Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Ablative armor: is usually a ceramic shield that takes kinetic force and reduces it by shattering and deflecting the kinetic forces away from the structure being protected.

Ganking: Killing a hauler in a way that you get the loot before concord can stop you. Usually considered naughty and generates carebear tears.

I propose a module called ablative armor. It would be very heavy with a flat mass multiplier. The larger the ship the bigger the penalty on mass and agility. Its benifits would be applied when the ship receives Incoming damage. So when the gank happens 100% of the damage is mitigated for 1 full server tick. Ablative armor can do this 3 times. or a max of 3 server ticks in a row. This allows concord a minimum 3 extra seconds to respond to a criminal ganking action.

Further explaining the 3 seconds:

When confronted with a solo ganker The module is most effective as you basically negate his first 3 attacks. Again this protects haulers and discourages gaking. allows for logi reaction and concord response.

VS ganking fleets your going to receive a huge alpha and large amount of followup damage every second after that. The module would be less effective vs this style gank and likely only delay your death by 3 full seconds. However this is 3 move seconds than you normally would have had, allowing the possibility for concord to show up in time. This module isn't intended to completely END ganking, but reduce it, or discourage it. If you give the victims a little bit more survival the gankers will have to put in more effort. Easy isk is Easy isk, make it a little more changeling for them.

Other uses:
Would be costly to use vs PVE rats and likely pointless. However rats do spawn in low, null on gates and this module might be useful to bypass them with less risk.

Could be fitted on a rolling orca to force collapse holes. Not its intended purpose, but an obvious use.



Further details/description.

-Uses a Large or huge amount of Nanite paste to repair the ablative armor. Think safety has a price tag on it

-Restrictions Needed: med haulers, transports, (ie no frigs, dessies or cruisers ) (anti-gank, not pro-gank)
interesting if people used them in large battleship fleets, As it would protect vs alpha strikes and give logi reaction time. This may or may not be popular due to the agility and mass hit. Certainly would not be popular on blops. That detail would need further consideration, or possibly just further restricting it to haulers and transports.

-Obviously restricted to 1 of this module type.
- 1 size fits all, no need to make different sizes if the penalty is a flat mass multiplier.

Idea Variations:
if 3 (1) seconds of full mitigation is over powered, a 100%, -60%, -40% stackable resistance buff ( or similar idea with different %'s) might be a possible consideration.

All this would do is give you 3 more seconds of staring at your ship being bumped before it gets destroyed.

It is easily circumvented and provides nothing to counter ganks.

This proposed module appears fairly easy to circumvent. I can't help but wonder how many would use it considering the potential increase to journey times that the mass and agility penalty would bring to already slow and cumbersome hulls and the added window of vulnerability caused by the increased align time to the next gate.

Not supported

Ganking: 2) killing a hauler in a way intentionally coded into the game by CCP in order to provide risk to haulers in highsec. Also known as 'working as intended'.

If you want to make haulers safer, why don't you just buff their EHP? Why add another module, which benefits can be bypassed and whose fitting costs are so high as to likely never be used? A Deep Space Transport is already nearly ungankable with that overheat bonus, so I see no need for such a module.

-1

Totally off subject, but I don't think that the Devs intend for new players to leave the game because they can't move any of their stuff anywhere without being ganked.

I am totally for any new mechanic or module that discourages "ganking," specifically ganking in high security space. If we (the older players) want this game to grow, thrive and continue on for another 10 years, we need to get past the "working as intended" Bull-Shoit surrounding ganking.

Ganking should not be a source of income for bored players looking for content. It should be a mechanic that is possible if one group is trying to disrupt another group for a specific purpose (FW, wars and the like). Moreover, we, as a community of players, should think about the overall health of the game, including the new player experience and choose to NOT grief the new player and then call him stupid for doing something that he had no idea was stupid in the first place.

/steps down from soap box

+1 from me, even if there are big issues with the specifics.

It seems you are mistaken. Suicide ganking is very much an intended mechanic in highsec. The "Devs" have been quite concerned about it existing as a source of risk in highsec (2012 CSM minutes, pg 59, for one example but there are more).

Of course we should not insult new players (or any player for that matter) but criminals are intended to exist in Eve. Crimewatch mechanics have been specifically coded to allow it as nowhere is suppose to be safe in this game. New players should be educated to this fact and taught how to be safe. Highsec has never been safer, and it is possible to avoid almost all risk of suicide ganking if you just spend a modicum of effort.

CCP recognizes that there are very good reasons why a PvP sandbox game like Eve cannot have any safe areas. It would be best to spend your time educating new players to this reality rather than futilely petitioning CCP to change the core of their game.

Ok critique me on my wording, but not the idea. I was thinking that the multiplier number would be a constant. I'll be more careful with my non mathematical knowledge in the future

Otherwise, I'm not seeing the positive response I expected.

I think 3 seconds extra time for concord is huge, anything more than that would seem broken to me. Not a big deal for med sized haulers, but it actually takes a bit of time to take down the larger ships and concord could take out several ships in that extra time. I'm basing my opinion on what I viewed during "Burn Amarr", and heard on the Goon Twitch feeds.

/thread


CCP Falcon has stated very plainly that the "solution" to the "problem" of suicide ganking is to "bring more guns". In other words...working as intended.

It's surprisingly easy to move stuff in hisec relatively safely once you learn how.

Granted, I don't think CCP intends for new players to leave, they probably intend for them to learn.

I came here to post that. Give me back my thoughts. >:[

as an Industrialist and sometimes casual miner............*sigh* *shakes head*

Whats wrong with your people acting like sheep....theis type of thing would never work...take 1 cat with ungrouped guns...bam module broken.

Quit thinking in passive defense and start thinking about being proactive....sheesh I am deeply embarassed that my profession is gaged in the same class as the rest of you and starting to border on shame........get a clue and start playing EvE correctly.

Oh yeah.....No -1