Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ben Ishikela
71
|
Posted - 2016.04.14 17:35:46 -
[1] - Quote
Hey! no time to discuss or presentation or search similar ==> for inspirational purposes for our lovely devs.
here we go: activating a midslot (jammers disruptors etc) on anyone in highsec, does spawn CONCORD, but does not activate their destructive power. but once damage is activated (drones / guns / smartbombs) !paeng! death by CONCORD's huge alpha (yes, imho they should use artillery or similar).
issues: (not complete ofc) an ibis with eccm+scram on every gate. (just activate ecmburst/damp/neut/ many complaints by carebears. (getting jammed in belts /etc ==> fitting eccm on barges )
benefit: ewar metagame neutral webbing services? lots of hostile camps with warpdisruptors ecm escort probably increase in effective distance via highsec.
ty for your time.
Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop trees to start a fire.
|
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
11656
|
Posted - 2016.04.14 19:38:17 -
[2] - Quote
Are you even trying any more?
There's no real reason to do this...at all. CONCORD responds violently to any inter-capsuleer hostile action, and scramming or jamming some random in HS is most definitely a hostile action. What's the point, apart from the somewhat tenuous points listed, and how would this make EVE a better game?
No way that this could be exploited at all, amirite?
I personally might find the idea of provoking others into CONCORDokkening themselves by mistake hilarious for an hour or two, but really - have you thought this idea through?
In before "You should be banned from commenting"
Got a HoleySheet1 corpse? I'll buy it for 200m!
Bumble's Space Log
|
Rivr Luzade
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
2443
|
Posted - 2016.04.14 20:53:17 -
[3] - Quote
Thanks, but I would rather if these insta lock Blackbirds die rather than being able to keep my freighter tackled until the gank fleet arrives. And neutral webbing services are already possible via Duels.
So... WTF have I just read?
UI Improvement Collective
My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
|
Iain Cariaba
2917
|
Posted - 2016.04.14 21:24:19 -
[4] - Quote
I, for one, support this idea 100%.
No more expensive bumping machs needed to keep a freighter, or any other ship, from warping away. Not when a free rookie ship with a 25k isk warp disruptor can do so indefinitely with zero risk.
No more need for piloting ability to keep a freighter, or any other ship, from warping away. Not when you can sit at zero on a gate, or on station undock, with a long point and cover the entire arrival area.
No more need for training those pesky skill points. Not when you can tackle freighters with the skills a new character has right out the gate.
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
I couldn't have said it better.
Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
|
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
602
|
Posted - 2016.04.14 23:37:02 -
[5] - Quote
Jamming logi in incursion fleets xD
but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
|
Ben Ishikela
71
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 00:13:37 -
[6] - Quote
Eli Apol wrote:Jamming logi in incursion fleets xD Thats the spirit :)
Would the incursion meta shift, to have recons/scorpions there to damp/ecm those possible-ibises down? However. It would disrupt the safety in which incursions can be run in highsec currently. Thats intended!
Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop trees to start a fire.
|
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4349
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 00:21:27 -
[7] - Quote
Fit blackbird, find missionrunner, point, scram, orbit, go AFK for 23 hours.
Hmm. |
Ben Ishikela
71
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 00:22:33 -
[8] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:I, for one, support this idea 100%.
No more expensive bumping machs needed to keep a freighter, or any other ship, from warping away. Not when a free rookie ship with a 25k isk warp disruptor can do so indefinitely with zero risk.
No more need for piloting ability to keep a freighter, or any other ship, from warping away. Not when you can sit at zero on a gate, or on station undock, with a long point and cover the entire arrival area.
No more need for training those pesky skill points. Not when you can tackle freighters with the skills a new character has right out the gate. I'd just park another ibis at the gate ahead and jam the hostile one. or damp it. etc etc.... Therefor actually creative gameplay/TEAMWORK possible. Day One Noobs can actually participate. Guys on a trial period could be recruited to jam those guys for a bit of isk. right?
Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop trees to start a fire.
|
Ben Ishikela
71
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 00:26:00 -
[9] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Fit blackbird, find missionrunner, point, scram, orbit, go AFK for 23 hours.
Hmm. new meta: 1) use ecmburst and/or mobile depot(+stabs,ecm) on your missionrunner. (they should learn to do that for lowsec/nullsec anyway.) 2) missionrunner might find a friendship by calling out in local. (or be ganked ) 3) loosing his ship still unlikely. well, puts another pressure on faction/deadspace mods for shure
Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop trees to start a fire.
|
Iain Cariaba
2917
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 00:29:03 -
[10] - Quote
Ben Ishikela wrote:Iain Cariaba wrote:I, for one, support this idea 100%.
No more expensive bumping machs needed to keep a freighter, or any other ship, from warping away. Not when a free rookie ship with a 25k isk warp disruptor can do so indefinitely with zero risk.
No more need for piloting ability to keep a freighter, or any other ship, from warping away. Not when you can sit at zero on a gate, or on station undock, with a long point and cover the entire arrival area.
No more need for training those pesky skill points. Not when you can tackle freighters with the skills a new character has right out the gate. I'd just park another ibis at the gate ahead and jam the hostile one. or damp it. etc etc.... Therefor actually creative gameplay/TEAMWORK possible. Day One Noobs can actually participate. Guys on a trial period could be recruited to jam those guys for a bit of isk. right? And I bring another rookie ship, then you bring another, and so on. We take the n+1 meta out of dominion sov and move it into highsec? Of course, the n+1 meta worked soooo well for dominion sov that it has to work for highsec, right?
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
I couldn't have said it better.
Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
|
|
Iain Cariaba
2917
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 00:33:25 -
[11] - Quote
Ben Ishikela wrote:Danika Princip wrote:Fit blackbird, find missionrunner, point, scram, orbit, go AFK for 23 hours.
Hmm. new meta: 1) use ecmburst and/or mobile depot(+stabs,ecm) on your missionrunner. (they should learn to do that for lowsec/nullsec anyway.) 2) missionrunner might find a friendship by calling out in local. (or be ganked ) 3) loosing his ship still unlikely. well, puts another pressure on faction/deadspace mods for shure Yeah, that'll work.
At least it will until the mission runners start noticing a reduction in their precious isk/hr, then they'll be here on forums screaming for nerfs to your idea.
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
I couldn't have said it better.
Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
|
Ben Ishikela
71
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 00:37:01 -
[12] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote: And I bring another rookie ship, then you bring another, and so on. We take the n+1 meta out of dominion sov and move it into highsec? Of course, the n+1 meta worked soooo well for dominion sov that it has to work for highsec, right?
it can escalate until someone brings a scorpion with his ecm burst is going to clean the gate anyway. thats the cap. some other tactics: a kitsune can sit outside of ibis's jamrange. maybe that ibis needs to be protected by damps then. ==> more than just n+1
Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop trees to start a fire.
|
Iain Cariaba
2917
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 00:39:52 -
[13] - Quote
Game mechanic wise, Ben, you lack the understanding of how this, and the vast majority of your ideas, will be abused by the players of EvE.
Player psychology wise, you lack the understanding of how players will react to the abuses available in your ideas.
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
I couldn't have said it better.
Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
|
Ben Ishikela
71
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 00:45:45 -
[14] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote: (...)until the mission runners start noticing a reduction in their precious isk/hr, then they'll be here on forums screaming for nerfs to your idea.
isk/hr will be same or higher. Because demand isnt going anywhere. Supply might drop, but therefor higher prices as well. Well, profit only for those that know how to do it properly of course. at all others i can say then: "improve, if you want more isk!"
Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop trees to start a fire.
|
Ben Ishikela
71
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 00:46:31 -
[15] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:Game mechanic wise, Ben, you lack the understanding of how this, and the vast majority of your ideas, will be abused by the players of EvE.
Player psychology wise, you lack the understanding of how players will react to the abuses available in your ideas. Abuseability is good!!!! (imho)
Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop trees to start a fire.
|
Iain Cariaba
2917
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 00:50:13 -
[16] - Quote
Ben Ishikela wrote:Iain Cariaba wrote: And I bring another rookie ship, then you bring another, and so on. We take the n+1 meta out of dominion sov and move it into highsec? Of course, the n+1 meta worked soooo well for dominion sov that it has to work for highsec, right?
it can escalate until someone brings a scorpion with his ecm burst is going to clean the gate anyway. thats the cap. but not if a keres sits outside of its effect. a kitsune can sit outside of ibis's jamrange. maybe that ibis needs to be protected by damps then. ==> more than just n+1
You obviously don't understand the n+1 meta. Here's a hint: If you tactic can be directly countered by simply bringing one more ship, that's n+1.
ECM burst is good for max 12km. Not really difficult to counter that with a second ships perched near max point range at a different angle. n+1 A kitsune can only fit so many jams. Bring one more ship than kitsune has jams. n+1
Ben Ishikela wrote:Abuseability is good!!!! (imho) IF and only IF there is meaningful and fun counterplay. No. Unintended abuse of a mechanic is the meta game, but a mechanic specifically designed to be abused is bad. N+1 is not counter play. It is cancer for the game.
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
I couldn't have said it better.
Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
|
Ben Ishikela
71
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 01:03:10 -
[17] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:"N+1 reasons" Ok ok. I get it. (its 18+ km btw.) So how do we fix this bug then? The bug that is the lack of a deterrend or cap for N.
Quickfixes: bigger ecm-burst that needs spooling up for some time and has higher range? What about "target spektrum breaker"? But all those require no creativity: just bring a scorpion with every freigter and fire ecmburst on every gate. There needs to be a better option...... (until it is found we will need to postpone it then)
Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop trees to start a fire.
|
Ben Ishikela
71
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 01:07:22 -
[18] - Quote
Ben Ishikela wrote: just bring a scorpion with every freigter and fire the super-ecmburst on every gate. this would not be lukrative if the time for spooling would be high enough, right? Would it be a nice option if this burst was so expensive that ganking the scorpion for a lootdrop would be profitable. ?
Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop trees to start a fire.
|
Iain Cariaba
2917
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 01:22:13 -
[19] - Quote
Ben Ishikela wrote:There needs to be a better option...... (until it is found we will need to postpone it then) There is a better option. Pull the plug and let this bad idea die.
If you have to try and create new mechanics to try and fix the new mechanic you're suggesting, then your suggestion is broken on a fundamental level.
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
I couldn't have said it better.
Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
|
Ben Ishikela
71
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 01:23:42 -
[20] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:Ben Ishikela wrote:Abuseability is good!!!! (imho) IF and only IF there is meaningful and fun counterplay. No. Unintended abuse of a mechanic is the meta game, but a mechanic specifically designed to be abused is bad. N+1 is not counter play. It is cancer for the game. n+1 alone is not fun counterplay in itself. so therefor it was not included in "good". however, n+1 is more difficult to achieve here than it was in dominion-sov, but that should not be a reason to overlook it. ewar scales differently than dps. it has to be coordinated.
Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop trees to start a fire.
|
|
Ben Ishikela
71
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 01:30:28 -
[21] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:Ben Ishikela wrote:There needs to be a better option...... (until it is found we will need to postpone it then) There is a better option. Pull the plug and let this bad idea die. If you have to try and create new mechanics to try and fix the new mechanic you're suggesting, then your suggestion is broken on a fundamental level. lol. so wrong. if you search for perfect, you never find something worth.
example: without the new camera, the citadel expansion would be a >>bad idea<<(quote). that doesnt make it bad to think about playerbuild-stations and fighters or sov. I like what CITADEL is promising so far.
Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop trees to start a fire.
|
Iain Cariaba
2917
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 01:33:06 -
[22] - Quote
Ben Ishikela wrote:it has to be coordinated. Yes, it does. You know what, though? The people that would be abusing this mechanic are already coordinated, where the people that would be the targets typically do not work together. The people that can pull together upwards of 30 pilots to hit a freighter would have no problem at all at this.
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
I couldn't have said it better.
Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
|
Iain Cariaba
2917
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 01:36:14 -
[23] - Quote
Ben Ishikela wrote:Iain Cariaba wrote:Ben Ishikela wrote:There needs to be a better option...... (until it is found we will need to postpone it then) There is a better option. Pull the plug and let this bad idea die. If you have to try and create new mechanics to try and fix the new mechanic you're suggesting, then your suggestion is broken on a fundamental level. lol. so wrong. if you search for perfect, you never find something worth. example: without the new camera, the citadel expansion would be a >>bad idea<<(quote). that doesnt make it bad to think about playerbuild-stations and fighters or sov. I like what CITADEL is promising so far. Citadels work just fine with the old camera on sisi. The two have no relation.
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
I couldn't have said it better.
Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
|
Ben Ishikela
71
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 01:49:55 -
[24] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:Ben Ishikela wrote:it has to be coordinated. Yes, it does. You know what, though? The people that would be abusing this mechanic are already coordinated, where the people that would be the targets typically do not work together. The people that can pull together upwards of 30 pilots to hit a freighter would have no problem at all at this.
Arent those uncoordinated targets picked as a victim in the first place, because the coordinated ones do avoid this position without anyone noticing? (scouting/webbing/avoiding.........)
Also you dont see defenders because a gank is over so quickly and repeats itself only every 15minutes, right? (forum is full of those who wish to take part in defence things but cannot. Thats an opportunity missed out by ccp to make money for actually producing witnessable interaction)
Let the uncoordinated die! Its eve damn it.
Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop trees to start a fire.
|
Ben Ishikela
71
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 01:52:37 -
[25] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:Ben Ishikela wrote:Iain Cariaba wrote:Ben Ishikela wrote:There needs to be a better option...... (until it is found we will need to postpone it then) There is a better option. Pull the plug and let this bad idea die. If you have to try and create new mechanics to try and fix the new mechanic you're suggesting, then your suggestion is broken on a fundamental level. lol. so wrong. if you search for perfect, you never find something worth. example: without the new camera, the citadel expansion would be a >>bad idea<<(quote). that doesnt make it bad to think about playerbuild-stations and fighters or sov. I like what CITADEL is promising so far. Citadels work just fine with the old camera on sisi. The two have no relation. well, but i hope you get the point even if this quick example wasnt fitting. what about ewar-bubbles without propulsion modules. what about doomsday sicles without capdrain.
Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop trees to start a fire.
|
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
803
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 12:49:22 -
[26] - Quote
NO, another in your never ending string of bad ideas.
There are to many ways this can be abused to the detriment of the game as a whole.
|
Ben Ishikela
71
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 14:02:06 -
[27] - Quote
not true. some of them got implemented. not exaclty as i expected or suggested, but i kind of inspired.
this thread is too cluttered with offtopic. im going to make a new topic that has an "updated first post" when time comes. possible updates for the v1.1 might be: - increase in ecm-burstrange. - disallow disruptors. - modification on ecm-bursts.
Can you please list more abuses ... seriously. (Because if you want to stop me, then you have to come up with an unsolvable problem that you can prove exist. because is want pvp in highsec for those new guys, that lets them keep their shitp. so that we might get more experienced ewar pilots for nullsec in two years.)
Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop trees to start a fire.
|
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
4149
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 14:10:53 -
[28] - Quote
It would be much more consistent with current game mechanics to have the use of ewar modules result in a suspect flag rather than a criminal flag.
And that would still be a bad idea. |
Ben Ishikela
71
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 14:22:51 -
[29] - Quote
Vimsy Vortis wrote:It would be much more consistent with current game mechanics to have the use of ewar modules result in a suspect flag rather than a criminal flag.
suspect might work, but then the agressor is shootable. and then its similar to can-flipping. we already have that as a playground and its not really competitive.
Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop trees to start a fire.
|
Rivr Luzade
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
2445
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 14:30:46 -
[30] - Quote
Ben Ishikela wrote:Can you please list more abuses ... seriously. (Because if you want to stop me, then you have to come up with an unsolvable problem that you can prove exist. because is want pvp in highsec for those new guys, that lets them keep their shitp. so that we might get more experienced ewar pilots for nullsec in two years.) PVP in high sec and null sec is fundamentally different. A person sitting on a gate pointing a freighter with his noob ship and not do much else is as incompetent and unprepared for null sec PVP as a noob who has just subscribed for the game. We do not need more PVP in high sec beyond the, duels, war decs and criminal actions because people are supposed to move out of high sec into low and null sec to forge their own unlimited empires unhampered by restrictions in high sec. Removing restrictions from high sec just makes more people move back to high sec and leave low and null sec even more deserted, underpopulated and useless as it is now. In particular do we not need PVP in high sec that removes the capital punishment for a criminal crime against other capsuleers. Yes, warp disrupting someone is a capital crime. And the fact that you need to change a ton of mechanics and modules just to make it possible to perma point a freighter or other ship without receiving the rightful punishment of the law shows that you "idea" is flawed to the root.
UI Improvement Collective
My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |