EVE Search - Kill Instas - why not just allow "warp to" distance to be set lower?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Kill Instas - why not just allow "warp to" distance to be set lower?

» 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)
Haikar E'Kunni	Posted - 2006.08.25 13:17:00 - [1] Setting a minimum "warp to" distance to 15Km requires everyone to go out and create tons of instas. Everyone knows about instas and everyone uses them. If there was an option to "warp to" destination - say 1Km, then people could dispose of instas and just use that in-game functionality instead. When a neat idea - instas - becomes the standard, then maybe it's time to consider why everyone needs them and adjust the game.
Maya Rkell Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2006.08.25 13:41:00 - [2] 'cos that makes things too easy. But, but he says... if we are to make people more vulnrable, is not actively adding interdiction methods just as viable as making peopel more inherently vulnrable. Ah yes! So, yes, 0/1km warp and a selection of new warp bubbles, warp coils etc... some of which work in Empire (especially against war enemies).
Haikar E'Kunni Amarr Federation Industries Inc.	Posted - 2006.08.26 15:11:00 - [3] the problem is that instas provide a work-around for the in game requirement of having to sit in space for a minute while you jet your way to the gate. If the designers want us to have to slow-poke it to the gate, or station, then there should be an area around the gate that you can't drop out of warp into regardless of instas. Like an anti-warp field with a radius of 15Km or whatever. This would force you to drop out of warp and approach regardless of instas. They could logic it by saying that the warp bubble breaks down within a certain distance of objects as massive as gates and bases. I guess what I'm saying is if CCP wants people to have to travel to the gate under normal power then instas are taking advantage of a bug and should be stomped out. If CCP doesn't mind people dropping out of warp right at the gate, then make that a "warp to" setting. Either way, it eliminates the clutter of instas.
Maya Rkell Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2006.08.26 15:16:00 - [4] CCP are interested in their being vulnrability to PvPers. My above idea fills this and allows manual 0km warping.
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.26 15:43:00 - [5] Originally by: Maya Rkell 'cos that makes things too easy. But, but he says... if we are to make people more vulnrable, is not actively adding interdiction methods just as viable as making peopel more inherently vulnrable. Ah yes! So, yes, 0/1km warp and a selection of new warp bubbles, warp coils etc... some of which work in Empire (especially against war enemies). No. Adds a WHOLE NEW MECHANISM. Can't do that. Just remove the damn things. Warping to 15km is good enough.
Maya Rkell Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2006.08.26 15:47:00 - [6] Good enough to change the gameplay to Shadowbane style and kill off most of the playerbase, sure. I'd rather have a proper soloution rather than "good enough to be terrible".
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.26 15:52:00 - [7] Originally by: Maya Rkell Good enough to change the gameplay to Shadowbane style and kill off most of the playerbase, sure. I'd rather have a proper soloution rather than "good enough to be terrible". What proper solution? Warp to 0? Why do industrials even have a lower speed than interceptors? Why is there a cargo bay expander penalty on speed? For ****s and giggles? We got the tractor beam, so its not about having to be slow in picking up loot. Its about slower travel. And warping to 0 on every gate is only gonna make travel faster. So we can have everybody in battleships all the time because there is no reason to be in another ship really. Bigger and bigger blobs because even if your fleet is out of position, thanks to instas/warping to 0 you can be in any place in Eve in just a bit of time.
Maya Rkell Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2006.08.26 15:56:00 - [8] "Why do industrials even have a lower speed than interceptors?" Because they're slower. And they're less agile to. And guess what's important for warping? Ah, agility. The RATIOS of travel time are not grossly distorted by instas (except freighters). Cargo expanders have the opportunity cost of NOT fitting WCS (safety) or nanos (agility). That's why it's fine. If you want to go slow everywhere with BS, fine. Frigates are still going to dance rings arround your fleet. "Bigger and bigger blobs because even if your fleet is out of position, thanks to instas/warping to 0 you can be in any place in Eve in just a bit of time." yawns And this is different from the fleet scouts with full instaBM's for Eve how? Oh wait, it's not. Except it's less laggy, and there are more tools to catch the fleet. That sounds suspiciously like "win" to me!
Haikar E'Kunni Amarr Federation Industries Inc.	Posted - 2006.08.26 19:34:00 - [9] I see instas as just being a way to take advantage of a bug in the code. The intent (based one minimum Warp To distance being 15Km) was that there would always be an opportunity to nab someone as they coast to their final destination. By placing a BM 15Km from your REAL intended destination, you're dropping in right where you wanna be. If they wanted us to be able to drop right in on the destination, they would have coded it that way. instas are taking advantage of game mechanics, not playing the spirit of the game better.
Maya Rkell Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2006.08.26 19:41:00 - [10] 2 1/2 years ago, yea. Now they're core gameplay.

Noveron Caldari Celestial Horizon Corp. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.26 22:34:00 - [11] It certainly would get rid of the insta's and people keep amassing huge collection of instas from everywhere to everywhere flooding the database of the game. Maybe something that can be done so people have to be there while travelling is making autopilot disable at each gate when you have set your warp distance to something less than 15km. So those in, for instance, empire who want to travel afk have to set their warp to distance to 15km minimun. And Those who travel to or through 0.0 like everyone does will be able to set autopilot destination but it will just remain active until it reaches the destination gate. Pros: * People that use and amass instas wont need them any more to travel, like it happens in 0.0 now, everyone sets their autopilot destination but they disable it and use their instas to travel and just have the autopilot route as a reference, so its the same thing but you get rid of all those instas * People travelling afk will travel as always, slower and dumper travel. * Prople in empire who want to travel fast setting their warp distance to 0, have to select your destination in every sector cause your autopilot disables when you select warp to a gate and you have set a distance less than 15km. * You would free the game database from all that crap, thus, much better database performance for the game. Cons (for some): * Some people who dont have instas right now will be able to warp to 0 with this method, anyways, it will be manually. * Those who gate camp on low sec will have to really find a distracted person travelling afk to be able to hunt them in lower than 0.5. Gate camping will be a tough job.
Reggie Stoneloader	Posted - 2006.08.26 23:33:00 - [12] I'm with Maya on this one. Some clever new ways to force fights would make a 0km warp a reasonable feature. Interdiction spheres will still pull everything out of warp 20km from the gate, and then all the speed differences between different ship types will be a huge factor. A following tech that counts as aggression, and thus can only be used against war targets in empire (or as a suicide maneuver, perhaps) combined with a mod that disrupts warp precision by 20km could have the effect of a warp bubble (or even better, since a target behind the gate is even more screwed than a target stopped 20km in front of it) in empire, but only on valid flagged or warred targets. I think I'll flesh that idea out in a new thread. I'm all about clever new ways to make people fight, and I'm all about shorter travel times, so the 0km/warp disruption ideas are right up my alley.
Maya Rkell Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2006.08.27 00:33:00 - [13] Noveron, what's wrong with a minimum AFK warp distance of 15km, period?
Trader Darin Gallente Sky Transport and Production	Posted - 2006.08.27 02:42:00 - [14] Warping to 15 - result of tecnological solution of warp technology. It accurasy can not be performed. So we have error in jups - 15 km. So will it be so :)
sr blackout Minmatar	Posted - 2006.08.27 07:00:00 - [15] Edited by: sr blackout on 27/08/2006 07:05:20 Originally by: Malachon Draco Originally by: Maya Rkell Good enough to change the gameplay to Shadowbane style and kill off most of the playerbase, sure. I'd rather have a proper soloution rather than "good enough to be terrible". What proper solution? Warp to 0? Why do industrials even have a lower speed than interceptors? Why is there a cargo bay expander penalty on speed? For ****s and giggles? We got the tractor beam, so its not about having to be slow in picking up loot. Its about slower travel. And warping to 0 on every gate is only gonna make travel faster. So we can have everybody in battleships all the time because there is no reason to be in another ship really. Bigger and bigger blobs because even if your fleet is out of position, thanks to instas/warping to 0 you can be in any place in Eve in just a bit of time. your forgeting 1 key thing... warping off... agility and size etc... that would still be in game... all ppl would have to do is wait on the other side of the gate as they do now... the only thing would change is warping in... i can live with that tbh i also like the idea of say having auto pilot not being able to be turned on with the 0km mark... and have it work with say 10km or something like that... they could change that for different sized ships... say that the safe way for the computer to warp in and auto pilot would be X distance based on ship size... so frigs and small ships would come into 5km and freighters and what not might come into like 15km as is... and everything else in between O_o freighters would still have to align and go what the 75% of there speed to warp off... so i do not see the problem
Whitethorn	Posted - 2006.08.27 08:39:00 - [16] The only way to "get rid" of most instas without losing a chunk of the player-base is to replace them with an in-game mechanism that makes travel instas irrelevant. The vast majority of bookmarks are to aid in travel, to eliminate that 15km distance to the gate to speed up travel. Noveron's idea of allowing warp to 0km but without autopilot would replace instas with an in-game mechanism serving the same purpose - and eliminate the need for three quarters of the current bookmarks. If there are concerns over the impact to alliance space, make it a mechanism only available in Empire space (0.1+). You can counter the reduced warp-in distance using more interdictors and warp bubbles and the like, and introducing more items of equipment along those lines - as suggested by Maya.
Prestidigitator Celestial Horizon Corp. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.27 09:36:00 - [17] It's a great idea, and one that I really do hope the devs recognise the value of. My own 0.02isk - for those folks who are concerned that implementing such an idea would mean that everyone (including newbies) instantly gets the equivalent of Full BM sets for every region in eve, how about tying it to a skill (which perhaps has a prerequisite of Nav 5 or something), which drops your 'manual warp-to' distance by 3km per level. (i do suspect that all this has been suggested before though) :)
Cromoxan	Posted - 2006.08.27 10:06:00 - [18] My personal idea, now that every1 is giving in theres are: base 15k warp to gate skill 3k less distance pr level ie: at level 5 0k warp, so this require a fix to the autopilot.. autopilot have a 15 sec delay from when the autopilot press jump to you actually jump. If you do it yourself ( pay attention to when you reach gate ) theres no delay. You are NOT invoulnable in those 15 sec sp every pirate can shoot you. I got 2 ideas to bookmarks: do nothin.. if the above is implemented most would remove all their bookmarks near gates ie 90% of them... ( you migt even run a cleanup that removes all bookmarks within 100k of gates. idea no.2 a new bookmark system that are a tap like evemail or charecter sheet in the menu. This tool give you 25 bookmarks you can make. extra: computer operation skill: 25 bookmarks pr level advanced computer operation skill : 50 bookmarks pr level this tool can negotiate with other people and you can give them bookmarks. relay bookmark to gang relay bookmark to corp relay bookmark to allience when you look in your tool you can then accept replayed bookmarks or reject them.. basically thats the idea.. hope at least it can give people some ideas to build on.. cromoxan
Reggie Stoneloader	Posted - 2006.08.27 16:49:00 - [19] The skill discussions come by again and again, and the eventual consensus is that you simply won't be able to compet in EvE until it's at least at level IV, so depending on the multiplier that's between one day and a week of training that absolutely everybody has to do, with an extra week to two months for those that want to be competitive at the top level. We already need Engineering, Electronics, Gunnery, Signature Analysis and Drones at level 5 before we're not crippled anymore, adding another skill that's mandatory for all careers is sadistic.
Aralt Aran	Posted - 2006.08.27 17:07:00 - [20] Edited by: Aralt Aran on 27/08/2006 17:15:53 Make travel moduls ,like every modul brings you 3km closer to a jump gate ,you fit them in low slots . Simple isn`t it.

Reggie Stoneloader	Posted - 2006.08.27 17:50:00 - [21] Originally by: Aralt Aran Make travel moduls ,like every modul brings you 3km closer to a jump gate ,you fit them in low slots . Simple isn`t it. Actually, that's pretty nice.
Noveron Caldari Celestial Horizon Corp. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.27 21:18:00 - [22] Originally by: Maya Rkell Noveron, what's wrong with a minimum AFK warp distance of 15km, period? mm.. I dont understand.. nothing is wrong, but to travel afk someone should set 15km in warp to distance, thats what i said in my opinion. You dont agree?
Xaranath	Posted - 2006.08.28 00:01:00 - [23] Originally by: Aralt Aran Make travel moduls ,like every modul brings you 3km closer to a jump gate ,you fit them in low slots . Simple isn`t it. That works, but probably you would want to have a module like that do say 5km per module or more? Otherwise we're looking at Industrials and BS as the primary beneficiaries. Also, it unfairly disadvantages armour tankers. Shield tankers would get to keep a good portion of their combat effectiveness and have insta-like gate travel, but for the same travel, armour tankers would be completely nerfed. Perhaps instead of a pure module or pure skill solution to instas, we could have four things done: 1) Add a new "warp-to" distance - You will have Warp to (15km), and warp to (Close). 2) Warp to "Close" cannot be set as a default distance. (Rationale is that it is dangerous, and requires a human pod pilot to devote their full attention to the task) 3) Add a new skill, "Warp Navigation", say rank 5. 4) Add two new modules, "Warp Targetting Array" (med) and "Warp Navigation Computer" (low) The two modules would each give a 10% bonus to "warp flight accuracy" per level of "Warp Navigation" skill. The Warp-to "Close" option would warp you to as close as your warp accuracy allows, which would be determined by what percentage of the 15km warp-in is eliminated by the combination of your skill and modules. Mounting only one module reduces manual travel time, but doesn't provide instajumping - at best it cuts the 15km gate trip in half to 7500m. More than one module is required, even with level V Warp Navigation, to instajump. Now, even with warp navigation V, you require 3 of these "10%" modules to insta. This is an incentive to get better modules. But, it has been mentioned that getting the skill to IV or higher for effectiveness is a pain because everyone will have to do it. I agree wholeheartedly. So, here is a table I calculated of skill level versus modules required for jumping within gate activation range: First, for 10% modules: Level 1: Impossible Level 2: 8 mods required Level 3: 5 mods required Level 4: 4 mods required Level 5: 3 mods required Now, for 12% (named) modules: Level 1: Still impossible Level 2: 7 mods Level 3: 4 mods Level 4: 3 mods Level 5: 2 mods For 17% (tech II) modules: Level 1: Still impossible Level 2: 5 modules Level 3: 3 modules Level 4: 2 modules Level 5: 1 module Now, at level 5 WN skill, and Named mods, you require 2 mods to instajump. On the other hand, you can jump to within 6km with one Named module. Maybe that's all you need if you're flying a ship with a good tank - it's up to you. Of course Tech II and level V skill is required for single-module instas. Having these modules taking up med or lowslots (or both) will certainly affect the combat capabilities of your ship, which I view as a good thing. Instas should not allow a ship to be immune to danger, and making a ship more vulnerable through lack of tanking / ganking slots seems a reasonable compromise. As far as bookmarks go, I think a good compromise to rid us of insta BMs would be to only allow bookmarking of large or anchored structures. POS towers, sentries, gates, secure cans, stations, moons, roids, beacons, deadspace gates, etc. Also, if the item no longer exists, the BM should fail. As a tradeoff, since that would cripple safespotting, you should be able to cancel a warp in-flight - again, eliminating wasteful BMs. Should probably be able to "stop gang in warp" too. Anyway, just some ideas. - X
Kael Brahe	Posted - 2006.08.28 00:06:00 - [24] Nobody would want to give up bookmarks for the new system unless it's strictly enforced, and it's going to be difficult to filter millions of bookmarks for those that are intended as instas and those that are, say, 300km observation points at gates. Forcing people to fit modules in order to do what they can do without fitting modules is just going to cause complaints, and it removes the personal effort required in gaining the ability now, as getting bookmarks have it. Instead, I strongly favor this idea <The ideas in this post do not reflect the beliefs or opinions of 20th Legion.>
Xaranath	Posted - 2006.08.28 00:25:00 - [25] Oh, just adjusted the tables a bit to accomodate a small change: Warp Navigation skill should give a 5% boost to warp accuracy per level, which changes the tables a little: First, for 10% modules: Level 1: "Impossible" Level 2: 6 mods required Level 3: 4 mods required Level 4: 3 mods required Level 5: 2 mods required Now, for 12% (named) modules: Level 1: Still impossible Level 2: 5 mods Level 3: 3 mods Level 4: 2 mods Level 5: 2 mods For 16% (tech II) modules: Level 1: 8 modules Level 2: 4 modules Level 3: 2 modules Level 4: 2 modules Level 5: 1 module Bear in mind that although the module count looks high, you can use either high or lowslots, or both. And remember this is just an idea, not a fixed-in-stone proposal at this point :) No flames please :) Constructive comments and criticism welcome :) - X
Xaranath	Posted - 2006.08.28 00:33:00 - [26] Ok, on seeing This Thread I think that although my idea has merit, this idea perhaps has more. The "Drift rate" mentioned could be a function of skill level in astronavigation skill or similar. Yummy! /me bows to the better idea - X
Aralt Aran	Posted - 2006.08.28 15:13:00 - [27] The idea ,with mods it`s more like a travel kit,when you want to pvp ,you can fit,what ever you want . I know some indy`s have 4 low slots .The can have a bonus on those travel mods (ship bonus).we solved the problem it wasn`t hard,lets see what ccp is doeing with it .
Maya Rkell Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2006.08.28 21:29:00 - [28] Originally by: Aralt Aran Edited by: Aralt Aran on 27/08/2006 17:15:53 Make travel moduls ,like every modul brings you 3km closer to a jump gate ,you fit them in low slots . Simple isn`t it. No, removing 5 lowslots from most ships is NOT nice. Yes, 5. If you don't insta in many situations, you are dead. Snipers will eat you alive at 3km in even slight lag. It dosn't WORK. Xaranath, "Rationale is that it is dangerous" What danger? Fluff text is dictated by gameplay, not the other way round. You just require training the skill high and 1 named module, period. "Maybe that's all you need if you're flying a ship with a good tank - it's up to you" NO speed is sufficient in lag. Period. "will certainly affect the combat capabilities of your ship, which I view as a good thing. Instas should not allow a ship to be immune to danger, No, nerfing your ship for a basic game function is not a good thing. The module is required for function (anyone without one won't be admitted to any deacent corp's game), and gives NO benefit beyond enabling normal gameplay. Further, the immune thing is comolete and utter fictional rubbish, you can be caught the other side. At BEST, they provide partial protection. "I think a good compromise to rid us of insta BMs" That is not what is being asked for. A soloution for their effects are. "compromise" means "nerf them all", in Avon-language, and has ensured that no compromise is ever avaliable. "cancel a warp in-flight" NO! This means you can NEVER catch a ship which gets into warp. Sigh. That is far more of a protection than instas have ever been. Noveron, what I said was if the distance is set to less than 15km, then it should just be 15km for AP. No need to force people to set it. //Maya


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.