| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Freyda
   |
Posted - 2006.06.26 13:07:00 -
[1]
Right basically in my opinions battles are too short.
I was drawn to the game by the trailers. When I started playing I was awe struck by the deepness of the game. My little tech 1 frigates tended to be rather easily popped in pvp. But I just figured my little Gallente Atron was just a silly little ship so that's what happens.
But to be honest it doesn't get better as you get in larger and large ships. It's not that I always win, or always lose, it's that battles are too short. Don't even get me started on how quickly ships go down in fleet battles. But even 1 vs 1. Very few ships will have really long drawn out battles. Let's face it, the most fun battles are really long battles (even if rare).
People have posted videos of pirating dreadnaughts, and look how fun it is when a ship doesn't die in 30 - 40 seconds. It looks like spectacular fun.
Reading the dev's blog I have seen some of the ideas they have had for the future, such as sub system targetting and modules over heating through extended use. Both of those ideas would are useless with battles being too short for either of those things to work. There's no point really trying to disable individual modules on a ship if they are concentrating on blowing you up in as fast a time as possible, and unless modules over heat in super fast time (which would be very annoying), then no system would ever over heat and need to be deactivated in the time it takes for most battles to take place.
There's so many new modules that could be released with longer battles. Here's ideas for but a few new things would be theoretically possible in the future if battles were longer:
Boarding parties of androids to steal cargo from cargo vessals after their shields fail.
Warp scramblers could over heat quickly, meaning pirates would have to disable a ships warp drive to keep her still for a while.
Micro management of your ship during combat, just imagine it. Having to be a lot more tactical about what it is your want to run on your ship, and what exactly on the enemy ship you want to target. You may want to bring their shields down and attempt to disable their shield tanking mods to stop them bringing them back up. Perhaps you haven't the firepower to take down that tech 2 hauler in your frigate, but you just want to raid them for the Blueprints you scanned in their cargo hold?
People would be way more willing to risk those expensive ships if a battle wasn't over within seconds of them starting, so maybe we'd see more of those faction ships outside of empire space for a change if people felt they'd actually get a proper fight out of their ship?
Cap ships would actually be used in fleets! What a thought! Their survivability would actually be decent enough to survive a decent amount of time after being called primary in larger battles.
...lastly it would just be more fun. The devs would have more potential freedom with future mods, battles would be more fun and more tactical based, and I believe there would be more variation with the types of set ups ships could use that would actually work.
Ok.. my ideas aren't without issues, so before you guys start flaming, I'll flame myself first. Then you guys get your turn.
Capacitors of ships are too small, certain ships would just run out of caps too fast. So with such a major change, we'd need to up the capacitor of all ships.. but then that would rebalance all the ships, and it would take forever to iron out all the rebalancing issues.
Lag might get pretty bad. At least how things are now, ships die fast enough in big battles that lag is short lived as the ships pop.
There's a risk battles maybe a little dull if it takes too long to get through each others shields and armour, especially one on one. The devs would need to introduce features to make the longer battles exciting throughout their duration. Possibly by keeping our minds active with an array of new mods like boarding parties, point defenses to deal with those etc.
Your thoughts?
|
Lord WarATron
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 14:02:00 -
[2]
To be perfectly honest, the number 1 thing that need to change is give all ships a 1000% structure boost, but make damage on structure damage slots.
Removes instagankers, and makes fleet battles less of a point and click affair.
---
Slot 10 Akemons Modified 'Noble'Zet 5000 implant +8% Armour
FREE |
Tobias Sjodin
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 14:22:00 -
[3]
You could:
* Stop participating in BLOB-battles.
* Learn to tank better.
* Become a solo PvP:er (or a pirate) - fights usually last longer 1v1 or so.
|
Meeko Gloom
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 14:22:00 -
[4]
We already did, in RMR all ships got a 25% increase in HP
--------------------------
Guns dont Kill People
Drones Do |
Meeko Gloom
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 14:50:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Meeko Gloom on 26/06/2006 14:51:01
Edited by: Meeko Gloom on 26/06/2006 14:50:35
 Originally by: Tobias Sjodin
You could:
* Stop participating in BLOB-battles.
* Learn to tank better.
* Become a solo PvP:er (or a pirate) - fights usually last longer 1v1 or so.
solo pvp, naw
I killed a Barge and a Carcacal in a belt raid in less then 30 seconds on saturday in a Vexor
--------------------------
Guns dont Kill People
Drones Do |
Cade Morrigan
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 14:51:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Cade Morrigan on 26/06/2006 14:54:58
Originally by: Meeko Gloom
We already did, in RMR all ships got a 25% increase in HP
And we got t2 ammo to nullify that hp increase.
I like the idea of giving ships massive structure point increases, and introducing damage to slots/modules once armor is breached.
/Edit: imagine... you're through his armor and into structure but his LAR reparis his armor a bit and you're back to doing armor damage for a short time. Then, back into structure, PIFF! you broke his cap injector so his LAR has about two pulses left in it. Back into his structure again, one of his turrets breaks, there is no way he can break your tank now, he radios you and begs for mercy... :)
-= Save the Gila! Fix its grid and cpu! =-
|
Imhotep Khem
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 14:55:00 -
[7]
A Barge and a Caracal  Those are not exactly the epitome of tankness.
1v1 battles do last a long time if the players are evenly matched and the kits are too. With so many people in eve its not common though. In 00 I tend to have longer battles since most out here are pretty solid and lots of veterans too.
____
"If your not dyin' your not tryin'."
"Are you prepared to go all the way, Alexi?" DuGalle |
Freyda
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 14:58:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Freyda on 26/06/2006 14:59:30
Originally by: Tobias Sjodin
You could:
* Stop participating in BLOB-battles.
* Learn to tank better.
* Become a solo PvP:er (or a pirate) - fights usually last longer 1v1 or so.
Hardly, what I'd call long, the devs said it themselves in the blog on this site. Combat's too short lived to implement a lot of their ideas for making combat a lot more tactical. Simply put.. if they wanted to add in a lot more ship micromanagement it would be pointless, since capacitor wouldn't last long enough, and just gunning down your enemy would be faster than anything else you would want to do.
As many pirates have said, "it's quicker to just blow them up and see what they have than scanning the contents." I went out ganking with an alt in a kestrel with only a weeks training the other day, and my god was I shocked how fast things went down. All I needed was just to use my scanner decently and check people's profiles on local to identify targets, and that was that. As long as I picked the right target things were over in under 20 seconds with a week old character.
It was fun 3/4 times, after that it was kinda dull.
The most fun I have ever had was a group of 3 cruisers against an uber tanked dominix
It was great, and I couldn't help thinking how fun the people in great battles vs dreadnaughts (those things are built to last).
check out this video: Video
It looks like how I imagined all eve war would be when I first joined up. But it really isn't. 1 vs 1 pvp is just ego contests about who has the best fittings. Fleet battles are a best internet connection contest with who can call targets the fastest.
Little micro management of a ship is required once combat starts really. We can't directly control our ships with, wasd keys and stuff, which is fine I guess. But I have this kind of helpless feeling once a fight has started. A feeling like.. the winner of the fight is already decided. Little of what I do will change the outcome. Either I have better skills and am at the best range for my guns/equipment, or they are. If it's me, I win, if it's them, they win. I can't "try a special tactic" because there are none.
Another idea.. would be that shields aren't on by default.. as things currently are the idea of ever having shields down is silly and every caldari in the world would cry out and kill us with whining if they did that. With much more durable ships we could add things like ships being harder to detect with shields down, and not appearing on scanners at over 50 au with shields down.
Things that make the game more tactical than... "I have more bookmarks in this system.. therefore I'll get better optimal range.. end of".
I'd just like more micromanagement of my ships.. and for that battles need to be longer to make it worthwhile to implement any new features. (As a dev has thought)
|
Meeko Gloom
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 14:59:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Imhotep Khem
A Barge and a Caracal Those are not exactly the epitome of tankness.
1v1 battles do last a long time if the players are evenly matched and the kits are too. With so many people in eve its not common though. In 00 I tend to have longer battles since most out here are pretty solid and lots of veterans too.
yea I just pointing out the fact that he said solo hunting, and when you huntinh most ppl you pick are weaker targets that will fall quickly
--------------------------
Guns dont Kill People
Drones Do |
Jerick Ludhowe
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 15:06:00 -
[10]
I really think a decent structure boost is the best way to go.
|
Phoenix Jones
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 15:07:00 -
[11]
either or, all battles are just over too quickly.
---------------The Low Sec Issue-------------
Gatecamps that kill all who pass with no remorse and in many cases, no possible way of retaliation, is not PVP. |
Freyda
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 15:48:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Jerick Ludhowe
I really think a decent structure boost is the best way to go.
Yeah that does sound like a pretty good idea, once you're through a ships shields and armour plating then you start putting the hurt on ships systems. The less structure a ship has, the less functional it becomes.
As long as the structure boost was big enough, it would certainly make things a lot more exciting.
|
Laboratus
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 15:56:00 -
[13]
Making combat last longer is actually relatively easy and simple.
But it does not involve nerfing damage tank ratio. On the contrary.
 Boost damage on all large+ weapons about 2000%
Give a flight time on all ammunition (10k/s or so)
Make all ammunition targetable and with a very small sig radius.
Implement lines of fire, collision detection on ammunition and friendly fire.
Add hit locations on ships and vary resistances on different locations.
1.This will make support ships vital in fleets, as they are the only things that can shoot down incoming enemy fire.
2. Blobing will become increasingly difficult as you end up shooting your buddies in the back where resistances are at the lowest.
3. 1vs1 combat will last about 3 to 4 secs, as you don't have support that can protect you, making flying BS solo non profitable (yay)
|
O'Sirius
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 16:12:00 -
[14]
Sure, screw Minnies over even more.
You guys realise not all races are balanced with their dps? Some have much crapier dps in order to have bigger alpha strike.
|
Naginataii
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 16:13:00 -
[15]
Oh I defantly agree. 1000% structure increase and 1500% of battleships and above.
and with each 10% of hull lost, a mod goes offline intill the hull gets repaired above the value it lost. Also every 10% hull lost the ship looses 10% speed. So at 10% hull, you are only going at 10% your orginal speed and have lost the use of 9 random mods.
|
BrerLapin
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 16:14:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Lord WarATron
To be perfectly honest, the number 1 thing that need to change is give all ships a 1000% structure boost, but make damage on structure damage slots.
Removes instagankers, and makes fleet battles less of a point and click affair.
You know I was thinknig half damage & ranges but I like that idea more.
Originally by: Market Scanner
Maybe CCP needs to remove all 3D models of NPC's and replace them with white 2D squares with the NPC's name typed in the square. I miss pong.
|
Foulis
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 16:18:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Lord WarATron
To be perfectly honest, the number 1 thing that need to change is give all ships a 1000% structure boost, but make damage on structure damage slots.
Removes instagankers, and makes fleet battles less of a point and click affair.
If 40 BS fire at a ship with 1000% more structure, the ship mite last about 1.375 seconds longer.
----
Cake > Pie - Imaran
Originally by: CCP Hammer
Boobies
|
Flaming sambuka
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 16:19:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Freyda
Boarding parties of androids to steal cargo from cargo vessals after their shields fail.
ROFL! that made me laugh like hell, what about the armour tankers???
|
Jerick Ludhowe
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 16:20:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Flaming sambuka
Originally by: Freyda
Boarding parties of androids to steal cargo from cargo vessals after their shields fail.
ROFL! that made me laugh like hell, what about the armour tankers???
Bah, screw armor tankers, lets just make Calda.. Erm... shield tankers better.
|
13th
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 16:47:00 -
[20]
Boosting the armor, shields and/or structure would help, but I think that there would need to be a lot of adjustment to other mechanics, like warping. As it is currently, starting a warp is a very fast activity, it takes just a few seconds unless you need to turn and align, and even then it is reasonably quick to go to warp. If you make combat take 10x as long but leave the warping mechanism the same, nobody would die unless they are warp scrammed.
Things that I think would help to slow combat down:
Increase Armor + Shield by 200%. Tweak the shield recharge rate so it still regenerates the same amount per minute as before (so passive shield regen doesn't get a boost)
Increase Structure by 500%. Change it so that when a ship takes structure damage, modules randomly get damaged. A module that has > 50% damage goes offline and cannot be onlined until it is repaired. In addition, the engines and warp drives could be damaged.
When a ship has been out of combat for 5 minutes, it will start to repair damaged modules and subsystems up to 51% so they can be onlined again and the ship can limp to a repair station.
Make warping require some sort prep activity that must be completed before warp can be initiated. Either powering up the warp engine or some sort of calculation the computer must complete before it can safely warp. It should take some fixed amount of time depending upon the propulsion strength of the ship and it's mass (modifiable by different equipment modules such as warp core stabilizers and warp disruptors). If a ship is performing this pre-warp activity it should be visible to other ships in the area, to give them time to hit the ship with their warp scramblers/disruptors.
|
Cohkka
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 16:56:00 -
[21]
You would break all heavy cap depending ships and ships that don't rely on pure DPS to win. It's also a problem for solohunters. You have to kill your enemy as fast as possible in order to escape alive from the blob.
Don't speak english, just F5, F5, F5... |
Laboratus
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 16:59:00 -
[22]
Originally by: 13th
Make warping require some sort prep activity that must be completed before warp can be initiated. Either powering up the warp engine or some sort of calculation the computer must complete before it can safely warp.
Or you could just need all modules inactive and/or have 100% cap that can be brought down to 75% or 50% with skills (emergancy escape) and to 50% to 25% with max skills and max gang assist or something...
|
Veldrin Farwin
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 17:01:00 -
[23]
Always thought armor tanking was a bit ...... i mean repairing damage while being shot at to a solid armor plate is a bit well strange.
The idea i have for a longer more tactical battles different types of shield's can be introduced depending on race. The starting % of resist for each damage type could reflect different races combat styles and then have the ability (speed and amount would depend on skills/ship) to change the resist of your shields at any given time.
This would mean during battles both pilots would have to try and find a weakness in the others resist while at the same time changing there own to stay alive.
When the shields fail armor starts taking damage then structure (it would have to be vastly increased for this to work) which can only be repaired at a pos/station perhaps even permenant damage to mods that for bigger ships would take hours or even days to fix would make logistics more critical for the larger wars as you would be fighting with less and less effective ships if you failed to repair or replace.
|
St'oto
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 17:42:00 -
[24]
CCP try to solve the "short fights" problem with lag...
|
Malthros Zenobia
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 18:23:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Imhotep Khem
A Barge and a Caracal Those are not exactly the epitome of tankness.
A Caracal with 2 extedners and some hardeners has quite a nice tank actually.
|
Grim Vandal
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 18:45:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Grim Vandal on 26/06/2006 18:46:43
you can really only start to prolong battles if you introduce the following:
You have to be able to cause serious dmg to someone without killing his ship.
Leaking dmg to modules is a first good step however I would move to even more extreme changes:
remove hull and armor reps! and let shield boosters affect shield recharge rate only!
boost armor hardeners CONSIDERABLY however let them use way more cap (like one 80% hardener uses as much as one large armor rep which actually wouldnt be ingame anymore)
now give every ship:
200% shield
500% armor (chance to leak 25 % dmg to structure = 2.5%)
and 1000% structure (chance to leak 0.1 % dmg to modules = 30%)
dmg controls would effect the chance of leaking dmg to modules instead of giving resistance to shield and armor
this would mean: an armor tank will BY FAR withstand the greatest beating however it cant be sustained at all which actually means you can be killed by ONE CIVILIAN GUN shooting at you for a few days
advantage: f.ucking ubber resistance, huge amount of hps
disadvantage: cant armorrepair itself except at stations or remotely
disadvantage: chance to leak dmg to structure which cant be repaired at all = costs isk AND small chance to dmg modules which cant be repaired remotely but in stations for a small sum however this is VERY annoying (like your interceptor lost his mwd)
shield tank:
advantage: shields recharge themself
disadvantage: not so high resistances can be achieved compared to armor tanks
disadvantage: shield booster affect shield recharge which is not constant (eg. faster recharge at about 35% and really slow recharge below 10%) which means alpha strikes become important to break shield tanks
btw:
all numbers are farted out of my head ...
flame away 
Greetings Grim |
Talen Kross
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 18:58:00 -
[27]
I know it isn't thougth through, but an increase in structure HP and damage to structure equals damage to mods, so as the ship takes a beating it makes more sense to runaway. Then the attacking ships could change target to a bigger threat (fully functioning ship). Obvioiusly the increase in structure would be even bigger for the larger ships.
-------------------------
Tuxford: "Besides I've got the nerfbat now, tremble in fear"
Eviltwin I: "...or keep em scrambled in a belt while you goto dinner for 15min"
|
Necrologic
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 18:58:00 -
[28]
The ability to kill people quickly is to some extent essential. If you can't kill a target before it gets to the gate you are never going to kill anyone. In blob fights you die far too quickly, in small gangs and solo the time is fine.
|
Laboratus
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 19:04:00 -
[29]
I think the whole point of the suggestion is to make the damage a bit more "realistic". The ships lose their systems and become inefficient, so they have to limp to the nearest logistic station/carrier/logistic ship to repair and fit new modules. As good modules are a lot more difficult to find than ship hulls and you won't get any insurance to get those new modules, since your ship didn't blow up...
|
ALPHA12125
|
Posted - 2006.06.26 19:11:00 -
[30]
if you give me a 1000% structure increase i will have around 70k of structure on my megathron. The moment i have that i will only fit 1 damage control and stop tanking alltogether.
it will remove any role to tank at all simply because it takes time to kill your ship anyway. so i will be fitting damagemods and ecm and whatnots.
tbh atm i like the current system except for capital ships which are a joke hullwise.
personally i would like to see a distinction between the different classes alot more. bs cant hit frigs and frigs dont do enough damage to hurt bs etc. that would make it alot more tactical
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |