These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123
 

Jump ranges and warp speed need to be doubled.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Skydell
Bad Girl Posse
#41 - 2013-06-10 00:24:20 UTC
Warp speed isn't the problem.

If you warp around in solar system map, you see that we actually warp very fast. The trouble is the inertia system is based on a diminishing returns system and the way we slow down is part of that so if you warped 50 AU 95% of the time is spent dropping out of warp, not warping itself.

Even in regular screen, count down in seconds, one ten thousand, two ten thousand and factor the time it takes to get from a gate to a gate, then watch it as it switches from AU away to millions, then hundreds of thousands of km away.

Just like you can MWD to 90% max speed almost immediately and then spend 20X as long getting to cap, the warp system is effecting your slow down.

As for Jump ranges, it's hull oriented. People have been ignored for years when asking for a useful jump range to Black Ops. I don't expect it to ever change. On the other end of the spectrum I don't think anyone has a complaint with the ranges of the Carrier. When talking about Jump ranges you need to specify your hull or the troll brigade will rip you to shreds and derail your topic in no time.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#42 - 2013-06-10 00:48:33 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Melvin Earl wrote:
Tippia wrote:
…although it would be interesting to see what dynamic would be created if the fuel requirement was exponential rather than linear.
So you are trying to be cleaver and sneak in a nerf? No thanks. The game does not need to be dumbed down even more.
No. I'm trying to be clever and sneak in a bit of balance combined with a bit of thinking, thus smartening the game up by offering you an important tactical and strategical choice to make.

What if fuel consumption was simply [distance in AU]² percent of your full fuel bay capacity? Do you want to jump 10 AU and burn 100% of the fuel your ship can carry, making it a one-way trip? Do you instead want to make it ten 1-AU jumps, eating up only 10% of your fuel capacity in the process, but requiring a good chain and a bit more time? Can you bring along enough fuel for the entire fleet so they can jump back 10 AU, meaning you can strike really deep into enemy territory? What happens if you bring along a JF with fuel for everyone and it is found and shot to pieces? Can you keep your jump route safe to do the low-fuel option and basically lap the entire galaxy four times over on one tank?

The only way to dumb down linear cost would be to make it a fixed cost regardless of distance.

I sure as hell hope you wouldn't intend to restrict jump drives to maximum ranges of 10 AU.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Ohishi
Apocalypse Reign
#43 - 2013-06-10 03:47:35 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Melvin Earl wrote:
Tippia wrote:
…although it would be interesting to see what dynamic would be created if the fuel requirement was exponential rather than linear.
So you are trying to be cleaver and sneak in a nerf? No thanks. The game does not need to be dumbed down even more.
No. I'm trying to be clever and sneak in a bit of balance combined with a bit of thinking, thus smartening the game up by offering you an important tactical and strategical choice to make.

What if fuel consumption was simply [distance in AU]² percent of your full fuel bay capacity? Do you want to jump 10 AU and burn 100% of the fuel your ship can carry, making it a one-way trip? Do you instead want to make it ten 1-AU jumps, eating up only 10% of your fuel capacity in the process, but requiring a good chain and a bit more time? Can you bring along enough fuel for the entire fleet so they can jump back 10 AU, meaning you can strike really deep into enemy territory? What happens if you bring along a JF with fuel for everyone and it is found and shot to pieces? Can you keep your jump route safe to do the low-fuel option and basically lap the entire galaxy four times over on one tank?

The only way to dumb down linear cost would be to make it a fixed cost regardless of distance.

I sure as hell hope you wouldn't intend to restrict jump drives to maximum ranges of 10 AU.

I would bet LY is what they meant. Not AU.

To Tippia.
Why would you bring a JF along when you can fit a cloak to any of the industrial ships? Or you can have a couple of transport ships in tow of a BO locking onto covert cynos?

I do believe that BO bridge and jump range needs to be increased though. If they don't want to add range to BO, then make a covert capital class based off of the dreadnoughts. They can easily balance it by reducing the amount of damage the BO dreads do by not allowing siege due to specialization of the electronics to allow use of coverts ops cyno/bridge. A cov-ops capital. Maybe add a ship hanger for sneaky ninja ships and a corp hanger to allow deep ops into enemy territory to be really untraceable. Yeah.

Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Seek what they sought.

dark heartt
#44 - 2013-06-10 03:55:28 UTC
Melvin Earl wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:
Jump ranges and warp speeds are outdated and need to be doubled.....

Nope, cant see any potential 'Power projection' threads being spawned from that at all.

How about NO.
Hmm… yeah, “no” works for me. I think I'll go with “no” as well.

Just make warp speed actually matter even at short ranges (yes, yes, I know the code is such a mess that no-one understands it, but still…), and then slash it by half across the board.

As usual you have no clue about the game.

Large fights happen because we can get there in time. With faster response ability and adequate supplies more will happen and thus; more news coverage. It will be better for game and you will enjoy it more.


Yes tell us more about the large fights you have in your NPC corp.

http://tetrisisunrealistic.blogspot.com.au/
Previous page123