Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Eyhoma
White-Noise
0
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 09:34:09 -
[1] - Quote
So at fanfest the idea of a FC ship with an OP tank was brought up.
Sounded kind of wonky to me. What about the ability to do a ride-along? It could be that he docks his pod in one of the ships in the fleet, or perhaps can FC from a ship which fit a special module, but it wouldn't show up on overview which ship was carrying the FC. |
Kieron VonDeux
158
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 09:53:51 -
[2] - Quote
I tried to get the discussion going as well, but not many opinions yet.
As for your ideas,
A ride along type of idea has always resulted with Dev reply of "bad things happen in Database if you try that". I don't think that has changed.
As for module, what would stop players from using that mod to just get massive tank bonus to save their ass when they are in trouble?
|
Eyhoma
White-Noise
0
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 10:53:27 -
[3] - Quote
Kieron VonDeux wrote:I tried to get the discussion going as well, but not many opinions yet. As for your ideas, A ride along type of idea has always resulted with Dev reply of "bad things happen in Database if you try that". I don't think that has changed. As for module, what would stop players from using that mod to just get massive tank bonus to save their ass when they are in trouble?
Ah, I guess I didn't explain myself that well. For the module I was thinking of a remote camera option, like telepresence. |
Anhenka
Infinite Point Violence of Action.
1667
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 16:41:28 -
[4] - Quote
Your proposal is incredibly more complicated than what most people want.
We want a ship with extremely limited offensive capabilities, but insane tank. Passing a capsule around like a hot potato is just a side trip that really doesn't do what we want. The FC still needs to be in command of his own ship.
Headshotting an FC is a major problem in large fights. Either a ship with nearly no offensive capabilities but massive tank, or module that prevents the user from activating cynos or offensive modules in return for massive defensive bonuses is the general idea.
Of the two, the ship would be easier to implement, less gameplay issues with activating the module in unintended situation.
Just a massive brick, with triple+ defensive bonuses to push the EHP up to a level where it cant easily be headshot in a large fleet fight. And a role bonus that disallows Cyno's, and the use of Ewar. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2269
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 16:44:18 -
[5] - Quote
Eyhoma wrote:So at fanfest the idea of a FC ship with an OP tank was brought up.
Sounded kind of wonky to me. What about the ability to do a ride-along? It could be that he docks his pod in one of the ships in the fleet, or perhaps can FC from a ship which fit a special module, but it wouldn't show up on overview which ship was carrying the FC.
Idea is you can be killed but are hard to just headshot
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4369
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 16:47:42 -
[6] - Quote
And how much is enough EHP?
I remember alphafleets one or two shotting carriers back in the day, and that's just with battleships. Bring in high angle guns, or some of the new doomsdays, and your EHP wall is going to have to rival a titan if you want guaranteed survival. |
Anhenka
Infinite Point Violence of Action.
1667
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 17:02:54 -
[7] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:And how much is enough EHP?
I remember alphafleets one or two shotting carriers back in the day, and that's just with battleships. Bring in high angle guns, or some of the new doomsdays, and your EHP wall is going to have to rival a titan if you want guaranteed survival.
Doesn't need to be immune to that level of damage, but enough that it can't easily be volleyed through the primary defense layer by say a 150 man fleet.
In exchange for crippling nearly all offensive capabilities, along with a role bonus that prevented the use of Ewar or Cynos, I would say around 500k EHP in the primary defensive band with a fairly shiny fit. On a BC hull. And around 150k EHP less on a cruiser version.
That would give all four races a fleet command ship on par roughly with a slaved FC Damnation, instead of this silly situation where the Damnation can get close to 650k EHP, and the best the shield Command ships can get if they want to fit a MWD is around 250k, with close to a third of the primary buffer in shield that a Damnation gets with armor.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
2269
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 17:15:16 -
[8] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:And how much is enough EHP?
I remember alphafleets one or two shotting carriers back in the day, and that's just with battleships. Bring in high angle guns, or some of the new doomsdays, and your EHP wall is going to have to rival a titan if you want guaranteed survival.
And then you wind up getting to much hp so fcs are invincible in smaller fights. Even without that problem I'm sure we would find unintended uses for a ship with that much ehp
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Kieron VonDeux
160
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 19:35:34 -
[9] - Quote
What about damage mitigation like the new Citadels?
They have a max dps they can receive so regardless who is shooting at them they will live for a certain period of time. So small fleets could kill them nearly as fast and the largest fleets.
|
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
3210
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 21:56:01 -
[10] - Quote
Don't carriers have a temp invulnerability field (i mean a real one). Why not down size that, but at the same time reduces max locked targets to 0 as well as switches off cynos...
EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"
Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
|
|
Kieron VonDeux
160
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 21:58:34 -
[11] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:Don't carriers have a temp invulnerability field (i mean a real one). Why not down size that, but at the same time reduces max locked targets to 0 as well as switches off cynos...
Can be exploited to get rid of cynos really fast after your fleetmate has jumped into system.
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions The-Company
1173
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 22:52:49 -
[12] - Quote
Or you could command your fleet in a covert ops boat so you don't have to worry so much getting shot but giving important commands to your buddies.
Eve Minions is recruiting. Learn from about pvp, learn about ships and how to fly them correctly. Small gang and solo action in high, low and nullsec and w-space alike.
We will teach you everything you need and want to know.
|
Anhenka
Infinite Point Violence of Action.
1668
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 22:58:31 -
[13] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Or you could command your fleet in a covert ops boat so you don't have to worry so much getting shot but giving important commands to your buddies.
As long as you don't care about little things like telling distances to targets, if enemies are catching reps, when they die, being able to fleet warp the fleet around effectively, people warping to you and decloaking your squishy ass, or actually maneuvering the fleet where you want them to go during battle.
You know, like 70% of the FC's job? |
Eyhoma
White-Noise
0
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 23:31:35 -
[14] - Quote
So here's my refined idea. Give players the ability to broadcast their telemetry to another player. This could be mediated by a module, or maybe just a general player option. This would allow one player to enable another see their overview info. The client would render the shared data picture in-a-picture style or in a modal way. The receiving player would see the other players in-space view, but would have his own camera to manipulate and the overview will be displayed according to the receiving players preferences. The broadcaster can end at any time.
A happy side effect could be that this would give Eve cinematographers new tools to work with by adding a new way to capture live footage and by providing a backbone for a telemetry recording and replay feature. |
Anhenka
Infinite Point Violence of Action.
1668
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 23:42:35 -
[15] - Quote
Eyhoma wrote:So here's my refined idea. Give players the ability to broadcast their telemetry to another player. This could be mediated by a module, or maybe just a general player option. This would allow one player to enable another see their overview info. The client would render the shared data picture in-a-picture style or in a modal way. The receiving player would see the other players in-space view, but would have his own camera to manipulate and the overview will be displayed according to the receiving players preferences. The broadcaster can end at any time.
A happy side effect could be that this would give Eve cinematographers new tools to work with by adding a new way to capture live footage and by providing a backbone for a telemetry recording and replay feature.
Once again, waaaaay too complicated, and also doesn't help solve the issue.
An FC viewing through another overview still cant do things like lock targets, order fleet warps, or maneuver their ship and by extension the fleet. An FC that can't actually command the fleet isn't much use. |
Eyhoma
White-Noise
0
|
Posted - 2016.04.23 23:59:32 -
[16] - Quote
Anhenka wrote:Once again, waaaaay too complicated, and also doesn't help solve the issue.
An FC viewing through another overview still cant do things like lock targets, order fleet warps, or maneuver their ship and by extension the fleet. An FC that can't actually command the fleet isn't much use.
Honestly I think if you consider the unintended consequences the could result from creating a supertank for this role it doesn't seem all that complicated at all.
Your other point can be address by counting the receiver as *present* in broadcasters location for giving fleet orders. The receiver's camera orientation could count as the receivers 'heading'. |
Anhenka
Infinite Point Violence of Action.
1669
|
Posted - 2016.04.24 00:07:17 -
[17] - Quote
Eyhoma wrote:Anhenka wrote:Once again, waaaaay too complicated, and also doesn't help solve the issue.
An FC viewing through another overview still cant do things like lock targets, order fleet warps, or maneuver their ship and by extension the fleet. An FC that can't actually command the fleet isn't much use. Honestly I think if you consider the unintended consequences the could result from creating a supertank for this role it doesn't seem all that complicated at all. Your other point can be address by counting the receiver as *present* in broadcasters location for giving fleet orders.
Please explain the unintended consequences of a ship with a huge tank that can't light cynos, and can't use Ewar, and has little to no DPS. I'm usually fairly good at figuring out how to break a mechanic, but I'm not seeing much here. I suppose you could use one as a tanky drone bunny, but without Ewar resist it's just going to get jammed/damped down anyway into uselessness.
And yes, your idea is complicated, regardless of the viability of other ideas. |
Bobman Smith
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
1
|
Posted - 2016.06.27 21:12:15 -
[18] - Quote
I think the idea of keeping FC a little bit safer is a good idea but how its implemented needs to be considered as we definitely don't want any bull sh*t unbalanced mechanics that get abused. FC should not be immune to the fight. I also like the idea that if were going to have on grid links in Command Ship, they should in fact be command ships. So lets build off that platform to start.
Using Command Destroyers and Battlecruisers I think is a perfect place to start. They can be modded to keep up with ships a class lower and higher then themselves.
Give them a high spot module that prevents them from warping, makes them unlockable and increases their speed. Give it a 10 second activation with a reactivation timer. And of course, cant use any offensive modules like weapons/ewar but can use drones.
Idea behind this is it cant be useful as a 'personal transport ship'. And it should not be invulnerable. It should be vulnerable when it needs to move around from grid to grid, system to system and if it has to jump from one spot to another on grid, there should be a vulnerability that could be exploited if the enemy is ready for it. It should then also be subject to area of effect stuff like bombs and ECM bursts.
Adding extra EHP I think is broken. Lets not go there...
T3 Destroyers should cost aprox 160M. Change 50% to 25% weapons damage bonus.
Remove Insurance from game. Undocking should be risky with no paybacks!
Ban Frigate Pirate Ships from Novice FW Plexs.
Have more then 1 Clone in a station without loss.
|
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
236
|
Posted - 2016.06.28 16:54:52 -
[19] - Quote
I think the correct answer you're looking for is to have backup FCs. Someone shouldn't get special treatment in battle just because a corp/alliance sees them as an FC. |
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4501
|
Posted - 2016.06.28 17:02:30 -
[20] - Quote
Bobman Smith wrote:I think the idea of keeping FC a little bit safer is a good idea but how its implemented needs to be considered as we definitely don't want any bull sh*t unbalanced mechanics that get abused. FC should not be immune to the fight. I also like the idea that if were going to have on grid links in Command Ship, they should in fact be command ships. So lets build off that platform to start.
Using Command Destroyers and Battlecruisers I think is a perfect place to start. They can be modded to keep up with ships a class lower and higher then themselves.
Give them a high spot module that prevents them from warping, makes them unlockable and increases their speed. Give it a 10 second activation with a reactivation timer. And of course, cant use any offensive modules like weapons/ewar but can use drones.
Idea behind this is it cant be useful as a 'personal transport ship'. And it should not be invulnerable. It should be vulnerable when it needs to move around from grid to grid, system to system and if it has to jump from one spot to another on grid, there should be a vulnerability that could be exploited if the enemy is ready for it. It should then also be subject to area of effect stuff like bombs and ECM bursts.
Adding extra EHP I think is broken. Lets not go there...
Please do this. I will not buy up every eos in jita the second word of it leaks, honest. Nothing could possibly go wrong with an 800+ DPS ship that can't be locked. |
|
Khan Wrenth
Ore Oppression Prevention and Salvation
629
|
Posted - 2016.06.28 17:24:25 -
[21] - Quote
Sonya Corvinus wrote:I think the correct answer you're looking for is to have backup FCs. Someone shouldn't get special treatment in battle just because a corp/alliance sees them as an FC. This sounds precisely right.
I'm currently training up command ships and links and all that. I wouldn't dream of being the only person on the field that has the critical warfare links my FC wants. Even right now, I have to imagine FC's have a backup plan in case their primary link ships get probed down and are forced to jump to a new safe, or outright attacked and killed.
Command ships, even without links, look like great ships on paper, which is why I'm training them. Being backup links for the inevitable "on-grid" is just a bonus. Any serious FC should have backups in mind when this time comes. Heck, more people ought to fly these ships in every fleet - make the enemy guess which ones are flying links, and which ones are regular!
Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
|
Old Pervert
Perkone Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2016.06.28 20:52:23 -
[22] - Quote
I know little about this, and it would be an insane project to undertake, but it might be interesting if being an FC was more like an RTS rather than a spaceplane shooter game. Perhaps the goal of eve is to play eve... perhaps the goal is to win the fight even if it means not actually playing the game. A strange game. The only winning move is to not play. How about a nice game of chess?
I would envision it as follows. The FC can be in any ship they want, in any system, in any region. They can be docked up in a station on the other side of the universe.
They gain a new camera view which looks like the current (ability to toggle the tactical overlay and what-not). Except they have a list of ships in their fleet that they can choose to view from. Essentially, no different than being on grid and choosing to look at another ship (friendly only of course).
They gain information based on what their fleet sees, which is presented to them as relevant from the currently selected fleet member ship. If you want to see health for a ship, someone needs to have that ship locked. Anything overview-related would be visible to the FC as aggregated from the fleet. This would also allow them to see friendly target locks as well.
They'd have no lock time, soon as the data is available, clicking on a ship would immediately show the available information.
They would of course have the ability to initiate fleet warps, broadcasts, etc.
This wouldn't be a module, it would simply be a new camera view available to them (accessible from within stations too of course) that they can toggle on and off at will.
|
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
236
|
Posted - 2016.06.28 20:58:08 -
[23] - Quote
"no one is safe, and consents to PvP as soon as they undock* "
*apart from FCs, they should be 100% safe all the time, apparently |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
3358
|
Posted - 2016.06.28 21:57:43 -
[24] - Quote
As mentioned in the last thread on this a week or so ago..... DPS caps on all ships. Now you can't insti pop anyone, so everyone gets to enjoy a longer individual time in fleet fights, and gets to attempt actions to save their ship. Squad commanders before more important with target calling, not 250 people shooting one target but 25 squads shooting different targets makes more room for errors.
And the FC can choose to super tank fit with no weapons if they want to be more resilient on grid, or they can choose to standard fit with ability to do personal damage.
Choices are good, more players engaged is good. |
Old Pervert
Perkone Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2016.06.29 17:25:59 -
[25] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:As mentioned in the last thread on this a week or so ago..... DPS caps on all ships. Now you can't insti pop anyone, so everyone gets to enjoy a longer individual time in fleet fights, and gets to attempt actions to save their ship. Squad commanders before more important with target calling, not 250 people shooting one target but 25 squads shooting different targets makes more room for errors.
And the FC can choose to super tank fit with no weapons if they want to be more resilient on grid, or they can choose to standard fit with ability to do personal damage.
Choices are good, more players engaged is good.
Blops groups would be completely neutered by this. I've plans to train into a widow specifically so that myself and 2-3 other friends can drop on people. Taking away burst dps means we're on grid for longer, with collectively 8 billion isk on the grid. Risk/reward ratio goes to hell if you cap dps.
Hisec gankers would also like to have a word with you; would be very hard to gank freighters if there was a cap, as concord would actually be able to protect rather than just punish (and who really wants that, except the freighter pilots?). |
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
241
|
Posted - 2016.06.29 17:29:37 -
[26] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:As mentioned in the last thread on this a week or so ago..... DPS caps on all ships. Now you can't insti pop anyone, so everyone gets to enjoy a longer individual time in fleet fights, and gets to attempt actions to save their ship. Squad commanders before more important with target calling, not 250 people shooting one target but 25 squads shooting different targets makes more room for errors.
And the FC can choose to super tank fit with no weapons if they want to be more resilient on grid, or they can choose to standard fit with ability to do personal damage.
Choices are good, more players engaged is good.
Only 15% of people live in null, and maybe half of those participate in large scale fleets. Why should we make sweeping changes to all ships for the benefit of such a small minority of the playerbase at the expense of the other 90+%? |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |