EVE Search - [Issue] Stasis Webifiers Underpowered

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[Issue] Stasis Webifiers Underpowered

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Maxsim Goratiev Gallente Imperial Tau Syndicate	Posted - 2010.02.16 16:07:00 - [31] scripted webs sound interesting indeed. Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes.StevieSG
Garr Anders Minmatar Thukk U	Posted - 2010.02.16 16:56:00 - [32] Originally by: Liol Wongsta Originally by: Garr Anders What about scripts for webs? Leave unscripted webs as they are now, but add script so you can: increase range but at a lower speed reduction lower range but increase speed reduction In general the current web is a bit "under powered" but due the ability to stack multiple on one target boosting the effect of one would be IMHO to much. Scripting though would allow a higher variety in engagement distance and fuzzing the "simple" avoid 7.5 for scrams, avoid 10k for webs, avoid 20 for disruptor engagements. Supported as a discussion could be health with scripting as option. Scripted webs i like :-p My 100/120km range fleet boosted rapier's especially would love them! That depends on a bit of number crunching. E.g. extending range for 50% but at the same time reducing the speed reduction for 50% would IMHO still balance the extended range. You still couldnt really point something at 60km with a faction web even if you add another 50% to that range so your opponent would be still able to warp out. Also the speed reduction would be 50% lower than at "normal" range. ----- Garr Anders "The only winning move is not to play" is about the best damn advice anyone can get regarding arguing over the internet. - referring to the Movie WarGames 1983
Gaogan Gallente Solar Storm Sev3rance	Posted - 2010.02.16 18:44:00 - [33] Originally by: Marcus Gideon - Micro Warp Drives (MWD) boost speed by generating momentary warp bubbles. The ship goes into warp briefly, and then comes out, over and over. (Personally, I'd like to see the old shield bubble effect used for these. As the warp bubble forms and collapses repeatedly) - Warp Scramblers (Scram disrupt the guidance of the (micro) warp drive. They prevent the ship from resolving the destination properly. Standard warp drives resolve a destination several AU ahead, while MWD resolve a destination several meters ahead. If they can't resolve the destination, the safety protocols won't allow warp. Your backstory is a bit off here. MWD supposedly works by creating a partial warp bubble allowing your ship to slip through space more easily, not pulsing a warp bubble on and off. The warp bubble is supposedly created by evacuating a pocket of space of ALL energy. Scrams prevent warp by filling the space with energy undoing the work the warp drive is trying to do to form the bubble. I really like the idea of scriptable webs, or maybe a web boost amp module.
Garr Anders Minmatar Thukk U	Posted - 2010.02.17 08:46:00 - [34] Originally by: Gaogan .., or maybe a web boost amp module. A module would just gimp the minni recons even more, no matter if low mid or high slot. Target painting is already semi usefull. Something I could see being at least partially balanced is a signature radius and speed reduction relation. The higher your signature radius is, the stronger is the effect of the speed reduction (if you want to have an "in game pseudo science explanation", the speed reduction is higher because the webber has a higher signature radius to grab). A speed reduction - signature radius relation would allow webbing small ships with MWDs stronger than ships without MWD, strengthening the usage of ABs more again. If this should be on top of the scripted webs, needs some number crunching, but in general both ideas have merrits, without totally overpowering the current underpowered web. ----- Garr Anders "The only winning move is not to play" is about the best damn advice anyone can get regarding arguing over the internet. - referring to the Movie WarGames 1983
The Djego Minmatar Hellequin Inc.	Posted - 2010.02.17 19:33:00 - [35] Originally by: Garr Anders Originally by: Gaogan .., or maybe a web boost amp module. A module would just gimp the minni recons even more, no matter if low mid or high slot. Target painting is already semi usefull. Something I could see being at least partially balanced is a signature radius and speed reduction relation. The higher your signature radius is, the stronger is the effect of the speed reduction (if you want to have an "in game pseudo science explanation", the speed reduction is higher because the webber has a higher signature radius to grab). A speed reduction - signature radius relation would allow webbing small ships with MWDs stronger than ships without MWD, strengthening the usage of ABs more again. If this should be on top of the scripted webs, needs some number crunching, but in general both ideas have merrits, without totally overpowering the current underpowered web. The problem with webs that got more range is that you will always have to use the script with the largest range and the lowest strength, it gives gangs the advantage to totally immobilize you and the problem with close range is not solved. Making it based on sig is even worse since it gives smaller ships the complete range control over larger ones and also giving the ships with the bigger guns a drawback on top of it by reducing the befit of fitting a web at all. Also it would be the biggest nerf to blaster PVP since QR, since you have the ships with the largest sigs in many classes(HAC, BC), with the guns that got the smallest range and that will never make it into range since it can be kitted by almost anything. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
Garr Anders Minmatar Thukk U	Posted - 2010.02.18 13:12:00 - [36] "Gangs" are already able to immobilize you when they have multiple webs and everybody just using the long range script version, is missing something that makes scripts so interesting: Stopping one cycle to change the script. Also immobilizing at range with gangs still depends on the amount of webs on one target (hard to balance since blobs are unbalancing everything at some point) and the amount of boni the script adds to the range vs the loss of speed reduction. I still think that research/number crunnching in that direction might result some interesting and balanced results. I see your point with the blaster boats though, the sig. radius effect on webbing was just a thought. ----- Garr Anders "The only winning move is not to play" is about the best damn advice anyone can get regarding arguing over the internet. - referring to the Movie WarGames 1983
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2010.02.18 14:29:00 - [37] If you were to script them to have a significantly lower strength (-60% or so) at moderately increased range (+50%), so just enough to slow something down for tracking to catch up (T2 web = 20% speed reduction at 15km). Wouldn't stacking penalties make the pin-in-place scenario a pure theory-craft exercise? (ie. 3 Rapiers all dedicated to holding one target in place). Basing strength on signature is counter productive, since it is the small stuff you actually want to slow down .. perhaps an inverse thing where mass is factored in or would that just exasperate the multi-plate buffer crap?
Garr Anders Minmatar Thukk U	Posted - 2010.02.18 15:36:00 - [38] Originally by: Hirana Yoshida .. Wouldn't stacking penalties make the pin-in-place scenario a pure theory-craft exercise? (ie. 3 Rapiers all dedicated to holding one target in place). Basing strength on signature is counter productive, since it is the small stuff you actually want to slow down .. perhaps an inverse thing where mass is factored in or would that just exasperate the multi-plate buffer crap? Stacking woulnt be really theory crafting but we're not trying to balance 5 carriers repping one BS either ;) . Anyway, I thought about the inverse thing but that would just gimp target painters even more, while my original reason to related web strength to sig. radius was to boost the painter with the idea as well. On a rapier (yeah minni recon sailor here) a target painter could have been an option vs. 2nd web fit on a recon if web strength would have related to sig. radius. The idea behind it was to discourage/counter usage of MWDs on small boats a bit (a bit not totally) while strengthening the AB and the target painter. I still like the sig.radius web relation on that level but it might need some more thought to take into account the big ships without gimping the target painter in the process. A (sig radius to mass relationship) and then the web strenght effect maybe? So big ships/huge mass with high sig radius are effected less while small ships/small mass with a huge sig radius are effected more? The target painting effect on webbing wouldnt be that bad on a huge mass ship, while on a small one the effect would be noticeable. ----- Garr Anders "The only winning move is not to play" is about the best damn advice anyone can get regarding arguing over the internet. - referring to the Movie WarGames 1983

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.