These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

The fix for black ops: Cloaking field generator (only for cruiser sized and less)
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Temuken Radzu
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2012-05-08 16:01:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Temuken Radzu
For too long the black ops has'nt got hardly any uses in small roaming ganks.
The idea is fairy simple: a new cloaking module exclusively for black ops.

Cloaking field generator:
Black ops only
Cloaks the ship itself, frigates, destroyers and cruiser sized ships only.
Ships must be in a fleet.
Up to 10 ships can be cloaked.
range: 15km
Ships can fleetwarp when cloaked but warpspeed is reduced to 0.3 au sec.

-Cloaked ships are not affected by penalty's but they are immediately decloaked if they lock, mwd, or use any sort of other active modules. They are also unable to cloak when they are themselves locked.
-Ships are also decloaked when they get in a 5000 radius of a object (excluding cloaked fleetmates)
ed.
-Black Ops ship itself is also decloaked when 4 or more ships that are cloaked, decloak.
-Cloaked ships have a targeting delay of 7.5 seconds no matter what ships they fly.
-Maybe a maximum of sig radius of ships that can be cloaked. (more sig, less ships can be cloaked. Less sig, more ships can be cloaked)
-Thinking of making this cloak using fuel to operate.
-Black Ops cant fit a Cover Jump Portal Generator when this module is fitted, forcing pilots to make choices.
This module could make the Black ops the ultimate ambush ship. Think of the possiblily's :P
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#2 - 2012-05-08 16:07:17 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
We all know the one trick ponies that black ops have become. Covert jump bridge, too impractical to do anything else.

What if they also had a secondary function, that of concealment?

As a reference, I point out the heavy interdictor. With it's bubble of warp disruption, it is a mobile lockdown unit. Consider the range, as modified by skills, etc.

What if the Black Ops had a similar bubble generator. Instead of warp disruption, it would be a cloaking bubble, where any ship in the field had the effects of a cloak on it.

Limits would be similar to a POS bubble, weapons would not function, etc.
Additional limitation would require that the ships be in fleet with the Black Ops, to confirm agreement and permission to be cloaked.
(You are losing access to weapons and all functions the same as any other cloaked vessel when this field is active on you)
This will not give ships the ability to warp cloaked, or even move beyond the range of the bubble without dropping the cloaking effect.

I still like the idea too.
(Tried to link the original post, but the web page chokes on it's own address)

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Temuken Radzu
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2012-05-08 16:17:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Temuken Radzu
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
We all know the one trick ponies that black ops have become. Covert jump bridge, too impractical to do anything else.

What if they also had a secondary function, that of concealment?

As a reference, I point out the heavy interdictor. With it's bubble of warp disruption, it is a mobile lockdown unit. Consider the range, as modified by skills, etc.

What if the Black Ops had a similar bubble generator. Instead of warp disruption, it would be a cloaking bubble, where any ship in the field had the effects of a cloak on it.

Limits would be similar to a POS bubble, weapons would not function, etc.
Additional limitation would require that the ships be in fleet with the Black Ops, to confirm agreement and permission to be cloaked.
(You are losing access to weapons and all functions the same as any other cloaked vessel when this field is active on you)
This will not give ships the ability to warp cloaked, or even move beyond the range of the bubble without dropping the cloaking effect.

I still like the idea too.
(Tried to link the original post, but the web page chokes on it's own address)


Didn't know that was posted too (i did use the seach option) but i think his version is a little too overpowered and has less uses. His version basicly says it cloaks every ship (cloaked titan anyone :P) while mine is more usefull for smallrange ganks and large fleet options without making the Black ops to overpowered.
Just added a little extra regarding the black ops cloak itself
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#4 - 2012-05-08 16:31:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Petrus Blackshell
Cool concept, but the ships affected by this must suffer cloaking penalties, especially to sensor recalibration.

The only two ships that can immediately target upon decloaking currently are bombers and black ops -- neither of which can tackle very well. This is for good reason. There is a general concept in PvP that, if you are on your toes and ready to react upon any info available (local, d-scan, etc), you can have a chance at getting away. Zero-penalty cloaked interceptors, sensor boosted hictors or even a cloaked Tornado alpha blob all completely break any semblance of balance that tackling has (particularly in gate camping).

Not to mention that Black Ops would become the ultimate GTFO ship for anything firing at more than 30-40 km away. Your Drake blob is getting outblobbed? Fire up the cloak and anyone who is not being targeted will be able to warp away safely, almost guaranteed.

If you look around at how things work right now, there are multiple giant penalties to fitting cloaks to non-covert ships (slot layouts, fittings, targeting recalibration, scan res nerf, bad speed while cloaked), some of which even carry over to a lesser degree to covert ships. Giving ships a way to cloak without any of the penalties is horribly broken.

Ed: I almost forgot, I told myself I'd post this when I saw any particularly bad ideas. Here you go.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
Temuken Radzu
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2012-05-08 17:07:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Temuken Radzu
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Cool concept, but the ships affected by this must suffer cloaking penalties, especially to sensor recalibration.

The only two ships that can immediately target upon decloaking currently are bombers and black ops -- neither of which can tackle very well. This is for good reason. There is a general concept in PvP that, if you are on your toes and ready to react upon any info available (local, d-scan, etc), you can have a chance at getting away. Zero-penalty cloaked interceptors, sensor boosted hictors or even a cloaked Tornado alpha blob all completely break any semblance of balance that tackling has (particularly in gate camping).

Not to mention that Black Ops would become the ultimate GTFO ship for anything firing at more than 30-40 km away. Your Drake blob is getting outblobbed? Fire up the cloak and anyone who is not being targeted will be able to warp away safely, almost guaranteed.

If you look around at how things work right now, there are multiple giant penalties to fitting cloaks to non-covert ships (slot layouts, fittings, targeting recalibration, scan res nerf, bad speed while cloaked), some of which even carry over to a lesser degree to covert ships. Giving ships a way to cloak without any of the penalties is horribly broken.

Ed: I almost forgot, I told myself I'd post this when I saw any particularly bad ideas. Here you go.


You got a point there, maybe a sensor calibration would be in place. But the drake blob CAN'T be cloaked (read it is only for cruiser sized and less, so battlecruisers will not get cloaked) In the same way i also used a limit of 10 ships that can be cloaked, to prevent of massive blobs with a single black ops in the fleet. Remember, those things are pretty expensive and fragile.
plus: You will also decloak if you try to warp away on your own.

I also made a speed limit for fleet warping of 0.3 au sec. This is slower than freighters, so it is difficult to get quick from one place to another.
Metal Icarus
Star Frontiers
Brotherhood of Spacers
#6 - 2012-05-08 17:13:29 UTC
>20 man SB fleet bashing SBU
>Blackops siting 100km away from agressing fleet
>Decloaks and 10 muninns start locking and popping bombers

win
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#7 - 2012-05-08 17:23:58 UTC
Replace "Drake" with Tengu, Zealot, Muninn, Guardian, Cerberus, or any other cruiser sized ship that can effectively fight at range. The point stands.

Warp speed is indeed a detractor, but not big enough of one to balance such a huge balance change.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#8 - 2012-05-08 17:26:10 UTC
Metal Icarus wrote:
>20 man SB fleet bashing SBU
>Blackops siting 100km away from agressing fleet
>Decloaks and 10 muninns start locking and popping bombers

win


>20 man SB fleet bashing SBU
>Blackops siting 100km away from agressing fleet
>Decloaks and 10 muninns start locking bombers
>Bombers cloak up

Lose.

Try this instead:


>20 man SB fleet bashing SBU
>Your own bombers sitting 30 km away cloaked up
>Bombers decloak and launch bombs

Win.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
Temuken Radzu
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2012-05-08 17:32:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Temuken Radzu
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Replace "Drake" with Tengu, Zealot, Muninn, Guardian, Cerberus, or any other cruiser sized ship that can effectively fight at range. The point stands.

Warp speed is indeed a detractor, but not big enough of one to balance such a huge balance change.


Isnt it true that any ship (cloaked or not) at range has a chance of getting away? Warp disruptors have only a range of 20 km.
Plus, the ships you have listed are pretty expensive and skill intensive. So it might be a little difficult to get a large fleet of those together, unlike the drake. Plus you have to take notion that the Black ops might be primaired the moment he decloaks.

ed. changed the cloaking range from 17 km to 15 km
Loius Woo
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#10 - 2012-05-08 17:39:13 UTC
To balance it on top of only allowing cruisers and below into the bubble, have each bubble only able to cloak some total signature radius so if you have cruisers you get a few ships cloaked, if you have frigs, you get more ships cloaked. And if an enemy gets into the bubble, the whole thing decloaks, not just the ship thats too close.

Agree that normal penalties to targeting and speed should apply to everyone who is cloaked. This way it becomes a way to shake up a fight, keep some forces hidden until the right time, not a game breaking balance change.
Temuken Radzu
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2012-05-08 17:41:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Temuken Radzu
Loius Woo wrote:
To balance it on top of only allowing cruisers and below into the bubble, have each bubble only able to cloak some total signature radius so if you have cruisers you get a few ships cloaked, if you have frigs, you get more ships cloaked. And if an enemy gets into the bubble, the whole thing decloaks, not just the ship thats too close.

Agree that normal penalties to targeting and speed should apply to everyone who is cloaked. This way it becomes a way to shake up a fight, keep some forces hidden until the right time, not a game breaking balance change.


Thats actualy a nice suggetion, tnx Loius
What max sig raidius should we have in mind... any idea's?
Loius Woo
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#12 - 2012-05-08 17:43:05 UTC
Temuken Radzu wrote:
Loius Woo wrote:
To balance it on top of only allowing cruisers and below into the bubble, have each bubble only able to cloak some total signature radius so if you have cruisers you get a few ships cloaked, if you have frigs, you get more ships cloaked. And if an enemy gets into the bubble, the whole thing decloaks, not just the ship thats too close.

Agree that normal penalties to targeting and speed should apply to everyone who is cloaked. This way it becomes a way to shake up a fight, keep some forces hidden until the right time, not a game breaking balance change.


Thats actualy a nice suggetion, tnx Loius



This would also penalize shield tanked ships more than armor tanked, but thats fine by me, the Caldari would already have the best Black Ops BS for this kind of thing anyway.
PinkKnife
The Cuddlefish
Ethereal Dawn
#13 - 2012-05-08 17:47:51 UTC  |  Edited by: PinkKnife
I replied in the original thread, but this isn't solving the problem, and doesn't take into account the new ship line changes coming to EVE.

What purpose does this solve? What problem that currently exists with BO ships is fixed by this? Does this new niche ability mean more people will actively use and skill up for them? Remember the training time for a BO ship is equal to or longer than a carrier these days.


The problem is that the cost of the ships is too high, for the benefit they give.

With the new ship lines, and removal of the tier system. Expect BOs to now be more akin to giant support ships. Largely the widow is a falcon turned up to 9000. (better tank, better dps, equal jamming strength, more mids, etc). The rest of the ships are largely useless in this role however. The Redeemer is basically just an armegeddon. 7.5% bonus Large Energy Turret tracking per level, are you kidding me? This should be a energy neut bonus, or a weapon disruption bonus. It should be a pilgrim jacked up past 9000.

The largest, simpliest, most effective change you can bring to Black ops right now is the covert opts cloak.
Temuken Radzu
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2012-05-08 17:55:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Temuken Radzu
PinkKnife wrote:
I replied in the original thread, but this isn't solving the problem, and doesn't take into account the new ship line changes coming to EVE.

What purpose does this solve? What problem that currently exists with BO ships is fixed by this? Does this new niche ability mean more people will actively use and skill up for them? Remember the training time for a BO ship is equal to or longer than a carrier these days.


The problem is that the cost of the ships is too high, for the benefit they give.

With the new ship lines, and removal of the tier system. Expect BOs to now be more akin to giant support ships. Largely the widow is a falcon turned up to 9000. (better tank, better dps, equal jamming strength, more mids, etc). The rest of the ships are largely useless in this role however. The Redeemer is basically just an armegeddon. 7.5% bonus Large Energy Turret tracking per level, are you kidding me?

The largest, simpliest, most effective change you can bring to Black ops ships is the covert opts cloak.



You basicly says you want to make the black ops a better combat ship. Not specialized, just a better version of a different ship.
I try to make from the Black ops a truely uniqe specialization, like T2 ships are supposed to be.
so maybe it should lose one of its damage bonuses in favor of this module, and its role.
Temuken Radzu
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2012-05-08 17:55:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Temuken Radzu
sorry, dualpost
Loius Woo
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#16 - 2012-05-08 18:22:43 UTC
PinkKnife wrote:
What purpose does this solve? What problem that currently exists with BO ships is fixed by this?


It doesn't "fix" anything per se except viability.

So the "problem" is that BO's are too expensive for what they do, which is covert bridge other ships which while on paper sounds pretty cool, doesn't justify the price tag of the BO ships or the skill time to train them.

The "fix" is to add a viable role for the BO in a fleet or gang.

This idea does that by allowing the BO to be the only ship in Eve that can extend it's cloak to other ships. This also makes some other ships more viable than they would have been otherwise, things like ships with big alpha but poor mobility, or ships with great damage but poor range and poor mobility (blaster boats anyone). It gives a reason to undock a BO for a fleet, and a new dynamic for fights that is not there now.

I think it is a great idea.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#17 - 2012-05-08 18:36:58 UTC
Loius Woo wrote:
PinkKnife wrote:
What purpose does this solve? What problem that currently exists with BO ships is fixed by this?


It doesn't "fix" anything per se except viability.

So the "problem" is that BO's are too expensive for what they do, which is covert bridge other ships which while on paper sounds pretty cool, doesn't justify the price tag of the BO ships or the skill time to train them.

The "fix" is to add a viable role for the BO in a fleet or gang.

This idea does that by allowing the BO to be the only ship in Eve that can extend it's cloak to other ships. This also makes some other ships more viable than they would have been otherwise, things like ships with big alpha but poor mobility, or ships with great damage but poor range and poor mobility (blaster boats anyone). It gives a reason to undock a BO for a fleet, and a new dynamic for fights that is not there now.

I think it is a great idea.

Yeah, she had one post in my thread... some misguided complaint about why would covops ships want to be cloaked by a ship that would penalize them like that, in order to cloak.
(Her comment gave the impression she misunderstood the idea, which more than one person responded to her about)

Since she never responded to those, I must think she never had her confusion dispelled, and still thinks it is for that bizarre use.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#18 - 2012-05-08 19:12:58 UTC
Get out get out get out. Cloak bubbles are a TERRIBLE GODDAMNED IDEA.
Loius Woo
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#19 - 2012-05-08 19:17:34 UTC
Ganthrithor wrote:
Get out get out get out. Cloak bubbles are a TERRIBLE GODDAMNED IDEA.


Thank you for your insightful and succinct logical rebuttal to the idea. You have brought so much to the discussion that I am speechless.

Here, take my internets.
Aleksander Erkkinen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#20 - 2012-05-08 20:42:01 UTC
I love cloaking, but I think that this is a little too much. I think there should be a wider variety of cloaking ships (cloaky destroyers come to mind) but I don't believe that everything subcruiser should be able to cloak. I much prefer to leave cloaking in the hands of specialist vehicles, because A) it's easier for the devs to balance, which means a less likely nerfhammer when someone discovers an exploit for it, B) it makes stealth less common, which makes it more interesting when it's actually encountered, and C) because everything cloaking (even if "everything" is cruiser and below) defeats scouting without any drawbacks except for one ship taking a hit for the team.

Love cloaks, interesting idea, but I don't like it.
12Next page