These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

Mobile / Anchor-able Force Field

Author
Amarisen Gream
The.Kin.of.Jupiter
#21 - 2016-02-24 07:00:02 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
Crazy Kitten wrote:
...or are you saying that the whole of eve should be either highsec, lowsec, npc nullsec, sov nullsec or wh space, so that you only have to learn one set of "rules"? in my opinion it is a good thing that this game supports different playstyles and has different areas in the game where one can enjoy those playstyles. these parts have different needs, and thus some items that are only beneficial to some playstyles should be restricted to the areas of the game where that playstyle is intended. sov-holding for example is a valid playstyle choice, but should neither be allowed unrestricted (jita being owned by some alliance isn't a good idea), nor should it be removed. and ideas that only benefit the sov playstyle (not saying that this applies here) are valid suggestions, but if they negativly influence other areas of the game, then they should be restricted in their usage. especially if there's already an established mechanic for that.


I don't know what you are getting at?

Anyhow, a similar mechanic is on the radar for the Rorqual, so let's wait how this pans out and see if there is a need for being invincible just because.



Link for the Rorqual statement please.

"The Lord loosed upon them his fierce anger All of his fury and rage. He dispatched against them a band of Avenging Angels" - The Scriptures, Book II, Apocalypse 10:1

#NPCLivesMatter #Freetheboobs

elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#22 - 2016-02-24 07:20:59 UTC
Amarisen Gream wrote:
elitatwo wrote:
Crazy Kitten wrote:
...or are you saying that the whole of eve should be either highsec, lowsec, npc nullsec, sov nullsec or wh space, so that you only have to learn one set of "rules"? in my opinion it is a good thing that this game supports different playstyles and has different areas in the game where one can enjoy those playstyles. these parts have different needs, and thus some items that are only beneficial to some playstyles should be restricted to the areas of the game where that playstyle is intended. sov-holding for example is a valid playstyle choice, but should neither be allowed unrestricted (jita being owned by some alliance isn't a good idea), nor should it be removed. and ideas that only benefit the sov playstyle (not saying that this applies here) are valid suggestions, but if they negativly influence other areas of the game, then they should be restricted in their usage. especially if there's already an established mechanic for that.


I don't know what you are getting at?

Anyhow, a similar mechanic is on the radar for the Rorqual, so let's wait how this pans out and see if there is a need for being invincible just because.



Link for the Rorqual statement please.


If I am not mistaken it was something CCP Fozzie was mentioning in one of the o7 shows but he didn't say that it will come, only that they are thinking about it.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#23 - 2016-02-24 07:47:13 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
While I don't like this idea the notion of "nope if you didn't get it right in your op so stop trying" is contrary to the point of f&I

Now in cases where people stay having to put a bunch of ridiculous or arbitrary limitations on their idea then it's generally a sign it's just plane bad. But a common restriction found on many items already in game is not unreasonable. ...


It wasn't my intention to shut the idea down or I would have just said so, I quoted one of the things my software development professor said in my first year of college, which I thought was fitting.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Neozblade
Henchmen Incorporated
#24 - 2016-02-24 12:27:53 UTC
I like all the input so far.

I believe for the deployed force fields, they should have all the rules of a Tower POS and all the restrictions of Interdiction bubbles. Not requiring fuel however having an anchor/online delay. Possibly making the size of them even smaller than earlier suggested.

As for the Battleship it should be limited to where it can be deployed, the cost for deployment should high to limit the number of uses in rapid succession and the module should act like the Bastion module with same ship restrictions. Or perhaps even the module itself is what takes damage, thus once the enemy has taken down your shield your module is destroyed, or other wise unusable.

Then with this idea maybe once the force field is erect, it does NOT break target locks and EWAR is still capable of penetrating the shield however the force field can absorb all incoming damage until destroyed.

The idea of having a forward facing ark shield is an interesting thought. Perhaps if this were the course taken, then the shield would allow friendly forces to fire through it and it would act as cover for friendly forces, yet useless if the enemy were to simply go around the ark.

How does this sound now?
Iria Ahrens
Space Perverts and Forum Pirates
#25 - 2016-02-24 14:35:12 UTC
I don't think friendly forces should be able to fire through the shield arc at all.

My choice of pronouns is based on your avatar. Even if I know what is behind the avatar.

Takari
Promised Victorious Entropy
#26 - 2016-02-24 16:37:18 UTC
Being able to safe up on grid just sounds like it's against the spirit of the game.

"Roll the dice, don't think twice. This is the way of things. Welcome to EVE." ~ CCP Falcon

"Good luck, shoot straight and don't back down." - Serendipity Lost

Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#27 - 2016-02-25 03:07:38 UTC
Takari wrote:
Being able to safe up on grid just sounds like it's against the spirit of the game.


Exactly. Why do you think CCP wants to do away with POS' current force field mechanic?

Because it's extremely contrary to the spirit of Eve.

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."

Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
#28 - 2016-02-25 05:09:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Petrified
I don't see much in the way of legs of this idea, but if it were done it should have the following:
1 - ship bound high slot module
2 - places the ship in a form of triage
3 - burns stront
4 - the shields have the same resists as the ship and the strength a quarter of what a small POS can pump out.
5 - standard POS shield mechanics come into play
6 - the module burns out after x amount of time or when the shield is breached. Either way, it works once before it has to be repaired in station.
7 - cannot be activated withing X distance of an anchored structure or celestial - prevents 'bubbling' a gate, wormhole, undock, etc.

edit to add:
8 - only one can be fitted. it can only be fitted on BS class ships.
9 - when the module de-activates it implodes, taking out half the ships armor and hull.

Cloaking is the closest thing to a "Pause Game" button one can get while in space.

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.

Moonlit Raid
Doomheim
#29 - 2016-02-25 19:49:41 UTC
Crazy Kitten wrote:
possible (ab)use scenarios: in highsec missions, bubble the accel gate to prevent ninja looting and mission gankers. in lowsec/null mission running, you'd no longer have to check dscan & local, you'd get a kill notification if anyone was coming for you

A gates activation range is far too wide to prevent use with a 20km bubble.

If brute force isn't working, you're just not using enough.

Please Note: Any advice given comes with the caveat that nothing will be suitable for every situation.

Pandora Carrollon
Provi Rapid Response
#30 - 2016-02-25 21:10:07 UTC
From a game mechanic perspective, generally you wouldn't allow something mobile like a battleship to do something like this unless that was about ALL that ship could do. At that point, just make it an 'industrial' ship, akin to a mining barge (which is just a dedicated industrial for mining) that militaries build to do this function. The larger the ship class, the larger the field it can cast. You could even have a frigate sized one of these critters that could cover a small mining operation in an asteroid field that could suck up some damage but would take the first hit.

It really has two game effects:

Removes surprise so kills like those on small groups from gangs of covert ops ships should drop.

Makes for some tactical protection options of areas that currently don't exist as well as increases the sheer amount of shenanigans that can be and have to be taken into consideration before implementation. (A lot of these have already been pointed out but guarantee there's about double or triple that number out there to be tried.)

Fleet actions won't be impacted as much, it's just a minor barrier for an attacking fleet to overcome, no different than a POS.

My suggestion is that it be a dedicated ship that is DESTROYED when the shield is forced down (call it Thermal Overload, whatever) so it's not used lightly. Make it relatively expensive to build, some exotic materials, high priced blueprints, whatever. This baby should cost about as much as the best fully equipped ship in the size class currently does. Again, this will restrict it from being used for stupid crazy stuff. Long/Expensive training curve to use it.

As far as HiSec, LoSec and Null sec rules go, just make it an offensive action when its erected. Concord will deal with it in HiSec, and local Police could deal with it around stations and gates in LoSec. NullSec, all bets are off.
Praal
Bearded BattleBears
#31 - 2016-02-26 20:50:55 UTC
I think the bubble working as a POS adds too many complexities that need to be worked around.

What I think would add some interesting gameplay elements would be a module that allows the ship to extends its own shield in a bubble. The bubble would not affect targetting, movement, jump, etc. but would take damage first. Esentially the protecting ship would use its own shields as a shared buffer for all nearby ships. Module would have drawbacks like no remote assistance, fuel and no-movement while active (for the host ship).

Since other ships can enter/exit at will, it eliminates the need to prevent movement-barrier dickery.

It also makes usage more tactical for all sides, because enemies can enter the bubble to benefit from the same protection, friendlies trade the ability to be mobile for the protection, the shielding ship has to choose when and where to activate and does so in a balance of essentially becoming primary with no ability to get reps until the cycle ends.
Neozblade
Henchmen Incorporated
#32 - 2016-02-28 17:17:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Neozblade
Bump
Previous page12