Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Elfred Gam'Havoc
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 15:05:00 -
[31] - Quote
Chitsa Jason wrote:
The effects have to be easy to understand and not require much dev time. Removing moons or adding drag might be a bit complicated.
Replace planets/moons with mining anom sites, rename them "Shattered World"?
I understand that a physics engine change would not be a "small thing", but I think it would be cool none the less. If it was feasable... have ships exert their own gravity too... think you're going to burn away from that Capital so easily? NOPE!
I digress.
TiDi with industry bonuses could make for some (dare I say) enjoyable mining content. |
James Solo
Bite Me inc Bitten.
2
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 15:38:00 -
[32] - Quote
Combining suggestions I like most in this thread with a few of my own: Wipe current bonuses.
- Add a Dual static
This alone will make it extremely valuable for pvp corps. Because of this value, pve should be harder, not easier in higher class wormholes.
- Local rep bonus (shield and armor)
Allows lower class black holes to be viable for smaller pvp corps and PVE becomes easier for them as well. Barrier to entry is low because tanking alone becomes easier.
- Proportional remote rep nerf
Makes it a lot harder to run the higher class sites, still viable however(people always find a way)
- 100% bonus to large hybrid, laser, and projectile turret damage, 100% to torpedo and cruise missile damage in a c6, scaled down accordingly for lower classes.
This way there is more room for playing with mass, teir3 battlecruisers can use the large guns in a c1 without having to build the battleship there. This will have interesting effects on stealth bomber damage as well.
- 75% less effectiveness of webs and target painters in a c6.
This has the dual purpose of making dread blapping hard, but making sites still doable. You just have to use more webs or figure out other ways of killing sleepers. Also scaled down for lower classes.
- Proportional bonus to range of webs, scram/point, and target painters
If a dual static cannot be done in a c5/c6 with the current programming, would it be possible to allow the ihub upgrade "Quantum Flux Generator" effects to the system by default? Essentially making them just very busy wormholes. |
Ghenghis Kralj
Big Johnson's PLEASE NOT VIOLENCE OUR BOATS
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 15:50:00 -
[33] - Quote
I agree with some of the others. Lower level black holes are not as bad as they are made out to be and can be quite livable. The problem is that the other wh effects are quite positive for pve, pvp, and daily living activities. Black holes are acceptable for pve and pvp in lower class wormholes, but make daily living activities more of a headache and risk. There is no advantage in higher class wormholes for pve or pvp. It just gets frustrating. Good luck getting drones back in your bay. Given that you can get empty wormholes, it's more that the competitive advantage of black holes is lacking relative to everything else. And for some, the warp time risk is not acceptable.
The main reason that I won't live in the a black whole is that EVE is a game of logic, and black wholes are illogical. My ship travelers faster, but my missiles slower?! What kind of loopey physics are those? In that case, might as well screw with ship mass. Buzzard weighs like a billion kg and a Moros 10 kg.
I think there are two solutions: 1. Change the basic effects offered by black wholes to something others have suggested: Missle damage bonus, explosion radius, indy (although not necessary imo), etc.
2. Make living easier and decrease the negative effects on inertia and missile velocity. |
Cosmic Scanner
Temnava Legion No Holes Barred
18
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 16:19:00 -
[34] - Quote
Black holes: * Missile Love - aka missile equivalent of magnetar. OR * Unique uninhabitable luxury system with lots of statics and high probability of inbound wormholes.
All Wormholes: * Dual Statics * More "Roaming" / "Wondering" wormholes (Especially for C4 to K-Space)
All this would mean more interaction between players in w-space. More PVP, less farming security, epic chains, the list goes on...
Cosmic Scanner / muu lufragga |
sten mattson
1st Praetorian Guard Curatores Veritatis Alliance
45
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 16:51:00 -
[35] - Quote
instead of tracking nerf , a reduction/boost to gun resolution? :P IMMA FIRING MA LAZAR!!! |
Godfrey Silvarna
Frozen Dawn Inc Arctic Light
84
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 17:43:00 -
[36] - Quote
Archdaimon wrote:How bout making black holes _the_ place for small ships to fight.
That is give bonuses and penalties compared to size of ship. Hence huge tracking penalties to caps, less to bs etc., but almost none to frigs (maybe even bonus?)
This would make c5/6 systems where _not_ cap pilots could live and fights with out fearing the blob-blap-dreads.
I am starting to really like this idea. |
Proclus Diadochu
Obstergo Bitten.
343
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 17:55:00 -
[37] - Quote
Personally liked the changing wormhole effects for Blackholes (downtime to downtime).
Blackholes can be a unique anomoly where CCP could write up something to pull random effects of the other wormholes, plus maybe add a couple more uniques, so it would always be interesting to see what perks and drawbacks you would have in the hole. It could be fun. ~Boredom Breeds Direction~ |
CeNSeR
Jazz Associates Azgoths of Kria
38
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 17:59:00 -
[38] - Quote
Ideal opportunity for CCP to have a little play.
Duel statics but change the rule e.g C2's where there is a W -space and a K - space static.
Null and a Highsec static would prove to be a major "conflict driver"
Cade Windstalkers input i thought was great, having a wormhole where underused ships like the Phoenix and the ham Legion could be a viable option would be cool. |
James Solo
Bite Me inc Bitten.
2
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 18:07:00 -
[39] - Quote
Godfrey Silvarna wrote:Archdaimon wrote:How bout making black holes _the_ place for small ships to fight.
That is give bonuses and penalties compared to size of ship. Hence huge tracking penalties to caps, less to bs etc., but almost none to frigs (maybe even bonus?)
This would make c5/6 systems where _not_ cap pilots could live and fights with out fearing the blob-blap-dreads.
I am starting to really like this idea.
I like this as well, but its important that whatever changes be made be balanced with future changes to the way dread guns track smaller ships anyway. Dreads still need to be usable for reinforcing towers and shooting carriers and other dreads, otherwise the effect just makes it so "most carriers + t3's" wins since it takes an enormous amount of t3 dps to take down RR'ing carriers, especially if they're orbiting your dreads with 100mn AB's going or something silly and you cant track them. I still think limiting EWAR is the way to go so that orbiting t3's and gardians are very hard to hit with dreads, but carriers, since they're already very slow anyway are still easy targets. Webs and paints are what makes dread blapping viable in the first place. |
StarFleetCommander
V0LTA Verge of Collapse
173
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 18:10:00 -
[40] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Adding a blue tag to this thread.
Help the CSM help CCP help you.
CCP Fozzie in the Wormhole section
Something must be up
I think all wormholes should have dual statics |
|
Lloyd Roses
Blue-Fire Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
148
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 18:18:00 -
[41] - Quote
Can't you just go from acceleration of things to 'slow things down'?
Currently, the most annoying thing in Eve is 'recalling Warrior IIs you dropped for any reason whatsoever', so if a wormhole would just reduce maximum velocity of a ship, it would even play arguably alright together with those other current effects. Or so.
I only correct my own spelling. |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
537
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 18:19:00 -
[42] - Quote
Black hole effect : No D-scan G££ <= Me |
Terrorfrodo
Renegade Hobbits for Mordor
568
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 18:31:00 -
[43] - Quote
Couldn't think of something good myself, but I like these two ideas best:
SMT008 wrote:Not a single WH effect offers a bonus to missiles.
So I would say, for a C6 BlackHole :
+100% Missile Explosion Velocity +100% Target Painter Efficiency (So that it's 2 times better, that's what I mean) +50% Missile Velocity
If it was just me, I would make it a place for Armor-Missile ships. Ie Sacrilege, HAM Legions, Torp-Typhoons and the like.
There are not many places where those are favored over Blaster-Prots.
Also, I'd like to attract your attention on an important fact (for me, at least) :
There are almost no battleships in wormholes.
What I mean is that yes, T3 > Battleship. That's ok, that's how it is, I'm not arguing about that. I'm arguing about the fact that Battleships really can't be used in wormholes except for a couple Bhaalgorns, Vindics and Armageddons.
The Mass Issue really is a massive issue when it comes to battleship usage. A single capital ship makes a massive change. The Battleship equivalent is just about 10 pointlessesly massive ships that will get blasted off the battlefield by dreads.
Please, seriously consider a special thing that would allow Battleship doctrines to have some breathing room. I mean, that would allow them to be flyable. Sure they'll still get stomped on by Dreads but at least you can use them if you want to.
Considering the fact that T1 battleships have been heavely rebalanced, it would be a shame if we couldn't use them :(
Archdaimon wrote:How bout making black holes _the_ place for small ships to fight.
That is give bonuses and penalties compared to size of ship. Hence huge tracking penalties to caps, less to bs etc., but almost none to frigs (maybe even bonus?)
This would make c5/6 systems where _not_ cap pilots could live and fights with out fearing the blob-blap-dreads.
As for TiDi, if something like that were to happen, I'd want it to be slower, not faster. That way Black Holes would become a kind of training system where you can think about your next move. Almost like turn-based combat. I love turn-based combat
But it won't happen, TiDi would decrease pve income and reverse TiDi would massively increase it, no chance CCP would do this. . |
Kynric
Sky Fighters Mass Overload
16
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 18:58:00 -
[44] - Quote
The engineer in me does not like the fact that ships and missles react differently to the same weather. Please set the missle speed bonus to match the ship speed bonus. I would prefer the remaining penalties remain as it is interesting having a pretty terrible weather type in the mix.
I do like the suggestion that black holes might have additional worm hole connections. I would rather this be done with additional periodics that lead to or from these systems rather than additional statics. Having random extra doors which lead to a variety of places is more intersting than having a reliable number of doors which go to predictable places. |
Dark HicQuaVideeum
Section 8. Fatal Ascension
72
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 20:22:00 -
[45] - Quote
i say put some into increased missile velocity and turret tracking, keep the speed strengh and add a sig reduction, keep reduced tracking and falloff, means that ppl will be able to use the speed tanking with improvement to missile damage and turret damage at close range |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
9
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 20:41:00 -
[46] - Quote
Cipreh wrote:No moons. Uninhabitable for any extended length of time. More or better sites. (Someone mentioned ice in w-space?) Multiple (2+) Statics or increased chance of K162. (Maybe shorter timers on the statics?)
The problem with this is it doesn't make Black Hole systems better it makes them something everyone else wants to find and fails to address the combat bonus/penalty problem.
Never mind all of the meta problems with having Ice in WH-space. |
Poloturion
Lead Farmers Kill It With Fire
29
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 20:43:00 -
[47] - Quote
Ships go faster so make the other stuff go faster. Replace missile speed nerf with buff, and increase optimal / falloff on guns.
The extra static is interesting and makes sense I guess.
Removing moons is hilariously unfeasible. Believe it or not but I think there are actually some people living in black holes, and I can't imagine CCP coming along exploding their moons/POS. Also, please fix POS. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
9
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 20:43:00 -
[48] - Quote
Dark HicQuaVideeum wrote:i say put some into increased missile velocity and turret tracking, keep the speed strengh and add a sig reduction, keep reduced tracking and falloff, means that ppl will be able to use the speed tanking with improvement to missile damage and turret damage at close range
The inertia penalty still rather kills speed tanking though, and the speed boost is already enough of a buff to speed/sig tanking without double-bonusing it. Never mind that 100MN T3s are pretty common already. |
Dark HicQuaVideeum
Section 8. Fatal Ascension
72
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 20:49:00 -
[49] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Dark HicQuaVideeum wrote:i say put some into increased missile velocity and turret tracking, keep the speed strengh and add a sig reduction, keep reduced tracking and falloff, means that ppl will be able to use the speed tanking with improvement to missile damage and turret damage at close range The inertia penalty still rather kills speed tanking though, and the speed boost is already enough of a buff to speed/sig tanking without double-bonusing it. Never mind that 100MN T3s are pretty common already.
then take away the inertia penalty, and dont add a sig reduction, but do increase dmg at small ranges |
Mohsar Trilar
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
1
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 21:03:00 -
[50] - Quote
stup idity wrote:I like the dual static idea from above very much. proposal 2 - move bonuses out of combat focus: - bonus to gas harvesting - bonus to mining - bonus to ore compression - more/other industry bonuses
How about we keep the inertia penalty and velocity bonus along with add significant bonuses to gas harvesting and mining. That way, miners can make more money in a black hole but the inertia penalty makes them more vulnerable to hunters. Possibly add an effect that makes ratting easier like a buff to missile damage or resistance to neuts.
Alternatively, I like the idea of Black Holes encouraging fast, brawling ships. Maybe reduce/remove the inertia penalty and add a webbing range bonus (that could be a bit crazy though). |
|
Winthorp
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
175
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 21:31:00 -
[51] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:Why should blackholes be changed? http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Wormhole_environment_effects The only people complaining about blackholes live in C5/6 because those penalties are rather harsh. The effects in lower classes are tenable. Any change to blackholes is a buff to income. Since higher classes tend to be extremely profitable, already, can I get a buff in C4 space income too?
To be fair even in C2 and on the affect is enough to make you not bother with that WH, i mean seriously why would you live in one. |
Winthorp
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
175
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 21:33:00 -
[52] - Quote
Good to see CCP are willing to listen and look at this, you mention not wanting to make dread blapping worse with a web bonus, but this is yours and CCP's chance to look at this and make this a WH effect worth fighting over. Don't avoid making the effects over the top, make it so good groups evict each other to have. |
M1k3y Koontz
Thorn Project Surely You're Joking
256
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 21:40:00 -
[53] - Quote
A different bonus is definitely a good idea, whenever we roll to a Black Hole system there is a collective groan on coms, regardless of the static.
Anything that doubles align time is just a bad idea, since it makes escaping twice as hard, and therefore makes everything unnecessarily riskier. How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp. |
Winthorp
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
175
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 21:52:00 -
[54] - Quote
Dscan delay in seconds 5 - 10 - 15 - 20 - 25 Multiple static WH - WH - WH - K-space - Kspace |
M1k3y Koontz
Thorn Project Surely You're Joking
256
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 22:05:00 -
[55] - Quote
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:make it have 2x time dilation
IE everything happens at twice the speed
seriously that would be a cool wormhole to live in...
And change the sound in Black Holes to this... How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp. |
M1k3y Koontz
Thorn Project Surely You're Joking
256
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 22:23:00 -
[56] - Quote
Make it like the opposite of a Cat Variable, bonus to local reps, nerf remote reps in the same percentages as they are in Cat Variables How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
10
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 22:49:00 -
[57] - Quote
M1k3y Koontz wrote:Make it like the opposite of a Cat Variable, bonus to local reps, nerf remote reps in the same percentages as they are in Cat Variables
This would almost completely kill Black Holes past C3 where RR is basically a requirement. Even a dread-blap fleet needs a triage carrier to stop the support ships from going pop. |
TwiKnight
Super Elite Friendship Club
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 23:10:00 -
[58] - Quote
black holes should be dark dreary places. the system graphic affect should make the whole system dark with a small beam of light/radiation coming from the event horizon. ideas for the system affects would be limiting d scan range 10% per wh level so 60% in a c6. it also should have a delay with the new scanner interface, a 2 min delay per wh level so 12 min delay in a c6 on a wh or sig popping up for your scanning window/probes to get the information. there should be some risk for farming sites and this would give people a chance to get the drop on you. i would say keep the velocity bonus all though it should be reversed 100% in a c1 and 25% in a c6. just like others have stated no wh has a bonus to missiles only negatives so reverse the missile velocity to positive so 50% in a c1 and 10% in a c6. idk how feasible it would be but maybe shorten the grids in the wh's because of the black hole affect visibility would be shortened. kind of how locking range is limited now but applied to grid affects so the ship disappears into the darkness. with stretching grid mechanics idk how possible it is just a thought. basically a black hole limits your intel because it is consuming the light in which the info would be traveling on to reach your ship and you gain increased velocity to missiles and your ship because the wh is on the very edge of the event horizon. it would be a unique affect in the fact most of the good bonuses apply fully in low end wh's and the negatives apply fully to high end wh's. |
Jack Miton
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
2229
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 23:22:00 -
[59] - Quote
Just change the agility penalty to an agility buff and youre done. Go faster but at better agility with range reduction on guns seems fine to me. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
10
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 02:26:00 -
[60] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:Just change the agility penalty to an agility buff and youre done. Go faster but at better agility with range reduction on guns seems fine to me.
Except that you end up shooting yourself in the foot. Great, you're faster, down-side, you have less range to play with on your kiting ship which means you're more likely to be in range of points, webs, and all that other fun stuff. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |