Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Zeba
Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 18:11:00 -
[1]
So in addition to the normal -60% velocity modifier webs get an additional effect of reducing agility by x amount. Yes? No? Genius or Madness? If the answer is yes then how much agility should get chopped off and will it even be useful? Off the top of my head I can see this working in two ways. The first would mean even if the webbed ship was much faster and agile than the webbing ship its acceleration would be too poor to build up an escape vector and wiggle out of point range if it was caught at cruising speed with no prop mod active. The other effect is that it would make it harder to web ships already up to speed as the instant hit to agility would mean a much longer time to slow down from top speed and so give the ship time to gtfo of web range. I kinda like the tradeoff myself as it gives my rapier a nice boost and also makes it harder for a normal ship to web down frigates who have agility to spend especially if the pilot has good reaction times.
Originally by: CCP Zymurgist Get off the forums and go kill someone!
Originally by: Amarr Supremacist Yeah, it(Jaguar) almost has cruiser level tank and gank!
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 18:17:00 -
[2]
Wouldn't it be simpler to have a web add mass based on target signature?
Reduces speed and agility in one go without running into large'ish differences present in agility ratings within the ship classes.
|
Zeba
Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 18:32:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida Wouldn't it be simpler to have a web add mass based on target signature?
Reduces speed and agility in one go without running into large'ish differences present in agility ratings within the ship classes.
Excellent point.
Originally by: CCP Zymurgist Get off the forums and go kill someone!
Originally by: Amarr Supremacist Yeah, it(Jaguar) almost has cruiser level tank and gank!
|
Lilith Velkor
Minmatar Final Agony B A N E
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 18:42:00 -
[4]
Hmm, sounds to me it would be an unnecessary buff to gatecamping while nerfing my Huginn in a typical combat situation.
|
Psiri
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 18:46:00 -
[5]
Seems unecessary to me, the web change was good it's just that it hurt some weapon systems more than others (blasters).
|
Psychotic Maniac
Caldari Head Shrinkers
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 18:47:00 -
[6]
webs already have this effect. ever try warping off while webbed? do a test a find out what happens.
|
Shadowy Assistant
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 18:49:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Psychotic Maniac webs already have this effect. ever try warping off while webbed? do a test a find out what happens.
I instawarped.
|
Saietor Blackgreen
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.04.14 18:54:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Psychotic Maniac webs already have this effect. ever try warping off while webbed? do a test a find out what happens.
Misconception. Webs only modify your maximum speed (not current). So, if you are aligned for warp and then webbed, you instawarp. If you are aligned fullspeed other direction, and then webbed, it takes you ages to re-align, because your current speed is 2.3 times higher than maximum. --- EvE online. New game every 6 months. |
Seriously Bored
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.04.14 19:21:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Seriously Bored on 14/04/2010 19:26:03
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida Wouldn't it be simpler to have a web add mass based on target signature?
Reduces speed and agility in one go without running into large'ish differences present in agility ratings within the ship classes.
Mass and agility are multiplied directly together in the acceleration equation.
Time to warp from 0 m/s = -ln(0.25) * Ship mass in kg * Inertial Modifier / 1,000,000
Increasing mass by 15% has the exact same effect as increasing the inertial modifier by 15% in terms of acceleration. (Decreasing the inertial modifier makes you more agile.)
However Mass is used in other parts of EVE, specifically wormholes. Having something increase agility instead on mass has fewer side-effects...but I'm still not sure if it would be a good idea to change webs this way.
ED: Replaced the word "agility" with the name of the actual stat.
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.04.14 19:58:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Seriously Bored Mass and agility are multiplied directly together in the acceleration equation.
This I know, which is why I mentioned it. The original suggestion was for an added modifier to agility/inertia to complement the speed effect, I gave an alternate solution to the same goal.
Using a mass modifier has the added "benefit" of reducing the effectiveness of drive modules (if I read the speed formula right) thus making it a double-double whammy against AB/MWD addicts - those one actually want webs buffed against. Problem with using agility/inertia is that there are, in some cases, significant variations within ship classes (frigates, cruisers etc.) so balancing would be nigh impossible if all ships were to be "treated" to the same level of detrimental effect.
|
|
Shadowy Assistant
Darkrime Industries
|
Posted - 2010.04.14 20:17:00 -
[11]
There's a core issue to take into account: implementing a mass addition or an agility increase would make the webbed target take longer to slow down, and will thus they will continue boating towards you at high speed. If you *decrease* mass to make the target slow down faster, then their MWDs work at a higher efficiency and that just won't do either.
|
Sidus Isaacs
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.04.14 20:55:00 -
[12]
Bad idea. Webs are already good enough by far.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html |
Last Wolf
Rage For Order
|
Posted - 2010.04.14 21:16:00 -
[13]
remove stacking penalty on webs tbh.
Only change needed.
Also the introduction of medium/small webbing drones. Oh no you don't! Incoming witty reply, ETA: 300 seconds! |
Liang Nuren
Parsec Flux
|
Posted - 2010.04.14 21:17:00 -
[14]
As long as it's unstacking nerfed... and adds mass. Then I can get like 10 guys to web a frigate and close a WH into a C5!
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire |
Seriously Bored
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.04.14 21:34:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
Using a mass modifier has the added "benefit" of reducing the effectiveness of drive modules (if I read the speed formula right) thus making it a double-double whammy against AB/MWD addicts - those one actually want webs buffed against.
Quad whammy, woo! My bad for not assuming you knew exactly what you were talking about, sorry about that.
But for reference, that equation is a bit outdated: it seems to have been written at a time when overdrives added a straight +X m/s to your velocity. They would just be another multiplier in the equation today, which would mean there would be no difference between choosing mass or agility to punish as far as ODs are concerned.
As for the thrust/mass part, you're correct. You would get your quad-whammy that way, but it would only make a difference if the AB/MWD were active while webbed, and I disagree webs need to be buffed that much.
One thing, however...
Quote: Problem with using agility/inertia is that there are, in some cases, significant variations within ship classes (frigates, cruisers etc.) so balancing would be nigh impossible if all ships were to be "treated" to the same level of detrimental effect.
No balancing would be required here, even though inertial modifies vary widely. Except for the thrust/mass effect you mentioned, it doesn't make a difference to acceleration whether you increase mass or the inertial modifier.
(A * 1.6) * B = A * (B * 1.6)
The only difference would be if webs had a flat addition, and we learned from the nano age how ridiculous straight +/- stat modules can get.
I just don't like the idea of having things muck with mass because it's used in several other places, while the inertial modifier isn't. (I'm not sure if I like the idea of webs screwing with acceleration at all either...)
|
Xyrcaryn
|
Posted - 2010.04.14 21:39:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Xyrcaryn on 14/04/2010 21:39:58 adding mass or reducing agility will also have the effect of target slowing down longer after you've put your web on it, probably even going out of range of your web on inertia
|
Typhado3
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.04.14 22:26:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Xyrcaryn Edited by: Xyrcaryn on 14/04/2010 21:39:58 adding mass or reducing agility will also have the effect of target slowing down longer after you've put your web on it, probably even going out of range of your web on inertia
This.
So your buffing webs my making frigs coast out of web range... ------------------------------ God is an afk cloaker |
Lilith Velkor
Minmatar Final Agony B A N E
|
Posted - 2010.04.14 22:37:00 -
[18]
Why buff webs anyway, the are fine as is. Havent seen anything yet my Huginn couldnt handle. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.04.15 08:32:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Hirana Yoshida on 15/04/2010 08:34:48
Originally by: Seriously Bored But for reference..
Doesn't matter how old it is as the thrust/mass ratio calculation as the formula itself is still valid as far as I know. The various modules do roughly the same things as they always have they just modify different sections of the formula (mass/speed/inertia) now.
Originally by: Typhado3 So your buffing webs my making frigs coast out of web range...
Wouldn't happen if it was an effect added to the existing speed reduction .. probably wouldn't be high enough to allow the coasting.
The combination of mass and speed reduction would primarily impacts AB frigate/cruiser fits which are scary strong when used right, these are the ones that webs largely fail against (close range AB orbit = pwn) MWD fits remain largely unaffected (compared to now) when scrammed/webbed since base speed (MWD killed by scram) is unaffected by mass leaving just the agility hit.
Either way, it was an alternate solution to an alternate solution .. so hah! The question whether something is even in need of fixing should not influence ones effort to do so!
|
Wacktopia
Dark Side Of The Womb
|
Posted - 2010.04.15 12:28:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Psiri Seems unecessary to me, the web change was good it's just that it hurt some weapon systems more than others (blasters).
Have you ever considered a job working at CCP, working on the Gallente-orientated development? Please do. :)
|
|
Calydonian Boar
|
Posted - 2010.04.15 13:54:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Calydonian Boar on 15/04/2010 13:55:40 Edited by: Calydonian Boar on 15/04/2010 13:54:34
Originally by: Shadowy Assistant
Originally by: Psychotic Maniac webs already have this effect. ever try warping off while webbed? do a test a find out what happens.
I instawarped.
I think I laughed about 3 minutes to that :D
Webs doesn't change align time... if you are moving towards something and try to warp 180 degrees back, it doesn't matter you are webbed or not, your align time doesn't change but your warp-out will take longer. You probably had your mwd on as you were webbed and that would increase the align time even more.
Web change was good enough and webs adding mass on target? that doesn't make much sense to be honest. Webifier is just a propulsion disorder module, it doesn't actually throw a web on the ship :D why should it put additional mass? Plus it would make webs overkill spec'ed assuming you would just web something and it will start going half speed and warp out in twice the time. Considering such change takes place, you would probably won't need a scram or disruptor having 2-3 webs instead, as you would kill a 3-plated bs with its mwd on, before it warps out :D Addition of warp-out counter would be epic as well - "Warp drive initiated.... 2 minutes 42 seconds left" ZzzZZzzZzz
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |