These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

a new class of ships: q-ship

Author
loard doktor
tradersbear
#61 - 2012-06-19 00:28:03 UTC  |  Edited by: loard doktor
Atrocitus Parallax wrote:
Would it specialize in going inside bigger ships audio receptors and removing any debris that may be clogging the receptor? If so im for it.


Sorry, i have no idea what your talking about. Cant tell that it has anything to do with the subject.

Best I can tell is its a joke about q-tips
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#62 - 2012-06-19 01:11:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
loard doktor wrote:
It might be that they can make modules do it easier, but I personally dont see it as necissary to remake a group of ships. Did they have to completely remake all the ships that got t2 and t3 changes? If so, were they that big of a change in programming. IF so, how much difference is it to change the model a little bit to make it work with freighters and miners. They already have the programming needed to make t2 and t3 ships, so why would it take that much more work to add those to miners and frieghters.
The point I'm making is that it seems counter-intuitive to have a mimic hulk that a player has absolutely no way of determining isn't a hulk when instead they could just make a module that hulks can fit that causes them to sacrifice what they normally do (mining) in order to counterattack a ganker or survive a gank in highsec. Howabout a high slot module that when activated increases the ship's resistances by 75% for 15 seconds, and then at the end of that time, it loses 75% resistance for 3 minutes. Or a high slot module that would reflect damage back to the attacker (without reducing the damage incoming). Either one would be one less strip miner on the hulk, and as such would very significantly impact its mining capability. Having both would gimp it as a miner but you'd still have one strip miner to make it look like you're a normal miner. Just brainstorming here.

The biggest thing is that in order to have mimic ships, they have to make an individual ship for every mimic version, and balance it, and that takes production time. Then players in-game have to build these ships and put them on the market. It would be far simpler to have a single module that allows any ship to be turned into a mimic.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Mortimer Civeri
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#63 - 2012-06-19 01:38:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Mortimer Civeri
After the war, it was concluded that Q-ships were greatly over-rated, diverting skilled seamen from other duties without sinking enough U-boats to justify the strategy.

The careers of all five ships were almost entirely unsuccessful and very short, with USS Atik sunk on its first patrol, all Q-ships patrols ended in 1943.

Q-ships were responsible for about 10% of all U-boats sunk, ranking them well below the use of ordinary minefields in effectiveness.

shall I continue, or do you get how useless your idea is?

Didn't work then, and won't work now.

"I don't know which is worse, ...that everyone has his price, or that the price is always so low." Calvin

Verity Sovereign
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#64 - 2012-06-19 06:49:34 UTC
Except they did work, just not very well.
On occasion they did catch the U boats off guard.
As a result, some U-boat commanders were more cautious.
It was a form of psychological warfare, its not all about the kill"loss ratio.

A better example is a related concept, the "East Indiaman" - again, armed merchant ships - except in this case, they didn't hide that they were armed, in fact, they often portrayed themselves as better armed than they actually were.
(they had a light armament, but often had dummy gunports painted)

The best example of their use was Linois' disasterous naval campaign.
First he stumbles upon a convoy protected only by a single Brig and some lightly armed Indamen. - The indiamen had been painted to appear like ships of the line, formed a battle line, hoisted ensigns of the Royal navy, fired some volleys at long range, and drove off Linois' squadron (he believed the indiamen to be ships of the line). The convoy was saved, its loss would have basically bankrupted England (Battle of Pulu Aura).

Linois was heavily criticized for failing to take advantage of the opporotunity...
At the end of the campaign, hile sailing back to france, he again encountered numerous ships... numerous ships of the line, which he believed were actually indiamen, trying to bluff him again - he probably though something like "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice..." - so he engaged.... only to find out... nope.... those were real warships, and he was massively outgunned.

His entire squadron was captured, and never achieved much of anything. Napoleon refused to do a prisoner transfer to get Linois back...

The "indaman" ruses worked quite well.
They may not have destroyed any enemy warships directly, but they saved their convoys, and lead other warships to their doom - even if the guns of the indamen never sank an enemy ship.
Duchess Starbuckington
Doomheim
#65 - 2012-06-19 10:52:13 UTC
Quote:
doesnt necissariy mean its a bad idea, just not one you like.

Right, except it is a bad idea and you've been repeatedly told why. Do you have a problem with reading comprehension?

There's no point dedicating dev resources to a problem that the players already have numerous means of solving themselves.

If you need that in smaller words, I can oblige.
Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#66 - 2012-06-19 13:34:29 UTC
Q ship?

Why not try Battle Badger?

Industrial hulls are cheap enough and flexible enough that no additional hulls are needed for this role.

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs

joebro1060
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#67 - 2012-06-19 13:54:51 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
loard doktor wrote:
It might be that they can make modules do it easier, but I personally dont see it as necissary to remake a group of ships. Did they have to completely remake all the ships that got t2 and t3 changes? If so, were they that big of a change in programming. IF so, how much difference is it to change the model a little bit to make it work with freighters and miners. They already have the programming needed to make t2 and t3 ships, so why would it take that much more work to add those to miners and frieghters.
The point I'm making is that it seems counter-intuitive to have a mimic hulk that a player has absolutely no way of determining isn't a hulk when instead they could just make a module that hulks can fit that causes them to sacrifice what they normally do (mining) in order to counterattack a ganker or survive a gank in highsec. Howabout a high slot module that when activated increases the ship's resistances by 75% for 15 seconds, and then at the end of that time, it loses 75% resistance for 3 minutes.



I would prefer this idea, if anything else in this topic is even considered...
Verity Sovereign
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#68 - 2012-06-19 21:51:26 UTC
Rather than a new ship hull, we need a weapon that looks like a mining laser, and can be shot at rocks like a mining laser.
Then we can fit all kinds of ships to make them look like they are fit for mining, when they are actually waiting for prey.
(ie BS's can be converted to be a decent mining ship - sacrificing lows for MLUs and cpu UGs, with 8 mining lasers in the highs)

How about a crystal that turns a modulated strip miner (or an entirely new mining laser module)into a damage dealing weapon.

Tank up a BS, fit it with a tank, web, and point, and 8 of these new mining lasers in the highs, start "mining", and drop a can, as if you were really a mining BS.

When prey comes, swap the crystals, to give you essentially 8 focused medium beam lasers worth of firepower... (plus launch combat drones) - you might actually get something.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#69 - 2012-06-20 00:17:35 UTC
Verity Sovereign wrote:
Rather than a new ship hull, we need a weapon that looks like a mining laser, and can be shot at rocks like a mining laser.
Then we can fit all kinds of ships to make them look like they are fit for mining, when they are actually waiting for prey.
(ie BS's can be converted to be a decent mining ship - sacrificing lows for MLUs and cpu UGs, with 8 mining lasers in the highs)

How about a crystal that turns a modulated strip miner (or an entirely new mining laser module)into a damage dealing weapon.

Tank up a BS, fit it with a tank, web, and point, and 8 of these new mining lasers in the highs, start "mining", and drop a can, as if you were really a mining BS.

When prey comes, swap the crystals, to give you essentially 8 focused medium beam lasers worth of firepower... (plus launch combat drones) - you might actually get something.

I think that's a great idea. However, if mining lasers got a damage crystal, it would have to be as weak as a light beam laser simply by virtue of its low powergrid cost. But perhaps all that is really needed is a laser frequency crystal that causes the laser beam to look like a mining laser. Then a crafty player can get a fat load of ore to put in a jet can beside them as bait, and actually just shoot at the asteroid, not doing anything other than pretend to mine.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Verity Sovereign
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#70 - 2012-06-20 07:36:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Verity Sovereign
Yes, some variation of the above.
We could make a crystal for normal lasers that makes them look like mining lasers (though to complete the effect, the 3d model would have to change too - I've never tried shooting asteroids with normal guns, are they a valid target, or do you get some message like target is invulnerable?)
We could make a completely new mining laser, that uses this new damage dealing crystal (or normal mining crystals).
We could make a crystal for the existing modulated laser (while the low PG use could be a problem, the ridiculous CPU use should balance it.
It will leave the BS with anemic firepower, so extra grid available to fit buffer would actually work well I think.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#71 - 2012-06-20 10:41:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Asteroids can be shot. They are also invincible, so they don't take any damage.

The CPU cost of mining lasers cannot be made to make up for the powergrid cost of medium or large lasers because small ships often have a lot of CPU.

Perhaps it would be better if there were created a special strip miner that was primarily a weapon, and its damage could be balanced to fit a reasonable amount for mining barges and exhumers in general. This strip miner would have a considerably reduced mining output but wouldn't look any different from a normal strip miner. I think people aren't likely to steal from a mining battleship simply by virtue of its drone bay and massive hit points, but lots of weak prey try to take on what they perceive to be a defenseless mining barge. And I have a feeling the new procurer and retriever HP boost won't be automatic--you'll have to fit your ship properly to get it I bet, meaning many noobs won't know it's there.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Amarr Haircare Products
Doomheim
#72 - 2012-06-20 10:52:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Amarr Haircare Products
How about a simple disguise module instead? One that only makes your ship look like a different ship of the same size. I.e. slap the Disguise Module on a Caracal, activate and you now look like(and show up on the Overview as) an Osprey to all other players.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#73 - 2012-06-20 10:55:43 UTC
That seems reasonable, as long as it can be detected with a ship scan.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Amarr Haircare Products
Doomheim
#74 - 2012-06-20 11:19:44 UTC
I'm afraid that would make it way too pointless, since you're going to stealthscan any potential gank victim/every ship in popular trading hub anyway.

I was thinking more of a combat/movement penalties to the ship using the module, with the disguise only going down on any aggression.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#75 - 2012-06-20 11:26:09 UTC
I know a lot of gankers do not check fits on the ship they gank, though I don't know the actual numbers.

But one way or another, it must be possible to discover the truth about the ship one way or another if the ganker is willing to go to the trouble. EVE isn't a lottery game. As much as you may believe that last fight you were in ended with bad luck, the other fleet probably knew they were going to win, and knew why as well.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Amarr Haircare Products
Doomheim
#76 - 2012-06-20 11:36:07 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
EVE isn't a lottery game.


ECM, Random 0.5-1.5 modifier applied to all turret damage, Falloff misses...

Though I agree that we probably shouldn't add more randomness to it at least. Simplest counterbalance would be to make a module that negates the Disguise module.
Verity Sovereign
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#77 - 2012-06-21 12:25:04 UTC
If they have time to lock you and then scan you, then determine whether they should attack, then you should be able to warp off.

I don't think many gankers scan their targets first - maybe they do and then decide not to attack - but scanning, refitting based on the results, and returning means that if they actually get their target, their target was *really* dumb (or AFK).

I'm not even talking about *stealing*, I'm talking about ganking in high sec/privateering in low/null/wh sec - baits and bluffs to get enemies to refrain from attacking when it would be advantageous for them to attack, or to get them to attack when they shouldn't.

When they aren't quite sure if they are facing a ship prepared for combat they will mistakes - Like Linois' did, 0 for 2 on guessing correctly, lost his whole squadron that had achieved virtually nothing.
In those cases, he could known for sure, but he had to get closer to have a look (hence the importance of long range fire in the first case where the convoy was bluffing) - in the 2nd case, he did get in close, and realied his mistake, and tried to flee, but he was caught.

Unfortunately, Eve's ship scanner is too long range - it would be nice if they had to come within warp disruptor range to get a scan in.
loard doktor
tradersbear
#78 - 2012-06-29 07:54:11 UTC  |  Edited by: loard doktor
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
That seems reasonable, as long as it can be detected with a ship scan.


Sorry i havent posted in a couple days. Been a bit busy else where.

If it can be detected by scan, its useless. The entire point is psycholocial warfare. Its meant to look in ever reguard precisely like the ships its mimicing. NO ONE is going to attack a ship that is OBVIOUSLY a warship in disguise.

As was pointed out above, its meant to make people THINK about fighting, not just simply figure its got to be worth their time no matter what the MINOR cost is. The way things are now, it never cost more to gank a hulk that you get back either from the salvage or the reward, usually both.

The original idea was to have a ship that could be converted with inventions and such into a warship. I dont see that this would be a great cost in time. Bots will not use them, but people that will are wanting to fight but only those that deserve to be fought. I dont want to go out and just attack some innocent player that might have everything invested in his ship. I want to know that the people Im killing are killers that deserve to be killed.

If a scan can show a battleship or something like that behind a screen, it invalidates the idea.

Yes, it might be better to have a module that will REDUCE the ability of a ship to do things lke hauling or mining, but if it cant do those things at all, all a ganker would need to do is watch and if it didnt mine, they would leave it alone. IT HAS to mine or haul, even if only a small amount to show that it would be capable of doing so.

Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
...As much as you may believe that last fight you were in ended with bad luck, the other fleet probably knew they were going to win, and knew why as well.


Precisely the situation this will cause. The gankers will be saying "that freighter got lucky and survived until concord took us out".

The freighter will know that it was due to the armor he had installed and would know that it was him, not concord that took them out.


Verity Sovereign wrote:
If they have time to lock you and then scan you, then determine whether they should attack, then you should be able to warp off.

I don't think many gankers scan their targets first - maybe they do and then decide not to attack - but scanning, refitting based on the results, and returning means that if they actually get their target, their target was *really* dumb (or AFK).

I'm not even talking about *stealing*, I'm talking about ganking in high sec/privateering in low/null/wh sec - baits and bluffs to get enemies to refrain from attacking when it would be advantageous for them to attack, or to get them to attack when they shouldn't.

When they aren't quite sure if they are facing a ship prepared for combat they will mistakes - Like Linois' did, 0 for 2 on guessing correctly, lost his whole squadron that had achieved virtually nothing.
In those cases, he could known for sure, but he had to get closer to have a look (hence the importance of long range fire in the first case where the convoy was bluffing) - in the 2nd case, he did get in close, and realied his mistake, and tried to flee, but he was caught.

Unfortunately, Eve's ship scanner is too long range - it would be nice if they had to come within warp disruptor range to get a scan in.


Most of the gankers Ive heard of has a scanner at one gate, scanning those that come in, and let those at the other gate know whats coming. They have all the time between the gate to decide if they want to attack you or not. Many times when I hauled long range I would be scanned at a gate. It didnt matter that I warped out before they had time to think about it, because it was people at the other end that made that decision. Only because i never hauled anything of that great a value keep my ship alive most of the time.

IF they were to make a module that would see through the disguise, it would have to be a seperate one that wouldnt be of use other wise, thus requiring the people to decide if they wanted one type of scanner or the other.

Think about what you guys are saying. It boils down to "It would be a waste of time because miners and haulers would know that the gankers would have to be able to spot these things a mile away. Your saying that ccp would have to make it so easy to spot that no one would fail to realise it was a warship, because the gankers would have to know that they shouldnt attack it.
loard doktor
tradersbear
#79 - 2012-06-29 08:22:58 UTC
Mortimer Civeri wrote:
After the war, it was concluded that Q-ships were greatly over-rated, diverting skilled seamen from other duties without sinking enough U-boats to justify the strategy.

The careers of all five ships were almost entirely unsuccessful and very short, with USS Atik sunk on its first patrol, all Q-ships patrols ended in 1943.

Q-ships were responsible for about 10% of all U-boats sunk, ranking them well below the use of ordinary minefields in effectiveness.

shall I continue, or do you get how useless your idea is?

Didn't work then, and won't work now.



hmmm, 5 ship, 2 years, and 10% vs hundreds of battleship, cruisers and destroyers (ship made spacifically to target subs), and other ships, PLUS minefields, take 7 years (the british were fighing years before the us got into it) to take out the other 90%, yet they were considered unsuccessful?

this is also only about the american q ship. the british had theirs, not to mention japanese version, the german version and the russian versions. Ive not heard much about them, but i have heard a few stories.