These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Tugs and capital ships towing
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Rusell
HSM Regulators
#1 - 2017-04-01 14:39:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Rusell
-Ship type: ORE Corvette.

-Description: extreme powerfull small ships able to tow Capital ships and asteroids towards the direction that they are facing.

-Effect: Towed capitalship included (freighter) increase their agility and decreasing warp time. (only can be towed a Capital ship in the same fleet of the tugs or Noctis)

-1 tug: 20 %

-3 tugs: 30% or 1 noctis: 30%

-5 tugs: 35%

-6 tugs: 40% or 2 noctis: 40%

-Noticiable module: Tractor Beam, consider to add the ability to tow with this module keeping their actual features.

-Towing with tractor beam cost Capacitor per cicle

-Tugs and Noctis Towing decrease their speed 95% but keep their agility.

-Towed freighters and capital ships cannot be controlled... Tugs control the navigation and warping direction.

-Tugs like Noctis will be able to tow asteroids and ice asteroids towards mining ships in same fit with a limit of a grid.

-Add extra bonus to Tractor beams and Towing to the new Tug type ship and Noctis.

-Im opened to add more ideas to this suggestion.

Thanks for your time, and thanks for adding tugs to the game.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#2 - 2017-04-01 14:44:07 UTC
Why? Stasis webifiers already exist for getting freighters into warp faster, and you'd get more mining yield out of putting your tug pilot in a venture than moving rocks around.
Rusell
HSM Regulators
#3 - 2017-04-01 14:49:41 UTC
The intentions of Minmatar republic electronical warfare is not to tug but bumpers and exploiters have forced to do it.

Dueling a freighter with a web Electronical warfare ship is possible now but not realistic.

There should be a ship for doing this without the necessity of dueling a freighter.

Im aware that this idea could affect the business of some alliance that i dont want to mention, but it is reallistic.
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#4 - 2017-04-01 15:02:48 UTC
Why do we need caps to be even safer to fly?
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#5 - 2017-04-01 15:05:21 UTC
Rusell wrote:
The intentions of Minmatar republic electronical warfare is not to tug but bumpers and exploiters have forced to do it.

Dueling a freighter with a web Electronical warfare ship is possible now but not realistic.

There should be a ship for doing this without the necessity of dueling a freighter.

Im aware that this idea could affect the business of some alliance that i dont want to mention, but it is reallistic.


So it's duplicating an existing feature for 'realism' purposes.

In a game about flying submarines through jelly.


Would your idea even be better than using a dual web vigil or something else that comes in at under a million ISK?
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#6 - 2017-04-01 15:23:49 UTC
Hmm.. I almost cannot see any abuse of such a boat.

Never would I ever tug a boat away from a gate to do it harm..

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
Bjorn Tyrson
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#7 - 2017-04-01 15:25:45 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
Hmm.. I almost cannot see any abuse of such a boat.

Never would I ever tug a boat away from a gate to do it harm..


now I want to see a "tug" of war. with ever increasing numbers of these ships pulling a freighter back and forth
Dior Ambraelle
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#8 - 2017-05-24 17:24:44 UTC
While I don't think we need a tug ship, the idea of using tractor beams on ships is interesting.

Personally I would turn this idea around: make capital tractor beams available to all capital ships and make them able to be used on subcapital ships.
The speed of pulling would be based on the mass of the target ship, the power of the target's propulsion system and the target's movement vector. This could be used to help friendly ships to move to safety faster, and you could mess with the fleet structure of the enemy.

If you want an intelligent argument, please do, I'm up for it!

But if you want a trolling contest, I will win it by simply not participating.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#9 - 2017-05-24 22:05:37 UTC
what does it matter if webs were intended to be used that way or not? they are and they work your idea is pointless


@dior

im not sure if CCP is still working on it or not but a tractor beam meant to be used on ships was planned to be implemented for citadels but there were problems with getting it to work

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Cade Windstalker
#10 - 2017-05-24 22:32:51 UTC
Rusell wrote:
The intentions of Minmatar republic electronical warfare is not to tug but bumpers and exploiters have forced to do it.

Dueling a freighter with a web Electronical warfare ship is possible now but not realistic.

There should be a ship for doing this without the necessity of dueling a freighter.

Im aware that this idea could affect the business of some alliance that i dont want to mention, but it is reallistic.


First off, there's no exploit forcing the use of webs on Freighters.

Second of all, nothing in this game is meant for a single purpose outside of a *very* few items, and even those generally end up with some other very very niche use.

Dueling and webbing a Freighter is *much* more realistic than this mess of an idea, you also don't need to do it with a duel that's just the easiest way. You can also just put both characters in the same corporation with friendly fire allowed. Both of these are the way the vast majority of Freighter webbing happens.

There's basically zero need for this idea and it would be horribly complex to implement relative to the benefits provided.

That's without getting into the whole "towing asteroids" idea, which basically only exists to be abused. Lets start with someone dragging every asteroid in an anom off in a random direction and go from there.....
Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#11 - 2017-05-25 04:09:11 UTC
No, it's not an "exploit" within the TOS, bumping is indeed working as anticipated. That said, it still FEELS like an exploit.

Allowing for the fact that we fly (most adeptly put by Danika) submarines through jelly, in that realism is... well... not... it still seems an even greater stretch that not only can an interceptor bump a ship a thousand times its mass, but it can survive such a bump and do so for the next 5 hours if it so chooses.

I've said it before (at least I think I have) and I'll say it again. Collision physics should result in ship damage. They already calculate bumping, all they need to do is change the calculation to compare what would happen. One ship dead, two ships dead, one ship with scratched paint (looking at you Avatar...), both ships in structure.

I know that suicide ganking would get a whole lot easier, knowing you can just fly ships into gank targets, but honestly... it's already easy, this way concord wouldn't need to bother with them lol.

Granted, Jita 4/4 would be an absolute blood bath, 24/7. I'd be sitting about 50km off watching the mess unfold too.

Probably the single greatest benefit to collision physics... NO MORE ANCHORING ON THE FC!! Rejoice, pilots piloting their ships!
Dark Lord Trump
Infinite Point
Pandemic Horde
#12 - 2017-05-25 19:03:09 UTC
So my spy alt can now drag ratting carriers into the waiting guns of my fleet?

I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
mkint
#13 - 2017-05-25 22:35:20 UTC
As presented, the idea doesn't work. The goals are unclear as well.

Assuming this is meant to be a web slingshot replacement that doesn't get minmatar web bonuses, fine. I don't see the need for a special ship to achieve that goal, a module would do. It would have to do it as effectively as a web bonused ship, or there's no real point. I wouldn't be too against it being even better than webshots if it required active participation by both parties.

Other than that, there's no real point. Except maybe dragging your dc'd titan buddy back into tethering range? I'd be against that. If you can't tow hostile ships it doesn't really do anything. Not worth the dev time. Considering it would probably need a heavy overhaul of the physics engine, definitely not worth it for something that basically does nothing.

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
Paige Booker
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#14 - 2017-05-26 04:29:58 UTC
Try webbing your capital ship before warp with a small ship, aaaaand insta warp!. Tada! we already have tugs in the game, any cheap ship with a web on it.

Keep thinking though. More interesting ship ideas please! :D
Lugh Crow-Slave
#15 - 2017-05-26 05:23:56 UTC
hmmm

would be interesting if faster warping ships tugged on slower ones the effect doesn't need to be strong. rather than always warping at the speed of the slowest ship have faster ones "pull" the speed up. we may even see more fleet comps with a larger ship in them. cruisers and frigs with support BBs now that that one BB doesn't slow the entire roam to a crall

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
mkint
#16 - 2017-05-26 12:57:22 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
hmmm

would be interesting if faster warping ships tugged on slower ones the effect doesn't need to be strong. rather than always warping at the speed of the slowest ship have faster ones "pull" the speed up. we may even see more fleet comps with a larger ship in them. cruisers and frigs with support BBs now that that one BB doesn't slow the entire roam to a crall

With that kind of iteration, it might put some emphasis on squads. Every squad brings its own bigger ship, enough people in the squad fit the tug module to get them to warp at a decent speed.

That also might be the trick for getting mixed sized fleets to actually happen, a fantasy CCP has failed at implementing for years. Maybe the trick to getting battleship fleets to be a thing again is by using dedicated tugs to get them into warp faster. Seems like the tug module would need offensive capabilities as well... maybe a script?

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#17 - 2017-05-26 14:26:32 UTC
Was more thinning any ship did this. No mod needed. Could also add in a mass factor so a cruiser with 5au speed pulls harder on a bb than a frig with 8 au.

Toy could still make dedicated tugs by using warp speed mods, rigs and implants

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Bjorn Tyrson
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#18 - 2017-05-26 20:23:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Bjorn Tyrson
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Was more thinning any ship did this. No mod needed. Could also add in a mass factor so a cruiser with 5au speed pulls harder on a bb than a frig with 8 au.

Toy could still make dedicated tugs by using warp speed mods, rigs and implants


So rather than warping at the speed of the slowest ship in the fleet, your suggesting that the fleet warp speed be averaged out according to mass.

I like the idea, except I have 2 concerns, 1 its extra calculations that the server needs to do every time a fleet warps. second, this could be abused with already fast warping ships like machariels to make them even more insanely fast.

although the trade off might be worth it in order to see more mixed fleets and squads. Might also create an interesting role bonus that could bring AF's and HaCs out of the t3 induced death spiral. if those ships contribute a higher bonus to fleet warp speed. (or, if that bonus could be given to T3's, and the overhead bonus given to the AF's and HAC's. since I always thought they deserved it more)