These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next page
 

Scaled warp systems.

Author
darkneko
Come And Get Your Love
#1 - 2014-02-27 12:55:21 UTC
The warp engine. The one thing that is equal of every ship needs to be put to an end. Hopefully i am not the only one who has noticed but it seams to be one of the most messed up parts of the entire game to me. More so than unbalanced race ships(they should be unbalanced) or any other part of the game and here is my greatest example.

So you're flying along in space in your capital class or even a battleship for that matter and suddenly a lone T1 frig not even half your size decides to warp scramble you. What happens? Well your now stuck of course, unable to warp off without draining his cap or killing him. Forced to try and hit it with your over sized guns and drones (if you have them). Why? Because your warp engine which should be the size of that frig is being Scrambled to hell by his point.


THIS MAKES NO SENSE TO ME. if my ship is so much larger it stands to reason that i would need a massively powerful engine to move it as well as more then a dozen redundant systems meaning such a large Ship should still be able to warp off from one lone T1 non-specialized frig even if slower then its normal warp. So this is what i am suggesting.

Scaling warp engines/scramblers
EX:



  1. T1 Frigs/Destroyers
  2. Warp stab +0-1 Scramble strength boost +0-2

  3. T1 Cruisers
  4. Warp stab +1-2 Scramble strength boost +2-3

  5. T1 Battle ships
  6. Warp stab +2-4 Scramble strength Boost+ 3-6

  7. Capitals
  8. Warp stab +6 Scramble strength boost +7


Now i know what you are thinking. "but then how the **** are we supposed to catch ships bigger then us if they can still warp off" Well along with this change to strength i suggest that the scramble would make it take longer to warp based off the strength difference that way you can still call in friends if you are fast enough(though i bet you keep some nearby) or just use a T2 tackle, which would have a grater stab/scramble strength boost then the T1 version of itself.
Seliah
Red Cloud Vigil
#2 - 2014-02-27 13:35:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Seliah
1. I don't think your justification makes any sense. It's not because it's a larger ship that it's harder to disrupt. Give me a bucket full of water and i'll disrupt your smartphone and your computer just the same, even if one is much bigger than the other one :). And redundant systems ... Warp Core Stabs ?

2. This would completely ruin the gameplay imo. Some mechanics are simple and are supposed to be simple so the game can actually be played and relatively balanced.

3. Your last suggestion doesn't help, your system would still mean a battleship is completely immune to a tackling frigate. How can this be a good thing ?

Big no for me.
darkneko
Come And Get Your Love
#3 - 2014-02-27 13:50:44 UTC  |  Edited by: darkneko
Seliah wrote:
1. I don't think your justification makes any sense. It's not because it's a larger ship that it's harder to disrupt. Give me a bucket full of water and i'll disrupt your smartphone and your computer just the same, even if one is much bigger than the other one :). And redundant systems ... Warp Core Stabs ?

2. This would completely ruin the gameplay imo. Some mechanics are simple and are supposed to be simple so the game can actually be played and relatively balanced.

3. Your last suggestion doesn't help, your system would still mean a battleship is completely immune to a tackling frigate. How can this be a good thing ?

Big no for me.


Fair enough i know it may not make sense at first glance.
As for point 1 its not the size that matters its the strength of said systems and the energy they put out around your ship. They are not breaking the engine, or short circuiting it like water would do to a smart phone but using a form of energy to disrupt the wavelengths of your own energy output. Jamming can be overcome with compensation so why not warp fields. That is what warp stabs do after all and the venture has such a system built in so why not other ships?

Point 2: How would it ruin the game play? if making eve harder doesn't suite you that's fine but give me a better reason than this. I would counter with this though. If it becomes harder to do a lone scramble T1 to catch a guy wont some of those high sec bares start to venture out if they know they have a chance at running away like cowards.

Point 3: I did not say immune, it would simply make it impossible for a T1 non specialized frig to tackle it alone for more then Say a minute while the systems of the battleship calibrate . A T2 variation could still manage it alone with a battle ship but it would take at least a T2 cruiser to permanently hold a capital and if you have friends (which is the point of the game) you can still use a group of T1 frigs.
Lilliana Stelles
#4 - 2014-02-27 13:56:40 UTC
This could work but it needs to be broken down a bit more.
Take the existing ship sizes:
Small, medium, large, capital.

Give them all an "engine strength" of that size.

Then give them all disrupters of their size category (like neuts).

Make larger disrupters effect small ships
But small disrupters are chance based against large ships

Not a forum alt. 

darkneko
Come And Get Your Love
#5 - 2014-02-27 13:58:32 UTC
Lilliana Stelles wrote:
This could work but it needs to be broken down a bit more.
Take the existing ship sizes:
Small, medium, large, capital.

Give them all an "engine strength" of that size.

Then give them all disrupters of their size category (like neuts).

Make larger disrupters effect small ships
But small disrupters are chance based against large ships


Good idea i was thinking thinking something similar but was wondering if all the new items would make it overly complicated.
Lilliana Stelles
#6 - 2014-02-27 14:02:22 UTC
To make things work "properly" with ship roles,

Interceptors would be capable of fitting battleship-sized tackle, or have a huge chance bonus.

Not a forum alt. 

Seliah
Red Cloud Vigil
#7 - 2014-02-27 14:04:43 UTC
darkneko wrote:

Jamming can be overcome with compensation so why not warp fields. That is what warp stabs do after all and the venture has such a system built in so why not other ships?


Well you're answering yourself really. ECM can be countered with ECCM. Warp disruption can be countered with Warp Core Stabs. Some ships have higher base ECCM, some ships have higher base WCS, if you want more you need to equip it. Seems perfectly logical to me.

darkneko wrote:

if making eve harder doesn't suite you that's fine but give me a better reason than this. I would counter with this though. If it becomes harder to do a lone scramble T1 to catch a guy wont some of those high sec bares start to venture out if they know they have a chance at running away like cowards.


Oh, I'm all right with making EVE harder than it is already. However, implementing a system that would hugely benefit people wanting to avoid PVP at all costs and encourage outnumbering isn't the first thing that would come to mind.

Warp disruption is one of the main things that allow players to engage others in non-consensual PVP. Weakening this system will not result in "high sec bears venturing into lowsec" as you said, it'll result in less non-consensual PVP (which is one of the great things about EVE), more frustration from people trying to hunt targets, and more passive gameplay from people trying to avoid combat interactions.

darkneko wrote:

if you have friends (which is the point of the game) you can still use a group of T1 frigs.


It's not the sole point of the game. It's a very important part of it, agreed, but killing solo pvp in a smaller ship shouldn't be something acceptable.


darkneko
Come And Get Your Love
#8 - 2014-02-27 14:21:39 UTC  |  Edited by: darkneko
So now you agree with me at least that warp stabs work. With a system that is built into a ship like the engine though shouldn't it be scaled like the other systems on board such as scan strength.

Well while i agree it may encourage outnumbering, that ship sailed a long time ago. It has happened and numbers already mean everything in this game. and i am not saying you cant still lock down a target but it would make it so that if you want to kill a battleship you need something of the same class or a number of smaller ships.

Who said anything about killing smaller pvp ships, the T2 variations would still be able to tackle bigger ships and if the bigger ship couldn't kill you before they still wont be able to just have the option of warping off or holding you until out of range.

Also to counteract this problem make the webs effect ships based off Sig radius so the smaller ships can speed tank easier or just fly out of range.
Kaerakh
Obscure Joke Implied
#9 - 2014-02-27 14:31:47 UTC
Someone posted this idea already. There are plenty of reasons in that thread for why this is a bad idea.
darkneko
Come And Get Your Love
#10 - 2014-02-27 14:36:08 UTC
Kaerakh wrote:
Someone posted this idea already. There are plenty of reasons in that thread for why this is a bad idea.

Where at? i would love to see why, i did not know this since it wasn't on the Commonly Proposed Ideas Thread as far as i could tell.
Kaerakh
Obscure Joke Implied
#11 - 2014-02-27 14:37:03 UTC
darkneko wrote:
Kaerakh wrote:
Someone posted this idea already. There are plenty of reasons in that thread for why this is a bad idea.

Where at? i would love to see why, i did not know this since it wasn't on the Commonly Proposed Ideas Thread as far as i could tell.


Why don't you go and do a search? (like you're supposed to do)
darkneko
Come And Get Your Love
#12 - 2014-02-27 14:39:16 UTC  |  Edited by: darkneko
Kaerakh wrote:
darkneko wrote:
Kaerakh wrote:
Someone posted this idea already. There are plenty of reasons in that thread for why this is a bad idea.

Where at? i would love to see why, i did not know this since it wasn't on the Commonly Proposed Ideas Thread as far as i could tell.


Why don't you go and do a search? (like you're supposed to do)


Well i could but since you brought it up i figured you would be the one defending your position(if you even have one) instead of having me do it for you.

This is off topic though and not constructive towards the idea one way or the other though so i will let it slide.
Kaerakh
Obscure Joke Implied
#13 - 2014-02-27 14:49:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaerakh
darkneko wrote:
Kaerakh wrote:
darkneko wrote:
Kaerakh wrote:
Someone posted this idea already. There are plenty of reasons in that thread for why this is a bad idea.

Where at? i would love to see why, i did not know this since it wasn't on the Commonly Proposed Ideas Thread as far as i could tell.


Why don't you go and do a search? (like you're supposed to do)


Well i could but since you brought it up i figured you would be the one defending your position(if you even have one) instead of having me do it for you.

This is off topic though and not constructive towards the idea one way or the other though so i will let it slide.


You're the one reposting an old idea contrary to the board's rules. I wouldn't be acting so self righteous if I were you. Blink
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4176874#post4176874

Edit: So in essence I just did your work for you.
darkneko
Come And Get Your Love
#14 - 2014-02-27 14:56:13 UTC  |  Edited by: darkneko
Well you are correct sir. Thank you for the link and directing me to it so i did not have to do the work myself Edit:(as i am quite lazy and did not wish to spend hours searching for something you already had information on) and since there idea is similar i hope the Devs can move my input onto his thread or visa versa
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2014-02-27 15:05:02 UTC
It could make sense to have a warp strength based on engine size and this then be used in the time-to-warp calculation. Then the scram has a strength that is subtracted from the ship warp strength. Enough scrams will shut it down, not enough will at least slow down the entry to warp buying time for more scram to be applied if necessary. An interceptor would be bonused on scram strength to fulfill it's role, the different meta scrams would likewise have incrementally increasing strengths.
darkneko
Come And Get Your Love
#16 - 2014-02-27 15:37:49 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
It could make sense to have a warp strength based on engine size and this then be used in the time-to-warp calculation. Then the scram has a strength that is subtracted from the ship warp strength. Enough scrams will shut it down, not enough will at least slow down the entry to warp buying time for more scram to be applied if necessary. An interceptor would be bonused on scram strength to fulfill it's role, the different meta scrams would likewise have incrementally increasing strengths.


That would be a great idea, especially since they have already been working on changing the align/warp time of each ship size.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#17 - 2014-02-27 15:48:04 UTC
With an implementation like this warp core stabs would add a given amount to the warp engine strength, and would also mean that even a 4 wcs hauler could be at least slowed down entering warp giving poeple more chance to catch them.
Psianh Auvyander
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#18 - 2014-02-27 16:45:10 UTC
The problem here is that there is no good reason to add this feature. Your only reason for adding this type of feature is because you say it makes no sense to you. There are a lot of things in EVE that don't make logical sense. We sacrifice those things in the spirit of a game that's more fun than it is realistic. These are game design decisions that are made in the interest of players.

The idea of making it so that larger ships are capable of ignoring, for all intents and purposes, single, smaller ships adds only one thing: ease of escape. As has been already mentioned, we need an EVE where things are dying, and often. If someone wants to have a higher chance of evasion, they should sacrifice something - which is what we already have. You have to sacrifice a potentially useful module for another module which helps you escape attackers.

It's bad game design to allow an innate advantage for ships to avoid combat simply because of their size. This does two things, both of which are detrimental to the game's health at large:

1. It makes larger ships too powerful.
You mention that to tackle a battleship you'd need multiple frigates or another battleship. Battleships are not made to tackle other things. Their slow speed and focused module purpose make getting in range to apply a point is unecessarily difficult. Thus, the larger the ship, the easier it is to simply leave when tackled by smaller ships. I read what you said about multiple frigates, but the fact is, people are not dumb; often times you only have time for one ship to make the difference.

2. It makes smaller ships too weak.
New players are instantly able to offer meaningful assistance in any fleet framework by flying tackle. These players are new to the game, they're not masters. They're learning mechanics, terminology, and much, much more. Making their life more difficult is the exact opposite tack that EVE Online should be taking. Furthermore, frigates already have substantial downsides to their vital upsides. They are easily destroyed if damaged.

There is a careful, albeit imperfect, balancing act between all ship classes in EVE. The smaller ships MUST remain viable, effective tool for experienced and new players alike, and taking away their main function can only damage the game. I'm afraid that I see no benefit whatsoever to this idea.

My Blog

@wsethbrown

Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#19 - 2014-02-27 16:57:28 UTC
I see no compelling reason to remove tackling.

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.

darkneko
Come And Get Your Love
#20 - 2014-02-27 17:09:43 UTC  |  Edited by: darkneko
Psianh Auvyander wrote:
The problem here is that there is no good reason to add this feature. Your only reason for adding this type of feature is because you say it makes no sense to you. There are a lot of things in EVE that don't make logical sense. We sacrifice those things in the spirit of a game that's more fun than it is realistic. These are game design decisions that are made in the interest of players.

The idea of making it so that larger ships are capable of ignoring, for all intents and purposes, single, smaller ships adds only one thing: ease of escape. As has been already mentioned, we need an EVE where things are dying, and often. If someone wants to have a higher chance of evasion, they should sacrifice something - which is what we already have. You have to sacrifice a potentially useful module for another module which helps you escape attackers.

It's bad game design to allow an innate advantage for ships to avoid combat simply because of their size. This does two things, both of which are detrimental to the game's health at large:

1. It makes larger ships too powerful.
You mention that to tackle a battleship you'd need multiple frigates or another battleship. Battleships are not made to tackle other things. Their slow speed and focused module purpose make getting in range to apply a point is unecessarily difficult. Thus, the larger the ship, the easier it is to simply leave when tackled by smaller ships. I read what you said about multiple frigates, but the fact is, people are not dumb; often times you only have time for one ship to make the difference.

2. It makes smaller ships too weak.
New players are instantly able to offer meaningful assistance in any fleet framework by flying tackle. These players are new to the game, they're not masters. They're learning mechanics, terminology, and much, much more. Making their life more difficult is the exact opposite tack that EVE Online should be taking. Furthermore, frigates already have substantial downsides to their vital upsides. They are easily destroyed if damaged.

There is a careful, albeit imperfect, balancing act between all ship classes in EVE. The smaller ships MUST remain viable, effective tool for experienced and new players alike, and taking away their main function can only damage the game. I'm afraid that I see no benefit whatsoever to this idea.


1. I do agree it makes larger ships more powerful but isn't that the point, To grow and try to get the larger expensive ships? Putting time into and training for them over the years with the reason of becoming more powerful. As for Frigs being easily destroyed this is true but only if you can catch them and as you suggest battleships are not made to tackle so why make them do it. Frigs are supposed to be fast and weak ships, Hard to hit but when you can hit them they should be ripped apart by massive guns.

2. New players should not be instantly useful in pvp vs lvl 5 players who have years on them unless that older player fail fits their ship to high hell. Why take the time to train pvp skills at all then if that is your line of thinking. Just use a blob of free noob ships with point and ab then hammer away at them while the bs cant hit back after its drones are dead.
(more often now new players are just alts if they can handle this task in the first place and i know the example above is extreme)
123Next page