| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jet Collins
   |
Posted - 2006.06.09 13:21:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Avon
Originally by: Avant Garde
Just make warp to 0km for gate travel it'll make traveling faster. If there are gate campers that want to get you they can have ago on the other side 
I can't see a problem using this method but i'm sure someone will enlighten me 
It isn't only about campers.
There are other aspects to this game other than just getting ganked.
When it comes to people that don't want insta's what are those aspects..
The only people that don't want instas, and thier reasons:
CCP: Instas cause lag, and take up to much data space.
Pirate campers: Ints give them less targets to pray on. ie they want to gank anyone that comes to thier gate.
Aliances: Instas make it more difficult to secure thier space. ie they want gank anyone they don't know in thier space.
If they remove instas CCP will lose alot of players:
People who make thier living selling BM's
Traders who use BM to move large amounts of product large distances.
Many players who arn't in aliances who use BM to get around emprire and 0.0. With out instas traveling from one place to another can take all you time in eve... where is the fun in that.
Possible fix to make everyone happy if they do remove instas. Still make it viable some way to warp in 1km away from gate(travel will take to long with out something like this), and make it so warp bubles can pull people out of warp affectivly 10km away from gate so Aliances have some means of securing thier space.
Gate campers... get a new profesion .
Yes I use instas.
No I do not buy or sell them.
Yes I have still been ganked when I have had instas.
Only reason I think instas should be fixed is if they are causing the game to not run properly.. ie lag. Not because people think other people should not beable to warp to a gate 1km away. They did the work/paid the isk. why shouldn't they.
|
yomtvraps
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 13:23:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Avant Garde
Originally by: Avon
Originally by: Avant Garde
Originally by: Avon
It isn't only about campers.
There are other aspects to this game other than just getting ganked.
I'm still failing to see what the problem is with warping to 0km.
You ever notice that ships have different speeds?
Ever wondered why?
Yes, and your point is...
I got his point. Unsure how you couldnt.
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 13:32:00 -
[33]
It isn't a matter of ganking at gates. This is where the dual nature of the insta problem becomes obvious.
Instas are used for two reasons:
1/ To speed up travel
2/ To decrease the risk of dying (gate camp).
The problem with 1/, which most people overlook, is that the logistical aspect of Eve balances cargo capacity with speed.
A solution to instas needs to take this in to consideration, even though it has nothing to do with pirates and gates - it is a totally seperate issue.
If you want to insta to a gate there needs to be a penalty - and this penaly needs to address both the safety aspects, and the cargo vs speed one.
The solution I proposed (so many times now), simply introduces a lo-slot module, and each one fitted reduces your warp-in distance by 50%.
Lo-slots were picked because it offers a way to address both problems with one solution.
With the speed vs cargo problem you are reducing maximum possible cargo (by using up slots which could be used for expanders) to gain the ability to insta.
With combat (gate ganks), the ability to insta reduces the ability to escape on the other side. You have to balance between instas and WCS, nano's, whatever.
The exact balance is decided by the player, and can lead to various compromises which best suit the intended role.
^^
And there is the key to solving the problem.
It MUST involve compromise. Insta's are wrong because they are a meta-gaming solution, used to bypass undesireable (to the player, not the game) situations, with no drawbacks to the user.
Warp to 0 only serves to lower the server problems, whilst doing nothing to addressing the problems created by this unintended method of travel.
It may be desireable, but it is not balanced.
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Haniblecter Teg
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 13:32:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Haniblecter Teg on 09/06/2006 13:32:53
Originally by: Jet Collins
Originally by: Avon
Originally by: Avant Garde
Just make warp to 0km for gate travel it'll make traveling faster. If there are gate campers that want to get you they can have ago on the other side
I can't see a problem using this method but i'm sure someone will enlighten me
It isn't only about campers.
There are other aspects to this game other than just getting ganked.
When it comes to people that don't want insta's what are those aspects..
The only people that don't want instas, and thier reasons:
CCP: Instas cause lag, and take up to much data space.
Pirate campers: Ints give them less targets to pray on. ie they want to gank anyone that comes to thier gate.
Aliances: Instas make it more difficult to secure thier space. ie they want gank anyone they don't know in thier space.
If they remove instas CCP will lose alot of players:
People who make thier living selling BM's
Traders who use BM to move large amounts of product large distances.
Many players who arn't in aliances who use BM to get around emprire and 0.0. With out instas traveling from one place to another can take all you time in eve... where is the fun in that.
Possible fix to make everyone happy if they do remove instas. Still make it viable some way to warp in 1km away from gate(travel will take to long with out something like this), and make it so warp bubles can pull people out of warp affectivly 10km away from gate so Aliances have some means of securing thier space.
Gate campers... get a new profesion .
Yes I use instas.
No I do not buy or sell them.
Yes I have still been ganked when I have had instas.
Only reason I think instas should be fixed is if they are causing the game to not run properly.. ie lag. Not because people think other people should not beable to warp to a gate 1km away. They did the work/paid the isk. why shouldn't they.
?
you make it sound that putting autopilot on is 10x slower than using instas.
Completely false. Throwing an AB/MWD on a ship and speeding to the gate is only fractionaly slower than a BM. If you're in an inty, the difference is hard to notice, save for pressing the boost button instead of the BM menu.
Also, when you need to travel 30 jumps, do you use BM's or afk autopilot? I, and most people, autopilot.
Removing BM's isnt that bad. As a previous poster said, it would have alot of positive effects for the economy, keeping territory, and increasing tactics.
Also, if you've ever been on a gate camp you'll know how frustrating it is dealing with insta jumps. Sure, giving pirates/enemies the ability to lock down travel lanes could be disasterous, but the organization required to counter a gate camp would be a positive thing for EVE.
In all, I wouldnt mind life without insta's. I know i'd feel better about going into new 00 region's, b/c I normally avoid those areas i dont have insta's for.
----------------------------------------
Friends Forever
|
Haniblecter Teg
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 13:36:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Avon
It isn't a matter of ganking at gates. This is where the dual nature of the insta problem becomes obvious.
Instas are used for two reasons:
1/ To speed up travel
2/ To decrease the risk of dying (gate camp).
The problem with 1/, which most people overlook, is that the logistical aspect of Eve balances cargo capacity with speed.
A solution to instas needs to take this in to consideration, even though it has nothing to do with pirates and gates - it is a totally seperate issue.
If you want to insta to a gate there needs to be a penalty - and this penaly needs to address both the safety aspects, and the cargo vs speed one.
The solution I proposed (so many times now), simply introduces a lo-slot module, and each one fitted reduces your warp-in distance by 50%.
Lo-slots were picked because it offers a way to address both problems with one solution.
With the speed vs cargo problem you are reducing maximum possible cargo (by using up slots which could be used for expanders) to gain the ability to insta.
With combat (gate ganks), the ability to insta reduces the ability to escape on the other side. You have to balance between instas and WCS, nano's, whatever.
The exact balance is decided by the player, and can lead to various compromises which best suit the intended role.
^^
And there is the key to solving the problem.
It MUST involve compromise. Insta's are wrong because they are a meta-gaming solution, used to bypass undesireable (to the player, not the game) situations, with no drawbacks to the user.
Warp to 0 only serves to lower the server problems, whilst doing nothing to addressing the problems created by this unintended method of travel.
It may be desireable, but it is not balanced.
Very interesting concept, I like it save for the effect it would have with autopilot: in empire, if you can autopliot to within 7500km of a gate. then travel gets cut quickly and time speeds up immensly. Unless you just disable the mods benefit with autopilot, which seems quick and dirty, but silly somehow.
----------------------------------------
Friends Forever
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 13:38:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
Very interesting concept, I like it save for the effect it would have with autopilot: in empire, if you can autopliot to within 7500km of a gate. then travel gets cut quickly and time speeds up immensly. Unless you just disable the mods benefit with autopilot, which seems quick and dirty, but silly somehow.
Sorry, it is just a summary of a much more indepth proposal I made some time ago.
They would be active modules, so no good on autopilot.
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
KirStain
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 13:42:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Avon
Originally by: KirStain
Make it skill based with the posibility of error once in a while. 
Skill based is a no-go, it just becomes a timesink.
But this whole thing has been done to death on multiple occasions.
I am still of the opinion that the low-slot module proposal I made is the most simple and balanced solution.
 Wow! Can you post the link where the DEV said that?
So, a low slot huh? You must shield tank. |
Jak'ai
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 13:42:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Avon
It isn't a matter of ganking at gates. This is where the dual nature of the insta problem becomes obvious.
Instas are used for two reasons:
1/ To speed up travel
2/ To decrease the risk of dying (gate camp).
Not only this but there are other by-products of the insta "system" that shouldn't be run over.
3/ The only (current) nod in-game to the Explorer profession. Making and selling "starcharts".
4/ Tactical benefits for the defender / the side that does the most preparation.
While a low slot mod addresses the ship specific issues, it does not cover the other knock-on effects that should be preserved if at all possible.
So a low slot module that must be loaded with constellation "charts", made by some means similar to scanning (however something that carries some risk to the charter - like they show up on overview or another more elegant solution) would be an even stronger option for replacing instas.
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 13:47:00 -
[39]
Originally by: KirStain
Wow! Can you post the link where the DEV said that?
So, a low slot huh? You must shield tank.
Shield tankers fly with empty lo-slots?
Odd.
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
KirStain
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 13:54:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Avon
Originally by: KirStain
Wow! Can you post the link where the DEV said that?
So, a low slot huh? You must shield tank.
Shield tankers fly with empty lo-slots?
Odd.
No dev post heh? |
Viktor Fyretracker
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 13:56:00 -
[41]
whats so bad about instas? honestly the only people effected badly are the pirates sniping haulers in .4 space.
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 13:58:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Viktor Fyretracker
whats so bad about instas? honestly the only people effected badly are the pirates sniping haulers in .4 space.
Wrong.
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Avon
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 13:58:00 -
[43]
Originally by: KirStain
Originally by: Avon
Originally by: KirStain
Wow! Can you post the link where the DEV said that?
So, a low slot huh? You must shield tank.
Shield tankers fly with empty lo-slots?
Odd.
No dev post heh?
Did I claim there was?
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
HippoKing
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 14:01:00 -
[44]
I don't mind the safety aspect being taken away, but I dislike the lengths of time it could take to travel without instas, and the way that if modules were introduced but were passive, you could AFK travel (in high sec) at the current insta-speed.
|
Avant Garde
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 14:01:00 -
[45]
So what was CCP's idea for removing instas? |
Jor Azmeh
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 14:04:00 -
[46]
skill-based is not a timesink if use use an existing skill, i.e. NAVIGATION
which is a rank 1 skill.
-
|
KirStain
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 14:05:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Viktor Fyretracker
whats so bad about instas? honestly the only people effected badly are the pirates sniping haulers in .4 space.
From what I have read, the Dbase is hurting with all the BMs. So it isn't only gameplay related. |
Avon
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 14:06:00 -
[48]
Originally by: HippoKing
I don't mind the safety aspect being taken away, but I dislike the lengths of time it could take to travel without instas, and the way that if modules were introduced but were passive, you could AFK travel (in high sec) at the current insta-speed.
Ah good, I am glad you love my proposal.
I hearby bequethe you this thread.
Have fun.
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Astrum Ludus
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 14:15:00 -
[49]
It's time to realise (admit) that travelling in this game is boring as hell no matter how you dress it up and solutions should be looked for that reduce travelling time.
Like you have this low slot idea which isn't bad, requires some thought and choices on behalf of the player which I like, then you say it doesn't work with Autopilot! why the heck not? let them auto pilot straight into someones trap while they're afk if they want to take that risk.
On the flip side if I need to get somewhere to buy something on the other side of empire it would be nice to carry out this practically risk free task in less time than it takes at the moment. A. Lot. Less. Time.
Also, the eye rollers and I'm smarter than you comment posters, please stop spamming it's not big and it's really not clever.
|
Fal'Tanarr
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 14:26:00 -
[50]
- Interdictors
- Mobile Warp Disruptors
- Sensor boosters + warpjammers on other side of gate
The fix is here already, use it.
Removing instas would just create a huge time sink. I have places to be at, don't keep me inching away at a gate 13km away since in the vast majority of cases no one is there to shoot at me anyway.
|
Admiral IceBlock
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 14:38:00 -
[51]
Quote:
- Interdictors
- Mobile Warp Disruptors
- Sensor boosters + warpjammers on other side of gate
The fix is here already, use it.
How are you suppose to use mobile warp disruptors in empire smartass? And currently due to how targetting works, there is no chance to warp disrupt a Interceptor because of its fast agility.
Bookmarks has to be removed for the better of this game. Will it make travelling take more time? Yes, and it will only make this game seem bigger, which is a good thing. Currently you can get to the end of the galaxy very fast with bookmarks, if bookmarks are removed people will start to think when crossing the galaxy. People will try to be more strategic in where they go because if they go 80 jumps to enemy territory it will sure as hell take some time to get the fleet back home to defend.
Of course Jump Clones is an exception here. ;)
13 -_- |
Avon
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 14:38:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Fal'Tanarr
Intys warp at 6 au/s with 120m3 cargo and a freighter warp at 0.4 au/s. So you can't argue that industrials haul stuff as quickly from point A to point B as an inty just because they're both using instas.
Apples and oranges.
Compare the cargo and speed of each freighter.
Compare the speed of an itty V with expanders vs one without.
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Jet Collins
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 14:41:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
you make it sound that putting autopilot on is 10x slower than using instas.
Completely false. Throwing an AB/MWD on a ship and speeding to the gate is only fractionaly slower than a BM. If you're in an inty, the difference is hard to notice, save for pressing the boost button instead of the BM menu.
My guess you don't travel 10 jumps very much with a fully loaded hauler or freightor.
Hmm lets see with out instas I'm going maybe 100m/s with AB, 15km. With instas AB not needed unless my insta is off. Gate travel time cut you can do the math.. time to get to gate traveling at 100m/s. vs time to get to gate when the gate is 1km away. yes autopilot is ~10x slower for people flying hauler or freighter or a BS with out MWD and all nano's. Also note my nav skills are maxed.
Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
Also, when you need to travel 30 jumps, do you use BM's or afk autopilot? I, and most people, autopilot.
I use instas has far as I have them. My instas are only for one region so when I go to anouther region I get very board and my time to travel is hudge. So I try to stick in my region. I would rather not spend my night traveling.
Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
Removing BM's isnt that bad. As a previous poster said, it would have alot of positive effects for the economy.
How so if the traders are no longer bring product to your area because it take to long to get there. I don't think inflated preices are good for the economy. Alot of stuff is inflated already. Please enlighten me as to how no instas would be good for the economy?
Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
Also, if you've ever been on a gate camp you'll know how frustrating it is dealing with insta jumps.
*Jet ditests gate campers. They are the low lives to eve.
I would much rather be attack at a belt than at a gate by someone over 150km away. Where is the sport in that. I'm not sure by I belive gate campers are one of the reasons why instas are still around. CCP doesn't want the game to be campfest. If people have no safe way to counter gate campers.. besides 0.0 campers I'm talking about, people will never leave safe space because all the gate leaving safe space will be camped, by joe in him meg/temp.
Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
In all, I wouldnt mind life without insta's. I know i'd feel better about going into new 00 region's, b/c I normally avoid those areas i dont have insta's for.
I wouldn't either as long as something was done about travel time. CCP want to make eve an interactive game, where people are all over the place and working togeather in many systems.
If they remove instas and don't fix travel time:
A: there will be more people soloing because it take up to much time to get to the system with thier frieds, unless they are all in B.
B: Systems like jita will be evem more crowded because people will not want to travel around to smaller markets or take the time to travel to make thier own markets.
C:Gate campers will rule low sec space. Forget about belt battles you'll never make it past the gate. Except for the occational inti that zips to the gate before they see him because they got board not seeing anyone come though over an hour.
D: Aliances will be happy because they now have more secure space.
Just my oppinon. Flame all you want. We all have our own oppinons.
|
JabJabVVV
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 14:47:00 -
[54]
I quite like the module idea. The only problems I can see with it are: freighters having to travel long distances in 0.0 and fleet battles. Currently I live about 60 or so jumps into 0.0 and getting there from empire even in a fast ship with instas takes an hour or more; if instas where simply removed it would kill the region as the travel times would be far to great to justify the risk. However the low slot module would fix this to a degree. BUT the freighters have no low slots and for fleet ops the 2 options are: nerf every ship in the fleet by fitting the modules or taking hours to travel to your destination, neither look very attractive. So I think the module idea would be good if implemented with a gang module with similair effects (fleet ops solved) and allowing freighters to use cyno fields (freighters solved). Just my 2 isk.
|
KirStain
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 14:51:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Jet Collins
D: Aliances will be happy because they now have more secure space.
Just my oppinon. Flame all you want. We all have our own oppinons.
I think you hit the nail on the head |
Alex Harumichi
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 14:52:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Alex Harumichi on 09/06/2006 14:55:37
Well, I sort of see instas doing more good than harm generally. Sure, they are a meta-game thing and apparently due to poor software implementation, they can cause lag.
But...
If they are removed, something almost as good needs to replace them. Otherwise, low-sec will become a total nightmare, with snipers at 150km+ frying everything that tries to pass through a gate. Currently there are some perma-camped low-sec chokepoints that pretty much require instas, and can be a bit tricky even then. Without instas, things would become ridiculous.
Oh, and to the automatic reply of "go take out the campers then". Yeah right, take out 4-5 aligned, stabbed-to-the hilt sniper battleships. Good luck even getting a lock on them before they safespot, and then return the moment your force goes away. And you need at least 4pts of scramble per ship to hold them down. Sigh.
Removal of instas would also pretty much kill 0.0 for everyone else except large alliances. With the current whining about how too few people venture into 0.0, what do you think this would do? We need to make it harder for alliances to lock out 0.0, not easier. With interdictors, 0.0 gate camps already have it easy enough. Removal of instas would be the final nail in the coffin, meaning you need either a large fleet or a cloaking ship in order to move around in 0.0. Fun fun. Not.
It's no coincidence that the people most advocating removal of instas are the people who have the most to gain from that, i.e. members of the big 0.0 alliances (BoB, etc).
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 14:53:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Jet Collins
How so if the traders are no longer bring product to your area because it take to long to get there. I don't think inflated preices are good for the economy. Alot of stuff is inflated already. Please enlighten me as to how no instas would be good for the economy?
Actually, this is a pretty good arguement for the removal of instas.
It would promote regionalisation, which is one thing Eve desperately needs.
That, however, is a different discussion.
A bit old, so don't necro it.
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
HippoKing
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 14:56:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Avon
Originally by: HippoKing
I don't mind the safety aspect being taken away, but I dislike the lengths of time it could take to travel without instas, and the way that if modules were introduced but were passive, you could AFK travel (in high sec) at the current insta-speed.
Ah good, I am glad you love my proposal.
I hearby bequethe you this thread.
Have fun.
Oh, I couldn't possibly let you give me your favourite thread. 
|
Jet Collins
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 14:56:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Admiral IceBlock
Quote:
- Interdictors
- Mobile Warp Disruptors
- Sensor boosters + warpjammers on other side of gate
The fix is here already, use it.
How are you suppose to use mobile warp disruptors in empire smartass? And currently due to how targetting works, there is no chance to warp disrupt a Interceptor because of its fast agility.
Bookmarks has to be removed for the better of this game. Will it make travelling take more time? Yes, and it will only make this game seem bigger, which is a good thing. Currently you can get to the end of the galaxy very fast with bookmarks, if bookmarks are removed people will start to think when crossing the galaxy. People will try to be more strategic in where they go because if they go 80 jumps to enemy territory it will sure as hell take some time to get the fleet back home to defend.
Of course Jump Clones is an exception here. ;)
I don' think CCP inteded empire space to be gate camped. Suicide attacks sure but gate campers. Sorry I don't have a link but pretty sure I have seem somewhere that they what Empire gate campers to get thier kills by other means.
|
Aminatar
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 14:59:00 -
[60]
I just wanna say I find Avon's idea very interesting
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |