These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Rubicon 1.1] Mobile Micro Jump Unit and Mobile Scan Inhibitor

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Erasmus Phoenix
Avalanche.
#241 - 2014-01-07 04:40:28 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Te more I think about the MSI the less I like it.
It seems that it would be useful to a complex runner or ratter, but it is only good by the hundreds to make it impossible to chose the right one.
From an offensive standpoint it is good as a trap, but then again it is too obvious a trap.

I'm not really sure the direction you were trying to go with this module.

There is no direction. They obviously put about 5 minutes of thought into it and went "yeah sounds good we'll worry about balance later".


Every possible use of the scanning inhibitor that I can think of falls into at least one of these catagories; No advantage because both sides will do it, cheap traps, making isk grinding easier/safer, or causing unfun structure grinds for anyone who actually wants a decent fight.
Iudicium Vastus
Doomheim
#242 - 2014-01-07 04:42:30 UTC
hmmm, might the MSI pave way for the often asked Cloaking Field deployable or ship module?

[u]Nerf stabs/cloaks in FW?[/u] No, just.. -Fit more points -Fit faction points -Bring a friend or two with points (an alt is fine too)
Jessica Danikov
Network Danikov
#243 - 2014-01-07 04:43:27 UTC
Yeah, I'm not too fond of the MSI either. I could debate back and forth about it's questionable utility and who it'll empower the most (campers, probably) and whether it's needed, but...

I think this is just a big '**** you' to d-scan tools. Now the guys have to go away and work out a way to parse Overview output instead.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#244 - 2014-01-07 05:15:35 UTC
It's pointless trying to suggest improvements or variations, as the design for these is already set in stone. It's just a question of what extent they're going to screw with gameplay. Case in-point: Heavy assault cruisers, Marauders and the new Rapid light and heavy missile launchers. Constructive criticism will be conveniently ignored; negative feedback will be used as justification for ignoring the thread entirely...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#245 - 2014-01-07 05:18:57 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
It's pointless trying to suggest improvements or variations, as the design for these is already set in stone. It's just a question of what extent they're going to screw with gameplay. Case in-point: Heavy assault cruisers, Marauders and the new Rapid light and heavy missile launchers. Constructive criticism will be conveniently ignored; negative feedback will be used as justification for ignoring the thread entirely...

This is CCP Fozzie here, he tends to listen more.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#246 - 2014-01-07 05:21:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
This is CCP Fozzie here, he tends to listen more.

Roll

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#247 - 2014-01-07 05:53:09 UTC
Powers Sa wrote:


This is massively broken if the radius is bigger than 15km (30km diameter), and the build cost needs to be that of like a t2 medium bubble or a t1 large bubble.

With a 30km radius you can hide capfleets and super fleets.


Isn't that kind of the point? Shaking up gameplay is fine as long as there's an effective counterbalance, and it seems like this structure's high visibility is an effective counter. The fact that you don't know what's in there when it's active makes it just as easy to turn it into a Mobile Bluffing Field. There's plenty of opportunities for shaking up traditional fleet gameplay by giving commanders more options, which is exactly what this will do.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#248 - 2014-01-07 05:54:52 UTC
An effective balance would be not being able to scan what's outside if you're inside, since nobody who's outside can scan what's inside.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
#249 - 2014-01-07 06:09:18 UTC
Morwennon wrote:
The scan disruptor seems like it might be a bit overpowered in space that's behind an acceleration gate since there will be no way to get information on whatever it's concealing without exposing yourself whereas in normal space you'd have multiple options for dong so.


Whats stopping you from putting one in front of an acceleration gate and coming back with a bigger gang/better ships?
Oh right nothing, your stupid. [Assuming they are placeable within deadspace which I personally hope so].
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#250 - 2014-01-07 06:27:55 UTC
One of the common themes I'm seeing in this thread is about how bad this is going to be for w-space. I would like to reiterate the factoid that wormhole space, since its inception, was intended to be completely unscripted; the devs simply created it, and left it open to the players without any themes or instructions for how to do it. So it makes it harder to find pve cap fleets in them? Good! That means there's more ways for people to not only secure their home turf, just as it should be; the current system of pvp in w-space needs more ways for players to defend themselves, since it literally is the last frontier in this game; the more tools to defend your homestead, the better.

That being said, the MSI has ENORMOUS potential for abuse in factional warfare. While this has both advantages and disadvantages, if they end up allowing it in deadspace complexes it will be used more or less as a Mobile Bluffing Field or the like. I agree with a lot of people on this thread that introducing that kind of gameplay where you HAVE to warp into a specific area sets up the perfect formula for exploitation and ambush.
That being said, I would love it if I was in the fleet using one, soooo....
Sid Crash
#251 - 2014-01-07 06:39:47 UTC
EI Digin wrote:
You should be very careful when introducing additional complexity onto a system that isn't quite understood in the first place, that you don't know the future to, and especially to a system that is way due for an overhaul.

In this case, intelligence (via local, dscan, probing) is definitely something that both the players and the devs know must eventually change. Do not try to fix a broken existing system or try to implement a bandaid solution without first completely understanding how intel should work on a massive scale because more often than not you will just end up causing more harm than good.

In short, create a vision of what you think the game would be like before implementing features like these, because it seems to me like this is another "wouldn't it be cool if" idea rather than what actually needs to be done.


Exactly this.
Kane Fenris
NWP
#252 - 2014-01-07 06:41:46 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hello one and all. Happy New Year and I hope you all had an enjoyable and fulfilling holiday season.

Today we're updating Singularity with its first version of the patch that will one day become Rubicon 1.1. With it comes working versions of the first two of the 1.1 Mobile Structures that we're ready to tell you about and start collecting feedback for.

I'm very excited about both of these structures and the new creative options they will open up. Both were intentionally chosen to provide the most open ended gameplay possible.

The versions described in this thread and on SISI are of course still open to change, and it is very likely that a lot of specific stats will be tweaked between now and release. We will also be announcing more structures for 1.1 (and more for later patches) at later points.


Mobile Micro Jump Unit

This baby does pretty much exactly what the name implies. When active, any player within range can use it to launch their ship 100km in the direction that the ship is travelling when it makes use of the structure. It has no cooldown or limit to how many ships can use it at once, but it does have a spoolup time just like the MJD module. This spoolup duration is not modified by skills and on the base structure it is 12s (just like the MJD module would be if you could use it without skills).

The actual Micro Jump effect works exactly the same as the effect from the module. So during the cycle you go full throttle in one direction with a sig radius penalty, it can't be cancelled, scrams prevent you from jumping, it preserves speed on landing, all that jazz. You only have to be within range of the structure at the start of the micro jump cycle, not at the end. If the structure is destroyed during your spoolup time, you do not get launched. Since the MJU has no cooldown, a player can start the jump cycle from a Micro Jump module or MJU immediately after finishing a previous jump facilitated by a different MJU.

There will be mass restrictions to prevent caps and supercaps from using it, but everything else is fair game. We are currently planning to set the mass restrictions such that freighters can use it but anything larger is blocked. Like I mentioned above, it is usable by everyone and is not restricted to the owner or their corp/fleet. This means you can feel free to use it to try and escape, but your assailant is also free to use it to follow you.

Like the Cynosaural Inhibitor and the Siphon Unit, the MJU is a single use structure. Once dropped it can never be scooped and will stay in space until it either gets blown up or finishes its lifetime.

Right now we have the base version set to 20s module activation time, 48hr lifetime, 25k ehp (mostly structure), 50m3 volume and a build cost of about 1m isk.
Micro Jump spoolup is 12s like an unskilled MJD.
Current activation range is 2500m but we're already leaning towards expanding that.
It can't be placed within 20km of gates or stations, within 40km of a starbase tower or within 6km of another MJU.

Please note that the version on SISI at the time of this post has a few known defects, including the lack of a visual model in space and the lack of a working mass restriction.



im really dislike this one. i dont think this should exist without major disadvantages to the bs mjd like 20s+ spooltime or somewhat else of a disadvantage.
Travasty Space
Pilots of Epic
#253 - 2014-01-07 06:44:10 UTC
Michael Harari wrote:
Tetsuo Tsukaya wrote:

The MSI is going to have a 5 mil build cost, so his idea is actually 250 million ISK per hour


250m isk/hour is quite cheap for making your c6 bearing ops so much safer


Which is why I'd only need to go to anomalies or data/relic sites(but no one does those anymore, or so I'm told). And with that 200mil of that is wasted.
Demica Diaz
SE-1
#254 - 2014-01-07 06:51:23 UTC
I hope that in order to activate MMJ you dont need to right click it and then select from menu to jump. Add keybind or something that when you are in range you see Green Icon of that structure which tells you that you are in range. You hit "H" for example and your ship jumps. Otherwise its too cluncky and "old" EVE style which is slow and boring.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#255 - 2014-01-07 06:52:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Andski
yes let's give MJDs to every ship in the game short of caps (but let freighters have it!) because somebody at CCP found out about antimage, great idea

oh and a deployable that hides every ship within a ridiculously sized radius? brilliant! so not only do we effectively allow people to conceal an entire mining op or even a supercapital fleet by anchoring a disposable deployable, we give them another disposable deployable that lets them get to safety if the first plan didn't work out! immunity, woot~

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
stoicfaux
#256 - 2014-01-07 07:11:01 UTC
CCP Admiral Ackbar called, and he wants his MSI back, you ungrateful louts.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#257 - 2014-01-07 08:22:10 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
It's pointless trying to suggest improvements or variations, as the design for these is already set in stone. It's just a question of what extent they're going to screw with gameplay. Case in-point: Heavy assault cruisers, Marauders and the new Rapid light and heavy missile launchers. Constructive criticism will be conveniently ignored; negative feedback will be used as justification for ignoring the thread entirely...

This is CCP Fozzie here, he tends to listen more.


Sorry, you are talking about some other dev. This guy's track record is the opposite of what you are thinking about.
Fozzie trashed drone activity in PvE, completely ignoring the damage it would do.
He was deeply involved in the destruction of the Marauder class.

He listens to no one.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#258 - 2014-01-07 08:53:55 UTC
The mobile Micro jump Unit: I do not like it. WHy? Because it takes away the SINGLE advantage that battleships had over other ship classes.

That again is HOMOGENIZATION! Its horrible for game and still ccp continue making everything the same.

If you gonna go trough with that, please think about boosting the MJD of the battleships a bit. These majestic class of ships deserve something for them!



The deployable Harry potter Invisibility Cloak is interesting, but maybe too powerful. IT affects the game so much that is fightening you touch that before dealign with local .

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#259 - 2014-01-07 08:58:56 UTC
Nerf Burger wrote:
Tasha Saisima wrote:
More tools to help prey hide and get away. Not interested



hahaha! suck it grief monkey! whats the matter, you don't like fair gameplay? I'm loving this change.Pirate

My main gripe with this game is that hostiles take very few risks and have it easy, and I am very happy to see that changing.



Its not FAIR gameplay. Now you just have to not be afk to be 100% immune to ANY attempt to kill you in space.


Basically this HORRIBLE set of things leaves more and more GATES as the SINGLE place where PVP can happen.


No it is nto fair when one side will escape 100% of time even when the other side spends far far more skils, time and effort.

These set of changes in very few hours are makign me reconsidering if to continue payign for this game. ....

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#260 - 2014-01-07 09:03:19 UTC
Capqu wrote:
so what you're saying is every ship gets a free module slot and in it is an mjd

that's the dumbest thing i've ever heard

Quote:

It can't be placed within 20km of gates or stations, within 40km of a starbase tower or within 6km of another MJU.


probably the only reason it isn't completely and utterly stupid, but seriously whats the point? why put this in the game? if it's just for the cool another mobile thing i'm really not buying it



CCP is just making even more clear that they want to remove ALL pvp from open space liuek missions and belts. They are carebearing even more this stupid game that is loosing its identity!


It will be nearly impossible to get ANYONe inside a mission now.. really impossible.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"