Player Features and Ideas Discussion

In a discussion, we were talking kiting, and power balances of ships. The advantages and disadvantages of certain fleets. One recently discussed was the benefits and issues that would come with changing the power effect of the tackle mods. All would fit to the standard models of small, med, large, extra large. Fittings to match.

Summary of discussions.

Webs:
Webs could go one of two ways. Perhaps both or a range that lets a player select.

1. Massed based webifiers.
Similar to the way mass affects your prop mods, it also could effect how well it works. Result would be a small web wouldn't be of much effect vs a larger heavy hull. It also means that if somebody expends the high fitting cost for a heavy web, then they would have more power vs a kiter/nano hull.

2. Range based webifiers.
Maintain the standard percentage bonus (or have a fixed mass effect common to all webs of a meta) that scales range with the module size.

Summary. The largest risk is potentially invalidating the kiting fit, but at the same time, it also means a person is giving up valuable fitting to counter kite and to tackle. It offers advantage to large ships slower mobility in fleets by making them more difficult to lock down. The mass scaled one means it is much more risky for small ships to run tackle because little web vs large web. Same goes for range. While range means getting webbed would be more common, it wouldnt be instant death for kiting larger hulls.


Webs and Scrams:
Once more, a few ways to look at this.

1. First is range as above. Else no real changes.

2. Strength
Strength based would be more complex and add another bit of depth to MWD. First thing would be to have the larger the ship, the more basic warp core strength. Disruptors and scrams offering more value of points. This could carry over to supers, etc. In addition, the MWD effect from scrams could also potentially be converted to an MWD reduction related to mass instead of just shutting it down.

Results and consequences?

First, I hope for diversified combat. The biggest consequence would be the invalidation of small/fast hulls. I hope to counter this by having powerful tackle being a fit and not necessarily a tactical choice. Fitting heavy tackle would result in a tradeoff of damage or tank. It would not just be an add in. The kiting fleets still having power in that multiple ships, common in the fast fleets would have the same resulting effect overall and fade off with kills.

As current, specialized tackle ships could get the range/strength/fitting bonuses to compensate.

In terms of capitals, I am thinking of some fun would occur if capitals change for carriers and force auxiliary being of additional role. Possible for dreadnoughts and similar as well.

This was just very raw vetting prior to the posting, so am curious of what people think would be legitimate other pros and cons that can come into play.

You mean make battleships dangerous?

I am on board with the idea that bigger isn't always better, but the idea that a frigate be the most dangerous thing on the field when you are in a battleship is kind of...odd.

I actually think that tackle and much ewar should be sized, but the differences be in range or possibly area of effect (depending on the effect in question). There is not a lot of sense in everything but guns and tank modules having the exact same effect regardless of ship.

That's why I said the differences should perhaps be in range, or area of effect, or some other aspect.

Right now, a battleship poses very little threat to a frigate, whereas a properly fit frigate is quite capable of being a death sentence to a battleship.

That's not in absolutes, there are some combinations that work better against others, but in general a frigate does not really fear a battleship, whereas the battleship better hope his drones get it before it gets him.

I have an idea for a web that uses target mass and signature radius to determine how well it can apply the effect. A lower mass or larger signature radius makes the effect easier to apply.

Simply compare the square root of the target's sig radius (before MWD and target painters) and cube root of the target's mass to the square root of the webifier's effect radius and the cube root of the webifier's effect mass. A medium webifier with an effect radius and mass designed for maximum effect against cruisers would have a reduced effect against frigates and battleships, but it would still have a pretty significant effect.

square root of 4 is 2. The cube root of 8 is 2. (you can extrapolate out the other outcomes from these base data points).

What more do you need?


(I think the idea is silly, this is only help with the math aspect)

Regarding scrams, I would love to see S M L sized scrams (with increased PG for each similar to how ancil armor reps are) with small giving 2 points, medium 4 points, and large 6 points. Each size could give better range as well with small T2 being 9km, medium 15km?, and large 25km?

With that I'd want ship classes to have inherent warp core strength:
Frigate: +0
Dessy: +1
Cruiser: +2
BC: +3
BS: +4

This would mean that you'd really need more than just 1 frigate to hold down a BS, and isn't that the way it should be?


Regarding webs, I am vehemently opposed to having signature radius have anything to do with webs. CCP hates shields as evidenced by their recent remote shield nerf, and the continued use of sig radius for bomb damage application. This is in addition to the fundamental aspects of being locked faster, as well as hit harder by weapon systems. When you have a giant sig, speed is your defense. Being penalized on your speed more for trying to be fast is, in a word, bullshit.

If high sig resulted in being webbed for more, the prevalence of tiny sig armor ships would go from its current state of "dominant" to "cancerous". I would rather see the upcoming web resistance be a thing. BS would have more web resistance (maybe 60%?) than a frigate (0%).

I wouldn't mind seeing S M L webs with longer ranges, but only slightly stronger effects, and concomitant PG needs (similar to the scrams above).

a tackler being able to do his job when it comes to solo BS is fine with me. BS need support or they need to be very careful out there.
The tackler needs some DPS from friends, you need some anti-tackle... i dont see the problem.





this would kill solo/micro/small all together unless you bring a dictor/hic. please dont. -1

I always thought it would be cool if webs worked like lassos, the heavier the thing applying the web the more it slows down the target.

I also thought it would be funny if a Battleship could web a frigate then use its comparatively huge engines to drag the tiny little thing around, but that's probably going too far.