Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Randomness is bad. EVE is a very strategic game, not a random deathmatch. ECM is already a terrible system and nothing should be based on it, except as an example of a gameplay mechanism that should be deleted. And that doesn't even start to get into the problems with fleet composition, tacklers vs bubblers balance, and so forth.

This change would be completely unsub-worthy for me.

That falloff crap is crap, but warp core strength idea is interesting.

Why do you think the falloff idea is crap? Can you give reasons or are you just rejecting anything that's different because it's SO different?

Because, Heavy Neut + Dual Web + Light Drones = A Totally not dead Frigate.

A Battleship can die to a Frig because he didn't properly fit for dealing with a frig. Why should he not be punished for that?

EVE online is not Bigger=Better

Okay well first of all, ECM isn't completely random, it has a higher or lower chance based on the strength of the jammer and target ship's sensors. Again, that's why I initially said that if Tackle had a system like this, I'd want it to be much less hit-or-miss, and more consistent.

Second, ECMs other problem is that it totally shuts down the target ship? So you think ECM is unfair/OP because it "completely shuts down the target ship", but it's also not good because it's chance based and doesn't ALWAYS shut down the target ship? You're being a little inconsistent here. Because right now, tackle "completely shuts down the target ship" from warping away, 100% of cycles of a disruptor (unless a target has warp core stabs). So why is it okay for Tackle to be 100% effective, but jamming to be random? (But then also jamming shouldn't be random? according to you?)

I just disagree that it would break or ruin combat. It would certainly CHANGE it a lot, yes. But nobody has convinced me that it would be for the worse. Granted I'm not certain that it would be for the better either.

Let's think, if tackle was like ECM, a chance to "land" based on warp core strength and disruptor strength (which got weaker as range increased)...

You're right, tackle as a role would change drastically. Tackle would be more like ECM, in that not every ship, or even every fleet would have it. Currently all E-war is like an extra bonus in your fleet, if you have a jamming ship or two, or a painting ship, or a damping ship, it's like "oh cool, we're that much stronger". MOST PVP fits don't include a jammer, but almost EVERY PVP fit includes a Dis/Scram. For all of EVE's history, tackle has been a NECESSITY for anyone hoping to get kills. Without it, things will just run away.

Under a system like what I'm imagining, tackle would still be necessary, and still viable for all pilots. Just like my first concept, under the newer ECM-like/falloff concept, disruptor strength would go up as hulls got bigger. And don't forget I also said some, maybe even lots of ship should get bonuses to Disruptor Strength (DS). So if we assume the Atron gets a big role bonus to DS, your fleets newbros can still tackle things twice their size, maybe even bigger. But let's say it takes a "Heavy Tackle", like a thorax or something, to tackle a fully skilled Battleship. Or even a perfectly skilled Atron, with a DS upgrade mod, and maybe some cheap DS implants... THEN it can tackle Battleships (consistently at optimal, maybe yes/maybe no once you're in falloff).

I don't see this as a bad thing. The total newbs in completely cheap trash frigs could still tackle most things, assuming they fly the "tackle" bonused hulls. In fact, with added range and falloff like what I made up, they may even be able to tackle more things, more often.

Honestly I think this would make tackle MUCH more interesting. With a several skills added, multiple implants (even low-mid-high grade sets for it), and tackle upgrade modules, I think it would become a much more fun system.

Think: "Oh yea I'm a dedicated PRO tackler... nothing gets away from me. I fly a (pick a ceptor) with a faction short point, DS upgrade, and DS implants blahblahbalh.... the ONLY thing that can warp when I'm scramming it is a (pick ship class with high Warp Core Strength), with at least 1 stab, and WCS implants."

Then tackle proficiency would go down from there, making it a career that people can really specialize in, instead of just "no stabs, point from any ship, and you're 100% tackled.

I agree that it might be a little bit "insane" to change that many things at once, but I don't agree that it's definitely a bad thing.

I think the original idea and its variants (warp core strengh and disruption multipliers according to ship class) was much more simple and elegant than the system based on ECM mechanics. Those mechanics are source of great discord, as they rely too much on chance on something as critical as to pin a ship in place. Personally I think we should revert to the original concept, and tweak it more.

I'm more supportive of this as well, for several reasons.

First of all, warp strength is already an existing statistic that every ship has. Increasing it for different ship classes would be very quick and simple for Devs to do. So, low overhead.

Second, fewer changes mean fewer things to balance.

Guys let's make running away super easy that won't be super frustrating at all.

Rather, the effect would be forcing people to tackle in heavier ships that can't run away immediately if the "victim" turns out to be a bait. Currently, it's so easy for roaming gang's interceptor to run away from a bait, even after taking the bait, that there's essentially no risk for the tacklers.

I kept running into this problem myself. The only bait I've had success killing interceptors in are Ravens with rapid heavies using precision missiles. These things run away way too fast unless you alpha them.

Interesting hypothetical (the original, not so much the RNG one), but personally I'd be more comfortable with larger ships receiving reduced penalties from warp core stabilizers, rather than simply having a higher warp core strength out of the box.

There are probably less significant changes that could be made to make larger ships more viable, though. I'm not sure tackle resistance would be really fun for anyone.