDelete
  6. If the problem is combat probing, then fix that directly, just don't allow warping to a probe result that's within 1000km.

    If the problem is bombers landing with a perfect shot lined up... well... they are called stealth bombers for a reason...

    If the problem is that someone else might be able to counter you then maybe you should... you know... counter that? Fights aren't meant to be one sided, it's supposed to be about the strategies all sides bring to bear.

    ReplyDelete
  7. My biggest problem is that this change affects w-space disproportionately to k-space, as I'm sure Corbexx has pointed out extensively.

    My next issue is that the goal of "transfer[ing] more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members" is not achieved with these changes. All you're doing is adding an additional step to the process of warping a fleet with no value-added to anyone.

    Finally, I get the distinct impression that there is a clear undertone that these changes are designed to impact stealth bombers and combat probing. I have a problem with making a design decision that impacts all of EVE in order to have an impact on two very specific roles.

    If this is true, this doesn't even impact stealth bombers other than adding an additional step of getting a cloaky on grid at the bookmark first (or just having the person who made the bookmark stay put). I've proposed other ideas in the thread for nerfing stealth bombers revolving around changes to your ship when equipping a bomb launcher.

    I also honestly have no idea what the issue is with combat probing. In w-space, if you get combat probed you weren't doing a good enough job checking d-scan. We also mainly brawl or fight in close quarters meaning that there's no need for combat probing during a fight. If combat probing is an issue in null (which I'm guessing it is), then fix the issue directly.

    Although now I'm reading that "contemporary bombing runs rely on split-second combat probing", so this change again appears to be targeting stealth bombers. Fix the problem directly, please, so you don't have to ruin everyone else's game for the benefit of one area of space.

    It seems to me that the people heralding this as being a great change are primarily people who gain from how this impacts stealth bombers (also vis à vis combat probers), because they're residents of null. It would be great if the null sec CSMs could push their agendas without impacting all other EVE players.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The problem with combat probing is that it exists :P

      More seriously, Combat probes *crush* the possibility of a sniper fleet that exists beyond 150km (Euphemistically referred to as a meta). In 'the good old days', a Sniper fleet that warped at 200km or so would obliterate the paralysed short range BS that they fought. If you want a good example of how a comparative fight might play out, look at the "I was there" trailer. Doesn't that look way more fun that 'right click -> warp fleet to'?

      The issue is that combat probes are so quick and efficient. (I also don't believe that you can stop probes scanning. [New Deployable coming soonTM]). So the ease of getting a short range fleet under the guns of the long-range fleet makes the long-range fleet totally sub-optimal.

      Rob K.

      Delete
    2. Not exactly the most powerful Nerf. If I read the notes right then instead of an FC being able to simply punt the fleet to probe results he has to send in a probing alt first which he can then warp the fleet to.

      Considering that I do this all the time against smaller low sec fleets which are much more agile then larger Null fleets its not like suddenly sniper fleets will be invulnerable. It actually doesn't change much at all for normal fleet combat.

      The nerf to bombers is also very slight, this merely adds at the MOST like half a minute of extra time to get a scout properly situated and to warp to them. It does slightly, and I do mean very very slightly, add a bit of danger to the warp off because the FC can't warp the fleet to a safe bookmark. Which only limits the options to a random planet, star, or a cloaked up afk alt for the purpose.

      I actually prefer the cloaked prober method because the scout can give you much more information on fleet disposition and such.

      This seems like another ill considered, poorly conceived, ineffectual band-aid that CCP is trying to slap onto a problem because they think it needs to be curbed and/or they have more important things to do.

      Bare in mind that if combat probing was completely removed or nerfed into oblivion then the meta would shift to only snipers instead of only brawlers and the new meta would be just as small as it is now.

      Delete
    3. The thing is, that when Combat probing (as it is now) didn't exist, people still used short range ships. The ability to 'punch up' with a smaller number of heavies dps ships was valued and common. So no, I don't think 'only snipers' would be used. Not unless they removed Interceptors, AFs, etc.

      But of course, back when the fights we're talking about happened, EvE was a much much smaller game. I don't know if it was a *better* one though...

      Rob K.

      Delete
  8. Finding content in w-space already takes lots of time, with all that scanning through literally dozens of systems. Sometimes it takes hours and hours of scanning. Fleet warps help to spare at least some time, besides, timing can be crucial and you can miss a target by seconds. Basically, what this change does is making boring stuff (warps) even more boring and time consuming. Like there isn't enough routine in the game.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I guess if you live within the blue donut (bagel? Krab Fortress?), finding actual PvPers must be hard.... :P

      It explains why SSC has been wandering Heimatar and Metro lately...

      Rob K.

      Delete
    2. I don't think SSC has a single blue, period. The blue donut doesn't exist and anyone telling you that it does is seriously misinformed. We fought LZHX the other day and HK too. I'm assuming you don't live in C5 space, so you wouldn't know how rare it is to get any sort of direct connection to one of these corps.

      SSC is in all areas of space, because content.

      Delete
    3. I didn't think my sense of humour was *that* opaque, but never mind...

      "SSC is in all areas of space, because content."

      SSC has been around Metro for a month, at least. If these guys aren't interested in being inside a WH, perhaps that's because there's a lack of people to shoot? There's a difference between roaming an area, and inhabiting it. SSC, I might suggest, are doing the latter.

      As for 'blue donut doesn't exist', the 'WH CSM' has concerns. You (Wormholers in general) voted for him because, presumably, he knows what he is talking about. I point you to his opinion... :P

      http://corbexx.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/c5-and-c6-space.html

      And finally, just because you fight someone, doesn't mean that you don't ally with them, if its necessary. Speaking from my own experience, people in low-sec shoot each other, until there's a 'bigger' threat/opportunity.

      Look out WHCFC, LSCFC is watching you :P

      Rob K.

      Delete
    4. I'm in SSC so I'm not talking out my ass when I talk about my own alliance. I can assure you that no one is inhabiting k-space, but taking out roams to null and low are common. If you ever lived in w-space you'd know that coming across other active corps in our chains is rare. A lot of that can be attributed to the randomness of chains but also the fact that you have risk-averse corps who will seal up their wormhole so they can PvE in peace.

      I read Corbexx's post back when it came out. The biggest issue is that fact that C6 space is being rented out using the W-Space Citizen alliance. The whole concept of the WHCFC is a farce.

      But of course, temporary blues are a thing everywhere in the game. If there's something mutual to be gained by not shooting each other to go after a bigger fish, why not?

      Delete
  9. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Caveat: I am a wormholer who care's not one damn whit for nullsec or Sov style gameplay. ((I also can't type for crap... hence the delete and repost... sheesh)

    The Mechanic:
    (1) Fleet Warp as it exists is one guy initiating a warp to a specific point which is then immediately carried out by all the ships in fleet simultaneously.

    The Issue:
    (2) One guy can manage the movement of a whole fleet all by himself.

    (2a)The issue harks directly to 'exploitive' gameplay whereby one player can utilize a fleet as if it were his sole ship.
    (2b) This was made even worse by Drone Assignment Mechanics that allowed one guy to simultaneously command all the drones in a fleet.
    (2c)This was heavily exacerbated by multi-boxing software that allowed one guy to generate target, fire (and all other) commands across a whole fleet simultaneously.

    Taken all together I think we can all agree this is suck gameplay, I don't care who you are or where you fly.

    The Rebalance:
    (3) So far, banning multi-boxing software so individual ships must be controlled individually, whether by individual players or by one player having to switch between clients to input commands to each ship, non-simultaneously.

    Now we take a look at changing Fleet Warp because it seems on the face of it to be part of the same 'exploitive' type of gameplay.

    But... is it really? Fleet Warping has been around a long long time. It empowers players to act in unison but only in movement. And fleet movement, leaving/arriving from/to designated places in EVE is a powerful thing... just look at Jump Changes.

    OK... so suggestions?

    (4) The Fleet Warp command does not initiate a Fleetwide ‘Warp To’ command... it initiates ONLY a Fleetwide ‘Align To’ command to a designated warpable point, that’s all. For the actual warp to take place each ship must have the actual ‘Warp To’ command initiated by a player.

    Go AFK... you get left behind, period. Wanna warp all your alts in Fleet? Better be amazingly fast at client switching…

    Simple, easy to play, you have to be there, at the keyboard and be awake... and for them as are there and awake, the gang still gets the job done whether it is a corp/personal BM or whatever warpable point the FC wants to land on.

    I do not doubt that this suggestion does not answer all needs and wants of all the players, but it does quite nicely eliminate the OP of the One Man Fleet... while maintaining the Strength in Numbers and Group Gameplay aspects of Fleet Mechanics in EVE.

    ReplyDelete
  11. They certainly aren't afraid to kick the hornet's nest, are they?

    Random observations after reading the feedback:

    1) Large one-man mining fleets are harder to warp in and out? That's probably intentional. Despite claims to the contrary, I think CCP is angling the game as close as practicable to a player:ship ratio of one. Nullsec players are going to have to get used to mining if they want to keep their indexes up, rather than leaving the work to that one dude with 30 accounts. As a side note, the inability to warp fleets to POSes is... amusing in its implications. Also, stealth buff to drag bubbles.

    2) Link T3s will become effectively invincible: Yeah, that sucks. Maybe the solution is to put a denominator under sensor strength's influence on signature radius? After all, the current situation, where you need a max-everything prober just to get a hit on one, is also pretty bad.

    3) Multi-corp and multi-alliance fleets take it on the chin. The intent might have been to make coalitions and large alliances more painful, which it will do, but this hits bands of smaller corps--especially in WHs--and NPSI fleets hard. Needs work.

    4) No more fleet warping to missions or sigs: It's not like EVE's PVE needed another nerf to group play. Also, frigate swarms in L4s are fun and profitable for new players.

    5) Ships warp at different speeds! Yes, they do. >:-) Leaving aside all the nice warp-speed-modifying options, this means that either fleets have to be reconceptualized or wing and squad commanders need to be much more proficient in estimating the warp time of their ships so that the logi don't land to soon before the DPS does, or vice versa. I don't think this is an intrinsically bad thing, but it's a *huge* change that may lead to more fleets of similar-classed ships, or at least much broader adoption of warp rigs.

    6) Fleets of -10 gankers and hostile FW soldiers won't be able to use the insta-warp, fleet safes and pings that keep them from death by NPCs. This is basically an issue of high-sec law enforcement being an all-or-nothing proposition: if they aren't uncatchable by players, they're dead to NPCs. I wouldn't want to be in charge of untangling that knot, but it's something CCP will have to look at eventually.

    As for AFK players still contributing to "ships blowing up," that seems like a cop-out to me. Sure, yes, they always will, but it's de minimus PVP. It's always better to have someone ATK when it matters.

    -D

    ReplyDelete
  12. I see this as putting a lot of effort into something that either 1) fixes a problem that doesn't need fixing, 2) results in a lot of grief for no benefit, and 3) takes away time from real issues.

    What I want from CCP is a non-babble, non-political answer, in plain English, stating what problem this change is meant to fix and why this is the best for it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's not news that Fozzie's had it in for fleet warp for... well, for a long time, right?

      There are definitely some implications that they need to think through, but I don't see this as having no benefit, nor do I see it as anything other than a real issue. The issue is that EVE encourages a style of organization where a handful of people work their tails off to arrange a park full of PVP rides for crowds of people who essentially just line up and get on the train when told to. The experience of riding a rollercoaster may be thrilling, but it's passive. You see this arrangement everywhere now: MaxDEL complains about having to be the do-everything guy. FCs and logistics guys burn out all the time, complaining that nobody knows how to fit or fly ships. Well, why is that? Because they're never given the opportunity to learn! Why do so many people automatically assume that the increased importance of scouts will just mean the FC rolling another alt and multiboxing? Because there are very few good scouts. Why? Because everyone is so damn serious about winning and "strategic objectives" and "wasting SRP" that they'll never give a volunteer the chance to learn--which means, the chance to fail.

      I'm glad CCP is trying to take a sledgehammer to this whole mindset. It's bad for the players and it's bad for the game.

      Delete
    2. Making people to click "warp to" more often in no way helps to change this mindset, while ruining a couple of things completely unrelated to nullsec game.

      I'm a guy with two accounts, this change shit on both my PvE and PvP, as I use second character for probing and providing warp-ins. Now things gonna get slower.

      Delete
    3. You're right, Fevric. It's not news that Fozzie has had it in for fleet warp.

      The problem is, I can't see any compelling arguments for getting rid of it/nerfing it other than Fozzie doesn't like it.

      The mindset issues you bring up will not be solved by CCP doing anything. It's up to players to change. I've been in null, FW, and w-space. When I was in null, my alliance only had one tactic; warp to zero and shoot. That wasn't because of fleet warp or any other mechanic. The same goes for the inability to realize this is a game and people need to learn.

      We also didn't use fleet warp all the time. Sometimes we did, sometimes we didn't. It depended on the FC. There were times, though, when we used fleet warp as a deception tactic to counter spies, where the FC would call a warp target but then use fleet warp to send us to the real one.

      It was surprisingly effective.

      I don't see how forcing the added step of sending a fleet member to be a warp-in adds any quality.

      I fly in small gangs. I fly logistics in small gangs. I love fleet warp. It takes some stress off the FC. It allows us to land on the site or the target at more or less the same time (barring alignment issues).

      I just don't see why this is such a pressing issue. No one has yet made a convincing case for why or how restricting fleet warp will enhance the enjoyment of the game. As far as I can tell, fleet warp is neutral.

      Why is CCP wasting time on this? Just so they can be seen to be doing something?

      Delete
  13. I think the WH impacts have been covered well by others. More generally we again seem to be in the position where once again the gameplay for all is jeopardized by an ill considered change to fix the failing null game. If the vision is to make everywhere like Null, and that is what it increasingly feels like right now, then Eve will also be empty like Null. If it is the case that the game doesn't like the way we play then inevitably the resolution to that tension will not be favourable to CCPs bottom line

    ReplyDelete
  14. Right now one pilot can punt another pilot from a station (pilot sits in a cloakie on grid with the station and calls for the pilot in station to undock, as soon as the in station pilot appears on overview the cloakie pilot fleet warps the other to an straight out undock bookmark). With the changes you will now need an additional pilot to warp to at the undock bookmark.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Its somewhat annoying that it will still work to fleet warp a moning fleet to a moon, which although it will likely be outside a, shield is still a, fairly safe place, yet cant be used to move a fleet from wormhole to wormhole. Woukd be happier if fleet watp in its,entirety were trashed rather than just removing some applications.

    ReplyDelete
  16. A solution for the t3 offgridbooster problem could be to add a sensorstrenght malus off xx% to link modules while they are running.
    At the moment and influence a fight on a other grid, you are probable far easier.
    Numbers are up to CCP but if a lachelispilot with normal scanningskills can scan you down while your links are running things should be fine until CCP hopefully removes offgridboosting.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sugar’s Non-Technical Guide to Making Boosters

Welcome to my non-technical and outdated but probably still useful guide to boosters.  There have been changes to how things are built in Eve. This was the old POS code before the introduction of new structures in 2016.   This is just a walk through on my wobbling path of booster production.  It took me half a dozen different documents to figure out what I needed to do to make these mythical things.  It is what I do.  It may not be perfect but it works.

This is pirate focused industry.
This guide brought to you by Lain asking me to write it after I tried to explain it in chat.

Why make boosters? Because drugs are good.  Really they are performance enhancers and performance enhancers can give someone that extra edge in PvP.  It was also because my boys used them and when they ran low they often ran out, I could be their supplier.  They would no longer hoard their drugs due to the length of time it takes to get fresh product.. The thought of being a drug kingpin was also very appealing. …

Have you done your Eve Vegas Survey?

I did attend Eve Vegas to the shock of many. I'd already paid for it and allotted the time. It seemed that I should go.


I went to the Grand Canyon and Hoover as well. This is not the space to discuss those amazing places or my new Camera.

Eve Vegas was a bit harder for me to go to then I expected. I've detached from Eve for the most part these past months. It is very easy to be angry, frustrated, and bitter about the past that I lived on. The game, its development, and the players move on while I find myself emotionally stuck. That emotional stickiness does not need to be given to everyone else. Part of experiencing it was shielding people from it. But, as I accepted my items and stared down the poor gentleman that tried to put a wristband around my wrist, I realized that I wasn't in as good of a place as I had hoped to be.

That is where the Survey comes in. There are a few things that I could say and did say. A few of the questions made me want to say a bit more.

One was …

Your ideal roadmap

To try to be a bit more interesting then blogging yet another daily list of summit meetings, how about a question?

In the producer session, as we try to figure out how to fix and improve our communication with teams and how we figure out who should be gone to for features and changes, we discussed the road map.

We discussed what 'our' ideal roadmap would be. This breaks down into the individual roadmaps for each member of the CSM. After all, we are individiuals and we have different dreams for Eve. We have different goals and features that we want to move forward or go back to.

How close are we to what CCP is looking at and planning? We discussed their safety mesures to weigh the value of features. What will this feature do for Eve? It is not enough to have an ideal road map of things you want. Those things have to have value and that value needs to be enough to dedicate the time to the feature.

Do you have an ideal roadmap? A path for Eve to head in the next year or two once …