|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Pboyt
Mentally Assured Destruction
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 16:55:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hey guys, I recently returned to Eve after many years away. When I came back I realised that many things had changed... and that many things hadn't.
One thing that I was disappointed to see relatively unchanged was the need for probing alts / gang members. This is when there is a ship that you want to track down that isnt docked in a station. Perhaps the ship has global criminal countdown and isnt planning on docking or going to the stargate.
I suggest an interesting high-slot module:
Ship Tracker
- This module is fired at a locked target. - It is classed as an act of aggression (unlike cargo scanners). - It has a succession rate (doesn't always work first time) - Once successful, allows the target ship to be tracked for 15 minutes within that system. Being 'tracked' means that the ship that fired the tracking device can warp to the target ship at ANY time within these 15 minutes. - If the ship leaves the system it can be located using the star-system view
This doesnt completely make a ship being tracked defenceless.. as long as it keeps warping around between safes then it doesnt have to worry about being found.... but if he stops for a couple of minutes, he may well find a guy landing on him from the group he just fought.
What are your thoughts?
|
Pboyt
Mentally Assured Destruction
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 17:46:00 -
[2] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:If you had time to hit the guy with one of these, why didn't you just point him? What makes you think jumping on top of him will work when you failed to point him last time?
I think your questions are irrelevant to the viability of this module. In the way you have described it, your question is just as applicable to general probing. Do you think probing ships is also pointless Danika? Based on the question you asked?
Asking why a target was failed to be pointed does not mean trying to find that target and having a second chance is pointless (excuse the pun). You must remember that this module was a suggestion to provide an alternative to the NEED of probing alts/characters, which many small gangs and lone pvper's may feel is lacking in eve.
But even if I was going to try to answer your questions I could think of lots of reasons.
- You forgot to point him - He got out of point range (overheated) - You never got a scram on him because he was initially too far - Perhaps this module works at a much longer range than a point. Maybe it could work at 40km+ |
Pboyt
Mentally Assured Destruction
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 18:38:00 -
[3] - Quote
FireT wrote: Actually he / she had a very good point. You simply refused to accept it. I am guessing you ignore intellectual discussions right away?
This is rude. Especially since I did not ignore his point, but argued it. I then continued to answer his question. You should read my post more thoroughly next time.
FireT wrote: How would this not break current mechanics? Warp bubbles, warp scramblers, interceptors, and all that good stuff already exists. How would this not give gate camping an additional bonus?
It will 'break' current mechanics as much as probing already does.
FireT wrote: Also, your idea is rubbish from a simple perspective: you would constantly fly in circles with the target since you would lock onto them during mid warp and then constantly need to catch up. So half baked idea is not only half baked but also partially alive screaming for it to be put out of its misery.
Again rude. Theres no need for these types of metaphors.
Yes you will obviously not catch your enemy if you choose to warp to him whilst he is in mid warp. But I fail to see why this is a problem because as I explained before.. this allows the target a level of defence: as long as he/she doesnt stop in one place for too long then they wont get caught. |
Pboyt
Mentally Assured Destruction
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 18:42:00 -
[4] - Quote
Barbara Nichole wrote:Danika Princip wrote:If you had time to hit the guy with one of these, why didn't you just point him? What makes you think jumping on top of him will work when you failed to point him last time? ...because he's trying to turn the tables against ships when he hadn't the prowess to take them out and his back-up isn't online or on grid yet... sort of a bad idea because it would change the game completely... and not in a good way for low sec.
This is about giving solo pvper's and small gangs a chance to find an enemy without the need for a dedicated prober. |
Pboyt
Mentally Assured Destruction
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 19:02:00 -
[5] - Quote
I think what you are asking for, is a scenario.
The suggested module is most useful in these situations:
1. A gang/solo pvper with no probing alt or module 2. You have engaged your target.
So for example, say I am a lone Sleipnir travelling through systems looking for trouble. I go into a system and find 2 neutrals. I use directional scan to locate one at the belt. I warp to the belt... I engage the drake, I have point on him. I use the ship tracker.
I notice after a minute into the battle that there is a scorpion on scan. I get spooked. I microwarpdrive away and as I do so I notice the scorpion warp onto grid. I warp away.
Several minutes later when I see the drake alone on directional scanner, I choose to warp on him. It takes me to a random spot in space - dam - i must have caught him mid-warp. So I try warping to him again - bingo, in ontop of him and hes in a belt.
This time I point him and there is no scorpion on directional scanner. I maintain point and kill him. Scorpion pilot tries to return but is too late. Drake pilot should not have resumed ratting or should have stayed with his ally. Alternatively he should have switched ship. |
Pboyt
Mentally Assured Destruction
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 19:06:00 -
[6] - Quote
Gizznitt Malikite wrote: If the target warps away, it may take quite a while to probe them down, whereas your method sounds much quicker.... but why should you get this easy-mode hunting tool???
Because you've already found them on grid once... AND locked AND shot your target with the tracker. That is why you deserve access to the easy-mode hunting. You cannot track a target you havent engaged yet. That is one of the fairly obvious (i thought) balancing principles of this module?
Thanks for your feedback though Gizznitt. I do like to hear everyone's thoughts on this.
Gizznitt Malikite wrote: 2.) Tagging Implementation: I can target 200+ km's in my recon... so if I tag a sniping Oracle at 200km's, I could then warp to him.... what warning does the oracle have that I've tagged him? And should tagging be an instantaneous shot (turret), or a missile (with travel time)?? What type of tagging range is fair?? If it's short (<24 kms), it's any better than a point... If it's long, it can become unbalancing..
Tagging will not be related to the max distance that you can lock a target. I imagine, like you said it would have a missile or shot type of animation and sound notification like 'your ship has been tagged'. It would also have a limited range.
Even if a tagging range is only 10km, tagging your opponent is still really important. A normal warp disruptor prevents warp at all - but we all know ships still get away due to unforeseen circumstances - this is when the tag shows its purpose |
Pboyt
Mentally Assured Destruction
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 19:26:00 -
[7] - Quote
FireT wrote:Nice, that is one option. Now let us look at what you ignore: the worst case the scenarios.
How would this enable any surprise attacks in 0.0? So let us assume you manage to point your target with your tracker but he escapes. Suddenly that tracker can chase the target for, as you said, at least 15 minutes. 15 minutes is a lot of time if you consider that this might effectively prevent cyno lighting. Instead suddenly there is a "hey guys, get online there might be something going on." Would they try to cyno and ditch then? Is that possible?
Hell, good alliances might simply triangulate your rough position and literally throw a warp bubble net around your rough location.
Thanks for your suggestions. The answer is - I'm not sure. I have not thought how this would affect cyno's. How do people think it should impact on cyno lighting?
FireT wrote: As much as I love new ideas, I recommend you consider how it could be abused. Not only "Hey I had an idea and it should be implemented." CCP is trying to balance the game after all.
I agree entirely. Hence at the end of my opening post I said openely 'what are your thoughts?'. I never claimed to have a flawless idea, I merely have a concept and I know that if there are a bright bunch of individuals which will see its issues, it will be the Eve Community
|
Pboyt
Mentally Assured Destruction
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 19:57:00 -
[8] - Quote
FireT's posts continue to insult and provoke... 'Your idea is half alive waiting to die' (which I've already warned him about) and 'You seem to lack the patience and skill'.
I have both. The problem is I solo pvp. No amount of 'skill' or 'patience' gives me the ability to track down a safespotted enemy solo. Maybe it shouldnt - but if i've had the chance to engage him already in battle then maybe it should give me the right to warp on him.
Now if your about to say 'why dont you just fit a probe launcher to your solo pvp ship', thats not feasable. You cannot maintain a tank, maintain damage, maintain a point AND ON TOP OF ALL THAT probe. Its simply not possible.
. |
Pboyt
Mentally Assured Destruction
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 20:02:00 -
[9] - Quote
Gizznitt Malikite wrote: The typical reason a tagged target would "get away" is if is fast enough to outrun your tackle.... Although it might be a lucky jam... Essentially, if you're prey got away from you once, it will probably be able to get away from you again... meaning this rarely improve your chances of catching a tagged target....
Yea. That might be the case. But why is that an issue? Whenever you make a point that the module will not help you kill a target, it doesn't really argue against the module existing. It just simply means people will not use it in that scenario that you have suggested, which I have no objections to. You cannot invent a module which will be used all the time and be useful in all situations. That is unbalanced.
You offer times when it isnt useful - thats fine. However, I have clearly described a scenario earlier when it could be useful. Such as when I am a solo sleipnir that tagged a drake, then ran myself because another enemy scorpion was joining the fight, then later returned to the drake I tagged who happened to be ratting again in belts.
|
Pboyt
Mentally Assured Destruction
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 20:10:00 -
[10] - Quote
FireT wrote:Pboyt wrote:Gizznitt Malikite wrote: The typical reason a tagged target would "get away" is if is fast enough to outrun your tackle.... Although it might be a lucky jam... Essentially, if you're prey got away from you once, it will probably be able to get away from you again... meaning this rarely improve your chances of catching a tagged target....
Yea. That might be the case. But why is that an issue? Whenever you make a point that the module will not help you kill a target, it doesn't really argue against the module existing. It just simply means people will not use it in that scenario that you have suggested, which I have no objections to. You cannot invent a module which will be used all the time and be useful in all situations. That is unbalanced. You offer times when it isnt useful - thats fine. However, I have clearly described a scenario earlier when it could be useful. Such as when I am a solo sleipnir that tagged a drake, then ran myself because another enemy scorpion was joining the fight, then later returned to the drake I tagged who happened to be ratting again in belts. One case scenario does not make it a viable option to never be exploited in any shape or form. Reread my previous post for I edited some additional stuff into it.
Im trying to say that I cannot see a good enough exploit (yet) from everything being said. You both talk about how it can be abused, but the things you say dont sound like exploits, they just sound like you cant imagine the module will help in getting the kill |
|
Pboyt
Mentally Assured Destruction
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 20:52:00 -
[11] - Quote
Thanks for the post. But again - lets see if you suggested any REAL exploits. Exploits being the only reason I would consider this module unconceivable.
FireT wrote: 1) What range would that module have to be useful? How would it be more likely to be used then all other EWAR methods?
Theres no exploits here.
What range? Thats upto Eve pilots to decide what is fair. Personally I'd say <40km. How would it be more likely to be used then all other EWAR methods? What other EWAR methods let you track a target after they've warped, apart from probes? None.
FireT wrote: 2) With targeting scripts you could effectively tag anything since your locking time would be nearly instantaneous. So gate campers would love this (or so I presume).
Theres no exploits here for this module.
See my previous explanation on how this will not benefit gamecampers much. Its pretty much as you've described. Any gate-campers who insta-lock and pointed their target are not likely to let the target get away. The target will die soon anyway, a module to find the target after it warps will not be needed.
Forget gatecamps, this has next to no use for a good gatecamp.
FireT wrote: 3) You seem to want to have a global tracker. Idiotic since you never put forth a limitation. Your only limitation seems to be 15 minutes and directionally scanning?
"Idiotic since you never put forth a limitation. Your only limitation seems to be 15 minutes" ... hang on, arent you calling me idiotic because I never put forth a limitation? Then in the next half of the sentence say I did put one? Please. You continue to be rude and what your rude about doesnt even make sense. You scream troll to me in more ways than one.
FireT wrote: Fine, all you would end up doing is a Bucks Bunny cartoon chase where you and your target keep warping around for 15 minutes. Nothing really done then. Your only target audience are afk pilots and careless people. Which usually tend to be easy pickings already.
There are again no exploits. Just reasons why you cannot see it working well.
How are afk pilots in safespots easy picking for people with no probing alts? I invented this module to give the solopvper a chance to finish a kill he started, no matter what reason he was unable to finish (whether he had to run or his prey escaped)
FireT wrote: So how would this not be exploitable if you go into different systems?
Whats the exploit exactly? So you can tell the ship has jumped to the next system? Big deal.
....Continued....
|
Pboyt
Mentally Assured Destruction
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 20:52:00 -
[12] - Quote
... continued
FireT wrote: 4) A second chance does exist, by your own admission, you just do not like probing and want an easier skill.
What admission is that? So your saying a solo pvper without a probe launcher is being lazy because he cannot locate a guy in a safespot? Thats ridiculous.
I've explained that this module is designed for the solopvper that cannot be expected to fit tank, DPS, point AND probe launcher on his ship.
FireT wrote: 5) You yourself pointed out its uselessness that you could simply switch ships.
Another great example of what I keep saying. Your giving examples of reasons why you think this module wont work well.
NONE of your examples explain how it is abuseable/exploitable.
Please comeback with a post that you've thought about thoroughly so I dont keep having to repeat my points over and over again. |
Pboyt
Mentally Assured Destruction
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 20:59:00 -
[13] - Quote
FireT wrote: As it stands right now, cloaked ships are rather save once they manage to disappear. So why not have a ship that is specifically designed to 'interfere' with their cloaking for a set duration, giving the cloaker a must to pay attention afterward and those that are chasing him time to try and catch him.
Please take your 'well-thought out' cloaking-interferer module and create a new thread. This thread is for the consideration of the ship tracker. |
Pboyt
Mentally Assured Destruction
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 21:32:00 -
[14] - Quote
Fantastic example of the possible use of this module that I did not consider. Very interesting concept - and one that could be potentially devastating.
I dispute your statement saying it is the only real application of it. There are others such as the scenario I described earlier. I'm hoping people can come up with more. |
Pboyt
Mentally Assured Destruction
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 23:10:00 -
[15] - Quote
FireT, before you speak anymore you should go back to my post where I responded to every single point of yours and called it out as being not relevant, and not exploitative.
Do that now.
FireT wrote: No, your application was a giant I WANT A SECOND GANK CHANCE. Which I contest already exists in the form of probes.... which you seem to ignore / refuse because it takes SP investment and actual patience.
I'm sorry FireT. But now I have to start getting quite blunt, since you are clearly ignoring every point I am making.
YOU CANNOT JUST FIT A PROBE LAUNCHER ONTO A SOLO PVP SHIP
It has NOTHING TO DO WITH SKILL POINTS. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PATIENCE. You just cannot do both. |
Pboyt
Mentally Assured Destruction
1
|
Posted - 2012.06.27 18:00:00 -
[16] - Quote
FireT wrote: Let me explain: YES YOU CAN YOU JUST CHOOSE NOT TO.
Let me explain even further: You are what gamers tend to call min - maxers. You want the biggest loudest and pew pewest ship there is. You ignore anything that is outside your cookie cutter design since it would force you to think outside the box and make actual choices.
I'm sorry. But you dont actually know anything about me. You dont know what I can fly. You dont know what my skills are. You have never seen my fits. So less talk about ME and more talk about the suggested module please.
I make no effort to degrade you as a person in this thread, because I know nothing about the way you play. You should give me the same respect or dont post.
For your information I fly all HACS, RECONS, COMMAND SHIPS with Level V. I love solo pvp. Yes, there are examples of some fits that can fit probe launchers AND DPS but its usually very vulnerable in that it lacks one of the following: tank, speed, longevitiy.
So far all of your posts have been to bring the module down as useless. None of your posts actually offer solutions to the big thing in question which is - the solo pvper. So what is your solution? Do you not think that we should make things easier for the solo pvper? To give them a chance to find someone they've already engaged? |
Pboyt
Mentally Assured Destruction
1
|
Posted - 2012.06.27 18:09:00 -
[17] - Quote
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote: If you can lock someone long enough to cycle a module, you can point them. if you can point them, why put a tracker on them?
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote: But still, the point remains: you're asking to be able to lock someone and cycle a module on them so they can't get away from you and hide. That exists: it's called a warp disruptor.
Both of these can be answered by the scenario I described earlier about the solo sleipnir hunting targets. Sometimes the sleipnir gets outnumbered as enemies come to defend the target hes trying to kill, and so he needs to run. He can tag a target before he runs, to warp back to it later.
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote: Also, if you're dumb enough to warp blind to wherever a guy who KNOWS he's being pursued goes, you're an idiot. If I get a tracker on me, where do you think I'll go: a safe spot to wait to die or a shoot-on-sight POS and cloak up? What if I have a friendly fleet that I warp to?
Good point, never thought about it. Thats a risk. But thats where a good solopvper with a ship tracker would need to use his brain as well. He would have to find the target of his on directional scan first - no towers or station - THEN choose to warp to his target. See? You still need to think things through, this module isnt a win all module.
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote: No competent gang would rely on such a module.
How many times will I have to repeat myself? This module is designed for the solo pvper. |
Pboyt
Mentally Assured Destruction
1
|
Posted - 2012.06.27 18:24:00 -
[18] - Quote
FireT wrote:Pboyt wrote: How many times will I have to repeat myself? This module is designed for the solo pvper.
I think right there is your problem with us. You want something for yourself disguised as your idea for small group of solo players. DESPITE us pointing out you have the choices already available. The only thing you do is bring up is ONE SINGLE ship ship that could not fit our recommendations. You literally are too narcissistic to fly anything beyond your beloved Slepnir to actually do what Eve already offers. In which case, you are a stubborn troll that is willingly ignorant. Your idea won't be (ever) implemented since it is a very selfish demand and CCP has a massive list of other things to worry about. Just go find their constantly updating 'to do list'. I am done with this discussion. Tried to point out the flaws in this but the original poster is to trolltarded. Sorry but its true.
Haha FireT you really are a great laugh. Scenario's are used in everyday life to help people understand points people are trying to make. All of a sudden my scenario is MY ONE SHIP THAT I CAN ONLY FLY AND NOTHING ELSE. HAHAHAH
Notice how I specifically quote every single point you make in every post and then provide a counter argument? Its because im looking at getting to the bottom of the technical application of the module.
You on the otherhand never go back and continue to explain your point. You just forget your last posts and the counter-posts I have suggested and instead you reel off a pathetic insult at me about being stupid and then continue to make more different and random points. If no points at all.
You, are the biggest troll. And your posts continue to insult me. 'Narcissitic', 'selfish', 'your beloved sleipnir', 'stubborn troll', 'ignorant'.
All of these words just in your last post alone. Thanks for being mature. Now I would appreciate you make no more contributions to this thread or I will contact mods. Your last post was pure insulting and offered no development to the module in question.
Goodbye FireT.
|
Pboyt
Mentally Assured Destruction
2
|
Posted - 2012.06.27 18:48:00 -
[19] - Quote
FireT wrote:I am insulting because you came up with a half baked idea at best: something else but probing (because I do not like a high slot probe launcher).
As a few people pointed out, probing already does what you want. So why add another semi probing? Do you really think CCP has nothing better to do than to make random modules of similar types in different slots?
Hell, by the look of their latest 'works in progress list' CCP will be busy simply implementing the current player wishlist within the next 5 years.
So yes, your idea is already there: probing. You just do not want to probe.
You do not like something, accept it and stop complaining. But no, you want a second chance at a gank. That is already there: local and probing. I would ask for your stuff, in case you quit because your idea won't be implemented, but it seems you might not have much.
Sorry, but CCP's current balancing act of ALL ships being balanced takes more priority than this silly idea.
My last question: why can you not fit a probe launcher? Seriously, so far you seem hell bent on not probing without an alt. Why is that? Patience issues? I am sincerely confused. yes it takes longer than your tracker, but your tracker idea is rather half baked since you ignore the mid slot, its range, duration, and limitations.
I will not entertain you any longer. I have answered all these already.
I think you have problems.
However, thank you for posting. Goodbye FireT. |
Pboyt
Mentally Assured Destruction
2
|
Posted - 2012.06.29 01:22:00 -
[20] - Quote
Xhaiden Ora wrote:I don't understand why you think you deserve a second and even easier shot at someone after you failed to lock down a target on the first attempt? If they warped away, that's your fault. You didn't lock them down or they were prepared for the scenario of your attack more so then you were prepared to catch them. They thus deserve to escape because they thought ahead further than you did.
If you want the utility of a probe launcher, fit a probe launcher. There are plenty of ships with utility high slots. If you're unwilling to compromise on your fit to include a launcher, that's your fault. Fitting is about compromising and finding the best balance of what you want to do vs the effectiveness of doing it. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
Even from a lore perspective this idea falls apart. The whole reason we have probe launchers is because space is vast and its thus very hard to isolate the signal of an individual ship or structure. From a lore perspective, "tagging" a ship would at best simply make it easier to probe down. Though how such a tag would even adhere to a ship designed to repel high velocity projectile rounds? Nevermind attach to it undetected. It would need to transmit one hell of a powerful signal to justify what you propose. Which would easily be detected by the tagged ship.
So no, bad idea. Either play better the first time around and lock your target down or make a compromise on your fit. If you're so diehard for a 1 on 1 but with extra utility, fly a Recon.
I have RECON V. I fly pilgrims, rapiers, arazu's and soon falcons. I know about the fits and designs you are describing.
This thread is an idea thread. Every pilot has different ideas and different opinions. I appreciate posts like this where you try to explain the reasons behind the opinions.
Spugg Galdon wrote: Hey Pboyt.
You fail at EvE.
End of message.
Trolls are not welcome here. Edit this post to something more relevant to the topic. Try to explain your opinions like Xhaidon Ora has. Im not having children interrupting conversations between grown men (or women). |
|
|
|
|