Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Captain Futur3
|
Posted - 2009.12.03 01:06:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Captain Futur3 on 03/12/2009 01:17:21 Actually when 2 or more ships are fighting, you have the situation that either ship A is faster than ship B or the oposite. Conclusion is that one ship is always dictating the distance of the fight. But what about this:
- You can say your gunner that he shall target the engines of the enemy ship. This will reduce the damage or rate of fire by 50% (because its harder to target), but with some luck, you will hit the engine, resulting in a total stop of the engines for 5 seconds or so, until the enemy crew has fixed the problem.
- This could also be added into a general random possibility for such a hit by lets say 1%
Maybe add a skill which will increase this possibility by 1% per skill level, setting it to a maximum of 6% at level 5 per hit of your weapon. Sure the values are not balanced, 6% is very much, but scaling the values down to 0.5% per skill level sounds good to me.
- This can be made even more complex if you add the possibility to shoot the enemy weapon systems down for 5 systems, or repair modules and so on.
I really love to have the possibility to shoot someone down, but not killing him and then sendinghim an offer "You have no chance to escape, maybe some ISK will change this...".
- Also missions would improve from it by making them less calculatable. If you have played a mission about 10 times, you know exactly what happens every moment, but when enemies can shoot your engines, weapons or modules down, it will be more challanging
|
Captain Futur3
|
Posted - 2009.12.03 01:42:00 -
[2]
Lets say when you force your weapons to shoot the engines, the possibility for such a special hits becomes 10 times higher, but you also do nearly no damage or have very low rate of fire. Something like that...
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2009.12.03 02:52:00 -
[3]
you think the other side is going to fast? bring tackle. web+2pt scram and most ships suddenly go very slowly.
targetting sub parts of the ships is already on CCPs agenda for a while, but i personally dont see the need for it. given the length of normal pvp fights and all the parameter you have to control already, you might not have enough time for all that added complexity.
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2009.12.03 04:05:00 -
[4]
I think the programming and server load for specific system targeting might be too much.
It's not a bad idea though - to completely take down a system would be great for both pirates and mission runners. Mission runners could reduce their faction standings loss by disabling enemy weapons platforms but not have to blow them up. Pirates could have a better time rendering ships unable to fight or escape, and have more to ransom, especially in those cases where the victim feels the ship is worth more than his clone. To that latter group, blowing up the ship and then ransoming the pod is ridiculous and not everybody has a body full of implants to save.
One thing that could be a compromise is to use ammo specific to disrupting systems. I recall playing an old version of Tie Fighter (that was on a 386, kids) where I had missions that required I use only certain weapons to disable targets so they could be captured. We already have modules that disrupt warp, mess with weapons systems, and such. Why not then specific ammo (like null) that damages certain systems?
|
Inglix Redhammer
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.12.03 05:02:00 -
[5]
Problem: CPU load
The game would have to keep not only both ships locations (x,y,z coord) in memory, but also the exact orientation. You're not going to hit the engines on my destroyer when she's nose toward you. This is also why you don't see differing (front / rear or 6 sided) shield systems. The CPU load of keep track of that, especially in a decent sized fight, would be utterly insane.
I like the idea, I don't see a way to implement it logically. --- Understanding is a three edged sword. |
SgtRaider
|
Posted - 2009.12.03 05:12:00 -
[6]
This is a great idea. Would make the EvE universe even better than it is now. Locking onto specific areas of a ship would be great in PvP. I dont know about missions though as an NPC would not be able to make the decision to abandon ship or pay a price to keep flying but I guess it could be added into the mission as a specific goal.
|
Captain Futur3
|
Posted - 2009.12.03 10:12:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Inglix Redhammer Problem: CPU load
The game would have to keep not only both ships locations (x,y,z coord) in memory, but also the exact orientation. You're not going to hit the engines on my destroyer when she's nose toward you. This is also why you don't see differing (front / rear or 6 sided) shield systems. The CPU load of keep track of that, especially in a decent sized fight, would be utterly insane.
I like the idea, I don't see a way to implement it logically.
You cant argue like that, else how can you explain that you can shoot through ships and structures if your target is behind such an object? I dont think that it would eat much of performance. Just a timer for each module that would be set to some seconds until it can be reactivated. Really, it wouldnt eat much memory of cpu load if done well. Sure i can not say much about a huge battle with thousands of ships...
|
GIGAR
Caldari Full Metal Seraphim
|
Posted - 2009.12.03 10:17:00 -
[8]
How would this make sense with shield tanks? It WOULD make sense for capital ships, though.
|
Captain Futur3
|
Posted - 2009.12.03 12:33:00 -
[9]
Originally by: GIGAR How would this make sense with shield tanks? It WOULD make sense for capital ships, though.
Maybe use your fantasy? There are several ways how this could be done.
- Small shield holes is one of them (if you shoot one area of the shield all the time) - Different shields for special areas of the ship like in star trek (normally you shoot random areas of the ship, so therefore this has no consequence for common battles, even if the game engine does not represent it right)
I really wonder why so many people prefer to work against improving the game instead of helping out to make things work. This is really beyond me and is a bad sign for a community.
|
Vaneshi SnowCrash
|
Posted - 2009.12.04 04:45:00 -
[10]
Something like a wrecking hit you say? Something that smashes through the shields and armour doing full on hull damage?
|
|
Lemmy Kravitz
|
Posted - 2009.12.04 09:16:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Lemmy Kravitz on 04/12/2009 09:18:47
Originally by: Inglix Redhammer Problem: CPU load
The game would have to keep not only both ships locations (x,y,z coord) in memory, but also the exact orientation. You're not going to hit the engines on my destroyer when she's nose toward you. This is also why you don't see differing (front / rear or 6 sided) shield systems. The CPU load of keep track of that, especially in a decent sized fight, would be utterly insane.
I like the idea, I don't see a way to implement it logically.
problem with this is that our turrets fire 360 and missles shoot out of... somewhere in the middle of the ship. orientation of a ship doesn't matter in eve atm. CPU load would only go up because it has x y z systems that can be affected + a % chance calc of success each time something get hit + a count down timer for effect. Yeah it would be a huge CPU load, but not as insane as your talking.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |