Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Pete Eichas
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 11:30:00 -
[1]
I was reading the posts about the problems with local chat in regards to both macro miners/ratters and gate campers, and it seems to me that both issues are a result of the same thing - in order to enter a system (generally) one must go through a gate. This is a chokepoint for campers on one hand, on the other it triggers macros to warp ships to safe points.
My idea is for CCP to create a module that allows a ship to drop a beacon of sorts, that would allow the ship that dropped it to warp directly back to that location from anywhere else in the Universe. The restriction would be that only the ship that dropped the beacon would be allowed to use it. The module could create a one time and one way wormhole tunnel with the destination and ship mass known, and will be available as long as the module stays equiped to the same ship and the ships mass remains relatively the same. |
Midge Mo'yb
Antares Shipyards Hoodlums Associates
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 11:33:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Pete Eichas I was reading the posts about the problems with local chat in regards to both macro miners/ratters and gate campers, and it seems to me that both issues are a result of the same thing - in order to enter a system (generally) one must go through a gate. This is a chokepoint for campers on one hand, on the other it triggers macros to warp ships to safe points.
My idea is for CCP to create a module that allows a ship to drop a beacon of sorts, that would allow the ship that dropped it to warp directly back to that location from anywhere else in the Universe. The restriction would be that only the ship that dropped the beacon would be allowed to use it. The module could create a one time and one way wormhole tunnel with the destination and ship mass known, and will be available as long as the module stays equiped to the same ship and the ships mass remains relatively the same.
or not |
Pete Eichas
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 11:45:00 -
[3]
Why not? |
Midge Mo'yb
Antares Shipyards Hoodlums Associates
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 11:57:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Pete Eichas Why not?
eve in its current incarnation means that there is a distinct lack of choke points of which to encounter PVP
the current PVP places are
Gates Station (undock games) Belts (Gank the ratter?) Planets(rarely tbh) POS
since the WTZ introduction it is too easy to move around - to easy to escape and not enough places to force an engagement -----------------------------------------------
|
Sniper Wolf18
Gallente A Pretty Pony Princess General Tso's Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 12:03:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Pete Eichas I was reading the posts about the problems with local chat in regards to both macro miners/ratters and gate campers, and it seems to me that both issues are a result of the same thing - in order to enter a system (generally) one must go through a gate. This is a chokepoint for campers on one hand, on the other it triggers macros to warp ships to safe points.
My idea is for CCP to create a module that allows a ship to drop a beacon of sorts, that would allow the ship that dropped it to warp directly back to that location from anywhere else in the Universe. The restriction would be that only the ship that dropped the beacon would be allowed to use it. The module could create a one time and one way wormhole tunnel with the destination and ship mass known, and will be available as long as the module stays equiped to the same ship and the ships mass remains relatively the same.
So basically you're asking for a way to avoid gatecamps under the guise of it getting rid of macros as well. Because as far as i see this does nothing to stop macros....
And to finish, thank you for reading my sig -------------------------------------------------- If you are still reading i would probably hav posted by now |
Pete Eichas
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 12:21:00 -
[6]
I see your points. However with my idea: In order to drop a beacon one must go there first - This creates traffic for PVP.
Asteriod belts become more of a focal point for PVP because ratters and miners would not be able to detect someone jumping through the wormhole. They would show up on local only after their ship appears, which could end up right next to them. This would discourage macro'ing and make the actual process of collecting ore and killing rats more dangerous than the transport of the loot.
I could see an issue brought up about when a player would know that it is the right time to use their wormhole. If the beacon is thought of as a direct link to another part of the universe, then it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to imagine that the link can transmit/receive data. The beacon could have sensors on them that detect ships within a certain range.
I am thinking that more than one beacon could be deployed at once which would give PVPers more of a chance to find targets in the long run.
|
Midge Mo'yb
Antares Shipyards Hoodlums Associates
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 12:25:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Pete Eichas I see your points. However with my idea: In order to drop a beacon one must go there first - This creates traffic for PVP.
Asteriod belts become more of a focal point for PVP because ratters and miners would not be able to detect someone jumping through the wormhole. They would show up on local only after their ship appears, which could end up right next to them. This would discourage macro'ing and make the actual process of collecting ore and killing rats more dangerous than the transport of the loot.
I could see an issue brought up about when a player would know that it is the right time to use their wormhole. If the beacon is thought of as a direct link to another part of the universe, then it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to imagine that the link can transmit/receive data. The beacon could have sensors on them that detect ships within a certain range.
I am thinking that more than one beacon could be deployed at once which would give PVPers more of a chance to find targets in the long run.
easy fix for macros - make the belts smaller/more concentrated - and have to be probed out.. becomes near impossible to macro. -----------------------------------------------
|
Midge Mo'yb
Antares Shipyards Hoodlums Associates
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 12:25:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Midge Mo''yb on 19/06/2009 12:25:18 stupid forum -----------------------------------------------
|
Pete Eichas
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 12:29:00 -
[9]
While yes, the idea is a way of getting around gate camps, it is also a way for people to not have to rely on it as much to find some action. It would create more movement I believe. While it would give the attackers more of an element of surprise, chances are there would be less of them because only the ships that could get to the point of attack (quickly anyways) would be those that dropped a beacon in the first place. Everyone else would have to take the normal route.
|
KaiserSoze435
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 12:30:00 -
[10]
So this is pretty much vastly buffing cyno? Why not just lobby to have bombs allowed in lowsec? They're great at breaking camps and would actually allow you to fight back effectively as opposed to wussing out the game for everyone else because you're too lazy to fight, deal with it, or pay mercs to clear the gate for you. As to macros, check the eve blog pack, there is a recent blog on how to spoof macros so that you can mop the floor with them. If you can't figure out how to outthink a program that has specific parameters, maybe go do something else rather than advocate mega-nerfing the game. Most xbox games have campaign modes for people that don't want to play a dynamic system. Check it out.
PS - Just get rid of local in low and nullsec, or EVEN BETTER allow local to be turned off by running certain complexes and hacking the local communication database. Whole new level to pvp strategy.
|
|
Pete Eichas
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 12:53:00 -
[11]
I think that my intentions may have been misread. I was not talking about buffing cyno. I was talking about dropping one beacon and letting only the ship that created it wormhole back to the point directly from another system.
No need to get rid of local. For those who wish, this would bypass it. You wouldn't show up in it until it was generally too late for a target to react affectively.
Dynamic playing? How dymanic is it really to sit in front of a gate, or outside of a staion and wait for someone to show up so that you can attack them. This is the main source of PVP action and it sucks in my opinion. I was not making suggestions that would avoid combat. I was thinking that this would improve it somewhat.
|
Sniper Wolf18
Gallente A Pretty Pony Princess General Tso's Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 12:57:00 -
[12]
pete, macros mine in HISEC you can kill them by just warping in as the marcos are normally ****-poor |
Rawr Cristina
Caldari Naqam Exalted.
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 13:28:00 -
[13]
so I heard like, you could counter campers by like, running past them or blowing them up
|
Sun Clausewitz
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 13:40:00 -
[14]
Gate camps are lame...
Macros ruin the game
We already have cynos... your trying to create a type of mini-cyno and you just didn't quite get it fleshed out enough for everyone to understand. |
Sturdy Girl
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 13:47:00 -
[15]
Obvious troll anyone? I'll bite anyway...
The symptoms discussed (macros and campers) are unrelated. One of the symptoms (macros) is complete unrelated to the specified cause (gates). The specified cause of the problem is unrelated to the proposed solution.
|
Pete Eichas
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 13:56:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Sun Clausewitz Gate camps are lame...
Macros ruin the game
We already have cynos... your trying to create a type of mini-cyno and you just didn't quite get it fleshed out enough for everyone to understand.
Yes you are probably right. Forget about the title. Can I change it? I was just thinking of ways that would improve EVE without really taking away the parts that are already there. Adding a new feature, if you will. I am not a troll, I just didn't get my point across correctly and it probably started off with the title. |
Pete Eichas
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 14:09:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Sturdy Girl Obvious troll anyone? I'll bite anyway...
The symptoms discussed (macros and campers) are unrelated. One of the symptoms (macros) is complete unrelated to the specified cause (gates). The specified cause of the problem is unrelated to the proposed solution.
Your right the symptoms are not related, but the process is. Both use your entry in a system (showing you in local) to either attack you in the case of campers, or run away in the case of the macros miners and ratters. I would like to see a way developed for getting sround the campers while at the same time having more of a chance to get to the ratter and miners.
|
Alora Venoda
GalTech Whiskey Creek Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 14:16:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Pete Eichas
Originally by: Sturdy Girl Obvious troll anyone? I'll bite anyway...
The symptoms discussed (macros and campers) are unrelated. One of the symptoms (macros) is complete unrelated to the specified cause (gates). The specified cause of the problem is unrelated to the proposed solution.
Your right the symptoms are not related, but the process is. Both use your entry in a system (showing you in local) to either attack you in the case of campers, or run away in the case of the macros miners and ratters. I would like to see a way developed for getting sround the campers while at the same time having more of a chance to get to the ratter and miners.
ever been in w-space? delayed local certainly helps fix part of that problem... but it adds a new one: scanner spamming, which is annoying and tedious and probably adds to the server load when lots of people are doing it. a real alternative to local-intel needs to be provided before 0.0 gets delayed local.
~~~~~ Remember, EVE is a sandbox and other MMOs are rock gardens. Pretty rocks can be collected, but collecting sand is pointless. Instead build a sandcastle and keep it from being knocked down. |
Sir Muffoon
Backdoor Enterprises
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 15:29:00 -
[19]
Wait, can you explain just how this reduces macros?
If you think you can drop a beacon and just warp to the macro to kill it so it doesn't have time to see you.. no actually I just don't understand this terrible idea. |
Uzume Ame
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 18:12:00 -
[20]
This is a quite bad idea actually... and does nothing to fix the problem.
But I'll give you a hint: I bet you that there are no macros on w-space, and there are a full load of reasons for this.
Better AI, not fixed locations (exploration driven content), no local: hell for anyone afk trying to automate these things.
Fixing macroing in empire is an other entire matter anyway, and that's were part of the trouble is.
|
|
|
CCP Zymurgist
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 18:19:00 -
[21]
Moved to Features and Ideas Discussion. |
|
Grarr Dexx
Amarr Corp 1 Allstars
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 18:54:00 -
[22]
Favors defenders. Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist |
wickedpheonix
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 22:06:00 -
[23]
Doesn't work when you think about applications outside of PVP. Cargo haulers now have insta-jump to Jita from within nullsec (and potentially back, with either a second module or a second ship etc.) making hauling as a profession virtually worthless. Any system with lucrative belts but no stations in it becomes more lucrative for small mining operations as the hauler can just drop a beacon back to station in the next system instead of slowly aligning, warping to gate, etc. |
Invelious
Amarr Deus Imperiosus Acies
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 23:06:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Invelious on 19/06/2009 23:06:36
easy fix for macros - make the belts smaller/more concentrated - and have to be probed out.. becomes near impossible to macro.
best idea of the day. this will also remove macro ratters. and to stop mission ratters there should be a multiple choice question generated by the agent before the mission or even better a typing word test of authentication as proof to the agent you are who you are.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |