These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Limited Sleeper Caches - feedback

Author
Matt Faithbringer
YOLO so no taxes please
#1 - 2014-11-11 18:59:22 UTC
First I would like to say that I love the idea this site brings into the game. Need for both relic and data analyzers, the two room progression, hacking in order to disable environmental damage etc. It brings nice PvE element which is solvable via hacking instead of firepower, which is great.

But CCP, really, I just don't get why restrict it to frigate class ships. I read the argument about difficulty of scaling damage with ship class, but is it really necessary? Can't you just apply damage based on signature? Code for that must be already in the game (missiles, bombs). Can't you just make plasma cloud into something like periodically exploding bomb with lower damage or something?

It would actually make a sense from logic point of view, since bigger ship has bigger surface area hence more plasma gets into contact with the hull resulting in more damage.

It would put shield tanked ships into possible disadvantage (larger signature), but it's really that big disadvantage?

Did I overlooked something which makes this approach impossible? Or why it wasn't implemented like this?

TL;DR: Let cruisers and above into Limited Sleeper Caches and change environmental damage from solid DPS into dps based on signature, similar to how bombs works.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#2 - 2014-11-11 19:09:38 UTC
Matt Faithbringer
YOLO so no taxes please
#3 - 2014-11-11 19:11:29 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:


I thought it's deployed on Tranquility now.. So "Test server feedback" didn't seem like right place to put it into.. Since I never was on test server
Komi Toran
Perkone
Caldari State
#4 - 2014-11-11 19:13:56 UTC
Matt Faithbringer wrote:
It would put shield tanked ships into possible disadvantage (larger signature), but it's really that big disadvantage?

Considering two of those slots are taken up with the necessary data and relic analyzers, and likely an additional one for a propulsion mod... yeah.

Plus fourth for cargo scanner so you aren't risking your ship for an empty can. I'm sorry, who's shield tanking in these sites again?
Matt Faithbringer
YOLO so no taxes please
#5 - 2014-11-11 20:01:18 UTC
Komi Toran wrote:
Matt Faithbringer wrote:
It would put shield tanked ships into possible disadvantage (larger signature), but it's really that big disadvantage?

Considering two of those slots are taken up with the necessary data and relic analyzers, and likely an additional one for a propulsion mod... yeah.

Plus fourth for cargo scanner so you aren't risking your ship for an empty can. I'm sorry, who's shield tanking in these sites again?


good point