Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
29
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 08:28:00 -
[1] - Quote
I was trying to come up with an elegant way to tie together many difference concepts in a nice smoothly delivered analogy that would be easily understood by the general Eve population. But that takes effort, and I'm lazy. So this is what you get instead:
Key points:
Space essentially has no "terrain features" to hide behind, particularly with respect to it's incarnation in the Eve Universe.
Eve provides nearly perfect information intelligence that can't be avoided or spoofed to hide one's existence (Local channel, ship/system scanner, probes, galactic map info).
The only counter Eve provides to any of this is a purely binary solution (on or off, no in-between) and it's only capable of hiding one's immediate location, and only on a system-wide level: the cloak. Everyone is still able to determine a player's location down to a system level of precision, even if they are cloaked.
Don't even *think* of bringing up W-Space. That's completely outside the scope of this issue.
With good game design players should never be handed anything for free. Large rewards need a large amount of effort. Information about a player's location is a large reward. It should require a large amount of effort.
Players currently complain about the lack of ability to carve out a small niche of space to call their own without belonging to a major Alliance or Coalition. The reason this doesn't currently work is because players are too easily tracked down and precisely located. It's simply impossible to exist somewhere and not be found.
An important bit here: EVE NEEDS "SPACE TERRAIN" ON A SYSTEM AND GALACTIC LEVEL that will allow players to mask and hide their presence.
There are two key areas here: Strategic and Tactical location information. I'll start with Tactical:
Tactical location information should be gained through sensors and sensors only (no, Local isn't a sensor). Sensors come in two flavors: active and passive.
The advantage of passive sensors: always on, doesn't give away your position. Disadvantages: short ranged, imprecise, doesn't reveal a lot of info ("hey, there's a ship out there!" not "hey, there's a ship out there and it's W type and at XYZ location!").
Active sensors have much greater range, greater precision and provide detailed information about any contacts. The disadvantage here is that you broadcast your presence to everyone within range of the active sensors.
Information should be range dependent: in order to get precise info, you need to get close. Yes, there's a group of ships at 20AU, at 10AU you can discern that it's 12 individual ships, at 5AU you can tell that it's 5 cruisers, 2 BCs and 5 BS. At 2AU you can tell what class each ship is. When you're on grid you can tell who's flying which ship.
The more powerful and/or specialized the sensors are, the greater the detail you get at longer ranges. Each race of ships should have their own trace signatures that sensors can be tuned or specialized in.
THE GAME DESIGN OF GAINING PLAYER SHIP INFORMATION AND CORRECTLY INTERPRETING IT SHOULD BE HIGHLY DEPENDENT UPON PLAYER SKILL AND INTERACTION. Highly skilled and specialized recon pilots should be of extreme value.
Players should be given new modules and rigs to build and customize sensor packages as they see fit in order to tailor them to their play styles. Defensive players (miners, mission runners etc.) will want powerful passive sensors to enable an "always on" long range omni-directional warning system that will alert them to incoming ships, regardless of type. Offensive players (PVPers, who else?) will want highly tuned directional sensors that will enable them to find prey at extreme range and identify targets with a high degree of detail as quickly as possible. Players should also be given modules/rigs to decrease their sensor signature to various types of sensors (stealth rigs, if you will) that will allow players to adapt to their prey.
Note that all of the above isn't binary. It's not ON/OFF- detected or not detected. There are multiple highly granular levels of information between detecting something and clearly identifying it as a threat. I could go on for pages in detail about how to implement these ideas, but let's leave it here for now. We can expand on this later.
Strategic location information- hiding among the stars:
Just like tactical information, strategic info needs to have many levels of detail and precision and be delivered through both active and passive sensors.
System bodies (planets, moons, asteroids, stars) should provide "terrain" with which to mask players, stations and their activities. The larger the mass, the larger and more intense the gravity well within which to hide ships and outposts etc. Asteroid belts would provide "backscatter", gas clouds and nebulae would provide opaque scan-proof environments in which to hide. A "stellar forest" if you will. The equivalent of hiding in the trees.
Corporations and Alliances would get the ability to install massive sensor installations that would provide real time active and passive information from a system to regional level, with varying degrees of detail and accuracy. At no point would these static sensor nets deliver information as accurately or as quickly as ship sensors would.
Strategic signatures would accrue over days and weeks and months of player ship activity. The more activity and the greater number of ships and/or tonnage of said ships would generate increasingly more intense signatures. Small groups of players in small ships tucked away in quiet corners of space in the shadow of massive stars and planets or hidden away in giant gas nebulae would go unnoticed for weeks, months or maybe years. Massive groups of highly active players would create so much "space pollution" that it would be sensed light years away, across multiple regions. You would literally be able to smell the stink of your enemy.
[more to come]
I'm a pirate in a pirate's body. |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
29
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 08:37:00 -
[2] - Quote
[continued]
Currently, there's no advantage to being a small group. With the above concepts there will now be a very good reason to bring only what you need, or even possibly less than you would optimally require. Currently, Eve's game design only rewards the biggest and most numerous. CCP needs to build in more game design that rewards a player who is smarter than the rest and attempts to be as asymmetric as possible and do more with less.
Once small groups or even solo players are able to exist and survive in 0.0 by keeping their existence hidden from other players I think we will see a large number of players migrating to 0.0 to give it a go. I think that the current perception by most players who aren't currently in 0.0 is "I can't survive without massive numbers, so why try?" I think that's a valid question. Once you're found, the enemy descends upon you with superior numbers and you're dead. The main problem here is the perfection and precision of location information and the ease with which it is required, and the fact that CCP rewards numbers superiority above all else in the game. The blob is the fault of CCP, pure and simple.
I'm looking forward to your comments. Let's try and keep them constructive and focused please. I know you can do it. I'm a pirate in a pirate's body. |
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
20
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 08:47:00 -
[3] - Quote
I like the ideas and vision for EVE you present. Practically speaking though what would you suggest CCP do that doesn't take several years for them to deliver? |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
34
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 09:55:00 -
[4] - Quote
Xorv wrote:I like the ideas and vision for EVE you present. Practically speaking though what would you suggest CCP do that doesn't take several years for them to deliver?
How to do it in a nutshell:
1. Put Local in Delayed Mode.
2. Tactical Location Information: Extensively modify the scanning system and build in passive/active modes, adding in rigs/modules to optimize for each. Additionally, factor in racial sensors, racial emissions (ship exhaust, emissions etc.) and various third and fourth order complexity to give evasion and detection a subtle and nuanced feel with an extreme amount of depth built into the game design.
3. Strategic Location Information: Similar to Tactical, build in the player produced/operated equipment that replaces the current "free" information streams and data sets. Strategic Location Information can be propagated through player groups via standings.
The mechanics for what I'm proposing should be viable with the existing code base. We already have variables like sig radius and sensor strength. We already have omni-directional and hyper-directional scanning capability. Now all we need to do is break the existing scanner mechanics into separate portions, add more detail to each and make it highly customizable and tunable by the players. Everything that I've thought of so far is based on existing game design/game mechanics.
More specifics:
I'll start with the most simple portion of the whole thing, the passive sensors.
All ships will have passive sensors. This will be the default sensor mode. All ships will have more/less effective base passive sensors depending on ship type and race. Some will have greater range, others faster refresh frequency (5 seconds vs. 10 as an example) while others provide more detail at greater range etc. Passive sensors will be upgradable with both rigs and modules, and all sensors will be able to be tuned to detect a particular racial type of ship at the expense of detecting other types of ships with less capability.
Ships will also be able to equip mods/rigs that will make them harder (or impossible) to detect with passive sensors and/or tuned to be particularly invisible to racial sensor types etc. Giving players the option to configure their ships for a specific threat at the cost of making them more vulnerable to others is good game design.
The larger/hotter the ship signature, the easier it will be detected: it will be detected at greater range and with more detail than other ships. No longer will a cloak be a 'one size fits all' solution, making a BS invisible just as easily as a frig.
Example: BS will be detectable from extreme range compared to a frig. As ships come closer to one another more info about the contact will be revealed depending on the power of the sensors and the type of target. Depending on the proximity of the contact with other ships and the size of those ships, multiple ships might appear as one large ship, or a large ship might mask the presence of smaller ships in its group. The closer you are, the more powerful your sensors and the less stealthy your target is, the more info you discern at a given range.
The concept with passive sensors is that they operate on the idea that they detect emissions by other ships: exhaust gas, heat, communications signals or what have you. The louder/brighter/smellier your ship is, the easier it will be to detect.
The automated nature of the passive scanner alleviates the issue of "always having to push the button" every 2 seconds. It's the equivalent of "watching local". It's imperfect information however is what gives attacking players a chance to locate other players and get within range before they can run. Which brings me to Active Sensors.
Active Sensors:
These can be separated into a further two groups: ship mounted and probes. Both systems will emit a "ping" which can be detected by targeted ships that are hit with this sensor ping. Targeted ships won't always be able to detect your pings if your active sensors are sufficiently advanced and you're operating far outside of the defending player's passive sensors. Active sensors are the equivalent of shining a flashlight into a dark room. You can see what the flashlight is pointed at, and your target can see the flashlight, but nobody else can see the light beam unless they're being painted by it.
Probes are comparable to an illumination round. You fire one up in the air and it lights up the entire battlefield, showing everyone where everyone else is all at once, friend and foe alike. This is a generalization and of course CCP should build in immense detail into this with respect to type of probe, race of probe, range, power, duration, pulse frequency, probe arrays and coverage, probe overlap and constructive interference of sensor volume etc.
Strategic sensors:
These are both active and passive as well. They will be Corporation and Alliance level assets. The more accurate and timely the information the more expensive it will be. At an exponential rate. The game needs analogues to every modern sensor type: surveillance satellites, early warning radars, missile launch detection etc. Not literally mind you, but figuratively.
What should never happen: big Alliances "getting local back" with some static sensor add-on to an outpost. At the most the information should be similar to "average number of ships in system in the last 24/12/6/4 hours, depending on the level of sensor (more granular/shorter time slice = better).
[more later] I'm a pirate in a pirate's body. |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
35
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 10:19:00 -
[5] - Quote
The concept of ship stealth and detection: incorporating it into every module, every choice!
Imagine if different types of shield extenders increased your ship's signature across various different racial emissions spectrums. The same for various microwarp drives or afterburners. What if different types of armor plates provided lower signatures due to better signal absorption, at the expense of not providing as much EHP? What if passive shield/armor hardeners provided lower emissions spectrum than active did? What if using special (Tech 3?) ammo in your guns caused zero increase to your sig (silenced weapons anyone?), allowing you to quickly and quietly make a kill before anyone knows you're in the area?
On earth, not every ship is a submarine, but every submarine is a ship. In Eve, EVERY ship is a submarine. Some are just more stealthy than others. Dedicated Covert Ops and Recon class ships will have exceptional sensor suites and ultra low emissions in addition to active cloaking capabilities. I would recommend that these active cloaking abilities be of limited duration and require cap/fuel to use, similar to how diesel/electric submarines used to operate. You can "go dark" to sneak up on a target and then attack, but you'll eventually need to "surface" and refresh your air/recharge your batteries so to speak. All other ships simply wouldn't be allowed to cloak. Non Covert Ops cloaks would be replaced with "stealth modules" that would reduce a ship's signature, but wouldn't render it completely invisible/impossible to find like cloaks currently do.
There should be trade offs that would make currently "worthless" modules attractive: do you go for the best fitting, best performance, best efficiency or lowest sensor signature/emissions? Incorporating various sensor emissions capabilities into named modules seems like a good way to differentiate them, mitigating the "bigger is always better" game design that currently exists.
Sensor networking:
In addition to information, sharing it is just as important. Where Corps and Alliances will really benefit is in the sharing of information. If you're in a gang and you have a CovOps pilot with you, what if everything his sensors detected showed up on your tactical overlay? Now he truly is your eyes and ears for your whole gang! What if your ships could fire their weapons at targets he acquired, even though the targets are out of your lock range (but not weapons range)? Indirect fire, so to speak!
What if you're two systems away but an enemy blob arrives and your Alliance has regional and local static sensors installed in that system? You're able to look on the map and notice increased activity two systems over in the past 4 hours and are able to pack up your mining op in time to make it to safety. Unfortunately, the next day the enemy comes back in smaller ships and in fewer numbers and splits up into three different groups, arriving from three separate directions. Unable to detect the smaller ships in fewer numbers from long range, your sensors don't notify you until it's too late and you lose half your mining crew to the invaders.
The inability to manage large amounts of information will inherently limit the size and scope of space that a single Alliance/entity can effectively police and control. This is another positive byproduct of this concept: it will be very costly in TIME to control a lot of space. People will tend to settle on a reasonable and practical amount of space to control and stick with that. Controlling large swaths of space for little or no need will go away as it won't be cost effective to do so from a time standpoint.
Thoughts? I'm a pirate in a pirate's body. |
Eyup Mi'duck
Republic University Minmatar Republic
12
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 10:22:00 -
[6] - Quote
TL;DR
But to answer your question, I cloak to become less visible as a target. I am me.-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á I am not you.-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-áI am happy with this situation. |
Lexmana
Imperial Stout
102
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 10:50:00 -
[7] - Quote
You know, it like your ideas alot. This is very close to what I envisioned EVE would be before actually trying the game out. I especially like how this would provide the basis for terrain in space and provide many more tactical options to fleet commanders (small fleets may actually become an advantage in many situations) and individual pilots.
The scanning system, local and cloaking mechanics is in dire need of a big overhaul. OP is a very good starting point.
+1 |
Jask Avan
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 11:16:00 -
[8] - Quote
+1 Information should be a skill, not handed to everyone on a silver platter. |
Thebriwan
LUX Uls Xystus
13
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 11:33:00 -
[9] - Quote
I like these ideas very much. You should consider posting them in the ideas section |
Seleia O'Sinnor
Arklight Project Fade 2 Black
82
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 11:38:00 -
[10] - Quote
+1000 This is well written and is sound in logic. I support this completely!. Thanks for a highly valuable thread. Eve community: An angry mob of bright people hunting witches, more torches, more hay forks, growing and growing. |
|
GreGh Rakrot
Rionnag Alba Northern Coalition.
2
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 11:39:00 -
[11] - Quote
I like it, alot. Its basicly how I envisioned space exploration game would be like, feeling of vast and unknown space. You get that feeling wheh you start playing EVE but as you learn the basic intel gathering tools (local chat and ship scanner) the feeling quickly vanishes, this would be alot more challenging and fun. Kind of similar to spaceship technology in Sci-Fi book series Vatta's War, where the tactical positioning and ability to communicate between ships in real time would greatly influence the space battles.
Sadly I doubt CCP would be bold enough to make such drastic changes to the game, one can only hope. |
Dr Karsun
Coffee Lovers Brewing Club Care Factor
39
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 12:00:00 -
[12] - Quote
I disagree.
This information of someones presence is for free, sure, but it's not precise information. The enemy can be, in some systems, more than a hundred AU away, I wouldn't really call that precise information.
I would gladly trade all kinds of local for removal of cloaks. I don't need to know that you'r in my system as long as I can scan your ass down with combat probes.
As long as cloaks are the only thing that doesn't have a counter - I see no reason to remove local. "Have you had your morning coffee?" -> the Coffee Lovers Brewing Club is recruiting! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=363976#post363976 |
Sarion Stormweaver
Spectrum Solutions INC
1
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 14:49:00 -
[13] - Quote
+1 nice idea.
One thing though. How do you make the change ? :) Because these are huge game mechanics changes. And switching overnight from one system to another is gonna **** off a lot of people. |
Apollo Gabriel
Mercatoris Etherium Cartel
349
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 14:54:00 -
[14] - Quote
I'd leave w-space for this I'm a ******* profanity filter that can catch **** and *****, but fuckin little else. -á
|
J Kunjeh
81
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 15:36:00 -
[15] - Quote
OP has some really good ideas in it. I hope this discussion continues and some of these get implemented down the road. "The world as we know it came about through an anomaly (anomou)" (The Gospel of Philip, 1-5)-á |
Vin Lieger
Ambiguous Holdings inc.
1
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 15:42:00 -
[16] - Quote
Love it
I imagine a day when you can hide swarms of frigs/cruisers etc behind titans and other caps for a while, kind of like hiding your true fleet size across battlefields |
Lexmana
Imperial Stout
104
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 15:48:00 -
[17] - Quote
Sarion Stormweaver wrote:+1 nice idea.
One thing though. How do you make the change ? :) Because these are huge game mechanics changes. And switching overnight from one system to another is gonna **** off a lot of people.
I am not so sure it is such a huge change. Most mechanics already exist in dscan today. Just apply different range/vector limitations and update intervals depending on ship/modules/rigs. That would cover most passive and active scanning mechanics. What needs to be added is mechanics to hide behind space objects/celestials and such.
As for upsetting people - most players in null and low knows how to adapt and would probably be very happy with such change. Highsecbears are another thing, but local could stay as is in highsec so no prob there. And since they don't use dscan much they would not see much of a change.
|
bartos100
DARK ADAMA Rolling Thunder.
1
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 15:50:00 -
[18] - Quote
i like the idea
not realy any comments besides that :) |
Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
199
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 15:57:00 -
[19] - Quote
So as to completly trash this nice thread idea which should be in Suggestions
Jump gates
You can hide behind a jump gate, because you can never see whats on the other side until you go through it.
Jump gates are the limiting factor and implimented for the exact opposite reason OP is describing to make space "spacey", jump gates "chokepoint" players into conflict otherwise you just avoid people. Which would chase away all the hardcore PVPers. Unless CCP does a MAJOR OVERHAUL of EVE (pfft, yeah right) and changes huge aspects its pointless to even suggest it adding space to space. |
Torin Corax
Zebra Corp
13
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 16:14:00 -
[20] - Quote
Very nice ideas. I dare say this would be a huge shake-up, and no doubt cause endless whine threads. That said something along these lines is long overdue imho. With proper balancing (and this would not be an overnight success I'm sure) this would be fair to both hunters and hunted.
If I had an inappropriate signature, it would be removed from here By. Spitfire |
|
Lexmana
Imperial Stout
104
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 16:20:00 -
[21] - Quote
Aqriue wrote:So as to completly trash this nice thread idea which should be in Suggestions
Jump gates
You can hide behind a jump gate, because you can never see whats on the other side until you go through it.
Jump gates are the limiting factor and implimented for the exact opposite reason OP is describing to make space "spacey", jump gates "chokepoint" players into conflict otherwise you just avoid people. Which would chase away all the hardcore PVPers. Unless CCP does a MAJOR OVERHAUL of EVE (pfft, yeah right) and changes huge aspects its pointless to even suggest it adding space to space.
So you are trying to be smart but all you can say is there is one place to hide right now and that it is enough?
And i bet you, jump gates wasn't put there for the reasons you state. I am pretty sure jump gates was put into EVE as a means to divide this single shard MMO universe into smaller pieces so that computers could have a chance handle the load. Becoming a choke was a nice side benefit.
I do agree with you though, that this thread has a place in ideas/suggestions.
|
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
3203
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 16:22:00 -
[22] - Quote
There are some good ideas in there, but I disagree with some. This should be in F & I though tbh.
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. |
Valei Khurelem
Viziam Amarr Empire
18
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 16:23:00 -
[23] - Quote
I posted a suggestion awhile back about no local and I think that you should have a command and conquer style radar installation in the 0.0 systems in order for the owners to enable it or use local if it's destroyed you should be able to have any number of ships sneaking into the system without them knowing. The current local system is massively easy to abuse, this is why it's so easy to get gate camps set up, this is why it's easy for blob fleets etc. to avoid each other and never have a conflict.
Information is power and CCP have handed it to everyone on a platter. |
Myrkala
Missions Mining and Mayhem Northern Coalition.
2
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 18:59:00 -
[24] - Quote
Omg, the forum still eats up posts? :(
I wrote about 4k chars worth of brainstorming considering your idea, as well as other gameplay factors you missed like tactical evasive maneuvers enabled by the cloak in the form it is today. (Avoiding getting killed in camps ect.)
Main points were: The cloaking device with fuel/cap consumption and a fixed activation timer, all of these could be effected by low and mid slot modules. As well as not being able to cloak indefinitely, because of fuel/cap consumption. And alertness required by the pilot because running out of fuel/cap while AFK cloaking usually ends up in your ship getting blown up.
Ship size vs sacrifice considerations, also looked at capitals.
And then looked at the tactical aspect of the system scanner structures on a group/corp/alliance level, and how it increases value of intel because its harder or requires more effort to come by. Which I like. As well as how the feel of the game changes when no one is really safe, because of no immediate local and also that having some weak signal on scan might mean there is an anomaly, a wreck, or a hostile ship present in the vicinity.
What must found is a good balance between: Hard to find targets, easy to find targets. Hard vs easy to catch targets and hard vs easy to evade being caught.
Ultimately these things should be about being smart, alert and ready to grab someone or gtfo. |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
61
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 18:59:00 -
[25] - Quote
To answer many of your posts, in no particular order:
Yes, technically, it should be in F&I. IMO F&I gets little or no attention by the general forum public and hence I posted in GD. Even though I'd prefer the post remain in GD, I'm sure it will get moved to F&I to die among all the other forgotten posts there.
Thank you for all the positive feedback!
Jumpgates as chokepoints- "back in the day".... there were no jumpgates- players always warped into the system at the star. There was one way in. Jumpgates were added so that there were multiple locations to arrive at.
Quick jump mechanic I just thought of while writing this: what if Jump gates allow you to travel without using fuel? What if you could "lock on" to any celestial body, provided it was large enough and jump to that instead, with varying degrees of accuracy, only you would have to consume isotopes like carriers currently do? You could have a choice of using jump gates for the ease of use and convenience, or jump into a system and land at the star, a planet, or even a moon if your "navigational sensors" were sufficiently advanced (read: RIGS AND MODULES) and able to lock on to such a small mass. Skills could be implemented to improve navigational accuracy, fuel use etc. There could always be a chance of failure and you'd end up in a nearby system. Fleet jumps could scatter a 100 man fleet with 10-20% landing in the middle of a system, 5-10AU away from the intended celestial object, or even in another system if the navigation was poor enough.
Heck, imagine being able to hit "JUMP" at any time during the align process! As the accuracy of the jump increases, you could call "good enough" once it's at 90% and hit jump in order to shave a few precious seconds off of your align time to escape harm. Clearly there would be a threshold for alignment so that you can't hit jump instantly in order to avoid death. In the last few seconds of a normal align cycle the accuracy would go from 0-100%, giving the player the choice when trying to run or trying to catch another player the option to gamble with their chance of arriving slightly sooner at the expense of accuracy.
We could build powerful navigation systems into Command Ships (OH HO, look, a real role for them!...) that would be able to quickly and accurately navigate large gangs of players to arrive all at the same place, at the same time, with less fuel cost. Again, just brainstorming here.
Believe it or not, Eve needs more complexity and more layers to peel back when it comes to PVP and combat, and adding additional complexity to information warfare and navigation is a great way to start without changing the existing offense/defense mechanics of actual combat.
All of these ideas don't require too much in the way of art. Most are purely game design changes. I can't think of anything that I'm proposing right now that isn't already in the game. The TL; DR of the above concept is as basic as proposing sub-capital ships be able to use celestial objects as pseudo cyno beacons to jump to, and building in accuracy errors when arriving. Should be pretty simple. As for precedent: what do you think happens when Black Ops ships bridge in a bomber gang onto a Covert Cyno? Same concept, more flexibility.
Again, bring on the discussion! I'd like to hear your ideas! I'm a pirate in a pirate's body. |
Karth Mentis
Aliastra Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 19:40:00 -
[26] - Quote
You know, talking about cloaking massive yell for some people to disapear from local when they cloak makes me remember a idea. So I thought, hey what if CCP gives them that with a massive twist.
What if when you are cloaked you disapear from local but at the same time you cannot send any messages outside the system. That way the run silent, run deep its gonna be more true and more cool. |
Alara IonStorm
646
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 19:47:00 -
[27] - Quote
OP's a talker. good thing I like what he is saying.
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
314
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 19:52:00 -
[28] - Quote
I cloak because I can.
I cloak because there are people who have nothing better to do than pad their all-worshipful killboards.
I cloak because the RMT'ers hate it when they can't find the person who made their bots dock up.
I cloak because everybody is like Jan Brady when you appear in "their" space and watching their semi-autistic emorage when they can't get their kill is fun.
I cloak because all exit gates being bubbled while someone is cursing at you in Russian means they probably brought combat probes too.
I cloak because it was also cool when the Klingons and Romulans did it.
|
Derus Grobb
Iron Oxide Institute
6
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 20:03:00 -
[29] - Quote
New intel tools should be in the next expansion. This would be a great overhaul to the staid mechanics of watching local. |
Jask Avan
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 21:00:00 -
[30] - Quote
Karth Mentis wrote:You know, talking about cloaking massive yell for some people to disapear from local when they cloak makes me remember a idea. So I thought, hey what if CCP gives them that with a massive twist.
What if when you are cloaked you disapear from local but at the same time you cannot send any messages outside the system. That way the run silent, run deep its gonna be more true and more cool. Interesting, but can be circumvented with out-of-game tools. |
|
Karth Mentis
Aliastra Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 21:12:00 -
[31] - Quote
Jask Avan wrote:Karth Mentis wrote:You know, talking about cloaking massive yell for some people to disapear from local when they cloak makes me remember a idea. So I thought, hey what if CCP gives them that with a massive twist.
What if when you are cloaked you disapear from local but at the same time you cannot send any messages outside the system. That way the run silent, run deep its gonna be more true and more cool. Interesting, but can be circumvented with out-of-game tools.
LOL, yeah my bad, thats why I never should make the plans of anything.
Still a twist in the system would be freaking awesome if they want to give the cloakers the benefict of no local. Like loosing some fleet advantages like being able to warp to somebody and things like that. |
How2FoldSoup
Hull Tanking Elitists
8
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 21:35:00 -
[32] - Quote
I personally love the sound of all of these changes. If this were in F&I I would support this thread but since its in GD
Signed
The groundwork is here and details can be worked out. I really hope CCP takes a look at this as a possible venture for perhaps next year's winter expansion. these changes could increase the depth of PvP 100 fold and make it a lot more engaging and challenging as it should be.
Soup |
Paragon Renegade
Offensive Logistics Inc
150
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 21:39:00 -
[33] - Quote
OP is Space Jesus.
OP, ironically, is completely correct :3 The pie is a tautology |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
69
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 20:44:00 -
[34] - Quote
Soup, Paragon etc.-
I'd like more input on what you think of my ideas, and if you have any ideas of your own to contribute to this concept. What do you envision a fight looking like? How does the process unfold? How are targets found, how do defenders make it out alive? How do you fake your true strength or bait someone into a trap using these new ideas? What about Q-ships? Hiding among other player ships in high sec during wars? How critical is getting "eyes on" a target before committing to a fight?
What if all ships had the flexibility to put jump fuel in their cargo holds at the expense of ammo or cap boosters? How about jump drive spin up/cool down times? Would the range of the jump and it's accuracy be affected by the size of the object being locked on as a reference point? (i.e. easier to jump to a star that's far away than to try and jump to a small moon of a planet with any accuracy)
How would being able to jump to celestial objects enable more porosity in boarders within 0.0 and low sec? What would be an effective counter to this?
Getting back to sensors and information warfare: what about decoys? Passive probes as well as active probes? What about the concept of minefields and/or static "leave behind" passive or active probes that would have life spans in hours or days that would allow coverage of large areas or specific pipelines? I'm a pirate in a pirate's body. |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
75
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 20:59:00 -
[35] - Quote
Came here expecting another lame manifesto about why hated people do what they do.
Left disappointed, but happy to have seen a good analysis of the current state of hiding in Eve, and reasonable ideas to make the situation better. |
Fidelium Mortis
Quantum Cats Syndicate
3
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 21:02:00 -
[36] - Quote
+1 like the ideas in general.
I especially like the idea of hideable terrain, and the introduction of more specialized ways to find people.
I would be a bit cautious about making the mechanics too specialized to the point where it would be annoying for a solo PvPer looking to hunt down a target in system is only limited to a specialized ship or module. ICRS - Intergalactic Certified Rocket Surgeon |
Killer Gandry
Shadow of the Pain
18
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 21:05:00 -
[37] - Quote
Don't try to touch the cloaking mechanics.
The tears would drown all hamster and the game / forum would crash.
|
Diana Dour
University of Caille Gallente Federation
5
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 21:19:00 -
[38] - Quote
I wanted to make a career change, become a space hermit, I wanted to set up a small POS in a dark region of space or be a bum/traveler/nomad.
I was going to fit out a completely sustainable and self sufficient Legion
Then I remembered no matter where I go in the universe someone with notice me in local, I will be hunted down, someone will notice me. They'll know if I am active in space/docked/killing NPC's
Even in a wormhole if I'm logged on I'll be found by someone in a matter of a couple days at most, if I kill any sleeper I will be found immediately
Some sort of Space God is broadcasting API info for no apparent reason.
Is this a space game? Like what the hell is this?
I though CCP said EVE was cold and dark? Dark? Not if you mean mysterious or anything relating to that at all, you can find as the OP said where everyone is, who everyone is, what corps they're in, which they've been in? You know exactly who and where everyone is! What kind of universe is that??? I don't know who or where my ******* neighbors are yet in EVE I know who and where AmarCitzen1239729834 is ?????? When he was born? His employment history? What the hell?
|
Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
145
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 21:21:00 -
[39] - Quote
***now i read it.*** |
Ottersmacker
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
12
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 21:29:00 -
[40] - Quote
some really cool ideas, tactical environments have long been proposed and discussed but it never got any further than W-space effects :\ The Order of the Falcon or Hin +¡slenska f+ílkaor+¦a is a national Order of Iceland |
|
Famble
Three's a Crowd
172
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 22:01:00 -
[41] - Quote
Posting in support of OP's vision.
If anyone ever looks at you and says, "Hold my beer, watch this,"-á you're probably going to want to pay attention. |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
75
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 22:44:00 -
[42] - Quote
Fidelium Mortis wrote:+1 like the ideas in general.
I especially like the idea of hideable terrain, and the introduction of more specialized ways to find people.
I would be a bit cautious about making the mechanics too specialized to the point where it would be annoying for a solo PvPer looking to hunt down a target in system is only limited to a specialized ship or module.
Fidelium-
A key point in my design is for *all* ships to have the capability of being configured to be 100% capable of hunting down targets all on their own. I'm very solo-PVP oriented and the last thing I would want to see happen is solo players being nerfed.
Specifically, I envision ships being able to be customized/tuned for specific roles, so if you're in a ship designed around solo PVP then perhaps you configure your sensor suite with more advanced active sensors, or you design your passive sensors to be better suited for sniffing out targets in a directional manner with longer range but less omni-directional capability. It would be easier for other targets to sneak up on you (less early warning) but your ship would be better equipped to search for targets at a longer range and with more precise info instead. Does any of this make sense?
The opposite would be defensive players where they would sacrifice active search capabilities for improved early warning/automated omni-directional detection. Key types of players that might use this configuration would be miners or mission runners, for example.
I'm a pirate in a pirate's body. |
Hainnz
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
16
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 22:50:00 -
[43] - Quote
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:The opposite would be defensive players where they would sacrifice active search capabilities for improved early warning/automated omni-directional detection. Key types of players that might use this configuration would be miners or mission runners, for example.
As long as it's possible to hide too. Right now it's impossible to hide unless cloaked, and even then other players know you are there. And of course if you are cloaked you can't do anything so you are stuck sitting there wasting time until the hunters get bored. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 23:09:00 -
[44] - Quote
At one point you mentioned stationary measures that could watch over entire regions. I like this idea, but wonder if that range might be too broad. Constellation level seems more reasonable. Stupid ideas I had while reading it:
The ability to relay info received to fleet/corp/alliance members in system to remove their need to fit extra sensor equipment The ability to relay info to out of system ships using specialized equipment or ships with specific roles that could rebroadcast it for friendlies in nearby systems The ability to interfere with information collection directly (range reduction or degradation of info reported) or transmission (jamming relayed info) Restricting access to types of info based on various criteria (can think of a few isolated instances this could be useful)? And decoys, just because? |
NARDAC
Newb U
2
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 23:15:00 -
[45] - Quote
In summary: You want to be able to sneak up on people and gank them. Sicne EVE won't let you "sneak up" becuase of local, you AFK cloak so they can't really know when you are on or not. You hope they will eventually assume you are AFK, and go out and PVE or mine while you are in local.... so you can come back, sneak up on them and gank them.
So, the answer to the question in the title is what everyone knows.
Your solution is to make it easy to hide so that it is easier to sneak up on people and gank them.
This is simple-minded 2 dimensional thinking where you have not through the consequences of your actions.
1) We make it easy to hide and sneak up on people and gank them. 2) People doing things like PVE and mining get ganked. 3) People stop doing all the things that get them ganked. 4) From lack fairly sae things to do in low/null, people move back to high sec. 5) You are right back to not being easy to gank people.
So, my tl;dr version. Make it easier to hide and sneak up on people to gank them, people stop doing anything that would make it easy to sneak up on them and gank them.
What % of the population lives in wormholes? |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
75
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 23:33:00 -
[46] - Quote
Hainnz wrote:Mors Sanctitatis wrote:The opposite would be defensive players where they would sacrifice active search capabilities for improved early warning/automated omni-directional detection. Key types of players that might use this configuration would be miners or mission runners, for example.
As long as it's possible to hide too. Right now it's impossible to hide unless cloaked, and even then other players know you are there. And of course if you are cloaked you can't do anything so you are stuck sitting there wasting time until the hunters get bored.
I would absolutely design it so that players would be able to "hide" without being cloaked. Basically, the existing situation is like this:
Jump into system, if you see any targets in local, scan/probe them out, warp to their location, they're dead. OR, they're cloaked/docked/at a POS and you can't kill them.
My proposed changes:
You jump into a system, there's no local so you don't know who is there, or where they are. Your passive sensors can detect ships at a very limited range, so you can fly around and look for ships passively, or engage active sensors and look for targets, but you're going to possibly give yourself away.
Defensive ships could be hiding in the gravity "shadow" if you will of planets/moons/asteroids etc. and only by getting closer to those objects would your sensors be able to resolve the different sensor contacts and the user (you) be able to get a clear picture of whether or not there's a ship there as well as a moon etc., and if so, how many ships, what types etc.
Ship activity would increase one's signature: moving (the faster you're flying, the "hotter" the signature), mining, shooting targets, salvaging, deploying drones, tanking etc. Anything you do will increase your signature.
Defensively, ships could post up active probes to alert them of incoming ships at long range, but any ship that was hit by the probe's ping would know that someone is actively scanning for incoming ships. Depending on the attacking ship's configuration with regard to how stealthy they're set up and/or if they're a special case ship (CovOps, Recon etc.) then they might be able to sneak in without activating their own sensors and find the target without giving themselves away.
Conversely, the defensive ships could use passive omni-directional sensors, but in this mode the sensors are very short ranged. The range would be increased exponentially as the viewing cone is decreased. Think of a more tightly focused and powerful flashlight, vs a bare bulb illuminating a room. The flashlight will have a very narrow view but much greater range of detection.
Depending on a passive sensors detection of a ship's signature, a skilled operator might be able to discern what type of ship it is, what it's doing (mining laser emissions or asteroid dust would deliver different values to the sensors than autocannon fire and plasma from destroyed NPC wrecks) etc. without having to use active sensors to get an extremely accurate ID.
The more careful a ship's pilot is, the closer they can stalk their targets, getting very close before they strike, allowing their sensors to collect a large amount of accurate information about the target. Note that all of this would take minutes and seconds, not hours and hours, for a skilled pilot. But at the same time, it's not the current situation of "push button" results with little to no skill involved.
And smart defensive pilots will be able to "stack the deck" in their favor by flying ships that will best hide in their surrounding environment. If a system is in Minmatar space for example and there's lots of Minmatar NPC ships as well as player ships, a player could configure his ship with Minmatar spec MWDs or other various systems, even "spoofing" systems that would allow his ship to emulate or mimic other types of ships at a distance (signature wise, imagine a mining ship "smelling" like a Vagabond at 15 AU out for example).
The goal is to provide a wide variety of options to both offensive and defensive players so that the person with the most creativity and cunning wins, instead of just aimlessly flying around until someone happens upon another player in local like there is now. I'm a pirate in a pirate's body. |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
75
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 23:39:00 -
[47] - Quote
NARDAC wrote:In summary: You want to be able to sneak up on people and gank them. Sicne EVE won't let you "sneak up" becuase of local, you AFK cloak so they can't really know when you are on or not. You hope they will eventually assume you are AFK, and go out and PVE or mine while you are in local.... so you can come back, sneak up on them and gank them.
So, the answer to the question in the title is what everyone knows.
Your solution is to make it easy to hide so that it is easier to sneak up on people and gank them.
This is simple-minded 2 dimensional thinking where you have not through the consequences of your actions.
1) We make it easy to hide and sneak up on people and gank them. 2) People doing things like PVE and mining get ganked. 3) People stop doing all the things that get them ganked. 4) From lack fairly sae things to do in low/null, people move back to high sec. 5) You are right back to not being easy to gank people.
So, my tl;dr version. Make it easier to hide and sneak up on people to gank them, people stop doing anything that would make it easy to sneak up on them and gank them.
What % of the population lives in wormholes?
Players such as yourself positively REEK of carebear.
Your one dimensional thinking is pathetic and your lack of creativity even more so. Clearly you don't have the vision capable of contemplating the idea that just as many tools to hide/evade detection would be included as there would be tools to find and attack players.
So TL; DR: you're only focusing on the things that you fear most: being ganked by players who are far smarter than you, which is probably the whole of Eve.
I'm a pirate in a pirate's body. |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
75
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 23:57:00 -
[48] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:At one point you mentioned stationary measures that could watch over entire regions. I like this idea, but wonder if that range might be too broad. Constellation level seems more reasonable. Stupid ideas I had while reading it:
The ability to relay info received to fleet/corp/alliance members in system to remove their need to fit extra sensor equipment The ability to relay info to out of system ships using specialized equipment or ships with specific roles that could rebroadcast it for friendlies in nearby systems The ability to interfere with information collection directly (range reduction or degradation of info reported) or transmission (jamming relayed info) Restricting access to types of info based on various criteria (can think of a few isolated instances this could be useful)? And decoys, just because?
Tyberius:
I envision a massive, multi-layered strategic sensor approach. Allow me to provide more detail on my vision:
Every bit of information will have cost. The more precise the info, and with greater coverage comes massive MASSIVE increase in costs. Everything will have operating costs- information will flow to everyone in the organization, but it will be able to be controlled via standings or roles or some other mechanism so that for example certain corps will have access to alliance level assets to give constellation or regional level real time intelligence. Every member of these authorized corps need only look at their galactic map to view the composite view of every sensor they have access to.
From a tactical perspective, you can set gang permissions so that if anything pops up on a gang mates sensors, all gang mates have instant access to that sensor data. Basically, once in a gang, your view of the system is a composite of every sensor suite of every gang mate in your gang: a big array of sensors thousands of times more powerful than yours alone.
From a strategic perspective, it works much the same way. Any corp deployed assets could relay sensor information to the alliance level intelligence picture. All corps in the alliance would benefit from all other corp deployed assets, if the assets were configured to send that intel up the chain. Alliance level assets could be configured to distribute their intel to corps or individuals etc.
All of these strategic level intel sensors/assets, whether at a system, constellation or regional level, will have massive operating costs in terms of fuel. Information isn't free. You mention constellation vs. regional level sensors. I absolutely agree with you: constellation will be plenty large for most organizations, and indeed, most will only be able to afford constellation level assets. Regional sensors will be so expensive to operate on a continuing basis that only the richest and most powerful alliances will be able to operate them. And even then, it may be more cost efficient and provide better and more accurate intel to build multiple constellation level assets instead of a single regional sensor array. Additionally, regional sensors (as I envision it) won't allow for the same level of resolution and cycle times that a constellation or system level sensor would.
Under NO circumstances would any strategic asset be a viable replacement for tactical sensors. In other words: having a strategic sensor would never give you enough information in a timely manner that would enable you to be protected from hostiles at a reasonable level of protection. For that you will and should always need "boots on the ground" tactical sensors and awareness.
In even simpler terms: static strategic sensors deployed by individuals, corps or alliances etc. would never be good enough to replace "ship sensors", allowing people to basically ignore the job of maintaining their own awareness for the safety of their ships. Strategic sensors would simply add another layer of information over and above what would be available to the player. The smart players will be the ones who will be able to easily avoid detection to do their PVE or mining etc. and conversely, the smart players will be the ones who will be able to sneak past an enemy's defensive perimeter and kill the miners/PVE players that aren't paying attention.
I'm a pirate in a pirate's body. |
Bartholemu Fu-Baz
Ancient and Mystical Order of the Atlantis Rose
5
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 00:15:00 -
[49] - Quote
One thing to add (unless its there and I missed it).
We need to be able to tell who is sitting (within 250km or so) outside our stations before we undock.
What will **** people off is if they are ganked because someone forgot to implement the "look out the window" feature.
Making local only show recent speakers or delayed mode is a fine idea, although would increase the amount of people hit coming out of station during wardecs. I might even consider changes to the wardec system if this was done. Perhaps concord, police and station owners wouldn't appreciate firefights so close to their interests. Wardec needs some rethinking anyway, IMHO and apparently in general sentiment. |
Hainnz
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
16
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 00:16:00 -
[50] - Quote
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:The goal is to provide a wide variety of options to both offensive and defensive players so that the person with the most creativity and cunning wins, instead of just aimlessly flying around until someone happens upon another player in local like there is now
I like your idea here, I really do. I don't like local and I hate mashing d-scan. Though I think you are approaching the problem a bit more from the view of a hunter rather than the hunted. (That is perfectly understandable.)
The old saying, "The best defense is a good offense," is true in EVE just as in everything else in the real world. Even with local and cloaking the best the hunted would ever be able to achieve is a complete stand-off, with the hunted actually losing out more than the hunter because whatever he or she was trying to do is now impossible until the hunters go away. I mean it's not like a group of pies lost their ships because some mission runner safed up and cloaked. :)
IMO, the ideal situation would be that if the hunted was on his toes and didn't make a mistake he would be a "safe" as he is now (warping off and cloaked) with a greater possibility of actually being able to do what he is in the system to do. In such a case the hunter would only get his kill if he got really lucky. Now before you say that makes things to easy for the carebears, keep in mind that eventually everyone makes mistakes, even the best players. (Bad players are going to make mistakes all the time.)
The other way around (which is where I think the current proposal is pointing), would be that if a hunter was really good he would be able to get his kill much more often than not (unless he got unlucky). I think that would be bad, because from the hunted's point of view it wouldn't matter how many inept hunters failed to catch him if all it took to lose his ship was for a good group of hunters to sweep through the system.
Regardless I think the current system could use some work and I like the basics of your idea. Hopefully CCP is think about such things too.
One other thing, if cloaks disappeared then something would have to be done about jump gates (I personally like the idea of celestial to celestial jump drives on sub-cap ships) because without cloaks there is very little getting through a competent camp. |
|
Marcus Wilde
Meat Shields
26
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 00:18:00 -
[51] - Quote
+1 for the well thought out concepts.
When the OP mentioned "mines", think I wet my pants. Tears + Bucket = Win |
YuuKnow
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
14
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 00:47:00 -
[52] - Quote
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:Currently, there's no advantage to being a small group. With the above concepts there will now be a very good reason to bring only what you need, or even possibly less than you would optimally require. Currently, Eve's game design only rewards the biggest and most numerous. CCP needs to build in more game design that rewards a player who is smarter than the rest and attempts to be as asymmetric as possible and do more with less.
This is so true... but in the RL jungle the wolf pack with the most wolves usually wins as well.
It would be however interesting to have more zones where small, flexible groups thrive. The fact that Eve warfare is centered around choke points most of the time I think is the problem. Static choke points are predictable and anticipated, so small, flexiblity, and mobility isn't as productive...
... I've got some ideas cooking that may grant a little more variety to low sec PvP, but they would grant some fundamental changes to low sec and I haven't matured them yet to survive the flamers/trollers... most players on the forums are afraid of change.... WIP. |
Olleybear
I R' Carebear
17
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 02:38:00 -
[53] - Quote
Love the OP's ideas.
I felt like a kid in a toy store standing slack-jawed looking at all the nice toys.
Very good ideas.
Space should feel big. The OP's ideas will give it that feeling. |
Roscojameson
The Riot Formation
1
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 04:11:00 -
[54] - Quote
Eve brings something to the gaming world that isn't seen anywhere else, warfare. Sure, you can PvP in just about any other game out there, but Eve has real warfare, with tangible goals and rewards.
Unfortunately, because of the near-perfect information available to anyone who wants it, the tactical aspect is turned into a matter of have more numbers or GTFO. The strategic aspect is watered down as you have no way to hide where you operate, how well you've upgraded your systems, or how many stations and POS's you have. Changing this will make the game a lot more fun.
You're ideas are probably the best I've seen for this. They may be a bit much and cause a lot of "screw that, too much work" but that's why we have empire space, where each empire has a communications array that every capsuleer has to register(fluff for current local mechanics) |
Soldarius
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
91
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 05:54:00 -
[55] - Quote
Forums tried to eat my post. C&P ftw.
OP has the most well thought out posts I've ever read on this forum. I enjoyed w-space much more than nulsec strictly because of the lack of instant intel immediate local in w-space. Stupid, lazy, or tired people get ganked. Alert and well-prepared people either escape or turn the tables on gankers.
OP talked about the various methods of detection and information gathering. I also have considered the ways that passive and active sensors suites could be implemented in Eve. It seems the commonly suggested method for passive sensors is an automatically updating feature like a "radar" sweep. I believe this would put undo stress on the servers, especially at the cluster level. Imagine a large fleet pinging the server for data every couple of seconds. Just having a fleet in system would cause TiDi to go crazy.
I agree that passive sensors should give less information overall or more general information than active sensors. I would also liek to point out that most passive sensors are more sensitive than active sensors simply because they are designed to detect emissions that are unintentional, non-directional, unfocused, or very weak.
Active sensors reverse this by, as the OP stated, shining a light in a dark room. The sensor emission bounces off the target and is detected by the original ship usually. This method will be much more reliable as far as detecting something's presence. But it won't tell you much about the object itself.
Perhaps the various racial sensors would be more effective at determining certain kinds of data, and have certain environmental weaknesses. Ex: Radar and Ladar or both forms of focused EM radiation. They are simply of different frequencies. Certain frequencies are effected more by environmental effects. The lower the frequency, the less things like gas clouds and rain interfere with them. However, lower frequencies cannot carry as much data as the higher frequencies. This is why fiber optics are more desireable for data transmissions than copper wires.
Ladar is more accurate, so long as it is not obstructed by gases or vapors. Radar is better at penetrating gases and vapors and thus tends to cover a longer range. But it doesn't tell you as much. Both of these are active systems.
Gravimetric sensors could be very effective at telling the mass of an object, as gravity is actually a fairly weak force, but has a long range effect. So it wouldn't be good at discerning if its one large object or several small objects. Magnetometric sensors are exactly the opposite, being a very strong force but only at close range. So they won't be able to tell the size so well. But they would be better at revealing numbers. Both of these are passive systems, as evidenced by the suffix "metric".
I see no reason why we could not have slots for customizing sensor suites in our ships, similar to rigs. But, that would kind of alter the racial flavor thing. I wouldn't cry if it didn't get implemented. But that doesn't mean we can't have the different sensors have better or worse detection modes.
In answer to the original question, why do I cloak? I cloak to make myself invisible to my prey. Unfortunately, immediate mode local makes that impossible. Only in w-space is this effective. Oh, and Romulans are the shiznit. Way more mysterious than Klingons, not that they don't have their own charm. (Klingons with charm, lol)
Cloaked ships already pay for the cloak by being unable to interact with anything. Trust me. That is annoying enough. "How do you kill that which has no life?" |
Soldarius
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
92
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 06:28:00 -
[56] - Quote
Forums tried to eat my post again. It failed again.
Forgot something. Strategic sensor arrays for sov holding alliances sounds like a proper benefit for various sov levels. If you're on the approved list (blue) you are registered with the sensor system and are not reported. If an unknown ship is detected and does not respond or does not respond properly to interrogation (this can be automated), you get reported.
Its basically a military grade IFF system. In Eve it would be based off of the alliance standings. No need to make it any more difficult for the players than necessary.
Reporting can be done in a variety of ways. Eve mail would kinda suck and get missed a lot. Plus it would generate all sorts of spam. Designing a new UI element would require all sorts of DEV time and effort. Another 18 months?
How about integrating the sensor results with our in-space brackets and/or overview? This is basically a telemetry feed from another system. It would also tie in rather well with one idea posted to have shared telemetry and targeting data similar to that used for indirect fire. The shown result would not be warpable. But it would give a rough bearing and strength of the detected signal. Mouse over the report and you could get some more detailed info like signal racial type and strength.
This system could also be upgraded and customizable for better accuracy, detail, and/or range, leaving the actual benefits in the hands of the operators. These sensor arrays could be part of the IHUB. Or they could be indepenent things to shoot in space. Personally, I would not put all my eggs in one basket. Powerful sensor suites should not be easily defeated by direct countermeasures, nor be difficult to destroy by conventional means. Hiding from these sensors should be the preferred method of infiltration. Covert cloaks / black ops ftw.
While this would allow for extreme long-range combat, it can also be easily defeated by a single jamming ship. Might give Kitsune's or other EAFs like the Hyena a real role in combat. I can imagine supers launching salvos of limited AoE bombs from across the grid, or something like that. The same effect could be garnered by using remote sensor boosters, except supers are immune to EWAR and can no longer gain these bonuses.
Oh, yeah. CCP, plz give bombs an obvious AoE graphic like torps. That would be epic. "How do you kill that which has no life?" |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
82
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 06:41:00 -
[57] - Quote
Hainnz wrote:
I like your idea here, I really do. I don't like local and I hate mashing d-scan. Though I think you are approaching the problem a bit more from the view of a hunter rather than the hunted. (That is perfectly understandable.)
The old saying, "The best defense is a good offense," is true in EVE just as in everything else in the real world. Even with local and cloaking the best the hunted would ever be able to achieve is a complete stand-off, with the hunted actually losing out more than the hunter because whatever he or she was trying to do is now impossible until the hunters go away. I mean it's not like a group of pies lost their ships because some mission runner safed up and cloaked. :)
IMO, the ideal situation would be that if the hunted was on his toes and didn't make a mistake he would be a "safe" as he is now (warping off and cloaked) with a greater possibility of actually being able to do what he is in the system to do. In such a case the hunter would only get his kill if he got really lucky. Now before you say that makes things to easy for the carebears, keep in mind that eventually everyone makes mistakes, even the best players. (Bad players are going to make mistakes all the time.)
The other way around (which is where I think the current proposal is pointing), would be that if a hunter was really good he would be able to get his kill much more often than not (unless he got unlucky). I think that would be bad, because from the hunted's point of view it wouldn't matter how many inept hunters failed to catch him if all it took to lose his ship was for a good group of hunters to sweep through the system.
Regardless I think the current system could use some work and I like the basics of your idea. Hopefully CCP is think about such things too.
One other thing, if cloaks disappeared then something would have to be done about jump gates (I personally like the idea of celestial to celestial jump drives on sub-cap ships) because without cloaks there is very little getting through a competent camp.
I know it may not look like it at first glance, but I'm actually in favor of the collective system being slightly weighted towards the defender. Ideally the system would be designed so that the general population of defensive players could effectively use the system to avoid being killed the majority of the time (say, 80-85% or so).
On the flip side, the system should be designed so that the top 1% of offensive players will be successful 98% of the time. I don't want it to be easy for the wolves to kill the sheep. Otherwise we'll run out of sheep very quickly.
Back in the day (I know, I keep saying that...), probing was exceptionally hard to accomplish if targets were very far away from celestial objects because you couldn't move probes around as you do now. You had to make bookmarks in the system and physically fly your ship to a location where you wanted to drop your probe. It was tedious and time consuming and required some skill and preparation. Hardly anyone did it. Mission runners felt safe. There were plenty of targets. Only a very rare few pirates had any success at all at killing a crafty and well prepared mission runner. I loved this situation. I was one of the few pirates who fully understood how to work the system to reliably kill mission runners, even with extremely limited tools. And then CCP introduced the "new and improved" probes and made it so easy that "anyone could do it" and ruined it for me and my fellow "experts".
So, rest assured, I do NOT want it to be easy for the hunters to find their targets. It needs to require skill and a deep understanding of complex game mechanics in order to be reliably successful. At first players will scream and cry and whine about how hard it is, but when a few top players figure out how to work the system they will be rewarded with access to a rich cache of targets that feel completely safe and comfortable mission running or mining with their faction fit navy ship of the month, just like it used to be.
That's kind of the whole point of Eve. It *should* be hard. It should be extremely hard in fact. If it was easy, everybody would be doing it. How can you aspire to be an elite expert at something when every 10 year old with a mouse can compete at the highest level with little to know experience?
By all means, please keep the discussion going with this point. I'm very interested to develop this point further into something that is actually fleshed out a bit. I'm a pirate in a pirate's body. |
Zleon Leigh
35
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 06:41:00 -
[58] - Quote
Karth Mentis wrote:You know, talking about cloaking massive yell for some people to disapear from local when they cloak makes me remember a idea. So I thought, hey what if CCP gives them that with a massive twist.
What if when you are cloaked you disapear from local but at the same time you cannot send any messages outside the system. That way the run silent, run deep its gonna be more true and more cool.
Except - 3rd Party VOIP negates this idea Incarna - Newest business example of mismanaged capital.
CCP - Continuing to gank independent PI producers every day |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
82
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 06:52:00 -
[59] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:Forums tried to eat my post again. It failed again. Forgot something. Strategic sensor arrays for sov holding alliances sounds like a proper benefit for various sov levels. If you're on the approved list (blue) you are registered with the sensor system and are not reported. If an unknown ship is detected and does not respond or does not respond properly to interrogation (this can be automated), you get reported. Its basically a military grade IFF system. In Eve it would be based off of the alliance standings. No need to make it any more difficult for the players than necessary. Reporting can be done in a variety of ways. Eve mail would kinda suck and get missed a lot. Plus it would generate all sorts of spam. Designing a new UI element would require all sorts of DEV time and effort. Another 18 months? How about integrating the sensor results with our in-space brackets and/or overview? This is basically a telemetry feed from another system. It would also tie in rather well with one idea posted to have shared telemetry and targeting data similar to that used for indirect fire. The shown result would not be warpable. But it would give a rough bearing and strength of the detected signal. Mouse over the report and you could get some more detailed info like signal racial type and strength. This system could also be upgraded and customizable for better accuracy, detail, and/or range, leaving the actual benefits in the hands of the operators. These sensor arrays could be part of the IHUB. Or they could be indepenent things to shoot in space. Personally, I would not put all my eggs in one basket. Powerful sensor suites should not be easily defeated by direct countermeasures, nor be difficult to destroy by conventional means. Hiding from these sensors should be the preferred method of infiltration. Covert cloaks / black ops ftw. While this would allow for extreme long-range combat, it can also be easily defeated by a single jamming ship. Might give Kitsune's or other EAFs like the Hyena a real role in combat. I can imagine supers launching salvos of limited AoE bombs from across the grid, or something like that. The same effect could be garnered by using remote sensor boosters, except supers are immune to EWAR and can no longer gain these bonuses. Oh, yeah. CCP, plz give bombs an obvious AoE graphic like torps. That would be epic.
Great ideas in your last two posts!
Regarding the IFF idea: back in the day F-16s had what they called "TWI"s or Threat Warning Indicators. They would provide a count for threats, but no precise location etc.
I would be comfortable suggesting something similar that would be at a constellation or regional level that would offer a snapshot every 4-6 hours or so that reported a hostile count for the entire region. Anything with any more timely reporting and/or more specific location information would be pushing towards something that too closely resembles the current situation with local and the "active pilots in system in last 30 minutes" report in the galactic map.
I think that all strategic level sensors should provide very broad and general info that is just that: strategic. The info shouldn't be able to be acted upon in a tactical manner with any sort of reliability, but it should provide a broad overview and deliver a general picture of what is going on in the extended battle space. It should provide enough info so that players can move into the indicated areas with tactical sensors and prosecute the various targets that were indicated with the strategic sensors.
The last thing I want to see is passive sensors that spoon feed players information that are available only to the richest of the alliances.
I'm a pirate in a pirate's body. |
Isabelle Evotori
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 06:58:00 -
[60] - Quote
Nice idea, Local chat always bothered me a bit. It would certainly spice things up in 0 sec. |
|
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
374
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 07:22:00 -
[61] - Quote
i would like to have local as on-grid only communication tool. - delayed char removal everywhere - delayed char addition in w-space
if you remove something you will have to add something to compensate the information loss a bit. What is really needed is a low range radar which has lower range than a dscan but updates automatically.
this above is probably feasible as combination of rather little changes and can be improved later. It makes space more interesting already.
further ideas: - if you dscan you expose yourself temporary in the radar even when you are far away - you can adjust radar range (til max), but if you see someone you have the risk to expose yourself (skill based) - radar range based on sensor strength a new bounty system for eve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=359105 You fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail to jump because you are cloaked |
Eternus8lux8lucis
Whack-A-Mole
18
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 07:46:00 -
[62] - Quote
Love this idea entirely. Ive always been one to advocate how easy it is to gather information in eve. When Eve started I remember fumbling about in the dark so to speak. To me space should always be vast and because of this you could be right next to one another and not know it if you didnt look in exactly the right place.
Now before I read the rest of the replies my only suggestion on the main point is this: Have the greatest area sensors to be on a constellation level and also of medium ability to be sought out and destroyed. Something a small to medium sized gang can destroy. |
Eternus8lux8lucis
Whack-A-Mole
18
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 08:07:00 -
[63] - Quote
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:The concept of ship stealth and detection: incorporating it into every module, every choice!
Imagine if different types of shield extenders increased your ship's signature across various different racial emissions spectrums. The same for various microwarp drives or afterburners. What if different types of armor plates provided lower signatures due to better signal absorption, at the expense of not providing as much EHP? What if passive shield/armor hardeners provided lower emissions spectrum than active did? What if using special (Tech 3?) ammo in your guns caused zero increase to your sig (silenced weapons anyone?), allowing you to quickly and quietly make a kill before anyone knows you're in the area?
On earth, not every ship is a submarine, but every submarine is a ship. In Eve, EVERY ship is a submarine. Some are just more stealthy than others. Dedicated Covert Ops and Recon class ships will have exceptional sensor suites and ultra low emissions in addition to active cloaking capabilities. I would recommend that these active cloaking abilities be of limited duration and require cap/fuel to use, similar to how diesel/electric submarines used to operate. You can "go dark" to sneak up on a target and then attack, but you'll eventually need to "surface" and refresh your air/recharge your batteries so to speak. All other ships simply wouldn't be allowed to cloak. Non Covert Ops cloaks would be replaced with "stealth modules" that would reduce a ship's signature, but wouldn't render it completely invisible/impossible to find like cloaks currently do.
There should be trade offs that would make currently "worthless" modules attractive: do you go for the best fitting, best performance, best efficiency or lowest sensor signature/emissions? Incorporating various sensor emissions capabilities into named modules seems like a good way to differentiate them, mitigating the "bigger is always better" game design that currently exists.
Sensor networking:
In addition to information, sharing it is just as important. Where Corps and Alliances will really benefit is in the sharing of information. If you're in a gang and you have a CovOps pilot with you, what if everything his sensors detected showed up on your tactical overlay? Now he truly is your eyes and ears for your whole gang! What if your ships could fire their weapons at targets he acquired, even though the targets are out of your lock range (but not weapons range)? Indirect fire, so to speak!
What if you're two systems away but an enemy blob arrives and your Alliance has regional and local static sensors installed in that system? You're able to look on the map and notice increased activity two systems over in the past 4 hours and are able to pack up your mining op in time to make it to safety. Unfortunately, the next day the enemy comes back in smaller ships and in fewer numbers and splits up into three different groups, arriving from three separate directions. Unable to detect the smaller ships in fewer numbers from long range, your sensors don't notify you until it's too late and you lose half your mining crew to the invaders.
The inability to manage large amounts of information will inherently limit the size and scope of space that a single Alliance/entity can effectively police and control. This is another positive byproduct of this concept: it will be very costly in TIME to control a lot of space. People will tend to settle on a reasonable and practical amount of space to control and stick with that. Controlling large swaths of space for little or no need will go away as it won't be cost effective to do so from a time standpoint.
Thoughts?
Balance for the first part would be hard. But interesting.
My reply is more geared to the cloak aspect.
Have a script nature on the cloaks. With script in it becomes active style that uses fuel at a set rate. Either like capacitor that needs to recharge to be used again or a consumable fuel based on some racial fuel types, assuming the easiest would be isotopes. When active the ship is the same as cloaks are now but can only do this as long as the fuel is available. In the passive mode no fuel is consumed but it can be scanned down. It would be harder than normal but still possible. So no more afk cloaking. Semi afk would work still.
Recons and Covert Ops would be exempt by ship class from fuel consumption or have a consumption bonus/reduction per level and would be the only ships to be able to. |
Ciar Meara
Virtus Vindice
359
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 08:08:00 -
[64] - Quote
I just think cloaking is cool. - [img]http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/janus/ceosig.jpg[/img] [yellow]English only please. Zymurgist[/yellow] |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
92
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 08:37:00 -
[65] - Quote
Eternus8lux8lucis wrote:
Balance for the first part would be hard. But interesting.
My reply is more geared to the cloak aspect.
Have a script nature on the cloaks. With script in it becomes active style that uses fuel at a set rate. Either like capacitor that needs to recharge to be used again or a consumable fuel based on some racial fuel types, assuming the easiest would be isotopes. When active the ship is the same as cloaks are now but can only do this as long as the fuel is available. In the passive mode no fuel is consumed but it can be scanned down. It would be harder than normal but still possible. So no more afk cloaking. Semi afk would work still.
Recons and Covert Ops would be exempt by ship class from fuel consumption or have a consumption bonus/reduction per level and would be the only ships to be able to.
I would suggest that cloaks for "regular" ships be removed all together. Cloaks would still exist for dedicated cloaking ships: Recons and CovOps, but that's it. Regular ships would benefit from "stealthy" modules that you can fit to your ship to reduce their scan signatures and improve their stealth. The idea being that their difficulty to find via scanning would be their main form of protection (vs. being able to use a cloak).
I agree that CovOps cloaks should use fuel, but a combination of advanced modules, rigs and skills/ship bonuses should reduce fuel use. A CovOps ship specifically configured for long range deep space recon should have very little fuel use with an endurance measured in days or a week, not hours.
I'm a pirate in a pirate's body. |
Terrorfrodo
Deep Space Darwinian Law Enforcement Agency
7
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 08:44:00 -
[66] - Quote
I like the vision. However, this would tailor EVE to the needs and wishes of exploration-minded players. That suits me, but I think most others would be put off. The majority of players in 0.0 want quick and easy fights, and the majority of people in hisec want to be invincible. The latter will never invest any effort into being less vulnerable, and the former will never want to invest all the effort into intel-gathering.
So I think the proposed changes would reduce conflict and battles to a large degree because people couldn't easily find each other anymore.
The OP's vision is basically an enhanced version of existing w-space. And do you know why so few people want to live there? Because you have to put more effort into your game and things are less easy. |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
96
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 09:01:00 -
[67] - Quote
Terrorfrodo wrote:I like the vision. However, this would tailor EVE to the needs and wishes of exploration-minded players. That suits me, but I think most others would be put off. The majority of players in 0.0 want quick and easy fights, and the majority of people in hisec want to be invincible. The latter will never invest any effort into being less vulnerable, and the former will never want to invest all the effort into intel-gathering.
So I think the proposed changes would reduce conflict and battles to a large degree because people couldn't easily find each other anymore.
The OP's vision is basically an enhanced version of existing w-space. And do you know why so few people want to live there? Because you have to put more effort into your game and things are less easy.
I appreciate the feedback and the differing viewpoint!
Allow me to address a few of your (very valid) points:
Quick easy fights: the easiest way to get players to engage each other is to design opportunities for them to come together in a violent fashion. CCP needs to add in a wide variety of targets that are easily engaged by small gangs. This will force contact with the enemy and one of two things will happen: you'll see a fight or you'll watch one side's assets be steamrolled. The other answer to this is "are existing fights that 'quick and easy' as Eve is right now?" Personally, I don't think the changes would reduce the time investment required to actually find a fight over what we currently experience at the moment. I've roamed literally hundreds of systems without finding a decent fight. There will still be gates and chokepoints etc. around which to engage targets.
How invincible are high sec players at the moment? I think that they would theoretically be even more safe with the proposed changes if for no other reason than they could hide among the clutter of other player ships in crowded high sec systems.
The concept is significantly different from W-Space because there are fixed gates and known travel routes that never change. One of the key issues with W-Space is that travel between systems is exceptionally slow and tedious and if you don't have a ship specifically configured to simply locate the wormholes you're going to get stuck in a system and never get out. This is one of the key factors why I don't pirate in W-Space- it's too difficult to PVP and navigate with the same ship.
I do agree that the initial perception would be that it's "more work", but just like anything else, players would get used to it and accept it.
I'm a pirate in a pirate's body. |
Paxarinus
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 09:22:00 -
[68] - Quote
this sounds more then awesome!
+1 |
Eternus8lux8lucis
Whack-A-Mole
18
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 09:41:00 -
[69] - Quote
I cant see this as a viable change to high sec. Only to low, null and WH space.
A buddy of mine that I showed this too expressed a distinct negative towards FW as he plays there. He, like others, likes the idea of quick PUG style combat. Which though I think this would increase the contact between groups or individuals to ascertain who, what, style information on a visual level is what a lot of people might not like due to the difficulty of scanning.
I do agree that people would eventually adapt and it would bring a LOT more conflict in the long run. Especially as if you have to get within a certain range visually to determine enemy status like FW or pirate/neutral. In areas like low sec it would make it ironically easier for the hunter to become the hunted and spring traps which makes me go giddy with the possibilities.
So given the idea of FW and how it is low sec heavy how do you envision this playing out there? |
Terrorfrodo
Deep Space Darwinian Law Enforcement Agency
7
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 09:46:00 -
[70] - Quote
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:The concept is significantly different from W-Space because there are fixed gates and known travel routes that never change. One of the key issues with W-Space is that travel between systems is exceptionally slow and tedious and if you don't have a ship specifically configured to simply locate the wormholes you're going to get stuck in a system and never get out. This is one of the key factors why I don't pirate in W-Space- it's too difficult to PVP and navigate with the same ship.
Good point.
Another possible problem: If local as we know it is removed and intel-gathering requires effort (which inevitably means that it is delayed too and not instant), this would probably give the larger force even more advantage in any fight.
Right now, when I roam with my 20 corpmates in null, engage a similar force and local suddenly spikes to 200, we know at once that we are being blobbed and have to get the **** out immediately. If we did not have the information at once, the enemy could easily tackle all of us and we all die.
What I'm saying is that the uncertainty would play to the advantage of entities who can rely on the fact that while they too may not know exactly what they will be facing, they can be sure that they will have the numbers 99 out of 100 times just because there aren't many other entities in the universe who are as big as them and if those had moved hundreds of pilots near their space they'd have noticed.
So, engaging superior forces in their space would be even more hopeless for small entities. Hiding and avoiding fights may work, but if you engage you are committed and probably can't get away. |
|
Varr Dorn
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 10:00:00 -
[71] - Quote
I agree with many of the points the OP has made.
On Local, though, I'd like to see it this way: Local seems to be a info network generated between stations and jump gates. The jump gate registers when you come in, the station registers when you dock/undock, and it is broadcast as "local" as if it were a radio/television/internet information network.
Leave Local as it is in High-sec, but link everything to the number of stations and gates in low and null. In low sec, if there is only 1 station, then there should be a delay to the updates since it has to process and update everything itself. Treat it like a backwater relay station.
In Null, Players with stations should be able to build a POS structure/add-on that allows them to broadcast a local network. But give them the options as to access rights and what is displayed. I.e. if you fly into a system with only POS from another corporation, you don't see anything. But if you're part of the corporation/Alliance, then you get to see local as it is now.
The only problem with this second idea is that it gives a possibly overwhelming defensive bonus to the owners of the system, but coupled with other ideas in the OP, it might not be that bad. |
Cpt Syrinx
Jovian Labs Jovian Enterprises
22
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 11:00:00 -
[72] - Quote
I like your ideas a lot. One that stood out to me was the idea of in-system phenomena and orbital bodies giving opportunities to hide limited operations in. Take your sensor-opaque nebula for instance, throw in some new player owned structures (maybe even NOT limiting them to corporations from the start this time). Fly a few 100 or 1000 km from the stellar entity's warp-in and set up either your little mobile home or a larger structure. Maybe even have this nebula prevent warping - conventional drives only.
Thoughts along these lines would bring a few thing EVE badly needs. 1) traffic, beyond station to gate to belt to moon to station to gate. 2) a proper sense of exploration. This sense lasts for about 3 hours when you start playing eve, and about 30 minutes every time you venture into some new kind of gameplay for the first time. That's it. Done, never to return. With a framework of limiting terrain, you get a sense of exploration again. You get to stumble upon all kinds of stuff, and better yet - its all player-made emergent stuff to find. You can't seed fake ambiance to compete with that.
A living universe does not come forth in a homogeneous playing field, no matter how its dressed up. Some new bit of framework to play in should be added to every expansion imho, such are the least-impact but most lasting additions.
The scanning changes are an interesting bunch of ideas as well, but game-changing. I'm convinced that, properly implemented, the jist of what you suggest would make the game much more interesting, but not with an enormous potential for the jita statue to get it again. |
Gempei
Siberian Khatru. Shadow Operations.
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 11:40:00 -
[73] - Quote
+1 |
Steven Fonulique
SF Incorporated
5
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 12:02:00 -
[74] - Quote
Haven't read the all the replies to the entire thread but I think I picked up on all the posts made by the op and I gotta say man oh man I'm loving these ideas.
This discussion kinda started putting my brain into overdrive thinking about the basic eve mechanics currently used for travelling between solar systems etc. So I will come right out and and say it: jump gates suck. They are a result of a mechanic designed to split the single server up into more manageable granules and a sense of artificially trying to make the eve universe feel big by making long journeys through multiple solar systems take ages. Forcing people to use jump gates to enter potentially hostile space has a negative effect on solo and small gang play because the only way to avoid the blob on the other side is by simply not entering the solar system containing the blob. In my mind travelling from one solar system to the next should be a little bit more of a big deal than simply clicking jump once you're within range of this magical object.
I will start by saying this isn't an original idea at all but I think it has so much potential within eve. Remove jump gates entirely and give ships jump capabilities directly. In order to travel from your current solar system to the next your ship's computers have to calculate a safe arrival location in the target solar system taking longer the farther the solar system is away. You could use the current eve jump system as a guideline saying it would take 1 minute per "adjacent" solar system. Different ships would have different jump ranges and you could fit computer modules that shorten the time it takes to calculate your next safe jump.
From a game balance perspective once you tell your ship to jump it would start the calculation timer and once complete you will have a 10-15 second window to activate the jump or start the entire calculation process over from scratch. So that you can't just sit in place with a jump destination calculated and dissapear the moment things don't look good.
Local in it's current form also doesn't really make sense for a flying space ships in space kind of game. The way local works in w-space makes infinitely more sense. It should be viewed as communication frequency ships can broadcast to to hail other ships send out distress calls etc.
These mechanics would compliment the proposed changes to sensors and scanning quite well, you could introduce a module for recon ships that monitors jump activity in your solar system so that gate camp fleets could turn into solar system camp fleets that know they have at least 1 minute to find and blob their prey before they jump out of system again. Mining barges should have a special bonus allowing them to also equip this module so they can spot random roaming gangs enter the system where they are mining and get safe.
Sensors should be able to pick up when a ship is broadcasting it's location for fleet members to be able to jump to so that one can know if reinforcements are likely to be arriving from another solar system, again the calculation for resolving the jump to a broadcasting fleet member takes longer the farther one is away.
I'll stop here as I'm beginning to get a bit too bogged down in details. |
Ma'kal
The Imperial Commonwealth E.Y
3
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 12:20:00 -
[75] - Quote
I think it would be great to have more varied ways of hiding in Eve. Being a sub sim fan myself I feel it would make Eve even more awesome. My question would be is it technically possible? But props to the OP to bringing a interesting angle to a old issue. |
Arcathra
Technodyne Ltd.
29
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 12:36:00 -
[76] - Quote
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:[a lot of stuff] I like your ideas. A lot mor constructive than the typical "remove local" whiners. This could be very interesting and enhance the gameplay. But I'm not sure if small corps would actually benefit from this. Anyway, its worth to look at this mechanics closer. |
Keno Skir
39
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 12:53:00 -
[77] - Quote
I like a lot of your ideas OP +1 The Apostle : I want a kangeroo Captain Kirk : Silly Austrians Sarmatiko : Let me guess: you're from US? Captain Kirk : Yeah Riverside IA - why? |
Zowie Powers
Hole in the wall
26
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 13:42:00 -
[78] - Quote
I didn't read it.
But Eve doesn't have a pause button. And I sometimes need one.
EDIT: Oh god, I just realised, the "Just dock up" fruitcakes are on the way. Oh god, oh god, oh god. Abandon thread. I don't mind Mr. Right, I just wish his first name wasn't Always. |
Lucien Visteen
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
56
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 14:24:00 -
[79] - Quote
You have a lot of big posts, I haven't gotten to read through all of them so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. But from what I can gather these rigs you propose, are the bonuses they give purely for the detection ability? If every ship can equip "stealth" rigs it might turn out a bit differently than you might envision since players have a tendency to work with what will be the safest for themselves, even if EVE is such a gritty and brutal place to be in.
So while good in theory, giving every ship every role might turn bad practise. But again feel free to correct me on this if I get it wrong.
Other than that. CCP listen to this man. I don't care how long it takes you to do it, but DO IT! The ships hung in the sky in much the same way that bricks don't. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
513
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 15:15:00 -
[80] - Quote
Jask Avan wrote:+1 Information should be a skill, not handed to everyone on a silver platter.
+1 on this and more, information is not only some "skill" to learn but also dedication to this, invest time to fill "folders" of information about "x" player corp and only available to this player or those he wants to share with.
On the other side of the coin, Eve is about shooting everything that isn't blue, well sometimes even blues shoot each others (Test/Fa) so is it really interesting to implement something complicated like that when pvp IG is resumed to NBSI and numbers?
|
|
Mizhir
Club Bear
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 15:40:00 -
[81] - Quote
You are brilliant :)
Changes like this is definitely making me screw my secstatus and move to low or nullsec. Would be cool to have my own little hidden home where I can explorer and pvp in the nearby area. |
FloppieTheBanjoClown
The Skunkworks Petition Blizzard
437
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 15:42:00 -
[82] - Quote
I see all this talk about being able to hide, yet not one bit about locator agents.
As the game stands right now, the only place you can escape the prying eyes of the mystical locators is w-space. If you're in k-space, they WILL betray your location to your enemies for a minimal fee. If we're going to go to all this trouble to rewrite vast portions of the game so that people can "hide" in a more meaningful sense, locators badly need a nerf to go along with it. |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
115
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 16:07:00 -
[83] - Quote
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:I see all this talk about being able to hide, yet not one bit about locator agents.
As the game stands right now, the only place you can escape the prying eyes of the mystical locators is w-space. If you're in k-space, they WILL betray your location to your enemies for a minimal fee. If we're going to go to all this trouble to rewrite vast portions of the game so that people can "hide" in a more meaningful sense, locators badly need a nerf to go along with it.
Floppie,
I'm glad you brought that up!
As a long time pirate and high sec war deccer, I've used locator agents quite extensively. I completely agree that locator agents in their present form would have to be radically revamped. Here's a twist however: what if we could redesign the concept of locator agents to be player driven instead of NPC based? What if players posted "information/location contracts" with a payout that decreased over time. The faster you get a player the correct info, the more money you receive. What if players could download entire data sets of intel information to other players/corps/alliances?
We could have professional scouts that do nothing but map areas for ship activity, resources, all sorts of things. CCP could move currently static resources to a more dynamic and flowing design that wouldn't change daily, but maybe on a monthly or annual scale so that last years resource maps aren't this years etc. This way there will always be something new to discover by returning players... The universe is always changing, Eve should too.
What if while randomly scanning, a player happens upon a few different players, the scanning player checks the "information/location wanted" database, sees that the players he just uncovered are wanted by someone and contacts the original poster to negotiate terms of payment for their location info? There could be some sort of professional level in-game structure that would be game-verified to prevent scamming. But the real way players will experience secure and reliable information is by reputation. Excellent scouts with outstanding reputations for timely information will earn their own reputations as being the "go-to" guy for info. The downside, people might not like the idea that you sold them out! The information brokers might get contracts taken out on their heads for doing so! Man, this just keeps getting better... :D
I'm a pirate in a pirate's body. |
MeestaPenni
Mercantile and Stuff
105
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 16:54:00 -
[84] - Quote
The author of this thread is way too creative and bright to be playing this game. He's probably just taking a short break from designing warp drives or sumpin' at MIT. |
oldbutfeelingyoung
VIRTUAL EMPIRE VANGUARD Vanguard Ascendants
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 17:12:00 -
[85] - Quote
nice read +1 nice ideas
|
Sany Saccante
Siberian Khatru. Shadow Operations.
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 15:13:00 -
[86] - Quote
+1 |
Dragon Outlaw
Rogue Fleet
2
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 17:48:00 -
[87] - Quote
Pushing this thread back up because I like the idea.
Makes me remember when I was playing submarine games where you had a silent hunter stalking is prey. Like it was expressed by some, the basis of the OP`s idea is what I though I was getting myself into when I started playing this game 2 years ago. I stil like the game but this idea would be an interesting revolution.
CCP should hire the OP, pay him an appartment somewhere in Iceland and provide him with a nice Porsh for is local travels. And how about a Challenger 300 at is disposal? |
Mussaschi
No Wise Guy's Stellar Economy Experts
3
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 18:24:00 -
[88] - Quote
+1
add something to a appease pirates (e.g. ransom contracts that pay out money, once the space ship does reach a station and dock) and we have a perfect addition to eve |
Chandaris
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
16
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 18:37:00 -
[89] - Quote
+1
fully agree
local needs to change, and directional scanner is the answer to removing it and adding greated depth to gameplay.. intel should not be free |
Kaylyis
Aces wild mining corporation The I.D.E.A.
2
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 18:49:00 -
[90] - Quote
If something like this were to be introduced in EVE tomorrow, I'd be ass deep in nullsec within 48 hours of the change. |
|
Dragon Outlaw
Rogue Fleet
2
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 19:18:00 -
[91] - Quote
Kaylyis wrote:If something like this were to be introduced in EVE tomorrow, I'd be ass deep in nullsec within 48 hours of the change.
What would you be flying?...and what do you mean by "ass deep"?
could not resist! |
Kaylyis
Aces wild mining corporation The I.D.E.A.
2
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 19:31:00 -
[92] - Quote
Dragon Outlaw wrote:Kaylyis wrote:If something like this were to be introduced in EVE tomorrow, I'd be ass deep in nullsec within 48 hours of the change. What would you be flying?...and what do you mean by "ass deep"? could not resist!
Tech 1 battleships, mining rigs, scanner boats, tackle frigs, HACs, whatever i can get my greedy little claws on.
One of the advantages of having some REALLY **** advice early on is I have a broad base of skills I can use to deal with **** even if I'm not ubercombatmonkey yet.
And by ass-deep? i'd dig in like a tick. |
Kaylyis
Aces wild mining corporation The I.D.E.A.
2
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 19:57:00 -
[93] - Quote
Funny thing is...
Even if these changes were implemented?
You'd still have highsec people who wouldn't consider the risks worth the reward.
I look at it more as if I can make enough ISK to keep the skillbooks coming, and replace the ships you nullsec maniacs cheerily detonate? totally worth it plus I'd get to shoot at someone before I explode.
Finding an alliance/null corp that works for me (hell finding a recruiter who'll talk to you is nonintuitive) is a pain, though here in a bit I'm going to have to start looking because Highsec is BOOOORIIING.
And if you go out but the costs of replacing ships are bigger than your income? You get driven right back out into highsec to recoup, so doing it solo is right out, as it should be for a long term roam.
Bluntly if I can make enough coin to keep myself in combat ships and mining rigs even when getting my **** blown up, then I won't need things like corp ship replacement programs. Nice to have, but I doubt there's many corps that freely replace my preferences in gear.
Playing EVE in hardmode: Gallente ships |
Cipher Jones
188
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 20:10:00 -
[94] - Quote
Quote:Currently, there's no advantage to being a small group.
I had been trying to take your post seriously, and read the entire post #1 until I came to that and realized you're not playing Eve online.
See what happens when fat neckbeards try to ride little ponies? The ponies die. |
Arthay
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 22:52:00 -
[95] - Quote
+1 |
Beaches
2
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 23:14:00 -
[96] - Quote
Kaylyis wrote:Dragon Outlaw wrote:Kaylyis wrote:If something like this were to be introduced in EVE tomorrow, I'd be ass deep in nullsec within 48 hours of the change. What would you be flying?...and what do you mean by "ass deep"? could not resist! Tech 1 battleships, mining rigs, scanner boats, tackle frigs, HACs, whatever i can get my greedy little claws on. One of the advantages of having some REALLY **** advice early on is I have a broad base of skills I can use to deal with **** even if I'm not ubercombatmonkey yet. And by ass-deep? i'd dig in like a tick.
I would bring... a small POS, a blockade runner and a t3 with guns, probes and gas harvesters. |
NARDAC
Newb U
3
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 14:36:00 -
[97] - Quote
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:Players such as yourself positively REEK of carebear.
You say that like it is an insult. Ask CCP if they want every carebear to drop their sub. I think you will find the answer is no.
Mors Sanctitatis wrote: Your one dimensional thinking is pathetic and your lack of creativity even more so. Clearly you don't have the vision capable of contemplating the idea that just as many tools to hide/evade detection would be included as there would be tools to find and attack players.
So, you want EVE to have 1,000 players, all flying covert ships, spending all their game time trying to find each other, without being found by each other?
You haven't addressed the most basic of my assertions. If you make it easy to gank people, people stop doing whatever it was tehy were doing that got them ganked.
No local in wormholes. What % of the population lives in wormholes? 3%? Something like that?
Mors Sanctitatis wrote: So TL; DR: you're only focusing on the things that you fear most: being ganked by players who are far smarter than you, which is probably the whole of Eve.
As a carebear, I'm explaining to you why your idea would destroy the game and wouldn't give you what you want anyway.
You want it to be easy to sneak up on people and kill them. Any system that enabled that would instantly result in people no longer doing any of the activities that makes it easy for them to be snuck up on.
So, you make just as many defensive systems to make it hard to sneak up on me and kill me. Okay, so you can't sneak up on me and kill me. Okay, what have you gained over local?
If you can sneak up on me and kill me, I don't do anything that lets you sneak up on me and kill me. If you can't sneak up on me and kill me, how is it different than local?
Think it through.
PEOPLE are not going to just sit there waiting for you to sneak up on them and kill them. Get rid of local, you turn all of EVE into Wormhole space with 97% fewer players.
But.. but.... people won't come out when I'm in local. Right, and without local they simply won't ever come out. |
bgummer
Malicious Destruction War Against the Manifest
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 15:37:00 -
[98] - Quote
+1
great idea's. like a previous poster stated, I'd move back to k space for this.
|
Mokokan
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 15:40:00 -
[99] - Quote
Well, pushing aside the your basic dismissal of the concept of "forcing" players to actually run into each other so they can actually interact, let's cut to the chase. You're proposing adding a very significant number of calculations per/ship, per/second, per/location in a game already struggling mightily NOT to have lag. A very significant amount of CCP dev manhours to produce a game where most of the game will remain invisible.
Did I precisely portray your proposal? No. I actually like your ideas, and hope some game improvements might have gotten their germination here. I also would love for the game to accurately portray gravity, inertia, and stations/ships actually orbiting planets(that are also in motion). But dat ain't gonna happen, and I accept that.
Hmmmm |
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
777
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 15:43:00 -
[100] - Quote
It looks great on paper... but it's enough free intel to be a nerf to wormholes. Wormholes are supposed to be dangerous... having the ships tell your lazy ass someone's around instead of requiring you to actively check the scanner makes it too easy.
This would also likely make it a lot easier for bots to detect ships and escape.
The part about cloaks needing fuel or the like... breaks the ability to gather intel in wormholes, which could take days or even weeks of remaining unseen to do. Really bad idea.
Nicely thought out, well done... but can't support nerfing wormholes or making life easier for bots. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
|
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
183
|
Posted - 2012.01.02 23:17:00 -
[101] - Quote
NARDAC wrote:Mors Sanctitatis wrote:Players such as yourself positively REEK of carebear. You say that like it is an insult. Ask CCP if they want every carebear to drop their sub. I think you will find the answer is no. Mors Sanctitatis wrote: Your one dimensional thinking is pathetic and your lack of creativity even more so. Clearly you don't have the vision capable of contemplating the idea that just as many tools to hide/evade detection would be included as there would be tools to find and attack players.
So, you want EVE to have 1,000 players, all flying covert ships, spending all their game time trying to find each other, without being found by each other? You haven't addressed the most basic of my assertions. If you make it easy to gank people, people stop doing whatever it was tehy were doing that got them ganked. No local in wormholes. What % of the population lives in wormholes? 3%? Something like that? Mors Sanctitatis wrote: So TL; DR: you're only focusing on the things that you fear most: being ganked by players who are far smarter than you, which is probably the whole of Eve.
As a carebear, I'm explaining to you why your idea would destroy the game and wouldn't give you what you want anyway. You want it to be easy to sneak up on people and kill them. Any system that enabled that would instantly result in people no longer doing any of the activities that makes it easy for them to be snuck up on. So, you make just as many defensive systems to make it hard to sneak up on me and kill me. Okay, so you can't sneak up on me and kill me. Okay, what have you gained over local? If you can sneak up on me and kill me, I don't do anything that lets you sneak up on me and kill me. If you can't sneak up on me and kill me, how is it different than local? Think it through. PEOPLE are not going to just sit there waiting for you to sneak up on them and kill them. Get rid of local, you turn all of EVE into Wormhole space with 97% fewer players. But.. but.... people won't come out when I'm in local. Right, and without local they simply won't ever come out.
You seem to be very selective in your reading. In the same instance as "OMG you're removing local" you also ignore all of my ideas for defensive systems. You are still missing my point. Right now local requires almost zero effort and skill to utilize as an intelligence tool. I want players to become (more) actively involved in their continued survival. The best players will live, everyone else will die, some more often than others. I have never intended to create a situation where "it's too easy to gank people". Again, you're focusing on everything *you* fear: being killed by a more competent player. My ideas are such that if you're a smart player, you'll be just as hard to catch as ever, possibly even more so.
One of the largest reasons why W-Space is so sparsely populated is because of access: it's difficult to just get around in it, much less fight in it. You need multiple ships/accounts just to navigate it effectively. It's almost impossible to fit a ship that can both PVP with a wide variety of targets and still probe wormholes effectively. Frankly, I think that this is an opportunity for CCP to create a new class of ships to solve this problem.
I'm a pirate in a pirate's body.-áIntelligence shouldn't be free... |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
183
|
Posted - 2012.01.02 23:22:00 -
[102] - Quote
Mokokan wrote:Well, pushing aside the your basic dismissal of the concept of "forcing" players to actually run into each other so they can actually interact, let's cut to the chase. You're proposing adding a very significant number of calculations per/ship, per/second, per/location in a game already struggling mightily NOT to have lag. A very significant amount of CCP dev manhours to produce a game where most of the game will remain invisible.
Did I precisely portray your proposal? No. I actually like your ideas, and hope some game improvements might have gotten their germination here. I also would love for the game to accurately portray gravity, inertia, and stations/ships actually orbiting planets(that are also in motion). But dat ain't gonna happen, and I accept that.
Hmmmm
You bring up a very good point with respect to the server load. Remember when CCP limited the scanner to a 5 second delay on the cycle time, then reduced it to 2 seconds? The server is already experiencing high bandwidth information requests from player ships with the existing scanner. The new scanner would be built around the considerations of bandwidth and lag, with the defensive (automated) mode having a cycle time long enough that it wouldn't adversely affect the server. I'm imagining a 5-10 second cycle time or so.
Again, these are details and this is pure speculation, but the concern is a good one and I think that it's obvious that it would be addressed by the developers. I'm a pirate in a pirate's body.-áIntelligence shouldn't be free... |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
183
|
Posted - 2012.01.02 23:30:00 -
[103] - Quote
Ingvar Angst wrote:It looks great on paper... but it's enough free intel to be a nerf to wormholes. Wormholes are supposed to be dangerous... having the ships tell your lazy ass someone's around instead of requiring you to actively check the scanner makes it too easy.
This would also likely make it a lot easier for bots to detect ships and escape.
The part about cloaks needing fuel or the like... breaks the ability to gather intel in wormholes, which could take days or even weeks of remaining unseen to do. Really bad idea.
Nicely thought out, well done... but can't support nerfing wormholes or making life easier for bots.
The last thing I want to do is dilute what is wonderful about W-Space. But on the other hand, putting local into delayed mode is the way forward and there isn't any way around that.
W-Space will always be differentiated from K-Space because of the nature of wormholes and the system anomalies. Additionally, all of the W-Space residents will quickly adapt to the new scanning systems both offensively and defensively. W-Space residents are some of the most cutting edge players in Eve. I think my proposed changes will affect them the least.
As for the cloaking issue- I envision CovOps ships as having a fuel endurance of weeks with a full load of fuel and the various probes required. I have no intention of ending up in a situation that diminishes the best aspects of current game play. I want to further the best aspects of what we have and improve them even more in addition to adding in new mechanics.
I'm a pirate in a pirate's body.-áIntelligence shouldn't be free... |
Serene Repose
Perkone Caldari State
189
|
Posted - 2012.01.03 00:20:00 -
[104] - Quote
Why you cloak? bok bok bok bok
If it fries like a chicken....
Smokestack lightnin' shinin' just like gold. |
Niko Takahashi
United Starbase Systems
28
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 21:30:00 -
[105] - Quote
This is an interesting detailed and inmost aspect very nice addition to the game.
I like 90 % of the proposed changes and I am OK with almost all of them.
Please someone get a dev to read through this and even contact the guy to pick his brain more. Very nicely done sir
Covert ops sensor links to fleet removed local command ship roles Limited range jumpdrives a lot of interesting stuff
Oh one thing the OP I think forgot Need to kill the API feeds for system statistics and the system statistics availble from the map should be limited only to Jumps / Gate activation's per hour. |
Degren
The Scope Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 05:29:00 -
[106] - Quote
By the end of the first post I was hitting my desk yelling "YES, YES THAT WOULD BE AMAZING"
I have no idea if it'd be feasible, but damn would it make for interesting stealth play and space stalking. |
Terminal Insanity
Convex Enterprises Unprovoked Aggression
232
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 05:35:00 -
[107] - Quote
I like to fit cloaks because it enables me to go AFK from a game that rarely lets you dock. You're out on a roam with your corp, 30 jumps away into 0.0, and you NEED to go for IRL stuff... CLOAK!
If Cloaking gets a change/nerf, i think the fairest option would be to allow him to be visually seen slightly, like a faint ripple or ghost effect (but not targetable/selectable)
Also, simply removing local would solve a lot of this |
Boma Airaken
Seekers of a Silent Paradise
8
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 07:56:00 -
[108] - Quote
TL;DR.
Does your idea mean that all detrimental effects to ships and fittings and bonuses, etc will be removed?
If that is ok, I can support this. |
Sri Nova
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
27
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 08:17:00 -
[109] - Quote
the removal of local would be the easy fix to all this.
it can be argued the current scanning system is ideal and works well .
with the removal of local capsuleers would be dependent on their already available dscan "sensor" and hunters could use their current methods but would be greatly aided with the help of a prober. |
Slightly Mental
The Exploration and Survey Collective
4
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 22:10:00 -
[110] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
I cloak because it was also cool when the Klingons and Romulans did it.
+1 |
|
Torijace
Industrial Anarchy
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 23:20:00 -
[111] - Quote
Wow itGÇÖs a pretty good idea so much so that I actually spent all of lunch thinking about the idea and how it could be implemented. I think our biggest issue isnGÇÖt what all can be done with it but how to streamline it to easily work within current eve mechanics without adding too much more server activity. This is what I came up with.
New items: System Communication Array - a pos structure that provides an active local channel. Signature Manipulation Unit: A scriptable item that allows you to appear on passive or active scans as another ship one class lower or high then your current class
Using existing d-scan window a second button is installed called GÇ£Active ScanGÇ¥ both passive and active scan strengths are a factor of the senor strength of the ship. Sensor strength of ships can be increased with existing ECCM mods, backup sensor arrays, or manipulated with a new mod called a GÇ£Signature Manipulation UnitGÇ¥ (SMU) Both passive and active scanning use the d-scans ability to change range and scan area. With that in mind effective scan strength would increase as area scanned is decreased. When scanning like the current system the degree the ship was scanned down would determine the information provided going from unknown>ship class>shiptype>warpable. A sample encounter might be something as follows: Me in my epic caracel of thunder jump through a gate and find the local channel to be offline. While still holding gate cloak I pop a passive scanning taking a glimpse of the area 14 aus out a have a couple POSes at 100% as well as a few unknowns in direction of planet V. I warp to planet V at 100km and using the degree selector change the angle down to 5% and find one of my unknowns to be an iteron IV sitting at the same distance as the POS on scan in the direction of moon 2. Damn! confident that IGÇÖm not getting that itty IV kill without a dread fleet I passive scan down another unknown to planet 1 belt 2. I warp to belt confident that my caracel can take almost everything null sec has to offer. While in warp I continue to spam passive scan and as I draw closer see my unknown resolve itself into a rifter. Salivating at the thought of another kill I land on grid and find myself sitting next to a proteus with a smile. He must have been running an SMU in his spare high slot. I quickly change from being the hunter to the hunted and try to overload my MWD to get away but itGÇÖs no use. My last thoughts before taking the pod express back to high sec is GÇ¥maybe I should have brought a drakeGÇ¥
A couple optional thoughts: Cloaking- allowed but prevents you from active scanning while cloaked and reduces the effective range and sensor strength by 1/2 for passive scan modules due to interference.
Scanning Delay: Both passive and active modes of the scanner would have a 5-10 second cycle time the results being displayed at the end of the cycle. This would further limit intel and reduce server load and could also be skill dependant.
Caldari are the best and the Worst: An interesting side effect of using sensor strength and sig radius as the factors on a passive/active scan is that caldari ships become the best at using those scans but also the easiest to find Signature Reduction Unit: An optional mod could be something that reduces your signature when activated to make it harder for people to scan you down.
Balance: All ships need to be able to d-scan to some effect but there needs to be limits to how well that ship can scaning using the d-scan method. In other words .. no unprobable ships and we can't making probey ships useless but we need to make d-scan effective.
My 2 cents |
Lt Angus
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
59
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 08:50:00 -
[112] - Quote
bump coz its just sooo good |
Tarryn Nightstorm
Hellstar Towing and Recovery
250
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 16:01:00 -
[113] - Quote
Dr Karsun wrote:I disagree.
This information of someones presence is for free, sure, but it's not precise information. The enemy can be, in some systems, more than a hundred AU away, I wouldn't really call that precise information.
I would gladly trade all kinds of local for removal of cloaks. I don't need to know that you'r in my system as long as I can scan your ass down with combat probes.
As long as cloaks are the only thing that doesn't have a counter - I see no reason to remove local.
As long as local is the only thing that doesn't have a counter, then I see no reason to remove/nerf cloaks. And many reasons not to.
And cloaks do have a counter, they even bring it in themselves (So nice of us "cloakyfags" to do that for you, no?).
Actually, several:
Whilst cloaked, you can't:
1) Use prop-modules 2) Turn on tanking modules 3) Target anything 4) Use weapons or even switch/load ammo 5) Launch probes 6) (There is no (6). It ran away and hid in its POS like a little squealing pig when the neut came into local, because its chickenshit fail-Alliance couldn't be arsed to actually secure its ratting/mining space properly) 7) Use gang-booster links, if so equipped 8) Or do much of anything else except slowboat in one direction or another, anomaly-scan, d-scan, or warp someplace else where it will have the same restrictions (if CovOps-type, anyway)
This is not a "NURVCLAOCKSNAOW!!!1111!!!oneoneone!!11" thread, mate, so don't be derailing it into one, please, thank you! In irae, veritas. |
Cipher Jones
341
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 17:06:00 -
[114] - Quote
Quote:Don't even *think* of bringing up W-Space. That's completely outside the scope of this issue.
AFK (or at keyboard even) cloaking makes the bots dock when you enter local. That does not happen in wspace. The "issue" you are addressing is championed by botters. Tell me its completely outside of the issue again so I can laugh out loud at how hard you have been tooled by botters some more.
04:25:37 Notify Cipher Jones, criminals are not welcome here. Leave now or be destroyed. |
Utsen Dari
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
8
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 18:29:00 -
[115] - Quote
Yes please for more terrain in EVE.
Wormspace has some idea of terrain (system effect beacons, the ability to manipulate connections) and it is one of the things that makes wormspace so much better than k space.
Would definitely like to see nebulas to fly into to lose pursuers, or more dangerous effects that cause ship damage, or even the ability to dodge behind asteroids to block incoming shots... |
Tarryn Nightstorm
Hellstar Towing and Recovery
251
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 19:03:00 -
[116] - Quote
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:I see all this talk about being able to hide, yet not one bit about locator agents.
As the game stands right now, the only place you can escape the prying eyes of the mystical locators is w-space. If you're in k-space, they WILL betray your location to your enemies for a minimal fee. If we're going to go to all this trouble to rewrite vast portions of the game so that people can "hide" in a more meaningful sense, locators badly need a nerf to go along with it. [...] Here's a twist however: what if we could redesign the concept of locator agents to be player driven instead of NPC based? What if players posted "information/location contracts" with a payout that decreased over time. The faster you get a player the correct info, the more money you receive. What if players could download entire data sets of intel information to other players/corps/alliances? We could have professional scouts that do nothing but map areas for ship activity, resources, all sorts of things. CCP could move currently static resources to a more dynamic and flowing design that wouldn't change daily, but maybe on a monthly or annual scale so that last years resource maps aren't this years etc. This way there will always be something new to discover by returning players... The universe is always changing, Eve should too. What if while randomly scanning, a player happens upon a few different players, the scanning player checks the "information/location wanted" database, sees that the players he just uncovered are wanted by someone and contacts the original poster to negotiate terms of payment for their location info? There could be some sort of professional level in-game structure that would be game-verified to prevent scamming. But the real way players will experience secure and reliable information is by reputation. Excellent scouts with outstanding reputations for timely information will earn their own reputations as being the "go-to" guy for info. The downside, people might not like the idea that you sold them out! The information brokers might get contracts taken out on their heads for doing so! Man, this just keeps getting better... :D
Now, imagine this in combination with a bounty-hunting system that isn't a sad, bitterly ironic, not-even-good-enough-to-be-a-joke waste of dBase space? (Don't even get me started re: Wardec'ing--"At CCP, egalising exploits is what we do, just for E-Uni you!"
Imagine how it could also give a larger "pile of sand"--or maybe I should say "many different piles of sand to choose from" for even the most carebear-ish explorers (as exploration is currently seen, it's a strictly PvE activity to most, even though, at least theoretically, this is not the case--ref.: Ninja-salvaging.), hopefully inspiring that crowd to do more in PvP for their friends and corp. Even if they have little skill/desire to directly violence people's boats, they could use, learn, and get good at this, gather data, and sell it to those that do.
Whole new profession, "independent scout/information-broker," which the "actual work" could be done solo, but at the same time would "force" even the most anti-social solo'ist to work with other people if they want to profit from it. Imagine that in an MMOG, eh?
And with real intel always in demand, you might just find a new way to make money consistently that doesn't involve endless NPC ISK-farming, and is truly player-driven and emergent.
This would be beyond merely "awesome."
+1 Internets for you, Sir!
In irae, veritas. |
Zagdul
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
409
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 19:15:00 -
[117] - Quote
Delayed local is the biggest troll in EVE and would destroy PVP as we know it.
The guy who wants delayed local is the guy who's looking for the null sec ratter but cant catch him because as soon as his scout enters a system, the person ratting warps off.
What you seem to forget and everyone always misses is that the number one way you FIND fights is with local. The number one way you HIDE from a fight is without.
PvP will die without local unless there is a better intel gathering tool which tracks ship movements on some kind of scale.
It's not Rocket Surgery |
Karash Amerius
Sutoka
41
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 19:31:00 -
[118] - Quote
You are going to get a lot of +1 posts here, but the simple fact is the bears of this game will riot if they lose local. I am not just talking about the carebears...but also the gankbears sitting on gates padding their K/D.
It has been a dream of mine since 2003 that we didnt have free intel in local channel...but at this point, I would be amazed if CCP pulled the trigger on it. |
Tarryn Nightstorm
Hellstar Towing and Recovery
252
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 19:53:00 -
[119] - Quote
Ingvar Angst wrote:It looks great on paper... but it's enough free intel to be a nerf to wormholes. Wormholes are supposed to be dangerous... having the ships tell your lazy ass someone's around instead of requiring you to actively check the scanner makes it too easy.
This would also likely make it a lot easier for bots to detect ships and escape.
The part about cloaks needing fuel or the like... breaks the ability to gather intel in wormholes, which could take days or even weeks of remaining unseen to do. Really bad idea.
Nicely thought out, well done... but can't support nerfing wormholes or making life easier for bots.
I'm thinking that this should not be applicable in w-space for that very reason.
[Lore-fluff]
The nature of w-space/environmental effects render (new-)"standard-scanners" inoperative, and you cloak and d-scan as current.
[/Lore-fluff]
If lots of k-spacers don't like the new scanning system, then hey, they move to w-space, and that means more targets for you, and more smart players surviving the "cull" by learning to thrive in w-space, boost to economy in the classic EVE manner--everyone wins!
In irae, veritas. |
Corina Jarr
Spazzoid Enterprises Purpose Built
594
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 20:53:00 -
[120] - Quote
I cloak for one of two reasons:
1) because I'm hiding and watching people and don't have the balls (well don't have them period...) to attack them.
2) because something came up in RL and I am not near a station.
If I do not have a cloak, and 2 happens, I log off. Or stay logged in and hope I don't get found at the first planet... |
|
Flurk Hellbron
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
74
|
Posted - 2012.03.13 02:13:00 -
[121] - Quote
Noooooooooooooooooooooooo more skill books................ them suck
For the OP................ nice work but, NNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO more dull skillbooks |
koll Kalmasji
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 05:58:00 -
[122] - Quote
+1 for OP
These ideas are very well thought out, and if it is put to CCP in just the right way i believe that they will have a hard time saying no. EVE needs a overhaul on a lot of issues and this "informational Warfare" is just the breath of fresh air needed |
Ioci
Bad Girl Posse
98
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 06:23:00 -
[123] - Quote
It's why I get a chuckle out of people who say "don't talk in local" in a wormhole. Anyone who wants to know you are in a wormhole does, anyone who can track you down, can anyway and if they can't, yapping in local makes no difference. If nothing else, Wormholes simply proved the combat ability of EVE goes beyond a list in local. CCP could remove local tommorow, in a month we would be right back to where we are today.
Overview is overview and everthing else is 0.1 to 30 seconds away from Overview. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cg-_HeVNYOk
Save Derpy! |
St Mio
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
527
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 07:42:00 -
[124] - Quote
Plenty of people smarter than me already made appropriate comments so I'll just say +1 |
Valei Khurelem
439
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 07:44:00 -
[125] - Quote
Flurk Hellbron wrote:Noooooooooooooooooooooooo more skill books................ them suck
For the OP................ nice work but, NNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO more dull skillbooks
I find it ridiculous that the very same people who complain about skillbooks insist that SP remain an integral part of the game.
Pick one dumbasses.
"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP." -á - CCP Ytterbium |
Frying Doom
198
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 03:05:00 -
[126] - Quote
Having just read this I will say +1
My only concern is that CCP would have to do something right and in a timely manner, which is why I am for removal of local in Null (excluding people broadcasting)
The idea itself is excellent. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
Local Channel in Null must Die. Jump Drives need Nerfing. Null is meant to be dangerous and hard. Not safe and boring. |
Amitious Turkey
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 03:20:00 -
[127] - Quote
Dr Karsun wrote:I disagree.
This information of someones presence is for free, sure, but it's not precise information. The enemy can be, in some systems, more than a hundred AU away, I wouldn't really call that precise information.
I would gladly trade all kinds of local for removal of cloaks. I don't need to know that you'r in my system as long as I can scan your ass down with combat probes.
As long as cloaks are the only thing that doesn't have a counter - I see no reason to remove local.
It works in w-space. Actually it's one of the things that makes w-space so fun. I like to lick things.
Haunting the forums since 03. |
loki energon
Voodoo Children Workers Trade Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 04:29:00 -
[128] - Quote
with an idea this thought out, and this precise, the level of thought involved with this idea is remarkable. if it was me....id email it in tantalizing chunks to EVERY dev in game and EVERY member of the CSM . sure, its a lot to process, and even more to implement, this 'aint no foolin' around. but its a damn fine plan that could be slowly intertwined with our existing world. kill em all. |
Aggressive Nutmeg
246
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 04:44:00 -
[129] - Quote
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:The only counter Eve provides to any of this is a purely binary solution (on or off, no in-between)... I prefer the term boolean instead of binary.
But apart from that, nice posts. Never make eye contact with someone while eating a banana. |
Ituhata Saken
Elysium Enterprises
118
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 05:19:00 -
[130] - Quote
What a great thread. I support OP's ideas. I am admittedly among the short attention-span tldr crowd but it doesn't matter, I was already on-board halfway through his presentation.
+1 |
|
Eso Es
Li3's Electric Cucumber SpaceMonkey's Alliance
17
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 05:55:00 -
[131] - Quote
Love the ideas presented here. I imagine some of them (Shield mods that give varied sensor returns) are a bit too grandiose to ever hope to get implemented, but its still a great idea. I would dearly love for CCP to take a good hard look at these ideas, its something this game is dearly lacking (Information control and Information gathering is waaaay too simplified for a game that takes place in space). |
Kimmi Chan
Black Rebel Rifter Club
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 06:06:00 -
[132] - Quote
I like the idea of a Recon ship engaging in... reconnaissance.
Each race has 2 Recon vessels a Combat Recon and a Force Recon. The only significant difference between the two is their weapon types or weapon bonuses. Both have ECM. Both have Cyno. So they are mini-Black Ops.
What if one, let's call it the Combat Recon, had the more advanced weapon systems. the ECM. and the Cyno.
The other, call it Force Recon for now. dumped the ECM and the cyno for passive and/or active scanning mods. Maybe limit it's weapon system - it can suitably defend itself in a short skirmish engagement but without help it's toast.
Maybe make its T1 Cruiser hull have some of the same ability but with greatly reduced bonuses.
I like all of the ideas that you have voiced here. I support the expansion of game play 100%. And I am glad that your idea does not take sides in the whole PvP vs Carebear ****fest. I am adding a link to this post in my signature so that others can evaluate and respond.
Intelligence shouldn't be free. by Mors Sanctitatis |
pussnheels
Vintage heavy industries
348
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 07:37:00 -
[133] - Quote
why not a combination of a sensor network and specialized probes to detect cloakers
the OP mentioned submarines and detection of submarines with sonar buyos why not put that into eve here is a idea these probes will never uncloak the target but with skil and patience they will give the the aprox loaction of the cloak ship a skillfull user and with plenty of time will be able to scandown the location within 10 to 20 k radius , while a quick search by a average skilled user will give youa loacation of about 100 k radius
Of course if the pilot of the cloaked ship is at the control he will notice the probes and move position forcing the searcher to start again IF the pilot of the cloaked ship is off to work or school well then he will find himself in a new clone when he comes home
We all know that one of the main reasons mining in nullsec is almost non exsitant is the use of dotlanmaps and afkcloakers anybody trying to raise the industrial index of a system will soon find afk cloakers a semi permanent feature in their system, killing off all mining attempts and little or no chanhe of ever catching them
while cloaking is and always will be a viable tactic to disrupt your enemies the idea that you can wake up log in with your afk cloaker and then go to work or school all day is silly and in a way a sort of griefing and there is at the moment little you can do about it I do not agree with what you are saying , but i will defend to the death your right to say it...... Voltaire |
Elena Melkan
Paladin Order Fidelas Constans
17
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 08:14:00 -
[134] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Having just read this I will say +1
My only concern is that CCP would have to do something right and in a timely manner, which is why I am for removal of local in Null (excluding people broadcasting)
The idea itself is excellent. If local was removed from null and replaced with the system the OP talks about, same system should be implemented to low and highsec as well. I don't see a reason why it should be only null. |
LadyJaye
Red Dawn. The Cool Kids Club
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 09:19:00 -
[135] - Quote
I cloak to fap. |
Sarah Schneider
PonyWaffe Test Alliance Please Ignore
250
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:13:00 -
[136] - Quote
I first thought i was gonna be reading one of those 'remove local' thread.
I was wrong, OP's ideas are totally awesome. +1. "Eve isnGÇÖt some welcoming online utopia: itGÇÖs cut-throat, cruel, atavistic despite the futuristic setting. Give people a sandbox, and theyGÇÖll throw the sand in a rivalGÇÖs eyes before kicking them in the shins and destroying their sandcastle." -Keza MacDonald, IGN. |
Ashriban Kador
Amarrian Retribution Amarr 7th Fleet
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:17:00 -
[137] - Quote
Supported. (oh wait, not F&I...oh well.)
If this was implimented, you can still keep the none Cov-Ops cloaks.
Prototype/Improved Cloaking Device: High Slot, Active Modual. Reduces Signiture Radius of the ship while active, while penalizing the ships velocity and locking time. (Does not actually cloak the ship, it remains on overview, still probable/can be D-scanned. It just makes it harder for enemy ship sensors to detect it unlike a Covert-Ops cloak which renders those ships -actually- invisible to scans.)
I don't think that would take a dev too long to change. (Assuming the rest of the scanning changes are implimented.) |
Minimal Charisma
Padded Sell
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:20:00 -
[138] - Quote
+1 from each of my alts. And I'm not even one of the shills hired by the OP! |
sthymj
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:28:00 -
[139] - Quote
Some excellent and well thought out ideas, +1 |
Mortis Umbra
The Arrow Project CORE.
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:30:00 -
[140] - Quote
+1 I really like your ideas. As far as cloaking goes it should still be in the game, just only on certain ships. A cloak fitted on a normal ship makes it invisible to all but the best d-scans. And much harder to probe, or maybe a certain type of probe. Watchlist needs nerf along the lines of OP aswell. (If watchlist is mutal instant etc, else based on standings between parties) Really like the idea of having the intel on galactic map when a large fleet is moving around in your space. |
|
Darion Amador
Nice Peace
14
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:42:00 -
[141] - Quote
+1 for potential. |
Jajas Helper
131
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 11:44:00 -
[142] - Quote
Amitious Turkey wrote:Dr Karsun wrote:I disagree.
This information of someones presence is for free, sure, but it's not precise information. The enemy can be, in some systems, more than a hundred AU away, I wouldn't really call that precise information.
I would gladly trade all kinds of local for removal of cloaks. I don't need to know that you'r in my system as long as I can scan your ass down with combat probes.
As long as cloaks are the only thing that doesn't have a counter - I see no reason to remove local. It works in w-space. Actually it's one of the things that makes w-space so fun.
It works in w-space because if you have no gates on overview - need to do extra effort to get in/out (giving away you beeing there every time you want to move further, you can control the incoming whs (reducing the mass) AND more important you can't freely roam 40 systems in an hour because you need to scan, each new system is randomly linked to another so that means you can't easily "visit" the same system every night for a good raid. Added that it costs no money for the sov, upgrades, no cyno faggotry either...
should i go on why null isn't wh space and why the no local is only doable in a wh because of the restrictions it has on "acces"... Inferno do stuff with stuff to imitate the stuff you could do faster with the old stuff
-stuff- |
Riyal
Chode Extravaganza
35
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:14:00 -
[143] - Quote
This is a brilliant thread and its growing faster that I can read all the replies.
Its made me realise how primitive information gathering is in eve, sensors are is usually an essential part of scifi. In games I'm reminded of sensor bubbles in homeworld, and more recently the sensor network and team Intel of the tribes games. My only concern is how this would work in cluttered hub systems from a lag perspective. I'll add more when I get home and have access to a keyboard. |
Natsett Amuinn
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
16
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:26:00 -
[144] - Quote
I didn't read all of it, did read most though. I liked it.
I'd also like a module that would send a false jump signal to hostile ships. A cloak that has to be used within 3500 km of a jump gate. It only cloaks me, but has a chance to give other ships the impression that I actually jumped.
The further from the 2000 km mark the less likely the signal works, the closer to 2000 km I get from the jump gate, the more likely that the signal works.
If I'm outside of 3500 km range of the jump gate, then I only cloak and no jump signal can be faked.
Of course, this means removing me from local if I'm cloaked. |
Sosan Metron
Sunshine Carebear Crew
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 14:51:00 -
[145] - Quote
Should be moved to features & Ideas forum tho, its gonna dissappear fast here under a pile of crap posts about how difficult the new inventory is or other such rubbish. |
Spy 21
Lonetrek Exploration and Salvage
72
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:06:00 -
[146] - Quote
Approval of OP +1
Gimme all that and make space bigger while you're at it... Bigger gates Bigger systems (or slower ships, less range on jump drives/bridges)
Thanks for a good post. Eve needs to evolve... Space is too small in all respects in game and it does not need be that way.
S "The next time airport security tells you to put your hands over your head and hold that vulnerable position for seven seconds, ask yourself: Is this the posture of a free man?" |
Easthir Ravin
Easy Co. Fatal Ascension
23
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:34:00 -
[147] - Quote
+1
As long as this is not some ploy to get rid of Cloaking devices.
vr East IN THE IMORTAL WORDS OF SOCRATES: -á" I drank WHAT?!" |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
83
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 15:46:00 -
[148] - Quote
Liike all really cool ideas, this one fails to take some things into consideration:
-The current system works ie people play eve online and live in places that has local/instant intel.
-The current system is a serious compromise, a compromise that needs to happen because a game has to be fun for the majority
-The current (compromise heavy) system evolved from "natural" forces ie CCP made it this way because doing it other ways resulted or could have resulted in less fun and less interaction.
It is "natural" for people to form big groups to control things, which is why null-sec looks like it does today. you would have to manipulate things to an incredible degree to change this.
It's basically a zero sum game, if you make the game (in null specifically) more friendly to small groups, those same mechanics will either make large groups more powerful in some way, or kill the need for large groups entirely. Lots of people don't like the big alliances, but I think many of us accept them as part of the game (some of us, like me, even enjoy being in a big group).
Living (fighting and ratting) in null, I deal with the compromises ccp had to make every day (High Sec is another such compromise, lots of us hate it, but the smarter folks will grudgingly admit that the game needs it), and no one dislikes squatters and cloaky campers more than I do (I turn lemon into lemonade though, and find ways to screw them back, even put a cyno on an armor tank navy raven as bait once...was fun :) ).
And theroy crafting is fine, but the persons putting out the theroies HAVE to take into account that things exist the way they do now for a reason. Keeping this in mind is the only way to make good changes instead of bad. |
Malice Redeemer
Redeemer Group Joint Venture Conglomerate
114
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 16:37:00 -
[149] - Quote
I like these types of ideas. +1 for solutions that are not, lets remove the cloaking device, or just raging about removing local.
As long as with work I can still secure myself as I can now, unless I make mistakes. I think that's what we want, eh? To be able to hide if we are better at it then they are at finding, and vice versa. |
Josef Djugashvilis
The Scope Gallente Federation
248
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 16:55:00 -
[150] - Quote
Hiding in Eve - why we cloak.
Because we can. You want fries with that? |
|
Karl Planck
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
180
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 17:06:00 -
[151] - Quote
The ideas listed in the op's first few responses are genuinly great ideas for progressing the games difficulty and realism. Unfortunately, in order to do this it would, without a doubt, require the creation of EVE II.
Look at the diffuclty when anything is dramatically changed. The last time we had a major overhaul of somethign it was the scannign system, which happened years ago and was basically a game added on to REPLACE a simple mechanic. what your suggesting is much more than a replacement, but a revamp of how celestial objects give information to your client.
The dev's already have insurmountable problems when it comes to changing code. This change, despite its value, is simply too much without a new game. To all everyone concerned over the fairness involving the H/O disqualification https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=113351&find=unread |
Garonis
G-corp Limited
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 17:32:00 -
[152] - Quote
+1 for well thought out, and delivered idea!
I think this would revitalize how things are done in Eve. It would also magnify the role of Scout. I totally support all of the OP's ideas! |
FloppieTheBanjoClown
The Skunkworks
1589
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 17:40:00 -
[153] - Quote
I cloak so they don't see me coming. It's time to put an end to CCP's war on piracy. Fight your own battles and stop asking CCP to do it for you. |
WCBirdman
a associacao dos Smurfs imundo
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 22:24:00 -
[154] - Quote
Been reading so many posts of how to make Eve better. This is the best by far. This game has been losing my attention for a long time, mainly because of this:
"Eve's game design only rewards the biggest and most numerous. CCP needs to build in more game design that rewards a player who is smarter than the rest and attempts to be as asymmetric as possible and do more with less."
Most people are thinking of stuff which should bring in more people. They forget the fact that a lot of people are leaving Eve after they find out that 'the blob' makes everything completely pointless. Why train up that measly 2 % skill, when after all the only thing that counts is how many friends you bring.
+1 and lets keep this on the frontpage.
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
612
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 22:40:00 -
[155] - Quote
Mag's wrote:There are some good ideas in there, but I disagree with some. This should be in F & I though tbh.
Basicly sums up my thoughts as well, but I gave him a +like for at least putting some serious effort into it. For once it's not a whine about local and/or cloak, he actually present solutions on how to replace/reshape the information. We've seen this debate for at least six-seven years, if not longer, and frankly speaking I think this is the best suggestion so far. Even tho not perfect, the core mechanics presented is a great place to start. shiptoastin' liek a baws |
Mallak Azaria
xX-Crusader-Xx Luna Sanguinem
106
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 22:52:00 -
[156] - Quote
+1
I can't find fault in your idea, because it's very solid & well thought out. This is how EVE should be. |
NeGaMeSH
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 23:45:00 -
[157] - Quote
Excellent ideas! +1 |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
562
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 00:53:00 -
[158] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Mag's wrote:There are some good ideas in there, but I disagree with some. This should be in F & I though tbh. Basicly sums up my thoughts as well, but I gave him a +like for at least putting some serious effort into it. For once it's not a whine about local and/or cloak, he actually present solutions on how to replace/reshape the information. We've seen this debate for at least six-seven years, if not longer, and frankly speaking I think this is the best suggestion so far. Even tho not perfect, the core mechanics presented is a great place to start.
Thanks for the kind words.
Let me be very clear: this is simply a starting point. A basic foundation with which to generate more thought and speculation until we uncover some truly elegant game design.
Also, Misanth / Mags, you guys might know me by another character from a while back. I'll let you guess as to which one hehe. Intelligence shouldn't be free. -á Mining, reloaded. -á-áADDICTED. |
Kimmi Chan
Black Rebel Rifter Club
8
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 02:15:00 -
[159] - Quote
Sosan Metron wrote:Should be moved to features & Ideas forum tho, its gonna dissappear fast here under a pile of crap posts about how difficult the new inventory is or other such rubbish.
Agreed. I wonder if we could just link to this post in F&I or if a Dev/Mod needs to actually move it.
Intelligence shouldn't be free. by Mors Sanctitatis |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
500
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 03:56:00 -
[160] - Quote
"abloobloobloo I'm not completely undetectable when cloaking please give me a crutch CCP" eh |
|
Dahren Caspo
Repo.
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 10:22:00 -
[161] - Quote
Very good ideas - intelligence gathering needs to be improved.
Recruitment open: repo-corp.net I support: Intelligence shouldn't be free. by Mors Sanctitatis How I feel every morning after I wake up. |
Lyissa Serine
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 19:05:00 -
[162] - Quote
Bump |
Garonis
G-corp Limited
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 11:52:00 -
[163] - Quote
First.. a bump for an awesome thread!
Secondly, would it also make space bigger if we slowed everyone's warp speed down? I think with this, introduce new mods that would alter warp speed, with speed tied directly to the ships footprint, or signature. Perhaps allow us to set warp speed, so we can decide to warp slow and stealthy, or burn in hot and let everyone see us coming from far out. As a random thought, covops ships would be slow by default.. as part of their "stealth" package. |
Garonis
G-corp Limited
1
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 00:28:00 -
[164] - Quote
back to top |
Kimmi Chan
Perkone Caldari State
62
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 01:18:00 -
[165] - Quote
Garonis wrote:back to top
Intelligence shouldn't be free. by Mors Sanctitatis |
Foofad
Aliastra Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 02:40:00 -
[166] - Quote
Overall I like your thoughts, but I want to make one correction. Active sensors are the short ranged ones, not passive.
Passive sensors, even today, are phenomenally sensitive. X-ray telescopes, spectrographs, and so on - all of these sophisticated pieces of scientific hardware that you read about - are passive sensors. And that's just what we've got today. Add a dash of space fantasy and there's no reason why a space ship's passive sensors shouldn't be able to detect the electromagnetic emissions of another space ship on the opposite end of a solar system.
Active sensors are needed for precise ranging that doesn't rely on assumptions and known factors. Active sensors are things like RADAR, LIDAR, Sonar, and so on. Active sensors are limited by the amount of energy that can be devoted to them. In order to detect something, an active sensor has to "ping" (like Sonar, echolocation, etc) and then listen in for a reflection. Lasers, like what are used in LIDAR, are very focused beams of light. As the distance grows however, they lose that focus. It's just like the cone of a flash light. As such, the energy requirement to detect something grows very rapidly as the distance increases.
So active sensors are something that you would see used for things like fire control, surface mapping, precise local navigation, missile or drone guidance, things like that. But active sensors are really not that useful over great distances, like if you're trying to detect an object or ship. This is why, for example, we are only just now mapping the surface of the moon with RADAR - we only recently had probes in orbit with that capability, and couldn't do it from Earth or an Earth orbiting satelite. Even WISE, the famed Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer which is known for detecting and mapping the trajectories of asteroids flying around our solar system, is just a fancy passive telescope. Meanwhile, NASA has a RADAR station that is capable of detecting individual raindrops in a cloud - but only to a range of two kilometers.
Just throwing that out there. It's an important distinction to make. |
Kimmi Chan
Perkone Caldari State
62
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 02:47:00 -
[167] - Quote
Foofad wrote:Overall I like your thoughts, but I want to make one correction. Active sensors are the short ranged ones, not passive.
Passive sensors, even today, are phenomenally sensitive. X-ray telescopes, spectrographs, and so on - all of these sophisticated pieces of scientific hardware that you read about - are passive sensors. And that's just what we've got today. Add a dash of space fantasy and there's no reason why a space ship's passive sensors shouldn't be able to detect the electromagnetic emissions of another space ship on the opposite end of a solar system.
Active sensors are needed for precise ranging that doesn't rely on assumptions and known factors. Active sensors are things like RADAR, LIDAR, Sonar, and so on. Active sensors are limited by the amount of energy that can be devoted to them. In order to detect something, an active sensor has to "ping" (like Sonar, echolocation, etc) and then listen in for a reflection. Lasers, like what are used in LIDAR, are very focused beams of light. As the distance grows however, they lose that focus. It's just like the cone of a flash light. As such, the energy requirement to detect something grows very rapidly as the distance increases.
So active sensors are something that you would see used for things like fire control, surface mapping, precise local navigation, missile or drone guidance, things like that. But active sensors are really not that useful over great distances, like if you're trying to detect an object or ship. This is why, for example, we are only just now mapping the surface of the moon with RADAR - we only recently had probes in orbit with that capability, and couldn't do it from Earth or an Earth orbiting satelite. Even WISE, the famed Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer which is known for detecting and mapping the trajectories of asteroids flying around our solar system, is just a fancy passive telescope. Meanwhile, NASA has a RADAR station that is capable of detecting individual raindrops in a cloud - but only to a range of two kilometers.
Just throwing that out there. It's an important distinction to make.
I believe that the differentiating of passive and active was for gameplay balance. Passive does not reveal your position - it is just listening and at long-range like S.E.T.I. with murky results. Active is transmitting and giving more accurate, short-range results but reveals your position, Like a sonar ping as you mentioned.
Intelligence shouldn't be free. by Mors Sanctitatis |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
587
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 03:06:00 -
[168] - Quote
Foofad wrote:Overall I like your thoughts, but I want to make one correction. Active sensors are the short ranged ones, not passive.
Passive sensors, even today, are phenomenally sensitive. X-ray telescopes, spectrographs, and so on - all of these sophisticated pieces of scientific hardware that you read about - are passive sensors. And that's just what we've got today. Add a dash of space fantasy and there's no reason why a space ship's passive sensors shouldn't be able to detect the electromagnetic emissions of another space ship on the opposite end of a solar system.
Active sensors are needed for precise ranging that doesn't rely on assumptions and known factors. Active sensors are things like RADAR, LIDAR, Sonar, and so on. Active sensors are limited by the amount of energy that can be devoted to them. In order to detect something, an active sensor has to "ping" (like Sonar, echolocation, etc) and then listen in for a reflection. Lasers, like what are used in LIDAR, are very focused beams of light. As the distance grows however, they lose that focus. It's just like the cone of a flash light. As such, the energy requirement to detect something grows very rapidly as the distance increases.
So active sensors are something that you would see used for things like fire control, surface mapping, precise local navigation, missile or drone guidance, things like that. But active sensors are really not that useful over great distances, like if you're trying to detect an object or ship. This is why, for example, we are only just now mapping the surface of the moon with RADAR - we only recently had probes in orbit with that capability, and couldn't do it from Earth or an Earth orbiting satelite. Even WISE, the famed Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer which is known for detecting and mapping the trajectories of asteroids flying around our solar system, is just a fancy passive telescope. Meanwhile, NASA has a RADAR station that is capable of detecting individual raindrops in a cloud - but only to a range of two kilometers.
Just throwing that out there. It's an important distinction to make.
Very good point- duely noted. I'll be sure to incorporate this into future designs. :)
Intelligence shouldn't be free. -á Mining, reloaded. -á-áADDICTED. |
Andre II
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
59
|
Posted - 2012.06.03 20:05:00 -
[169] - Quote
I almost cried when I read this post.. It was everything I had been hoping for when I joined EVE. I've only been playing for a year and have learned to stick to high sec space. I believe all these changes should primarily effect low and null sec space. This could be explain by low and null sec space having a lack on Racial empire senors present. I may be one of the few players who kinda wants to find my own bubble in EVE. I wish to be able to live in null and low sec alone. Currently it's impossible for anyone can find you. It's seems CCP's directed the theme of EVE towards finding space combat rather than becoming what you want. they advertise possible career paths but in actuality it's most difficult unless you're with a large corp. It seems every plays for like a tactical battle field of tanks. Anyone can simply look from a bird's eye view and see other vehicles and unless you have specific camouflage you will be found. I think CCP should really look into incorporating these game mechanics in. Space is suppose to be large and mysterious, virtually the big dark unknown. CCP's managed to install a street light in every system making it virtually unable to just be by yourself.
Oh and I really like the idea of specialized cloaks and stealth modules. +1
CCP PUT THIS IN ALREADY! |
Pretax Metron
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 07:55:00 -
[170] - Quote
Dont let this thread die |
|
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
2388
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 10:11:00 -
[171] - Quote
Actually, I liked the attention to detail in your OP as well as the replies, I got the impression that you're a very articulate and intelligent person. As others have stated, this thread definitely belongs in F&I sub-forum though.
Then I saw this reply from you to another player reading this thread and quite frankly, I think it's rude and egotistical. You could have easily refrained from being insulting and replied with a logical concise explanation that showed how it could also be used as a defensive option.
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:NARDAC wrote:In summary: You want to be able to sneak up on people and gank them. Sicne EVE won't let you "sneak up" becuase of local, you AFK cloak so they can't really know when you are on or not. You hope they will eventually assume you are AFK, and go out and PVE or mine while you are in local.... so you can come back, sneak up on them and gank them.
So, the answer to the question in the title is what everyone knows.
Your solution is to make it easy to hide so that it is easier to sneak up on people and gank them.
This is simple-minded 2 dimensional thinking where you have not through the consequences of your actions.
1) We make it easy to hide and sneak up on people and gank them. 2) People doing things like PVE and mining get ganked. 3) People stop doing all the things that get them ganked. 4) From lack fairly sae things to do in low/null, people move back to high sec. 5) You are right back to not being easy to gank people.
So, my tl;dr version. Make it easier to hide and sneak up on people to gank them, people stop doing anything that would make it easy to sneak up on them and gank them.
What % of the population lives in wormholes? Players such as yourself positively REEK of carebear. Your one dimensional thinking is pathetic and your lack of creativity even more so. Clearly you don't have the vision capable of contemplating the idea that just as many tools to hide/evade detection would be included as there would be tools to find and attack players. So TL; DR: you're only focusing on the things that you fear most: being ganked by players who are far smarter than you, which is probably the whole of Eve.
Anyway, I still like the premise of the ideas presented, just this shallow display of sanctimoniousness attitude from you kinda kills my desire to show support for this.
|
Phaedra Stargazer
Rising Sun Inc.
3
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 20:37:00 -
[172] - Quote
+1 support |
MetaMorpheus Jones
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 22:05:00 -
[173] - Quote
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:In addition to information, sharing it is just as important. Where Corps and Alliances will really benefit is in the sharing of information. If you're in a gang and you have a CovOps pilot with you, what if everything his sensors detected showed up on your tactical overlay? Now he truly is your eyes and ears for your whole gang! What if your ships could fire their weapons at targets he acquired, even though the targets are out of your lock range (but not weapons range)? Indirect fire, so to speak!
This is essentially what an AWACS (Airborne Warning And Control System), used buy the US and some of it's allies, does. In-air commanders have near total access to everything in the air for 400 miles, and can track targets and direct friendlies to those targets, as well as feed targets to weapons systems on friendlies that would otherwise be outside of their own sensor range.
In addition, because the friendly fighters are depending on the AWACS for sensor information, they can turn off their own active sensor equipment, thereby rendering themselves more stealthy to electronic detection.
The drawback is that the active sensor signal falloff is greater than the signal's usable range, so enemies with the right equipment, outside of the AWACS sensor range, could find the AWACS by following that falloff to its origin.
I think similar mechanics could be implemented under the system you propose. this way, a smart commander would have to employ a flight of protectors for the AWACS; it would not be some stand-alone, unsee-able untouchable ship somewhere in the system. Your ability to track targets (both # and range), hand them off to friendly offensive packages, mitigate your own signature, etc can all be governed by skill level and meta level of the mods/rigs used.
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:What if you're two systems away but an enemy blob arrives and your Alliance has regional and local static sensors installed in that system? You're able to look on the map and notice increased activity two systems over in the past 4 hours and are able to pack up your mining op in time to make it to safety.
Following the same AWACS analogy, ships could be specialized to provide that "1-2 system out" sensor range and deployed during battles or defense, giving the deployers warning of reinforcements on the way; likewise, those reinforcements could have with them another such specialized ship that is dedicated to hiding, corrupting, or otherwise rendering that sensor data unreliable to the operator, so that what he perceives as a flight of reinforcement frigates is actually a flight of BC's, or a real flight of frigates appears as a moving asteroid field.
I've been reading the EVE forums for a couple of years now. This is the most thought out and serious suggestion I have ever seen on this forum. Excellent. |
Tubrav Sadarts
Station Exports
2
|
Posted - 2012.06.06 22:21:00 -
[174] - Quote
I hope someone from CCP reads this thread, points it to someone high up in the decision chain and says 'look, we should really do this'. It would put the 'space' back into 'spaceship game'. As has been said many times in this thread, EVE doesn't feel 'empty' and unknown when you can jump in and see *everyone* in the system, and all the information associated with that.
+1'ed, and really hoping that this makes it into the game in some way or another. Even better, hoping for a Dev Post acknowledging they like this idea too... |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
615
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 00:53:00 -
[175] - Quote
MetaMorpheus Jones wrote:Mors Sanctitatis wrote:In addition to information, sharing it is just as important. Where Corps and Alliances will really benefit is in the sharing of information. If you're in a gang and you have a CovOps pilot with you, what if everything his sensors detected showed up on your tactical overlay? Now he truly is your eyes and ears for your whole gang! What if your ships could fire their weapons at targets he acquired, even though the targets are out of your lock range (but not weapons range)? Indirect fire, so to speak! This is essentially what an AWACS (Airborne Warning And Control System), used buy the US and some of it's allies, does. In-air commanders have near total access to everything in the air for 400 miles, and can track targets and direct friendlies to those targets, as well as feed targets to weapons systems on friendlies that would otherwise be outside of their own sensor range. In addition, because the friendly fighters are depending on the AWACS for sensor information, they can turn off their own active sensor equipment, thereby rendering themselves more stealthy to electronic detection. The drawback is that the active sensor signal falloff is greater than the signal's usable range, so enemies with the right equipment, outside of the AWACS sensor range, could find the AWACS by following that falloff to its origin. I think similar mechanics could be implemented under the system you propose. this way, a smart commander would have to employ a flight of protectors for the AWACS; it would not be some stand-alone, unsee-able untouchable ship somewhere in the system. Your ability to track targets (both # and range), hand them off to friendly offensive packages, mitigate your own signature, etc can all be governed by skill level and meta level of the mods/rigs used. Mors Sanctitatis wrote:What if you're two systems away but an enemy blob arrives and your Alliance has regional and local static sensors installed in that system? You're able to look on the map and notice increased activity two systems over in the past 4 hours and are able to pack up your mining op in time to make it to safety. Following the same AWACS analogy, ships could be specialized to provide that "1-2 system out" sensor range and deployed during battles or defense, giving the deployers warning of reinforcements on the way; likewise, those reinforcements could have with them another such specialized ship that is dedicated to hiding, corrupting, or otherwise rendering that sensor data unreliable to the operator, so that what he perceives as a flight of reinforcement frigates is actually a flight of BC's, or a real flight of frigates appears as a moving asteroid field. I've been reading the EVE forums for a couple of years now. This is the most thought out and serious suggestion I have ever seen on this forum. Excellent.
Great post providing additional detail. I am aware of how AWACS operates and I couldn't agree more- it would be a great addition to the game to build that capability into the system. Intelligence shouldn't be free. -á Mining, reloaded. -á-áADDICTED. |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
615
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 00:58:00 -
[176] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:Actually, I liked the attention to detail in your OP as well as the replies, I got the impression that you're a very articulate and intelligent person. As others have stated, this thread definitely belongs in F&I sub-forum though. Then I saw this reply from you to another player reading this thread and quite frankly, I think it's rude and egotistical. You could have easily refrained from being insulting and replied with a logical concise explanation that showed how it could also be used as a defensive option. Mors Sanctitatis wrote:NARDAC wrote:In summary: You want to be able to sneak up on people and gank them. Sicne EVE won't let you "sneak up" becuase of local, you AFK cloak so they can't really know when you are on or not. You hope they will eventually assume you are AFK, and go out and PVE or mine while you are in local.... so you can come back, sneak up on them and gank them.
So, the answer to the question in the title is what everyone knows.
Your solution is to make it easy to hide so that it is easier to sneak up on people and gank them.
This is simple-minded 2 dimensional thinking where you have not through the consequences of your actions.
1) We make it easy to hide and sneak up on people and gank them. 2) People doing things like PVE and mining get ganked. 3) People stop doing all the things that get them ganked. 4) From lack fairly sae things to do in low/null, people move back to high sec. 5) You are right back to not being easy to gank people.
So, my tl;dr version. Make it easier to hide and sneak up on people to gank them, people stop doing anything that would make it easy to sneak up on them and gank them.
What % of the population lives in wormholes? Players such as yourself positively REEK of carebear. Your one dimensional thinking is pathetic and your lack of creativity even more so. Clearly you don't have the vision capable of contemplating the idea that just as many tools to hide/evade detection would be included as there would be tools to find and attack players. So TL; DR: you're only focusing on the things that you fear most: being ganked by players who are far smarter than you, which is probably the whole of Eve. Anyway, I still like the premise of the ideas presented, just this shallow display of sanctimoniousness attitude from you kinda kills my desire to show support for this.
Yeah, you're right. Poor show on my part. But at the same time, I have a very hard time giving someone the benefit of the doubt when they can so easily find all of the 'problems' with the idea as it applies to themselves, but aren't creative enough to envision how it would also help them and/or the design would include them in a positive aspect.
The selfish and self centered players are what makes up the core of the carebear legions in Eve. They only think of themselves and are always certain that everyone is out to ruin 'their' game. Carebears are anathema to Eve and they are anathema to me. Intelligence shouldn't be free. -á Mining, reloaded. -á-áADDICTED. |
MetaMorpheus Jones
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
14
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 04:53:00 -
[177] - Quote
Rather than implement this as a radical change to the EVE universe, and because it is based almost entirely on equipment and skill (rather than a "fix" per se of a game mechanic), this could be introduced in phases over time, as newly developed technology, but based on the existing scanner and mapping technology in the EVE universe today.
So rather than splash eve with this radical change in sensor usage and ability in one expansion, simply add new modules here and there over the course of three or four expansions - letting the technology itself have its introduction into the EVE universe as increments of skill, modules, even implants, just as tech gets smaller, more capable, and more prevalent in RL ~ and just so, too, it is very often born for military purpose. This tech could start as a military boat-only option, but evolve to mining operations based, or transport based, or civil defense based - sensor arrays and abilities. |
David Cedarbridge
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
220
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 06:13:00 -
[178] - Quote
What is Dscan and what are scanner probes and why would I want either of those things? In related news, what are all of these astrometrics skills I've trained and what can I do with them? |
Ban Bindy
Bindy Brothers Pottery Association
304
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 06:44:00 -
[179] - Quote
Having to work this hard simply to find other players would not work for very much other than to make the game seem even emptier than it is. Just the fact that it takes this much space to explain the idea kills it. |
0ccupy 4-4
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2012.06.07 06:55:00 -
[180] - Quote
Make it so that the thousands of inevitable nomads can subvert 0.0 power blocs. |
|
Adonis Peverell
Republic of Awesome
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.08 01:15:00 -
[181] - Quote
+1, I would absolutely love to be able to play solo in null, as these proposed changes would allow. Not to mention the fantastic meta-gaming that this would enable--It would add a much needed level of complexity to sensing, which is now insanely boring. OPs ideas throughout the thread are just stellar. I really hope someone at CCP takes a look at this. |
Mirim Rokstar
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.06.08 02:13:00 -
[182] - Quote
Huge +1,
I like the well thougth out ideas, whilst I may not agree with all of them, it fuels debate and discussion, which is great, one thing you mentioned is making some sensors linked to certain races, quick thought, this could be tied into engine trails, each race has it's own engine trail, therefore the code must be there somewhere to differentiate between races at the sensor level.
Anyway, well written and kudos that I spent the time to read a large majority of it :P |
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy Black Sun Alliance
214
|
Posted - 2012.06.08 02:48:00 -
[183] - Quote
some of your ideas are very interesting.. I'm not in favor of any idea which gives a remote chance that you can scan down a cloaked vessel; that is a slippery slope. but really some of your ideas are very well thought out. [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/OldST.jpg[/IMG] |
Svarek
39
|
Posted - 2012.06.08 03:05:00 -
[184] - Quote
Wow, these are some of the best ideas I've seen. I love the idea of skill actually entering into scanning. Takes me back to the old submarine games.
+2
I really hope something comes of this. Please read the above post with facetiousness, sarcasm, and irony detectors activated. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1007
|
Posted - 2012.06.08 06:20:00 -
[185] - Quote
Barbara Nichole wrote:some of your ideas are very interesting.. I'm not in favor of any idea which gives a remote chance that you can scan down a cloaked vessel; that is a slippery slope. but really some of your ideas are very well thought out. Slippery slopes can be some of the best rides, though. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd |
Marlona Sky
Massive PVPness Psychotic Tendencies.
1081
|
Posted - 2012.06.08 06:24:00 -
[186] - Quote
I would like to hear a well thought out idea on finding people using normal cloaks, covert cloaks should be off limits though.
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
Khalia Nestune
Mad Stacks
14
|
Posted - 2012.06.08 08:04:00 -
[187] - Quote
I think these are excellent ideas. I'd be happy with just delayed local everywhere!
http://www.mylootyourtears.com |
Merch BAYLOR
New Eden Burns Moist.
3
|
Posted - 2012.06.08 08:55:00 -
[188] - Quote
This sounds great. It would make the game really interesting for small corps/alliances, and enable them to be a real threat for large corporations/alliances.
BUT this would require quite some serious work on the dev side, and from the looks of recent patches and 'expansions' they go with little an/or easy to fix things.
We can only dream and hope this vision of your will be taken into consideration. |
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy Black Sun Alliance
219
|
Posted - 2012.06.08 17:12:00 -
[189] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Barbara Nichole wrote:some of your ideas are very interesting.. I'm not in favor of any idea which gives a remote chance that you can scan down a cloaked vessel; that is a slippery slope. but really some of your ideas are very well thought out. Slippery slopes can be some of the best rides, though.
slippery slopes may be a fun ride for a few minutes... but they end and the bottom where you never wanted to go. [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/OldST.jpg[/IMG] |
Garonis
G-corp Limited
1
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 12:08:00 -
[190] - Quote
I am amazed there hasn't been any dev commentary on this thread so far. |
|
Gillia Winddancer
Aliastra Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 12:20:00 -
[191] - Quote
Why hasn't the OP been given a medal yet?
This is exactly what EVE needs. |
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
176
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 12:37:00 -
[192] - Quote
Gillia Winddancer wrote:Why hasn't the OP been given a medal yet?
This is exactly what EVE needs.
It's a brand new game, Eve wouldn't adapt. brb |
Qvar Dar'Zanar
EVE University Ivy League
48
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 12:46:00 -
[193] - Quote
+1 for the local channel scrapping. |
Sloppy Podfarts
Hedion University Amarr Empire
17
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 14:53:00 -
[194] - Quote
Good stuff |
Helo Primus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 15:08:00 -
[195] - Quote
Great ideas although I could imagine in implementation it benefiting the large fleets and making it even harder for the solo guy. Large fleets would just fit ships as they do now with a couple of spec'd up sensor boats whereas the solo guy would have to sacrifice some of his weopon/tank mods or rigs to include said sensor mods leading to an even bigger divide. I'm all for being able to hide but I also want to be able to fight :)
Also do you not think this would just further encourage gate camps? I mean anyone who couldnt be bothered to look will just sit on a gate and wait for traffic.
The major step that should be taken is just the removal of local. Or not showing a player in the channel until they say something or dock up. |
Adaam Ikalaa
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.10 16:24:00 -
[196] - Quote
Not much to say except that I love the ideas posted by the OP! Well thought out and expressed! If you waste today, you've wasted one of the last days of your life. |
Delen Ormand
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 01:57:00 -
[197] - Quote
Would have missed this thread, except someone posted the link to it from another (this one). Love the idea :) |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1090
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 02:04:00 -
[198] - Quote
Helo Primus wrote:Great ideas although I could imagine in implementation it benefiting the large fleets and making it even harder for the solo guy. Large fleets would just fit ships as they do now with a couple of spec'd up sensor boats whereas the solo guy would have to sacrifice some of his weopon/tank mods or rigs to include said sensor mods leading to an even bigger divide. I'm all for being able to hide but I also want to be able to fight :)
Also do you not think this would just further encourage gate camps? I mean anyone who couldnt be bothered to look will just sit on a gate and wait for traffic.
The major step that should be taken is just the removal of local. Or not showing a player in the channel until they say something or dock up. Ah removing local. Always good to see that coming up again and again. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
Kimmi Chan
Illuminatus Reforged The Revenant Order
141
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 02:10:00 -
[199] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Ah removing local. Always good to see that coming up again and again.
The nice thing about the OP is that it isn't just the removal of local but replacing local with a new, more interactive mechanic that, at least in my opinion, has the potential for making the game more fun and immersive (making up words).
I agree. I am not really in favor of just removing local and saying, "Woohoo, Eve is fixed." But the OP is not suggesting that. He is suggesting a replacement for local.
-á"Miners mine so I don't have to." ~Metal Icarus |
Herr Hammer Draken
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
15
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 03:23:00 -
[200] - Quote
I like this idea as well. However I think EVE updates too slow for this plan to work. Lag becomes critical with something like this. And EVE was designed with a much losser game play too allow for some lag issues without breaking the game. Granted it could be so much cooler. But that is just too demanding game play for the server under exsisting world wide conditions. IMHO.
|
|
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
12
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 04:04:00 -
[201] - Quote
+1
This would make EVE "a lot more real". More diversity, more activity, more fun. |
Crunchie Attuxors
Always Another Corporate Venture
24
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 04:08:00 -
[202] - Quote
Xorv wrote:I like the ideas and vision for EVE you present. Practically speaking though what would you suggest CCP do that doesn't take several years for them to deliver?
I too agree. This vision and ideas are cool.
However, I think they are a bit too ambitious, and he only one really concrete short term, is delayed local, which is easy to implement.
Nearly all other ideas require major changes to the mechanics of the game. Which we as we now, is asking for SoonGäó.
So I put the thinking hat on, and came up with a solution:
1) Eliminate all general purpose cloaks. Only leave the specialized ones and the specialized ships for them (because Stealth Bombers and Blockade Runners are necessary and cool). This also returns them to their true role as unique ships, rather than as just ships that can fire faster after decloak.
2) Introduce a new module - call it the Signature Reduction Module, in the two techs and various metas (affecting cycle speed and negative bonuses as well as CPU, PG, and cap needs) and with scripts. This module would use the existing ship signature and reduce it incredibly, and would also cloak the ship to certain ranges based on the base sig radius. The negative bonuses could be the sames as a cloak, less targeting speed after inactivation and a hit to max speed. The various scripts would allow to customize the experience to the player:
a) A pure reduction script - adds to the sig reduction, but increases the negative bonuses etc.
b) A pure negative bonus script - reduce the negative bonuses, but decrease the sig reduction.
c) a middle script - adds a little more to the reduction, but also has a little more neg bonus.
d) etc etc etc
3) When using this module, the visual range of a ship is related to the ability of someone to lock the ship in under X seconds. If you can lock it in under X, then yo can see it, it shows in overview and you can lock it.
4) This is similar to how the sensor booster works, so no need to learn a new mechanic for it to work.
This would be extremely easy to achieve as all it does is adapt the existing cloak and sig radius ECM and ECCM code.
It would also introduce some of the advantages of terrain without needing a major code overhaul.
Think about it.
Of course, the ideal would be to introduce real terrain, heat, etc, but that could take years. My proposal is doable in relatively short term. Eve forums official anthem:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pudOFG5X6uA |
Grumpy Owly
Paladin Philanthropists
661
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 06:32:00 -
[203] - Quote
I have to say this is one of "the" more exciting new proposals I've seen in a while personally and gets my support.
It's well thought out also and considers the ramifications of both sides whilst looking at current topical thinking on a number of issues players are having problems with regarding intelligence.
Some extra things to consider might be an extentsion to the active strategical model. This is where the "scout/recon" role can actually helpfully provide more of an initial role within fleets/corps/alliances. If a scout aquires a "target" he is capable of bookmarking the details and adding this information at a corporation level for shared use. At present this is used generically for varous in game needs both with military and commercial advantages.
The extension to this could be to allow a small management to "target" related details so that commanders can effectively prioritise targets and as such help to feed information through to co-oridnated efforts of how best to "dish" out tasks to various individuals/fleets. However, I think it needs to retain the "at time" information as opposed to "real time" information as is current, so that as a complete tactical package it will never replace the need for having effective co-ordinated communications or commanders reacting to real time changes. But certainly having some strategic tool to help co-ordiante tasks fed through from scouts might add a helpful tool.
e.g. scout finds a POS, he BM's it at organisational level. A commander can then maipulate this to than prioritise that target and or/apply specific parties for attention.
To make this more effective then it would mean applying more information to BM's. Like a sub file which may store this strategic info feed items in by command. Likewise it could contain useful info like screen prints with some overview info feed within to help see the actual details. This occurs anyhow but needs a bit of out of game manipulation to achieve to help share. Prinicipally if this could be hosted more at the server level it could go a long way of putting the intel in recon imho.
Other general feedback points about the ideas:
Hopefully not go too module heavy on the hunter as the need to have lots of "toys" just to do the job as this subtracts from the combat capabilties. This is generally the balancing notion with the stealth/hunter role in that they are limited in combat effectiveness by design already by the CCP model for having these capabilties. But if tweaks to fittings compensate the changes to derived added mod use expected of the role then that works just as good. Potentially yes this could mean more a team orientated need to fullfill these things, but the need to retain some solo related gameplay here may be neccesary for various reasons including some other than just functional.
Cloak fuel I'm happy with as a "management" issue if it can still be measured in hours as some observational recon duties are a "patience" exercise at the best of times. One obvious issue with the cargo use and fuel are firstly stealth bombers as bombs take up a lot of space, and secondly Blockade runners whose objective is to make best use of the limited cargo capacities they have currently, some issues with cyno use might be apparent here also for recon ships but if a seperate fuel bay or extension to cargo aspects can compensate here might not compromise those dedicated functions. Certainly the timings of hours might be most applicable and would go a long way to helping with AFK cloakies.
Removal of the easy to use and exploitable local chat intel issue we have currently should not really occur without having the neccesary tools for active "ships in space" network of information to help compensate for the lack of info. But I'm all for making this a more "active" benefit to intel than the passive ease of the chat channel useage presently.
Also might be usefull to consider the "look outside the window" issue on stations if local was simply removed? The gate combat issues and camping is a bit more culturally problematic and convoluted and I don't really have a problem with it really. But I don't really have a magic wand to some of the more apparent "blob" concerns either. Some of the new mods with e-war issues and targetting and other things might help to compensate here?
As some potential "novelty" ideas to explore for intel focussed roles:
1) Limited useage of drop satalites in systems and use them to d-scan in systems remotely (variable ranges)?
2) Remote camera drones/probes, allow a drone/probe to feedback visual information from a distance.
3) Scramble system communications, interupt d-scan integrity.
4) Mirage projection systems. Dummy ship representation.
5) Tracking Devices, ability to attach devices to ships to reveal its location, remotely, similar to the locater agent features.
Otherwise the proposals to add more impact to the relevance of inteligence and the related subterfuge aspects of the gameplay should be explored more and given more emphasis as real things to consider as opposed to having an entilted expectation to having it. Keep working at it with others OP but I really like where you are going with this manifesto on the subject. Bounty Hunting, Soon Gäó
It's just criminal - Smuggling |
Wu Jiaqiu
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
16
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 08:23:00 -
[204] - Quote
Excellent idea |
Forest Hill
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
13
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 14:50:00 -
[205] - Quote
TL;DR
Removing local would virtually kill industry as a meaningful activity in nullsec.. no miner I know is going to risk hundreds of millions of ISK with virtually no protection. And mining isn't lucrative enough to warrant the manpower needed to guard every miner out there. So it'll have to be heavily guarded mining ops, CTA style. Well, that sounds like fun...
I could agree to the delay or removal of Local, if you could buy it back as an upgrade in your ihub, and then only if CCP would end the ability to 'afk cloaky camp' such an upgraded system. |
Draek
Tarmikos Shipyards
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 16:03:00 -
[206] - Quote
I just wanted to say I really like these ideas and I think it adds nice gameplay elements for both hunter and hunted.
There is one thing I wanted to add though.
I like the mechanic that the larger your signature radius is the "hotter" you are as a target and thus easier to find.
However I was thinking in addition to certain modules increasing/decreasing this value perhaps certain actions would as well.
Decreasing actions: - Sitting still - Hiding next to bodies with higher sig radius (asteroids, planets, maybe even bigger ships)
Increasing actions: - Running MWD (this does it already but just asserting it makes you easier to spot with sensors as well) - Warping
I also mulled over weapons/modules increasing this as well since it seems logical if there is fighting it's easier to detect (passive or active).
However if we're playing with the actual sig radius value these actions would make you easier to hit which I doubt anyone would like without a complete rebalance of sigs and how weapons hit.
If that's not possible perhaps there is a way to make the area where the fight is happening hot to sensors instead of the people inside. Expanding on this idea could lead to a visualization of hot sig events on the solar system map, complete with areas of recent activity, warp trails, etc...
Essentially a signature fingerprint of the last few hours or so. |
Forest Hill
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
13
|
Posted - 2012.06.21 18:47:00 -
[207] - Quote
I was thinking about this a bit more.. it actually isn't that strange to have local intel. After all, you have jumped through a gate into a system. Anyone who hasn't jumped out or who's pod hasn't been destroyed, must automatically be in the system. Traffic control/Concord has this knowledge.
The only reason why concord would *not* know about a pilot/ship in local is - I think - theoretically, if it was built in local and never jumped through something, or undocked. Perhaps someone better versed in the lore dept. can shed some light on this. |
Riieck
New World Industries Inc StoneGuard Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 03:14:00 -
[208] - Quote
I am definitely in favor of:
- Using sensors to track people down.
- Using some sort of log in the stargates to check for people
- Using ship systems to make your enemy's sensors think you are bigger/smaller than you really are.
- Using nearby "terrain" to shield/mask sensors (although it is easy to implement, it might be hard to actually put to use, unless the mechanic uses only range to object as the mask and not direction+range [ie having to go to the dark side of the body to hide from somebody].
- How about a signature minimizer module? Will not hide you completely but will make you significantly harder to track. Advantages will be less penalty to speed vs full cloak (after all the engines should make some interstellar EM noise). Also this should be fittable to any ship. A good skill level will lessen speed penalty while lowering long range signature. The module should not have any usefullness at "visual" range.
|
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
678
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 03:58:00 -
[209] - Quote
To the player population in general: thank you for the kudos, the general positive reinforcement and the constructive discourse so far. I'd like to deliver a few thoughts on the discussion:
The concept of sensing other players and intelligence gathering shouldn't come in the form of an additional module. There shouldn't be an additional layer of something new added to the game in order to accomplish this. Everything should be inherent to what we do naturally: fit ships, fight, play the game as we always do.
It's not too impossible for CCP to implement this. The ideas and concepts are not too far out of reach. CCP needs to build sensing and stealth factors into every layer of choice. Every module, every ship hull, every action.
Think of activity as 'dust'. Everything you do as a pilot kicks up said dust. The dust can be visualized as a heat map (see population representation as 'blobs' on the galactic map) on our system level sensors. We can use larger signatures to mask our own smaller signature and blend into the surrounding shadow of larger objects, or even old fights, where other ships have kicked up a lot of 'dust' that is now drifting across the solar system.
It shouldn't be that difficult for CCP to implement this. The computational and database overhead shouldn't be too much. We're not talking about real time combat. The server checks could be very limited if need be. Additional variables are assigned to each module to affect their effect upon the overall signature output of a ship in a given posture. My point is, let's work within the existing framework we have. No need to invent additional modules etc.
I see a few posts worried that solo hunters would be at a disadvantage due to the need for specialized sensing modules, or have to dumb down their combat fits for more offensive sensing capability. Not at all. I'm a solo player first and foremost. I want the solo player with a keen intellect to be the most dangerous opponent in the galaxy. Slip in, kill, and slip out undetected.
Quite a few players are horrified at the prospect of a veritable Call To Arms in order to have to do something as mundane as a mining op. Why not? Mining ops are an almost social occasion. Why not involve the PVP arms of the alliance as well? Of course it will be worth it ISK-wise. The added cost of the defenders will be incorporated into the price of the minerals. Because your time isn't free, right? Right?
With the added mining frigate (it looks so awesome!), there would even be the option of sneaking in and mining with a signature so small that it goes undetected or is simply ignored as a false positve. Think about that for a second. A false positive. What if there was enough naturally occuring activity that there are numerous false positives. Enough that it's actually feasable to hide among them. The hunters dilemma: do we check out every one, or just move on to the next system? What is real? What is ambient? What is fake? What does your gut tell you?
Everyone who instantly fears for whatever way of life they currently have in Eve and worries that it might get disrupted or horribly destroyed: good. You've been doing the same stupid crap for the better part of 8-9 years now. Eve needs some dramatic and far reaching core game play changes to keep it new and fresh. Rebalancing a few T1 frigs isn't my idea of change. Changes like that are evolutionary, not revolutionary. I want to see CCP be fearless. Put their money where their mouth is. Show me that you care CCP.
There are so many opportunities for truely dramatic game play. All CCP has to do is abandon the incremental and safe development and reach for the gold ring. They've done it before. They might have the balls to do it again. Intelligence shouldn't be free. -á Mining, reloaded. -á-áADDICTED. |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
678
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 05:48:00 -
[210] - Quote
Also- the thread finally got moved to F&I. Intelligence shouldn't be free. -á Mining, reloaded. -á-áADDICTED. |
|
Wu Jiaqiu
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
16
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 11:03:00 -
[211] - Quote
I was about to mention that in General. But I guess the intent of the OP was to get as much attention as possible.
Still +1 support from me to change this |
Kimmi Chan
Illuminatus Reforged The Revenant Order
155
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 11:10:00 -
[212] - Quote
I petitioned to get it moved. I got tired of it getting buried under a deluge of Goons R Bad and **** Miners threads.
I apologize if my actions have offended anyone.
-á"Miners mine so I don't have to." ~Metal Icarus |
Jack Paladin
Solar Storm Intrepid Crossing
205
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 13:03:00 -
[213] - Quote
Brilliant, simply brilliant.
+1 |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
678
|
Posted - 2012.06.22 14:58:00 -
[214] - Quote
Kimmi Chan wrote:I petitioned to get it moved. I got tired of it getting buried under a deluge of Goons R Bad and **** Miners threads. I apologize if my actions have offended anyone.
No problem, was too lazy to do it myself ;)
Intelligence shouldn't be free. -á Mining, reloaded. -á-áADDICTED. |
Wu Jiaqiu
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
17
|
Posted - 2012.06.24 13:13:00 -
[215] - Quote
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:To the player population in general: thank you for the kudos, the general positive reinforcement and the constructive discourse so far. I'd like to deliver a few thoughts on the discussion:
The concept of sensing other players and intelligence gathering shouldn't come in the form of an additional module. There shouldn't be an additional layer of something new added to the game in order to accomplish this. Everything should be inherent to what we do naturally: fit ships, fight, play the game as we always do.
It's not too impossible for CCP to implement this. The ideas and concepts are not too far out of reach. CCP needs to build sensing and stealth factors into every layer of choice. Every module, every ship hull, every action.
Think of activity as 'dust'. Everything you do as a pilot kicks up said dust. The dust can be visualized as a heat map (see population representation as 'blobs' on the galactic map) on our system level sensors. We can use larger signatures to mask our own smaller signature and blend into the surrounding shadow of larger objects, or even old fights, where other ships have kicked up a lot of 'dust' that is now drifting across the solar system.
It shouldn't be that difficult for CCP to implement this. The computational and database overhead shouldn't be too much. We're not talking about real time combat. The server checks could be very limited if need be. Additional variables are assigned to each module to affect their effect upon the overall signature output of a ship in a given posture. My point is, let's work within the existing framework we have. No need to invent additional modules etc.
I see a few posts worried that solo hunters would be at a disadvantage due to the need for specialized sensing modules, or have to dumb down their combat fits for more offensive sensing capability. Not at all. I'm a solo player first and foremost. I want the solo player with a keen intellect to be the most dangerous opponent in the galaxy. Slip in, kill, and slip out undetected.
Quite a few players are horrified at the prospect of a veritable Call To Arms in order to have to do something as mundane as a mining op. Why not? Mining ops are an almost social occasion. Why not involve the PVP arms of the alliance as well? Of course it will be worth it ISK-wise. The added cost of the defenders will be incorporated into the price of the minerals. Because your time isn't free, right? Right?
With the added mining frigate (it looks so awesome!), there would even be the option of sneaking in and mining with a signature so small that it goes undetected or is simply ignored as a false positve. Think about that for a second. A false positive. What if there was enough naturally occuring activity that there are numerous false positives. Enough that it's actually feasable to hide among them. The hunters dilemma: do we check out every one, or just move on to the next system? What is real? What is ambient? What is fake? What does your gut tell you?
Everyone who instantly fears for whatever way of life they currently have in Eve and worries that it might get disrupted or horribly destroyed: good. You've been doing the same stupid crap for the better part of 8-9 years now. Eve needs some dramatic and far reaching core game play changes to keep it new and fresh. Rebalancing a few T1 frigs isn't my idea of change. Changes like that are evolutionary, not revolutionary. I want to see CCP be fearless. Put their money where their mouth is. Show me that you care CCP.
There are so many opportunities for truely dramatic game play. All CCP has to do is abandon the incremental and safe development and reach for the gold ring. They've done it before. They might have the balls to do it again.
Im still waiting for that dev post. :(
|
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor Federal Consensus Outreach
1059
|
Posted - 2012.06.25 17:47:00 -
[216] - Quote
The idea of passive sensors not being able to accurately glean information about things is very silly. We could see the attitude control thrusters of the Space Shuttle firing in the asteroid belt from Earth with passive sensor technology available today. If it had its primary engine online, we could spot it anywhere out to Neptune's orbit, with passive sensor technology available today.
The flare of an interstellar antimatter rocket could be seen from Alpha Centauri.
With passive sensor technology.
Available today.
You can tell an insane amount of things simply from the exhaust plume of a ship alone - detailed analysis can give you fairly accurate information about the ship's exhaust velocity, engine mass flow, engine power, thrust, acceleration, mass and bearing. Spectroscopy can tell you what fuel the engine's burning. With all this information you can easily determine the class of warship, and maybe make a good stab at determining which particular member of that class it is (since even with the massive-scale starship manufacturing present in EVE, no two members of a ship class will be built exactly alike). Mane 614
|
Garonis
Aggressive Narcissists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 00:14:00 -
[217] - Quote
Andreus Ixiris wrote:The idea of passive sensors not being able to accurately glean information about things is very silly. We could see the attitude control thrusters of the Space Shuttle firing in the asteroid belt from Earth with passive sensor technology available today. If it had its primary engine online, we could spot it anywhere out to Neptune's orbit, with passive sensor technology available today.
The flare of an interstellar antimatter rocket could be seen from Alpha Centauri.
With passive sensor technology.
Available today.
You can tell an insane amount of things simply from the exhaust plume of a ship alone - detailed analysis can give you fairly accurate information about the ship's exhaust velocity, engine mass flow, engine power, thrust, acceleration, mass and bearing. Spectroscopy can tell you what fuel the engine's burning. With all this information you can easily determine the class of warship, and maybe make a good stab at determining which particular member of that class it is (since even with the massive-scale starship manufacturing present in EVE, no two members of a ship class will be built exactly alike).
Ahh but spectography and the like are limited to the speed of light... just wanted to throw that out there. |
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor Federal Consensus Outreach
1061
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 08:15:00 -
[218] - Quote
Garonis wrote:Ahh but spectography and the like are limited to the speed of light... just wanted to throw that out there.
Yeah but EVE has future magic space technology. D-scan can already tell you a fair few things instantly (like ship type, and bizarrely, callsign) that would take two hours to learn at light-speed. Mane 614
|
Hailynn Delixa
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 11:06:00 -
[219] - Quote
Like.
Dense nebulae, solar wind radition and just about anything else with some sort of astronomical effect is missing in this game. |
Kimmi Chan
Illuminatus Reforged The Revenant Order
164
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 11:28:00 -
[220] - Quote
Andreus Ixiris wrote:The flare of an interstellar antimatter rocket could be seen from Alpha Centauri.
With passive sensor technology.
Available today.
I don't want to troll but you assert that the means to "see" an antimatter rocket from Alpha Centauri is available to us today. How is that possible considering that antimatter rockets are NOT available to us today?
The game mechanics of this design are more "submarine" in nature. Think of this more in terms of playing a submarine, "cat and mouse" game. Think of The Hunt for Red October and you will see this concept as the OP envisions its deployment. Passive SONAR "listening" for signatures amidst the "background noise" of space. Active SONAR "pinging" in a particular direction to sniff out it's prey (and revealing the location of a cloaked ship).
If you keep the framework of this concept in those terms, it will make more sense.
-á"Miners mine so I don't have to." ~Metal Icarus |
|
Spugg Galdon
Love for You Broken Toys
142
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 11:39:00 -
[221] - Quote
I do like these ideas and if it can get refined and put into the game it would be fantastic but a little feedback......
A ship that can scan down cloaked ships is in the works. This means the death of the AFK cloaker and hiding capitals. Means Local could be put into delayed mode. So cloaking is how you hide from scanners but not "special" probers. No need for new modules that hide you from dirrectional scanners
(Space) Terrain that masks your position (obviously not from probes) is a good idea. Couple it with deployable "facilities" and you have a nice base of ops. I'm sure deadspace was supposed to greatly reduce your scanning signature so it was more difficult to be scanned whilst doing a sight. This seems to have changed at some point a few years ago though.
Tuning sensors to racial ship types is something I'm not too sure about. I'd rather you got more info from narrowing your scan. For example: a 360 degree scan would say "ships detected". 180 degree "x number of ships detected". 90 degree would give ship types. 45 degree racial ship types. 30 degree would give corp/alliance of ship type. 15 degree player names. 5 degree would give an approximate range to the nearest 100,000 km.
With those three things I just suggested (+ delayed local) you could implement this very quickly. |
Lady Hanguko
Suicide Lemmings
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 11:59:00 -
[222] - Quote
Dream boy..... All ccp ever gonna do is literate existing mechanics nerfing em one way or another, update skins, and add redundant features. Ether u like the game, or u dont.
PS there is my meat locker ? |
Wu Jiaqiu
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
19
|
Posted - 2012.06.26 22:13:00 -
[223] - Quote
You're probably right. I mean, they won't even change local. Why would they implement this? I think the devs want this game to be hardcore...but not THIS hardcore.
Sad though. I would really like this feature :( |
Hyacinthine
Yulai Guard 1st Fleet Yulai Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.06.27 01:41:00 -
[224] - Quote
Looks well designed, but that's a different game entirely, not EVE. I will say that you'd go far in pitching that to a publisher if you had more of an idea for a non-EVE game.
Just here to shoot down the very first change, delayed local. The current local mechanic favors the lone pilot when the obvious meta of delayed is considered. Sovereignty holders would create a new role within their alliances of dedicated scouts/police. Presently, when such a scout enters the system, the lone guy can make a run for it. In delayed mode, those dedicated scouts are going to have a fleet on top of you before you can move, unless you bring a cloaked scout of your own for each gate, station, and POS in the system. |
Merovee
Gorthaur Legion Of Mordor
20
|
Posted - 2012.06.29 05:19:00 -
[225] - Quote
I think that the easiest map improvement is to limit statistics to yesterday only. Remove the hourly statistics and only show what happen before the last downtime.
As for local, if you move into a system before down time, you don't show up after down time, unless to type in local or move out and move back in. |
Jackal Datapaw
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
24
|
Posted - 2012.06.30 05:45:00 -
[226] - Quote
+1 o_o |
Astroniomix
State Protectorate Caldari State
78
|
Posted - 2012.06.30 05:56:00 -
[227] - Quote
I'm still on the fence about how I feel about your suggestions, but props for not making another whine thread about cloaking. |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
368
|
Posted - 2012.07.04 03:04:00 -
[228] - Quote
I still think this is the way to go. Also it has so many likes now that the CSM should at least bring it up or better yet CCP should just implement it.
Actually its kind of sad that a thread with this many likes hasn't even gotten a comment from a DEV. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Laechyd Eldgorn
Molden Heath Angels
41
|
Posted - 2012.07.04 08:15:00 -
[229] - Quote
My major complain here is that cloaking and sovereignity have very little to do with each other. OP gives me an impression that changing the way cloaking works would have some kind of effect on how 0.0 space is controlled. Which is not true. Issue with sov is more with instant fleet movements with titans and easy intel across the galaxy. You can even see how many npc's are killed, heh. Cloaking has very little to do with it.
Very few old good ideas reposted there again, nicely in same thread. I do agree that local should be put at least on delayed mode and scanning mechanics improved in general, however...
I'd like to remind that how ever cloaking is changed, if ever. You should be able to go afk without logging out of game. Or you should be able to stay hidden in hostile system. As much as this annoys the mighty 0.0 bears or whatsoever this is one playstyle forced by game mechanics. If player flies 30 jumps into hostile space he has same right than anyone docked in those systems to take a small afk cloaking break in safe place to chat or whatever, because there's no place for docking there.
|
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy Black Sun Alliance
263
|
Posted - 2012.07.04 08:38:00 -
[230] - Quote
gad zooks, is this a needless wall of .. blather. If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bs?
I'm sorry op but I'm taking away your dictionary and thesaurus..then limiting you to 15 words with which to get your "new feature suggestion" across in this post.
I have to vote NO on any change to cloaking.. especially when it seems the op is trying to hide his purpose or meaning. [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG] |
|
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
10
|
Posted - 2012.07.04 16:35:00 -
[231] - Quote
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:[continued]
Currently, there's no advantage to being a small group. With the above concepts there will now be a very good reason to bring only what you need, or even possibly less than you would optimally require. Currently, Eve's game design only rewards the biggest and most numerous. CCP needs to build in more game design that rewards a player who is smarter than the rest and attempts to be as asymmetric as possible and do more with less.
Once small groups or even solo players are able to exist and survive in 0.0 by keeping their existence hidden from other players I think we will see a large number of players migrating to 0.0 to give it a go. I think that the current perception by most players who aren't currently in 0.0 is "I can't survive without massive numbers, so why try?" I think that's a valid question. Once you're found, the enemy descends upon you with superior numbers and you're dead. The main problem here is the perfection and precision of location information and the ease with which it is required, and the fact that CCP rewards numbers superiority above all else in the game. The blob is the fault of CCP, pure and simple.
I'm looking forward to your comments. Let's try and keep them constructive and focused please. I know you can do it.
This might actually fix the blob! oh god, heart attack!
CCP do this now; this is your top priority! And uhh, give this guy lots of money.
|
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
10
|
Posted - 2012.07.04 16:46:00 -
[232] - Quote
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:Xorv wrote:I like the ideas and vision for EVE you present. Practically speaking though what would you suggest CCP do that doesn't take several years for them to deliver? How to do it in a nutshell: 1. Put Local in Delayed Mode. 2. Tactical Location Information: Extensively modify the scanning system and build in passive/active modes, adding in rigs/modules to optimize for each. Additionally, factor in racial sensors, racial emissions (ship exhaust, emissions etc.) and various third and fourth order complexity to give evasion and detection a subtle and nuanced feel with an extreme amount of depth built into the game design. 3. Strategic Location Information: Similar to Tactical, build in the player produced/operated equipment that replaces the current "free" information streams and data sets. Strategic Location Information can be propagated through player groups via standings. The mechanics for what I'm proposing should be viable with the existing code base. We already have variables like sig radius and sensor strength. We already have omni-directional and hyper-directional scanning capability. Now all we need to do is break the existing scanner mechanics into separate portions, add more detail to each and make it highly customizable and tunable by the players. Everything that I've thought of so far is based on existing game design/game mechanics. More specifics: I'll start with the most simple portion of the whole thing, the passive sensors. All ships will have passive sensors. This will be the default sensor mode. All ships will have more/less effective base passive sensors depending on ship type and race. Some will have greater range, others faster refresh frequency (5 seconds vs. 10 as an example) while others provide more detail at greater range etc. Passive sensors will be upgradable with both rigs and modules, and all sensors will be able to be tuned to detect a particular racial type of ship at the expense of detecting other types of ships with less capability. Ships will also be able to equip mods/rigs that will make them harder (or impossible) to detect with passive sensors and/or tuned to be particularly invisible to racial sensor types etc. Giving players the option to configure their ships for a specific threat at the cost of making them more vulnerable to others is good game design. The larger/hotter the ship signature, the easier it will be detected: it will be detected at greater range and with more detail than other ships. No longer will a cloak be a 'one size fits all' solution, making a BS invisible just as easily as a frig. Example: BS will be detectable from extreme range compared to a frig. As ships come closer to one another more info about the contact will be revealed depending on the power of the sensors and the type of target. Depending on the proximity of the contact with other ships and the size of those ships, multiple ships might appear as one large ship, or a large ship might mask the presence of smaller ships in its group. The closer you are, the more powerful your sensors and the less stealthy your target is, the more info you discern at a given range. The concept with passive sensors is that they operate on the idea that they detect emissions by other ships: exhaust gas, heat, communications signals or what have you. The louder/brighter/smellier your ship is, the easier it will be to detect. The automated nature of the passive scanner alleviates the issue of "always having to push the button" every 2 seconds. It's the equivalent of "watching local". It's imperfect information however is what gives attacking players a chance to locate other players and get within range before they can run. Which brings me to Active Sensors. Active Sensors: These can be separated into a further two groups: ship mounted and probes. Both systems will emit a "ping" which can be detected by targeted ships that are hit with this sensor ping. Targeted ships won't always be able to detect your pings if your active sensors are sufficiently advanced and you're operating far outside of the defending player's passive sensors. Active sensors are the equivalent of shining a flashlight into a dark room. You can see what the flashlight is pointed at, and your target can see the flashlight, but nobody else can see the light beam unless they're being painted by it. Probes are comparable to an illumination round. You fire one up in the air and it lights up the entire battlefield, showing everyone where everyone else is all at once, friend and foe alike. This is a generalization and of course CCP should build in immense detail into this with respect to type of probe, race of probe, range, power, duration, pulse frequency, probe arrays and coverage, probe overlap and constructive interference of sensor volume etc. [more later]
This is the first person who gives a detailed analysis of the problems with the local intel tool, but for importantly HOW to FIX it. What here is unclear? impliment delayed local. check. passive and active scanning (aka defensive and offensive scanning respectfully)check. moduless to agment you whether you be miner or fighter. (instead of the attackers having a huge advantage) check. Different factors for how well you can scan (such as nebulas, number of ships, race of ship, type of ship etc.) This would revolutionize the intel war and give real meaning to the words "im going solo" (instead of "im going to die because i dont have 2000 friends to back me up") and you say this is a bad idea because he uses big words? you are the one that is being vauge, Barbara Nichole. |
Wolodymyr
Breaking Ambitions Solid Foundation
174
|
Posted - 2012.07.04 22:16:00 -
[233] - Quote
OK I really like the idea of space having terrain. Right now a solar system is nothing but bookmarks (planet warp ins, scannable sites, complexes, etc) and large collidable objects.
Imagine if you had gas clouds or larger asteroid fields that effected how your ship moved. (I am thinking like 8, 16, or 32 AU big).
Also as far as cloaking and terrain goes: A while ago I was watching some sci fi movie where someone hid by powering down in an asteroid field to look like random debris. Imagine if you had a rule like "If you are cloaked less than 5km off of an asteroid you don't show up in local"
Now you could have people chilling out in a system waiting to hot drop ratters, BUT if they went AFK then there is a chance a random miner or belt rat would decloak them in the course of the day.
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:Why We Cloak So you don't get shot. I honestly think PoCo based sov is a good idea https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1417544 |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
389
|
Posted - 2012.07.10 08:27:00 -
[234] - Quote
In idea with 174 likes should not be buried under pages of junk.
Features & Ideas, Where good threads come to die. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Kadeyoo
BS And UNICORNS Inc Black Pearl Alliance
10
|
Posted - 2012.07.10 13:00:00 -
[235] - Quote
The whole idea is great, but far too complex considering the vast amount of casual players.
Local is easy, overview is easy, d-scan is easy. The complexity in eve comes from options and strategy, something you do not have to commit to unless you want to.
To an extend we already have the whole concept though. Local just indicates the presence of a player. D-scan indicates direction, distance and ship type - but it does not necessarily tell you who it is. Probes are your active version, giving you a precise warpable location.
I hate to have to say this over and over again. All these ideas boil down to this: Your proposal indicates you should get into wormholes. The lack of local makes scanning probes the only way to get accurate (warpable signature) information, but it is active and can be seen on d-scan. It can be made easier by manual skill (narrowing down direction and distance with d-scan), with actual skills/rigs (scanning skills), actively be countered with sensor strength/signature radius, and detected with d-scan. Different local mechanics as well.
The whole concept exists already, and would - if you wanted it to be exactly like your way - just need some minor modification. As such it would not be too hard to polish it, but you should not think about a solution until you exactly identify and analyze the underlying problem.
You don't solve a problem until you figure out what *exactly* the problem is (and merely remembering that many people complain about local is not a justification, it's just an indication there might be an issue (either with gamemechanics, or with people's perspectives) |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
724
|
Posted - 2012.07.11 03:18:00 -
[236] - Quote
Kadeyoo wrote:The whole idea is great, but far too complex considering the vast amount of casual players.
Local is easy, overview is easy, d-scan is easy. The complexity in eve comes from options and strategy, something you do not have to commit to unless you want to.
To an extend we already have the whole concept though. Local just indicates the presence of a player. D-scan indicates direction, distance and ship type - but it does not necessarily tell you who it is. Probes are your active version, giving you a precise warpable location.
I hate to have to say this over and over again. All these ideas boil down to this: Your proposal indicates you should get into wormholes. The lack of local makes scanning probes the only way to get accurate (warpable signature) information, but it is active and can be seen on d-scan. It can be made easier by manual skill (narrowing down direction and distance with d-scan), with actual skills/rigs (scanning skills), actively be countered with sensor strength/signature radius, and detected with d-scan. Different local mechanics as well.
The whole concept exists already, and would - if you wanted it to be exactly like your way - just need some minor modification. As such it would not be too hard to polish it, but you should not think about a solution until you exactly identify and analyze the underlying problem.
You don't solve a problem until you figure out what *exactly* the problem is (and merely remembering that many people complain about local is not a justification, it's just an indication there might be an issue (either with gamemechanics, or with people's perspectives)
I don't fly in wspace for the simple reason that it's too tedious to travel between systems due to the need for a dedicated probing ship to find the wormholes in a timely manner. The concept of 'roaming' in wspace is ridiculous.
Intelligence shouldn't be free. -á Mining, reloaded. -á-áADDICTED. |
Wu Jiaqiu
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
34
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 15:59:00 -
[237] - Quote
I'm surprised a thread that got this much heat has no dev response. Perhaps sticky this to the compilation thread of things? It would really be a terrible thing to let this die. |
BobFenner
Black Hole Runners
22
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 21:48:00 -
[238] - Quote
This thread needs a bump - and a DEV to say hi. :)
OP = Genius My missus thinks of EvE as 'the other woman'. :) |
Busta Rock
The DawnSoarers
12
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 00:12:00 -
[239] - Quote
I have an issue with the sensors, in that your descriptions are somewhat reversed.
Passive sensors should always have substantial range and sensitivity advantages over active sensors, which should have the advantages of precision and speed of targeting solution.
in particular, passive sensor sensitivity and accuracy should be tied directly to the size of the sensor platform (the ship), with larger vessels having much more powerful passive sensor suites than smaller ones (barring specialized sensor platforms). as such, passive suites are a strategic sensor - though one which can be used for on grid tactical use if the sensing vessel is large enough and the EW environment well controlled.
by contrast, active sensors are independent of ship size, instead relying upon radiated power and direct knowledge of signal characteristics to enhance precision over tactical ranges. as such, active sensors really shouldnt be useable against any off-grid target (indeed, a vessel's active sensor range should determine it's effective combat grid - and to a large degree it already does). being much more heavily filtered in the types of signal that they process, active sensors are also much more tolerant of EW (unless the opponent finds just the right signals to interfere with)
I touched upon this distinction in another thread regarding improving marauders, where I suggested that the reason why they are so easily jammed could be explained by near total dependence on passive suites far more sensitive than any other ship in eve (sensors capable of resolving interstellar jump navigation solutions without a cyno in the destination system). |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
742
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 03:18:00 -
[240] - Quote
Busta Rock wrote:I have an issue with the sensors, in that your descriptions are somewhat reversed.
Passive sensors should always have substantial range and sensitivity advantages over active sensors, which should have the advantages of precision and speed of targeting solution.
in particular, passive sensor sensitivity and accuracy should be tied directly to the size of the sensor platform (the ship), with larger vessels having much more powerful passive sensor suites than smaller ones (barring specialized sensor platforms). as such, passive suites are a strategic sensor - though one which can be used for on grid tactical use if the sensing vessel is large enough and the EW environment well controlled.
by contrast, active sensors are independent of ship size, instead relying upon radiated power and direct knowledge of signal characteristics to enhance precision over tactical ranges. as such, active sensors really shouldnt be useable against any off-grid target (indeed, a vessel's active sensor range should determine it's effective combat grid - and to a large degree it already does). being much more heavily filtered in the types of signal that they process, active sensors are also much more tolerant of EW (unless the opponent finds just the right signals to interfere with)
I touched upon this distinction in another thread regarding improving marauders, where I suggested that the reason why they are so easily jammed could be explained by near total dependence on passive suites far more sensitive than any other ship in eve (sensors capable of resolving interstellar jump navigation solutions without a cyno in the destination system).
You're getting caught up on one detail and missing the entire rest of the concept to fuss over semantics about sensor descriptions. Indeed, you're being pedantic.
I literally don't care what you call it. Reverse the descriptions, that's perfectly fine with me. I'm simply talking about gameplay, and real life design and function only goes so far, and then gameplay rules for the sake of the game.
So, stop thinking about "how it really is" and allow a little artistic license for the sake of the game and let's get on with it.
Intelligence shouldn't be free. -á Mining, reloaded. -á-áADDICTED. |
|
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
719
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 04:44:00 -
[241] - Quote
These ideas are good, but they're not the first time they've been suggested or recommended and have been often repeated and sponsored by the EVE Community.
If CCP decides to listen today, then so be it.
Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
743
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 04:56:00 -
[242] - Quote
Bloodpetal wrote:These ideas are good, but they're not the first time they've been suggested or recommended and have been often repeated and sponsored by the EVE Community.
If CCP decides to listen today, then so be it.
I've been playing Eve for a long while (8 years now), and thinking about its game design just as long. I know full well that everything has been discussed to death. The point is to bring a few concepts together in one integrated design so that they all work together cooperatively so that the end result is greater than any one single change.
Intelligence shouldn't be free. -á Mining, reloaded. -á-áADDICTED. |
Sorceror Majiir
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 12:08:00 -
[243] - Quote
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:
Players currently complain about the lack of ability to carve out a small niche of space to call their own without belonging to a major Alliance or Coalition. The reason this doesn't currently work is because players are too easily tracked down and precisely located. It's simply impossible to exist somewhere and not be found.
Players should be given new modules and rigs to build and customize sensor packages as they see fit in order to tailor them to their play styles. Defensive players (miners, mission runners etc.) will want powerful passive sensors to enable an "always on" long range omni-directional warning system that will alert them to incoming ships, regardless of type. Offensive players (PVPers, who else?) will want highly tuned directional sensors that will enable them to find prey at extreme range and identify targets with a high degree of detail as quickly as possible. Players should also be given modules/rigs to decrease their sensor signature to various types of sensors (stealth rigs, if you will) that will allow players to adapt to their prey.
...
Corporations and Alliances would get the ability to install massive sensor installations that would provide real time active and passive information from a system to regional level, with varying degrees of detail and accuracy. At no point would these static sensor nets deliver information as accurately or as quickly as ship sensors would.
[more to come]
I think Eve devs may be ahead of you. I saw a Scan Distortion device (2x) on a deadspace gate while missioning the other day. I thought it was something they had implemented, however, after maintenance the devices we're gone from new missions I was running. I now suspect Devs were testing this device. It was a collidable object and you could attack it like any mission bunker. I did attack but nothing dropped. Also within the mission deadspace the target container was both cloaked and shielded like a POS. The shield generator however could be located and destroyed.. once that happened the shield dropped and you could get to the container.
If Devs are introducing this scan disruptor device, that may be just what we need to slip into 0.0 and mission/sites etc. |
Archdaimon
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
75
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 02:58:00 -
[244] - Quote
I like the idea. |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Industrial Complex Cosmic Consortium
1740
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 10:03:00 -
[245] - Quote
Worth reading!
Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Sukur
Shimai of New Eden
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 10:51:00 -
[246] - Quote
I totally agree with OP.
Given a good balance it will save solo/almost solo PVP.
I hope CCP reads this.
|
IgnasS
High Intellion Exhale.
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 11:43:00 -
[247] - Quote
I think this the best thread in EvE-O forums. OP you are genius 11/10 If ever implemented it would make the game much more interesting for everyone I think. Moreover, bots would produce oceans of tears.
Some storyline events about CONCORD should come through. Changes after : - CONCORD goes rogue. Becomes a business establishment; - CONCORD doesn't give local intel for free anymore; - By default all capsuleers are paying (fixed amount per each jump through gates) CONCORD in order not be shown in local, although it's possible to switch (through settings) to pay CONCORD in order to be visible in local (sellers, scammers etc..); - Above mentioned fee is used provide relative safety when operating in hi-sec (same GCC mechanics as now). - It is possible to buy intel from CONCORD (in their stations only) in order to find someone specific. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1654
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 02:47:00 -
[248] - Quote
I really hope that something like this is implemented.
However, no form of cloak should give you absolute undetectability - while I don't care for silly ideas like AoE decloakers or whatever, the presence of a cloaked ship in a system should remain detectable. I don't believe that one should be able to, say, remain absolutely undetectable while camping a beacon or jump bridge. Local is the only way to counter that - and you have to fly a character to that system to scout it before jumping to a beacon. Remotely scanning a system for hostile presence shouldn't require the mere press of a button, however.
If every ship is a submarine, a cloaked ship is a submarine that might require you to actively ping your sonar a bit, making your presence known, but you can find it if you're a skilled sonar operator.
Think "the Dallas finding Red October" EVE Online: Trammel (or NGE) |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
453
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 02:50:00 -
[249] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:I really hope that something like this is implemented.
However, no form of cloak should give you absolute undetectability - while I don't care for silly ideas like AoE decloakers or whatever, the presence of a cloaked ship in a system should remain detectable. I don't believe that one should be able to, say, remain absolutely undetectable while camping a beacon or jump bridge. Local is the only way to counter that - and you have to fly a character to that system to scout it before jumping to a beacon. Remotely scanning a system for hostile presence shouldn't require the mere press of a button, however.
If every ship is a submarine, a cloaked ship is a submarine that might require you to actively ping your sonar a bit, making your presence known, but you can find it if you're a skilled sonar operator.
Think "the Dallas finding Red October" I would like to see a ship dedicated to being able to tracking down cloaked ships, a T2 destroyer for example, so it has abilities to track down the "subs". Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1654
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 03:14:00 -
[250] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:I would like to see a ship dedicated to being able to tracking down cloaked ships, a T2 destroyer for example, so it has abilities to track down the "subs".
Perhaps tracking down the ships would be a role for such a ship, but detecting its presence should be possible regardless of ship, but not something that is done with the push of a button.
Think about it this way - if I'm in a cloaked ship, I could make myself very difficult to detect but at the same time, I lose more awareness of my surroundings, until it's paralyzed and even its passive sensors and "camera drones" are deactivated, and loses its ability to decloak. To find me, a ship would have to do its "sonar ping" with a stronger amplitude or whatever. If he's at the point where he's picking up my "dead-cloaked" ship, he's pinging loud enough that a guy on the other side of the cluster can hear him. Naturally, the cloaked ship can't exactly rapidly go into "dead-cloak" mode or whatever because (insert silly lore reason here) and it's not exactly that good if you can just go into "dead-cloak" for a few moments and right back to the point where you can't decloak.
On the other end of that scale, you're at the point where you can quickly decloak, but you can easily be detected because your ship is "warmer" or something like that.
Think of it this way - a sub can "run silent" but an active sonar will detect it, but the other sub running the active sonar is also making its presence known. EVE Online: Trammel (or NGE) |
|
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
453
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 04:41:00 -
[251] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Frying Doom wrote:I would like to see a ship dedicated to being able to tracking down cloaked ships, a T2 destroyer for example, so it has abilities to track down the "subs". Perhaps tracking down the ships would be a role for such a ship, but detecting its presence should be possible regardless of ship, but not something that is done with the push of a button. Think about it this way - if I'm in a cloaked ship, I could make myself very difficult to detect but at the same time, I lose more awareness of my surroundings, until it's paralyzed and even its passive sensors and "camera drones" are deactivated, and loses its ability to decloak. To find me, a ship would have to do its "sonar ping" with a stronger amplitude or whatever. If he's at the point where he's picking up my "dead-cloaked" ship, he's pinging loud enough that a guy on the other side of the cluster can hear him. Naturally, the cloaked ship can't exactly rapidly go into "dead-cloak" mode or whatever because (insert silly lore reason here) and it's not exactly that good if you can just go into "dead-cloak" for a few moments and right back to the point where you can't decloak. On the other end of that scale, you're at the point where you can quickly decloak, but you can easily be detected because your ship is "warmer" or something like that. Think of it this way - a sub can "run silent" but an active sonar will detect it, but the other sub running the active sonar is also making its presence known. maybe some kind of actual ship equipment (Hi slot) to ping so ships do not automatically gain the ability, like on this planet where subs are invisible to ships unless they have sonar or are currently being fire on but without the ability to locate them directly. For example module spews out an approx range and angle off ship but not a location so you can tell if the cloaked ship is moving rather than just afk. This with a dedicated line of destroyers to actively hunt down cloaked ships. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Tarn Kugisa
M.I.A.C Corporation
95
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 11:11:00 -
[252] - Quote
I want all these Ideas implemented RIGHT NOW!
Seriously it all sounds like a lot of fun I Endorse this Product and/or Service Source Recorder-esque tool for EVE |
Motoko Kusanagui
State War Academy Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 13:48:00 -
[253] - Quote
Very good and nice ideas, I like some more than others but if those were the game mechanics it would be awesome, it goes pretty close to what I thought EVE was when started to play, just to be disappointed about the way it is.
If things were this way I would leave carebearing and become a recon pilot, scanning is what I most like of this game.
Thanks for those great ideas, it's sad you are leaving the game. |
Ogogov
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
26
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 14:52:00 -
[254] - Quote
Posting in 100,100% support of introducing terrain into spreadsheets in space.
I'd like to think that the ring mining experiment will be the first stage in introducing these kinds of effects into EVE, and that it will be a roaring success.
A dev post would also be much appreciated. |
Saladin Boneslash
EveMerc's
3
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 17:49:00 -
[255] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:However, no form of cloak should give you absolute undetectability - while I don't care for silly ideas like AoE decloakers or whatever, the presence of a cloaked ship in a system should remain detectable. I don't believe that one should be able to, say, remain absolutely undetectable while camping a beacon or jump bridge. Local is the only way to counter that - and you have to fly a character to that system to scout it before jumping to a beacon. I'm a w-space dweller who flies around cloaked 90% of the time, and I love doing so. But I agree that cloaking can be overpowered. For balance, there ought to be SOME way for them to detect me, at least when I am on-grid. I would envision a module that is "aimed" similar to dscan, but detects cloaked ships. They are not decloaked, but their presence is detected. It would, by default, have a relatively small cone of detection, say 20 degrees or so, that could be improved with a skill. And the special cloaked-detector ship would get a bonus that might get it up to a high value, maybe even full 360 degree coverage.
With regard to the original post -- awesome ideas. I think that early in the thread someone mentioned that current mechanics discourage people from heading into null as a solo or small gang because they know that getting blobbed is inevitable. Whether or not that is actually true, it is exactly my perception, and the main reason I avoid null. I like small gang/solo. I hate big fleets. And my perception (perhaps I am wrong) is that nullsec pvp is 90% blob warfare.
|
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1664
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 00:34:00 -
[256] - Quote
Saladin Boneslash wrote:I'm a w-space dweller who flies around cloaked 90% of the time, and I love doing so. But I agree that cloaking can be overpowered. For balance, there ought to be SOME way for them to detect me, at least when I am on-grid. I would envision a module that is "aimed" similar to dscan, but detects cloaked ships. They are not decloaked, but their presence is detected. It would, by default, have a relatively small cone of detection, say 20 degrees or so, that could be improved with a skill. And the special cloaked-detector ship would get a bonus that might get it up to a high value, maybe even full 360 degree coverage.
The thing I dislike about cloaking is that a ship cloaked in a good safespot is virtually impossible to take out, whether it's a covops frigate or a titan. Sure, you might say that cloaks are somewhat balanced by their scan res penalty, but that's hardly an issue. Cloaks should not be a simple way of moving through hostile space with near impunity. And that's coming from somebody who rarely flies anything that cannot warp cloaked. EVE Online: Trammel (or NGE) |
Motoko Kusanagui
State War Academy Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:14:00 -
[257] - Quote
Cloaking also allows to take a break, and depending on what space you are or players present in the system it might be the only way to make a pause in the game, sometimes we need to take care of something in RL, kids, phone call or any other thing.
If some change is gonna be applied to cloaking this should also be considered. |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Mordus Angels
486
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 13:31:00 -
[258] - Quote
Motoko Kusanagui wrote:Cloaking also allows to take a break, and depending on what space you are or players present in the system it might be the only way to make a pause in the game, sometimes we need to take care of something in RL, kids, phone call or any other thing.
If some change is gonna be applied to cloaking this should also be considered. You make a good point, but finding a way to do this without leaving it open to exploits sounds tricky.
You would effectively need to log out, even if you weren't completely out of the game on some level. (Keeping fleet roles, etc, might be a double edged sword if you were performing a needed task) 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. |
Loius Woo
PATRIOT KNIGHTS
130
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 04:02:00 -
[259] - Quote
Motoko Kusanagui wrote:Cloaking also allows to take a break, and depending on what space you are or players present in the system it might be the only way to make a pause in the game, sometimes we need to take care of something in RL, kids, phone call or any other thing.
If some change is gonna be applied to cloaking this should also be considered.
Thats pretty simple actually, make cloaks require some fuel, the burn rate of fuel is based on your ship's velocity up to some maximum along a logarithmic curve so that if you are sitting still, a full load of fuel (full as in the modules "ammo") would last say 5-6 hours, if warping all over the system, fuel would last 20-30 minutes. Then make the module be shut off to reload, and require something like 45 seconds to reload, that way a reasonably good scan prober has a chance to lock you down.
To the OP's ideas, I like them immensely.
I few ideas to add to them though:
1. Terrain. I would add a bunch more of it. Large gas clouds, debris fields, comets, etc. I fell the right number of "terrain" features other than planets should be above 40 in any given system (too many for a gang to blindly warp to all of them looking for people). All of them should be discoverable by using a system scanner. The system scanner can be activated and take time to scan in an outward spiral, covering approximately 1AU per 10-20 seconds (modifiable by skills). So for example, if you want to hide, you can activate your scanner, and in a large system, it might take half an hour or more to scan the whole thing, after you have scanned, all of the terrain are now warp able objects that you can bookmark. This way, preparation will give you an advantage but that advantage can be overtaken by patience if your enemy is willing to sit and scan long enough. Into these terrain features, you should be able to either hide your ships, or hide your POS (the new POSes that will be anchor able anywhere). In addition to this, collections of bookmarks should be able to be created from scanning these sites so that explorers could map systems and sell the bookmarks on the market. Over time, the positions of different terrain features should drift, making old bookmarks (older than 2-3 weeks) no longer good enough. But each time you warp to a bookmark, it automatically corrects for spatial drift, so if you "live" in a gas cloud, you don't have to manually update the bookmark all the time.
2. Local. I would make local chat optional as it is in W-hole space, however, I would also separate the local count from local chat and add a new piece of information to the UI that indicates the total signature size of all active ships in that system that are detectable by your sensors. This should include ships that are cloaked. So, if your sensors say that there is a total of about 800m of signature right when you jump through, you know there are people active, as your sensors either get closer, or activate the active sensors, you might be able to tell that those 800m's are from 4 signatures. After that, it works as described. This way, an experienced pilot will still be able to tell when people are in the system and would have a decent idea of how many etc, but not WHO they are or what they are flying unless they work for it.
3. Strategic Intel. I think this could easily be done in two ways, first as a bribe to CONCORD to get the stats that you can currently get through the map, but the bribe would be some set amount for intel on a system, constellation, or region that is fairly cheap, but scaled by size (maybe 25,000 for a system, 100,000 for a constellation and 1 mil for a region...just as a rough swag). The bribes would be good for a 24 hour period or so. In addition, players should be able to deploy a variety of strategic scanners that are able to provide the same kinds of stats as long as the scanner probe/structure is not destroyed. Players should also be able to "sell" their intel for less than CONCORD charges via contracts. Some sensors should be able to report on gate traffic to include ship types and times. This way, being a scout recon becomes a profession able to make you money in Eve. For better quality intel (like ship types and times, an active scanner that actually scans ships as they jump in and provides fitting/cargo information) would be much more valuable, but require scanners that are much easier to identify and destroy, making them good for Alliances defending space, or scouts in deep behind enemy lines. Such intel could be contracted for millions of isk/hour if so desired. |
Loius Woo
PATRIOT KNIGHTS
131
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 17:16:00 -
[260] - Quote
bump |
|
Loius Woo
PATRIOT KNIGHTS
133
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 03:33:00 -
[261] - Quote
I am surprised there are no comments to my suggestion.
To the OP, if you want people to take your ideas seriously, you need to be active in your own threads. |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
846
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 03:37:00 -
[262] - Quote
Loius Woo wrote:I am surprised there are no comments to my suggestion.
To the OP, if you want people to take your ideas seriously, you need to be active in your own threads.
1) Your ideas have merit.
2) Don't keep posting until you get the attention you think you deserve. It comes off as being a whiny brat.
3) Don't assume you know what is best for me.
Intelligence shouldn't be free. -á Mining, reloaded. -á-áADDICTED. |
Loius Woo
PATRIOT KNIGHTS
133
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 04:14:00 -
[263] - Quote
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:Loius Woo wrote:I am surprised there are no comments to my suggestion.
To the OP, if you want people to take your ideas seriously, you need to be active in your own threads. 1) Your ideas have merit. 2) Don't keep posting until you get the attention you think you deserve. It comes off as being a whiny brat. 3) Don't assume you know what is best for me.
HEY!
Welcome back!
What do you think of the things in your thread?
|
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
142
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 08:45:00 -
[264] - Quote
Came to hate, ended up likeing . . . |
Motoko Kusanagui
State War Academy Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 18:31:00 -
[265] - Quote
Loius Woo wrote:Motoko Kusanagui wrote:Cloaking also allows to take a break, and depending on what space you are or players present in the system it might be the only way to make a pause in the game, sometimes we need to take care of something in RL, kids, phone call or any other thing.
If some change is gonna be applied to cloaking this should also be considered. Thats pretty simple actually, make cloaks require some fuel, the burn rate of fuel is based on your ship's velocity up to some maximum along a logarithmic curve so that if you are sitting still, a full load of fuel (full as in the modules "ammo") would last say 5-6 hours, if warping all over the system, fuel would last 20-30 minutes. Then make the module be shut off to reload, and require something like 45 seconds to reload, that way a reasonably good scan prober has a chance to lock you down. To the OP's ideas, I like them immensely. I few ideas to add to them though: 1. Terrain. I would add a bunch more of it. Large gas clouds, debris fields, comets, etc. I fell the right number of "terrain" features other than planets should be above 40 in any given system (too many for a gang to blindly warp to all of them looking for people). All of them should be discoverable by using a system scanner. The system scanner can be activated and take time to scan in an outward spiral, covering approximately 1AU per 10-20 seconds (modifiable by skills). So for example, if you want to hide, you can activate your scanner, and in a large system, it might take half an hour or more to scan the whole thing, after you have scanned, all of the terrain are now warp able objects that you can bookmark. This way, preparation will give you an advantage but that advantage can be overtaken by patience if your enemy is willing to sit and scan long enough. Into these terrain features, you should be able to either hide your ships, or hide your POS (the new POSes that will be anchor able anywhere). In addition to this, collections of bookmarks should be able to be created from scanning these sites so that explorers could map systems and sell the bookmarks on the market. Over time, the positions of different terrain features should drift, making old bookmarks (older than 2-3 weeks) no longer good enough. But each time you warp to a bookmark, it automatically corrects for spatial drift, so if you "live" in a gas cloud, you don't have to manually update the bookmark all the time. 2. Local. I would make local chat optional as it is in W-hole space, however, I would also separate the local count from local chat and add a new piece of information to the UI that indicates the total signature size of all active ships in that system that are detectable by your sensors. This should include ships that are cloaked. So, if your sensors say that there is a total of about 800m of signature right when you jump through, you know there are people active, as your sensors either get closer, or activate the active sensors, you might be able to tell that those 800m's are from 4 signatures. After that, it works as described. This way, an experienced pilot will still be able to tell when people are in the system and would have a decent idea of how many etc, but not WHO they are or what they are flying unless they work for it. 3. Strategic Intel. I think this could easily be done in two ways, first as a bribe to CONCORD to get the stats that you can currently get through the map, but the bribe would be some set amount for intel on a system, constellation, or region that is fairly cheap, but scaled by size (maybe 25,000 for a system, 100,000 for a constellation and 1 mil for a region...just as a rough swag). The bribes would be good for a 24 hour period or so. In addition, players should be able to deploy a variety of strategic scanners that are able to provide the same kinds of stats as long as the scanner probe/structure is not destroyed. Players should also be able to "sell" their intel for less than CONCORD charges via contracts. Some sensors should be able to report on gate traffic to include ship types and times. This way, being a scout recon becomes a profession able to make you money in Eve. For better quality intel (like ship types and times, an active scanner that actually scans ships as they jump in and provides fitting/cargo information) would be much more valuable, but require scanners that are much easier to identify and destroy, making them good for Alliances defending space, or scouts in deep behind enemy lines. Such intel could be contracted for millions of isk/hour if so desired.
|
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
849
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 18:51:00 -
[266] - Quote
Loius Woo wrote:Snipped for space.
So, to reply to your ideas-
1) Strategic intel- the idea of bribing Concord already exists- locator agents. Essentially, this is what you're talking about. The problem is, it's an "ISK for capability" setup, and with alliances having trillions of ISK, it's a bad idea. There would never be a reason for them not to max out everything, in every area. The expense would be negligible and there would be no way to attack any infrastructure to destroy the capability.
Everything should be in the hands on the players, and I do agree that there should be some way for players to record intel info and then sell it or trade it to others, and have it be 100% verifiable in game. Indeed, a recon/scout/spy profession is sorely needed.
2) Local in delayed mode, enough said. Local count- only counted if you came in through a gate. Total signature ideas- each ship, even if it's a cloaked ship, should leave some sort of signature or trail of tell tale "space pollution" or "space dust" if you will, and the overall effect will be to add to the background pollution. High pollution levels, more ships in the area recently. So, I agree with your idea in a sense, in that with my original design your thoughts are taking into account.
3) Unnecessary detail at this point. Most beginning designers get too caught up in the minutia of all the 'cool stuff' when the high level design isn't complete, we have no working framework and there is no 'crawl, walk, run' process established. Your ideas are good, and are an obvious iteration/extrapolation of the basic idea. But at this point, design effort should be focused on refining and realizing the fundamental structure and framework of the concept, not adding wrapping paper and unicorn sprinkles to the cake. Intelligence shouldn't be free. -á Mining, reloaded. -á-áADDICTED. |
Virgin Slayer
Caldari Syndicate
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 05:20:00 -
[267] - Quote
Well thought out and written. I love the ideas you have presented here! Don't think. Thinking is the enemy of creativity. It's self-conscious, and anything self-conscious is lousy. You can't try to do things. You simply must do things. ~Ray Bradbury~
|
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
516
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 12:49:00 -
[268] - Quote
Always a good idea and it comes up so often now. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Conir
Lords of Entropy V.e.G.A.
2
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 17:53:00 -
[269] - Quote
+1 from me, hope to see this happen |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
529
|
Posted - 2012.08.18 03:42:00 -
[270] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Came to hate, ended up likeing . . . Welcome to the best thread in the forum graveyard. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
|
TheBreadMuncher
Boxxed Up Industries EPIC Alliance
200
|
Posted - 2012.08.19 12:17:00 -
[271] - Quote
Do you believe that this system should introduce some sort of way for ships with covops capabilities to disguise themselves as other signatures? For instance, a ship with a small sig could emulate a battleship. Therefore, the small sig would make it seem like there's a battleship further away rather than a covops proteus in-warp and about to drop right on top of your gang. "We will create the introduction thread if that is requested by the community. Also, we will have an ISD Seminar about the CCL team in the coming weeks in which you can ask your questions about the CCL team and provide some constructive feedback to us." - Countless pages of locked threads and numerous permabanned accounts later, change is coming. |
Thor Kerrigan
Guardians of Asceticism
208
|
Posted - 2012.08.20 00:48:00 -
[272] - Quote
What if alliance/corps could setup local to what it is now but it required a module essentially similar to the POCO. Only with about half the hitpoints. Which means 5 guys with decent DPS can take it out at a planet (no passive POS guns, max of 1000 ish DPS and no 300 km point) in less than 30 minutes. Sure, put a reinforcement timer on it, but local essentially breaks back to delayed until the module is fully repaired.
I like the idea of having the more precise modules be the most vulnerable/expensive. Follows the risk/reward quite nicely.
I always thought small roaming gangs should have some clear targets they could periodically kill, thus annoying bigger alliances who control space too big to properly patrol.
Targets can easily be automatically defended by adding something similar to gate guns. Serves as a tank-check if you will, but is countered by bringing 1-2 extra guys above the tank-check. |
Kethry Avenger
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
39
|
Posted - 2012.08.20 02:50:00 -
[273] - Quote
I support EVE moving in this general direction. Maybe not in highsec. But low and null for sure.
|
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
543
|
Posted - 2012.08.23 02:07:00 -
[274] - Quote
Kethry Avenger wrote:I support EVE moving in this general direction. Maybe not in highsec. But low and null for sure.
Personally I feel if they implement this they should do it everywhere Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Melodee619
The Scope Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2012.08.23 06:25:00 -
[275] - Quote
No offense but with CCPs new found "lets turn EVE into wow", they don't really need any help to make the game even easier than it is becoming. From what I read here you want everyone to have access to everything.... blizzard did that, an look what we got... world of Warcraft. As I said, not slagging you off, just hoping we don't go down this road anymore than we are already.
ratters have been demanding CCP remove the ability to "AFK" for years on cloakers, yet CCP gave it to miners in spades... So called afk cloaking is a feature it can be either a scout waiting till FC tells him to lite off... or just a random pvper looking to hunt ratters. Personally I do it, because I know it annoys the bejezus out of ratters. To be frank it shouldnt be ccp['s responsibility to play for you, even though they do these days. If you have a red in local tough... either find an kill him or deal with it, an pay attention :D |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
565
|
Posted - 2012.08.27 00:29:00 -
[276] - Quote
Well 211 likes so what does it win Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
22
|
Posted - 2012.08.27 15:29:00 -
[277] - Quote
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:Bloodpetal wrote:These ideas are good, but they're not the first time they've been suggested or recommended and have been often repeated and sponsored by the EVE Community.
If CCP decides to listen today, then so be it.
I've been playing Eve for a long while (8 years now), and thinking about its game design just as long. I know full well that everything has been discussed to death. The point is to bring a few concepts together in one integrated design so that they all work together cooperatively so that the end result is greater than any one single change.
I messaged one of the CSM members, they all like the idea and say they've been trying to pitch something like this to CCP for years, but the fact is the mechanics aren't actually 'broken' they're not ideal, but they work, and so it gets a backseat to fixing things that actually are broken. |
Usagi Toshiro
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.27 15:54:00 -
[278] - Quote
+1
More akin to submarine warfare with active and passive as well as using natural surroundings and events to camo your noise. I would take an active interest in a mechanic like this. Currently using D-scan and probes is a headache even after you're fluent in their use. |
FRONT TOWARD ENEMY
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 06:31:00 -
[279] - Quote
Thor Kerrigan wrote:What if alliance/corps could setup local to what it is now but it required a module essentially similar to the POCO. Only with about half the hitpoints. Which means 5 guys with decent DPS can take it out at a planet (no passive POS guns, max of 1000 ish DPS and no 300 km point) in less than 30 minutes. Sure, put a reinforcement timer on it, but local essentially breaks back to delayed until the module is fully repaired.
I like the idea of having the more precise modules be the most vulnerable/expensive. Follows the risk/reward quite nicely.
I always thought small roaming gangs should have some clear targets they could periodically kill, thus annoying bigger alliances who control space too big to properly patrol.
Targets can easily be automatically defended by adding something similar to gate guns. Serves as a tank-check if you will, but is countered by bringing 1-2 extra guys above the tank-check.
I think the whole point of the thread is to specifically stay away from an ISK-for-goodies model, don't you think? Titans are a perfect example of how ISK will never be a limiting factor to proliferation. And the last thing we should do is remove local as it is, and then give it right back to 0.0 Alliances.
Nobody should ever have the perfect precision of the current local channel ever again. Regardless of what upgrades are applied.
|
FRONT TOWARD ENEMY
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 06:33:00 -
[280] - Quote
Saede Riordan wrote:Mors Sanctitatis wrote:Bloodpetal wrote:These ideas are good, but they're not the first time they've been suggested or recommended and have been often repeated and sponsored by the EVE Community.
If CCP decides to listen today, then so be it.
I've been playing Eve for a long while (8 years now), and thinking about its game design just as long. I know full well that everything has been discussed to death. The point is to bring a few concepts together in one integrated design so that they all work together cooperatively so that the end result is greater than any one single change. I messaged one of the CSM members, they all like the idea and say they've been trying to pitch something like this to CCP for years, but the fact is the mechanics aren't actually 'broken' they're not ideal, but they work, and so it gets a backseat to fixing things that actually are broken.
I would argue that the mechanics are indeed 'broken'. lol. |
|
Mike Lockstep
X3 Brothers
13
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 07:04:00 -
[281] - Quote
+1 and a bump. Indeed i need new local mechanics which will make low/null systems more "appropriately dangerous" environment, just as it was intended from the start. OP has some nice ideas and i will be happy to see them implemented |
Juniorama
State War Academy Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 08:51:00 -
[282] - Quote
This will provide a very limited amount of new game play for an extreme amount of complication.
According ot OP active scans are used to find people but they also alert everyone in system that some one is scanning. PvE pilots will still dock up.
Consentual PvP pilots will have to work harder to find their fights.
Fleets will just use more scouts to gather information.
This will induce clutter and complicate things without changing any essential game mechanic.
I have yet to hear an idea about local, etc., that will significantly change game play without hampering all parties involved. |
RFD commander
The Knight's Who Say Ni
4
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 10:39:00 -
[283] - Quote
I like these ideas. Take note, CCP! |
Loius Woo
PATRIOT KNIGHTS
194
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 19:26:00 -
[284] - Quote
Juniorama wrote:This will provide a very limited amount of new game play for an extreme amount of complication.
According ot OP active scans are used to find people but they also alert everyone in system that some one is scanning. PvE pilots will still dock up.
Consentual PvP pilots will have to work harder to find their fights.
Fleets will just use more scouts to gather information.
This will induce clutter and complicate things without changing any essential game mechanic.
I have yet to hear an idea about local, etc., that will significantly change game play without hampering all parties involved.
I don't think you actually read this thread.
There is a lot more to it than active scans.
PvE still takes place in locations determined by the spawning of dedspace pockets anyway...
I am actually having a hard time figuring out how you came to your conclusions at all... |
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
65
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 12:30:00 -
[285] - Quote
Bump for this. |
classified data
Dominion Enterprise Spectrum Alliance
35
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 22:54:00 -
[286] - Quote
usefulness bump ;) |
Staleward Ad'mraa
Knights In the Round Table JINN.
2
|
Posted - 2012.09.09 23:59:00 -
[287] - Quote
When you say Space terrain do you mean like hiding inside a hollow asteroid, parking your ship on the other side of a planet, special radiation belt around a planet that hinders sensors? Stuff that can help boost or hinder ships in space to the point that makes the game much more strategic in battlefield? |
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
75
|
Posted - 2012.09.12 12:48:00 -
[288] - Quote
Staleward Ad'mraa wrote:When you say Space terrain do you mean like hiding inside a hollow asteroid, parking your ship on the other side of a planet, special radiation belt around a planet that hinders sensors? Stuff that can help boost or hinder ships in space to the point that makes the game much more strategic in battlefield?
Yes, that and more. |
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
286
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 21:28:00 -
[289] - Quote
bump |
mine mi
Hispania Armored Forces Vera Cruz Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 22:28:00 -
[290] - Quote
men I have only one thing to say, well done, +1
suggestion, the sensor strength could indicate the reach of the ship-¦s d-scan |
|
Mars Theran
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
288
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 01:14:00 -
[291] - Quote
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:Xorv wrote:I like the ideas and vision for EVE you present. Practically speaking though what would you suggest CCP do that doesn't take several years for them to deliver? How to do it in a nutshell: 1. Put Local in Delayed Mode.
With all of this idea, what's the point of putting local in delayed mode?
Why not just remove local entirely as an information source and restrict it to a Comms channel? That's what it should be anyway. No faces, no names, just anonymous transmissions. I have deleted and cleared my signature 7 times and it still won't go away. |
Artyom Hunter
Battlestars En Garde
7
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 01:34:00 -
[292] - Quote
This is beautiful. Take my likes. Take them all! |
Krall Hoar
TunDraGon
5
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 07:53:00 -
[293] - Quote
Like |
Sukur
Shimai of New Eden
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.26 16:27:00 -
[294] - Quote
Friendly bump |
Jin alPatar
Entertainment 7wenty
9
|
Posted - 2012.10.26 16:38:00 -
[295] - Quote
Oooh. I like this. |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Mordus Angels
645
|
Posted - 2012.10.26 19:43:00 -
[296] - Quote
Seriously filled with good ideas.
The concept of seeing the universe using sensors, combined with maps of systems and rumors about who was flying around...
Isn't that the game we signed on for? 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. |
Seranova Farreach
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Exhale.
16
|
Posted - 2012.10.26 19:52:00 -
[297] - Quote
DOWN WITH LOCAL!!! |
Devon Krah'tor
Magis.Erudire.Ratus.Knoen
7
|
Posted - 2012.10.27 00:03:00 -
[298] - Quote
+10
Could we please have a Dev comment or acknowledge this idea, its truly brilliant. Greater.Insight.Skill.Knowledge |
Vae Abeo
Viziam Amarr Empire
13
|
Posted - 2012.10.27 15:27:00 -
[299] - Quote
+1 CCP implement this please |
Vindictate
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2012.10.31 00:07:00 -
[300] - Quote
+5 |
|
Vae Abeo
Vae Caudex Corporation
14
|
Posted - 2012.11.08 03:26:00 -
[301] - Quote
Devon Krah'tor wrote:+10
Could we please have a Dev comment or acknowledge this idea, its truly brilliant.
bumps |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc
228
|
Posted - 2012.11.08 14:55:00 -
[302] - Quote
If you give intelligence an advantage over brute force, what'll happen, Pandemic Legion will finally kick Goon's ass?
I've got cookies, anyone bring popcorn?
+1 for active and passive sensors -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens |
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
2494
|
Posted - 2012.12.02 21:25:00 -
[303] - Quote
I'd like to bump this again, and if CCP Fozzie hasn't seen it yet, he really should.
Torn from grace, gotta find your faith or the devils gonna claim your soul
|
Endymion Varg
Interstellar Vermin Inc.
9
|
Posted - 2012.12.04 07:12:00 -
[304] - Quote
My humble suggestion for an addition to this great concept:
Make solar systems dynamic. Planets, asteroids, moons, stars and all other objects should follow orbits and constantly move. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Tribal Band
235
|
Posted - 2012.12.04 08:24:00 -
[305] - Quote
Endymion Varg wrote:My humble suggestion for an addition to this great concept:
Make solar systems dynamic. Planets, asteroids, moons, stars and all other objects should follow orbits and constantly move. I wholeheartedly agree, and for many reasons! After all, they already have orbit lines. Now they just need to follow them! -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens |
Tempelman N
Vengance Inc.
1
|
Posted - 2012.12.12 16:33:00 -
[306] - Quote
I run a stealth bomber squadron most days and I think these changes would let us bombers truly hunt among the stars like I always wanted to. But right now? I come into local and everybody runs like a ***** because I'm to well known. CCP has basically let players take the surprise out of the only ship in the game THAT'S DESIGNED AROUND SURPRISE! I say the changes suggested are WAY WAY WAY overdue. Lets face it guys, EVE's at 50 0-00 people and its been that way for a while, lets start showing CCP that this changes are necessary not only for the longevity of the game but for the players as well. |
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy
351
|
Posted - 2012.12.12 19:36:00 -
[307] - Quote
I'm in favor of complexity but this is still a stealth cloaking nerf thread. The change to cloaking you ask for is not acceptable; timers cause problems at gate camps and in WH's where they get in the way of normal sensitive use; yes, I am bringing up wormholes.. because any change you make to cloaks will effect wormhole play in a big way.
-1 in general.. but interesting read on some specifics [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG] |
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
2536
|
Posted - 2012.12.13 08:26:00 -
[308] - Quote
to the top!
Torn from grace, gotta find your faith or the devils gonna claim your soul
|
Streya Jormagdnir
Alexylva Paradox
25
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 18:22:00 -
[309] - Quote
I like these ideas. I have always wondered why you can't hide behind planets, moons, or even asteroids (for small enough ships) in order to avoid detection. Gathering information is too perfect. Why am I, a low-SP toon, able to distinguish between a Stabber and Vagabond at 14 AU away with one click of a button just as well as a high-SP toon? How can ship sensor distinguish between the tiny energy signature of a frigate at a star over that of the star itself? Warping to the star should serve a purpose, rather than act as a place where people warp to in order to duel. The various regional descriptions should also impact visibility. I liked how on the first few pages someone referenced to the Vatta War series. I LOVED how sensor were depicted there, and would also love it if EVE were the same way.
Looking at the star map, you see bits of RP fluff such as the Cord of the Elements, the Vapor Sea, black holes. Look at the regional description of Scalding Pass! These are all areas that should realistically mask signatures, distort readings, and generally make it harder to detect ships or even pilot.
+1 to this post. Make space space-y. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Tribal Band
251
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 09:33:00 -
[310] - Quote
Streya Jormagdnir wrote:Warping to the star should serve a purpose, rather than act as a place where people warp to in order to duel. This gives me an idea:
I think warping to the star should land you in a random place at a specific distance from the star instead of a specific place (fleet members would all warp to the same spot of course), and you should suffer some negative effects while at the star but it'll protect you from on-board sensors and make you more difficult to probe.
Perhaps the negative effect would be that your capacitor and shield regen are reduced while you have shields (diverting power to protect you from the radiation), and if your shields go down, your whole ships starts to gradually take heat damage, though much slower than overheating modules would. And the longer you stay, the stronger the effect gets (up to a max at around 5 minutes). So if you're alone, you could hang out there for a while and be fine, but if you get into PVP with someone who just arrived, you might be at a disadvantage. Also, some players might design fits specifically for attacking sun-hiders. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens |
|
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
3254
|
Posted - 2013.02.08 14:23:00 -
[311] - Quote
bump for the bump gods! topics for the topic throne!
Torn from grace, gotta find your faith or the devils gonna claim your soul
|
Daichi Yamato
Swamp Bucket Swamp Bucket Empire
627
|
Posted - 2013.02.08 16:14:00 -
[312] - Quote
much love for this thread.
always wanted to be able to use other objects to mask my signature and generally use terrain more. |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Unclaimed.
1296
|
Posted - 2013.02.08 16:38:00 -
[313] - Quote
A lot of this is fantastic. I wish it did not have the impression of being such a major change to implement. 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. |
Thorian Crystal
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
8
|
Posted - 2013.02.08 20:56:00 -
[314] - Quote
Well the change would have to be gradual and preinformed. Add something then and more later and so on. Any suggestions of the steps, what to add first and what next? |
Wu Jiaqiu
Heretic Army Atrocitas
140
|
Posted - 2013.02.08 21:00:00 -
[315] - Quote
If they choose to implement this idea, we should expect to wait a good year or year and a half. Theres balancing and lots of other improvements going on at the moment. I expect this to be taken up quite a bit later. |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Unclaimed.
1296
|
Posted - 2013.02.08 21:01:00 -
[316] - Quote
Thorian Crystal wrote:Well the change would have to be gradual and preinformed. Add something then and more later and so on. Any suggestions of the steps, what to add first and what next? Oh, that's fairly easy.
Start with the changes requiring the least programming changes as well as the least player effort to adapt to.
I would suggest things like I posted here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=112964&find=unread
Which basically uses the current overview, adds an auto-cycle to d-scan, and encourages use of sensors more.
Local Chat is kind of overpowered, there are many ideas how to modify that. I won't go into that here, but I can suggest a few ways to change it gradually if needed. 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. |
Dexterous Spider
Reliables Inc THORN Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2013.02.08 21:33:00 -
[317] - Quote
Players currently complain about the lack of ability to carve out a small niche of space to call their own without belonging to a major Alliance or Coalition. The reason this doesn't currently work is because players are too easily tracked down and precisely located. It's simply impossible to exist somewhere and not be found.
~What would be the point of PVP if all people did was hide and NOT be found? I know you say dont bring up W space but thats what it offers, for the most part.
An important bit here: EVE NEEDS "SPACE TERRAIN" ON A SYSTEM AND GALACTIC LEVEL that will allow players to mask and hide their presence.
~No, we dont. Even if it exsisted, there are SOV units, and if you cannot defend them, you lose space. Once more, I refer you to W space.
Further more, EVEN IF all the changes you wanted were taken into effect, imagine the implications of jumping into a system, and being insta-boomed by said larger forces of people. None of these implimented ideas help the smaller gangs. But hey, +20 for 30 onlined hidden not seen nyx's to **** up your chosen roam. |
Daichi Yamato
Swamp Bucket Swamp Bucket Empire
629
|
Posted - 2013.02.09 01:47:00 -
[318] - Quote
i can see why no one 'likes' u
Dexterous Spider wrote:
~What would be the point of PVP if all people did was hide and NOT be found? I know you say dont bring up W space but thats what it offers, for the most part.
as oppose to what they do now? which is dock, POS up, cloak or log off. the changes put forward would also make it easier to ambush and spring traps on the un-witting.
Dexterous Spider wrote: An important bit here: EVE NEEDS "SPACE TERRAIN" ON A SYSTEM AND GALACTIC LEVEL that will allow players to mask and hide their presence.
~No, we dont. Even if it exsisted, there are SOV units, and if you cannot defend them, you lose space. Once more, I refer you to W space.
using terrain has been a part of masking ones presence since forever, and hiding ships in asteroid belts and gas clouds has been often represented in sci-fi culture. it also means u dnt need a cloak or hold one system out for every single clandestine maneuver.
Dexterous Spider wrote: Further more, EVEN IF all the changes you wanted were taken into effect, imagine the implications of jumping into a system, and being insta-boomed by said larger forces of people. None of these implimented ideas help the smaller gangs. But hey, +20 for 30 onlined hidden not seen nyx's to **** up your chosen roam.
u could not be more wrong. smaller gangs are much harder to lock down than blobs, which are obvious to identify and locate. it greatly empowers small gangs by allowing them to circumvent detection or pursuit by larger forces. in essence, small and fast gangs become more useful for slipping into enemy territory and attacking exposed targets. the raw strength of the blob however, remains unaffected and just as useful for direct attacks and defences, ur enemy is just more likely to see that u are coming. |
hacksideways
Assah Shipping Company
15
|
Posted - 2013.02.09 08:09:00 -
[319] - Quote
+1
I've always wanted a better method of information distribution in EVE. At first I thought I wouldn't like where the OP was going, but the ideas are solid, elegant, and set the stage for more complex information warfare and manipulation to build down the road. |
Bum Shadow
Es and Whizz Hedonistic Imperative
24
|
Posted - 2013.02.15 19:45:00 -
[320] - Quote
This, along with celestials following their orbits would be extremely cool.
It would make for an extremely dynamic galactic map and each system due to orbits wouldn't have "known" safe and dangerous areas as they would shift and move.
By adding this system you remove the requirement of the cloak. But to prevent half the game crying. You could make the covops ship tree be the only ships capable of using an actual cloak at all. Perhaps not as powerful as a covops cloak. Maybe just a standard T2 cloak would be the new covops cloak. So you still have the option to completely hide. But you cannot move around totally safe. And only the specific stealth ships can fit them too. Not normal ships.
Overall though, these would be AWESOME changes. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: [one page] |