These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Proposal] Weaker bubbles, battleship-size warp disruptors instead

Author
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2015-10-19 03:28:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Currently, bubbles have two primary uses:
1.) stopping a whole fleet
2.) stopping someone with a lot of warp stabs, or one who warps too fast

My proposal would relegate bubbles to stopping fleets (which rarely have warp stabs fitted), while providing alternative means for stopping ships that have a lot of warp stabs. Ships that enter warp quickly will possibly but not necessarily be a bit safer than before. The proposal contains four steps and would not be balanced without committing to all four at the same time. Please reserve judgement until you have at least glanced at each step.



First, make bubbles have a warp scramble strength. Anyone with a warp strength high enough can warp out of it, but since roaming combat fleets and strat op fleets almost never fit warp stabs, you'll be able to catch them just fine even in the weakest bubbles.

Tech 1 anchorable bubbles would perhaps have a scramble strength of 1, while tech 2 anchorable bubbles would come in two flavors: a larger bubble with scramble strength 1 or a smaller bubble with scramble strength 2. Anyone inside multiple overlapping bubbles will be affected by all of them, which will have an additive warp scramble effect.

Heavy interdictor bubbles would probably always have a warp strength of 1 as they specialize in a wide area effect, but perhaps standard interdictors would make up for their smaller bubble size with a warp strength of 2, plus their increased ability to overlap the bubbles.

None of these bubbles would turn off propulsion modules.





Second, warp-stabbed ships can warp out of these bubbles but will still take longer to enter warp. Make it so that getting partial scram on a target increases percentage of max velocity which must be obtained in order to enter warp, and enforce minimum warp entry timer equal to the extra time cost from a standard acceleration into warp (without the use of prop mods, webifiers, or cloaking devices).

For example, if a ship with +4 warp strength (5 warp scramble strength to prevent from warping) is affected by 4 total scramble strength, its max speed needed to get into warp would be 95% which is found with the following calculation: ((4 / 5) * 25%) + 75%

If the ship takes 2 seconds to get to 50% velocity under standard acceleration (without prop mod), then it takes 4 seconds to get to 75%. This ship will take just over 8 seconds to reach 95% velocity, giving a lot more time to lock the target, but even if it uses the MWD+cloak trick, it still has a minimum time to enter warp of just over 4 seconds starting when it begins trying to warp, regardless of when it began to align.

This will make it easier to catch heavily-stabbed ships by getting partial scram on them with a fast-locking ship and buying time for slower-locking ships to put stronger scrams on the target, or buying time to bump the target if it's a slow one. Later in this proposal I discuss stronger scramblers and disruptors that can be fit to bigger ships, as well as stronger warp core stabilizers that take extra time to activate, making them more useful for ships with the durability to stick around while charging them up (Deep Space Transports, for instance).

Frigates will be able to warp right out of bubbles if they have 1-2 warp stabs, but it'll take longer for them to enter warp which may make the difference between them getting away or getting caught. This will additionally encourage ensuring your bubble camps have fast-locking tacklers on hand.





Third, add new warp disruptors and scramblers--attributes may need a lot of work:

Medium Warp Scrambler
12.5km range, scramble strength 3, 40MW (possible but difficult for frigate to use)

Medium Warp Disruptor
30km range, scramble strength 2, 80MW and high capacitor cost (possible but difficult for destroyer to use)

Large Warp Scrambler
17.5km range, scramble strength 5, 800MW, high capacitor cost (possible but difficult for cruiser to use)

Large Warp Disruptor
40km range, scramble strength 3, 1600MW, very high capacitor cost (possible but difficult for battlecruiser to use)

The purpose of these modules is so that a camp fleet can use light tackle to buy time for heavy tackle to lock target. Incidentally, this may boost the popularity of the Vigil somewhat. These modules will greatly assist in taking down the occasional very heavily stabbed ship, made possible with the following module:





Fourth, add Warp Core Reinforcer module which initially adds zero bonus warp strength but gains +1 each 3s cycle for two cycles, resulting in a max warp strength per module of +2 after 6 seconds of activity. These modules would have the same fitting drawbacks as Warp Core Stabilizers but would cost more CPU to fit, and would use capacitor to run. Also, only one module may power up at a time, the rest that have been activated will wait in queue.

For instance, an Impel with seven WCRs fit will need 14 cycles (42 seconds) to fully online all seven and gain the full +14 warp strength. Its warp strength will gradually rise while the modules are onlining and if it can survive long enough, it may get away from even quite a few warp scrambling ships.

Large, slow ships can get significantly higher warp strengths than smaller, faster ships, and the counter to that is that larger opponent ships can fit bigger warp disruptors. I predict that this will make it safer to take battleships solo through nullsec, as it won't be so common to encounter large ships with large points, but it still wouldn't be very safe.

As an additional bonus, the Warp Core Reinforcer can be overheated to allow a third cycle which can give it an additional +1 warp strength for a total of +3 after 9 seconds. The Impel could overheat all 7 to achieve +21 warp strength after 63 seconds, in addition to its base +2.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Zerinia
Lom Corporation
#2 - 2015-10-19 04:07:13 UTC
no
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#3 - 2015-10-19 12:01:11 UTC
But we want MORE caps and supers to die, not for it to become impossible to hold them down.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2015-10-19 17:51:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Danika Princip wrote:
But we want MORE caps and supers to die, not for it to become impossible to hold them down.

It takes one HIC to hold a super down. What exactly is so difficult about that? Why does everyone always complain about not being able to get ONE HIC to hold it down? How do thousands of pilots show up to take down a titan and they can't produce a second HIC when the first one goes down?

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#5 - 2015-10-19 18:24:04 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
But we want MORE caps and supers to die, not for it to become impossible to hold them down.

It takes one HIC to hold a super down. What exactly is so difficult about that? Why does everyone always complain about not being able to get ONE HIC to hold it down? How do thousands of pilots show up to take down a titan and they can't produce a second HIC when the first one goes down?


Because everybody is more interested in whoring on a KM to give themself the illusion they are 1337 PvPers with a good KB ratio but can't organise worth **** so they bring kity long range **** to get a shot on it and then OP success in their mind. Nobody's gonna bring a HIC unless they are part of a fleet and fleet and the thousand of leechers on those brawl are not exactly coming with a doctrine.

It's easy to say "bring a HIC". Getting people to do it is a whole different issue.
SFM Hobb3s
Perkone
Caldari State
#6 - 2015-10-19 19:28:30 UTC
I'm going to say no, but this is because I assume CCP programming is taking shortcuts. My expectation is that per tick, CCP only runs one if->then operation to determine if a ship is in a bubble or not. If the server had to run the same operation for X amount of bubbles that overlap each ship...well, that's a huge amount of CPU cycles. Gonna get real laggy. Real fast. I'd love to see warp scramble mechanics change completely, but, not in this way.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2015-10-19 19:41:21 UTC
SFM Hobb3s wrote:
I'm going to say no, but this is because I assume CCP programming is taking shortcuts. My expectation is that per tick, CCP only runs one if->then operation to determine if a ship is in a bubble or not. If the server had to run the same operation for X amount of bubbles that overlap each ship...well, that's a huge amount of CPU cycles. Gonna get real laggy. Real fast. I'd love to see warp scramble mechanics change completely, but, not in this way.

Nah, it already determines its range from all the bubbles, as well as everything else on the overview. How else do you think you get quickly updating info on where every other ship on grid is sitting relative to everything else? The only part of it that would increase server strain is where it measures up your net warp scram based on how many bubbles you're inside, and even that is fairly insignificant.

I'm no programmer but I am fairly certain that this proposal would not even measurably impact server performance. Ever notice that the biggest thing leading to time dilation is having a lot of pilots in one space together? There is a multiplicative effect of having multiple pilots together in which each client needs to know the position and certain statuses of each other pilot in the vicinity. If everyone is shooting at each other and launching drones, that spikes it even higher because now every client needs to know which way every shot is going, and the position of every single drone. Clients aren't updated with info on how much everyone else is warp scrambled, a fact made apparent when you notice that throwing bubbles all over a time dilated environment doesn't cause it to become further dilated. Your client only needs to know if your own ship is able to warp and that's easier for the server to handle.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#8 - 2015-10-19 19:50:03 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
SFM Hobb3s wrote:
I'm going to say no, but this is because I assume CCP programming is taking shortcuts. My expectation is that per tick, CCP only runs one if->then operation to determine if a ship is in a bubble or not. If the server had to run the same operation for X amount of bubbles that overlap each ship...well, that's a huge amount of CPU cycles. Gonna get real laggy. Real fast. I'd love to see warp scramble mechanics change completely, but, not in this way.

Nah, it already determines its range from all the bubbles, as well as everything else on the overview. How else do you think you get quickly updating info on where every other ship on grid is sitting relative to everything else? The only part of it that would increase server strain is where it measures up your net warp scram based on how many bubbles you're inside, and even that is fairly insignificant.

I'm no programmer but I am fairly certain that this proposal would not even measurably impact server performance. Ever notice that the biggest thing leading to time dilation is having a lot of pilots in one space together? There is a multiplicative effect of having multiple pilots together in which each client needs to know the position and certain statuses of each other pilot in the vicinity. If everyone is shooting at each other and launching drones, that spikes it even higher because now every client needs to know which way every shot is going, and the position of every single drone. Clients aren't updated with info on how much everyone else is warp scrambled, a fact made apparent when you notice that throwing bubbles all over a time dilated environment doesn't cause it to become further dilated. Your client only needs to know if your own ship is able to warp and that's easier for the server to handle.


Counting the amounf of bubbles worth of point and checking that value against your warp core strength after mods is not insignificant especially if it has to be checked every tick that you try to warp away from a camp.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#9 - 2015-10-19 20:07:38 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:

Counting the amounf of bubbles worth of point and checking that value against your warp core strength after mods is not insignificant especially if it has to be checked every tick that you try to warp away from a camp.

It doesn't.
It only checks if you are in a bubble when you try to initiate warp. Hence why the weapons flag only comes up then etc.
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#10 - 2015-10-19 20:13:04 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:

Counting the amounf of bubbles worth of point and checking that value against your warp core strength after mods is not insignificant especially if it has to be checked every tick that you try to warp away from a camp.

It doesn't.
It only checks if you are in a bubble when you try to initiate warp. Hence why the weapons flag only comes up then etc.


You forgot to read the quote or something? I'm obviously talking about what is proposed in this thread, not what actually happen right now in game.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2015-10-19 21:20:23 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Counting the amounf of bubbles worth of point and checking that value against your warp core strength after mods is not insignificant especially if it has to be checked every tick that you try to warp away from a camp.

It doesn't check that often. It checks once per server tick (which in EVE is about once per second) and sends the info to the client that you can't warp. Then when you try to warp 6 times in a second, the client denies the request and sends nothing to the server.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#12 - 2015-10-19 21:35:08 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
But we want MORE caps and supers to die, not for it to become impossible to hold them down.

It takes one HIC to hold a super down. What exactly is so difficult about that? Why does everyone always complain about not being able to get ONE HIC to hold it down? How do thousands of pilots show up to take down a titan and they can't produce a second HIC when the first one goes down?



Currently, you can hold them down with dictors and anchorable bubbles.

You do not want either of those things to be possible anymore, or for a hic bubble to work. That is a buff to supers. you are asking for three of the four methods of tackling them to be removed, and for it to become impossible to hold down multiple supers/caps at once.

And that's not even mentioning what this does to camping dead super staging towers.

Why do you want this to happen? Justify what you are asking for. Explain why you hate seeing supers die.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2015-10-19 23:54:14 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
You do not want either of those things to be possible anymore, or for a hic bubble to work. That is a buff to supers. you are asking for three of the four methods of tackling them to be removed, and for it to become impossible to hold down multiple supers/caps at once.

And that's not even mentioning what this does to camping dead super staging towers.

Why do you want this to happen? Justify what you are asking for. Explain why you hate seeing supers die.

Honestly, I want to see supers die just as much as you do. I really don't understand why bringing HICs is difficult, but I could see adjusting my proposal with a few other bits and pieces. Here's some possibilities:

1.) give Interdictors a probe to tackle supers, an option they can carry in their cargoholds should they be willing to pay for it

2.) remove super immunity to warp disruption and instead give them a really high warp strength--then make jumping take time, so along with the time increase from partial warp scrambling, if, say, supers were given 100 warp strength and you have 90 disruption on it, it takes 10x as long to activate the jump.

3.) anchorable item for tackling capital ships, including supers--perhaps something fairly large, expensive, and requiring high skill instead of being something that takes a long time to online. Or maybe I have that backwards. It should take work to tackle a super, but it should be work that a competent fleet can cough up.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#14 - 2015-10-20 05:16:17 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
You do not want either of those things to be possible anymore, or for a hic bubble to work. That is a buff to supers. you are asking for three of the four methods of tackling them to be removed, and for it to become impossible to hold down multiple supers/caps at once.

And that's not even mentioning what this does to camping dead super staging towers.

Why do you want this to happen? Justify what you are asking for. Explain why you hate seeing supers die.

Honestly, I want to see supers die just as much as you do. I really don't understand why bringing HICs is difficult, but I could see adjusting my proposal with a few other bits and pieces. Here's some possibilities:

1.) give Interdictors a probe to tackle supers, an option they can carry in their cargoholds should they be willing to pay for it

2.) remove super immunity to warp disruption and instead give them a really high warp strength--then make jumping take time, so along with the time increase from partial warp scrambling, if, say, supers were given 100 warp strength and you have 90 disruption on it, it takes 10x as long to activate the jump.

3.) anchorable item for tackling capital ships, including supers--perhaps something fairly large, expensive, and requiring high skill instead of being something that takes a long time to online. Or maybe I have that backwards. It should take work to tackle a super, but it should be work that a competent fleet can cough up.


If you want to see supers die, why are you asking for every method of tackling them, beyond scripted HIC points, to be removed?

Dictors ALREADY HAVE a probe that tackles supers. you just asked for this to be removed.

Really high warp strength like that would, under your proposal, mean you needed a hundred bubbles to tackle them, not one. This is just not practical. (and jumping is instant, so...)

Anchorable bubbles ALREADY TACKLE supers, you just asked for it to be removed.

I really don't understand why you want most of the ways of tackling supers, and all of the ways of tackling capital fleets, should be removed. Yes, you can bring HICs, but those can't tackle fleets with just scripted points, can be ECM bursted off, and are an expensive, skill intensive ship to expect people to use full fleets of.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2015-10-20 06:07:17 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Really high warp strength like that would, under your proposal, mean you needed a hundred bubbles to tackle them, not one. This is just not practical.

I meant for all tackles to work, so if you have several hundred subcaps shooting the super, it shouldn't be too hard to get 100 total warp scramble strength on it. You could do it with a small battleship gang, 20 large warp scramblers.

I bet making subcap fleets able to tackle supers would make them easier to hold down in some events, but really I just don't like using bubbles to do it because then you're using a tool that can hold down a whole bunch of ships at once to hold down one really big ship. Seems more reasonable to me if the easiest way to tackle the super is to focus the tackle onto it, not spread it out all over the field.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Haatakan Reppola
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#16 - 2015-10-20 11:30:07 UTC
IF you need focused tackle to hold down supers or capitals, what is stopping people from just getting 100 carriers to rep whatever is taking dmg? Its not like your fleet have any chance to hold down 100+capital/supers with focused tackle...
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#17 - 2015-10-20 12:31:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Frostys Virpio
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Counting the amounf of bubbles worth of point and checking that value against your warp core strength after mods is not insignificant especially if it has to be checked every tick that you try to warp away from a camp.

It doesn't check that often. It checks once per server tick (which in EVE is about once per second) and sends the info to the client that you can't warp. Then when you try to warp 6 times in a second, the client denies the request and sends nothing to the server.


Except it would have to both check every tick and do the calculation each tick also in case you have activated one of your new WCS module because your warp strength might be high enough to warp at that tick. All of that multiplied by the number of ship active. It might not be as big as drones deployed but it's still added server load compared to "in a bubble = can't warp unless nullified" we have now. All of that will amount to 1 thing on any decent gate camp and it will be more bubbles stacked over another thus making the removal of their infinite strength irrelevant.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#18 - 2015-10-20 15:36:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Except it would have to both check every tick and do the calculation each tick also in case you have activated one of your new WCS module because your warp strength might be high enough to warp at that tick. All of that multiplied by the number of ship active. It might not be as big as drones deployed but it's still added server load compared to "in a bubble = can't warp unless nullified" we have now. All of that will amount to 1 thing on any decent gate camp and it will be more bubbles stacked over another thus making the removal of their infinite strength irrelevant.

It's really not going to add more cycles because all of the redundancy has been removed. It's not going to check if you have warp core stabilizers or reinforcers unless your client sends that request. That will happen when you fit one to your ship, when you online it.

Sure, a fleet of 200 fitted with a whole lot of warp core reinforcers trying to escape ten overlapping bubbles might cause the server be a lot more sluggish than the same fleet of 200 warping through an unbubbled gate, but that's a niche case that is particularly unlikely to ever happen because the more ships you have in fleet, the less likely you are to have anyone fit warp stabs.

Case in point: only going to slow the server down with a whole lot of bubbles against a whole lot of ships using warp stabs/reinforcers, and that isn't how they are used.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#19 - 2015-10-20 16:24:32 UTC
No

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.