These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Idea: variable warp speed.

Author
Thoirdhealbhach
Liga der hessischen Gentlemen
#1 - 2015-03-01 01:19:40 UTC
In my opinion, time spent in warp is often just dead waiting time. Except for D-scan there is very little you can do, almost nothing you can actively influence, while in warp. Most of the time it's too short to do trading or some other non-ship related thing and in a big ship, it's too long, to pass by unnoticed. This is bad thing.

Waiting time acts as a deterrent for all PvP related activities. The expectation of exciting combat has to outweigh the dead, inactive, passive travelling time in order to make someone undock, who wants to roam...

In a gaming environment in general, all preparation time, i.e. time you need to spend in order to get to the fun part, should ALWAYS be considered a serious drawback. In fact all people, that I introduced to EVE and that did not follow through, quit because it takes just too long to get to the places where you can do stuff, or to the people with whom you can do the fun stuff.

The obvious solution would be, to allow for instant teleport. Since EVE's economy relies on logistics as a key cost driver, sadly this is not an option.

Instead, here's my idea:

Turbocharged warping:

  • Give each and every ship type a fuel bay and a warp speed selector. Like legality-safety-switch with settings like standard/faster/turbo or 1-10 etc.
  • On the lowest speed setting, the ship warps just as it does now, but it doesn't consume fuel either.
  • On the higher settings, warp speed increases, and fuel is consumed.
  • Fuel consumption is proportional to the percentage of warp speed increase, to the total mass (including cargo and maybe fitting as well) of the ship, and potentially also proportionally to the distance to be warped, but the last one's not absolutely necessary.


PRO:

  • People getting together and DOING FUN STUFF, gets a whole lot easier.
  • Adds a fundamental and easy to understand opt-in choice to an every-day activity.
  • Adds a new layer of purely optional complexity, when turbocharged ships would actually travel faster and/or cheaper on routes with more jumps but shorter in-system distances.
  • Adds a new layer of complexity to logistics, where you would need to weigh travel time vs. fuel costs.
  • Adds an additional widespread ISK sink.
  • Opens a whole lot of options for additional rigs, modules, skills, specialized industrial ships...
  • Warp speed is a very one-dimensional stat (in comparison to sig radius or agility or velocity...), therefore repercussions for player interaction are somewhat limited.
  • Fuel consumption could be a new ship stat, allowing for fine grained control. Make Battlecruisers and Battleships very fuel efficient for lots of fun (with a pricetag still...) and make haulers and capitals even more thirsty for a controled impact on large scale economy.


CON:

  • Huge potential repercussions to play style and economy.
  • Need to touch every ship during implementation in order to add the fuel bay.
  • Balancing fuel consumption and fuel composition/pricing could prove tricky...
  • The features needed to implement would be at least the ability to change a ships warp speed in space and to design/implement a warp speed selector and a calculation for fuel consumption. As an outsider the first two seem reasonable but the third is unclear...?
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#2 - 2015-03-01 01:33:46 UTC
Except who would fly without fuel...?

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#3 - 2015-03-01 02:10:15 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Except who would fly without fuel...?

This.

Anytime you introduce a tangible advantage into a competitive environment with no substantial tradeoff (cost is not a tradeoff, it's merely an annoyance)... it stops being optional.

At this point OP... you might as well ask for all ships to have their warp speed increased right out of the box. But this will run into issues of power projection and "making the game too small."
Thoirdhealbhach
Liga der hessischen Gentlemen
#4 - 2015-03-01 02:22:54 UTC
Not everyone is in a rush all the time. Someone who finds it relaxing (!) to mine ore might not see the need to go extra fast...

If the fuel cost for the fastest warp mode is a sizable portion of the potential profit of the trip you're making, then some people will think twice about using up expensive fuel. If you want to earn ISK, then weighing the time saved vs. the additional cost becomes a potentially interesting and important calculation.

The price point ought to be at a place, where people inclined to PvP (who are probably prepared to lose a certain amount of ISK anyway) or in need of fast but rare change of location are willing to spent the ISK, but people with steady, and somewhat localized routine, like a mission runner, would rather save the ISK.

It's not about warping fast all the time, that should just be painfully expensive.

It's about removing painful long travel times, that are painful long for no or very few important meta-reasons.

It's about corp mates deciding on an activity and possibly rejecting fun stuff (like an incursion 30 jumps away) simply because it's a big hassle getting there, because everyone only has so much time during weekdays... So some people might say, I'm itching for some action, and I've got only 2 or 3 hours tonight, so I want to make my time count. Others might say, I'm hanging out chatting with my buddies, that's what counts; there's no need to spend extra ISK.
Kabark
Schilden
#5 - 2015-03-01 02:43:01 UTC
Ok I can see one major exploit with this. It would be a cap pilots wet dream to fast burn into a system, engage and cyno out. Jump fatigue just eliminated, in a large part, the ability to bring a thousand cap ship armada across the entire galaxy. With this, they could just hyper drive their thousand man fleet where ever, blap, then cyno home or the other way around. This would totally change low and null PVP concept. The way I see this is turning EVE from a calculated, well organized, and tactical PVP mechanic to an instant gratification Call of Duty in space. I don't support.
Thoirdhealbhach
Liga der hessischen Gentlemen
#6 - 2015-03-01 02:45:23 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:

Anytime you introduce a tangible advantage into a competitive environment with no substantial tradeoff (cost is not a tradeoff, it's merely an annoyance)... it stops being optional.


Well, it would or lets say it should not merely be a kind of "extra speed taxation"...

Firstly, the fuel would only last so long and it would need resupplies once its used up, resupplies need logistics, which have their limitations. Plus, psychologically certain waiting times are more unnerving than others.

Secondly, certain ships might have particularly large fuel bays, that allow for long distance travel. Others might have small fuel bays, but very reasonable fuel consumption rates. Others ships might only be capable of very modest speed increases. Yet another ship might be able to push its warp speed further than most others, but at tremendous costs.
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#7 - 2015-03-01 03:11:44 UTC
Thoirdhealbhach wrote:
Not everyone is in a rush all the time. Someone who finds it relaxing (!) to mine ore might not see the need to go extra fast...

And for PvPers... speed is everything. Going slower puts you at a disadvantage. Hence, why I say this isn't really an "optional" thing.

Thoirdhealbhach wrote:
If the fuel cost for the fastest warp mode is a sizable portion of the potential profit of the trip you're making, then some people will think twice about using up expensive fuel. If you want to earn ISK, then weighing the time saved vs. the additional cost becomes a potentially interesting and important calculation.

PvPers don't care about "profit" or "efficiency" when they are PvPing. They care about performance. Hence, why I say this isn't really an "optional" thing.

Thoirdhealbhach wrote:
The price point ought to be at a place, where people inclined to PvP (who are probably prepared to lose a certain amount of ISK anyway) or in need of fast but rare change of location are willing to spent the ISK, but people with steady, and somewhat localized routine, like a mission runner, would rather save the ISK.

I often burn through 50 million ISK worth in ships in a single night. More if it is a a major combat operation. A couple million (or even tens of millions) would be chump change for extra performance.
Hence, why i say this isn't really an "optional" thing (for PvPers).

Thoirdhealbhach wrote:
It's not about warping fast all the time, that should just be painfully expensive.

For a PvPer... it is ALWAYS about the extra performance. Expense is not a limiting factor for most... especially when it gives a major advantage (like catching a target quicker).
Hence, why I say this isn't really an "optional" thing.

Thoirdhealbhach wrote:
It's about removing painful long travel times, that are painful long for no or very few important meta-reasons.

It's about corp mates deciding on an activity and possibly rejecting fun stuff (like an incursion 30 jumps away) simply because it's a big hassle getting there, because everyone only has so much time during weekdays... So some people might say, I'm itching for some action, and I've got only 2 or 3 hours tonight, so I want to make my time count. Others might say, I'm hanging out chatting with my buddies, that's what counts; there's no need to spend extra ISK.

The part I underlined above... that's the problem I was alluding to in my first post. It's called "Power Projection."

CCP recently nerfed "Power Projection" by introducing "Jump Fatigue"... because it is INTENDED to be painful to quickly move across entire regions (for any activity). Basically, you are SUPPOSED TO COMMIT to an area you are living in... not skip around on a whim.

And the only way to reliably enforce this intention is through "time sinks"... because EVE's history is riddled with examples on why cost is never a limiting factor for certain groups.

By the way... this is why Jump Bridges also give Jump Fatigue.
Thoirdhealbhach
Liga der hessischen Gentlemen
#8 - 2015-03-01 03:14:15 UTC
Kabark wrote:
Ok I can see one major exploit with this. It would be a cap pilots wet dream to fast burn into a system, engage and cyno out. Jump fatigue just eliminated, in a large part, the ability to bring a thousand cap ship armada across the entire galaxy. With this, they could just hyper drive their thousand man fleet where ever, blap, then cyno home or the other way around. This would totally change low and null PVP concept. The way I see this is turning EVE from a calculated, well organized, and tactical PVP mechanic to an instant gratification Call of Duty in space. I don't support.


Honestly, I don't see the big exploit there. Caps already have 75% of a Battleships warp speed. My proposal aims at a relative increase in warp speed by a reasonable percentage yet to be determined. It's NOT a "lets make 20 jumps with a dread in 10s" thingy...
Supercaps can't jump through gates, so you're limited to dreads and carriers, which I believe are quite killable by conventional subcaps.

Even if you could turbo-boost your warp speed by 100% or even 200% (which probably would be waaay overboard anyway) and even if you provided a webber for every cap... You could bring 10 battleships or 100 (!) T3s instead of every dread in terms of fuel costs... A fleet of T3s would be easy twice as fast...

Plus a roaming mega-gang of capitals with a bee-hive of webbers would still need to go around high-sec and would need hours to get to the other end of the galaxy. This in turn would would sure as hell not go unnoticed...
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#9 - 2015-03-01 03:18:04 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
Thoirdhealbhach wrote:
Supercaps can't jump through gates, so you're limited to dreads and carriers, which I believe are quite killable by conventional subcaps.

Lol

Yes... Supercaps CAN use stargates.

Or did you miss how Pandemic Legion rolled through Providence region in a FLEET of Supercarriers a few months ago... just for giggles?


Also... you don't seem to be acquainted with Slowcat/Pantheon Carrier setups.

Take 20 carriers... each able to remote rep about ~900 hp/sec... all have with 70+% resistances... with ~200 sensor strength.
That's 18,000 hp/sec that can be repped between them all... or ~30,000 damage per second that any opposing fleet has to pump out when resistances are factored in.

Assuming each hostile battleship is capable of ~1000 damage per second... it would take 300 battleships to punch through a 20 man RR carrier fleet.

Now make a fleet composed of 100+ carriers and supercarriers (which can do the same thing) performing this tactic. It would take 2000+ battleships to punch through that.

Their only true limiting factors are...

- they are SLOOOOOOOOOOW. Like... PAINFULLY slow in normal gate-to-gate movement.
- if they want to cyno into something, they have to deal with Jump Fatigue (which compounds exponentially and prevents quick jump outs).
Thoirdhealbhach
Liga der hessischen Gentlemen
#10 - 2015-03-01 03:31:23 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:

....
I often burn through 50 million ISK worth in ships in a single night. More if it is a a major combat operation. A couple million (or even tens of millions) would be chump change for extra performance.
Hence, why i say this isn't really an "optional" thing (for PvPers).

.....
The part I underlined above... that's the problem I was alluding to in my first post. It's called "Power Projection."

CCP recently nerfed "Power Projection" by introducing "Jump Fatigue"... because it is INTENDED to be painful to quickly move across entire regions (for any activity). Basically, you are SUPPOSED TO COMMIT to an area you are living in... not skip around on a whim.

And the only way to reliably enforce this intention is through "time sinks"... because EVE's history is riddled with examples on why cost is never a limiting factor for certain groups.


Well, there are two points here:

First, I would be OK with certain PvP tactics needing "warp fuel" per default. As I said, PvPers are used to spending bundles of ISK, so no harm done here. Plus, I could imagine, that i.e. in wormholes with ships invisible to D-scan or stealth bombers or stealthy T3s this would not so much be an issue.

Second, I'm well aware of power projection, but the way I understood it, the key issues are hot drops from far far away and in general the circumvention of gates and bubbles through the whole jump-mechanic. Didn't CCP state, they actually WANTED capitals "to move on foot" instead of a long cyno+jump chain? All that faster warp-speeds do is reduce early warning and reaction times. I'm no expert here, but I would expect, that as long as those stay in the same order of magnitude (say within +/- 50%) things shouldn't change too much, should they?

Again, I'm not talking about enabling a "10 Systems in 60 seconds" raid. I'm talking about alleviating some travel times (not industrials) by a reasonable degree and for a price.
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
#11 - 2015-03-01 03:31:32 UTC
Came in expecting someone to want to warp more slowly to throw off a potential chase. Left disappointed. Shah has this one well covered....
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#12 - 2015-03-01 03:43:14 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
Quote:
Didn't CCP state, they actually WANTED capitals "to move on foot" instead of a long cyno+jump chain?

Not exactly.

They wanted to prevent the rapid deployment of forces across the map in general.

Because nothing says "**** you" to a bunch of nobody low-sec pirates like having their frigate fleet hotdropped by a battleship fleet via a Titan bridge.
Or two or three neutral cruisers doing a roam through null-sec and then being greeted by a 100 man fleet composed of people from all over a 30 system region via Jump Bridges... not two minutes after being spotted.

The point was to make travel across large distances VERY painful... forcing players to make more tactical decisions regarding where they live, where they move to, and how big a territory they can claim/control.

You idea undoes some of this by just introducing a "little fee" or "tax"... which is nothing more than an annoyance for someone like me. But very painful for a newbie. Or a player with limited cashflow. Or someone who doesn't understand that performance > efficiency.
Kabark
Schilden
#13 - 2015-03-01 03:43:54 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:
Thoirdhealbhach wrote:
Supercaps can't jump through gates, so you're limited to dreads and carriers, which I believe are quite killable by conventional subcaps.

Lol

Yes... Supercaps CAN use stargates.

Or did you miss how Pandemic Legion rolled through Providence region in a FLEET of Supercarriers a few months ago... just for giggles?


Also... you don't seem to be acquainted with Slowcat/Pantheon Carrier setups.

Take 20 carriers... each able to remote rep about ~900 hp/sec... all have with 70+% resistances... with ~200 sensor strength.
That's 18,000 hp/sec that can be repped between them all... or ~30,000 damage per second that any opposing fleet has to pump out when resistances are factored in.

Assuming each hostile battleship is capable of ~1000 damage per second... it would take 300 battleships to punch through a 20 man RR carrier fleet.

Now make a fleet composed of 100+ carriers and supercarriers (which can do the same thing) performing this tactic. It would take 2000+ battleships to punch through that.

Their only true limiting factors are...

- they are SLOOOOOOOOOOW. Like... PAINFULLY slow in normal gate-to-gate movement.
- if they want to cyno into something, they have to deal with Jump Fatigue (which compounds exponentially and prevents quick jump outs).
I'm glad we both see the impotence of such a feature. More to the point, this would mostly benefit cap fleets. When PL darted through the Galaxy to steam roll anything got out of hand, they put in jump fatigue. And while slowboating caps around is becoming a norm, having a Super with the warp speed of even a battleship would almost completely negate what CCPs intentions were with jump fatigue. It takes about 10-15 minutes to jump 10 systems in a battleship. So going the 50 jumps from top null to bottom would be a 1 hour affair.
Thoirdhealbhach
Liga der hessischen Gentlemen
#14 - 2015-03-01 03:49:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Thoirdhealbhach
ShahFluffers wrote:

Their only true limiting factors are...

- they are SLOOOOOOOOOOW. Like... PAINFULLY slow in normal gate-to-gate movement.
- if they want to cyno into something, they have to deal with Jump Fatigue (which compounds exponentially and prevents quick jump outs).


Well, admittedly, as far as cap/supercap tactics/firepower/capabilities are concerned, I'm absolutely no expert for sure.

My question here is: The stats on paper say caps have warp speeds somewhere around 1.5 AU/s, which would make their max warp speed about 25% slower than battleships, correct? That is once they are finally aligned and in warp...

If one keeps all the alignment and acceleration stuff same as present and just gives all ships the ability to be somewhat faster, what exactly would be the advantage for capitals? Wouldn't they just suffer the same relative disadvantage to other ship classes as before?

Oh and one more thing, what if one would just exempt capitals from this proposed warp speed changes?
Thoirdhealbhach
Liga der hessischen Gentlemen
#15 - 2015-03-01 04:05:16 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:

They wanted to prevent the rapid deployment of forces across the map in general.


Sure, I agree, that steamrolling people with superior firepower is just bad... Just how much faster than the current status quo would be qualify as "rapid deployment" in your opinion?

My question is, if everyone has the opportunity to move a little faster and the cost for doing so is well correlated with the size and the cost of the ship in question, where is the advantage for capitals? If everyone can switch on his warp-turbo to make the same 10 Jumps say 20% faster, what's the big deal? It would be still nowhere near as fast as a jump bridge wouldn't it? Plus, what fraction of the travel time for caps is aligning and how much is due to actual warp travel?
Alena McJenkins
McJenkins' Saucy Shipwreckers LLC
#16 - 2015-03-01 04:15:42 UTC
Uh, no.

Sauce.

ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#17 - 2015-03-01 04:22:52 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
Again... you are missing the point.

The problem is with ships in general moving too fast from one location to another... and that cost in general is a terrible way to balance things... because for some groups, money is no object.

Again, the idea behind the Jump Fatigue changes was that you are not supposed to rapidly move from one location to another without paying a heavy penalty. And, again, cost is not really a limiting factor. This leaves "time" as the only true "penalty" (because everyone values time).

Your idea backtracks on this by introducing a "pay to go faster" mechanic (which is basically what Titan Bridges and Jump Bridges use to be).
Even a 10% increase in warp speed is too much IMO.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#18 - 2015-03-01 04:25:49 UTC
there are already mods to make you go faster the only thing that needs to be added are ones made to make you go slower in warp(not as a penalty)

then we will have all the variable speed we need
Kabark
Schilden
#19 - 2015-03-01 04:26:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Kabark
Ok say you do exempt caps from this idea. Now everyone will be using fuel to warp around. As said earlier, cost is not an impedance, merely an annoyance. There are already rigs to boost your warp speed. If you want to zip around the Galaxy, buy a Leopard, or fit a ceptor with warp rigs and nanos.
Thoirdhealbhach
Liga der hessischen Gentlemen
#20 - 2015-03-01 10:16:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Thoirdhealbhach
ShahFluffers wrote:
Again... you are missing the point.

The problem is with ships in general moving too fast from one location to another... and that cost in general is a terrible way to balance things... because for some groups, money is no object.

Again, the idea behind the Jump Fatigue changes was that you are not supposed to rapidly move from one location to another without paying a heavy penalty. And, again, cost is not really a limiting factor. This leaves "time" as the only true "penalty" (because everyone values time).

Your idea backtracks on this by introducing a "pay to go faster" mechanic (which is basically what Titan Bridges and Jump Bridges use to be).
Even a 10% increase in warp speed is too much IMO.


Arguably, it is a thin line to walk on. Making fast travel easy (but expensive) all the time is surely not the way to go. But you forget one little detail: The fuel is a commodity taking up space. Ships would have fuel bays with a limited capacity. Therefore it would be easy to restrict the distance/duration when a ship (even fine tuned to ship class or specific ship type) can warp faster. +X% more warp speed all the time might be too much. How about +X% warp speed for Y warps (or even better AU's) with ship class A and fuel type Alpha? For heavier ship class B nerf X and Y accordingly.... For faster high performance Fuel Beta nerf range/fuel consumption to a point where it hurts.

Wanna go really fast in your dread? Sure, just place a hauler with 50,000 m³ of expensive faction/T2/whatever special fuel in every system you go through. That's the kind of balancing I had in mind...

My proposal basically boils down to a mechanic, where there is no sharp distinction between a clone jump (instant travel but can't take anything with you) and travel by ship (travel a looong time, but take as much, as your ship allows), but rather a gradual transition. This would mean, that for a price shuttles could be even more convenient than today but their use cases are fairly limited. Industrial haulers need to be cost effective, going faster is NOT a no brainer for merchants...

Even battleships could go rather fast, but only for couple of systems before they run out of fuel. If there are enough refuelling possibilities along the way, you can restock and keep going, but for large fleets in hostile territory this is not an option. They would need additional dedicated resupply ships following them around. Which creates another interesting choice: Go slow, or take along a very vulnerable supply convoy? Ambushing a resupply convoy and having the other fleet stuck at the low default warp speed might be an all new fun twist...

Hell, you could even make fuel consumption mandatory, enabling ships to get stranded in 0.0 or WH space... Offer free low grade fuel resupply NPCs in high sec/low sec (with a steep waiting for the refuel ship timer, of course...) in order to keep newbies and casual player out of too much trouble.
12Next page