These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

Can the warp stab be combat-viable without being overpowered?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises
Otherworld Empire
#21 - 2013-09-23 19:05:56 UTC
Alundil wrote:
Swiftstrike1 wrote:
a doomsday weapon to mine asteroids.

NB4 Chribba

mmm!

★★★ Secure 3rd party service ★★★

Visit my in-game channel 'Holy Veldspar'

Twitter @ChribbaVeldspar
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#22 - 2013-09-27 20:18:24 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:
The problem is that the ability to avoid being reliably tackled (with minimal penalties) is such a powerful thing you would be stupid not to take advantage of it (i.e. everyone would fit it).

Sure, it won't help against scrams... but it makes fast, long points useless unless multiple ones are used (which is a problem for some frigates and interceptors with only 2 mid-slots). And, again, this encourages blobbing tactics and puts a rather large crimp on small-gang, solo warfare.

I'm not suggesting minimal penalties, and I'm fully aware of the gameplay cost of a poorly balanced WCS. I'm not sure I made this clear in the OP - this is not a suggestion thread, exactly, this is meant to be a discussion. Or a question. I think the WCS could be a more interesting module than it is now (ie. never fit it) and I believe that if a change to the game will expand the meta of PVP without unbalancing the game, it'll make the game more interesting and a change worth making. I am not either for or against the idea of a rebalanced WCS. But if the mod was interesting, and the meta effects of the mod not-undesirable, I think it'd be cool. No I have no idea how to achieve such a balance point :/

And yeah I know about the dislike of ECM drones and I did list their drawbacks :P It was an example.

Zappity wrote:
I'm not sure either. I did read the OP and specifically addressed a couple of points of concern. Perhaps you could do the same - what about solo?

The agility penalty concept is interesting. It would hurt kiters a lot.

No, you came in attacking me for trying to discuss something. Also, the topic is 'can WCS be usable without being overpowered'. Making everyone carry two points always is obviously OP.

Kahega Amielden wrote:
If we need to change the balance of fast ships vs slow ships (something you have not established), giving slow ships a "get out of any fight free" card is quite possibly the least interesting way to do it.


The OP is just meant to be thinking about the possible effects, including effects on solo play, of a changed WCS. I don't want to see WCS changed specifically to meet what I described. It's probably poor communication on my part. Or I was rambling. I'm also aware of my limited experience, which is why I put all the questions at the bottom.

I don't want to see a game where having multiple points of disruption is mandatory, and I wanted to discuss a possible balance point where the WCS is usable sometimes without making everyone fit two disruptors. I mean, you don't fit for every niche setup you might come across. And a WCS setup could probably only ever be a niche fit and remain balanced.

I did talk to a corpie who thought a single WCS was already usable on cruiser up. He said cruiser fights will often last long enough for the targeting penalties not to matter as much. Are they fit more often than I thought?
Oswaldos
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2013-09-27 20:38:01 UTC
I really don't think buffing warp core stabilizers would be good for eve. If you don't want to engage in combat you fit WCS and then generally speaking your safe to move around high sec/ low sec without issue. If you only want to engage in combat where can win.. join the club. Their are lots of different ways to avoiding conflict in the game including but not limited to, MJD, MWD back to gate, cloak and warp, MWD out of range of tackle, neut tackle out, target breaker, ECM burst, ECM drones, sensor damps (in some applications), or just explode the guy tackling you. So we defiantly don't need another way to avoid conflict.

I actually think larger ships need the ability to point out to farther ranges. Someone suggested 30k disruptors that aren't faction, its a good idea
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#24 - 2013-09-27 20:41:02 UTC
What about a 'reverse interdiction' bubble? It would be a sphere of point/scram nullification. Maybe make the deploying ship locked in place like a cyno ship.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Rendiff
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2013-09-27 21:16:41 UTC
What if they changed them into an active module that had a, lets say 20%, per cycle chance of over charging you warp corp and breaking the scramble/disruption?
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#26 - 2013-09-27 21:19:36 UTC
Rendiff wrote:
What if they changed them into an active module that had a, lets say 20%, per cycle chance of over charging you warp corp and breaking the scramble/disruption?


Yeah that's interesting. Overheat mechanic applied to your warp core. If you get too hot your ship explodes.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2013-10-05 08:27:02 UTC
Zappity wrote:
There are already faction scrams and disruptors with increased point value - how would these differ? I think we're getting to the pointy end of the discussion now.

How would they differ? HOW WOULD THEY DIFFER!? You do reallize that faction modules are expensive, right? You actually play EVE, right? You're not just a forums-only player?

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."
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2013-10-05 08:31:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Kahega Amielden wrote:
Quote:
Along with this there could be a larger warp core stabilizer with lower penalties to allow bigger ships an easier time fitting them. This way large ships might find it easier to flee from small ships, while it wouldn't make it any easier for them to flee from large ships. I also think capital ships should all have a warp strength of at least 1.


...Why should big ships find it easier to flee from small ships?
I think that small ships should be better at giving chase, but as they are cheaper and more expendable as well as more maneuverable, a large ship should have an advantage in warping away in a one-on-one fight.

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."
Sleepy Buddha
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2013-10-05 08:36:41 UTC
because of the fw farmers ... remove them, or allow them to be fited only on industrial ships or something like that
Yolo
Unknown Nation
#30 - 2013-10-05 08:53:58 UTC
Swiftstrike1 wrote:
To repeat a point that someone else already made, stabs are for escaping and/or avoiding combat. The idea of a "combat-viable" warp core stabiliser is similar to e.g. a target painter than only paints you. You wouldn't redesign a WCS to be combat viable any more than you would redesign a doomsday weapon to mine asteroids.

I actually made a post regarding weapons causing damage to asteroids as a form of mining. Adventures of Mining

- since 2003, bitches
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
#31 - 2013-10-05 09:07:40 UTC
Like others, I don't see anything that should be changed with Warp Stabilizers at this point. The trade off is intentional: if you are going to fit for a fight, you don't fit a Warp Stab (unless you go Smart Bombing... but that is something else). The lock penalty is a decent trade off for the assurance that if you don't want to engage in fights during your travels, you make the opponent work harder than usual.

Cloaking is the closest thing to a "Pause Game" button one can get while in space.

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
#32 - 2013-10-05 09:10:27 UTC
Sleepy Buddha wrote:
because of the fw farmers ... remove them, or allow them to be fited only on industrial ships or something like that


In the case of faction warfare, perhaps the best thing is this: time to cap is tripled. If the person wants to have the comfort of avoiding a fight, he should be penalized by not being able to capture a point as quickly.

Cloaking is the closest thing to a "Pause Game" button one can get while in space.

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.
Lair Osen
#33 - 2013-10-05 10:52:26 UTC
It would be nice if there was a mod that removed the effects of scrams that make them different from disruptors, so you can keep MWDing for example.
Previous page12