These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Sura Sadiva
Entropic Tactical Crew
#681 - 2014-01-09 13:29:31 UTC
MisterAl tt1 wrote:
Nor FW problems are covered.

Maybe deny anchoring those within 75km of any signature? So that they are used only in fleet fights and other more unpredictable situations.


This could fix a lot of potential issues
LtCol Laurentius
The Imperial Sardaukar
#682 - 2014-01-09 13:32:21 UTC
Sura Sadiva wrote:
MisterAl tt1 wrote:
Nor FW problems are covered.

Maybe deny anchoring those within 75km of any signature? So that they are used only in fleet fights and other more unpredictable situations.


This could fix a lot of potential issues


They are allready nerfed into oblivion, so why not. Make sure there is no viable use cases left at all.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#683 - 2014-01-09 13:34:52 UTC
Theon Severasse wrote:
One problem that I just thought of is that currently when a scout goes to get intel on a fleet, they will typically use a Dscan analyser in order to pass that information to the rest of the fleet. Since there is no way to copy what is in the overview (that I know of), it will make passing intel on what is inside the MSI very difficult.

I don't think anybody wants to have to listen to a scout as he lists off every single ship in a 40 man gang :P



That could be a very nice addition to fleet system don 'tyou think?


Could have the spot of SCOUT, and the members in commadn positiosn would get a feed on EVERYTHIGN the scout coudl see? Woudl make an interestign gameplay ....

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#684 - 2014-01-09 13:38:32 UTC
LtCol Laurentius wrote:
Sura Sadiva wrote:
MisterAl tt1 wrote:
Nor FW problems are covered.

Maybe deny anchoring those within 75km of any signature? So that they are used only in fleet fights and other more unpredictable situations.


This could fix a lot of potential issues


They are allready nerfed into oblivion, so why not. Make sure there is no viable use cases left at all.



The only thing I see as overnerfed is the duration. 1 hour might be too short. But they can still be sued to lay on traps, cover fleet compositions, make a mining op look same as a combat fleet.

Everything like that works. The nerfs removed the capability of making clearly undesirable things, like blocking wormholes for example or hiding all signatures of a system.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#685 - 2014-01-09 13:41:54 UTC
Nicen Jehr wrote:
I think the one minute minute activation on the MJU is too long.

The coolest aspect of these, to me, would be using them for fast travel and tactical repositioning. But with such a long delay AND frigate EHP these will seem gimped. Also, sitting in space for one minute happens all the time, but it feels a lot more boring when a game mechanic requires it.

I would like to see the activation time reduced to 30 or 40 seconds.

Oh, also, scrams (but not long points) should prevent ships from jumping with MJU.



they do, but with the earlier 20 sec deployment time. That means that ships with long points would be unable to catch anyone ever again.


These structures are still very powerful... when used in preparation of the battlefield. They could be placed around a POS.. at distance to get a huge advantage on a defensive battle. They can be used by laying traps very well. They are jus t not as powerful get me out of jail cards anymore.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Erasmus Phoenix
Avalanche.
#686 - 2014-01-09 13:41:55 UTC
That balancing is definitely progress, yes. I would say that it should not be able to be anchored within at the very least FW plexes, though I suppose the need is less so now that it can't be a solo pilot who is still getting all the information he was anyway.

I'd be interested to see how much effect a whole ton of remote ECCM would have... Is it stacking penalised? I'm assuming that's what Fozzie was referring to when he said "go ahead and apply as many as you want", suggesting that you won't be able to have any real effect regardless of what you try.

I think the only real issues left are looking at whether or not the MSI should be anchorable within a plex, and looking at the issue of bubbles within MSIs. I agree with other comments that anchorable bubbles should be off limits, but I'm torn between having dictors/hictors break the MSI's effect or saying that hictors at least should be fair game since they require active piloting to work.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#687 - 2014-01-09 13:44:24 UTC
Btw, can any FW dweller explain me why they think this still does nto help with FW issues? I ran FW for some time, but the metagame might have changed a lot...

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Erasmus Phoenix
Avalanche.
#688 - 2014-01-09 13:48:54 UTC
The new version is basically going to act as a great big "DON'T COME IN HERE" button in FW, to be fair. A big fleet can use MSIs since they can have a scout on the acceleration gate, but a single farmer can't use one because he'd have to give up his own intel completely. That does seem more balanced, however it comes back to the problem of it making fights less likely to happen.
Padanemi
Perkone
Caldari State
#689 - 2014-01-09 13:53:27 UTC
I believe both of these proposed modules have a potential to be used in "creative ways that enrich the sandbox".

I also believe both of these proposed modules have a HIGH potential to be used in ways that take the fun out of encounters/situations.

Mobile Scan Inhibitor

Blobs hiding in an unscanable bubble? Tons of FUN for everyone involved, right?

Spamming the hell out of contested null systems with these? 5 minutes spent by 2-3 people warping to random spots in system to anchor them can ruin the evening of hundreds of players.

Changing the battlefield you say..? Really? For better or for worse?

Transition: instead of having a fleet of cloakable ships with all their skill grinding, cost, pilot experience, fitting and ship limitations, you now just haul 1-2 units in the cargo of someone. Yeah... that will enrich the sandbox alright.

Mobile Micro Jump Unit

Why fit a MJD in the doctrine fleet when you can have a couple of these hauled with the fleet? Transition: Ability of a whole fleet to Micro Jumpdrive just went from slot+fitting+skill+cost(fleet size) to cost(2-3)+cargo space in 1-2 ships.

Reducing the actual game value of a hard-designed module in a swift "feature". Well done.


On a more important note, I believe developer time and effort should focus on fixing bugs and/or things that already exist in the game and don't work well, instead of adding even more "features" that can potentially add to the pool of "things that need fixing".
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#690 - 2014-01-09 13:56:24 UTC
Erasmus Phoenix wrote:
The new version is basically going to act as a great big "DON'T COME IN HERE" button in FW, to be fair. A big fleet can use MSIs since they can have a scout on the acceleration gate, but a single farmer can't use one because he'd have to give up his own intel completely. That does seem more balanced, however it comes back to the problem of it making fights less likely to happen.



mm understand that it will not help the solo player ok. But can't the solo player just continue to run them as he does now? The Jump stuff I don't see much effect on FW since there is mostly frigates and destroyers and those can already warp fast like hell.


IF at least the unrestricted sites were more valauble, thsoe would be the places to use the MSI.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
#691 - 2014-01-09 13:59:11 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Theon Severasse wrote:
gascanu wrote:
Quote:
As for the bubbles, I would say make it so it can't be anchored within the radius of the bubble effect (of a T2 Large). Now obviously people who have a bit of common sense are thinking "But Theon, surely they can just anchor the bubble in front of/behind the MSI!", which is true, but at the very least you are going to know that you are warping into a bubble trap, in the same way that you do now. Again I reiterate, facechecking is not a good way of gathering intel, and requiring a player to have particular character skills and be in a particular ship is not a good idea.


how about dictor bubbles?


Forgot about them. Personally I would say that if a dictor or hictor uses it's bubble then the MSI should become disabled until that bubble is either taken down or expires. Hictors could obviously still use focused points without disabling the effect.

If a camp decides to put a Hitor in one, that should be fine, as it is a manned ship and not just a deployable structure.
But I agree with not being able to put a deployable bubble inside of one, while being reduced in the ability due to the now 1hr life span, it still will be used as a stall tactic.



let me put it this way:

you are in a farming station sistem, and there is a hostile roaming gang in the area, several jumps out; you undock your fleet, go into an anomally, anchor a msi and a bubble, and wait; at some point the roaming gang will come into your system, theyr scout will scan and see the msi in the annomally, and there is where he's troubles began:
being a st system, he have no way to know how many ppl are doked;
and if he's in anything else than a nullified cloacky t3, if he choose to check that anomally with a msi in it, he's dead; even in an inty he will have to chose between dieing to a smartbomb bs as he's landing, or to a fast locking sniper that will puff him out of the sky in 2"
this msi thing give way too much options to the defenders while leaving the attackers with only one: use a nullified cloacky t3 for scouting
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#692 - 2014-01-09 14:00:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Mobile Micro Jump Unit

I think all these changes nicely balance this unit out.

CCP Fozzie wrote:
Mobile Scan Inhibitor
We're increasing the build cost to ~15m isk.
We're decreasing the structure's lifetime in space to 1 hour.
We're increasing the volume of the structure to 100m3.

These are the three changes I'm not sure about. I think that for a 1 hour lifespan these structures should be a lot smaller (25-50m3) and cheaper (~1-2m ISK).

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Sura Sadiva
Entropic Tactical Crew
#693 - 2014-01-09 14:03:02 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Btw, can any FW dweller explain me why they think this still does nto help with FW issues? I ran FW for some time, but the metagame might have changed a lot...


Personally most of the time I use FW plexes to search for suitable 1vs1 fight. I already have to avoid: people known for using link, people known for always call for help (to deal with a T1 frigates) and so on.
If I see an MSI deployed in the system and several hostiles I've to assume they are up for a blob trap and skip to the next system.

Also in FW there're a lot of solo/small gang, having dedicated scouts is not that common, as well as the luxury of a probe launcher. So MSI become unbalanced and hard to deal with, they will simply act as deadlocks.
Sura Sadiva
Entropic Tactical Crew
#694 - 2014-01-09 14:17:42 UTC
Also, the one inside the FW plex already have all the advantages:
- can see you coming and decide to warp away if the engagment seems not convenient
- can decide the starting range of the fight
- is the one getting the LP reward if nobody chase him.

Adding another one-sided tool like MSI sounds excessive.
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#695 - 2014-01-09 14:21:40 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Ok everyone, here is our first round of changes since the beginning of public feedback. These are some quite large changes but we think the end result is a much stronger design.

Mobile Micro Jump Unit

We're cutting the EHP of the structure by 80%, to 5000hp.
We're increasing the time that the MJU takes to activate to 1 minute.
We're increasing the range at which the MJU can be used to 5000m.
We're increasing the minimum range from other MJU structures to 10km.
We're disabling the ability to jump while cloaked.

Mobile Scan Inhibitor

Ships inside the area of a MSI's effect will have their own directional scanner and probe results disabled.
We're adding a minimum distance of 75km from wormholes.
We're reducing the sensor strength of the structure to 5 and increasing the signature radius to 500. Go ahead and apply as many projected ECCM to that as you want.
We're increasing the build cost to ~15m isk.
We're decreasing the structure's lifetime in space to 1 hour.
Minimum distance to another MSI is now 100km.
We're increasing the volume of the structure to 100m3.


I'll be updating the OP momentarily.


Ouch lol, that is a rude nerf. The MJU seems still fine in some usages, although the ability to jump while cloaked would have certainly created interesting scenarios, even if said scenarios would not occur very often. I'm sad to see you removing it as it could hardly be OP but, why not. The 1minut activation is also a contestable choice. What is preventing some people into using more the mobile structures is their anchoring time. With so little EHP there is really no need to nerf the activation time to a minut, in my opinion.

The Scan inhibitor is even more nerfed. I understand the sensor strength nerf because it was justified. Minimum distance from wormholes, given the structure price and lifetime, is discutable but understandable.
Volume seems too big in my opinion now. Because given its price, you don't want to spam it anyway. Price that increased substantially as well. Will people still use this structure outside of big fleet blobs with big revenues ? I don't know. For instance, I live in low and null sec, and since Rubicon, despite having pariticipated to huge fights against multiple well-known alliances, I never got to see a cyno jammer in action. Nor any of my corp mates. Yet we have killed 56bil worth of assets in the two last weeks of december.
Lifetime of the structure has been shortened without any true reason where a two hours lifetime could be OP. Minimum distance has been increased despite the fact that, again, it wouldn't be OP to put multiple MSI next to eachothers as long as they don't hide eachothers.

So overall, the changes you made are for most part logical to me, but they also seem too radical.

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#696 - 2014-01-09 14:28:05 UTC
Altrue wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Ok everyone, here is our first round of changes since the beginning of public feedback. These are some quite large changes but we think the end result is a much stronger design.

Mobile Micro Jump Unit

We're cutting the EHP of the structure by 80%, to 5000hp.
We're increasing the time that the MJU takes to activate to 1 minute.
We're increasing the range at which the MJU can be used to 5000m.
We're increasing the minimum range from other MJU structures to 10km.
We're disabling the ability to jump while cloaked.

Mobile Scan Inhibitor

Ships inside the area of a MSI's effect will have their own directional scanner and probe results disabled.
We're adding a minimum distance of 75km from wormholes.
We're reducing the sensor strength of the structure to 5 and increasing the signature radius to 500. Go ahead and apply as many projected ECCM to that as you want.
We're increasing the build cost to ~15m isk.
We're decreasing the structure's lifetime in space to 1 hour.
Minimum distance to another MSI is now 100km.
We're increasing the volume of the structure to 100m3.


I'll be updating the OP momentarily.


Ouch lol, that is a rude nerf. The MJU seems still fine in some usages, although the ability to jump while cloaked would have certainly created interesting scenarios, even if said scenarios would not occur very often. I'm sad to see you removing it as it could hardly be OP but, why not. The 1minut activation is also a contestable choice. What is preventing some people into using more the mobile structures is their anchoring time. With so little EHP there is really no need to nerf the activation time to a minut, in my opinion.

The Scan inhibitor is even more nerfed. I understand the sensor strength nerf because it was justified. Minimum distance from wormholes, given the structure price and lifetime, is discutable but understandable.
Volume seems too big in my opinion now. Because given its price, you don't want to spam it anyway. Price that increased substantially as well. Will people still use this structure outside of big fleet blobs with big revenues ? I don't know. For instance, I live in low and null sec, and since Rubicon, despite having pariticipated to huge fights against multiple well-known alliances, I never got to see a cyno jammer in action. Nor any of my corp mates. Yet we have killed 56bil worth of assets in the two last weeks of december.
Lifetime of the structure has been shortened without any true reason where a two hours lifetime could be OP. Minimum distance has been increased despite the fact that, again, it wouldn't be OP to put multiple MSI next to eachothers as long as they don't hide eachothers.

So overall, the changes you made are for most part logical to me, but they also seem too radical.



The cyno jammer was made mostly for low sec people. So that batphoning 0.0 alliances woudl not destroy their fun.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#697 - 2014-01-09 14:30:41 UTC
gascanu wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Theon Severasse wrote:
gascanu wrote:
Quote:
As for the bubbles, I would say make it so it can't be anchored within the radius of the bubble effect (of a T2 Large). Now obviously people who have a bit of common sense are thinking "But Theon, surely they can just anchor the bubble in front of/behind the MSI!", which is true, but at the very least you are going to know that you are warping into a bubble trap, in the same way that you do now. Again I reiterate, facechecking is not a good way of gathering intel, and requiring a player to have particular character skills and be in a particular ship is not a good idea.


how about dictor bubbles?


Forgot about them. Personally I would say that if a dictor or hictor uses it's bubble then the MSI should become disabled until that bubble is either taken down or expires. Hictors could obviously still use focused points without disabling the effect.

If a camp decides to put a Hitor in one, that should be fine, as it is a manned ship and not just a deployable structure.
But I agree with not being able to put a deployable bubble inside of one, while being reduced in the ability due to the now 1hr life span, it still will be used as a stall tactic.



let me put it this way:

you are in a farming station sistem, and there is a hostile roaming gang in the area, several jumps out; you undock your fleet, go into an anomally, anchor a msi and a bubble, and wait; at some point the roaming gang will come into your system, theyr scout will scan and see the msi in the annomally, and there is where he's troubles began:
being a st system, he have no way to know how many ppl are doked;
and if he's in anything else than a nullified cloacky t3, if he choose to check that anomally with a msi in it, he's dead; even in an inty he will have to chose between dieing to a smartbomb bs as he's landing, or to a fast locking sniper that will puff him out of the sky in 2"
this msi thing give way too much options to the defenders while leaving the attackers with only one: use a nullified cloacky t3 for scouting

Correct, which is why I am against drag bubbles. But a heavy interdictor is not a drag bubble, it also requires the capping fleet to dedicate a ship.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Theon Severasse
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#698 - 2014-01-09 14:41:15 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
gascanu wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Theon Severasse wrote:
gascanu wrote:


how about dictor bubbles?


Forgot about them. Personally I would say that if a dictor or hictor uses it's bubble then the MSI should become disabled until that bubble is either taken down or expires. Hictors could obviously still use focused points without disabling the effect.

If a camp decides to put a Hitor in one, that should be fine, as it is a manned ship and not just a deployable structure.
But I agree with not being able to put a deployable bubble inside of one, while being reduced in the ability due to the now 1hr life span, it still will be used as a stall tactic.



let me put it this way:

you are in a farming station sistem, and there is a hostile roaming gang in the area, several jumps out; you undock your fleet, go into an anomally, anchor a msi and a bubble, and wait; at some point the roaming gang will come into your system, theyr scout will scan and see the msi in the annomally, and there is where he's troubles began:
being a st system, he have no way to know how many ppl are doked;
and if he's in anything else than a nullified cloacky t3, if he choose to check that anomally with a msi in it, he's dead; even in an inty he will have to chose between dieing to a smartbomb bs as he's landing, or to a fast locking sniper that will puff him out of the sky in 2"
this msi thing give way too much options to the defenders while leaving the attackers with only one: use a nullified cloacky t3 for scouting

Correct, which is why I am against drag bubbles. But a heavy interdictor is not a drag bubble, it also requires the capping fleet to dedicate a ship.


But it acts like one. If you have a hictor in an MSI with it's bubble up, people who are outside lose the ability to safely check without using a nullified T3. You can't use a Covops (the very ship that is designed for scouting) since it will get dragged and probably decloaked and killed.

Inties can be used, but mean that the people inside know that they have been scouted.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#699 - 2014-01-09 14:43:49 UTC
Solution: bubbles originating inside the area of effect of the MSI have no effect.

The changes look excellent so far Fozzie.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#700 - 2014-01-09 14:59:20 UTC
This module gave-me an wild idea. A field where inside it.. ALL ships are identified to other ships as a single type of ship randomly selected from the pool of ships there.


Nothign could make battles more chaotic :)

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