Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Extended Jump Range for caps in system :DD Cooooooolll +1 All this sounds super cool



I was afraid you would remove local in null sec, but pin pointing cloked duders /o\ awwww yissss

+1

What about usage fee of gates? Or any bilateral standing dependancies?
How can I get reward of structures fuel usage, if no fees are planned. Will NPCs claim tax for gate usage?

Which NPC corp will claim sovereignity in highsec systems and get control of gates?

What about different size and costs depending on jump range of gates?

Acceleration gates for everyone?

Are there plans for medium (constellation-), large (regional) and extra-large (interregional) jumpgates? Or anything else size depending on inter-system jump ranges of gates? You know... size matters!

What about gate count limits in highsec systems?

What about corp security status and/or corp faction standing related limits for structures/gates?

If anybody can deny the use of gate in case of bad standing, how can I reach a destination if the system is not chained elswhere? HighSec usable jumpdrives or covered jumdrives for small ships?

I think a lot of quwstions will come up, if structures become destructable in general in highsec space.

Observatory array's ability to pinpoint cloaked ships should be a timed ping forcing active cloakers, such as bomber fleets, to move location immediately after the ping. Or simply add a forced idle log out like every other MMO in the market has which will solve the issue of afk cloaky campers. I honestly don't see the point in this structure. You're adding a layer of complexity for the sake of it. You should be streamlining the information we have on screen, not adding to it.

Ok so a few small ideas off my head before I run around and forget.

Counter Mind Link Radar
Super accurate system scans that can only pinpoint warpins on active fleet boosting ships. If a mind link comes on in system with it, ships withing a small range of the structure can warp to it as if it was combat probed out.

Decoy Scan Counter Measures
Simple deployable or maybe a bit larger. Creates false Dscan results with the real ones if ships use Dscan in its area of effect (system wide or like 20aus maybe).

If you actually read the thread you'll notice that my first post was that it should not be possible to be safer than TODAY.

At this point, your compatriots jumped all over me. So tell me, who has the agenda?

Less safe, not more was what I said.

And as I said, was promptly jumped on. Who did the jumping and as to their reasons is nothing I can influence however so I'll kindly ask for the removal of the conspiracy/bias/"agenda" tinfoil hattery you all have got going in here.

We do not need MORE safety out in null.

I mean just look at the ideas on this PAGE alone (or prior page, if this wraps). Find cloakers, easy scanning, fake dscan results. All conducive to a nice, safe blanket with which to sit in almost complete safety. None of these promote conflict, none of these are conflict drivers. These are ALL designed to make space SAFER.

So do we really need more safety out there, is that what you're all telling me?

The "I h8s teh claockey camperz" portion of the player base must be creaming their sweat pants over this.

Having a large structure that is able to facilitate locating cloaked ships in system does make sense; see submarine warfare.

I could see these structures at their base level being able to detect the presence of a cloaked ship in-system, but not be able to show where they are. By adding service modules, rigs and/or modules this ability gets more precise or powerful.

A moderately equipped OA could give enough intel to friendlies on its own to get a general area for a cloaked ship then facilitate an active friendly player in tracking it down. The simple way for the cloaked player to avoid this would be to change position. Hence, AFK campers would be the most vulnerable.

A very specialized OA with all slots dedicated to locating cloaked ships could go so far as to make a cloaked ship "shimmer" for a couple seconds when it the OA "pings".

The OAs could also be used like scan probes. Deploy a main OA then smaller ones around the given solar system like one would deploy probes. If players wanted to protect the space directly surrounding something important, like an asteroid field or an Admin structure, then the smaller OAs could be anchored close by and offer the highest resolution/effectiveness for that area. If players want to secure a wider area, then the resolution wouldn't be as good. Sure, some players might go hog wild and anchor dozens of OAs in a system, but its their ISK and their choice. I see this as an extreme example.

To be fair, however, there should be a way through rigs, skills, specialized ships, modules or a combination of all of them for a cloaking player to decrease the effect an OA (or group of OAs) has on the given ship. If an OA's strength is less than the cloak strength, the cloaked ship is harder to find. If it is more, then the cloaked ship is easier to find.

But timers, forced decloaking, activity sensors are all a resounding NO. Those are all non-active mechanics. It just takes what is perceived as unbalanced and puts it on the other side.

Agreed — anti-cloaking measures should absolutely require active players (potentially multiple) to operate, and an active cloaker should be able to evade the measures, perhaps trivially.

Being able to affect wormholes with a structure would be really awesome. Like extending the mass limit by reducing the lifetime and vice-versa, for example, or having a structure capable of reading the remaining time and mass.

it is not a good idea to use the number of how many people pointed out the obvious flaws in your reasoning as support for that reasoning