| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Packtu'sa
   |
Posted - 2006.05.16 06:49:00 -
[1]
Okay, here's this for a question: Why is it possible for a tiny Condor frigate to prevent a massive ship like a Freighter or Battleship from entering a warp tunnel?
Warp scramblers should be chance-based, and the involved chance should depend quite on the mass of the target. Then, warp scramblers could be created in multiple sizes, which would inflict increasing amounts of warp scramble strength, but require more capacitor energy and powergrid/CPU.
Then, WARP CORE STABALIZERS! These could reduce the chance of being warp scrambled, and have a stacking penalty, just like shield/armor hardeners do! Oh, and let's not forget my new favorite idea...
ACTIVE WARP CORE STABALIZERS. If this new system were implemented, we'd have problems using our existing low-slot stabalizers, and so we'd want a bit more stabalizing ability to insure that we don't get scrambled.
Thoughts? Perhaps both the Passive and Active WCS modules should have small/medium/large versions too? That would require a new stacking system to be made, but it would balance things out between the larger and smaller ships.
Yes? No? Pie?
Packtu'sa
Founder/CEO
Nabaal Construction and Industrials Corp |
Henka
|
Posted - 2006.05.16 07:17:00 -
[2]
there where talks about making scramblers like ECM is today (ie, chance based and they dont stack). Overall, the idea of a small ship scrambling a large is just "right" for me. Ie, you disturb the SHIP COMPUTER with your scrambler, not the ship itself.
Webifiers i can understand, they increase mass or whatever, but warp scramblers is more like computer warfare then fysics.
|
James Duar
|
Posted - 2006.05.16 07:44:00 -
[3]
My impression of warp scramblers was that they messed with the navigation systems of a target ship by punching holes in the warp field faster then the computer could stabilize them on its own - i.e. they mess with the gravitational targets the warp drive locks onto to guide itself.
A warp stabilizer works by increasing the strength of the warp field, so the scrambling has less effect - it's ship size independant since as a ship gets larger you need a bigger warp drive and stronger field anyway to get it to warp at all.
|
Packtu'sa
|
Posted - 2006.05.16 08:10:00 -
[4]
Right, right, but consider this: a battleship has a whole lot more CPU power at its disposal than a cruiser or frigate; the ship's warp core uses more CPU to warp a larger object, too.
If a warp core stabalizer increases the strength of the field and the speed with which the warp core can compensate for fluctuations, wouldn't it need more CPU and powergrid for a larger field, since it would need to have more power for the field and would have a larger field which it would need to stabalize?
Likewise, warp scramblers with very little power or CPU available to them can only do so well against a battleship warp field; but a larger scrambler, with more intensity and speed, would be able to scramble more powerful warp fields.
I disagree, I think warp scramblers and stabalizers are very much related to ship mass and powergrid/CPU availability.
Packtu'sa
Founder/CEO
Nabaal Construction and Industrials Corp |
K Shara
|
Posted - 2006.05.16 08:51:00 -
[5]
you havnt considered that maybe the mechanism for the warp jump is delicate and can be disrupted, and thats all that is happening
<><><><><><><><><>
Contraband
<><><><><><><><><> |
Zarch AlDain
|
Posted - 2006.05.16 11:32:00 -
[6]
I see where you are coming from, but at the moment the main reason for frigates to go into fleet battles is tackling.
Flying a tackling frigate means that a young character can still contribute something to PvP engagements and be a useful part of the fleet.
Take that away and you remove young characters and inties/assault frigates/inties from fleet battles.
Now you don't have frigates you don't need anti-frigate - so you lose all the cruisers.
So now you just have battleships, covert ops - and maybe the odd HAC or Command Ship.
...still think it's a good idea?
As several people have said there are several ways to justify it in game - and it works well for balance purposes.
--
Zarch AlDain
The Bridgeburners
Huzzah Federation
|
James Duar
|
Posted - 2006.05.16 11:38:00 -
[7]
 Originally by: K Shara
you havnt considered that maybe the mechanism for the warp jump is delicate and can be disrupted, and thats all that is happening
My point exactly - space doesn't want us to be travelling at supra-light velocities all over the place. For it to work the ships has to make depleted vacuum around itself to eliminate the 'drag' which causes things to top out at light speed - in this case the drag is the Higg's bosonic mass field that permeates the universe. Hence why we can undergo such insane acceleration gradients when entering warp - the ship is basically made massless or near to it, so the force experienced by the ship is essentially nil. Similarly, by not weighing anything the ship's can also burn right through physical objects because they've got no mass to interact with them.
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2006.05.16 14:37:00 -
[8]
From a gameplay perspective, chance-based scrambling kills off piracy (ransoming).
"The Human eye is a marvelous device, with a very little effort it can overlook all but the most glaring injustice" - Quellchrist Falconer |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |