The possible solution for FC HeadShotting


(Oddsodz) #1

I have been doing that thing where you think you can beat DEV’s at making things for Eve. Silly to try, I know. But every dog has it’s day (no chucky nut bar for you Rimmer - Red Dwarf joke).

Let’s get on with it shall we.

OK so at Fanfest. CCP Fozzie and team proposed an idea that there maybe a new up coming ship that is designed for Fleet Commander to minimise or curb the tactic of “Head Shotting” fleet commander (the guy or girl directing the fleet to targets and so on) so as to destabilize an enemy fleet combat effectiveness. The premise is that by “Head Shotting” the FC off the field at the start of a battle, you can win a battle before it even gets really going. The fear is that when the FC is blown off the field of battle. Then major battles are not even fought. Long story short. It is believed that PVP in this manner is being suppressed as FC will not engage in big fleet battles because they can not stay on field to direct the troops even if losing the fight.

So with that in mind. CCP has put forth the idea that a new ship may address this. I myself don’t think a new ship is the right way to go. Here is why

If a new ship is designed, Then it will have to be a frigate sized hull. Anything bigger and you lock out PVP in novice sized combat sites in Faction Warfare systems in Lowsec. But a frigate is not going to be the ship of choice when in battleship slug feast. Or any ship class above a frigate level sized hull. To address that you will not only need to design 1 ship. But a whole line of ships for each hull size and also for each race (maybe). That is a whole lot of DEV time and work. And also a lot of “Balancing debt” for any future features.

The possible solution

Rework or make a new version of the “Target Spectrum Breaker”. CCP Fozzie should be very familiar with this module.

See here for how it works

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oofwHuN5ydg&feature=youtu.be&t=284 (skip to 4.44 minutes)

The biggest issue with the module is that when you use it. You are effectively ECM jamming yourself with no chance of ever escaping from a blob due to warp scramblers/disrupter cycle times. So to use it means that you can not shoot anything (drones still work), And so you can’t kill any tackle that is holding you.

But what good is tanking if you can’t kill anything or even lock a target to shoot or direct fire for the fleet. A fleet commander needs to lock targets to direct fire for the fleet so he/she can assess if the target is a good choice. Things that a fleet commander needs to see is if the target is tanking the outgoing fire from his/her fleet, What sort of tank type the target is using (armour or shield or manTank Hull). Things like this are important to fleet commanders.

My idea is to change (or make a new version of) the “Target Spectrum Breaker” from a battleship only module to a module that can be fitted to any ship class and also move from a mid slots to the high slots.

Now here is why

Removing the Battleship only rule means it can be fitted to any ship. That means all ship sizes in terms of hull can field them. Frigate battle in novice size complex in faction warfare Lowsec will be doable.

By making it a high slot module. You give the fleet commander a choice of more tank in the mids for shield doctrine ships. And more choice for tackle modules or EWAR. You also give choices for losing DPS and or utility high slots for better survivability against many target shooting you.

Next thing is to remove the part that makes the module ECM jamming yourself. You must be able to lock targets to shoot and direct fire for your fleet.

And the last part (and I know this will take up a lot of DEV time to figure out). The lock breaker effect should not effect your own fleet members. Yes this means that your own fleet members will be able to rep the fleet commander. And that is the point. To keep the fleet commander from being removed from the fight.

Now. For some drawbacks to using this reworked or new module.

I would not be opposed to things like when the module is active. The ship can’t warp. Or your DPS from the ship is cut by 50% or even more. Or anything else that your guys can come up with.

Fitting attributes should be adjusted as needed. I would also like to add that skill requirements up changed to so that “Wing Command 1” also be needed to fit the module.

As for concerns that the module would become too powerful and be fitted to every ship everywhere. I would like to point out that DPS output would be greatly reduced from ships fitting this module. And that fitting this module in a small gang to flight another small gang* is an absolute disaster due to so few targets locking you to make the lock breaker calculations worth it’s fitting over more DPS or utility. As seen here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6rBuMu0zsY (be warned, I rage here. Sorry).

As a side note. A good way to counter an FC fit with this module would be to have a small bunch of your own fleet shoot the enemy FC instead of your whole fleet. You will in fact kill an enemy FC faster this way depending on how good his logi wing is. This means more roles for players to play with when fighting big fleet battles.

Other points to address.

1# To stop whole fleets fitting this. I would impost that you must be in the “WING” or “FLEET” position in the fleet hierarchy for the module to work. And that you must have the FLEET BOSS STAR. If a ship is fitted with the module and not in a “WING” or “FLEET Commander” spot in the fleet hierarchy. Then the module has no effect at all. Or you could just make it so that only the “FLEET BOSS” (the fleet member that has the star) can benefit from the module.

2# To address the possible tactic of having your own fleet members lock up the FC to maximise the calculations for “Lock Breaking”. I would impose that your own fleet members have no effect for the calculations of the module. Only targets locks from ships not in the fleet should be counted towards the calculations.

3# I don’t think this should be fit on capital ships. They already have enough EHP and also have things like the HULL Energizer thingy that stops all damage for a set time.

4# There must be a warm up timer to stop fleet members switching FLEET BOSS STAR when they become primary from an enemy fleet

That is my idea. Thanks for reading.

Oddsodz.

*Small gang = less that 15 ships in a fleet


[March] The Monitor Flag Cruiser
(Oddsodz) #2

Adding more info here due to forum limits

The one thing the “Target Spectrum Breaker” does really well is reduced incoming damage to a more manageable level. As seen here.

And here https://www.twitch.tv/videos/132014132?t=3h19m12s (I lived. I was bait for the CANE fleet. It was so funny)


(Luc Chastot) #3

This doesn’t work against alpha doctrines. CCP only needs to design two ships: A destroyer and a battlecruiser, both with bad dps, exceptional tanks and better than average align times.

Edit: Or create a new module that can only be fitted to HACs and AFs that considerably increases their resistances, but greatly decreases their dps.


(Oddsodz) #4

Alas you missed the point. If they design just 2 ships. Then Facwar gets left out of novices sites large fleet battles (Yes they do happen). And it does work against “alpha doctrines” because just like any other type of combat. They have to “LOCK” the target before they fire.

Also, by limiting to just 1 or 2 hull sizes. You mess up the whole ship speed to the rest of the fleet. Not everybody has wonderful “Feathering Skills” like Chessar :wink:


(Jonny Copper) #5

TBH what you are proposing, although not a terrible idea, is literally as you said yourself “a whole lot of DEV time and work” which makes this pointless in the first place. If they are going to have to spent a whole lot of DEV time and work, why not make more ships since players would enjoy that more than one module? Not only that but if you look at how citadels vary in size and race, it wouldn’t be hard to get something similar going for this new class of ships. You would just have to look at which ships are used most frequently in x-y-z classes and make a variant of that. Would this be perfect? Of course not, but it would get the job done and save CCP a lot of time. I personally would suggest something minmatar for sure as their ship typically can pull of shield/armor tanks relatively well.


(Morrigan Laima) #6

Command Defense Module

  • High slot
  • -99% damage to all targeted weapon systems while fitted (turrets,launchers,drones)
  • Incoming damage capped at a value that friendly logistics can easily repair through while active
  • 5 minute cycle, gives weapons timer and cannot cloak while active,
  • -100% command burst strength while fitted
  • -100% to local reps
  • 9999999% ewar capacitor usage while active
  • Can be fitted to command destroyers and command battlecruisers

Basically, disable or neuter everything but hardeners, and smartbombs in exchange for capping incoming damage at a level where you can’t be killed.


(Oddsodz) #7

Capping incoming damage bad. There is no counter play there. As I said above. The counter play to my idea is to not use your WHOLE fleet to kill an enemy FC with my module fitted. This opens up more roles for fleet members to partake in.

Damage caps have never been popular and with good reason.


(Morrigan Laima) #8

There is counter play, kill their fleet first, they can’t repair themselves, they die without sufficient logi support.


(Luc Chastot) #9

Yeah, I was thinking about something like this, except I would design it for HACs and AFs. Damage capping doesn’t sound like a very good idea, however, and I’d much prefer a 95% increase in resistances.


(Silas Sanyasi) #10

Well, I hardly think that is an unfair price for a fleet to pay to have an “unkillable” FC.


(Shawn en Tilavine) #11

I don’t have any problem with “headshotting” FC’s at all. It’s a valid and time honored tactic in war. Back in the 1780’s, during the U.S. Revolutionary war, some Loyalist officers complained that the Americans weren’t following the “rules of engagement” when they employed this strategy, and that in so doing, were creating chaos on the battlefield. At the time, the European mentality in time of war was that officers were of “Noble Blood” and were deserving of special consideration. To their credit, many of the officers with the Continental Army were former Loyalists and knew the tactics and doctrines of the British, giving them the upper hand. And it was these tactics that prompted King George III to label the American revolutionaries as terrorists.

So we all know how that one turned out. Not only did the colonists win (with a little help from the French), but they changed the course of modern warfare with their tactics. So much so that the British were forced, postwar, to re-evaluate their war doctrine going forward. So should it be in Eve. Prioritizing FC’s is a valid strategy and should be countered with battlefield strategy and tactics, not a CCP nerf.

Respectfully Submitted.


(Silas Sanyasi) #12

It’s also no damn fun…


(Shawn en Tilavine) #13

LOL. With all due respect, I would offer that that depends on what side of the gun you’re sitting on. :smiley:


(Silas Sanyasi) #14

With all due respect… I disagree. It usually leads to one fleet making a rapid extraction and discourages the ever elusive “good fight”.


(Shawn en Tilavine) #15

Which brings me back to re-evaluating your fleet strategy. A good fight results when both sides adapt to the unfolding tactics of the battle. Running away suggests being unprepared to deal with situations in which your enemy doesn’t fight the way you want them to. And that’s what separates a marginal fleet commander from a good fleet commander. Being prepared for any contingency, and having an exit strategy in the event things don’t go according to plan is the mark of a good leader. :wink:


(Silas Sanyasi) #16

Sure… yet FC headshoting is still not fun in any way, shape or form.

Of course a decent fleet will have backup FCs etc. but that is hardly the point.


(King Voodoo) #17

If your alliance has this problem of being headshot you need to have a training program to train more guys to FC and have them ready to take over. Headshotting commanders is a valid strategy. There should be no easy way around this.


(Oddsodz) #18

valid or not. It’s no dam fun and why would I even bother to take out a fleet if I can 100% guarantee I will be off the field as soon as the battle starts. It is one of the reasons I don’t FC anymore at all. It’s just no fun. Better to be in a support role of sort and just whore on all the mails I can. FCing is no easy task. FCing and not getting to have FUN is just not a game worth playing.


(Nevyn Auscent) #19

@Oddsodz
Capping incoming damage isn’t actually a bad thing. It just should happen to all ships, not just the FC.
FC’s getting head shotted is just a symptom of the issue, not the primary issue, it sucks for anyone to be instantly alpha’ed off the field.

It also goes hand in hand with a logi cap, which means logi in larger fleets remain useful rather than hitting the alpha cap limit, but it also takes a lot more skill to play logi in a large fleet since you have to make sure your reps are spread appropriately.
And means a smaller fleet can always kill some ships vs a larger fleet since Logi will never be able to completely save any one ship.

But yes, a damage cap does actually work. And no, it won’t result in fewer ships dying, because DPS gets spread so you get 6 ships dying at once after a minute, rather than 1 every 10 seconds.


(Morrigan Laima) #20

Disagree here, alpha strike should continue to be part of the game, just some ships should have a way around it. However, alpha strike shouldn’t be a requirement to break through reps. Remote shield/armor repair is simply too powerful, and more importantly too predictable right now. It creates a well-defined point in the engagement that the FC can anticipate long in advance where they will start losing ships because of no longer having critical mass of logistics ships. Get rid of that predictability, and make it possible to either grind someone down in spike of reps, or give them resource constraints that make it possible to push those reps past the point of sustainability even when there is a critical mass, and the meta will be much healthier and much less alpha dependent.

Edit: Going to split this line of thinking this into another topic, since I’m off on a tangent.