EVE General Discussion

Think of your ships targeting system as a laser enhanced sight. If you hit the ship with one, it creates a splash effect, which acually makes the ship more visible.

Most basic targeting systems are either camera or laser oriented, or a combination of both.

I think chess is taking about the King yes. However that's not what you said.

This.

Funny how you don't see them whining about the impossible things that happen in EvE all the time. I think they just to try and look clever for a little bit, or they just like whining about irrelivant points.

this wont reduce the blob, just make it harder for the server to cope with the really large battles. as they would still happen

Based on what? You're unproven programming and maths skills?

I think people should stop liking ideas because they seam like an easy fix to a bad situation that nobody likes. Granted the mechanics would change the dynamics; but that doesn't mean they are the best solution to the problem.

The simple fact is, it's not possible to do this without it being extremely exploitable. We should have learned that with the numerous other exploitable factors in game. Many of those took some time to discover the exploits inherent in the system and abuse them to the point they were eventually nerfed or mechanics were modified to remove some of that exploit.

Fact is, some things just cannot be fixed.

---

We could fix mines, and make them a functional part of the game and a reliable and interesting mechanic to help combat other fleet mechanics and gate camps. The answer is simple.

Make a specific ship that deploys mines, and has to remain on grid for them to remain active. This would be a stealth ship, like the Bomber, only Destroyer or Cruiser sized; and would require similar skills as any equivalent Tech 2 ship.

Once on grid, it would have to manually move around and deploy mines with anchoring mechanics; including a short timer for each mine, requirements to decloak on initial deployment, and limitations on proximity for those mines. Following that the ship would cloak, move off to a safe distance, and turn to face the mine field like a Bomber would.

Mines would show up on a Tactical overlay with an explosion radius, and have significantly less damage than a bomb, though their fields could overlap.

The ship would be limited to an arc in front of the ship, with mines outside that arc showing up as no more than blips, and have a maximum distance for activation. This would control spread pattern, while also allowing the ship to change facing and activate a secondary field outside of, and possibly inclusiveof, its initial arc.

There would also be a limit to maximum deployment, activation, and control. You could have, for example, both a T2 Destroyer class, and a T2 Cruiser Class of mine deployment ship; the latter with greater capabilities, cargohold, and potentially higher Alpha mines than the former.

Leaving grid would cause the mines to unanchor and become standard 2 hour timer objects in space; collectible, but with a limited time in which they can exist like wrecks, jetcans, and the rest.

That could be made to balance in game without being completely exploitable. It's also a mechanic that has been removed from the game for years.

---

I don't think anyone can think of a way to remove exploit from this proposed mechanic; short of not being able to target anything. Even limiting targeting capabilities to war targets and negative standings is exploitable.

forget the server issue. this wont reduce the blob, it woule actually make it bigger. 1 fleet v logi's, 1 fleet v bs fleet a-f,1 fleet v bs fleet g-l etc etc. it would make it a must to bring more people to negate the effects of this.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ this. The locking delay is only on people currently locking the target, not people who have already locked it. That means that everybody can alpha one single ship, but people will have to stagger their lock times. It also gets rid of all the mess of friendlies already locking up targets, because it only affects people who are currently locking the target when you are locking.

This also means smaller ships are more useful because the time they take to lock targets is much smaller, so they'll only incur the penalty for a short amount of time. This also makes ECCM's more useful because targets will take longer to lock you, ensuring that more people can get the penalty. This also means you might as well just spread people around to several different targets to avoid the penalty altogether. This also means that smaller targets will be harder to lock, thus giving them more survivability in large fleet fights.

The key difference between this idea and the first idea is that this idea only has the penalty for all people currently IN THE PROCESS OF LOCKING the target. It doesn't matter if 300 people have already locked the target in the past. Honestly it seems like the perfect solution for preventing rediculous 300 man fleets alphaing one person, while at the same time making it non-exploitable without the exploiters being overwhelmed by tons of crap on their screen.

As an edit: For those who are going to play the "this will cause lag" card, don't you think the server is already keeping track of who is locking who? How hard would it be to tag a counter with it, counting the number of ongoing locks?

I think it is worth a test on Duality.

V I D E O G A M E S
In EVE:
-Space is a liquid
-We can warp through planets
-Lasers have recoil
-Ships travel FTL
-Hybrid ships and weapons were suddenly buffed
-There's no sound in space
-Weapons fire through friendly ships and random space objects

You know the thing about all the things above? There's a fiction explanation about all of them. This idea is no different.

Would you like to know the simplest explanation for the reason we can warp through planets. The warp tunnel changes. The game admits we are doing the seemingly impossible. Therefore, the player knows it isn't a bug or unintended effect, so the suspension of disbelief is maintained.

EVE is a game, I don't know why you're complaining now.