These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Increasing Warp Strength
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#81 - 2015-03-01 06:32:59 UTC
Bronson Hughes wrote:
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
I like this idea.

Battleship don't care about your point. Battleship don't give a ****. Battleship goes where it wants.

Agreed. Battleships would become ideal "heavy tacklers" and would be less vulnerable to a single frigate while still remaining vulnerable to a frigate gang.


If this were to go through though, I'd propose that 'Ceptors and their T1 counterparts get a +1 base warp disruption strength (not warp core strength) role bonus.


I'm not sold yet, but it's an interesting idea.



They have bubble immunity, they don't need another perk.
Clara Barcelo
Abysmal Gentlemen
#82 - 2015-03-01 06:45:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Clara Barcelo
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Guys let's make running away super easy that won't be super frustrating at all.

It just means that going forward you're going to have to make more fitting sacrifices to tackle ships.




Or everyone just brings one HIC with them where ever they go. Infit-point Solved. I was iffy on the idea at first but now that I see that a HIC would become irreplaceable to a fleet it starting to seems more and more of a bad idea. I don't believe that you should have a dedicated tackle for Small gang and Fleet fights to happen.


And the Battleships being dedicated heavy tacklers idea? You mean on Armor Battleships right? Because Duel Webs, Point, Scram, leaves little room for a tank on any Shield Tanked ship. And if you just add more mids to that shield ship suddenly every shield Battleship has the defensive capabilities of a Navy Scorp.
Cora Thunder
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#83 - 2015-03-01 07:10:05 UTC
I was about to propose the same idea so it definitely has a +1 from me.

The main reason for this is it would add a doze of realism to the game, as the energy required to make a larger ship go into warp is way bigger than the one needed to move a smaller one.

So, consequently, a larger ship needs to have a more powerful warp core, and the only way to disrupt such a warp core is to project at least an equivalent amount of power onto it, in order to shut id down. There's no way in hell a 100 MW power core frigate should be able to project enough power that would shut down a 10000+ MW Battleship warp core.

I think a lone T1 frigate should not stand more than 30% chance of tackling a BS, and maybe specialized tackler versions of HAF's or Inty's should be added that will allow such a frig to go up to 50% tackling chance.

From the realism's point of view this will be a very welcome change and definitely worth for CCP to look into it.

Also I think warp disruptors and scramblers should have lower initial tackling strengths and benefit from a Warp Core Disruption skill that should gradually increase their effectiveness. Also they should be able to fit scripts for either tackling optimal/faloff range or tackling strength, so they would give the tackler pilot options for either go for a ranged tackling versus a similar ship class foe in order to prevent them from being damaged, or go for warp disruption power versus a higher ship class opponent, and thus allow their friends to finish such a target off.

I vote for the second version of tackling system that has been proposed, because even though it is more complex, it's also more realistic.
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#84 - 2015-03-01 07:56:29 UTC
You're trying to apply 'realism' to warp core stability while scaling it for imaginary ships the size of a small town.

This overcomplicates the game in some aspects, kills small gang stuff in others and is easily bypassed via HIC and DIC.

-1
Cora Thunder
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#85 - 2015-03-01 08:31:49 UTC
Actually it does not kill small gangs, but makes their pilots work a bit harder in order to accomplish what's too easily done at the moment. Two frigates will still be enough to tackle a BS, and the added scripts option will provide their pilots with added flexibility of engagement style.
Also about the realism things, these ' imaginary' ships actually have a mass and inertia, and this have to be moved through warp somehow...it's obvious a 100k ton BS would need much more energy to do so than a 1K ton frigate.
Also I think it'll be a nice balance for the loss of warp speed the Capitals, Battleships and Battlecruisers suffered, which has to be compensated somehow.
Will make them more worth flying and than at this moment are, even tough CCP thinks they are fine in their present form.
Well, no CCP, they are not atm, the Dev team needs to put up some more work and creativity in order to make them so....this warp strength idea adds only one of the things that need to be done to make them worth using again.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#86 - 2015-03-01 08:36:07 UTC
Cora Thunder wrote:
Actually it does not kill small gangs, but makes their pilots work a bit harder in order to accomplish what's too easily done at the moment. Two frigates will still be enough to tackle a BS, and the added scripts option will provide their pilots with added flexibility of engagement style.
Also about the realism things, these ' imaginary' ships actually have a mass and inertia, and this have to be moved through warp somehow...it's obvious a 100k ton BS would need much more energy to do so than a 1K ton frigate.
Also I think it'll be a nice balance for the loss of warp speed the Capitals, Battleships and Battlecruisers suffered, which has to be compensated somehow.
Will make them more worth flying and than at this moment are, even tough CCP thinks they are fine in their present form.
Well, no CCP, they are not atm, the Dev team needs to put up some more work and creativity in order to make them so....this warp strength idea adds only one of the things that need to be done to make them worth using again.


Tell me how you could go solo in damn near any ship with this change.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#87 - 2015-03-01 08:36:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
While I still like the idea, after more consideration I think these would be more reasonable values:

Frigate, Bomber, Destroyer, Cruiser: 0
Battlecruiser, Command Ship, Black Ops: 1
Battleship, Marauder, Freighter: 2
Carrier, Dreadnought: 3

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Komodo Askold
Strategic Exploration and Development Corp
Silent Company
#88 - 2015-03-01 12:56:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Komodo Askold
Serendipity Lost wrote:
You're trying to apply 'realism' to warp core stability while scaling it for imaginary ships the size of a small town.

This overcomplicates the game in some aspects, kills small gang stuff in others and is easily bypassed via HIC and DIC.

-1
Realism, as how a small yatch can't hold in place a battleship, but a few of them could. Or a lesser number of tugboats.

About the small gang stuff, those gangs could just bring a few more basic ships, use more advanced ships (for example interceptors), or use larger ships. Just by scaling from frigates to cruisers (even on just a few ships of the gang) your tackling power would increase a lot.

And HICs and DICs are supposed to be the kings of holding ships in place, as they are now. Nothing would change in that regard.

That said, I'm much more fond of the version of this idea based on giving increased warp core strenght and disruption power to each ship size, than the version based on ECM mechanics.
Valkin Mordirc
#89 - 2015-03-01 13:00:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Valkin Mordirc
Quote:
Realism, as how a small yatch can't hold in place a battleship,



Go to Somalia and ask how it's going for the Pirates up there. XD
#DeleteTheWeak
Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights
#90 - 2015-03-01 18:58:37 UTC
Good idea.

I am still not convinced that battleships are in a good spot right now with their stats but it would differentiate them slightly.
Reina Xyaer
Tha Lench Mob
#91 - 2015-03-02 17:19:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Reina Xyaer
Serendipity Lost wrote:
You're trying to apply 'realism' to warp core stability while scaling it for imaginary ships the size of a small town.

This overcomplicates the game in some aspects, kills small gang stuff in others and is easily bypassed via HIC and DIC.

-1


Disagree that it overcomplicates anything

Disagree that it kills small gang anything.

Easily bypassed by a HIC, (or DIC in null)... yes, and so what? Makes those ships more relevant... more used.
Reina Xyaer
Tha Lench Mob
#92 - 2015-03-02 17:33:37 UTC
So I'm seeing that almost everyone likes the original, simple, +1, +2, etc system that I first proposed.

And in fact, you guys have all convinced me, I've decided that my first idea is in fact better. For now...

I'm going to put the original back as the main body of the OP and support that instead.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#93 - 2015-03-02 17:39:07 UTC
Reina Xyaer wrote:
So I'm seeing that almost everyone likes the original, simple, +1, +2, etc system that I first proposed.

And in fact, you guys have all convinced me, I've decided that my first idea is in fact better. For now...

I'm going to put the original back as the main body of the OP and support that instead.


Congrats I can no longer go solo in a battleship, or anything else that isnt a HIC.
Reina Xyaer
Tha Lench Mob
#94 - 2015-03-02 17:44:15 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Reina Xyaer wrote:
So I'm seeing that almost everyone likes the original, simple, +1, +2, etc system that I first proposed.

And in fact, you guys have all convinced me, I've decided that my first idea is in fact better. For now...

I'm going to put the original back as the main body of the OP and support that instead.


Congrats I can no longer go solo in a battleship, or anything else that isnt a HIC.


What are you talking about? This idea was created for the purpose of buffing Battleships, making them more viable for solo, and it does. (Actually buffing all ships bigger than frigs)

How does it make anything other than HICs impossible to solo in?

Make an argument with actual logic and some ideas, reasons, etc, please.
Conrad Makbure
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#95 - 2015-04-10 00:42:10 UTC
This is a good idea, worth a look. The 'hero tackle' needs to be reinvented, reimagined with a new role; the T1 frig locking down a larger ship with a trained pilot is old and outdated, time to be re-evaluated.