These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Targeting, Sensors and ECM Overhaul

Author
Swiftstrike1
Swiftstrike Incorporated
#1 - 2014-08-05 20:43:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Swiftstrike1
Targeting, Sensors and ECM Overhaul <--- Pretty looking PDF version

Aims
1. Create interdependencies between the 5 Targeting attributes: Maximum Targeting Range, Sensor Strength, Scan Resolution, Signature Radius and Max Locked Targets.
2. Enable new strategies and tactics based on these new connections.
3. Make life harder for Devs who balance internet spaceship stats lol jk 
4. Eliminate the binary nature of ECM and bring it in line with other e-war types

Why?
EVE is constantly evolving. New features arise, old features change… the only constant is that every change enables new gameplay and experiences. This overhaul of a system which has been largely unchanged since day 1 will bring a variety of new gameplay.


Step 1 – a new game mechanic
Sensor Strength becomes a resource like your PG and CPU, which you must manage appropriately. You spend it by targeting objects (ships, NPCs, wrecks, etc…) in space. The amount of Sensor Strength you have available determines how many objects you can lock. If at any point your “used” Sensor Strength exceeds your maximum Sensor Strength, you lose target locks until this is no longer true. This could potentially cause you to lose all your target locks. This will tie in with the ECM overhaul in step 4.

Step 2 – creating interdependency
Remove the Maximum Locked Targets attribute. That is now determined by your Sensor Strength, your Scan Resolution, the Signature Radii of the targets you have locked and your range from them. There is still a hard cap on Maximum Locked Targets based on your skill level in the Target Management and Advanced Target Management skills.

Step 3 – fleshing out the bones
The amount of Sensor Strength required to lock a particular target will be determined by your Scan Resolution, the Signature Radius of the target and your range from it. Without going into any numbers:
• Having high Scan Resolution reduces the Sensor Strength required to lock the target
• A target with a higher Signature Radius requires less Sensor Strength to lock up
• If you have sufficient Sensor Strength available you may lock a target that is beyond your Maximum Targeting Range. However, the amount of Sensor Strength required to do so increases exponentially outside your Maximum Targeting Range.
(Think of it like turret falloff, but for sensors!)

Step 4 – ECM overhaul
Now that we have Sensor Strength as a vital resource for all things involving targeting other spaceships, we can change the way ECM works and bring it in line with other forms of electronic warfare. As an example, I present to you…
• Multispectral ECM I
o -20% to target’s maximum Sensor Strength
The implications of an ECM mechanic like this are numerous and I could write such a massive wall of text about it that not even a PL wrecking ball fleet could knock it down… but I’d rather let you think about them yourselves than list them all here.

Results
• Sensor Strength becomes a resource that you must manage during a fight.
• Old modules and tactics have new effects:
o e.g. a sensor booster improves your Scan Resolution. This means you use less Sensor Strength when locking targets and are therefore more resilient to ECM. It also potentially increases your Max Locked Targets and/or lets you lock farther beyond your Max Targeting Range.
o e.g. Skirmish boosts that reduce your Signature Radius will increase the amount of Sensor Strength the enemy need to use to target you, making their entire fleet slightly more susceptible to ECM.
o Etc…
• All ECM and sensor strengths would need to be rebalanced in order to make these changes feasible.

Casual Incursion runner & Faction Warfare grunt, ex-Wormholer, ex-Nullbear.

Fer'isam K'ahn
SAS Veterinarians
#2 - 2014-08-05 21:01:12 UTC
I like the basic idea.

Though I have some issues with range, it either will not matter or will be the determined role depending on combat range. Though it makes logic sense (lore wise) It should be taken out of the accounts.

The other issues I have is, will it work ? With FCs only calling primary the only ships that need to lock more then one are logies and they will be close and boosted anyway. You would lose most of the tinkering range if fleets only lock single targets (max 2) no matter what.

And for balance reasons, the sensor strength would need to be almost identical for all ships or you will have real issues with it - and with players.

So after this, if those three won't work, whats the point ? - Don't get me wrong, I like it, but still not really seing the application it is supposed to have.

Cheers.
Swiftstrike1
Swiftstrike Incorporated
#3 - 2014-08-05 21:12:11 UTC
Thanks for the feedback.

Balancing something like this will always be tricky. At the end of the day I would like to see sensor strength become an important consideration in every ship, almost on the same level as DPS, speed and EHP.

As for the rest... well that all depends on the balance. Without hard numbers, it's all just hypothetical :)

Casual Incursion runner & Faction Warfare grunt, ex-Wormholer, ex-Nullbear.

epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#4 - 2014-08-05 23:10:48 UTC
You have clearly put a lot of thought into this idea, and I can see where you are coming from, I think.
As you realise this would have very wide ranging effects, and I am trying to see where it would lead and whether it would be a net good.

I do have one concern however, this is EVE and no good idea goes unpunished.Lol

There is always someone who can use such a wide ranging idea to mask or hide a trojan horse. i am not saying this is in any way your intention, but as it is your idea, and you know it best, give some thought as to how it could be exploited, because as it is such a wide ranging concept and change it would be well nigh impossible to roll back.

But congratulations for the thoughts and ideas, it is always good to consider new thinking. i look forward to reading more.

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE

Edwin McAlister
Empire Hooligans
#5 - 2014-08-06 00:08:59 UTC
while i very much like this idea, my first initial thought is, the amount of data going back and forth between client and server and how would this play out in massive blob 1000+ ship environment. small scale or medium scale it could work.
Jessica Danikov
Network Danikov
#6 - 2014-08-06 00:15:00 UTC
I actually like the idea of removing the max target cap and making it really easy to, say, target 8 capitals, but much harder to target 8 interceptors. I like the idea of having a falloff that increases the 'cost' of locking and how that cost can increase vulnerability to ECM.

I mean, you could almost change it to work like capacitor- lock too many targets, you start running out of 'sensor' and start dropping targets. ECM would then be like a neut effect, reducing your ability to maintain locks rather than eliminating it entirely.

The main concerns I'd have are the effects it might have on certain doctrines, e.g. alpha maelstroms. Taking away hard locking limits may make them overly powerful in certain situations, especially considering the fact that if you're alpha'ing through targets, you only need to lock the primary and you have a long reload in which to lock the next target.

Still, I think this idea deserves more attention, a bit more rigour, and serious consideration. What a rare treat.
Swiftstrike1
Swiftstrike Incorporated
#7 - 2014-08-06 00:23:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Swiftstrike1
Jessica Danikov wrote:
I actually like the idea of removing the max target cap and making it really easy to, say, target 8 capitals, but much harder to target 8 interceptors

It's immensely satisfying to see someone else appreciating the finer points of my idea. Thank you Big smile

Jessica Danikov wrote:
you could almost change it to work like capacitor- lock too many targets, you start running out of 'sensor' and start dropping targets. ECM would then be like a neut effect, reducing your ability to maintain locks rather than eliminating it entirely.

I like that a lot. Definitely a strong contender Smile

Casual Incursion runner & Faction Warfare grunt, ex-Wormholer, ex-Nullbear.

Christopher Tsutola
State Navy
#8 - 2014-08-06 06:13:55 UTC
I would love this to be implemented but CCP wants to make things easier for new players to understand not add content that would scare them casuals away we would probably see a removal of tracing speed before this was implemented but still i'd love to have something like this
Swiftstrike1
Swiftstrike Incorporated
#9 - 2014-08-06 17:00:28 UTC
I admit that these changes are ambitious, but I didn't use the word "overhaul" for nothing!

I strongly believe that (if implemented well) a system like this, where every ship's sensor systems are strongly interconnected, will be:

  • fun
  • realistic
  • immersive

Additionally, I think it is necessary if we are ever going to resolve "the ECM problem" and bring it in line with other forms of e-war.

Casual Incursion runner & Faction Warfare grunt, ex-Wormholer, ex-Nullbear.