These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Using the shield as counter measure.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vypera Blackneck
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1 - 2015-10-29 16:40:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Vypera Blackneck
Hello again!

I have and idea I can't rid out of my head. It came up in relation of haulers and miners ships. Those ships, and some others are quite defenceless and hopeless in certain situation therefore they are sitting ducks for many gankers. Those ships are either fit to the purpose what they meant to do or quite crappy. I understand there must be a limit about module fitting.

Here is where my thing comes into the picture.

The basic concept is, the ships we are flying have shield. why doesn't the game allow certain ships (given the ability) to use their shield in another way, as a special ECM.

So shield are from energy. A lot of energy. What if the pilot were able to kind of manipulate the actual shield charge to create either untargeted energy spikes (such as lightning like discharges) to break target-lock and/or disable drones for a short period? To do so the shield would use up it's own charge so would drop maybe by a third for one attempt.

Maybe it should be based on a pre-setting how much the charge would use up from the shield to increase either the strength or the radius of the shock wave.

That's all for now.
Thanks for reading commenting!


Oh, and dear trolls and other no-brainers read this https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=386386&find=unread
(I know you won't but then you just make an idiot out of yourself when leave a pointless comment in this forum section anywhere)
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#2 - 2015-10-29 17:56:55 UTC
Stop trolling this forum.
Atomeon
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2015-10-29 22:00:27 UTC
Nope, this will work on favor of shield tanked ships, because armor and hull tanked losing the shield in a few secs.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#4 - 2015-10-29 22:02:45 UTC
What you propose is to use the energy stored in the shield as an AOE EMP.

Yeah... I can think of at least two reasons why that's a silly idea, Concord and gate guns.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#5 - 2015-10-29 22:46:19 UTC
But it's actually really hard to gank a hauler who makes an effort...

(Hint: fly a DST)

And why should shield tanking ships get a new ability like this?

And have you tried a regular ECM burst? (Or, you know, actually tanking your hauler?)
Xavindo Sirober
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#6 - 2015-10-29 22:51:42 UTC
-1

we already have this specific idea impented as a module and i don't see a reason why this should be changed or copied into a diffrent way
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2015-10-30 03:25:18 UTC
So like an ECM burst which doesn't require fitting the module, and costs no capacitor but instead it just depletes your shield. To balance shield vs. armor tankers, it could perhaps have its jam strength based only on the percentage of shield remaining and not on the actual amount, though one could argue that lends an advantage to armor tankers because they can better afford to give away their shield.

In the end it can definitely be balanced, and I'm not qualified to say where the numbers should rightly lie.


It'll never be something that can reasonably be put into EVE. It's too far outside of the way ships work. It would change too many things and therefore be way too hard to implement and control, so it's never going to happen. But it's fun to think about! :)

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."
Vypera Blackneck
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#8 - 2015-11-01 11:11:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Vypera Blackneck
@Serendipity Lost: Hmm... Trolling? Yeah, sure. Very well done. Now go, and ask for a candy from your troll-master. Oh, ****... I'm feeding the trolls... so bro, I'm out of candies.

--

I see some real concerns with this. Yeah, the gate guns could be simply avoidable and Concord could be a real one in the matter of using on a neut. too. I didn't think about that. Tricky for sure.

As I said it could work on only some ships with the specific bonus on it.

Yes, it would use up the shield charge. Let's say it would use up the whole shield to do one surge. Which MIGHT create the opportunity to escape from a tight/otherwise hopeless situation.

@Xavindo Sirober: because of the limit of slots and because why not :) But I do accept your vote.

I agree with Reaver Glitterstim, it would be more viable for armour-tanked ships to give up the shield.

The basic idea was because the HS gankers. I see people posting disgraceful kill mails about defenceless people killed in HS quite often.

@Danika Princip: I don't mine neither haul anyway. But I think it is a common thing to say in EVE yeah fly an XY thing or use ZY thing... and thus that takes 6 months of training to try out how does it work, or if you still need that thing at all... and then dear CCP nerf something. But you are right there are other ways to do it. Though tanks I will sooner cancel my account than play a hauler or a miner :)
Zan Shiro
Doomheim
#9 - 2015-11-01 15:40:21 UTC
Vypera Blackneck wrote:
@
@Danika Princip: I don't mine neither haul anyway. But I think it is a common thing to say in EVE yeah fly an XY thing or use ZY thing... and thus that takes 6 months of training to try out how does it work, or if you still need that thing at all... and then dear CCP nerf something. But you are right there are other ways to do it. Though tanks I will sooner cancel my account than play a hauler or a miner :)




First, many of the nerfs you mention generally are not surprises. Ishtar, dual neut o cane, mommies and fb's prenerf. among many others where questions of when, not if, nerf hammer would come. I trained dual neut o cane for its I win button factor for example. Its demise was not a question of why ccp? It was a question of why so long ccp?

Second, hauling can be be done more safely and less chances of incidence. On the player to work this out. Many guides have been given in this area. If hauling was truly this dangerous crews known hauling contract corps would either fold up since not many pilots would sign ip for suicide detail or charge way more for their services.

Thirdly haulers do not take 6 months to train. Shake and bake freighters alts train in no where near this time. In the time to train this an observant player should be going damn I hate this route with a badger. If hating it in a badger, its probably a bad route for a charon when trained for.

Miners....as a former miner the signs on the wall should have been seen first month in really. One of the smartest things I did was respec miner to mission runner. Also made me a lot of isk. I was a pre-moongoo bottleneck miner. My hulks sold for a hell of a lot more than I paid for them after the moon goo shifts and such.