These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

Sensors
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
L'Petit Object
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1 - 2012-01-17 04:00:29 UTC  |  Edited by: L'Petit Object
This is not a "something is worthless" topic. Or is it.

I've attempted to post on this topic twice now, and it got deleted. God (read Capital, you RP bastards) wanted me to refine this post.

This originally started as a critique of Liang's argument against the Imbalance of ECM.

Let's put it on the line:
ECM is not unbalanced.
Either ECM or Sensor Dampeners are Redundant
Tracking Disrupters don't make sense
ECCM doesn't make sense
Sensor attributes don't make sense
Target painters are alright...

So obviously when I talk about sensors I'm talking about EWAR. Why? Because EWAR is one of the few ways player can affect this aspect of our ships. With the exception of turret disrupters. The entire sensor suite could be badly designed and it would matter much, except that we depend on this design for two things: interaction with other players, and supsension of disbelief.

Let's talk about a ship's electronics suite and the suspension of disbelief:
The part we are specifically interested in is Sensors. In order for a ship to see another ship and display it on a hud in the vastness of space it either needs to project energy and have it bounce back informigng the ship and/or passively receive energy. Instead we have the 4 sensor types laid out by ECM and ECCM modules according to race. Ladar, Radar, Gravimetric, and Magnetometric.

Ladar: Scan using wide beam lasers
Radar: scan using radiowaves
Magnetometric: Put a powerful magnet on your ship, and see whereit gets pulled.
Gravimetric: suspend a mass under balanced tension and see how it gets pulled.

First,Gravimetric is kinda bullshit in terms of existing as a radar. movement sensor, guidance device, cool. Radar? no. Second Magnetometric means ships could be built out of mostly ceramics and they would disappear. This would be pointless. Third, all ships would have a combination of these devices used for different purposes, as any RL modern warship does. So the sensor types are obvious fluff. BUT IT GETS WORSE.

Another properties of sensors are scan-resolution, sensor strength, signature radius and sensor range. If I had an active scanning sensor, like LADAR or RADAR, I would have to use energy to create an electromagnetic field. The resolution of my scan would be determined by the sensitivity/sophistication of my receiver/recognition programs and BY THE FREQUENCY OF MY EMISSIONS. High frequency, higher resolution. Higher Frequency, MORE ENERGY for the SAME RANGE.

What this implies is that sensor strength (the more energy sensors can produce) should increase targeting speed or range. The Sensor boosters have the divide correctly. You can either put energy into the system to increase frequency, or amplitude of the signal to increase range or both. But that measn Large ships would be the FASTEST targeting ships, rather than the slowest. This mechanci doesn't make sense. Sure it doesn't have to. Slmaller ships would be still be slower to be targeted. It's just that larger ships would have relatively larger energy reserves and sensing equipment to detect and identify stuff.

On top of it, increasing sensor strength has NO EFFECT on range or targeting speed. ECCM modules, except in relationship to ECM are useless. Obviously increasing the strength of your sensors should have an effect on targeting range and/or scan resolution. BUT IT GETS WORSE.

Ships with higher sensor strength or who are deliberately projecting signals (such as ewar signatures) should have an increase in signature radius. They are what submariners would call, Making a hell of a lot of noise.

Now let's talk sensor dampeners and ECM. Sensor dampeners and ECM do THE SAME THING only one is more extreme. The counter to sensor dampeners and ECM should provide a boost to the other. If it weren't for the fluff, we could argue that ECM is doing a computer hacking thing à la Battlestar Galactica. But the fluff has confused the matter. And if you could hack a ships sensors, why not the rest of its modules, à la Battlestar Galactica?

The system is non-sensical.

Tracking disrupters could, in theory, fool guns by tricking it into believing the signature radius is in the wrong place. But at that point, aren't you just jamming ship sensor? You can see how scan resolution might help with this.

ECM has a lot of advantages and disadvantages. All of them are based on this silly system of sensor type and sensor strength. Both of which I feel I've demonstrated, don't make sense. Sensor Dampeners also have many advantages/disadvantages. Arguing the chance based aspect of it as effed up is meaningless. Turret damage is chance based. ECM is the way it is because it's the only way to differentiate it from sensor dampeners. So the ECM mechanic is crap. It is balanced in the context of non-sensical sensor fluff.
Khrage
#2 - 2012-01-17 05:14:27 UTC
it's a sci-fi game... i know internet space ships is a serious business, but come on - it's a game.
Rel'k Bloodlor
Federation Front Line Report
Federation Front Line
#3 - 2012-01-17 06:52:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Rel'k Bloodlor
Well all forms most likely involve both a passive and active element. The only odd thing with it as is would be that ships don't use all the forms at the same time. Larger ships would produce more background noise making it take longer to sort out the information obtained from the noise. Also turrets them selves have there own sensers built in.

More importantly is what the 4 types of Ewar really are
ECM-stun
Dampeners-sight radius reduced/silence
Turret disruptor-X%(HtH blind) miss chance
Target painters-Defence debuff

They are kind of staples of MMORPG PvP, just with a Si-Fi flavor.

The biggest thing with ECM is the 20 seconds of stunn is way a lot, most games only do stuns of 1-5 seconds.

I wanted to paint my space ship red, but I couldn't find enough goats. 
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
#4 - 2012-01-17 16:48:13 UTC
L'Petit Object wrote:
This is not a "something is worthless" topic. Or is it.


Frankly, I have no idea. What is it?

From what I can tell, it's a critique of flavor text on sensors followed by a slight ECM whine with no substantive suggestions on what to change. Did I miss something?
L'Petit Object
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#5 - 2012-01-18 00:52:55 UTC
Zhilia Mann wrote:
L'Petit Object wrote:
This is not a "something is worthless" topic. Or is it.


Frankly, I have no idea. What is it?

From what I can tell, it's a critique of flavor text on sensors followed by a slight ECM whine with no substantive suggestions on what to change. Did I miss something?


cool
L'Petit Object
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#6 - 2012-01-18 00:55:25 UTC  |  Edited by: L'Petit Object
Rel'k Bloodlor wrote:
Well all forms most likely involve both a passive and active element. The only odd thing with it as is would be that ships don't use all the forms at the same time. Larger ships would produce more background noise making it take longer to sort out the information obtained from the noise. Also turrets them selves have there own sensers built in.

More importantly is what the 4 types of Ewar really are
ECM-stun
Dampeners-sight radius reduced/silence
Turret disruptor-X%(HtH blind) miss chance
Target painters-Defence debuff

They are kind of staples of MMORPG PvP, just with a Si-Fi flavor.

The biggest thing with ECM is the 20 seconds of stunn is way a lot, most games only do stuns of 1-5 seconds.


You make sense, sir.

You know when you edit too many times and you lose your own point. Goddamn forums dropped two previous drafts of this thing because of crap, and now I've already argued myself out of a point.

Anyways, ECCM should boost sensor range or resolution. Currently it does nothing. If this were medevil RPG spaceships, then it wold be like a character wakling around with a bucket of cold-water suspended over their head, just in case someone knocks them out.

Passive targeting should be a hard counter to both ECM and dampeners. Sensor strength should either be done away with, or made to interact with the rest of the sensor suite.

I may have to try this again in a year. Post failed. It happens.
SpaceSquirrels
#7 - 2012-01-18 03:13:50 UTC
ECM should really mess with the hud... Rather can't ID targets, (Name ship class, ranges) cant get FC info primary etc. Doesnt block info rather play havoc.

Or start locking random targets etc.


Things like Sensor dampers seem good rather everything else pales in comparison to ECM.
Ehn Roh
#8 - 2012-01-18 04:22:06 UTC
This is not a complaint about any particular electronic warfare module or how it does or does not get the job done -

I agree with a lot of the OP's general gripes, if not the all of the details. EWAR in this game has always been nonsensical. I don't know if the wacky mechanics came first or the wacky explanations, but it is clear that whoever thought this stuff up really has no understanding of contemporary electronic warfare.

Most of it seems to be a bunch of random effects with labels slapped on, much the same way they used to write Sci-Fi television scripts. "This is the (something) module, it (somethings) the enemy's (something).

Compare that to the more robust spaceship sensor and electronic warfare gameplay mechanics in, say, the Independence War games, where you have varying levels of emissions based on what your ship is doing - shooting, moving, using active sensors (which greatly increase your range), plus various modules to increase your active and passive sensor capabilities, jam enemy sensors, screw with enemy missiles, etc.

It seems like such a wasted mechanic as currently implemented - Instead of EWAR, we get generic fantasy MMO PvP in space with particle effects going off and assorted magical shenannigans. Performance issues would probably get in the way of anything more complicated, but it's pretty obvious that performance concerns are not the reason our EWAR works in the nonsensical ways it does.

Personally, if we have to stick with the same sorts of game systems we have now, I'd like to see it scrapped and replaced with modules that boost your sensors, and other modules that impact the enemy's sensors, with the end result on both ends affecting targeting range, lock time, and increased chance to miss (perhaps offering scripts to min-max those options). The 4 sensor types could stick around for racial or omni jammers, but for sensor upgrades as well... so you get one "good" sensor setup out of the box, but can run a module to boost another one for redundancy against racial EWAR.

This would indeed make ECM and damps redundant, but I don't particularly care about one or the other either way.

Combined with this I'd like to see more meaningful causes for sig radius effects, rather than "hey we need a random drawback to this Tech II missile, let's make it increase your sig radius!" A good example would be having non-passive EWAR modules increase your sig radius a bit.

This would get us some systems that are less arbitrary and less dependent on weird gimmicky fits or applications.



And while we're at it - it's been a long time since I messed with them, so I don't know if they've since done something like this - Defender Missiles should be able to intercept fire directed at your gang, not just your ship. They're not effective unless you're crammed full of them, at which point no one is going to shoot at *you* anyways if you aren't hurting anyone.
Tak McMonagle
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#9 - 2012-01-18 08:52:40 UTC
You can't really impliment what your saying without implimenting the drawbacks of everything. In reality, any real jamming to a radar often fries the electronic components for the system. perma-jam, literally, isn't going to be fun. Also, the amount of interference the sun in any solar system can put out to any of these systems is so dramatic and dynamic there's no practical way to impliment this "realism" you seek in Eve.
L'Petit Object
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#10 - 2012-01-19 02:05:54 UTC  |  Edited by: L'Petit Object
Tak McMonagle wrote:
You can't really impliment what your saying without implimenting the drawbacks of everything. In reality, any real jamming to a radar often fries the electronic components for the system. perma-jam, literally, isn't going to be fun. Also, the amount of interference the sun in any solar system can put out to any of these systems is so dramatic and dynamic there's no practical way to impliment this "realism" you seek in Eve.


Hey tak.

TL:DR Nano bots repair electronics. + In RL, basic electronic circuits can protect systems from overload. Done all the time. For military hardware, you really gotta work hard to break it...I mean, it breaks itself all the time, but against outside imput, it's pretty goddamn tough.

Suspension of disbelief is a delicate thing. But we all casually accept in this game that we can take a liquid vat of nano-turd and pump it through a honeycombe armor system and have armor replenish like shields in exchange for energy... While armor reppers, in this sense, should have an ammo supply, we can just ignore that for now. There's a lot of fantastical things going on.

But if I said goblins emit dark energy. That they have a dark energy strength of 5.And then I said I can suppress their dark energy with light energy, based on such and such factor. Then you would expect the strength of the dark energy to effect other things. With sensor dampeners, this is fine. But with ECM and sensor strength and blah blah blah, it doesn't. That's the basic gripe. The fluff is not re-enforcing itself.

To use the armor example, it would be like saying I have an armor hardness of 6, which effects remote repairers, making it repair faster. But then that hardness has no effect on my demamge resistance or anything else. The systems may be imaginary, but their imaginary elements need to jive with each other.

The whole cricism was developed from people arguing about ECM imbal. The primary gripe about ECM, besides permajam, was how chance based it was. In effect, it was about how arbitrary it was. Part of the reason it is arbitrary is because fitting to counter-ecm has no other benefit. Then I thought about why it wouldn't have a benefit, and looked up sensor properties and noticed they make no sense.
L'Petit Object
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#11 - 2012-01-19 02:08:17 UTC
SpaceSquirrels wrote:
ECM should really mess with the hud... Rather can't ID targets, (Name ship class, ranges) cant get FC info primary etc. Doesnt block info rather play havoc.

Or start locking random targets etc.


Things like Sensor dampers seem good rather everything else pales in comparison to ECM.


Personally, I like ideas like these. But it sidesteps the issue and introduces a new element which if implemented in the same manner could suck just as much.
L'Petit Object
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#12 - 2012-01-19 02:13:42 UTC
Ehn Roh wrote:
This is not a complaint about any particular electronic warfare module or how it does or does not get the job done -

I agree with a lot of the OP's general gripes, if not the all of the details. EWAR in this game has always been nonsensical. I don't know if the wacky mechanics came first or the wacky explanations, but it is clear that whoever thought this stuff up really has no understanding of contemporary electronic warfare.

Most of it seems to be a bunch of random effects with labels slapped on, much the same way they used to write Sci-Fi television scripts. "This is the (something) module, it (somethings) the enemy's (something).

Compare that to the more robust spaceship sensor and electronic warfare gameplay mechanics in, say, the Independence War games, where you have varying levels of emissions based on what your ship is doing - shooting, moving, using active sensors (which greatly increase your range), plus various modules to increase your active and passive sensor capabilities, jam enemy sensors, screw with enemy missiles, etc.

It seems like such a wasted mechanic as currently implemented - Instead of EWAR, we get generic fantasy MMO PvP in space with particle effects going off and assorted magical shenannigans. Performance issues would probably get in the way of anything more complicated, but it's pretty obvious that performance concerns are not the reason our EWAR works in the nonsensical ways it does.

Personally, if we have to stick with the same sorts of game systems we have now, I'd like to see it scrapped and replaced with modules that boost your sensors, and other modules that impact the enemy's sensors, with the end result on both ends affecting targeting range, lock time, and increased chance to miss (perhaps offering scripts to min-max those options). The 4 sensor types could stick around for racial or omni jammers, but for sensor upgrades as well... so you get one "good" sensor setup out of the box, but can run a module to boost another one for redundancy against racial EWAR.

This would indeed make ECM and damps redundant, but I don't particularly care about one or the other either way.

Combined with this I'd like to see more meaningful causes for sig radius effects, rather than "hey we need a random drawback to this Tech II missile, let's make it increase your sig radius!" A good example would be having non-passive EWAR modules increase your sig radius a bit.

This would get us some systems that are less arbitrary and less dependent on weird gimmicky fits or applications.



And while we're at it - it's been a long time since I messed with them, so I don't know if they've since done something like this - Defender Missiles should be able to intercept fire directed at your gang, not just your ship. They're not effective unless you're crammed full of them, at which point no one is going to shoot at *you* anyways if you aren't hurting anyone.



Thanks for reading for meaning rather than just criticizing, and I apprectiate your points. For what it's worth, I endorse this post.
Metal Icarus
Star Frontiers
Brotherhood of Spacers
#13 - 2012-01-19 02:52:53 UTC
After reading your post and coming up with all sort of arguements about OPs explanation of all the sensors while doing so, all I have to say is....

ECM is like a blue screen of death on your targeting system. It needs to restart and recalibrate just like your computer does when it crashes. Sensor damps targets the computer's abilities other than the than computer itself.

I love my falcon.... hold on, I'm hacking your rapier stealing your tears....
Elindreal
Planetary Interactors
#14 - 2012-01-19 07:51:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Elindreal
L'Petit Object wrote:

Anyways, ECCM should boost sensor range or resolution. Currently it does nothing. If this were medevil RPG spaceships, then it wold be like a character wakling around with a bucket of cold-water suspended over their head, just in case someone knocks them out.



in standard RPG, eccm is more like a buff to willpower/fortitude, a greater chance to roll against a stun

If I wanted to give a quick run down of standard RPG debuffs:

snare - web (can't run as fast)
slow/dexterity debuff - tracking disruptor (reduces the defenders hit chance, also reduces the 'visibility' of ranged weapons)
blindness - sensor damp (your visibility is reduced)
stun/mesermize - ecm (under the influence of ecm you can still move, you just can't target back)
root - point (can't run)
agility debuff - target paint (tougher to evade hits)
sap/strength debuff - energy neut (reduce enemies power)

resistance debuff - unavailable
charm - unavailable

the difference in EVE from standard RPGs however is that instead of everything being a chance based roll depending on the attacker's skill/attributes/equipment vs. the defenders skill/attributes/equipment the 'roll' so to say is based upon range.

in this way it somewhat makes sense since most RPGs differentiate between melee weapons and ranged weapons. whereas most magical debuffs are range based.

RPGs also suffer from severe class limitations, whereas in EVE anyone can fit an ewar module, it's just that some ships have bonus' to specific ewar.

another difference is that in EVE everything is range based. there are no weapons which have secondary effects as magical weapons can have in RPGs again, this is made up for by the fact that there are no class limitations in EVE
Skorpynekomimi
#15 - 2012-01-19 10:07:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Skorpynekomimi
Gravometric sensors are a radar-like scan, actually. It's a modified anti-gravity drive that detects fluctuations in space.

Magnetometric... Do you actually know anything about science? Go look up the 'hall effect '. THEN you'll see.

Economic PVP
L'Petit Object
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#16 - 2012-01-20 01:00:27 UTC  |  Edited by: L'Petit Object
Skorpynekomimi wrote:
Gravometric sensors are a radar-like scan, actually. It's a modified anti-gravity drive that detects fluctuations in space.

Magnetometric... Do you actually know anything about science? Go look up the 'hall effect '. THEN you'll see.


So, my knowledge of science...There was the electronics training I recieved in the military...but ****, what do they know.

Your Hall effect is simple effing inductance. At best it's a PASSIVE sensor. If you're going to go ahead and generate a magnetic field powerful enough to measurably pull on space ships KILOMETERS Away, why not do it at a high frequency, say a 500 MHZ isntead..but that's called RADAR.

Radar is the hall effect. You run a current through an antena, it creates a magnetif field, you alternate the current, it sets up a wave. The wave returns, the magnetism induces a current. That's how antennas work. Magnetometric sounds like science, AND IS NOTHING when it comes to speaking about Active scanning systems. A lump of iron passing behind a space ship would look exactly like a DOUBLE SIZED spaceship. Not to mention the exorbitant energy expenditure in producing a magnetic field that large.

GRAVITY is currently measured by watching the wobble how one mass affects the vector of another. How you do that (in most case) is by observing the electromagnetic radiation bouncing off of things. What you are suggesting is that Gravity is somehow caused by particles emitted by mass. Well, that theory was discarded after EINSTEIN told us it was actually caused by the curvature of space by mass.

If you're going to observe the curvature of space from a distance, you will have to project an electromagnetic field into it and see how the signal is distorted...at that point, you are once again using RADAR. And then, there's no point in paying attention to how a ship sized vehicle woudl curve space, because the radar bounce will be so much bigger and accurate.

Now we could start talking about magic. But why would we introduce magic into a system that is perfectly plausible using current technology that has NO magic.
L'Petit Object
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#17 - 2012-01-20 01:09:34 UTC
Elindreal wrote:
L'Petit Object wrote:

Anyways, ECCM should boost sensor range or resolution. Currently it does nothing. If this were medevil RPG spaceships, then it wold be like a character wakling around with a bucket of cold-water suspended over their head, just in case someone knocks them out.



in standard RPG, eccm is more like a buff to willpower/fortitude, a greater chance to roll against a stun

If I wanted to give a quick run down of standard RPG debuffs:

snare - web (can't run as fast)
slow/dexterity debuff - tracking disruptor (reduces the defenders hit chance, also reduces the 'visibility' of ranged weapons)
blindness - sensor damp (your visibility is reduced)
stun/mesermize - ecm (under the influence of ecm you can still move, you just can't target back)
root - point (can't run)
agility debuff - target paint (tougher to evade hits)
sap/strength debuff - energy neut (reduce enemies power)

resistance debuff - unavailable
charm - unavailable

the difference in EVE from standard RPGs however is that instead of everything being a chance based roll depending on the attacker's skill/attributes/equipment vs. the defenders skill/attributes/equipment the 'roll' so to say is based upon range.

in this way it somewhat makes sense since most RPGs differentiate between melee weapons and ranged weapons. whereas most magical debuffs are range based.

RPGs also suffer from severe class limitations, whereas in EVE anyone can fit an ewar module, it's just that some ships have bonus' to specific ewar.

another difference is that in EVE everything is range based. there are no weapons which have secondary effects as magical weapons can have in RPGs again, this is made up for by the fact that there are no class limitations in EVE


You will notice that my argument doesn't actually pertain to whether or not ECM is a valid game concept. At the very heart of my argument I say either ECM or Sensor Dampening is redundant...but redundancy is fine if you like. In space, a person is effectively stunned if they can't target you and you can target them. Sensor dampeners do this.

I would argue that In EVE, your ship is your class. There's just a lot of effing classes. And we can hop in and out of them. Yeah, ships are fairly flexible, but their bonuses predetermine much of their fitting.

The problem with ECM or our stun, is that a buff to fortitude in an RPG would also help you against POISON, knockdown, slow, etc, ad naseum. The boost to Sensor Strength, does NOTHING else and for NO REASON. It doesn't make sense. It is non-sensical.

My real point is that ECCM should boost other aspects of the ship. It could, Lower Signature Radius, no other module does that (NONE!). It could boost other positive sensor attributes. It could add a target or it could do whatever. Currently, as I said in my quote, it does absolutely nothing until it is needed.
Elindreal
Planetary Interactors
#18 - 2012-01-20 17:06:19 UTC
L'Petit Object wrote:


The problem with ECM or our stun, is that a buff to fortitude in an RPG would also help you against POISON, knockdown, slow, etc, ad naseum. The boost to Sensor Strength, does NOTHING else and for NO REASON. It doesn't make sense. It is non-sensical.

My real point is that ECCM should boost other aspects of the ship. It could, Lower Signature Radius, no other module does that (NONE!). It could boost other positive sensor attributes. It could add a target or it could do whatever. Currently, as I said in my quote, it does absolutely nothing until it is needed.




technically boosting your sensor str does make you more difficult to probe down. now you can no longer be unprobable such as the days of yore, but it is an effective security measure.

with a couple eccm modules on board even an experienced scanner will likely have to do a 2nd or 3rd scan before they can lock you, instead of catching you off of an initial 4au scan.

but yes, i understand, it seems as if ewar stats in this game are fairly black and white, with little overlap. module x's sole purpose is to counter module y, and if player B is not using module y, then module x is completely useless.

a little creativity to expand the use of stats may be in order, but it would probably have to coincide with a very large game overhaul which no one seems to want to do at the moment.
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#19 - 2012-01-20 18:40:32 UTC
Came here expecting discussion of imbalance between ECM/Damps/TD/TP, left disappointed.

But yeah, the sci-fi behind it is non-sensical. I can live with it, though.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
JVLP
Dark Nexxus
S0ns Of Anarchy
#20 - 2012-01-20 18:57:12 UTC
Critique submarine physics in space next!

And how I can dock at a station when I'm 40km from the dock and even on the other side of the station from the dock?
12Next page