Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I'm fine with the nullification ecosystem, there needs to be only some tweaks to anchorable bubbles, namely:

1. make them generate a killmail
2. 10x their cost
3. lower their HP

Done.

EDIT: I read a lot about splitting the ceptor roles and removing nullification from one. You need to see, that ceptors are used because of their nullification. No nullification no point using a (combat) ceptor, there are cheaper and/or better suited ships for that role.

We already have perfect safety for large amounts of cargo movement: jump freighters.

LOL we dont have space for ratters (or at least enough to matter right now).

I just pointed out what I considered a broken mechanic. Also if you read the post other than just my alliance tag, you would notice I mentioned that I as well have cloaky camped ratters in their stations.

T3Cs are the only ships with covert cyno AND interdiction meaning they eliminate half the options of killing them.

Covert Cyno on others ships can still be intercepted by bubbles, so they can be killed by a bubble behind a gate and decloaked.

T3Cs can only be killed via bad game/server ticks or a good/lucky uncloak on a gate camp.


Let me put it to you another way. A recon ship can be caught on both sides of the gate via bubbles and die. On the IN gate, you need to bubble the ship and then get a decloak. You have time to decloak the ship due to the bubble. It is hard but not that bad considering a t3c.

You cannot kill a t3c on the side of the gate you are jumping FROM (out gate) because of a bubble. He laughs and jumps through regardless. You can kill him on the other side BUT it can only be done via an uncloak because a bubble does not stop him. This means you have at most 5 seconds to:

See him uncloak
Burn toward him
decloak him
notice he has been uncloaked
lock him
scram/disrupt him

Much harder to do period.


NOTE: I left out the possibilities of an instalocker because both ships are affected, but if you need to rely on someone living in England for your gatecamp, that is another issue by itself.

TLDR: T3C are much harder to catch then other ships that can have a covert cyno.

I think it's an extremely useful tool for allowing content to be developed. Sending in a quick scout to get tackle on something pushes people into conflict. Really the only people I can see complain about ceptors are krabs who want to AFKtar and talent-less gate campers salty over not being able to just F1 on ceptors.


I wouldn't even mind making it an AoE module to be used with fuel (one ceptor can get their fleet through bubbles once or something) and making specific bubbles that could counter it. Adding more variation, not less, to the game is good. Is it perfect as it is now? No. Can we do more and develop it further? Certainly.

Making anchored bubbles drop killmails would be a good thing.

Some sort of Universal Nullification module would be, I think, Too powerful. Restricting Universal Nullification to T3 and dedicated transports/haulers Is healthy.

How about Faction Nullification?

Interdiction drop bubbles of their races type.
Nullifiers go through bubbles of their type and multi spectrum bubbles. The current anchored bubbles are multi-spectrum.

Caldari Navy gravimetric Warp field Nullifier

Warp speed -10%

This module looks for the gravimetric signature of interdiction bubbles along the warp field and adapts the ships warpfield to nullify the interdiction.

Caldari Navy Mobile Warp Disruptor

This structure projects a blue warp disruption field.

Faction fields could consume fuel and be larger and have more tank then T2 bubbles.
Pirate fields could be bypassable by 2 different types and have odd effects. Perhaps phenomena generators? Most fights happen inside of a bubble, and it would be interesting if a WH style effect was possible under the titan class. This also could make asymmetric fights possible where One side is in the bubble and under some effect and another side is outside the bubble.

Also I want to drop actual Blue balls on the field...

Funny you should bring this up right now.. I've been looking for a way to screw with someone's camping Mobile Depot in null and was thinking of putting up a few Mobile Warp disrupters around it so I can camp it properly and stop the guy zooming in and just picking it up after I reinforce it.. 48hours timer on them is bloody ridiculous..

If you're going to change it, give them the same 30 days timer as a Mobil Depot.. Training the skills for mobile disrupters takes a long time, a lower timer just makes it an evil long train for no benefit..

And ships, leave them as they are.. There's other ways to kill them from smartbombing to insta-lockers..

Removed post and those quoting for the above.



Also executed CSM privilege and stickyed this thread.

Yes pretty much this:
Nullification has a point and use for both combat and transit.
I dont think shuttles need nullification inties hard enough to catch.
T3's with subsytems definately - they are already balanced for less damage etc.
There is perhaps a case for interdictors and command destroyers too to encourage small gang pvp.
I wouldnt go with blockade runners (already cloaky) or dst's
Bubbles do need a timer - you see piles of them sitting in wh space been there forever and the bubble camps ppl use in null are OTT - Fair enough 1 or 2 I have seen more than twenty on multiple gates which tbh should be an exploit.
I would put a limit on how close they can be together much like other structures ideally no less than 100km apart or perhaps a max of say 6 on a grid. And they must expire (say 24-48 hours if not scooped) and generate killmails (to encourage their destruction)
These measures along with delaying local in null sec by say 30 secs would allow much more pvp and encourage small gangs again which presently have to mwd thro huge bubble camps a while local tells everyone they are there.

Nullification effects are good, I like where it stands right now, although Inty Fleets can be annoying, but in the end they serve a good purpose as they are easily scattered. I would like to see the feasibility of inventing t2 shuttles that are nullified. Another idea from above is to have the nullification be a modual, like a t2 modified warp core stabalizer, similar to the covert ops cloak but the same huge penalties, and ship fitting restrictions.

I haven't really ever seen a good use for the Surgical Warp Disrupt Probe, I know that it has specific situations that they are used in. But as an interdictor pilot I bought a batch of 30 when they first came out and haven't used them all. It would be interesting to modify the use of these to include nullified ships, and finally give them a more focused role. Another option is to have a t2 variant for the same effect. The point is that there needs to at least be one if not multiple options to stop nullified ships, especially if there is discussion about putting more in the game.

Anchorable Bubbles must have a timer on them just like every other deployable that has come out recently, they are a relic of pre-Incarna eve and must be updated to fit the current game. Something akin to the cyno inhibitor with variables between 1 hour to 4 hours based on the tech level and size, likewise the cost of the bubbles need to be reduced to compensate for the new expendable nature. In certain constellations the bubbles are out of control, miners and ratters are completely safe because of scouts and 120 km radius bubble defenses.

This is a good discussion to have and I'm glad it's being taken seriously.

Should you be able to have nullified combat ships? Why, or why not?

No, except in the case of T3 cruisers fitted with the appropriate subsystem. Nullification should, on other ships, be a choice that negatively affects combat ability. Insta-warping nullified interceptors have removed a massive amount of the tactical function of area warp denial.

How about non-combat ships? Shuttles? Blockade runners? Yachts?

Ships that exist solely to transport pilots or very small amounts of cargo - and cannot warp cloaked - are a reasonable target for nullification. Shuttles, basically. Yachts and Blockade Runners can warp cloaked, ergo have no need to be nullified since they already have tactics at their disposal to evade warp interdiction.

Should anchorable bubbles exist? Should they decay if they exist?
Yes, anchorable bubbles should continue to exist, and additional forms of static emplacements - mobile turrets, anyone? - should be introduced. Said static emplacements should be subject to the decay and reinforcement mechanics like modern deployables, EG, if left floating unattended in space for more than 30 days they should unanchor, and when damaged should offline and enter a reinforcement period of reasonable length, perhaps four hours.

Mechanics should also be introduced to limit the number of static emplacements within a given area ongrid, so it becomes mechanically impossible to surround a gate with hundreds of bubbles. A maximum of six bubbles and twenty-four mobile turrets within a given 1k km cuboid is where I would start, with further adjustments made as necessary.