Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sidus Rado
Sidus Rado Tax Free Corporation
2
|
Posted - 2013.01.12 18:13:00 -
[1] - Quote
Weapon that kills pod inside ship, but don't destructs ship. That weapon will be weaker than existing weapons, maybe twice weaker. Also there can be ship with bonuses for that weapon. |
Noriko Mai
732
|
Posted - 2013.01.12 18:25:00 -
[2] - Quote
Actually interesting if the ships HP are counted in destruction process. On the other hand it's almost the same as boarding enemy ships with marines/soldiers/whatEver |
De'Veldrin
East India Ore Trade The East India Co.
736
|
Posted - 2013.01.12 18:33:00 -
[3] - Quote
This is so over powered I have to assume you're trolling. The Margin Trading Scam: If you fell for it, it's your own damned fault. |
Sidus Rado
Sidus Rado Tax Free Corporation
2
|
Posted - 2013.01.12 18:36:00 -
[4] - Quote
Noriko Mai wrote:Actually interesting if the ships HP are counted in destruction process.
I mean that. Thanks for correction. Corrected first post. |
Hakan MacTrew
Caledonian Heavy Industries Sick N' Twisted
211
|
Posted - 2013.01.12 18:37:00 -
[5] - Quote
Sidus Rado wrote:Weapon that kills pod inside ship, but don't destructs ship. That weapon will be weaker than existing weapons, maybe twice weaker. Also there can be ship with bonuses for that weapon. So, a pod that is deep within a ship is going to be destroyed by your weapon without damaging the shop... how?
I understand why, so you can pilfer the ship. But being able to just pod someone without them having the defense of a ship is just crap.
Now, a weapon that forces them to eject while I. structure makes a lot more sense as well as being much more balanced. MODULAR DRONES
MORE ORE SHIPS |
Sidus Rado
Sidus Rado Tax Free Corporation
2
|
Posted - 2013.01.12 18:53:00 -
[6] - Quote
Hakan MacTrew wrote:Sidus Rado wrote:Weapon that kills pod inside ship, but don't destructs ship. That weapon will be weaker than existing weapons, maybe twice weaker. Also there can be ship with bonuses for that weapon. So, a pod that is deep within a ship is going to be destroyed by your weapon without damaging the shop... how? I understand why, so you can pilfer the ship. But being able to just pod someone without them having the defense of a ship is just crap. Now, a weapon that forces them to eject while I. structure makes a lot more sense as well as being much more balanced.
Ships HP are counted in destruction process. Also these weapons will be much weaker that exiting weapons. So there will not be problem with weapon balance. I corrected first post. |
Sidus Rado
Sidus Rado Tax Free Corporation
2
|
Posted - 2013.01.12 18:54:00 -
[7] - Quote
del |
sabre906
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
576
|
Posted - 2013.01.12 19:19:00 -
[8] - Quote
The new Eve: No ship will ever pop. Standings Improvement Service https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=19454 |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
947
|
Posted - 2013.01.12 20:24:00 -
[9] - Quote
Sidus Rado wrote:Hakan MacTrew wrote:Sidus Rado wrote:Weapon that kills pod inside ship, but don't destructs ship. That weapon will be weaker than existing weapons, maybe twice weaker. Also there can be ship with bonuses for that weapon. So, a pod that is deep within a ship is going to be destroyed by your weapon without damaging the shop... how? I understand why, so you can pilfer the ship. But being able to just pod someone without them having the defense of a ship is just crap. Now, a weapon that forces them to eject while I. structure makes a lot more sense as well as being much more balanced. Ships HP are counted in destruction process. Also these weapons will be much weaker that exiting weapons. So there will not be problem with weapon balance. I corrected first post.
But you didn't explain how a capsule buried deep in the heaviest armoured part of the ship is going to be destroyed without the destruction of the ship. |
Sidus Rado
Sidus Rado Tax Free Corporation
2
|
Posted - 2013.01.12 20:47:00 -
[10] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Sidus Rado wrote:Hakan MacTrew wrote:Sidus Rado wrote:Weapon that kills pod inside ship, but don't destructs ship. That weapon will be weaker than existing weapons, maybe twice weaker. Also there can be ship with bonuses for that weapon. So, a pod that is deep within a ship is going to be destroyed by your weapon without damaging the shop... how? I understand why, so you can pilfer the ship. But being able to just pod someone without them having the defense of a ship is just crap. Now, a weapon that forces them to eject while I. structure makes a lot more sense as well as being much more balanced. Ships HP are counted in destruction process. Also these weapons will be much weaker that exiting weapons. So there will not be problem with weapon balance. I corrected first post. But you didn't explain how a capsule buried deep in the heaviest armoured part of the ship is going to be destroyed without the destruction of the ship. It can destroy special kind of microchips that have only pod but not ship. Or damages special kind of metal alloy that has only pod hull but not ship.
Or better variant, it will kill pilot, it will damage biological tissue but not mechanical parts. Like neutron bomb in real life damages biological organisms with neutron radiation, but has little effect on infrastructure. |
|
Sidus Rado
Sidus Rado Tax Free Corporation
2
|
Posted - 2013.01.12 20:49:00 -
[11] - Quote
sabre906 wrote:The new Eve: No ship will ever pop. That weapon will have much lower damage that other weapons. So it will be much difficult to kill pilot with that weapon. |
Grey Azorria
Federation Industries
245
|
Posted - 2013.01.12 21:02:00 -
[12] - Quote
Sidus Rado wrote:sabre906 wrote:The new Eve: No ship will ever pop. That weapon will have much lower damage that other weapons. So it will be much difficult to kill pilot with it. Not really, pods have a really pathetic EHP. Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
Mate. |
Sidus Rado
Sidus Rado Tax Free Corporation
2
|
Posted - 2013.01.12 21:17:00 -
[13] - Quote
Grey Azorria wrote:Sidus Rado wrote:sabre906 wrote:The new Eve: No ship will ever pop. That weapon will have much lower damage that other weapons. So it will be much difficult to kill pilot with it. Nope, it'll just become the new must have utility high, do the work with normal guns, use the magic ray gun while they're in deep structure
That "magic ray" damage is not the same as actual damage. So if ship already has damage and you use "magic ray" on that ship you will have to make same amount of damage with it as on undamaged ship. |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Relativity Alliance
1035
|
Posted - 2013.01.12 21:32:00 -
[14] - Quote
Grey Azorria wrote:Sidus Rado wrote:sabre906 wrote:The new Eve: No ship will ever pop. That weapon will have much lower damage that other weapons. So it will be much difficult to kill pilot with it. Nope, it'll just become the new must have utility high, do the work with normal guns, use the magic ray gun while they're in deep structure It sounds like once your ship is damaged enough to use this weapon on you, you need to consider yourself exposed and flee.
If you can't take the hull with you, eject and hope they can't target you in time.
The problem is this: what condition is the hull left in? If the pod never ejected, there is a dead capsuleer still inside. This means you cannot board it unless you know some means to eject them.
Manually cycling the ejection system should take some time at least. It should never be as simple as a snatch and grab.
I think perhaps it might make more sense for the hull itself to have a chance to be salvageable as a whole. You can board it with 10% align speed and maneuverability. The modules, rigs and cargo may or may not have survived, and have greyed out generic placeholders in both cases, as everything is offline. (You find out what they have fitted once the hull is repaired and you are in a station at the fitting panel. The non surviving items will be missing at that point, while surviving ones can be brought online if you have the prerequisite skills) Cloaking being on a ten minute manual cycle timer? (Author: Bree Okanata) Fine. As long as there is a ten minute timer for being docked in a station. Also, you can't stop moving in the game. Just add in a way so every ten minutes you are randomly warped to the nearest other player. Keeps people from going AFK. |
Jessy Berbers
Disturbed Friends Of Diazepam Disturbed Acquaintance
62
|
Posted - 2013.01.12 22:07:00 -
[15] - Quote
You do Realise that the pod is heavily shielded, and protected in several redundant armor and shield layers dont you?
it would be like (|(|(|(|(|POD before you could even reach the thing...or the person inside for that matter, the pod pilot is multi million investment heavily protected and responsible for bringing the ship home, and it's crew, even if some of us might decide to suicide the ship...
Greets
Jessy. |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
13506
|
Posted - 2013.01.12 23:36:00 -
[16] - Quote
Terrible idea. Sorry, it's a no from me.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Beta Miner
COBRA Logistics Outer-Haven
57
|
Posted - 2013.01.13 04:11:00 -
[17] - Quote
That weapon already exists; code name SLIM WILLIAMS. AFK Cloaking? An afk cloaker has never ganked me. In fact a cloaker at his keybourd has never ganked me either.
|
Dark Long
solo and loveing it
52
|
Posted - 2013.01.13 05:06:00 -
[18] - Quote
Sidus Rado wrote:Weapon that kills pod inside ship, but don't destructs ship. Ships HP are counted in destruction process. Also that weapons will be weaker than existing weapons, maybe twice weaker. Also there can be ship with bonuses for that weapon.
ah no.
|
Crimeo Khamsi
AirHogs Zulu People
243
|
Posted - 2013.01.13 05:40:00 -
[19] - Quote
Sorry but this just a bad idea, period. It makes absolutely no sense roleplaying-wise, and it would do little for the game other than cause inflation and screw over miners, since virtually nobody would ever build ships anymore.
If you think there needs to be some way of capturing a ship, then the obvious and much more interesting alternative would be to integrate it with DUST and have DUST game maps that are the insides of all the different ship types. Vastly more fun, and also this would introduce an isk sink (having to pay those mercenaries, which makes the money disappear and go to the other game) to offset the loss of an item sink from ships going boom. It would also actually make sense. |
Hakan MacTrew
Caledonian Heavy Industries Sick N' Twisted
213
|
Posted - 2013.01.13 09:57:00 -
[20] - Quote
Crimeo Khamsi wrote:Sorry but this just a bad idea, period. It makes absolutely no sense roleplaying-wise, and it would do little for the game other than cause inflation and screw over miners, since virtually nobody would ever build ships anymore.
If you think there needs to be some way of capturing a ship, then the obvious and much more interesting alternative would be to integrate it with DUST and have DUST game maps that are the insides of all the different ship types. Vastly more fun, and also this would introduce an isk sink (having to pay those mercenaries, which makes the money disappear and go to the other game) to offset the loss of an item sink from ships going boom. It would also actually make sense. As cool as the "Boarding Action" idea is, it would just take too long. I know its been suggested before to use a random 'pre-fought' battle result to determine the result, but I really don't like that idea either. Just doesn't feel right.
I maintain that if the OPs idea were to work, at all, then it would make the most sense to use some sort of weaponised Ewar device to forcibly eject the pod. Perhaps a multiple stage hack using a random chance mechanic, (better chances with skills,) possibly tied to sensor strength like ecm, (but make it a competion between the attackers sensor strength and the targets.) I would also suggest it could only be done while the target ship has less than 10% shields and/or armour, (to account for reps, so a steady level of dps must be maintained,) and less than 50% structure, so that the target is weakened enough to be vulnerable. It also gives the opportunity for the target to activate the self destruct. That would force the pirate to work within a time frame.
As far as I am concerned, anyone trying to steal a ship this way will have seriously work for their prize.
Infact, to balance risk and reward little more, how about a feedback blast if the target does detonate through the self destruct and the attacker is still trying force the eject. Let's say half the base EHP of the target ship. That way, by trying to steal a ship, particularly one bigger than your own, you run the risk of losing your own.
That's my take on it anyway. MODULAR DRONES
MORE ORE SHIPS |
|
Kitt JT
League of Non-Aligned Worlds Nulli Secunda
175
|
Posted - 2013.01.13 10:44:00 -
[21] - Quote
No supercapital will ever die ever again. |
Crimeo Khamsi
AirHogs Zulu People
244
|
Posted - 2013.01.13 10:53:00 -
[22] - Quote
Hakan MacTrew wrote: As cool as the "Boarding Action" idea is, it would just take too long. I know its been suggested before to use a random 'pre-fought' battle result to determine the result, but I really don't like that idea either. Just doesn't feel right.
What do you mean it "takes too long?" It takes however long it takes. Are you operating under the assumption that gameplay would have to halt for the pilot until the fight is over? Because I see no reason for that to be the case...
While the battle is ongoing in your ship, you continue flying around doing whatever you were doing (possibly with reduced speed or other handicaps if they've sabotaged stuff or killed some of your engineers etc.).
Possibly with the attackers losing if you make it to a station, or something. |
Hakan MacTrew
Caledonian Heavy Industries Sick N' Twisted
214
|
Posted - 2013.01.13 12:05:00 -
[23] - Quote
Crimeo Khamsi wrote:Hakan MacTrew wrote: As cool as the "Boarding Action" idea is, it would just take too long. I know its been suggested before to use a random 'pre-fought' battle result to determine the result, but I really don't like that idea either. Just doesn't feel right.
What do you mean it "takes too long?" It takes however long it takes. Are you operating under the assumption that gameplay would have to halt for the pilot until the fight is over? Because I see no reason for that to be the case... While the battle is ongoing in your ship, you continue flying around doing whatever you were doing (possibly with reduced speed or other handicaps if they've sabotaged stuff or killed some of your engineers etc.). Possibly with the attackers losing if you make it to a station, or something. No, I'm operating under the assumption tha people aren't going to want to wait 5, 10 or even 20 minutes, (or even longer,) to see the result of their boarding action. MODULAR DRONES
MORE ORE SHIPS |
Sean Parisi
Meridian Commonwealth
116
|
Posted - 2013.01.13 12:09:00 -
[24] - Quote
This would definitely not encourage me to join a random mission / incursion corp, ECM a friendly ship to the point it cant target as I DPS away their ship so that I might hijack it and sell it on the market. It definitely would not make me do that, at all. |
Griffin Omanid
Knights of the Zodiac
20
|
Posted - 2013.01.13 18:00:00 -
[25] - Quote
A modul for anything like this would be to OP you easily could be able to hijack all ships with a really cheap ship. This could be much worser then any gank mechanic or can flipping could be.
Maybe if you add something like a Space landing craft with Dust mercs, which allows you to deploy maybe 10 mercs per ship in the hostile ship. These mercs then have the ability to damge the ships or some moduls or even eject the pod. In the ship there would be obviously some defense systems (a few in frigs, quit a lot in Supers), which could kill the whole boarding team, and if the boarded ship gets into warp all mercs get killed. This way you are forced, to scramble a Supercapital all the time and use a lot of mercs to board the ship.
Proposal T2 BS Class Juggernaut |
Crimeo Khamsi
AirHogs Zulu People
245
|
Posted - 2013.01.13 19:32:00 -
[26] - Quote
Hakan MacTrew wrote:Crimeo Khamsi wrote:Hakan MacTrew wrote: As cool as the "Boarding Action" idea is, it would just take too long. I know its been suggested before to use a random 'pre-fought' battle result to determine the result, but I really don't like that idea either. Just doesn't feel right.
What do you mean it "takes too long?" It takes however long it takes. Are you operating under the assumption that gameplay would have to halt for the pilot until the fight is over? Because I see no reason for that to be the case... While the battle is ongoing in your ship, you continue flying around doing whatever you were doing (possibly with reduced speed or other handicaps if they've sabotaged stuff or killed some of your engineers etc.). Possibly with the attackers losing if you make it to a station, or something. No, I'm operating under the assumption tha people aren't going to want to wait 5, 10 or even 20 minutes, (or even longer,) to see the result of their boarding action.
The goal is not to have the boarding action significantly affect capsuleer combat. the goal is to steal a ship. Thus, it doesn't have to take place on the same time scale as typical combat. It's an issue of collecting "war prizes" and such, after the fact.
That said, depending on how it was implemented, it COULD have an effect on capsuleer combat, though. Again, for example, slowing down your ship significantly if the mercs damage the engine core, or disabling warp. Which might happen less than a minute or two into the fight or something, if they are good.
So yeah.. A) There could be entertaining and useful side effects prior to the end of the battle B) If you can't wait 10 minutes to win a ship, then you're pretty ADD. I would have no trouble waiting that long for such a significant prize potential. C) The fact that the battle takes awhile opens up the possibility of reinforcements, etc. and encourages more pvp in eve, as you sit there vulnerable in space waiting. |
Caitlyn Tufy
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
129
|
Posted - 2013.01.13 20:14:00 -
[27] - Quote
No.
EvE's entire economical system depends on a cycle of destruction. Destroyed ships mean new customers means work for industrialists, researchers, miners, explorers. Unless that weapon was impossibly expensive and hard to make, it would unbalance the entire game. |
Sidus Rado
Sidus Rado Tax Free Corporation
2
|
Posted - 2013.01.13 21:06:00 -
[28] - Quote
Caitlyn Tufy wrote:No.
EvE's entire economical system depends on a cycle of destruction. Destroyed ships mean new customers means work for industrialists, researchers, miners, explorers. Unless that weapon was impossibly expensive and hard to make, it would unbalance the entire game.
The main point of ship capture is to make it very difficult and not regular action. It is like achievement which is very rare. So it will not have or will have very little impact on eve economics. |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
3937
|
Posted - 2013.01.13 22:11:00 -
[29] - Quote
Crimeo Khamsi wrote:Hakan MacTrew wrote:Crimeo Khamsi wrote:Hakan MacTrew wrote: As cool as the "Boarding Action" idea is, it would just take too long. I know its been suggested before to use a random 'pre-fought' battle result to determine the result, but I really don't like that idea either. Just doesn't feel right.
What do you mean it "takes too long?" It takes however long it takes. Are you operating under the assumption that gameplay would have to halt for the pilot until the fight is over? Because I see no reason for that to be the case... While the battle is ongoing in your ship, you continue flying around doing whatever you were doing (possibly with reduced speed or other handicaps if they've sabotaged stuff or killed some of your engineers etc.). Possibly with the attackers losing if you make it to a station, or something. No, I'm operating under the assumption tha people aren't going to want to wait 5, 10 or even 20 minutes, (or even longer,) to see the result of their boarding action. The goal is not to have the boarding action significantly affect capsuleer combat. the goal is to steal a ship. Thus, it doesn't have to take place on the same time scale as typical combat. It's an issue of collecting "war prizes" and such, after the fact. That said, depending on how it was implemented, it COULD have an effect on capsuleer combat, though. Again, for example, slowing down your ship significantly if the mercs damage the engine core, or disabling warp. Which might happen less than a minute or two into the fight or something, if they are good. So yeah.. A) There could be entertaining and useful side effects prior to the end of the battle B) If you can't wait 10 minutes to win a ship, then you're pretty ADD. I would have no trouble waiting that long for such a significant prize potential. C) The fact that the battle takes awhile opens up the possibility of reinforcements, etc. and encourages more pvp in eve, as you sit there vulnerable in space waiting.
A) Doesn't seem that entertaining to me. Seems like making my gameplay potentially a lot worse, so some other guys in another game can have fun. Or more accurately it seems like an idea, that hasn't been given any actual thought on how it would impact the gameplay for all participants.
B) Waiting 10 doing nothing is boring. It's boring for the people waiting for the result and it's boring for the victim. I'd selfdestruct every time just the mitigate the tidium of such awful game design. Point is that it just isn't fun for us and it's terrible to the victim, so he has very little reason not to selfdestruct, since once boarded it's all out of his hands.
C) I don't see that happening as a general rule. Any boarding action is going to be taken when the fight is practically over and one side is clearly dominating. Fully functioning warships aren't exactly vulnerable to boarding parties. You can't just hoist yourself on their deck with a rope and start swashbuckling. It's much more likely going to be a 10 minute end of the fight gangbang that is forced on selected individuals of the losing side who are made immobile and unable to do anything about it. It might be ok if you were fighting NPCs, so you're only wasting your own time, but you're forcing a long and painful period on another subscriber who can't do anything about it but wait. Or more likely kill himself just to deny you any chance of stealing his ship.
This is all after the fact, that ship destruction is a necessary component for the health of the game, so I don't get why you would want to do anything to reduce it. |
Crimeo Khamsi
AirHogs Zulu People
246
|
Posted - 2013.01.13 22:28:00 -
[30] - Quote
Quote:Any boarding action is going to be taken when the fight is practically over and one side is clearly dominating. Fully functioning warships aren't exactly vulnerable to boarding parties. You can't just hoist yourself on their deck with a rope and start swashbuckling. It's much more likely going to be a 10 minute end of the fight gangbang that is forced on selected individuals of the losing side who are made immobile and unable to do anything about it.
This is easily solved. Whenever a boarding party attempts to board your ship, a little dialogue box comes up, that you have 5 seconds to respond to. It gives you the choice of either immediately self destructing, or taking your chances repelling boarders. If you choose to let the battle happen, you are then prevented from self destructing until it is over, when somebody wins or some maximum timer is reached. 10 minutes is a reasonable max timer. If the boarders havent taken the ship by then, they simply lose.
That way, A) DUST players wouldn't constantly be starting battles and then having them end 5 seconds later, but also B) nobody in EVE would ever bother to actually try to board you in the aftermath of a battle when only crippled ships were left. It would be too much of a hassle to maneuver the transport ship with marines into position or whatever blah blah. They'd just shoot you like normal, because they would know that everybody would just self destruct anyway.
Instead, this would be something that would be used for clashing small pirate gangs and the like, OR during the middle of a major battle. Basically it would only be used in situations where the victor of the spacefight is as of yet unclear.
In those situations, you would often allow the boarders on without self destructing because your ship and its guns are still needed in the space fight, so you take the risk.
Thus, while the boarders are fighting, you would still be busy fighting your space battle between capsuleer ships in the meantime, not being bored at all.
Then if you win that fight, there are plenty of other things for you to do. For instance trying to get to a station in time to clear the boarders, or trying to get friends to bring reinforcement boarders, or perhaps intentionally having a friend cripple your ship to almost-dead, so that if the boarding goes badly, you can wipe them out right after they gain control of the bridge.
If you lose the fight, then you may have to wait a tiny while for it to be over, sure, but half the boarding fight will be done already, and it should only be a matter of a few minutes. Compared to every other kind of gameplay in Eve, a few minutes of waiting is NOTHING. Waiting for much longer than that is the rule in eve, not the exception. Mining = waiting for minerals, gate camping = waiting for victims, hauling = waiting for jumps...
Here, it would be waiting for much less time, and only if you lost your fight. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |