Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sturgeon's Law in full effect here.

There's a module idea... The Sturgeonator: Turns 90% of the enemy fleet into crap, instantly.

Warp scramble script for the Warp Disruption Field Generator. This would have a shorter range than the Focused Warp Disruption script but would shut down micro warp drives.

So what you're saying is that these modules are for Minmatar only.

Damage to modules.

Have something simular to nanite repair paste, Nanite Acid, it can by added to conventional ammo, ofcourse there will be a reduction in volley damage, but it will provide a damage over time effect to modules. For game fluff, Missiles/projectiles have it added to there payload, Lasers have a plasma burst effect at the end of the shot that causes secondary fires and explosions on the victim, hybrids have Nanite injected to the charge and imbedded into the hull.

There are many tactical uses I could see for this, Smaller ships using Acidic ammo to disable larger ships modules. It would provide massive tactical changes and the need for a new module.

Internal Dampener: Simular to a Damage Control in fitting and power usage, it allows the use of Nanite Repair Paste while the module is active. It also adds a 50%(60% T2) resistance to acidic ammo, but when modules are overheated they take damage faster than normal. The module also updates the modules hp repair status at the end of everycycle, so you don't have to wait for the whole cycle to finish to recieve the repair effect.

LSE's and 1600 mm plates are good for battlecruisers, but it seems that in order to fit an even moderately decent tank on a battleship, you have to plate or shield-extend the hell out of it - AND use rigs too.

Give us an X-Large Shield Extender - and have it require enough powergrid to where mounting ONE is not incosequential to a battleship (and virtually impossible to fit on a battlecruiser at all). Also, give us a 3200 mm plate, with similarly huge fitting requirements for the armor tankers (at least as much as a large repper, maybe more).

Frigates can fit cruiser-grade tank equipment for large boosts to EHP from a single module.

Cruisers and battlecruisers can fit battleship-grade tank equipment for similarly massive EHP boosts from just one or two modules. A cruiser with a single LSE effectively doubles its base shield HP.

Battleships lack any such module. There's no reason that there should be such a large EHP gap between battleships and capitals. Start with more potential for battleship EHP.

Another idea, already proposed - semi-siege module for vastly boosting active tanking capabilities. Have this require fuel in the cargo bay, just like a cyno or a siege module.

And of course, anti-blob tanking modules. "Absorbative Shielding" for shield tankers, and "Powered Armor" for armor tankers. When activated, these modules would consume fuel for each cycle, and apply diminishing returns for incoming DPS, according to the number of people firing at the user. Getting primaried by a fleet of 50 people would not be much different in terms of incoming damage as compared to a fleet of 5. And capital EHP could be brought in line with other ships, starting at only modestly better than battleship EHP.

Obviously, don't implement ALL of these. Otherwise ships would be unkillable. Anti-blob tanking modules would probably be the most useful.

I previously mentioned heat, and others have like Saelyth have mentioned a coolant tank for overheating.

May I suggest that heat is the new e-warfare type, and there should be new ships and modules for it, and against it. I would prefer if you are going to do Damage over Time, that instead, it is Heat over Time. Damage over Time will just end up as more broadcasts to logistics, which is already a very busy role. Heat on the other hand, could be an entirely separate mechanic, that does not affect logistics ships broadcasting bandwidth.

Heat would be interesting, as it has the ability to destroy modules, or cause them to need nanite repair, and a counter coolant. Increasing overheating in the game would not be a bad thing and add more tactical flexibility to fights, and give DPS pilots something to do, other than spamming the repair button

Actually, it shouldn't be high/medium/low. There should be one of each. I propose "Rack - Coolant Injector" Where Rack is Low/Medium/High. It is applicable to a given rack that is overheated, and consumes coolant. This would do wonders for active tanking!

With that in mind:

1. Magnetic Accelerator

Works with Blasters only

Fitting: 1 Low Slot, further requirements matching Magnetic Field Stabilizers.

Effect: 50% to 100% Optimal range increase in Blasters with Falloff bonus to match.

Penalty: Always active, possible damage reduction (Passive).

2. Inertial Compensator:

[i]Works for Railguns only[/i

Fitting: 1 Low Slot, further requirements matching Magnetic Field Stabilizers.

Effect: Reduction in Optimal range, higher Tracking.

Penalty: Always Active (Passive).

These two modules would essentially provide for Blasters and Railguns to become permanent medium-ranged weapons at the cost of 1 low slot. The lack of further modules to amplify damage and tracking aswell as fall off is intended to complement the way these things would work.

3. Improved Nanotubed Internal Structure.

Fitting: 1 Low Slot

Effect: Armor repair amount +% (To be defined).

Penalty: Active Module

Description: By improving the ship's internal structure with passageways for nanites, the possibiites for faster access to damaged sections of the ship by repair teams and nanite paste allow for a better rate of structural damage repair, at the cost of further capacitor by the Nnites to transverse the passageways.

Regarding stuff for decloaking cloaky stuff, may I suggest it is a module type and skill tied to destroyers, and perhaps a new T2 Destroyer variant. This is the historical comparison of what destroyers did in a naval fleet role, with anti-air secondary.

I am against anything that is basically a click this to win button. It should be cat and mouse, just like the submarine warfare, cloaky ships already resemble.

But there is a big difference, a stealth bomber, can't kill a real ship solo, either with bombs or torpedos, where as historically, a single submarine could sink multiple ships, where as it takes several stealth bombers to take down a battleship.

If there is a anti-cloaky mechanic, I would like to see it tied to the tactical overlay, and act as a sort of 'ping' mechanic which only works on grid, with only a rough idea where a cloaky ship is located increasing as the destroyer closes in, but pings can only be done every couple of minutes or so. In addition, the de-cloaking mechanic should remain (have to get in range), small smart bombs should get a range bonus on new/existing destroyers, which makes them more useful and gives them a sort of depth charge ability to hurt cloaky ships while not revealing them.

I think it would be fun for all involved.

There are thousands of killmails on battleclinic that directly opposes that satement. Bombers can kill a BS 1v1 easily.

I like the idea of anchorable beacons that ping the system for cloaked ships.