These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next page
 

New command module
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jason Itiner
Harmless People
#1 - 2014-03-11 08:37:32 UTC
Currently, command ships seem to have no counters other than probing down and driving them off. So how about a module that neutralizes command links?

Command Link Jammer I

Prerequisites: Electronic Warfare V, Warfare Link Specialist V (maybe others?)

Fitting cost: 125 MW, 75 TF

Description: This module detects broadcasts from other command modules in the system, and broadcasts a phase-inverted signal that renders other warfare links unusable. May only be mounted on command ships. Only one module may be mounted and active.

This would provide a counter in which one command ship may neutralize all others in the system, but if two such modules are activated, ALL command links in the system are rendered unusable.

What does the community think about this?
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#2 - 2014-03-11 08:48:49 UTC
No. Many reasons why not. Go read the bajillion and one threads about boosting to get all the nitty gritty details, cause someone proposes this every thread.

TLDR: Toys are cool, using cool toys is cool and should be rewarded, and having an "I CBA to bring my own toys so you can't use your anywhere in here" mod is both bad game design and anti-fun. It rewards having more people that the other group near exclusively since the universal jamming of links means specialized fleets for fighting outnumbered are much more difficult to fly in large combat.
Jason Itiner
Harmless People
#3 - 2014-03-11 08:56:21 UTC
You make a good point (which is pretty rare on this subforum from what I see). I was just throwing the idea to the wind since I had it and haven't seen it before...
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2014-03-11 10:23:52 UTC
Maybe playing devils advocate, maybe serious discussion point, not 100% sure myself:


What about a deployable structure with a limited range, calculated based on the the ship using x module's location, not where the target is?


Example: Structure has 100k range. Attacker is 140k away from structure, defender is 90. Attacker could still benefit from links but defender could not.

Where this might be used? Gate camp defense, tower defense? An over-arching 'I block the whole system' module, no, don' t like it at all. But a limited module.... IDK.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal
Jason Itiner
Harmless People
#5 - 2014-03-11 10:33:24 UTC
Kenrailae wrote:
Maybe playing devils advocate, maybe serious discussion point, not 100% sure myself:


What about a deployable structure with a limited range, calculated based on the the ship using x module's location, not where the target is?


Example: Structure has 100k range. Attacker is 140k away from structure, defender is 90. Attacker could still benefit from links but defender could not.

Where this might be used? Gate camp defense, tower defense? An over-arching 'I block the whole system' module, no, don' t like it at all. But a limited module.... IDK.


That could work, I guess. It would make for an interesting turn of a battle when one party drops such a module during a brawl and starts burning for range...
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
#6 - 2014-03-11 11:50:40 UTC
Why not make a module/script dictors and/or Hics (or another Ship) that negates or decrease boosts instead of prevent targets from warping.

Like a Anti-Warefare-Link-Bubble™.

Meet the Mario Kart 8 - Capsuleer Club Cup
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2014-03-11 11:56:29 UTC
Lephia DeGrande wrote:
Why not make a module/script dictors and/or Hics (or another Ship) that negates or decrease boosts instead of prevent targets from warping.

Like a Anti-Warefare-Link-Bubble™.


escort destroyer use number 342...jamming platform..using a module that reduces effective warfare link range to be on grid. Easier than rewriting all the warfare link code too :D (and maybe I can get my tech II algos out of it...)
Jason Itiner
Harmless People
#8 - 2014-03-11 11:57:44 UTC
Lephia DeGrande wrote:
Why not make a module/script dictors and/or Hics (or another Ship) that negates or decrease boosts instead of prevent targets from warping.

Like a Anti-Warefare-Link-Bubble™.


With DICs/HICs, it would probably be even less acceptable. I was going along the line of thinking "If it's warfare link, it should be command ships".
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
#9 - 2014-03-11 13:12:04 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Lephia DeGrande wrote:
Why not make a module/script dictors and/or Hics (or another Ship) that negates or decrease boosts instead of prevent targets from warping.

Like a Anti-Warefare-Link-Bubble™.


escort destroyer use number 342...jamming platform..using a module that reduces effective warfare link range to be on grid. Easier than rewriting all the warfare link code too :D (and maybe I can get my tech II algos out of it...)


Jason Itiner wrote:
Lephia DeGrande wrote:
Why not make a module/script dictors and/or Hics (or another Ship) that negates or decrease boosts instead of prevent targets from warping.

Like a Anti-Warefare-Link-Bubble™.


With DICs/HICs, it would probably be even less acceptable. I was going along the line of thinking "If it's warfare link, it should be command ships".


Ok NP, i can satisfy both of you.

We introduce a new Ship Line with Command Ship Destroyer that use the Hulls from the new Destroyer (Algos, Corax,...) and give Warefare links Scripts which generate Bubbles to Counter the same kind of Links as fitted but reduces the own Fleet Bonus by 50%.

Meet the Mario Kart 8 - Capsuleer Club Cup
Agondray
Avenger Mercenaries
VOID Intergalactic Forces
#10 - 2014-03-11 14:40:28 UTC
Any thing along the system line would become heavy abused in empire against many groups. Specs would need to be developed to only work against those that are hostile against you otherwise there's nothing keeping someone rolling their alt in to system and shutting mining boost or all boosters in an incursion system.

"Sarcasm is the Recourse of a weak mind." -Dr. Smith
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2014-03-11 15:17:43 UTC
Agondray wrote:
Any thing along the system line would become heavy abused in empire against many groups. Specs would need to be developed to only work against those that are hostile against you otherwise there's nothing keeping someone rolling their alt in to system and shutting mining boost or all boosters in an incursion system.



This could be answered by making a structure only anchorable in sec below .X

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
#12 - 2014-03-11 15:34:06 UTC
Agondray wrote:
Any thing along the system line would become heavy abused in empire against many groups. Specs would need to be developed to only work against those that are hostile against you otherwise there's nothing keeping someone rolling their alt in to system and shutting mining boost or all boosters in an incursion system.


Using Anti-Warefare-Link-Bubble™ in highsec gives you suspect flag. Only downside is when wardeccing but what ever it would be a nice Tool in all other cases, ofc you have to combine that with onGrid Boosting only.

Meet the Mario Kart 8 - Capsuleer Club Cup
Buhhdust Princess
Mind Games.
#13 - 2014-03-11 15:37:06 UTC
No. Just no. Links have been shat on enough already...
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#14 - 2014-03-11 15:39:10 UTC
Jason Itiner wrote:
Currently, command ships seem to have no counters other than probing down and driving them off. So how about a module that neutralizes command links?

Command Link Jammer I

Prerequisites: Electronic Warfare V, Warfare Link Specialist V (maybe others?)

Fitting cost: 125 MW, 75 TF

Description: This module detects broadcasts from other command modules in the system, and broadcasts a phase-inverted signal that renders other warfare links unusable. May only be mounted on command ships. Only one module may be mounted and active.

This would provide a counter in which one command ship may neutralize all others in the system, but if two such modules are activated, ALL command links in the system are rendered unusable.

What does the community think about this?


I would prefer a deployable structure that disables all links in a system, or all links on a grid.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#15 - 2014-03-11 22:27:39 UTC
Every single one of these suggestions leaves links completely and totally unusable...
Jason Itiner
Harmless People
#16 - 2014-03-11 22:34:00 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Every single one of these suggestions leaves links completely and totally unusable...


The original one would only leave them fully negated if two or more jammers were active in the system. It could be argued that you'd only use it to turn the tide if you were sure the enemy couldn't counter-jam your links, but on second thought, a grid-limited link jammer would be more appropriate.
Zan Shiro
Doomheim
#17 - 2014-03-11 22:59:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Zan Shiro
Kenrailae wrote:
Maybe playing devils advocate, maybe serious discussion point, not 100% sure myself:


What about a deployable structure with a limited range, calculated based on the the ship using x module's location, not where the target is?


Example: Structure has 100k range. Attacker is 140k away from structure, defender is 90. Attacker could still benefit from links but defender could not.

Where this might be used? Gate camp defense, tower defense? An over-arching 'I block the whole system' module, no, don' t like it at all. But a limited module.... IDK.



you are hitting the issue that is, iirc, hindering ccps' attempts to get even off grid boosting off the server. They want links on grid. It's just its a complex problem that the calculation spam is bit much to handle. The calculation spam being constant updating of spatial relationship of ships to boost in relation to position of the link boat.

edit: this structure would have this same issue. Granted the problem gets easier as the structure won't move like a CS. BUt...its still a complex problem.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#18 - 2014-03-11 23:17:58 UTC
Jason Itiner wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
Every single one of these suggestions leaves links completely and totally unusable...


The original one would only leave them fully negated if two or more jammers were active in the system. It could be argued that you'd only use it to turn the tide if you were sure the enemy couldn't counter-jam your links, but on second thought, a grid-limited link jammer would be more appropriate.



But there would always be a minimum of two in system. Always. Regardless of weather or not either side actually brought one.

And a grid limited one would also make links worthless. If you can't actually apply the bonuses to the ships in the fight, why bother bringing them?
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
#19 - 2014-03-11 23:28:46 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Every single one of these suggestions leaves links completely and totally unusable...



What? Do you believe a Ship with a 10km bubble would make all links useless at once? lol

On the other hand, in every other Thread there are so many whiny players who think Links are sooooo super strong and now they are to weak to get any counter?

Whats the deal now? Are Links to strong, to weak or simply fine?

Meet the Mario Kart 8 - Capsuleer Club Cup
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#20 - 2014-03-12 00:00:27 UTC
I would imagine that a module or deployable as described would run into the same technical hurdle keeping links off-grid. There is probably no way to make a decent AE to cut links without killing them in the whole system.

However, a Communications Disruptor directed at a single ship as a targeted effect might do the job.
123Next page