EVE Search - Targeting, Sensors and ECM Overhaul

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Targeting, Sensors and ECM Overhaul

» 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 - 0 post(s)
Swiftstrike1 Swiftstrike Incorporated 734	Posted - 2014.08.05 20:43:00 - [1] - Quote Targeting, Sensors and ECM Overhaul Aims 1.Create interdependencies between the 5 Targeting attributes: Maximum Targeting Range, Sensor Strength, Scan Resolution, Signature Radius and Max Locked Targets. 2.Enable new strategies and tactics based on these new connections. 3.Make life harder for Devs who balance internet spaceship stats lol jk nüè 4.Eliminate the binary nature of ECM and bring it in line with other e-war types Why? EVE is constantly evolving. New features arise, old features changeGÇª the only constant is that every change enables new gameplay and experiences. This overhaul of a system which has been largely unchanged since day 1 will bring a variety of new gameplay. Step 1 GÇô a new game mechanic Sensor Strength becomes a resource like your PG and CPU, which you must manage appropriately. You spend it by targeting objects (ships, NPCs, wrecks, etcGÇª) in space. The amount of Sensor Strength you have available determines how many objects you can lock. If at any point your GÇ£usedGÇ¥ Sensor Strength exceeds your maximum Sensor Strength, you lose target locks until this is no longer true. This could potentially cause you to lose all your target locks. This will tie in with the ECM overhaul in step 4. Step 2 GÇô creating interdependency Remove the Maximum Locked Targets attribute. That is now determined by your Sensor Strength, your Scan Resolution, the Signature Radii of the targets you have locked and your range from them. There is still a hard cap on Maximum Locked Targets based on your skill level in the Target Management and Advanced Target Management skills. Step 3 GÇô fleshing out the bones The amount of Sensor Strength required to lock a particular target will be determined by your Scan Resolution, the Signature Radius of the target and your range from it. Without going into any numbers: GÇóHaving high Scan Resolution reduces the Sensor Strength required to lock the target GÇóA target with a higher Signature Radius requires less Sensor Strength to lock up GÇóIf you have sufficient Sensor Strength available you may lock a target that is beyond your Maximum Targeting Range. However, the amount of Sensor Strength required to do so increases exponentially outside your Maximum Targeting Range. (Think of it like turret falloff, but for sensors!) Step 4 GÇô ECM overhaul Now that we have Sensor Strength as a vital resource for all things involving targeting other spaceships, we can change the way ECM works and bring it in line with other forms of electronic warfare. As an example, I present to youGÇª GÇóMultispectral ECM I o-20% to targetGÇÖs maximum Sensor Strength The implications of an ECM mechanic like this are numerous and I could write such a massive wall of text about it that not even a PL wrecking ball fleet could knock it downGÇª but IGÇÖd rather let you think about them yourselves than list them all here. Results GÇóSensor Strength becomes a resource that you must manage during a fight. GÇóOld modules and tactics have new effects: oe.g. a sensor booster improves your Scan Resolution. This means you use less Sensor Strength when locking targets and are therefore more resilient to ECM. It also potentially increases your Max Locked Targets and/or lets you lock farther beyond your Max Targeting Range. oe.g. Skirmish boosts that reduce your Signature Radius will increase the amount of Sensor Strength the enemy need to use to target you, making their entire fleet slightly more susceptible to ECM. oEtcGÇª GÇóAll ECM and sensor strengths would need to be rebalanced in order to make these changes feasible. Fleet Bookmarks New Gravimetric Sites Med Clones 2.0
Fer'isam K'ahn None Of One 290	Posted - 2014.08.05 21:01:00 - [2] - Quote I like the basic idea. Though I have some issues with range, it either will not matter or will be the determined role depending on combat range. Though it makes logic sense (lore wise) It should be taken out of the accounts. The other issues I have is, will it work ? With FCs only calling primary the only ships that need to lock more then one are logies and they will be close and boosted anyway. You would lose most of the tinkering range if fleets only lock single targets (max 2) no matter what. And for balance reasons, the sensor strength would need to be almost identical for all ships or you will have real issues with it - and with players. So after this, if those three won't work, whats the point ? - Don't get me wrong, I like it, but still not really seing the application it is supposed to have. Cheers. Are you sure your issues aren't elsewhere ?!
Swiftstrike1 Swiftstrike Incorporated 734	Posted - 2014.08.05 21:12:00 - [3] - Quote Thanks for the feedback. Balancing something like this will always be tricky. At the end of the day I would like to see sensor strength become an important consideration in every ship, almost on the same level as DPS, speed and EHP. As for the rest... well that all depends on the balance. Without hard numbers, it's all just hypothetical :) Fleet Bookmarks New Gravimetric Sites Med Clones 2.0
epicurus ataraxia Lazerhawks 891	Posted - 2014.08.05 23:10:00 - [4] - Quote You have clearly put a lot of thought into this idea, and I can see where you are coming from, I think. As you realise this would have very wide ranging effects, and I am trying to see where it would lead and whether it would be a net good. I do have one concern however, this is EVE and no good idea goes unpunished. There is always someone who can use such a wide ranging idea to mask or hide a trojan horse. i am not saying this is in any way your intention, but as it is your idea, and you know it best, give some thought as to how it could be exploited, because as it is such a wide ranging concept and change it would be well nigh impossible to roll back. But congratulations for the thoughts and ideas, it is always good to consider new thinking. i look forward to reading more. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
Edwin McAlister Interstellar Engineering and Electronics INC 29	Posted - 2014.08.06 00:08:00 - [5] - Quote while i very much like this idea, my first initial thought is, the amount of data going back and forth between client and server and how would this play out in massive blob 1000+ ship environment. small scale or medium scale it could work.
Jessica Danikov Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension 373	Posted - 2014.08.06 00:15:00 - [6] - Quote I actually like the idea of removing the max target cap and making it really easy to, say, target 8 capitals, but much harder to target 8 interceptors. I like the idea of having a falloff that increases the 'cost' of locking and how that cost can increase vulnerability to ECM. I mean, you could almost change it to work like capacitor- lock too many targets, you start running out of 'sensor' and start dropping targets. ECM would then be like a neut effect, reducing your ability to maintain locks rather than eliminating it entirely. The main concerns I'd have are the effects it might have on certain doctrines, e.g. alpha maelstroms. Taking away hard locking limits may make them overly powerful in certain situations, especially considering the fact that if you're alpha'ing through targets, you only need to lock the primary and you have a long reload in which to lock the next target. Still, I think this idea deserves more attention, a bit more rigour, and serious consideration. What a rare treat.
Swiftstrike1 Swiftstrike Incorporated 735	Posted - 2014.08.06 00:23:00 - [7] - Quote Jessica Danikov wrote: you could almost change it to work like capacitor- lock too many targets, you start running out of 'sensor' and start dropping targets. ECM would then be like a neut effect, reducing your ability to maintain locks rather than eliminating it entirely. I like that a lot. Definitely a strong contender Fleet Bookmarks New Gravimetric Sites Med Clones 2.0
Christopher Tsutola Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 18	Posted - 2014.08.06 06:13:00 - [8] - Quote I would love this to be implemented but CCP wants to make things easier for new players to understand not add content that would scare them casuals away we would probably see a removal of tracing speed before this was implemented but still i'd love to have something like this
Swiftstrike1 Swiftstrike Incorporated 735	Posted - 2014.08.06 17:00:00 - [9] - Quote I admit that these changes are ambitious, but I didn't use the word "overhaul" for nothing! I strongly believe that (if implemented well) a system like this, where every ship's sensor systems are strongly interconnected, will be: fun realistic immersive Additionally, I think it is necessary if we are ever going to resolve "the ECM problem" and bring it in line with other forms of e-war. Fleet Bookmarks New Gravimetric Sites Med Clones 2.0

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.