These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Proposal to change the warp system

Author
Siigari Kitawa
Operation Sleepless
#1 - 2013-04-02 06:54:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Siigari Kitawa
I was just doing a little thinking, and I was wondering what Eve would be like with a change to how the warp system works.

Currently as you all know, warping is as easy as reaching 3/4 max velocity (usually) and hitting warp in a line to your destination. While the align system functions in a way that rewards pointing your ship in the direction you want to warp it, I have taken to consideration today that that seems more accessible for some and less accessible for others. So I thought maybe a rebalancing may be worth looking at.

Let's say that aligning your ship no longer matters as much, and now what matters is actually charging your warp drive.

A frigate, sitting at 0 velocity wants to warp. It activates warp. Now it enters warp mode and the velocity indicator changes from speed to warp drive charge percentage. When a ship reaches 100% warp drive charge it may enter warp. What does this do? This means a frigate may align to a target if it wishes but now it must spool up its warp drive to leave the grid.

So say for example a 0-100 charge on a frigate is 5-6 seconds.
Cruisers are 10-13 seconds.
Battleships are 15-20 seconds.
Tech 1 Industrials are 15-20 seconds (similar core to a battleship)
Freighters are 40-50 seconds.
etc


This would change some things, but permit some other things. What it may change is it would remove MWD/Cloaking. Though it works as intended, I don't believe it was really ever 'intended.' Believe it or not, that actually would injure me as I enjoy zipping around in my Occator safe from getting thumped by Tornadoes. But it also adds a risk cost to almost every ship involved. Actually, many a time, you slap a MWD onto your ship and boom you are instantly rewarded with 10 second align times. That seems to break the spirit of a ship classification if you can make every ship act much nimbler than it seems.

Now charging the warp drive would actually decrease capacitor as it charges. That means activating warp no longer has an immediate penalty, and cap can be saved if you stop warp halfway through the old align cycle, so to speak.

So how could one improve their warp drive charge times? Fit a new module, rig or implant called a Warp Drive Harmonizer (could also be Warp Drive Regulator or Warp Drive Aligner (hah)). At any rate these would increase the rate at which a ship charges its warp drive.

Anyway I think this would certainly change quite a few things, but it would definitely put Eve back in line with "massively multiplayer" and force individuals to work together more. I know it'd personally set me back some, but the idea is to redesign the way the warp system works so people can't just have instant warp times for free any more because they took a moment of forethought before any proverbial crap hit the fan. It would reward a system of actual ship fittings, and not just simple alignment movement in space. Though aligning to the target will still be required, it's not a free way out any longer.

Edit: What this post is trying to convey is bring meaning back to wanting to leave a grid. Don't have leaving a grid be as simple as just aligning then warping whenever you want any longer. Make the decision to leave a grid have a consequence in the form of a time penalty associated to it.

Thanks.

Need stuff moved? Push Industries will handle it. Serving highsec, lowsec and nullsec - and we do it faster and more reliably than anyone else. Ingame channel: PUSHX

James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#2 - 2013-04-02 07:09:28 UTC
I can't help but wonder if this is related to the acceleration gate issue you posted about.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2013-04-02 07:10:03 UTC
Siigari Kitawa wrote:
ююю so people can't just have instant warp times for free any more because they took a moment of forethought before any proverbial crap hit the fan.

you mean if you get camped in station you have no options to get out. So either clone jump or logoff. I would choose logoff and other game this way.

Maybe i'm wrong here but i think your idea will seriously reduce amount of PvP in low/0.0. Why? Because of:
1) multiplayer only mode - so if i'm the only one logged on now i can't do anything
2) no insta-warp - if small gang is in station and bigger one closed exit - there is no chances for small gang to undock/warp out/regroup and go to fight. They will need to fight surrounded. Or they will just sit and wait.

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"

Siigari Kitawa
Operation Sleepless
#4 - 2013-04-02 07:15:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Siigari Kitawa
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
I can't help but wonder if this is related to the acceleration gate issue you posted about.

No. Actually what inspired it was the fact that any ship that is aligned anywhere may immediately warp regardless of circumstance. Warp is the easiest way out of a situation.

So say Player A lands on grid where Player B is at. Player B is aligned to a warp destination. Before Player A even lands and has control of their ship, Player B can already be gone. This system would balance that so the penalties Player A may have applied to their own ship (say scan res bonuses) may be attempted to be utilized against Player B, regardless of distance. If Player B is 100km away from Player A when Player A lands, then Player B already took some forethought by being far away. But if Player A lands right on top of Player B, then Player B should have to make the choice THEN to leave (because that is when they are making it) and as such a consequence should follow.

A way to speed up is to watch close-range D-Scan and decide if a target is too close for comfort, then get out. D-scan range is an extension of a grid, just you can't see what the intentions are.

This is in no way shape or form associated with the acceleration gates. It didn't even cross my mind really. Was just thinking that any ship, no matter its size has a free GTFO card in its hand ready to go when somebody is arriving on the same grid with you. It has some side effects for ships of all types (including capitals such as titans, transports and freighters) that are either positive or negative, but I think for the most part those side effects are fair.

How is a Titan which has the mass of many, many ships able to simply warp because of one MWD cycle?

March rabbit wrote:
Siigari Kitawa wrote:
ююю so people can't just have instant warp times for free any more because they took a moment of forethought before any proverbial crap hit the fan.

you mean if you get camped in station you have no options to get out. So either clone jump or logoff. I would choose logoff and other game this way.

Maybe i'm wrong here but i think your idea will seriously reduce amount of PvP in low/0.0. Why? Because of:
1) multiplayer only mode - so if i'm the only one logged on now i can't do anything
2) no insta-warp - if small gang is in station and bigger one closed exit - there is no chances for small gang to undock/warp out/regroup and go to fight. They will need to fight surrounded. Or they will just sit and wait.

Then I suggest reworking WCS. And yeah, space is a dangerous place. If you dock up at a station with 20 people camping outside, sucks. Make some friends and fight them! I'm sure that's what CCP would have said 10 years ago.

Need stuff moved? Push Industries will handle it. Serving highsec, lowsec and nullsec - and we do it faster and more reliably than anyone else. Ingame channel: PUSHX

Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
#5 - 2013-04-02 07:20:28 UTC
NOW we can catch those filthy reds that undock from Hek Boundless Creation Factory without having to bump them!
AND everyone else that we just want to gank!
INCLUDING wartargets that try to get away! NOW YOU DIE!

Big smile excellent idea!
















not
Steve WingYip
Doomheim
#6 - 2013-04-02 07:22:51 UTC
Siigari Kitawa wrote:
I was just doing a little thinking, and I was wondering what Eve would be like with a change to how the warp system works.

Currently as you all know, warping is as easy as reaching 3/4 max velocity (usually) and hitting warp in a line to your destination. While the align system functions in a way that rewards pointing your ship in the direction you want to warp it, I have taken to consideration today that that seems more accessible for some and less accessible for others. So I thought maybe a rebalancing may be worth looking at.

Let's say that aligning your ship no longer matters as much, and now what matters is actually charging your warp drive.

A frigate, sitting at 0 velocity wants to warp. It activates warp. Now it enters warp mode and the velocity indicator changes from speed to warp drive charge percentage. When a ship reaches 100% warp drive charge it may enter warp. What does this do? This means a frigate may align to a target if it wishes but now it must spool up its warp drive to leave the grid.

So say for example a 0-100 charge on a frigate is 5-6 seconds.
Cruisers are 10-13 seconds.
Battleships are 15-20 seconds.
Tech 1 Industrials are 15-20 seconds (similar core to a battleship)
Freighters are 40-50 seconds.
etc


This would change some things, but permit some other things. What it may change is it would remove MWD/Cloaking. Though it works as intended, I don't believe it was really ever 'intended.' Believe it or not, that actually would injure me as I enjoy zipping around in my Occator safe from getting thumped by Tornadoes. But it also adds a risk cost to almost every ship involved. Actually, many a time, you slap a MWD onto your ship and boom you are instantly rewarded with 10 second align times. That seems to break the spirit of a ship classification if you can make every ship act much nimbler than it seems.

Now charging the warp drive would actually decrease capacitor as it charges. That means activating warp no longer has an immediate penalty, and cap can be saved if you stop warp halfway through the old align cycle, so to speak.

So how could one improve their warp drive charge times? Fit a new module, rig or implant called a Warp Drive Harmonizer (could also be Warp Drive Regulator or Warp Drive Aligner (hah)). At any rate these would increase the rate at which a ship charges its warp drive.

Anyway I think this would certainly change quite a few things, but it would definitely put Eve back in line with "massively multiplayer" and force individuals to work together more. I know it'd personally set me back some, but the idea is to redesign the way the warp system works so people can't just have instant warp times for free any more because they took a moment of forethought before any proverbial crap hit the fan. It would reward a system of actual ship fittings, and not just simple alignment movement in space. Though aligning to the target will still be required, it's not a free way out any longer.

Edit: What this post is trying to convey is bring meaning back to wanting to leave a grid. Don't have leaving a grid be as simple as just aligning then warping whenever you want any longer. Make the decision to leave a grid have a consequence in the form of a time penalty associated to it.

Thanks.


Looks like you want to make it easier to gank those miners that you can't catch. Bad idea.
Kamden Line
Sovereign Citizen and other Tax Evasion Schemes
#7 - 2013-04-02 07:23:11 UTC
So, in order to create PVP, we must make it utterly impossible for singular players to move about safely in nulsec or lowsec.

In order to create PVP, we must remove insurance.

In order to create PVP, we must remove local.

In order to create PVP, we must remove incentives that actually encourage PVP or provide opportunities for one-sided ganking that somehow is supposed to encourage 'group play'.
Maire Devylin
IFCA Mining Graduates
Void Nexus Alliance
#8 - 2013-04-02 07:48:28 UTC
That would make traveling a lot more interesting however, if something like this were implemented, there would have to be drastic changes to warp disrupting as well. The pendulum has to swing both ways.

For example: a warp disruptor would have a % chance to stop a ship. The larger the ship the lower the chance it would work and that chance would happen each and every cycle of the module, which wold be a decent amount of time, say 8 seconds. Multiple modules, even if on multiple ships, would not stack the effect.

If you miss that frig on the first try, it's gone.

Skills would have to be added to increase the chance of it working as well as skills to negate that chance.

Basically it would make warp scrambling a crapshoot and not allow for free gankage.
Siigari Kitawa
Operation Sleepless
#9 - 2013-04-02 08:06:29 UTC
Maire Devylin wrote:
That would make traveling a lot more interesting however, if something like this were implemented, there would have to be drastic changes to warp disrupting as well. The pendulum has to swing both ways.

For example: a warp disruptor would have a % chance to stop a ship. The larger the ship the lower the chance it would work and that chance would happen each and every cycle of the module, which wold be a decent amount of time, say 8 seconds. Multiple modules, even if on multiple ships, would not stack the effect.

If you miss that frig on the first try, it's gone.

Skills would have to be added to increase the chance of it working as well as skills to negate that chance.

Basically it would make warp scrambling a crapshoot and not allow for free gankage.

I like the direction you're going with that, but I don't like the fact that you're turning a mostly skill-based game into a game of chance.

If you wanted to go that route though, let's say that a warp disruptor has a cycle time of 1 second. Each second the disruptor checks the target ship to see if it is activating its warp drive. If it is, it disables the warp drive for a duration of time (say 10 seconds, similar to how ewar works right now.) That means you can technically hold a variety of ships on a grid for a period as long as they're not slamming the crap out of you.

A ship can fit a warp core stabilizer which would allow the warp drive to continue spooling up (like it is now) but would slow down the warp process significantly if you're actually being pointed. THIS is where the chance-based effect should be, perhaps with a skill called Warp Core Harmonics, which increases the chance for a WCS to get you into warp by say 5% per level, with the module being a default 25%. You wouldn't need more than one though, no matter how many points are applied to you. I believe this would facilitate a need to either fit a WCS and gimp your set up or not fit one and have a full set.

Infinite points however completely knock the warp drive out of alignment and it can't compensate.

Need stuff moved? Push Industries will handle it. Serving highsec, lowsec and nullsec - and we do it faster and more reliably than anyone else. Ingame channel: PUSHX

Whitehound
#10 - 2013-04-02 08:11:20 UTC
Features and Ideas Discussion would have been the place for you to post this. You play EVE for long enough to know better than posting these in GD.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#11 - 2013-04-02 08:21:04 UTC
So... what you're saying is that you want to massively buff Gatecamps.


While what CCP is saying is that they want to slightly nerf them (the RSEBO nerf is aimed squarely at LS camps)....

Hmmmm...

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon

Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
#12 - 2013-04-02 11:05:23 UTC
Siigari Kitawa wrote:
Currently as you all know, warping is as easy as reaching 3/4 max velocity (usually) and hitting warp in a line to your destination.


Unless, of course, your ship is under heavy fire and has less than 10% armor left, in which case the game will magically decide that this is a good time to temporarily raise that requirement to 9/10th of max velocity.

Go on, try to tell me I'm wrong.

http://youtu.be/t0q2F8NsYQ0