EVE Search - Hey Guys, I had a thought earlier...

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Hey Guys, I had a thought earlier...

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Spartan Winters	Posted - 2011.03.31 08:48:00 - [1] I'm not sure if this has been posted before, I did a search and it came up empty. I was thinking it would be cool to see the ability to target ship subsystems, like the cloaking system or the warp drive. You could disable the enemy's ship in stages... Anyway I'm just thinking out loud. What does everyone else think?
mkmin	Posted - 2011.03.31 08:54:00 - [2] I think it's been proposed and talked about at just about every fanfest as a "someday we may get around to it." In practice though, I can see it adding extra complexity to the game, extra lag, and little actual value. Everyone would have to do it all the time in order to be competitive. For how it may or may not make combat more interesting (which I'm not convinced it will) it adds layers of complexity that would make the game less fun. There are much more important things that need to be worked into the game first, probably including formations (which again, imo, should be very low priority if ever done at all because of other issues it could raise.)
Spartan Winters	Posted - 2011.03.31 08:57:00 - [3] Originally by: mkmin I think it's been proposed and talked about at just about every fanfest as a "someday we may get around to it." In practice though, I can see it adding extra complexity to the game, extra lag, and little actual value. Everyone would have to do it all the time in order to be competitive. For how it may or may not make combat more interesting (which I'm not convinced it will) it adds layers of complexity that would make the game less fun. There are much more important things that need to be worked into the game first, probably including formations (which again, imo, should be very low priority if ever done at all because of other issues it could raise.) Well in a way yeah I can see your point. But to me, it's the complexity that would make it more interesting and realistic. Instead of having to point someone to keep them from running away, you can just destroy their warp drive...then they would have to repair it in space or limp to a station to repair. I dunno, again I'm just thinking out loud. Thanks for the response though
Tasha Baxter Amarr Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2011.03.31 09:04:00 - [4] Originally by: Spartan Winters Originally by: mkmin I think it's been proposed and talked about at just about every fanfest as a "someday we may get around to it." In practice though, I can see it adding extra complexity to the game, extra lag, and little actual value. Everyone would have to do it all the time in order to be competitive. For how it may or may not make combat more interesting (which I'm not convinced it will) it adds layers of complexity that would make the game less fun. There are much more important things that need to be worked into the game first, probably including formations (which again, imo, should be very low priority if ever done at all because of other issues it could raise.) Well in a way yeah I can see your point. But to me, it's the complexity that would make it more interesting and realistic. Instead of having to point someone to keep them from running away, you can just destroy their warp drive...then they would have to repair it in space or limp to a station to repair. I dunno, again I'm just thinking out loud. Thanks for the response though I wonder how many hours/days it would take to get back to station without a warpdrive.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2011.03.31 09:13:00 - [5] Edited by: Akita T on 31/03/2011 09:16:41 This system would be awesome in a single-player game (see : Nexus - The Jupiter Incident), but it's not so nice anymore when you're looking at a MMO. Temporary incapacitation, borderline JUST maybe, and only if target is already at zero shields/armor, with chance of incapacitation PER NEW SPECIAL NO-DAMAGE INCAPACITATION WEAPON CYCLE FOR ONE ENEMY SUBSYSTEM TARGETED depending on remaining hull percentage (starting at maybe 25% at 0% hull damage going up to 100% at 75% hull damage). But just maybe. _ Make ISK\|\|Build\|\|React\|\|1k papercuts _
Marija Vanszar Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2011.03.31 09:14:00 - [6] Wouldn't make sense to me, it would be realistic, but as soon as the shields are gone, blow up the enemies guns and he's finished. With that we would totally kill amarr "passive" or bugger tanking. leave it as it is, just make more hit areas so that you are not hitting the enemy at the exact same spot every time, visually. BR
Florestan Bronstein Amarr Taishi Combine	Posted - 2011.03.31 09:18:00 - [7] Edited by: Florestan Bronstein on 31/03/2011 09:18:44 Originally by: Spartan Winters Well in a way yeah I can see your point. But to me, it's the complexity that would make it more interesting and realistic. Instead of having to point someone to keep them from running away, you can just destroy their warp drive...then they would have to repair it in space or limp to a station to repair. I dunno, again I'm just thinking out loud. Thanks for the response though My cruiser is stranded a moderate 3 AU from the next station, with AB it can go at 500 m/s. 3 AU = 448.794.000.000 m 448.794.000.000 m / 500 m/s = 897.588.000 s 897.588.000 s = 28.4 years. guess I'll rather self-destruct...
Marija Vanszar Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2011.03.31 09:22:00 - [8] Originally by: Florestan Bronstein Edited by: Florestan Bronstein on 31/03/2011 09:18:44 Originally by: Spartan Winters Well in a way yeah I can see your point. But to me, it's the complexity that would make it more interesting and realistic. Instead of having to point someone to keep them from running away, you can just destroy their warp drive...then they would have to repair it in space or limp to a station to repair. I dunno, again I'm just thinking out loud. Thanks for the response though My cruiser is stranded a moderate 3 AU from the next station, with AB it can go at 500 m/s. 3 AU = 448.794.000.000 m 448.794.000.000 m / 500 m/s = 897.588.000 s 897.588.000 s = 28.4 years. guess I'll rather self-destruct... Or you eject, warp in a copsule to a station of your choice to get a repair ship, get back with the repair ship, repair the old ship, go back to station, leave repair ship there, warp back to first ship in pod, jump in warp back to station..... yeah self destruct...
Tasha Baxter Amarr Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2011.03.31 09:25:00 - [9] Originally by: Marija Vanszar Originally by: Florestan Bronstein Edited by: Florestan Bronstein on 31/03/2011 09:18:44 Originally by: Spartan Winters Well in a way yeah I can see your point. But to me, it's the complexity that would make it more interesting and realistic. Instead of having to point someone to keep them from running away, you can just destroy their warp drive...then they would have to repair it in space or limp to a station to repair. I dunno, again I'm just thinking out loud. Thanks for the response though My cruiser is stranded a moderate 3 AU from the next station, with AB it can go at 500 m/s. 3 AU = 448.794.000.000 m 448.794.000.000 m / 500 m/s = 897.588.000 s 897.588.000 s = 28.4 years. guess I'll rather self-destruct... Or you eject, warp in a copsule to a station of your choice to get a repair ship, get back with the repair ship, repair the old ship, go back to station, leave repair ship there, warp back to first ship in pod, jump in warp back to station..... yeah self destruct...
Florestan Bronstein Amarr Taishi Combine	Posted - 2011.03.31 09:26:00 - [10] Originally by: Marija Vanszar Or you eject, warp in a copsule to a station of your choice to get a repair ship, get back with the repair ship, repair the old ship, go back to station, leave repair ship there, warp back to first ship in pod, jump in warp back to station..... yeah self destruct... hmm... maybe I can retrofit my pod's warpdrive to my ship?
Shawnm339	Posted - 2011.03.31 10:15:00 - [11] If this happens I'm starting a ship repair service like Green Flag.......Green Flag Corp is being registered as we speak
Jagga Spikes Minmatar Tribal Liberation Force	Posted - 2011.03.31 10:37:00 - [12] Edited by: Jagga Spikes on 31/03/2011 10:37:12 Originally by: Spartan Winters ... Well in a way yeah I can see your point. But to me, it's the complexity that would make it more interesting and realistic. Instead of having to point someone to keep them from running away, you can just destroy their warp drive...then they would have to repair it in space or limp to a station to repair. I dunno, again I'm just thinking out loud. Thanks for the response though replace "destroy" with "damage". reduced warp speed. reduced standard speed. reduced tracking, locking, targeting, cap, etc. tho, it would have to be much slower combat to make a choice between destroying a ship and damaging a system have any meaning. on the other hand it would make logistics much more important. ________________________________ : Forum Bore 'Em : Foamy The Squirrel - [jedi handwave] "There is no spoon."
Gavjack Bunk Gallente Zero taxes corps are easy to make	Posted - 2011.03.31 10:59:00 - [13] Originally by: Spartan Winters I'm not sure if this has been posted before, I did a search and it came up empty. Let me google that for you
Banana Torres The Green Banana Corporation	Posted - 2011.03.31 12:03:00 - [14] Originally by: Florestan Bronstein Edited by: Florestan Bronstein on 31/03/2011 09:18:44 Originally by: Spartan Winters Well in a way yeah I can see your point. But to me, it's the complexity that would make it more interesting and realistic. Instead of having to point someone to keep them from running away, you can just destroy their warp drive...then they would have to repair it in space or limp to a station to repair. I dunno, again I'm just thinking out loud. Thanks for the response though My cruiser is stranded a moderate 3 AU from the next station, with AB it can go at 500 m/s. 3 AU = 448.794.000.000 m 448.794.000.000 m / 500 m/s = 897.588.000 s 897.588.000 s = 28.4 years. guess I'll rather self-destruct... Our ships have crews, who would be able to fix you up. You could imagine yourself as Captain Janeaway ordering Seven of Six to take an science team to fix the warp drive.
Elzon1 Caldari Shadow Boys Corp White Angels.	Posted - 2011.03.31 12:03:00 - [15] Originally by: Spartan Winters Hey Guys, I had a thought earlier... "I have an idea..." I don't know where, I don't know when... but something awful is going to happen xD
Angst IronShard Minmatar Sense of Serendipity Echoes of Nowhere	Posted - 2011.03.31 12:11:00 - [16] Originally by: Elzon1 Originally by: Spartan Winters Hey Guys, I had a thought earlier... "I have an idea..." hehe . ____________________________________________ Freedom is nothing but a chance to be better.
Gavjack Bunk Gallente Zero taxes corps are easy to make	Posted - 2011.03.31 12:23:00 - [17] Originally by: Elzon1 Originally by: Spartan Winters Hey Guys, I had a thought earlier... "I have an idea..." In what way is it fair to drag that erased memory back into existence? Well up yours, two can play that game.
stoicfaux Gallente	Posted - 2011.03.31 14:17:00 - [18] Uhm, imagine what the interface would be. Right click on the ship. The 'Target Subsystem' option will be right below the 'Unlock target' option, so be careful. Then select from the sub-menu option High, Medium, Low. Then select from the sub-sub-menu option Offensive, Defensive, Propulsion, Weapons, Engines, Other. Then the sub-sub-sub-menu option will present a scrollable list of every possible item you can target (similar to searching on contracts,) then you select a module, and then get a message stating 'That module is not available.' (You didn't scan the ship first, so you don't know exactly what modules the ship is carrying so you'll have to guess what modules it is carrying.) Once you determine (guess) whether the target is carrying a Siege Launcher II or an Arbalest Siege Launcher, then you wait while your targeting system locks onto the targeted module. Given that the targeted module is much smaller than the ship, it will take a while to lock onto the module. Finally, you fire and your weapons hits will partially damage the module in a manner similar to heat damage. Repeat the process for each of the seven siege launchers that the target is carrying (and hope they're all the same type.) In the meantime, your target has destroyed your ship while you were waiting to lock on to one of his weapons. Now your pod won't warp until the 'target a module' lock has completed. After you're podded, file a bug report about the 'target a module lock' not being interrupted by ship destruction. Wait a few days for the response of 'works as intended' followed by a Chronicle detailing how the pod pilot's 'target a module lock' requires such intense concentration that pod pilots have to block out most external stimulus (such as your ship exploding) and can't break the lock once started due to the pod pilot's use of spontaneous quantum sensory entanglement to target a sub-system that is hidden behind shields and armor. ----- "Are you a sociopathic paranoid schizophrenic with accounting skills? We have the game for you! -- Eve, the game of Alts, Economics, Machiavelli, and PvP"
ZombifiedRob	Posted - 2011.03.31 14:23:00 - [19] Shooting the warp drive wouldn't be possible (since that's what makes that huge explosion when your ship dies) but it might be a cool thing to have. Also, perhaps not completely destroying that function but maybe a 20-40% reduction in functionality. Shoot the sensors? Smaller targeting range/slower targeting. Engines? Move slower/less agile. Not a complete disability.

CCP StevieSG	Posted - 2011.03.31 14:59:00 - [20] Moved to Features and Ideas from EVE General.

Hayaishi Gallente Aperture Harmonics	Posted - 2011.03.31 15:12:00 - [21] Originally by: ZombifiedRob Shooting the warp drive wouldn't be possible (since that's what makes that huge explosion when your ship dies) but it might be a cool thing to have. Also, perhaps not completely destroying that function but maybe a 20-40% reduction in functionality. Shoot the sensors? Smaller targeting range/slower targeting. Engines? Move slower/less agile. Not a complete disability. I would have thought that was the reactor... But i suppose if the warp core gets damaged, it will just warp really slowly, so it takes like 10 minutes to warp 100 AU or so.
KlintortheDestroyer	Posted - 2011.03.31 16:01:00 - [22] this is pretty good idea, probably scan a ship with a scanner and then have the ability to target their modules to disable their shields, bulky artillery guns or propulsion systems while still on this topic, i was actually thinking about faction abilities earlier but it would instead have to be changed into special equippable module abilities which require several science Vs to utilize but can be used by anyone of course they are meant to be used by the faction and their specific type of ship... (caldari are light and fast, gallente are heavy and bulky, amarrian are long slow snipers, minmatar are junky fast flying wrecks) minmatar - derelict ship module, power down the ship to make it appear as a wreck and then when unsuspecting people come to salvage your ugly minmatar space junk, you can power it back up and start attacking them (only in .4-0 space of course) minmatar - suicide det module, a fearless or suicidal matari pilot can easily overload his old outdated nuclear warp core and charge into enemies unleashing a massive self destruct explosion which dmgs all nearby with heavy thermal and radiation amarr - ship scanning sniping module, your idea comes here where amarrians using their scanner and accuracy with lasers can aim at your propulsion or warp drive, crippling your movement and then they can begin dissecting your hull after they get through the shield generator of course amarr - ship tractor beam, with this beam amarrian cruisers/capitals can pull in frigates into killing range/kidnapping range and multiple frigates can tow larger vessels away from danger/into danger (warp core stabilizers strength combat this effect, doesn't work on battleships/dreads/carriers/capitals/vehicles of high mass and density) caldari - teleporter beam mod, with this new hitech jovian device the caldari/gurista pirates can quickly steal onboard goods (limit 5-10m3 a time) or teleport enemy navy marines onto your vessel in an attmept to take over your ship (your crews? of course will be able to kill these marines if you have security forces deployed) caldari - missile hacking mod, with this module the caldari can emit a field of energy which scrambles missiles and forces them to seek out other nearby targets gallente - drone hacking device mod, with this module the gallente can easily read your encrypted drone signal languages and steal your drones and give them false commands to attack their owner gallente - armor hardening mod - when activated heavy gallente armor becomes resistant to damage and ramming smaller/less dense ships is possible for dealing large amounts of kinetic dmg

Pages: [1] :: 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.