Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tassadar Gantrithor
|
Posted - 2008.12.01 18:19:00 -
[1]
Dear CCP:
I am trying to learn all I possibly can about EVE. In looking to do so, I browse through all of the items and ships examining their aspects. Recently I have browsed through the EW in Ship Equipment. In this category I inspected the Warp Jammers. I have seen many modules you can use to warp scramble or jam a person in space. However, I have also looked into the way to counter-act that action. To that end I have only come across the module called Warp Core Stabilizer. To this I suggest a new module to be placed into EVE. My proposal is that you add a module called a Remote Warp Core Stabilizer. This module would act in the same way as the Remote Armor or Hull Repairer. With the same requirement of locking onto a ship with either Warp Disruption or Jamming occurring. Then once you activate the Remote Warp Core Stabilizer you can disengage that disruption or jam. For an example ship for this module to be best applied for are the Logistic Ships. These ships are deemed as the Support Cruisers. With that title I would assume that those ships can assist other ships with any type of problem. These ships are designed to help out with repairing of the shields, capacitor, and the armor. With the Remote Warp Core Stabilizer it could help make the Logistic ships be more useful in large fleet battles, or even small battles such as two players versus two other players. In any case, this new module would allow players to not rely on the Warp Core Stabilizer alone to get them out of warp jamming situations and have to suffer with the consequences of 40-50% off of their targeting range and scan resolution. If you have already considered this module for use, then here is some motivation to help.
Sincerely, Tassadar_Gantrithor
|
Rudolf Miller
Dawn of a new Empire The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2008.12.01 18:37:00 -
[2]
wow... really well written for the forums
but interesting idea.. it has my support :)
|
Arrs Grazznic
Poena Executive Solutions
|
Posted - 2008.12.01 19:09:00 -
[3]
Interesting idea...
Cheers, Arrs
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2008.12.01 19:12:00 -
[4]
LOL. NO way. Imagine a RR BS gang. Now imagine the same gang with the equivalent of 20+ WCS in one ship if anyone starts to die.
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Drake Draconis
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.12.01 19:13:00 -
[5]
Post this in assembly hall.
Very good idea.
I literally see no drawbacks to this.
It would have to require the same slot qualifications as any other repper... along with skills and ranges.
If your going to make it worth while however... each one should be a +2 bonus.
Warp Core Stabs only give +1.
Most jamming capable ships are anything above 2.
|
Bald Rikk
The Legendary Fleet
|
Posted - 2008.12.01 19:20:00 -
[6]
I support this concept.
Adds another dimension - having players remote rep, or core stabilise so pilots have more chance to get their ships out.
Adds a new tactical option. ---------------------------------------------- Baldrikk CCP Navigator : - "Can I have your stuff", "stuff, can I haz it?" or any variation of these sayings is considered spam. |
Khandara Seraphim
StarHunt Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2008.12.01 20:01:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Khandara Seraphim on 01/12/2008 20:01:41
Originally by: Bellum Eternus LOL. NO way. Imagine a RR BS gang. Now imagine the same gang with the equivalent of 20+ WCS in one ship if anyone starts to die.
Imagine a BS gang that instantly heals thousands of dps to whichever ship is being shot at!
when you phrase it that way of course it's going to sound ridiculous. Regular RR gangs also confer invulnerability to one ship too.
Just like regular RR this can be broken up by ECM, and I'd assume a heavy dictor would be able to hold you as well.
Might need a few kinks ironed out of it but really doesn't seem to be all that bad, especially if it could only be used on a logistics
|
Troezar
Fatality.
|
Posted - 2008.12.01 20:30:00 -
[8]
Sounds like an excellent idea to me. I only forsee one complaint and that is by the solo pvpers as it further promotes teamwork. I however see that as a good thing
|
The Tzar
Malicious Intentions
|
Posted - 2008.12.01 23:35:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus LOL. NO way. Imagine a RR BS gang. Now imagine the same gang with the equivalent of 20+ WCS in one ship if anyone starts to die.
Agreed.
It's bad enough stabs even exist at all tbh. __________________________________________
'Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear intelligent until they speak' __________________________________________ |
Rudolf Miller
Dawn of a new Empire The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2008.12.01 23:55:00 -
[10]
it would just leave it up to the attacking party to have a hic or dictor.. which would break the ability of the remote warp core stab... and it should only be +1.. making warp scrams effective.
furthermore.. i suggest it go in the hi slot.. namely it makes RR gangs choose which is more important. if it MUST go in a mid slot that would also be interesting too because armor tankers don't have many option slots to start with. it also continues to ruin shield tankers in this respect
just my thoughts
|
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2008.12.02 00:27:00 -
[11]
Awesome. Now every random target and their Ibis alt can have an automatic "get out of jail free" card for zero effort. This could not possibly harm PvP.... -----------
|
Dracthera
|
Posted - 2008.12.02 00:47:00 -
[12]
I don't mind the concept of a remote warp stab, but it should have a long cooldown (like 5 minutes or something), and while the module is in cooldown the ship with the module would not be able to warp anywhere. That makes sure people would use it judiciously on select targets, and would be open to sacrificing their own ships in order to allow another critical one to escape.
|
xhardxcorex
|
Posted - 2008.12.02 03:02:00 -
[13]
Good idea... but I think properly implementing it would be a bit difficult.
The only way I see this as having a chance at working is if it were a logistics ship specific module. That way the price of that remote +1 to warp core is a 50mil logistics ship + fittings. True, two logistics ships could remote WCS each other but wtf would be the point? Now fleet warfare... I'm not so sure about. Logistics ship vs a dread?
The module would need too many exceptions to start off with. I just don't see it working out.
|
Xori Ruscuv
|
Posted - 2008.12.02 04:36:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Xori Ruscuv on 02/12/2008 04:41:17 *facepalm*
Originally by: The Tzar
Originally by: Bellum Eternus LOL. NO way. Imagine a RR BS gang. Now imagine the same gang with the equivalent of 20+ WCS in one ship if anyone starts to die.
Agreed.
It's bad enough stabs even exist at all tbh.
What these guys said. And what Merin said.
This thread could almost be a litmus test for who is a PVPer and who isn't, here.
|
Dreadpilot Roberts
R.U.S.T. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.12.02 04:46:00 -
[15]
Crap ideea. Imagine a small gang fighting, now they start losing, everyone targets someone, whole gang aligns, they hit warp core thingy and warpoff. Crap ideea, would destroy pvp. CCP should focus on t3 ships and lag atm so... I'm sorry, did I say u could speak ? |
Kilrex
|
Posted - 2008.12.02 05:20:00 -
[16]
Adding the drawbacks to targeting range and scan resolution would be a very bad idea.
All it takes is a heavy dictor with the warp dis script and you could not warp off, while one Log ship fits 2-3 of your new Remote WCS. One target would be completely FUBAR. Would become the new FOTM for roving gangs.
|
techzer0
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2008.12.02 07:45:00 -
[17]
All of the people who PVP in high DPS ships with a Falcon alt would just switch to a Support ship alt and be able to disengage at will... Not to mention the mission runners that venture into lowsec in their 1+ bil ISK setups would all just use this.
Yay for Navy throns, CNRs, Nightmares etc that can run away at will
If you can think of a way that will not allow it to be exploited like this, go for it. ------------
Originally by: Nexus Kinnon I could outgay you even without my pink tutu. >.>
|
Letifer Deus
A Astroid Belt Lotto Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.12.02 07:52:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Letifer Deus on 02/12/2008 07:52:23 This idea sounds great until you actually think about it. I believe multiple people in here have given good reasons why. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Brought to you by the letter ARRR!" |
Troezar
Fatality.
|
Posted - 2008.12.02 09:04:00 -
[19]
Come to think of it this could be game breaking, imagine if there was a module that had infinite warp jam strength, now that would be imba...
|
Plave Okice
Universal Securities Pirate Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.12.02 10:00:00 -
[20]
Originally by: The Tzar
Originally by: Bellum Eternus LOL. NO way. Imagine a RR BS gang. Now imagine the same gang with the equivalent of 20+ WCS in one ship if anyone starts to die.
Agreed.
It's bad enough stabs even exist at all tbh.
There's no reason it should be allowed to be fitted to BS. As a logistics ship only module I quite like the idea actually, or maybe for an new T2 Destroyer, an antidictor.
|
|
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2008.12.02 10:12:00 -
[21]
This essentially gives your entire gang a WCS without any of the penalties while the logistic ship or whatever gets the penalty. WCS without penalties is overpowered, This idea is overpowered. WCS should be deemed a bug and eliminated by CCP.
What's next remote smartbombs? Wait, that sounds fun... --
http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html
|
JienNuRen
|
Posted - 2008.12.02 10:33:00 -
[22]
wtb remote doomsday convo me
|
Shereza
|
Posted - 2008.12.02 11:14:00 -
[23]
If the range was short then ships that use it would be susceptible to such lovely toys as... Bombs. You know, assuming you found a stealth bomber pilot suicidal enough to use them. Of course I have to wonder, are lockbreaker bombs in the game and in production? EVE-Mon makes'em look rathre intersting and such. Actually, for that matter was Quantum Rise something of an accidental boost for them?
Then of course there's always the option of having them disabled, the same was standard stabilizers are "disabled," when in the field of a warp disruption bubble, whether created by a interdictor, heavy interdictor, or stand-alone structure. You can't "ReStab" someone who's inside the field or if you're inside one yourself, period.
Then there's the option of prohibitive fitting costs or activation costs. Requiring 50mw to fit would put it beyond the range of all rookie ships and most frigate. Setting it to 75mw would put it out of the range of most frigates and 100mw would put it out of the range of almost every frigate (unless you spend a lot of money on it) and most destroyers as well. Likewise having them use, for example, 250 cap/cycle on a 2 second cycle would cause many battleships to have issues quickly.
As long as any such module couldn't be put on a frigate or destroyer, which are so far as I know designed and intended to be expendable so using such a module in a roaming sub-cruiser gang would be rather pointless, it'd be a little easier to prevent "noob" alts from using them. Of course requiring people to train up warp drive operation 5 and graviton physics 4 before being able to use the module would make any alts that use it a bit less expendable.
Then there's always the option of having them apply that lovely sensor penalty to the ship they're being used on as well as the ship that's using them ____________________
Minmatar in Fantasy or Duct Tape Goes Medieval. |
Zaknussem
Caldari Intrum Industria
|
Posted - 2008.12.02 11:36:00 -
[24]
The idea in itself sounds nice. However, getting it right and balanced is the hard part, and I'm certain CCP has tried and failed to do so, which is why you don't see it in the game. They have better things to do, afterall.
That said, what concerns me about this thread is not the feasibility of the idea, but the rampant stupidity shown by the following players:
Originally by: Xori Ruscuv
Originally by: The Tzar It's bad enough stabs even exist at all tbh.
What these guys said. And what Merin said.
Originally by: Vaal Erit WCS should be deemed a bug and eliminated by CCP.
Warp Core Stabliziers only exist in the game because Warp Scramblers exist in the game. You can't have one without the other. You want to get rid of WCS, you'll have to get rid of everything that can prevent a ship from initiating warp. That includes loads of (deployable) modules, two ship classes and a handful of skills. PvP sounds like so much fun after that, doesn't it? |
Rajere
No Trademark Notoriety Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.12.02 13:21:00 -
[25]
Remote effects do not cause aggression. Even as A logistics ship only module it would be ******ed, as the logistics simply WCS's up everyone to warp out then he jumps the gate himself. The OP knew this when making the suggestion and is an obvious carebear troll. -------------------------- NOTR
|
Zaknussem
Caldari Intrum Industria
|
Posted - 2008.12.02 14:39:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Rajere There is no Remote warpdisrupt_your_target module, therefore there is no remote_warpcore stab module. There are only Warp Disruptor/scramblers and WCSs.
I'm sorry...what? You say that there are no modules that warp scramble your target over a distance, and then say that there are only Warp Disruptors/Scramblers...which do what again? Warp disrupt your target over a distance. (Remember, greater than 0 is a distance.) And you use this as a reason why there is not, and should not be, a remote_warpcore stab module in the game?
Originally by: Rajere If you add a way to remotely give another gang member a WCS, you have to add a way to remotely point the person your target has targetted. If I point you, it means I have you locked and you can see who is pointing you, and know which target needs to get jammed/neuted/killed/forced to disengage so that you may disengage. A remote WCS ability eliminates this since you will not know who is remote WCSing your target.
Before the overview gave us a nice indicator to tell us who was scrambling us, we had to do it the hard way, which is to use the in-game effects to track down which ship had a trail of blue pulses aimed at our ship. You can still do that today, you know. If it's a remote effect, it shows clearly in the game. Please tell us why the same cannot be done with Remote WCS modules.
Quote: Thus, the attackers need a way to prevent you from knowing who is pointing you.
Uh, no. That's like saying the attackers need a way to prevent you from knowing who's shooting at you. |
Sidus Isaacs
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.12.02 14:41:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus LOL. NO way. Imagine a RR BS gang. Now imagine the same gang with the equivalent of 20+ WCS in one ship if anyone starts to die.
And then comes teh HIC, and it matters no more ^^
|
Diomidis
Amarr Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.12.02 14:42:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Plave Okice
Originally by: The Tzar
Originally by: Bellum Eternus LOL. NO way. Imagine a RR BS gang. Now imagine the same gang with the equivalent of 20+ WCS in one ship if anyone starts to die.
Agreed.
It's bad enough stabs even exist at all tbh.
There's no reason it should be allowed to be fitted to BS. As a logistics ship only module I quite like the idea actually, or maybe for an new T2 Destroyer, an antidictor.
An anti-bubble-bubble probe or other type of area effect that cancels all warp jamming within it's radius... But make capitals anti-immune to it... Join the Biggest Greek Corp! www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game! |
RedSplat
Suddenly Ninjas
|
Posted - 2008.12.02 14:50:00 -
[29]
Cute idea. If its use was limited to say dictors and logistics and Hictors could ignore it: it might even NOT pull another tooth from EVE's less than threatening snarl. There was even talk of French toast
But there was none to be had |
sAyArrrr
Minmatar Omyst Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.12.02 14:51:00 -
[30]
THe only thing this mod will change, is that every gang now besides the mandatory falcons needs mandatory hics.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |