These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

So what If warp scram and warp disruption was chance based?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tuggboat
Oneida Inc.
#41 - 2013-09-19 17:59:07 UTC
I'm looking at range also, Infact these first ideas on the nature of fun produced range based fruit but not on the warp disruptive. If the gates themselve dropped you in a spere larger than the current 12-15 km you start increasing chances of survival, possibly decreasing risk. The decrease in probability would have to do with calculating a comparisons of volumes inside a sphere. As the radius increases, the probabilities would at some point fall too rapidly. But it could be a way to adjust risk also. skill based disrupter range, rnd scrams, gate diameters, agility even all affect probabilities of getting pinned.
Metal Icarus
Star Frontiers
Brotherhood of Spacers
#42 - 2013-09-19 18:34:02 UTC
Wrong thread...

Chance based warp disruption belongs in:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=272809&find=unread
Tuggboat
Oneida Inc.
#43 - 2013-09-19 19:22:26 UTC
Thats a joke thread. Jokes are fun. Engagement level is pretty high, risk, but only to your ego, moderately low. This could belong in features and ideas though its more fun here since more are engaged.
Mr Pragmatic
#44 - 2013-09-19 19:35:03 UTC
I like this idea. Because it goes against the main stream. Anything main stream here is inherently pig headed.

"Omg you'll ruin my easy ganks OMFgWTfBbQ, Rage quits" *eats cheetos and mountian dews* "Freaking noobs suggesting good ideas" -Typical forum warrior.

Super cali hella yolo swaga dopeness.  -Yoloswaggins, in the fellowship of the bling.
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#45 - 2013-09-19 20:22:28 UTC
Quote:
So what If warp scram and warp disruption was chance based?


Level of tears would be so hard no noah's ark would be big or strong enough to get us sorted.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#46 - 2013-09-19 20:44:21 UTC
Oswald Bolke wrote:
Bienator II wrote:
points are such an important part of pvp that i would probably stop playing as soon they work like ECM. There is no room for random in a competitive environment.


I'm talking skill based not random here.


you are talking chance based, which is random

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
ISD Tyrozan
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#47 - 2013-09-19 20:59:08 UTC
Thread has been moved to Features & Ideas Discussion.

ISD Tyrozan

Captain

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

@ISDTyrozan | @ISD_CCL
Rico Minali
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#48 - 2013-09-19 21:00:26 UTC
The only chance based Ewar are ecm.
As for the idea, well it would make for less pvp and you would have to make stabs chance based too.

Trust me, I almost know what I'm doing.
Tuggboat
Oneida Inc.
#49 - 2013-09-19 21:50:49 UTC
What are the chances that any type of ewar will be present? Fleet composition affects all manner of probability, ecm is just like any other factor, its not in isolation but part of a whole system in conflict with another system, the whole of the two we call an engagement.

ECM is RND but it affect OFFENSIVE capabilities of the targeted fleet. RND scram/dis affects DEFENSIVE. In ECM the defender is altering the enemies offense, but ECM not only effect targeting of guns but all modules dependent on targeting such as warp disruption reseboes, remote reppers to name a few. Here if anywhere in these dependencies lie any overpoweredness of ECM.

RND scram/dis would not share these dependencies so design and implementation, management of risk would be a lot more easier to implement and balance.

The comparison going on between ECM and RND disruption is like apples and oranges, at best apples and pomegranates, because they are both red and incidentally pomegranates are also called love apples. There the similarity ends and like talking about love apples or red fruits, so does ECMS relevancy simply because the both would have random elements.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#50 - 2013-09-19 22:32:05 UTC
makes the game less player skill based and makes it more chance based and character skill based?

no...its much better being based on player skill. Also noob tackling is great for entry level PvP. u've just nerfed the hell out of it.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Oswald Bolke
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#51 - 2013-09-19 22:50:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Oswald Bolke
but have we?

people keep throwing out the:

"we would nerf PVP" but I think they are saying

"well crap it will nerf one sided ganking!"

Most things I think of as PVP are really arranged fleet battles or semi arranged battles where the majority of people are not tackled and both sides stick around till somebody is thrashed

Let put it this way:
Most successful gankers bring overwhelming force to an engagement. A new player can't just decline to fight that attack, or many times have a very good chance to escape. If a Rapier jumps in on them...well you can't always say toodles because A. It's likely faster than you B. It's got waaay more DPS than you and C: he's got more skills and snakes in his head. So it goes blap blap easy kill for the vet with little risk...where the person out there mining, or ratting, or trading all pretty Benin activities gets dragged into PVP really without out any consent. This being said, I get that a lot of players really enjoy being pirates, sure It's fun blowing somebody else up. But why does it have to be a guaranteed thing? I feel like giving some people who are tackled a small chance to not get pointed might make areas formerly off limits or deemed to dangerous or things like solo mining in lowsec maybe a bit more viable. Also, As before more people would mean more chance of a point.

the only thing Gankers and Pirates stand to lose is a few free kills
Oswald Bolke
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#52 - 2013-09-19 22:52:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Oswald Bolke
double post. please delete
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#53 - 2013-09-19 23:28:19 UTC
so it suits YOUR PvP, but everyone elses has to suffer?

small scale PvP exists. it is very tactical, which means pilot skill is a very big deal. this proposal takes away from that. and no, small scale PvP does not just mean a skilled player ganking a noob or indy pilot. Small scale PvP can happen in a variety of ways, consensual and un-consensual.

Quote:

If a Rapier jumps in on them...well you can't always say toodles because A. It's likely faster than you B. It's got waaay more DPS than you and C: he's got more skills and snakes in his head. So it goes blap blap easy kill for the vet with little risk


in this very example ur talkin about a player with a lot of skills attacking someone with fewer skills. but have somehow missed that under ur propsal this high skilled player will have an overwhelmingly better chance of holding point over the lesser skilled player. so the newer player has even LESS of a chance to fight back and the older player has even LESS risk because even when the newer player tries to tackle him, he still has a better chance of escaping than the noob.

all ur idea hopes to achieve is to allow ppl who dnt want to fight to escape more easily. and ur pushing this despite the obvious flaws of:

1) giving even more power to vets
2) ruining noob tackling
3) lessening the power of good tactical play.

the idea is BAD.

if u really want ur attackers point to work by chance, use ECM drones...

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Tuggboat
Oneida Inc.
#54 - 2013-09-19 23:54:43 UTC
I see this about new versus old, I mentioned about targeting based modules being affected by ecm. Targeting also affects tackling, skill que based skills for targeting speed sig radius also effect chance to tackle. Agility and speed can break a tackle therefore the affect the chance to stay tackled.

Which brings me to another question. Would a chance based scram still hold lock on the next cycle? or are we talking about not only initiating tackle but holding it? If so I think cycle duration would be another tool to manage risk. Undoubtedly there's a point that risks drops to0 low. When it does it drops to entertainment level instead of excitement. Example of entertainment are mining and missions.

The small gang components are well thought out but multiple tackles or even double disruptors could solve the problem. I've just seen a flood of midslots into many ships. why just double web when you could double scram unless the added risk by sacrificing a midslot is to0 high to accept. I really doubt it though. so many doubled up mids out there. Sure most are to decrease risk but as I said before decreasing risk increase the odds of survival and if those odds are more acceptable and balanced, overall the game would be more fun in more circumstances.
Ludi Burek
The Player Haters Corp
#55 - 2013-09-20 02:14:06 UTC
I propose we make locking other ships chance based. A very low chance!!!

Make it skill based. Yes.
Elvis Preslie
NRDS Securities
#56 - 2013-09-20 02:58:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Elvis Preslie
NO, tactics should be used instead of chance:

If you get scrammed with +2 scram strength and you counteracted at least 50% of those points with a stab (-1) then your MWD should still work BUT your warp should NOT, as you have done so and counteracted HALF of the scram strength being thrown at you. This would require both the scrambler and scramblee to use tactics to keep them scrammed and to keep from being scrammed.

This is logical.

Also, since you gave us skills to decrease chances of being jammed with ecm (sensor compensations) then give us warp scramble compensation skills, based on our ships (i.e. minmatar warp scramble compensation), which give us a HALF a point (-0.5) or something for each ship of that race per skill level, maybe even just a quarter of a point (-0.25) idk; you guys can debate this part.

I have made this suggestion in its own thread TWO TIMES over the past couple years but people were ignorant then. im surprised your thread has gotten this far WITHOUT being logical. Figures.
enigma marine
Doom Generation
Best Intentions.
#57 - 2013-09-20 03:17:13 UTC
So I'm sitting in a small FW plex, in my Blaster Harpy; Waiting for some fool to warp in. I see an INSlicer on dscan at the gate. he hasn't left, he might come in! I overheat my guns, scram, and MASB. Luckily, i have quick fingers and manage to catch the bastard on the warp in with my scram; But my scram fails, and soon he has burned out of range of my scram. I quickly realize if i dont get out quick i will soon melt to this Slicer. I overheat my AB ad MASB, hoping for his point to fail, but it doesn't, and im only ever able to burn to 21km from him before he comes around again. Five percent armor, then five percent hull. I sadly warp my pod out and GF in local cursing my luck. I was just RNJesus'd out of a kill, and lost my harpy too.


This is why it is a bad idea, see? I lost a battle I setup to win because of random chance. Nothing to do with ganking. Just simply being outplayed by lady luck. From a fellow Brave, please see why this is a bad idea.
Aglais
Ice-Storm
#58 - 2013-09-20 03:32:21 UTC
Posting in an obvious troll thread.

Jimmies not even rustled, "idea" too unbelievably silly.

Enigma Marine's post though shows us all why the idea is so silly.
Johan Civire
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#59 - 2013-09-20 04:15:16 UTC
Great idea, I don't like to be ganked but I can feel the tears already this will destroyed what's left off the pirates play style.

So even I hate pirates the don`t deserve this one. Bad idea.
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
#60 - 2013-09-20 04:59:49 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
so it suits YOUR PvP, but everyone elses has to suffer?


Did you mean to say "so it suits YOUR PVP, but I have to suffer?"?

Daichi Yamato wrote:
small scale PvP exists. it is very tactical, which means pilot skill is a very big deal. this proposal takes away from that. and no, small scale PvP does not just mean a skilled player ganking a noob or indy pilot. Small scale PvP can happen in a variety of ways, consensual and un-consensual.


How does targeting -> activating interdiction module equate to skill? And, what do you mean by "tactical"? There are many different tactics even for the same exact ship, letalone entire fleets.

Daichi Yamato wrote:
Quote:
If a Rapier jumps in on them...well you can't always say toodles because A. It's likely faster than you B. It's got waaay more DPS than you and C: he's got more skills and snakes in his head. So it goes blap blap easy kill for the vet with little risk


in this very example ur talkin about a player with a lot of skills attacking someone with fewer skills. but have somehow missed that under ur propsal this high skilled player will have an overwhelmingly better chance of holding point over the lesser skilled player. so the newer player has even LESS of a chance to fight back and the older player has even LESS risk because even when the newer player tries to tackle him, he still has a better chance of escaping than the noob.

all ur idea hopes to achieve is to allow ppl who dnt want to fight to escape more easily. and ur pushing this despite the obvious flaws of:

1) giving even more power to vets
2) ruining noob tackling
3) lessening the power of good tactical play.


1)How does a new player having to sit there and tank damage FOREVER empower them? You seem to be painting a picture of some new Golden Boy player running up on a savvy low sec pirate and holding him down while barely managing to whittle down his tank and avoid the pirate's fleet/corp/alliance mates, and that's a cool story, but maybe you should log in and play the game to see how that ACTUALLY plays out. Then you might change your opinion.
2)Noobs don't make good tacklers, not even with the current mechanics. They're cannon fodder, very useful cannon fodder performing an invaluable function, but . . . I don't see how they would fare any worse than they do now. The only difference would be that their extra warp disrupt cycles might actually matter and losing them might actually turn the tide of a fight. As it is now, they tend to run up and tackle something for long enough to allow other players to get onto grid. Then they usually explode inconsequentially. If interdiction were chance based, teaching/helping them to stay alive might become an actual priority, because it would increase the odds of maintaining points on the target.
3)"Tactical" play involves using tactics. If every "tactic" involves warp scrambling/disrupting/interdicting your opponent, that might be an indication that interdiction is very heavily weighted in the game, some might even say imbalanced.

Daichi Yamato wrote:
if u really want ur attackers point to work by chance, use ECM drones...


If someone wants to fly their internet spaceship around, why shouldn't they be able to just because you say so? Why should they have to carry around such specialized equipment as ECM drones to do that? (Not every ship has a drone bay and not every noob can use ECM drones.) Shouldn't the burden be on the person trying to stop them? And, how much of a burden should stopping someone be? Have you ever tried to stop someone from running away? How about someone bigger? How about a horse? A truck? A freight train?

If you will, search your own personal knowledge base. Is there any equivalent to "tackling" anywhere in your memory of history, militarily, technologically, commercially, biologically? A lion cannot webify a gazelle. An F-15 cannot warp scramble a Mig 29. The police do not bubble a bank robber. A pawn cannot warp disrupt the opposing queen to keep it from moving across the board.

I think that somewhere in MMO history, some dev got pissed off that he couldn't catch and pwn some frisky player and decided he would put in a snare mechanic so that he didn't have to. And now it is standard for every MMO to put mechanics in place to make players "fight honorably" by not moving/running away.