These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Idea for EWAR on Available CPU/PG
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Garrett Howe
New Eden Shipbuilding
#1 - 2015-08-03 04:10:48 UTC
Not that it is necessary, but what if there were an EWAR module with a chance to hit (like ECM) that disabled a portion of the target ship's CPU or PG? I've always thought being able to knock modules on a ship offline would be an interesting mechanic, if it could be designed to not be completely broken compared to other EWAR.
Khan Wrenth
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#2 - 2015-08-03 04:51:07 UTC
As I sit here and think about it, no matter how you configured it, it would be the most overpowered form of EWAR in the game overnight.

Most ships are fitted with very little CPU or PWG left over. And given that a module takes ~90% capacitor to online in space, you're effectively removing that module from use for the rest of the fight, sans fringe cases. That's huge no matter which module is offlined. Tank module? Prop? Turret? Every one of them is a game-changer.

The only way to counter that is to fit ships that have enough wiggle room to accommodate the loss. That means gimping your fit in advance of the fight, or blinging it out with faction or deadspace modules that use less resources.

This would change the meta overnight. Even if the chance were low, you'd have entire wings of fleets dedicated to fielding two or three modules apiece.

Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
Grezh
Hextrix Enterprise
#3 - 2015-08-03 04:55:45 UTC
So either this is worthless if your opponent has an sma handy, or its overpowered as you randomly gimp the enemy ship and their only option to undo it is to either dock or sit in space waiting for their cap to regen to online the mods.
Garrett Howe
New Eden Shipbuilding
#4 - 2015-08-03 05:06:31 UTC
Khan Wrenth wrote:
As I sit here and think about it, no matter how you configured it, it would be the most overpowered form of EWAR in the game overnight.

Most ships are fitted with very little CPU or PWG left over. And given that a module takes ~90% capacitor to online in space, you're effectively removing that module from use for the rest of the fight, sans fringe cases. That's huge no matter which module is offlined. Tank module? Prop? Turret? Every one of them is a game-changer.

The only way to counter that is to fit ships that have enough wiggle room to accommodate the loss. That means gimping your fit in advance of the fight, or blinging it out with faction or deadspace modules that use less resources.

This would change the meta overnight. Even if the chance were low, you'd have entire wings of fleets dedicated to fielding two or three modules apiece.

Something would definitely have to change with how modules are offlined/onlined. Maybe something where the module would know which module it deactivated, then reactive that module when it turns off. The other way would be, rather than directly affecting CPU/PG, give the module a random chance to deactivate a module on the target ship, where you could script it to favor offensive, defensive, or propulsion modules, although that seems a bit more convoluted.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2015-08-03 05:37:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Khan Wrenth wrote:
As I sit here and think about it, no matter how you configured it, it would be the most overpowered form of EWAR in the game overnight.

Most ships are fitted with very little CPU or PWG left over. And given that a module takes ~90% capacitor to online in space, you're effectively removing that module from use for the rest of the fight, sans fringe cases. That's huge no matter which module is offlined.

You lack imagination. Just configure the effect to automatically re-online anything it forces offline at the end of the effect.

To clarify, this is how I formulated the solution:
Problem: X effect leads to Y and Y is bad
Solution: make X effect also include the direct prevention of Y

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Lu Ziffer
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#6 - 2015-08-03 05:45:10 UTC
Already exists its called a neutralizer.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#7 - 2015-08-03 07:18:26 UTC
Lu Ziffer wrote:
Already exists its called a neutralizer.


Damnit Lu, you beat me to it.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#8 - 2015-08-03 14:47:01 UTC
No, it should not be possible for a bored EAF pilot to shut down entire ships for giggles, with no real way of preventing or recovering from the effect.
Lucius Kalari
Mass Collapse
It Must Be Jelly Cause Jam Don't Shake
#9 - 2015-08-03 15:30:55 UTC
If we're using ECM as an example, why not instead of turning mods off, have jams work a little differently. Land a solid jam on a ship and that ship as usual can't lock anything, but a partial jam reduces the amount the ship can lock, down to 1 or 2 max, or even maybe reduce the amount they can lock by a percentage e.g a guardian can lock 10 targets, but that gets reduced by 80% leaving it only able to lock 2 targets. Not trying to knock your idea, it just seems a little OP.
Xe'Cara'eos
A Big Enough Lever
#10 - 2015-08-03 20:26:12 UTC
Lucius Kalari wrote:
If we're using ECM as an example, why not instead of turning mods off, have jams work a little differently. Land a solid jam on a ship and that ship as usual can't lock anything, but a partial jam reduces the amount the ship can lock, down to 1 or 2 max, or even maybe reduce the amount they can lock by a percentage e.g a guardian can lock 10 targets, but that gets reduced by 80% leaving it only able to lock 2 targets. Not trying to knock your idea, it just seems a little OP.


how do you lock 0.2 targets? or 1.2 targets, for that matter......

For posting an idea into F&I: come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it..... If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.
Nyalnara
Marauder Initiative
#11 - 2015-08-03 23:31:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Nyalnara
Round to upper value. Or lower. Depend on GameDesigner choice.

French half-noob.

Non, je ne suis pas gentil.