EVE Search - Battle Dust - Environmental Dangers of Large Fleet Combat

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Battle Dust - Environmental Dangers of Large Fleet Combat

» 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)
Helixios	Posted - 2010.06.02 04:17:00 - [1] Edited by: Helixios on 02/06/2010 04:19:40 One thing that has always bothered me about Eve is the lack of environment. We're in space (where all ship movement seems to mimic that of submarines, but whatever). Space is big an empty, sure. But there are some areas that have certain effects. My suggestion is to open up Eve to a number of environmental factors (areas) that players can take advantage of. So far, outside of missions and deadspace complexes, the only environmental effects are the result of wormholes. Wormholes can cause certain adverse effects on your ships that change attributes, etc. I'm sure everyone knows at least a little about that. Here's the (first) idea: ___________________________________________________ Battle Dust. In the wake of (and even during) large battles come adverse effects of massive transfer of energy and chemical reactions. In real life after battles where ordinance detonation, burning fuels, and floating debris are abundant... The atmosphere takes on a very different quality. Sometimes it's toxic, the sky can fill with black smoke. It can cause (acid) rain, lightening, etc. Environmental factors change. In space, and in the scale of Eve where capital ships hurl monumental amounts of energy into another ship to try to break it to pieces, and hundreds of ships compete to destroy one another, the effects of environmental change could be incredible. Dust would spread in clouds. Energy would build up, resonating amongst debris and unburned fuels. The fact that the void is now full of vapors and particulates would even change the way you move through it. These factors would quickly change the way a battle functions as it becomes more chaotic and destructive. ___________________________________________________ There's your flavor text. Now here's the "why": In fleet engagements, two main factors would contribute to the "battle dust" scenario. -Particulates and Vapor clouds -Energy Fields and Electrical Disruption Projectile turrets use a charge to fire a slug. The charge emits large amounts of vapor and minor small particles into space and, when the projectile strikes, debris will break away. Missiles (probably) use fuel to hurl themselves long distances and create large amounts of force in the form of expanding gasses and energy transfers to cause damage. This would also create debris and vapor clouds. Lasers would dilute in atmospheric conditions, causing large amounts of energy to collect in the debris fields and vapors of space, causing a decrease in their effectiveness and also dangerously charging the fields they fire through. Rail Guns hit with such extreme force that they would also cause debris fields, as well as blasters, though they don't use a charge to fire their projectile (so they don't emit vapors). Ship Destruction and Power Core detonation would cause the most harmful "Battle Dust" scenarios, spewing large amounts of vapor, debris, and energy into space. ___________________________________________________ Next I will explain what this all means for us, the players, experiencing these factors in-game, and realistically what might occur when trying to fight in such conditions.
Helixios	Posted - 2010.06.02 04:41:00 - [2] So- Like I said, there are to major factors of the battle dust scenario: Particulates/Vapor Clouds Energy Fields/Electrical Disruption These would have adverse effects on ships attempting to fight in them. In most situations, multiple factors would effect you at once, but I will explain each in turn. Particulates and Vapor (The basis of Battle Dust): These floating particles and vapor would make space no longer a void. While still thin and insubstantial, the effects of atmosphere on a ship designed for space would heavily effect how it moves. As particulates and vapor become more dense, your ship would perform more sluggishly. -This would effectively lower your agility, decrease the effect of speed enhancing modules, and lower overall maximum speed. In addition, all weapons would experience a decrease in tracking speed due to the complications of atmospheric recalibration (except for lasers), as well as a reduction in maximum firing range. Damage would also be reduced due to resistance against the projectile as it travels down range, and laser weaponry would be diluted as it travels through substances. ___________________________________________________ While the drawback above is bad, the worst effect of Particulates and Vapor on fleet combat would be what it enables. Now that there is effectively an "atmosphere" in space, other effects can take hold. ___________________________________________________ Energy Fields/Electrical Disruption If you think fighting through debris to get to your enemy and all the while not dealing as much damage was bad, you'd have to take a step back and look at what happens next. Now that there is an "atmosphere" for energy to collect, the high transfer of energy would cause dangerous reactions and discharges that would not only be harmful and unpredictable, but would make your ship effectively blind as well. The in-game effects? -Energy discharges and electrical arcs would damage any ships caught inside them. Shields, armor, and structure alike. -Harmful substances and fuel detonations alike would be caused by the same electrical arcs and energy build ups mentioned before, making them even deadlier. Bad enough? Not really. -Energy buildup would cause severe disruption to targeting systems, causing malfunctions that would reduce lock time, disrupt the effectiveness of electronic warfare, and even break locks in extreme cases. So what's this mean? It may be personal opinion, but environmental factors increase the realism and immersion of a game, while providing the "random" factors that make real tactics all the more important. If you want a reason to like this I'll mention this would be one way to encourage blob warfare to spread out and shrink down. While the effects mentioned above are worst-case scenarios of large fleet combat and would be relatively hard to produce, I believe it could be fun and interesting if implemented. Give me some ideas and feedback. I'd like to know what you think.
Lord Accio	Posted - 2010.06.02 05:00:00 - [3] bump
Cameron Boe Caldari Frontier Explorations Inc. Black Core Alliance	Posted - 2010.06.02 05:04:00 - [4] ^ fail bump My loler skates go swoosh swoosh
Savatar Mei	Posted - 2010.06.02 13:39:00 - [5] nice idea. some extensions: some locations can hold a tactical advantage: eg. corona of star used by defense fleet? upper atmosphere of gas giant?
Twotoad	Posted - 2010.06.02 13:50:00 - [6] YES. Adding "terrain" into Eve would really help shake p the range of tactical options available to people and make the entire experience less samey. Take it a step further - What about those debris fields in Luminaire, or other solar systems where large storyline-level battles have been fought? These fields could make shipping more hazardous, forcing people to reroute through different systems. It would be a nice way to control and alter the flow of traffic to and from major trade hubs. Also making these fields vast and somewhat harvestable might give a boost to the salvaging profession - not in terms of standard mission salvage but more along the lines of gas cloud harvesting and very basic minerals.
Bender 01000010	Posted - 2010.06.02 14:07:00 - [7] yes..this could be in the next expansion.
mkmin	Posted - 2010.06.02 14:28:00 - [8] Originally by: Twotoad YES. Adding "terrain" into Eve would really help shake p the range of tactical options available to people and make the entire experience less samey. Take it a step further - What about those debris fields in Luminaire, or other solar systems where large storyline-level battles have been fought? These fields could make shipping more hazardous, forcing people to reroute through different systems. It would be a nice way to control and alter the flow of traffic to and from major trade hubs. Also making these fields vast and somewhat harvestable might give a boost to the salvaging profession - not in terms of standard mission salvage but more along the lines of gas cloud harvesting and very basic minerals. And adding something to the space junk that the content team has been working so hard on adding (instead of, you know, actual content) would actually mean something instead of just causing more frivolous database calls.
Helixios	Posted - 2010.06.03 06:24:00 - [9] In a similar sense, mass mining operations could also cause dangerous scenarios involving "space pollution". Unused materials left behind from mining would leave loads of floating debris making it especially difficult to maneuver. In reality, asteroid belts would be a terribly dangerous place, quite different from the peacefully spinning rocks we're all used to. Asteroid belts are the bowling alleys of space, leading to some rather dangerous, and crushing experiences (namely the point between two colliding asteroids). Take this scenario: A single hulk is mining in a belt while a stealth bomber lurks nearby, aligning his ship to launch a bomb. With a few clicks, his cloak is up and the bomb is on it's way, locking systems getting ready for a deadly volley of torpedos. The bomb detonates, wrecking the Hulk's shield and setting up for an easy kill. Normally this would be the end of a hulk, but insert some actual physics and it leads to a nearly suicidal choice by the bomber. Launching a bomb into the midst of a field of mining particles and unharvested ore, as well as the surrounding asteroids, would set off a terrible, unpredictable chain reaction of ricocheting shrapnel and debris. The result would be a rather terrible experience for any ships caught in the now deadlier blast radius of the bomb. That's just the single hulk and the asteroids that are already in the belt. Add in a fleet of harvesters, all going after precious ore, and you'd have a scenario more than enough to create a "Particulates and vapor" problem just as bad as during the large fleet battles.
gunnar aztek	Posted - 2010.06.05 11:02:00 - [10] siGNED hard to implement i'm sure, but it's ccp. and it would most likely reduce blob warfare, reducing lag, reducing annoyance (creating annoyance too?). ---- oRly?

DuKackBoon	Posted - 2010.06.05 11:39:00 - [11] Also, please, make asteroids expplode when mined out, instead of just disappearing :P
Lord macattack DARK ADAMA LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM	Posted - 2010.06.05 11:46:00 - [12] /signed Alas implementation chance of ZERO as CCP wouldnt do this and some people would troll for years about why the hell did my ship blow up cuz of debris. But in the point to make EVE more realistic. OH YEAH BABY!
Abbot Laarkin Order Of Mystical Mountain Monks	Posted - 2010.06.05 12:45:00 - [13] I'm all for more and varied tactical options in Eve. Some of these ideas are rather nice tbh. In the absence of LOS shooting, which unfortunately is unlikely any time soon, this would seem to add some interesting possibilities. That said..... Originally by: Helixios A single hulk is mining in a belt while a stealth bomber lurks nearby, aligning his ship to launch a bomb. With a few clicks, his cloak is up and the bomb is on it's way, locking systems getting ready for a deadly volley of torpedos. The bomb detonates, wrecking the Hulk's shield and setting up for an easy kill. Normally this would be the end of a hulk, but insert some actual physics and it leads to a nearly suicidal choice by the bomber. I just *knew* you were going to bring cloaks and bombers into this somehow. Peace. ---- Originally by: Sir Carnage Originally by: Marko Riva Why does that read like they're all 12 and have an IQ of 37? I was under the impression they were 37 and had an IQ of 12
Party Scout	Posted - 2010.06.05 15:04:00 - [14] Oh, yes please! Nebulas, or different areas in a system that affect your ship in different ways (affect sensors so you can hide in some for example). Make it tactical. Location would mean a lot, not just another grid out there. I'm all for this.
mundus123	Posted - 2010.06.05 18:43:00 - [15] Great idea i must say. First idea ive seen that adds a reasonable and usable terrian to space and an effective and realistic deterent to blobs of ships, forcing them to spread out more and use more tactics than just warp everyone on top. One thing that ill add just to add it is maybe T2 hauler ships that are designed to either exlode causing one of these affects or has some highslot generator that creats these effects allowing defenders to set up a trap or just set up the battle field. Grab it and run with it CCP!
Helixios Minmatar Frontier Explorations Inc. Black Core Alliance	Posted - 2010.06.05 21:45:00 - [16] In my defense, the hulk scenario wasn't a complaint, just a stated fact. :p Good to see a lot of people agreeing with this idea. I'd like to see more, though. - Battle Dust Proposal
XIRUSPHERE Gallente THE DISC	Posted - 2010.06.06 05:16:00 - [17] Step 1 : Gate camping blob with RR has some pew fun with t1 ammo orbiting gate at 12km creating a sphere of death where pilots pop in. Step 2 : Sit on the gate or get out from sphere of death range and wait for hapless victims. Step 3 : Profit.
Helixios Minmatar Frontier Explorations Inc. Black Core Alliance	Posted - 2010.06.06 08:52:00 - [18] Edited by: Helixios on 06/06/2010 08:53:43 Edited by: Helixios on 06/06/2010 08:53:16 Energy transfer and shield transfer would be the quickest and easiest way to super charge the atmosphere around your ship. I'd imagine it could be balanced pretty easily to keep people purposely creating debris fields. Energy Transfer and Shield Transfer (etc) would be diluted just like lasers. Probably more so. Edit: To state the obvious, the above statement would mean you'd have gimped logistics in a field of harmful electrical disturbances that make lock times slower. Probably the worst set up for a gate camp. - Battle Dust Proposal
Fournone	Posted - 2010.06.10 16:32:00 - [19] bump /signed
SymFOR0	Posted - 2010.07.02 05:53:00 - [20] /signed

Arretu Khanid Guard	Posted - 2010.07.03 15:49:00 - [21] /signed
Valandril Caldari Ex-Mortis	Posted - 2010.07.03 16:13:00 - [22] Why is that people who post about how tactic-less is eve never ever led fleet and got close to no pvp experience whatsoever ? Food for thought And on topic,it's already complex and laggy enough Read latest "THE WORD"
Camios Minmatar Insurgent New Eden Tribe	Posted - 2010.07.03 19:45:00 - [23] Uhm yes environmental effects are cool, they are actually present in WH space. The key of the idea is that player activities will change the environment, and I like it. Perhaps something like the toxic nebulae found in some missions? This would be easier to implement than OP proposal because it's a mechaic that is already implemented somewhat. But from a gameplay perspective, what would this entail? The proposal by the OP would just reduce the survivability of ships in big engagements, perhaps the smaller ships will have their one reduced more than bigger ones. That would, finally, set a scenario where capital ships are required and subcapital are not suitable for the task: it could be a good thing that will reduce the number in fights (excluding subcapitals from the fight). But then I, as a BS/support/dictor/ceptor pilot would like to have a number of smaller objective for small gangs to shoot.
Helixios Minmatar	Posted - 2010.07.04 01:32:00 - [24] Quote: Why is that people who post about how tactic-less is eve never ever led fleet and got close to no pvp experience whatsoever ? Food for thought If that was aimed at me, I find that rather insulting. I've participated in various forms of PVP and I've got to say, large fleet combat is the most boring, thoughtless thing I've done in Eve. While I haven't led any massive blobs in battle, what I know of doing so seems highly simplistic, the only "intricate" part being organizing the sheer amount of people to do extremely simple tasks together. Quote: And on topic,it's already complex and laggy enough If you've read this proposition, you might understand that the entire purpose of the proposition is to make an in-game deterrent to lag inducing blobs. Depending on the effectiveness of this proposal, it's contribution to the current laggy state of fleet combat might be very minimal compared to the reduction it might encourage. - Battle Dust Proposal
Helixios Minmatar	Posted - 2010.08.08 07:15:00 - [25] Bump from the dead. Lets see if there's any fresh additions anyone can think of. - Battle Dust Proposal
Rhinanna Minmatar Volition Cult The Volition Cult	Posted - 2010.08.16 12:59:00 - [26] Terrible plan. For 1 reason. How many rookie ships would you need to self-destruct before anyone undocking from Jita 4-4 gets royal'ed screwed? -The sword is only as sharp as the one who wields it. Drenzul (My normal internet tag)
Alex Jarwind	Posted - 2010.08.16 13:18:00 - [27] Don't forget Mercoxit ore. dangerous it is. but yeah at least change the asteroid depletion. though explosions wouldn't be as realistic in all cases, how about random chance of Implosion? Jita, I have been there once and till then i though 300+ in amarrwas a lot. 1200. if debris is caused in such a way what about salvagers? they could clean up the debris and gas cloud harvesters could suck up the vapor and such which could allow for more items to be made and more materials. I like that as i salvager now and then and would like a change to the unrealistic asteroid belts. Speaking of asteroids why not have some showers on planets?
Helixios Minmatar	Posted - 2010.08.17 00:49:00 - [28] A viable problem, seeing as market hubs might become problematic. Simple solution- salvaging being able to clean up debris areas? or perhaps simple NPC cleaning crews that can come along (in high sec). Perhaps the debris from mining could be (hilariously enough) be cleaned up with Gas Cloud Harvesters to yield normal ores? Salvagers, or a special type of salvager could pick up vapors in the area to make the environment more stable (mining's version of salvaging). So this could actually be a balancing aspect- Salvagers, which are already common to find on PVP ships that have an extra high slot or two, could also be an active way to revert dangerous combat environments to a more stable state. Thanks for the bump, btw- While I like my ideas, I don't like having to bring them back up myself with content-less posts. - Battle Dust Proposal
Zuju Minmatar Talocan Vanguard Revival Of The Talocan Empire	Posted - 2010.08.18 13:19:00 - [29] I like. I've seen a few science fiction stories where combatants flood battlefields with "sand" that disrupts communications, targeting and at high velocities acts as a weapon. but I'm getting away from the OP Idea. perhaps the inclusion dedicated modules for creating the battle dust effect? a worthy idea. keep working on it War does not determine who is right, only who is left.
LoRDa RaMOs Fatal Ascension	Posted - 2010.08.18 13:57:00 - [30] Shiny, but me not like it. More server load = more lag.



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.