[AAR] 8D02 Reverse Thought
- K950
- Member
- Posts: 284
- Joined: 2015.09.06 17:06
- Title: Sophomore
[AAR] 8D02 Reverse Thought
Right.
Forward Operating Bases (FOBs) are a new type of structure added with the Ascension expansion of last year. They went through a couple of changes, at first they were rather elusive and they required a hunter to find them. Nowadays they are easier to find and an efficient method of deleting them is essential because they disrupt highsec operations. Even freighters traveling through such a system can run into trouble with these forces.
Before the 13th of February, a small group of pilots within a small corporation were regularly taking down these sites with some degree of efficiency: I estimated they could kill one in less than 15 minutes. After studying the killboard and talking to one of these individuals, I came to the conclusion that the Remote Rep Dominix is the first choice for this kind of operation. The reason was because you needed the tank of a battleship to handle the waves which would escalate roughly every minute to levels which were very difficult to manage with a subcapital fleet. In areas outside of high security space the answer would be to use battleships, ideally with a tank bonus, combined with triage carriers. This option is not practical though for many reasons.
By the time the 13th rolled around, a small update put a cap on the reinforcement fleet size. With that came a surge in FOB attacks and a number of smaller groups are taking them down. At some point CCP will probably figure out (most likely Larrikin) some kind of medium, then move on to other projects and it won't be touched for a long time. This cap on reinforcement fleets made it possible to do with fewer battleships than before - a kill is out there for one that used just 2 Nestors, which are slightly more advantageous to use over Dominixes, if you can afford them, since they have an armor resistance bonus, but you fit them up similarly.
Rollout
We formed up nicely in the system of Jufvitte. Not many latecomers, which was nice. People were looking bright and ready. We then traveled to Jita to acquire the hull and fittings. Because of the possibility of war targets, which must be accounted for in operations like this, it was important that we traveled PvP ready, and stuck together. We did pretty well with that, and found an FOB just 4 jumps away from Jita itself. Excellent progress we were making. There are more people hunting these FOBs, they also have a certain life-cycle associated with them, and (as we found out later) they can also be bugged in the Agency window, so you can't really announce a staging system out of a trade hub with any degree of certainty because in the 10 days before the fleet is ran the FOB could have expired.
When we got to the system of Komo, I had the fleet dock up and change fits. It was then that I found out that I forgot to buy the rigs in Jita. Whoops. They weren't tank rigs, they were merely ones related to capacitor usage, so that could have been a problem, but it didn't have time to manifest itself. It was a good thing the system was close because battleships are slow to maneuver around, which is one problem of the doctrine, but there's nothing that can be feasibliy done about it.
We then undocked and did a quick practice run of the capacitor chain. RR Dominixes are not newbie friendly, so I think the warmup was a good idea to get people started with the concept so they won't falter in the first minute on grid, which is probably the most critical. In this warmup, I left one thing out: to prime the Reactive Armor Hardeners. By shooting each other with thermal damage drones, we could have had extra tank on grid because the RAHs would have been already primed for the exact damage type the rats would be doing, and thus people would have more time to respond to the damage the NPCs were doing as they rotated around primaries.
Once I felt we were ready, I walked the fleet on how to warp to the structure. You can't fleet warp to the structure, neither can you warp to it at range, unless you use a pod or something like it to grab a bookmark on grid. We warped nicely together and came on the grid in an orderly fashion. Capacitor chains were formed up and the hostile forces spawned. The plan was simple: the fleet would rely on the tank to survive the NPCs by out-tanking their damage, while simply attacking the structure, shooting the tackle, and fleet warping out. It's pretty basic, but I noticed a serious problem, probably too late.
By design, the presence of an FOB in a system also spawns an independent pirate mining fleet with their own reinforcement fleet they can call. This is separate from the FOB forces, and use different ship fits. The tackle Condors are AB fit with scrams, while the FOB tackle Kestrels use MWDs with warp disruptors, for example. I saw the Guristas Production Badger warp on grid, and I called for us to ignore it, since I knew that it could summon reinforcements of its own when attacked. What I didn't know was that it would do so immediately. The rest was chaos: we got hit with two different fleets at once, and I was amazed how fast the Dominixes were melting. We were fit to tank very high amounts of Thermal damage but not Kinetic damage. Here is a Dscan of the hostile forces: you will note two sepearate corps, Guristas and then Guristas Production. Guristas alone is the FOB reinforcement forces, and Guristas Production is the hauler's reinforcement fleet. One uses Thermal damage, the other uses Kinetic. We could have handled the Guristas forces, but not with the Guristas Production members on field. The result was disaster.
Battlereport 2.3b of SRP was paid out
I want to thank all of those who were able to help me figure out what was the reason for the extra forces on grid. The lossmails pointed definitively to the presence of the hauler's response fleet. Some groups use battleships fitted with MJDs for this reason, and as an escape tool. Problem in this case was scrams from the hostile hauler's fleet would have meant this wouldn't have worked.
Naturally the question comes up, "With that outcome, what can be done to prevent it?" It's a good question. The easiest way which seems to have surfaced is to have an alt warp to the miners out in the belt, and trigger the response fleet, which you don't even need to shoot them, just warp to the belt alone. Next, burn out with a MWD, in excess of 4km/sec (I'd recommend 4.2km/sec or greater) and go AFK. That'll keep them busy for awhile as they fruitlessly warp around trying to catch something they can't catch. Then the FOB battleships can grind away in peace.
I didn't want to ask people to go out and buy another battleship after that operation. So I called it and the large majority of participants went home. I felt so bad, because something that was literally the worst possible case scenario soured the image of not only myself but also these FOBs, and there wasn't much I could have done about it.
Part 2
The hardiest of individuals weren't satisfied. A FOB killmail was what they wanted, and I was happy to oblige. Back to Jita we went, bought up again, and went out again like soldiers. I like this part. People who don't give up easily.
A certain individual had contacted me before and wanted me to remove this FOB from his system, as it was causing problems for his operations. We set a destination for Hadji, a system roughly 14 jumps from Jita. Along the way I noticed a certain problem with RR battleship doctrines: If you spawn on opposite sides of the gate as your partner, you could be roughly 18km or more from each other, which isn't enough to send cap. You'd have to burn with a MWD (which we didn't have) to each other catch reps. That could be a serious problem. RR doctrines have weaknesses in large numbers too -- finding a cap partner can be a problem, and they don't work very well beyond a certain margin.
When we made it to the target system I made contact with the individual right as he logged in. Such accurate timing couldn't have been better. With fewer numbers the cap chain was easier to use: although, having odd numbers of capacitor transmitters isn't something I care for: 1 up and 1 down is easier to manage. While we had not made an agreement, he was willing to offer 100M to have the foreign object eradicated. He offered to give us a warp in with bookmarks -- I politely declined, as I trusted in the Agency window -- which right as I was about to test it, found out it was bugged. So I accepted his bookmarks, we primed our Reactive Armor Hardeners and kept our MJDs, and went off.
We got 3 Apocs and 2 Cruors for a defense fleet. That would have been nice the first time. We picked off the Cruors easily enough, and having examined the Apocs, decided that we can simply ignore them and would just have to rep each other once in awhile. We warped to the structure, and after roughly 45 minutes or so, we took it out.
https://zkillboard.com/kill/68248838/ + 27.5M each
Later I got the gratitude of my contact, and paid out each member + 33.3M each, as I decided I would forfeit my share as part of respect to these hardier types.
Summary
+ Formup was reasonably fast
+ We had plenty of people to make it work the first time
+ Commentary after the failure was positive and constructive, we got to the root of the problem quickly
+ After all that mess, we got something, and I'm proud of those hardy types who refused to give up
+ People learned some things as part of the fleet, and I'm grateful for that
+ Our command ship escaped the disaster
+ I was the last on grid with the disaster, and I thought it was fitting that I was the last to perish
o Excursions like this can be costly sometimes, this is why I asked for people who could afford the initial expense
- Even with a proven doctrine (check ZKillboard for dozens of FOBs taken out with the principle) there can still be disaster
- Overcoming the initial shock will mean that people won't attempt these in the future, which, when things go right, as those on grid with the final FOB can attest, is relatively benign
Thank you for reading, and coming along for this. As always, could be worse.
Forward Operating Bases (FOBs) are a new type of structure added with the Ascension expansion of last year. They went through a couple of changes, at first they were rather elusive and they required a hunter to find them. Nowadays they are easier to find and an efficient method of deleting them is essential because they disrupt highsec operations. Even freighters traveling through such a system can run into trouble with these forces.
Before the 13th of February, a small group of pilots within a small corporation were regularly taking down these sites with some degree of efficiency: I estimated they could kill one in less than 15 minutes. After studying the killboard and talking to one of these individuals, I came to the conclusion that the Remote Rep Dominix is the first choice for this kind of operation. The reason was because you needed the tank of a battleship to handle the waves which would escalate roughly every minute to levels which were very difficult to manage with a subcapital fleet. In areas outside of high security space the answer would be to use battleships, ideally with a tank bonus, combined with triage carriers. This option is not practical though for many reasons.
By the time the 13th rolled around, a small update put a cap on the reinforcement fleet size. With that came a surge in FOB attacks and a number of smaller groups are taking them down. At some point CCP will probably figure out (most likely Larrikin) some kind of medium, then move on to other projects and it won't be touched for a long time. This cap on reinforcement fleets made it possible to do with fewer battleships than before - a kill is out there for one that used just 2 Nestors, which are slightly more advantageous to use over Dominixes, if you can afford them, since they have an armor resistance bonus, but you fit them up similarly.
Rollout
We formed up nicely in the system of Jufvitte. Not many latecomers, which was nice. People were looking bright and ready. We then traveled to Jita to acquire the hull and fittings. Because of the possibility of war targets, which must be accounted for in operations like this, it was important that we traveled PvP ready, and stuck together. We did pretty well with that, and found an FOB just 4 jumps away from Jita itself. Excellent progress we were making. There are more people hunting these FOBs, they also have a certain life-cycle associated with them, and (as we found out later) they can also be bugged in the Agency window, so you can't really announce a staging system out of a trade hub with any degree of certainty because in the 10 days before the fleet is ran the FOB could have expired.
When we got to the system of Komo, I had the fleet dock up and change fits. It was then that I found out that I forgot to buy the rigs in Jita. Whoops. They weren't tank rigs, they were merely ones related to capacitor usage, so that could have been a problem, but it didn't have time to manifest itself. It was a good thing the system was close because battleships are slow to maneuver around, which is one problem of the doctrine, but there's nothing that can be feasibliy done about it.
We then undocked and did a quick practice run of the capacitor chain. RR Dominixes are not newbie friendly, so I think the warmup was a good idea to get people started with the concept so they won't falter in the first minute on grid, which is probably the most critical. In this warmup, I left one thing out: to prime the Reactive Armor Hardeners. By shooting each other with thermal damage drones, we could have had extra tank on grid because the RAHs would have been already primed for the exact damage type the rats would be doing, and thus people would have more time to respond to the damage the NPCs were doing as they rotated around primaries.
Once I felt we were ready, I walked the fleet on how to warp to the structure. You can't fleet warp to the structure, neither can you warp to it at range, unless you use a pod or something like it to grab a bookmark on grid. We warped nicely together and came on the grid in an orderly fashion. Capacitor chains were formed up and the hostile forces spawned. The plan was simple: the fleet would rely on the tank to survive the NPCs by out-tanking their damage, while simply attacking the structure, shooting the tackle, and fleet warping out. It's pretty basic, but I noticed a serious problem, probably too late.
By design, the presence of an FOB in a system also spawns an independent pirate mining fleet with their own reinforcement fleet they can call. This is separate from the FOB forces, and use different ship fits. The tackle Condors are AB fit with scrams, while the FOB tackle Kestrels use MWDs with warp disruptors, for example. I saw the Guristas Production Badger warp on grid, and I called for us to ignore it, since I knew that it could summon reinforcements of its own when attacked. What I didn't know was that it would do so immediately. The rest was chaos: we got hit with two different fleets at once, and I was amazed how fast the Dominixes were melting. We were fit to tank very high amounts of Thermal damage but not Kinetic damage. Here is a Dscan of the hostile forces: you will note two sepearate corps, Guristas and then Guristas Production. Guristas alone is the FOB reinforcement forces, and Guristas Production is the hauler's reinforcement fleet. One uses Thermal damage, the other uses Kinetic. We could have handled the Guristas forces, but not with the Guristas Production members on field. The result was disaster.
Battlereport 2.3b of SRP was paid out
I want to thank all of those who were able to help me figure out what was the reason for the extra forces on grid. The lossmails pointed definitively to the presence of the hauler's response fleet. Some groups use battleships fitted with MJDs for this reason, and as an escape tool. Problem in this case was scrams from the hostile hauler's fleet would have meant this wouldn't have worked.
Naturally the question comes up, "With that outcome, what can be done to prevent it?" It's a good question. The easiest way which seems to have surfaced is to have an alt warp to the miners out in the belt, and trigger the response fleet, which you don't even need to shoot them, just warp to the belt alone. Next, burn out with a MWD, in excess of 4km/sec (I'd recommend 4.2km/sec or greater) and go AFK. That'll keep them busy for awhile as they fruitlessly warp around trying to catch something they can't catch. Then the FOB battleships can grind away in peace.
I didn't want to ask people to go out and buy another battleship after that operation. So I called it and the large majority of participants went home. I felt so bad, because something that was literally the worst possible case scenario soured the image of not only myself but also these FOBs, and there wasn't much I could have done about it.
Part 2
The hardiest of individuals weren't satisfied. A FOB killmail was what they wanted, and I was happy to oblige. Back to Jita we went, bought up again, and went out again like soldiers. I like this part. People who don't give up easily.
A certain individual had contacted me before and wanted me to remove this FOB from his system, as it was causing problems for his operations. We set a destination for Hadji, a system roughly 14 jumps from Jita. Along the way I noticed a certain problem with RR battleship doctrines: If you spawn on opposite sides of the gate as your partner, you could be roughly 18km or more from each other, which isn't enough to send cap. You'd have to burn with a MWD (which we didn't have) to each other catch reps. That could be a serious problem. RR doctrines have weaknesses in large numbers too -- finding a cap partner can be a problem, and they don't work very well beyond a certain margin.
When we made it to the target system I made contact with the individual right as he logged in. Such accurate timing couldn't have been better. With fewer numbers the cap chain was easier to use: although, having odd numbers of capacitor transmitters isn't something I care for: 1 up and 1 down is easier to manage. While we had not made an agreement, he was willing to offer 100M to have the foreign object eradicated. He offered to give us a warp in with bookmarks -- I politely declined, as I trusted in the Agency window -- which right as I was about to test it, found out it was bugged. So I accepted his bookmarks, we primed our Reactive Armor Hardeners and kept our MJDs, and went off.
We got 3 Apocs and 2 Cruors for a defense fleet. That would have been nice the first time. We picked off the Cruors easily enough, and having examined the Apocs, decided that we can simply ignore them and would just have to rep each other once in awhile. We warped to the structure, and after roughly 45 minutes or so, we took it out.
https://zkillboard.com/kill/68248838/ + 27.5M each
Later I got the gratitude of my contact, and paid out each member + 33.3M each, as I decided I would forfeit my share as part of respect to these hardier types.
Summary
+ Formup was reasonably fast
+ We had plenty of people to make it work the first time
+ Commentary after the failure was positive and constructive, we got to the root of the problem quickly
+ After all that mess, we got something, and I'm proud of those hardy types who refused to give up
+ People learned some things as part of the fleet, and I'm grateful for that
+ Our command ship escaped the disaster
+ I was the last on grid with the disaster, and I thought it was fitting that I was the last to perish
o Excursions like this can be costly sometimes, this is why I asked for people who could afford the initial expense
- Even with a proven doctrine (check ZKillboard for dozens of FOBs taken out with the principle) there can still be disaster
- Overcoming the initial shock will mean that people won't attempt these in the future, which, when things go right, as those on grid with the final FOB can attest, is relatively benign
Thank you for reading, and coming along for this. As always, could be worse.
Last edited by K950 on 2018.03.29 02:57, edited 1 time in total.
- Zeerse Solaris
- Member
- Posts: 807
- Joined: 2015.01.28 22:22
- Title: Diplomat, AMC Officer, Mentor, Bloober, Teacher, Graduate
Re: [AAR] 8D02 Reverse Thought
There is a lot left unsaid K950, I'll try to be diplomatic . I was on the 2nd attempt so was happy for you that the objective was achieved.
People became frustrated that they wouldn't be told what they were flying until they reached Jita. Some so much so that you lost a couple of them before even undocking the travel fleet.
If I understood comms correctly, the secrecy of the fits was about ensuring no one else in the Uni beat the fleet to the first FOB kill.
This compounded the issues from the previous form up, where you missed out on PvE pilots, and had unhappy PvP pilots show up because the purpose was so obscure.
Those things are the main lessons for you as an FC/organizer. People want to know what they're doing and what to fly ahead of time, this lets them shop around or they might have something already suitable.
Had you given notice of the fits, I would have been very surprised if someone would have taken out a rival fleet before yours to take one down (especially after we formed up!), and if they had, so what, it's not like it was the first FOB to be destroyed in Eve.
For the ongrid action, I would add that it seems as though the AI heavily weights aggro to logi to the point where my alt in the comand ship was left untargeted by the rats in both attempts, hence on the command to warp to sun, I was unmolested while the Domis were sadly being picked off.
That feels like it can be manipulated. Some newbros could potentially come in high DPS destroyers, although I am guessing isk reward is based on how many first land on grid and the related response fleet.
As to the hauler fleets, the information given by the experts in the FOB channel you consulted with were wrong, standings to the production arm of the pirates made no difference, at least 0.0 standings, simply landing on grid with the miners or haulers triggers a response.
People became frustrated that they wouldn't be told what they were flying until they reached Jita. Some so much so that you lost a couple of them before even undocking the travel fleet.
If I understood comms correctly, the secrecy of the fits was about ensuring no one else in the Uni beat the fleet to the first FOB kill.
This compounded the issues from the previous form up, where you missed out on PvE pilots, and had unhappy PvP pilots show up because the purpose was so obscure.
Those things are the main lessons for you as an FC/organizer. People want to know what they're doing and what to fly ahead of time, this lets them shop around or they might have something already suitable.
Had you given notice of the fits, I would have been very surprised if someone would have taken out a rival fleet before yours to take one down (especially after we formed up!), and if they had, so what, it's not like it was the first FOB to be destroyed in Eve.
For the ongrid action, I would add that it seems as though the AI heavily weights aggro to logi to the point where my alt in the comand ship was left untargeted by the rats in both attempts, hence on the command to warp to sun, I was unmolested while the Domis were sadly being picked off.
That feels like it can be manipulated. Some newbros could potentially come in high DPS destroyers, although I am guessing isk reward is based on how many first land on grid and the related response fleet.
As to the hauler fleets, the information given by the experts in the FOB channel you consulted with were wrong, standings to the production arm of the pirates made no difference, at least 0.0 standings, simply landing on grid with the miners or haulers triggers a response.
- Turlough Dominian
- Retired Director
- Posts: 3456
- Joined: 2011.02.06 21:52
- Title: Manager (Events), Senior Personnel Officer, Spai Hunter Extraordinaire, interrupter, Events, Graduate, Management
Re: [AAR] 8D02 Reverse Thought
Any chance you would be able to put in the doctrine fit that you guys used to kill the 2nd attempt encase there was any changes to it from attempt one plz, also think there was at least two different fits at the start so having both so we can see the small differences and understand why there different
Q. excluding the hauler defense fleet making a 3 way but have more people in the first attempt do you feel there was two much npc's to handle with compared to the smaller amount for attempt two, I ask as over time I would like to try understand the scaling more. even tho ccp will prob change again
Q. excluding the hauler defense fleet making a 3 way but have more people in the first attempt do you feel there was two much npc's to handle with compared to the smaller amount for attempt two, I ask as over time I would like to try understand the scaling more. even tho ccp will prob change again
Retired Assistant Personnel Manager,Retired Director of special projects, Retired Assistant Guidance Manager, Retired Events Manager,Retired senior Personnel Officer Graduate,
- Titus Tallang
- Retired Director
- Posts: 2485
- Joined: 2013.01.21 15:28
- Title: Director of Special Projects, Teacher, Puella Magi
Re: [AAR] 8D02 Reverse Thought
And the secret doctrine that nobody else must discover lest someone beat the Uni to theZeerse Solaris wrote:People became frustrated that they wouldn't be told what they were flying until they reached Jita. Some so much so that you lost a couple of them before even undocking the travel fleet.
If I understood comms correctly, the secrecy of the fits was about ensuring no one else in the Uni beat the fleet to the first FOB kill.
Unrigged Dominixes with two specific
I am quite frankly at a loss for words at the levels of snowflake displayed in the announcement, formup and execution of this event.
PS:
2.3b was lost. Call it what it is. This isn't a State of the Goonion address, it's an AAR intended for critical reflection.K950 wrote:Battlereport 2.3b of SRP was paid out
*creak*
- White 0rchid
- Member
- Posts: 1413
- Joined: 2013.08.14 21:17
- Location: United Kingdom
Re: [AAR] 8D02 Reverse Thought
Quote from the other thread (there were many more than just this).
Don't use the uni to fulfill your own personal agenda, especially if it involves going about pretty much everything wrong.
Plenty of people said this, you didn't want to listen. Whether you're cocky or just plain ignorant I don't really care, you should have shared beforehand.White 0rchid wrote:Not only that, but generally it's considered good practice as other, more experienced players can critique them.Dunar Dolorgiet wrote:If you share those ahead of time you'll properly get a more reliable picture of who can actually fly them. Including the doctrine is considered good form for a reason.
Don't use the uni to fulfill your own personal agenda, especially if it involves going about pretty much everything wrong.
WE FORM V0LTA
- K950
- Member
- Posts: 284
- Joined: 2015.09.06 17:06
- Title: Sophomore
Re: [AAR] 8D02 Reverse Thought
Of course. This is the Blood Raider fit. This time I remembered rigs.Turlough Dominian wrote:Any chance you would be able to put in the doctrine fit that you guys used to kill the 2nd attempt encase there was any changes to it from attempt one plz, also think there was at least two different fits at the start so having both so we can see the small differences and understand why there different
Q. excluding the hauler defense fleet making a 3 way but have more people in the first attempt do you feel there was two much npc's to handle with compared to the smaller amount for attempt two, I ask as over time I would like to try understand the scaling more. even tho ccp will prob change again
Code: Select all
[Dominix, Dominix - Armor No Prop Spider Tank RR BR FOB Concept]
Reactive Armor Hardener
Corelum C-Type Energized Thermal Membrane
Centum C-Type Energized EM Membrane
Centum C-Type Energized EM Membrane
Corelum C-Type Energized Thermal Membrane
1600mm Steel Plates II
Damage Control II
Large Micro Jump Drive
Cap Recharger II
Cap Recharger II
Cap Recharger II
Large Cap Battery II
Large Remote Armor Repairer II
Large Remote Armor Repairer II
Large Remote Armor Repairer II
Large Remote Capacitor Transmitter II
Large Remote Capacitor Transmitter II
Large Remote Capacitor Transmitter II
Large Remote Repair Augmentor I
Large Egress Port Maximizer I
Large Trimark Armor Pump I
Federation Navy Ogre x5
Hornet II x5
Vespa II x5
Acolyte II x5
Imperial Navy Curator x5
Warrior II x5
The Blood Raider sites are technically harder since you have to deal with 2 damage types, as the RAH can't simply shift its resistances to 60% max Th resistances. This is why the damage control is not a bad idea, otherwise I'd rather have a DDA. Nestors are pretty nice because you can refit off each other to increase tank or DPS as needed.
Other losses I've seen of Dominixes include DLAs.
- Breeze One
- Member
- Posts: 704
- Joined: 2016.08.17 13:34
- Title: Lieutenant, Teacher, Graduate
Re: [AAR] 8D02 Reverse Thought
Part of learning is acknowledging your mistakes. The flat out ignoring of critical comments both in the announcement and already in the AAR is...disappointing. Like it or not they're valid.
I joined briefly, but joined comms in time to hear that the rationale for not sharing fits was so that the FC couldnt have his doctrine stolen by people who might run the site before him, thereby somehow taking away from some achievement. I decided I didn't feel like burning over and spending a few hundred million ISK for a personal vanity project
If this was about providing fun content for the Uni, and working together as a team to discover, learn and conquer content (all the best things about this corp and game), then maybe just think about whether how this was run was the best way to achieve that, and take on-board the constructive criticism that many players have repeatedly suggested
If it wasn't about that, then maybe just ask yourself why you're running group content
I joined briefly, but joined comms in time to hear that the rationale for not sharing fits was so that the FC couldnt have his doctrine stolen by people who might run the site before him, thereby somehow taking away from some achievement. I decided I didn't feel like burning over and spending a few hundred million ISK for a personal vanity project
If this was about providing fun content for the Uni, and working together as a team to discover, learn and conquer content (all the best things about this corp and game), then maybe just think about whether how this was run was the best way to achieve that, and take on-board the constructive criticism that many players have repeatedly suggested
If it wasn't about that, then maybe just ask yourself why you're running group content
- K950
- Member
- Posts: 284
- Joined: 2015.09.06 17:06
- Title: Sophomore
Re: [AAR] 8D02 Reverse Thought
You bring up a good point. I get a bit of a hostile tone with some of the responses, which I don't feel provide an ideal way to communicate with people who are University members. The fleet didn't end well for most folks, and having an AAR populated with a negative tone only compounds people's memory of it.
When someone gets that kind of feedback on fleets, why would they feel comfortable running future fleets?
This isn't Goonswarm. Let's be polite and friendly. I have nothing wrong with negative feedback if it's genuine, accurate, and fair.
So I'll respond to everyone.
Because of the way the rats work, PvE pilots are on equal footing with PvP pilots. PvE pilots such as dedicated mission runners or nullsec escalation runners are used to moderate amounts of damage over longer periods of time, while PvP pilots are used to high paced brisk fights.
I wanted to be the first University FC to get a FOB kill for the University. I wanted something achieve that was notable. Some may dismiss that as trivial, but to me, that was important. Some people want to be the first one to get a kill of a new ship that comes out: or the first person to kill some fancy new AT ship. Those are goals. And I care about that.
The rest of your comments are very appreciated.
This one will be tough.
I forgot to rig it. Human error. Hardeners - because of neuting pressure; damage control because the FC usually has a lot on his mind with managing his own ship while watching the rest of the fleet, and thus more tank is always a good thing. The ships were specifically for the job: this is not only normal for these sites, it's required.
As a Director, what would you like to say positive about this excursion?
I really don't want this thread to descend into a morbid fashion with negativity. I don't have a problem with criticism, but if people have nothing positive to add, then how does that really help?
When someone gets that kind of feedback on fleets, why would they feel comfortable running future fleets?
This isn't Goonswarm. Let's be polite and friendly. I have nothing wrong with negative feedback if it's genuine, accurate, and fair.
So I'll respond to everyone.
I didn't want to clutter the AAR with too much talk. AARs that are five pages long tend to be ignored.Zeerse Solaris wrote:...
Because of the way the rats work, PvE pilots are on equal footing with PvP pilots. PvE pilots such as dedicated mission runners or nullsec escalation runners are used to moderate amounts of damage over longer periods of time, while PvP pilots are used to high paced brisk fights.
I wanted to be the first University FC to get a FOB kill for the University. I wanted something achieve that was notable. Some may dismiss that as trivial, but to me, that was important. Some people want to be the first one to get a kill of a new ship that comes out: or the first person to kill some fancy new AT ship. Those are goals. And I care about that.
The rest of your comments are very appreciated.
This one will be tough.
The doctrine itself could have been guessed by vigilant searching of FOB kills. Confirmed, no, but a solid guess.Titus Tallang wrote:...
I forgot to rig it. Human error. Hardeners - because of neuting pressure; damage control because the FC usually has a lot on his mind with managing his own ship while watching the rest of the fleet, and thus more tank is always a good thing. The ships were specifically for the job: this is not only normal for these sites, it's required.
As a Director, what would you like to say positive about this excursion?
The fleet wasn't done for me alone, it was meant for the University folks who were interested in the concept. Would you like to contribute something positive to this fleet report?White 0rchid wrote:...
I suppose everybody has different expectations. For myself as a vanity project -- not so much, but more for the corporation. I feel that most of the constructive criticism was rather coarse: as I mentioned earlier, people really haven't had much positive to say in this thread (aside from Zeerse), so if all people do is snipe, what obligation do I have to respond to it?Breeze One wrote:...
I really don't want this thread to descend into a morbid fashion with negativity. I don't have a problem with criticism, but if people have nothing positive to add, then how does that really help?
- Breeze One
- Member
- Posts: 704
- Joined: 2016.08.17 13:34
- Title: Lieutenant, Teacher, Graduate
Re: [AAR] 8D02 Reverse Thought
I’ll try to keep this as constructive as possible. I think the fear that someone else in the Uni would run the fleet before you if you post your doctrine, suggest a bit of a negative perception of your fellow Corpmates
If I post up a PvP fleet using a fun new doctrine I want to try out, people don’t go “Oh that looks cool, I want to be the first in the Uni to FC that!” and pre-empt my fleet. Instead they go, “Oh, that looks cool, I want to make sure I’m part of Breeze’s fleet!” (Or more usually: “Ummm Breeze, I think you’ve forgotten to add ammunition to those fits”)
People have ideas for content, they post about them, they get some input from the corp as a whole, and then the corp comes together to have fun trying that idea out. Collaboration like that is one of the best things about the Uni, and it’s also how people learn best. This way, we achieve things for the Uni. Not for an individual
The fact people turned up at all is because those people wanted to do something fun together. Treating those people as potential rivals (who might take your doctrine and do that fun thing before/without you) does them a deep disservice
Without going into the specifics of the fleet, I’d just say a good learning point from this would be, trust people (or at least your own Corporation) more, and you’ll get more trust back. And probably more success. Many minds are better than one
If I post up a PvP fleet using a fun new doctrine I want to try out, people don’t go “Oh that looks cool, I want to be the first in the Uni to FC that!” and pre-empt my fleet. Instead they go, “Oh, that looks cool, I want to make sure I’m part of Breeze’s fleet!” (Or more usually: “Ummm Breeze, I think you’ve forgotten to add ammunition to those fits”)
People have ideas for content, they post about them, they get some input from the corp as a whole, and then the corp comes together to have fun trying that idea out. Collaboration like that is one of the best things about the Uni, and it’s also how people learn best. This way, we achieve things for the Uni. Not for an individual
The fact people turned up at all is because those people wanted to do something fun together. Treating those people as potential rivals (who might take your doctrine and do that fun thing before/without you) does them a deep disservice
Without going into the specifics of the fleet, I’d just say a good learning point from this would be, trust people (or at least your own Corporation) more, and you’ll get more trust back. And probably more success. Many minds are better than one
- Conci Furiram
- Retired Director
- Posts: 493
- Joined: 2012.10.05 02:44
- Title: Fittings Staff, Doooooooooooooooooooomed, Graduate
Re: [AAR] 8D02 Reverse Thought
Pardon my language but holy f*ck, are you really this dense? You're ignoring feedback and criticism because it isn't positive? Of course it's not positive! You've done something wrong and refuse to acknowledge the countless voices pointing out your mistakes! Of course responses will not be positive.I get a bit of a hostile tone with some of the responses, which I don't feel provide an ideal way to communicate with people who are University members.
...
As a Director, what would you like to say positive about this excursion?
...
Would you like to contribute something positive to this fleet report?
...
I don't have a problem with criticism, but if people have nothing positive to add, then how does that really help?
Your logic sounds like this: "Criticism is negative. I ignore negative responses. Therefore, I ignore criticism"
Get off your high horse.
- Krevlorn Severasse
- Member
- Posts: 369
- Joined: 2013.03.22 22:01
- Title: Assistant Manager (Reimbursement), Sophomore, Logistics, Reimbursement Staff, Management
- Location: Australia
Re: [AAR] 8D02 Reverse Thought
Clarification for the curious: As this wasn't a PvP fleet any SRP payments were not covered by the Logistics Department.2.3b of SRP was paid out
- Dunar Dolorgiet
- Retired Director
- Posts: 552
- Joined: 2012.07.23 17:48
- Title: Director of Education, Resident Data Wizard, He Puts On His Robe And Wizard Hat
Re: [AAR] 8D02 Reverse Thought
K950 wrote:I get a bit of a hostile tone with some of the responses, which I don't feel provide an ideal way to communicate with people who are University members.
When someone gets that kind of feedback on fleets, why would they feel comfortable running future fleets?
I think you need to look at it in context. People readily suggested and requested information in various times in a very friendly tone ... which ... got either flat out ignored, in some cases multiple times or dismissed as not relevant. They tried (one example aside) work with you in that constructive feedback culture, you however opted out.K950 wrote:I really don't want this thread to descend into a morbid fashion with negativity. I don't have a problem with criticism, but if people have nothing positive to add, then how does that really help?
So yes, some may appear to read unfriendly, in reality those people are simply super frustrated with your communication behavior. They tried their earnest to help you, to correct potential mistakes before being committed and all they got was what had to be perceived as a "if i don't respond they may stop posting"-vibe.
Others iterated on that point multiple times as well, should be a good source for some reflection.
On the topic of reflection: others may want to do the same before posting. Is your comment contributing or is it to rub it in ones face?
Now that you achieved your personal goal lets take a step back and look at the bigger picture.
Is the information gained about FOB's and how to kill them worth anything to the Uni? Hell yes, good job. We had those spawn in systems with our structures multiple times, pinging those structures, generating notifications that eventually wear down the alertness and willingness to even look at what or who is attacking one of our structures. With a bit more open minded and inclusive approach on the fitting side we could have gotten straight to testing an answer to those. Guess we'll have to kill a few more.
Our observations over the years tell a different story and so does any metric available to us.K950 wrote:AARs that are five pages long tend to be ignored.
Good job on not welping a fleet of pve battleships undocking from Jita during wartime. I still don't understand how that happendK950 wrote:As a Director, what would you like to say positive about this excursion?
Out of curiosity: How long did you guys require to form, travel to Jita and undock? Did that match the 30 minutes proposed in the announcement thread?
- Neonen
- Member
- Posts: 6
- Joined: 2017.07.21 15:15
Re: [AAR] 8D02 Reverse Thought
The formup+travel took roughly 1 hour, the fight itself maybe 5 minutes.
I think this is really appropriate in this situation.
People have tried to tell you what can go wrong, you had several fleets. Instead you chose not to listen and follow though with your own plan.
This in itself isn't even an issue whatsoever, sometimes you have to learn by doing. But if you touch a hot plate repeatedly, you have to get the message at some point.
And if you take the rist of literally telling people you keep this super good doctrine secret because you want to be the first, you better succeed. Otherwise you stepped on their toes, willfully ignored them AND failed. The last point isn't an issue in the uni, you're here to learn. But if you fail at learning, that's bad man. Really bad.
So it's just another whelp, the message still got lost.
I think this is really appropriate in this situation.
People have tried to tell you what can go wrong, you had several fleets. Instead you chose not to listen and follow though with your own plan.
This in itself isn't even an issue whatsoever, sometimes you have to learn by doing. But if you touch a hot plate repeatedly, you have to get the message at some point.
And if you take the rist of literally telling people you keep this super good doctrine secret because you want to be the first, you better succeed. Otherwise you stepped on their toes, willfully ignored them AND failed. The last point isn't an issue in the uni, you're here to learn. But if you fail at learning, that's bad man. Really bad.
So it's just another whelp, the message still got lost.
- White 0rchid
- Member
- Posts: 1413
- Joined: 2013.08.14 21:17
- Location: United Kingdom
Re: [AAR] 8D02 Reverse Thought
K950 wrote:Would you like to contribute something positive to this fleet report?
Seeing as you asked... I contributed in the original thread, along with many others. Also if you think this was anywhere close to hostile you're in for a surprise. But you ignored that, so I have no more time for helping you.K950 wrote:I get a bit of a hostile tone with some of the responses
WE FORM V0LTA
- Tahrl Cabot
- Member
- Posts: 30
- Joined: 2015.01.27 19:30
- Title: Sophomore
- Location: Utah, USA
Re: [AAR] 8D02 Reverse Thought
The early formup worked well for me, as I had RL obligations after the fleet, this is also why I couldn't stay for the second attempt. The fleet was well run and a good learning experience; I am very much looking forward to doing it again sometime.
Tahrl Cabot
Pilot, Scholar, and Industrialist
Pilot, Scholar, and Industrialist