These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Remove interceptor immunity to HIC bubbles (part of HIC rebalance?)

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
NEONOVUS
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#21 - 2014-06-04 16:08:25 UTC
Your issue is you are treating the symptom not the cause

Lets step back and look at lowsec
Diverse fleets and ships, differing battles and it still has the urded camps
Now why is this not the case in nullsec?

Largely its the bubbles
That is the fear of them and their actuality

Dont want to take something that cant escape a bubble, it will just die
If in a bubble high odds of death if I cant get out fast

So you are left only seeing ships that can reliably get out of a bubble for small gangs and blob, we dont care, for larger

So again the real issue is that bubbles are actually the issue
They make people interested in free roams and small gang, make people want fast and cloaky ships and generally are the driver behind all the complaints


So simply, get rid of stationary bubbles, perhaps convert them into deployable scram or disruptor towers so you can nuke and escape

Now you have changed the perceived risk and people start fighting more

Then its just hotdrops and n+1 blobs left
Ray Kyonhe
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2014-06-04 16:14:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Ray Kyonhe
Debora Tsung wrote:
"HALP! there's other players in mah yard!" and "Teh others are to clever, nerf brain! BRAINS ARE OP!"

The problem with AFK cloacking is that it doesn't require brains at all. And while it doesn't, it does require some brains and much of effort from those who percieve it as a threat.
And adding some tools to the game, which will be able to combat AFK cloakers won't actually break something. If you want to be AFK, just log off. If you are gathering intel or hunting - be atk. It's not a genious revelation at all, just a common sense.

Survey/voting system inbuilt to the game client: link_Reforming corp and taxation system: link_New PvE content (reward collective gameplay): link
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#23 - 2014-06-04 16:17:20 UTC
Saisin wrote:

I would not remove the bubble immunity, but I would suggest that when a HIC load their bubble mod with a focused script their locking time becomes way faster, and potentially a threat to even the fastest aligning intys.




That's stupid and entirely impractical, thanks to the fact that the server runs on 1-second ticks.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Bohneik Itohn
10.K
#24 - 2014-06-04 16:49:16 UTC
Because blowing up ships is the only way content is made, of course. That pilot couldn't possibly be in the middle of doing something that would allow the whole shipsplosion process to even be possible. Absolutely unfathomable.

If the ceptor has stabs on, he's not doing anything interesting anyways. He's certainly not shooting you.

The Eve universe is frickin' huge, and while travel should always carry some risk, it shouldn't always carry a heavy risk, because then you end up with a gridlocked game. If people start losing too many ships while they are just moving around taking care of the grunt work that they need to do so that they can get back to their pew, people will start huddling up in smaller and smaller areas to do those activities in, until you see absolutely no traffic at all. Enjoy no targets.

Go ahead and let that ceptor pass. If you shoot him while he's trying to do something other than PvP, all you've done is delay the time it takes for him to get back to doing PvP. And now that he knows you're there, he might even bring some good fights your way.

There is no drawback to letting people move THROUGH your sphere of influence who have no intention of creating conflict. When they MOVE IN, or TAKE FROM, or CONTEST that sphere of influence, you have just begun an interesting piece of content.

Is alphaing a non-aggressor really that interesting that you've got to request balance changes to get more of it? Is it exciting, knowing you will never see returning fire from those WCS'd interceptors because they will never be able to lock you before popping?

Can't you think of anything more engaging to add to the game? Let's work on that, shall we?

Ray Kyonhe wrote:
Debora Tsung wrote:
"HALP! there's other players in mah yard!" and "Teh others are to clever, nerf brain! BRAINS ARE OP!"

The problem with AFK cloacking is that it doesn't require brains at all. And while it doesn't, it does require some brains and much of effort from those who percieve it as a threat.
And adding some tools to the game, which will be able to combat AFK cloakers won't actually break something. If you want to be AFK, just log off. If you are gathering intel or hunting - be atk. It's not a genious revelation at all, just a common sense.


Stay on topic, and don't be wrong please.....

Wait, CCP kills kittens now too?!  - Freyya

Are you a forum alt? Have you ever wondered why your experience on the forums is always so frustrating and unrewarding? This may help.
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#25 - 2014-06-04 18:35:24 UTC
Removed some off topic posts.

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

Senior Lead

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#26 - 2014-06-04 18:45:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Debora Tsung
Arean Proktor wrote:
... Debora your post has nothing to do with Ray´s post at all... just make you look ... not smart at all... if you Quote a post read it or gtfo


I'll just quote a part of his post here: " [...] This total AFK immunity [...]"

EDIT: But that's not what I wanted to say at all, I think I'll just ignore anything that has anything to do with AFK cloaking. Until there's a new thread for that.

What I actuall wanted to say:

The Problem, for some, is that an interceptor is a highly specialized ship and it's specialization is "be there first" "Gtfo fastest" "tackle it and hope the cavalry will be there in time (a.k.a. friendly gang)".

And because it's so specialized it is really easy to equip it in a way to make that possible and with just that little bit more effort it can be really really good at it's job.

So, if you want to catch an interceptor, just be equipped for that. Tripple scramblers remote sensor boosters aimed at your designated tackler for faster targeting, etc. good ships for designated tacklers: other interceptors. Especially those with scrambler range bonus. Basically anything that has fast lock times and a bonus to scrambler range.

Don't like? well, suck it up. Interceptors are made to catch other ships, that does not exclude other interceptors. Straight

Stupidity should be a bannable offense.

Fighting back is more fun than not.

Sticky: AFK Cloaking Thread It's not pretty, but it's there.
Kaerakh
Obscure Joke Implied
#27 - 2014-06-04 19:27:33 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
*Snip* Please refrain from discussing forum moderation. ISD Ezwal.

As I said, this is not a new idea. 1 - 2 - 3

You can catch fast aligning ships if you have a high enough scan resolution(sensor boosters(sebos) are a great way to do that). It happens in low sec gate camps all the time where they don't have the luxury of bubbles. If you make one type of bubble better than the others then automatically all other bubbles become obsolete and unused(that's bad).

Schrodinger's Hot Dropper

The Fate of Forum Alts

Guaranteed Success
Titus Tallang
EVE University
Ivy League
#28 - 2014-06-04 21:01:22 UTC
If a ship's align time drops to 2 seconds or below (easily achievable in most Interceptors by using Inertial Stabilizers), you cannot activate a warp disruptor/scrambler before it enters warp even with infinite scan resolution due to the way server ticks work.

Double-check your facts, please.

Director of Education - EVE University - http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/
Kaerakh
Obscure Joke Implied
#29 - 2014-06-04 21:59:17 UTC
Titus Tallang wrote:
If a ship's align time drops to 2 seconds or below (easily achievable in most Interceptors by using Inertial Stabilizers), you cannot activate a warp disruptor/scrambler before it enters warp even with infinite scan resolution due to the way server ticks work.

Double-check your facts, please.


In spite of what you are saying it does happen. Watch Jita undock or check the gatecamps in Perimeter, you'll see some inhuman clicking and lock speeds there. Doesn't matter how fast you align because the very mechanic you're siting as proof sometime swings the other way. Anyone who actually has lowsec pvp experience knows that fast alignment doesn't guarantee safety.

Schrodinger's Hot Dropper

The Fate of Forum Alts

Guaranteed Success
Ray Kyonhe
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#30 - 2014-06-04 22:27:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Ray Kyonhe
Kaerakh wrote:

In spite of what you are saying it does happen. Watch Jita undock or check the gatecamps in Perimeter, you'll see some inhuman clicking and lock speeds there

Couldn't all those incidents be attributed to trivial human factor, like pilot's own erorr?

Survey/voting system inbuilt to the game client: link_Reforming corp and taxation system: link_New PvE content (reward collective gameplay): link
Titus Tallang
EVE University
Ivy League
#31 - 2014-06-04 22:40:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Titus Tallang
We ran Singularity tests on this a few months back. Had a 2sec align Interceptor warp from gate cloak while a second pilot had an auto-clicking tool spam click the overview at 50 clicks per second (with nothing except "Interceptors" ticked) with a warp disruptor pending activation ("flashing").

We kept doing this until we had a sample of 20 test runs where the Interceptor actually jumped in within disruptor range. As expected, not a single disruption attempt succeeded - the lock would always complete, but the module activation would fail with a "Target is invulnerable." error message.

Now, this might not be considered a conclusive sample by some, of course. Feel free to run your own tests to refute the claim.


PS: You wouldn't be getting a 2-second align time on the Jita undock, as align time is measured from a standstill. You undock from a station with a certain velocity, thus increasing your align time when the target location is not in-line with the undock vector.

Director of Education - EVE University - http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/
Kaerakh
Obscure Joke Implied
#32 - 2014-06-04 22:53:17 UTC
Ray Kyonhe wrote:
Kaerakh wrote:

In spite of what you are saying it does happen. Watch Jita undock or check the gatecamps in Perimeter, you'll see some inhuman clicking and lock speeds there

Couldn't all those incidents be attributed to trivial human factor, like pilot's own erorr?

I suppose, I wasn't actually piloting the ships that I killed. Roll

Schrodinger's Hot Dropper

The Fate of Forum Alts

Guaranteed Success
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#33 - 2014-06-04 23:50:22 UTC
I railed against it when they said they were giving them bubble immunity and I'll do it now. 'dictors should have gotten the bubble immunity, not interceptors. They could have solved the cyno issue easily by making only the ewar ships in the game (t1&t2 frigs, cruisers) the ability to drop a cyno, and nobody would have complained. It's so simple it's a wonder they haven't fixed it and adopted that method.
Gaijin Lanis
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2014-06-04 23:51:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Gaijin Lanis
Kaerakh wrote:
Titus Tallang wrote:
If a ship's align time drops to 2 seconds or below (easily achievable in most Interceptors by using Inertial Stabilizers), you cannot activate a warp disruptor/scrambler before it enters warp even with infinite scan resolution due to the way server ticks work.

Double-check your facts, please.


In spite of what you are saying it does happen. Watch Jita undock or check the gatecamps in Perimeter, you'll see some inhuman clicking and lock speeds there. Doesn't matter how fast you align because the very mechanic you're siting as proof sometime swings the other way. Anyone who actually has lowsec pvp experience knows that fast alignment doesn't guarantee safety.



Jita undock is not a fair indication of time to align/lock/whatever. As even the fastest aligning hull will need more than a server tick to stop, turn around, accelerate to 75% of speed, and warp to the gates that are not directly in line with jita's undock kick. Since all gates in jita are not directly in line with jita's undock kick, anyone who warps directly to a gate will be vulnerable for at least one server tick.

Nothing "superhuman" there, just game physics.


Also, all bubbles are in need of a complete top-down redesign.

The above was written and posted with nothing but love in my heart for all.
w3ak3stl1nk
Hedion University
#35 - 2014-06-05 00:33:56 UTC
Catherine Laartii wrote:
I railed against it when they said they were giving them bubble immunity and I'll do it now. 'dictors should have gotten the bubble immunity, not interceptors. They could have solved the cyno issue easily by making only the ewar ships in the game (t1&t2 frigs, cruisers) the ability to drop a cyno, and nobody would have complained. It's so simple it's a wonder they haven't fixed it and adopted that method.

I think the venture should have got it and not interceptors and not dictor

Is that my two cents or yours?
Previous page12