These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Overview Upgrade Suggestion (RADAR)

First post
Author
Teshania
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#121 - 2012-11-06 13:06:51 UTC
When can my space ship sensor panel up and running, i'm tired of beating on the damn thing to get something worth a damn to display being some what realistic, and all i keep getting is static, some numbers... Really come on get with the times, i feel like i'm flying something built and designed back on Earth itself o.O is this not suppose to be NEW Eden?!?!

We need a Bounty Button on the Forums

Captain CarlCosmogasm
Cosmogasm
#122 - 2012-11-15 16:24:43 UTC
I like the ideas.

I don't think a ship should be able to detect or identify a shuttle at the same range it would detect or identify a battleship. Scan quality should depend on the target's range, its sig radius, and the focus (angular width) of the scan. Also just because a scan has a 10+ AU range doesn't mean it should have the fidelity to detect something that far out, let alone identify it. Think of the current scan probe system for reference.
Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#123 - 2012-11-15 17:21:02 UTC
+1

Ill be honest, I havent read the whole thread, but heres my take on it.

I like the idea of 'sonar in space'. I think that it opens some possibilities that haven't previously been available.

Passive - Pings increase and decrease in their spacing dependant on D-scan range setting, giving more accurate readouts at closer ranges. Various objects can be picked up depending on the D-scan/overview settings. Ping time could also be decreased by the appropriate sensor skill

Active - Perhaps a good role for an active module. During activation, replaces passive radar output with active output. 3 second cycle, 1 ping per cycle. Low to medium activation cost. Very close range, 20km +7.5% per level in appropriate sensor skill, (max being 27.5km.) Capable of detecting the presence of a cloaked vessel, (not its identity, size or designation, just its prescence and approximate direction and distance.) The downside of active pinging is massively increased signature radius as well as an obvious audio/visual output, (the sneaky T3 stalking you will be able to see and hear your active pinging effort, not to mention that you will be lit up like a Christmas tree.)

(This active range would allow an opportunity to get advance warning of close up stalkers, as well as nail afk cloakers if you know their safespot. Even has potential for interupting cloakers at gates.

Also, maybe have the radar show up in a colour appropriate to the ships racial alignment.

Every other "NERF AFK CLAOKING TOO OP BLAH BLAH BLAH" thread I've read I have been against the ability to detect cloaking in any form. But this seems pretty cool, interesting, innovative and has a suitable downside. If there was ever going to be a way to spot cloakers, this is the only way I can see it being even remotely viable.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#124 - 2012-11-15 17:28:43 UTC
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
I like the idea of 'sonar in space'. I think that it opens some possibilities that haven't previously been available.

Sonar in space, as many would point out, is not what this is. (Sonar being sound based, no sound in space, blah blah blah)

Accepting that, sonar is an excellent analogy for this. Energy waves react and behave a lot like we expect sonar to do in movies about submarines hunting each other.

With a few tweaks, it COULD be the basis of hunting any ship, including cloaked.
Please understand, however, I am not advocating for hunting cloaked vessels unless it is balanced. Balance has been discussed and agreed upon for this, as cloaked vessel awareness must be earned by effort.
(You gotta figure out they are there using effort, no chat channel roster cheat sheet tipping you off)
(Translation: they are not listed and known to be present because of local chat)
Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#125 - 2012-11-16 13:34:54 UTC
I do understand the rudimentary laws of physics, including no sound in a vacuum. It was meant as an analogy. Energy waves seem the most likely candidate, totally with you on that one.

You gave me an idea though. It's probably come up before, but how about removing cloakers from local? Not only could no-one tell if they were there, but they can't see anyone else either. Cloaky Intel gathering would be a lot harder.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#126 - 2012-11-16 14:37:58 UTC
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
I do understand the rudimentary laws of physics, including no sound in a vacuum. It was meant as an analogy. Energy waves seem the most likely candidate, totally with you on that one.

You gave me an idea though. It's probably come up before, but how about removing cloakers from local? Not only could no-one tell if they were there, but they can't see anyone else either. Cloaky Intel gathering would be a lot harder.

Indeed it has been suggested. By many others and myself.

It is also the best solution I have ever heard for it, then and now.
Penny Ibramovic
Wormhole Engineers
#127 - 2012-11-16 16:31:35 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
4.) Wormholes are a unique experience in EVE, and I have not spent enough time in them to say whether or not this would be a good fit for them. Unless CCP felt otherwise, I would leave them as is.


This would be terrible for w-space. See, for example, how to hunt in w-space using d-scan. Passive d-scan would not offer enough information to hunt a target, and any active ping would immediately reveal your presence.

Yes, it is possible to use probes, but the whole concept revolves around using d-scan to know where to put your probes so that they are visible for as short a time as possible.

This active/passive radar would fundamentally change w-space for the poorer.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#128 - 2012-11-16 17:02:57 UTC
Penny Ibramovic wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
4.) Wormholes are a unique experience in EVE, and I have not spent enough time in them to say whether or not this would be a good fit for them. Unless CCP felt otherwise, I would leave them as is.


This would be terrible for w-space. See, for example, how to hunt in w-space using d-scan. Passive d-scan would not offer enough information to hunt a target, and any active ping would immediately reveal your presence.

Yes, it is possible to use probes, but the whole concept revolves around using d-scan to know where to put your probes so that they are visible for as short a time as possible.

This active/passive radar would fundamentally change w-space for the poorer.

As you noted, I would not try to enforce this onto W-space without better informed guidance.

As you mentioned probes, it might be worth noting a cloaked vessel can certainly use probes, and D-Scan can certainly see probes.

Passive, as you may infer, is great at taking in data without exposing you. This would include probe data, since in order to gather their data, probes effectively emit an active scan pulse.
Now, the passive ship won't get the data from the probes, but they will know the probes are out there, and possibly a general sense of direction and / or distance.
Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#129 - 2012-11-16 18:58:07 UTC
Penny Ibramovic wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
4.) Wormholes are a unique experience in EVE, and I have not spent enough time in them to say whether or not this would be a good fit for them. Unless CCP felt otherwise, I would leave them as is.


This would be terrible for w-space. See, for example, how to hunt in w-space using d-scan. Passive d-scan would not offer enough information to hunt a target, and any active ping would immediately reveal your presence.

Yes, it is possible to use probes, but the whole concept revolves around using d-scan to know where to put your probes so that they are visible for as short a time as possible.

This active/passive radar would fundamentally change w-space for the poorer.


I think my take on the passive/active radar would still work well with W-Space. I suggest the passive radar be used in conjuction with the overview, giving a 3D readout of the overview. I would give the passive radar a range of about 1,000km, roughly double the size of a grid

I would keep the current D-scan as well, it is a radar in its own right, (it just cannot tell you where someone is without a lot of leg work.
zus
TxivYawg
#130 - 2012-11-16 20:59:20 UTC
Sounds good it makes sense.Idea
Ellente Fervens
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#131 - 2012-11-16 22:04:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Ellente Fervens
Posting here cause you dropped by my suggestion.

I completely agree dscan needs a rework and this seems like a reasonable direction to take it.

I just wanted something that could be put in the game now rather than something that may require an entire production cycle to sort out.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#132 - 2012-12-04 20:40:14 UTC
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#133 - 2012-12-11 17:37:45 UTC
Mary Annabelle
Moonlit Bonsai
#134 - 2012-12-19 19:23:12 UTC
The OP here: This this this!!!

Someone please raise the bar on intel, this is really dumbing down the game to levels of duhhhh...

Seriously, it's like local blurts out: Simon says GET SAFE every time the wrong pilot enters. Where is the effort being made to earn that intel?
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#135 - 2012-12-31 14:30:22 UTC
Mary Annabelle wrote:
The OP here: This this this!!!

Someone please raise the bar on intel, this is really dumbing down the game to levels of duhhhh...

Seriously, it's like local blurts out: Simon says GET SAFE every time the wrong pilot enters. Where is the effort being made to earn that intel?

Suggesting an effort needs to be made is the first step.

I see it being taken for granted too much that local is not only the proper source for intel, but that the counter being used needs to be nerfed so the more risk averse can operate in a less stressful environment.

That's about one step away from needing to ask permission before engaging in PvP, since local can reliably be used to avoid unwanted fights. If only those AFK cloaked vessels would stop messing it up...
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#136 - 2013-01-04 19:20:55 UTC
Bumping for blueberry muffins.

What? Pilots need more than just burritos and hot pockets... just sayin!
Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#137 - 2013-01-05 03:27:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Maximus Andendare
Tchulen wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Cloaking should be effectively a contest of skills. The detection abilities of the target versus the cloaking abilities of the hunter.


Agreed as long as the result of the contest with maxed out skills is in favour of the cloaked ship. The issue with it being the other way around is everyone would just max out the skill required to see cloaked ships as quickly as possible and then cloaks would become pointless.

Other than that, great idea.
The simple fix to this issue of "zomg my cloaking ship can't gather all the intel and be completely safe doing it!" is just to exploit that we already have ships that are specifically designed to be sensor platforms.

Anathemas, Helioses, Buzzards and Cheetahs are all specialized T2 ships that are designed to be scanning platforms. All they'd need is a role bonus or similar that'd enable them to gather intelligence via their sensors and not negatively impact their cloaks.

To the OP, this idea is fantastic. I've been wondering what sort of changes will be made to local to lower its position as a huge crutch that doesn't really require people to use their brains and intel networks. I mean, in wormhole space, we deal with the lack of information in local all the time, and we still get good fights and have intel about our surroundings.

edit: also to the OP, I abhor people who bump their own threads. If people care about what you posted or what you have to say, then your thread will live on organically without you having the need to bump it.

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

Mary Annabelle
Moonlit Bonsai
#138 - 2013-01-07 17:26:09 UTC
Maximus Andendare wrote:
edit: also to the OP, I abhor people who bump their own threads. If people care about what you posted or what you have to say, then your thread will live on organically without you having the need to bump it.


LOL

Popular ideas, maybe. Joelinux did an amazing popular thread about a frozen corpse needing clothes. It was a lot of fun, no kidding.

Good ideas--- everyone else expects someone else to jump over it, maybe they think that they don't say the right things well enough.
Its not that a good idea needs help, but its the one that actually deserves it.
Jessica Danikov
Network Danikov
#139 - 2013-01-09 14:26:37 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Mary Annabelle wrote:
WH pilots have shown we can play without local.

Is everyone else trying to say these pilots are that much better, and only they can do this?

Aw heck no!

Most pilots have just gotten so used to the idea that local hands them free intel, that they are simply resisting change.


Everyone resists change, otherwise life would be chaos.

I wouldn't say that WH pilots are better (well, a little bit, they just have different skills/mentalities/habits). What they have done is chosen a different experience- that's the beauty of EVE, you're offered that choice, rather than having some twerps believing that a certain form of gameplay is superior and should be forced on everyone.

One of the biggest aspects of EVE is attention- as you get deeper into EVE, the game requires more and more attention for you to survive. In hisec, you can get away with watching local while at war, and maybe d-scan while in expensive ships. In lowsec and nullsec, local becomes more important, intel channels start to play a part, and d-scan can be more useful in dealing with situations. Finally, in w-space, d-scan and a good, friendly gang become the only tools in your disposal.

W-space is a very intensive and often draining form of gameplay. Some people burn out or bore of all the scanning and probing involved and will take breaks. Nullsec is the same, some people need to retreat to hisec for a gentler experience. There's nothing wrong with that, if anything it's a quality of EVE. There is some shame in that some people are so attached to their safety-net that they never explore beyond it, and they already have to enjoy general derision by the greater community for that activity, but ultimately they pay subscription and help keep the game afloat, so they will always be catered to by people who do understand that EVE is not a one-note game and has a lot of things for an arrangement of people with different tastes and attitudes. People who think that great features like not having local in w-space should be homogenised across null or all of EVE are just totally missing the point.

EVE isn't broken like this. Your attitude is the problem. You do have good and interesting ideas, and by all means, go out there, implement them, see if they make for an interesting game. However, EVE is not your playground and your idea is far too complex and untested for the EVE community to be your test guinea pig for something that might not even work, and it's a joke that you think that such a radical change might get lifted out from the forums, let alone occur at all.

There are some pitfalls with your idea that would be worth discussion, but not inside the context of trying to unnecessarily wedge them into EVE.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#140 - 2013-01-09 15:03:00 UTC
I shortened this for simplicity, her post is visible in complete form above this, obviously.
Jessica Danikov wrote:
Everyone resists change, otherwise life would be chaos...

Oh my.

You must forgive my non acceptance of your base logic, as I disagree with it.
You are connecting resistance to change as an idealistic issue. While possibly noble in specific cases, more often it is simply because change takes effort, and human nature despises any effort that is not seen as necessary.

That is the biggest obstacle EVE has in this case: the human nature of the players is pushing them to compete with the least possible amount of effort, and frankly free intel caters to this shamelessly.
The problem is that we have a section of the game meant for this play style, high sec. The fact that local chat can be used to effectively duplicate it is exactly what created AFK Cloaking.

The experience in high sec belongs exclusively in high sec. The rewards in low and null were never meant to be offered without accepting higher levels of risk, and that is not happening here.

My idea offers a reasonable means of properly playing the game, one where use of a chat channel offers a lesser reward than can be achieved by proper effort with real sensors. Right now it is foolish to use sensors, as the chat channel gives more useful information according to most needs. That is a perfect example of a broken mechanic.

WH space is not defined by a single difference, as your argument suggests. You are simply pointing out it's more notable one, the difference in local chat. There are three other major differences alone that make it drastically different from null sec, let alone low or high sec.
For reference: No Outposts, No Market, and specifically limited access for entry, make this section of space a unique play experience above and beyond the simple absence of local chat's pilot roster alone.

As to my idea being expected for direct insertion, don't be ridiculous. No idea on these forums stands scrutiny with that expectation.

It simply offers a more balanced and mutually play respective approach than: "nerf cloaks K thnx bye!"