Player Features and Ideas Discussion

warpspeed was not fine, it has been tested proven many times, under a 50 AU warp, there was no difference, a shuttle and a stilleto both aligned to the same gate, would land at exaclty the same time.

this was broken since a shuttle is supposed to do 6AU/s while a stiletto was 13.5, so stilletto would have needed less than half the time the shuttle need to complete the warp, yet it was not the reality

I have flown every size class of ship other than capitals since this patch. I do believe that the hammer was taken to battleships in particular with these changes. A 200-AU warp, which is not a rare thing for someone like me who runs incursions for example, now takes 4 minutes. I am not arguing that they shouldn't be a slower class of ship...the very slowest subcap...and that interceptors and the like shouldn't have significant agility advantages. However, as it stands right now there is a serious quality of life issue if you are sitting in a battleship.

There is a meta-changing element to this as well. This change greatly favors defensive posturing during system chases. If you are in a battleship, the "hero tackle" has to hold your targets anywhere from 1 to 4 minutes before you can land on grid. Since a battleship can no longer get there fast enough, those tacklers have to realize they are very likely to die before the big guns can arrive. Any roaming gang that flies battleships is just asking to be split at all times.

Other than combat concerns, the tedious warp speed makes flying a battleship barely better than a freighter. It now shares its warp speed class with the Orca, a ship that has 2.5x the mass. It only has a 50% higher speed than freighters, while coming in at 1/9 of the weight. The math doesn't even add up on this.

Battleship speed should be bumped to 3.0 AU/sec as a starter. Give Destroyers 4.5, cruisers 4, and BCs 3.5. Leave interceptors fast as hell and awesome at landing and catching stragglers, as befits their role.

Barring this, can we please have a module for warp speed, in addition to the new implants? That way we can make the decision to reduce low slot survivability to be faster on the fly. Perhaps make it so that fitting such a module makes it impossible to use warp core stabilizers due to the increased engine output, so that people can't just make untackleable fast travel fits.

Signed,
A Guy On A 35-Jump Route In A Battleship Who has Time To Write a Novel

I don't think anyone disagrees that the accel/decel changes are reasonable and right. Maybe some people who just want game balance to work in their favor.

The main issue is that in true CCP fashion they decided to alter multiple variables in the equation at once. Fixing accel/decel, with a minor tweak to ship warp speeds to make it "feel right", would have gotten us most of the way to where we needed to be. Instead, they fixed accel/decel but made battleships so ponderous that they are going to be effectively useless in everything but gatecamps. And we can all agree that what EVE needs is more gatecamps, right? :)

Please explain why a battleship should move more slowly through space than a battlecruiser. This is not the case for maritime shipping, nor is it the case that contemporary space ships move more slowly when they are bigger.

Since this is a *warp* (i.e. warping space-time) the mass of the ship is largely irrelevant.

Sure it may take more energy to get up to speed, but the final speed should be no different.

The relationship between mass and power required to accelerate is linear (at least until you get close to the speed of light)

F = MA (force = mass x acceleration)
Work = F x S (distance moved)
Power = Work / Time

Taking this as a proxy for (as yet undiscovered) warp physics, it follows that the power generation system only needs grow linearly in power output as the ships mass increases.

Battleships have bigger capacitors (and presumably power generation systems) so why should they not accelerate just as quickly?

I can understand the case for civilian ships needing to be efficient, but military vessels would be built for effectiveness in combat, not eco-friendliness.

Notwithstanding pseudo-technical arguments, as things stand battleships have become ineffective in any kind of mobile combat. This is a very large nerf to an already-compromised ship class. Gangs will avoid battleship docrtines all over Eve unless they are hot-dropping.

This is undesirable.

I have no intention of dropping my slave clone for the new implants, or a crystal clone or my snake clone or even my +5'/6% clone....... the warp speed is a huge gimp for battleships, but alot of players ( my self included ) aren't going to give up 40% or so extra tank or speed.....

Do you mean for PVE or PVP?

In PVE I can see that the slow warp makes little difference. In PVP it's a bit of a show-stopper for anyone needing to warp to an engagement.

I like the new warp acceleration system, even if physics rules, it is not so relevant, it seems quite logic. In matter of gameplay it is awesome..
The Freighters thoug should be revamp quickly. They are sooooo slooooooow. And they are so weak....
If I did not have tree accounts, it is clear that I would never transport anything.
It is a game, even if Eve is based on frustrations, there are limits...

When was the last time you used snakes or slaves in a mission? I haven't done a high-sec mission in a couple years, no im talking pvp. When it comes down to "oh look, i can warp faster then my battleship fleet now...woohoo" or "I have 70,000 armor in my battleship and 25,000 in my cruiser.... i'll just tank these guys for days." It's kind of obvious which youre going to go for. Slaves ( and snakes ) work for pretty much any sort of pvp in eve at the moment ( bar active shield tank ) where as the warp speed implants can actually get you killed in smaller class ships, as you arrive miles ahead of everyone else.

I have the feeling ccp does not care ... who want my stuff?