EVE Search - Speed Kills Eve gameplay Fix

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Speed Kills Eve gameplay Fix

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Rekam Evarg Caldari Union Of Xtreme Military The Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2007.02.15 08:30:00 - [1] Speed kills, itÆs killing EVE but it should be killing the speedsters This is not a whine it is a suggestion to make speed more realistic in comparison to ship size. First of all, we all know the problem, but for those who choice to ignore it or pretend it doesnÆt exist hereÆs a short an sweet recap. Interceptors were designs to be fast and agile however now days certain Battleships and Battlecruisers can easily out run them. Yes I am talking Nanofiber and Inertial Stabilizers type setups. To me a Battleship out running an interceptor is absolutely ridiculous, it is indeed laughable. But what makes it even more laughable is the fact that whilst it is doing this insane act it suffers no consequence. Ok to the point, my suggestion on one way to fix this which would, imho, make an interesting ôfixö to this problem. Firstly, Give every ship in game a maximum safe flying speed (MSFS) this could be equal to base ship speed fitted with one MWD, one nanofiber and one Inertial Stabilizers. For every 1% over that MSFS the ship goes the ships shield and armour resists should drop by 1% therefore at twice the MSFS the ship should have no resists. Above twice MSFS the ship should start to break up again a simple calculation for this could be every 1% of speed over 2xMSFS = 1% of Shield, armour and Hull damage per second. This would allow someone to use the speed if they wanted, but at very high risk. Ships like the Vaga, whoÆs only asset is speed, should have there bonuses change so one is 5% extra MSFS per level. CCP, Please end this jokeà Rek RekamEvarg Oh Hello, You can see the pub from here. No Animals were harmed in the writing of this post
Sokratesz Guardians of Hell's Gate Tactical Narcotics Team	Posted - 2007.02.15 08:42:00 - [2] some suggestions... - Reduce all battleship base speed by 30% - Overdrive injectors and nanofibers = percentage increase instead of fixed number - Reduce effectiveness of i-stabs by 25% Suicide is bad, hmkay? (clickety clickety)
blackjorj	Posted - 2007.02.15 08:57:00 - [3] its a sound idea - rekams suggestions on a ship disintegrating or having the possiblity of such is both realistic and an awnser that would only affect those taking this route with their setups. The standard BS speed is slow enough atm thanks very much so lets not go there lol - i dont see why this should affect those that use a BS "properly".
Soraya Silvermoon Union Of Xtreme Military The Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2007.02.15 09:46:00 - [4] to complicated.. just make nanofibers and inertias stacking penalized like everything else in this game and problem is solved.. small ships have few slots so wount matter as frigs usally only fit1-3 mods but you wount have bses fitting 7 nanofibers.
Rekam Evarg Caldari Union Of Xtreme Military The Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2007.02.15 15:35:00 - [5] Originally by: Soraya Silvermoon to complicated.. just make nanofibers and inertias stacking penalized like everything else in this game and problem is solved.. small ships have few slots so wount matter as frigs usally only fit1-3 mods but you wount have bses fitting 7 nanofibers. granted, that would work. The reason I suggested the idea of taking damage etc. is to allow everyone the choice, by simply nerfing it, it takes away thre option all together. One of the best things about this game is variaty of setups and uses etc. But removing the choices altogether is taking things aways from the game, by allowing choices but at a cost adds to the game. But all in all at the end of the day some thing needs to be done to stop / restrict this madness or before long all you will see if fleets of Nanos RekamEvarg Oh Hello, You can see the pub from here. No Animals were harmed in the writing of this post
Uncle Smokey	Posted - 2007.02.15 16:14:00 - [6] word! ive never been that into physics but could someone gimme a hint why do i-stabs give mass reduction but tuning with lightweight parts does not? just curious.
Angelus Xenotov	Posted - 2007.02.15 16:32:00 - [7] With respect, Speed has its advantages and its disadvantages already, full speed = no tank. A web and abit of brains can make a Nano-whatever bite the dust fast. Look at it this way, a battleship has massive engines, right? Rip out every piece of internal structure and that thing is now basically a set of massive engines with little else. Its obviously going to go faster than a small engine with a small amount of mass, but its also going to get ripped apart by anyone who knows how to get them. So really, MSFS idea is poor beyond words.
Rekam Evarg Caldari Union Of Xtreme Military The Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2007.02.15 16:52:00 - [8] Thanks for your contributions Lets look at the pure mechanics. Get somthing that us designed and engineered to travel at a given speed, and take given loads, stresses etc. Weaken it by removing all the structure then ask it to do 4 or 5 times the speed, thus taking maybe upto 20 or 30 time the stress strains loading etc. Now tell me it wouldnt start to break up. As to take them down with a web... thats fantastic and very well thought out, but you forgot to explain how to catch a ship that is faster than an interceptor!! oh yes use another Nano type ship, back to square one, every one need one, end of game play... I know there are ways to catch them, I also know that if nano pilot uses good tatics and thinks about things, it is very very hard to catch them without alot of luck. There is a real problem with game play balance here and I am trying to suggest an altenative to just a pure nerf, one that adds to realism and still allows for choice. Regards respectfully Rek RekamEvarg Oh Hello, You can see the pub from here. No Animals were harmed in the writing of this post
Tarron Sarek Gallente Solid Industries Inc.	Posted - 2007.02.15 16:56:00 - [9] Edited by: Tarron Sarek on 15/02/2007 16:54:44 Originally by: Sokratesz some suggestions... - Reduce all battleship base speed by 30% - Overdrive injectors and nanofibers = percentage increase instead of fixed number - Reduce effectiveness of i-stabs by 25% No, no and no. I think you haven't thought those through. If at all the game needs more base speed and less speed increasing factors. Pimped and un-pimped max speed shouldn't differ by 100-200% or more. The devs would also do themselves quite a favour with this, because the bigger the span of values gets, the harder it is to balance. I'd like to agree that stacking penalties might be the easiest and best ad hoc solution. ___________________________________ _/_/ Game balance isn't just a luxury \_\_
Angelus Xenotov	Posted - 2007.02.15 17:16:00 - [10] Originally by: Rekam Evarg Thanks for your contributions Lets look at the pure mechanics. Get somthing that us designed and engineered to travel at a given speed, and take given loads, stresses etc. Weaken it by removing all the structure then ask it to do 4 or 5 times the speed, thus taking maybe upto 20 or 30 time the stress strains loading etc. Now tell me it wouldnt start to break up. As to take them down with a web... thats fantastic and very well thought out, but you forgot to explain how to catch a ship that is faster than an interceptor!! oh yes use another Nano type ship, back to square one, every one need one, end of game play... I know there are ways to catch them, I also know that if nano pilot uses good tatics and thinks about things, it is very very hard to catch them without alot of luck. There is a real problem with game play balance here and I am trying to suggest an altenative to just a pure nerf, one that adds to realism and still allows for choice. Regards respectfully Rek Given that you're not removing ALL of your structure, just replacing it with much lighter material (Which breaks under weapons fire much easier than normal), add in the factor that its Space, so unless you're being effected by a gravitational field, stress is purely engine based and given the fact that most space-faring races would probably realise that and build their vessels specifically to counter any engine stress and you're boned. Nanophoons and such only work if its attacking one person, if you have two people vs one ship and you still can't take it down, you need to go back to school.
Tarron Sarek Gallente Solid Industries Inc.	Posted - 2007.02.15 17:55:00 - [11] Edited by: Tarron Sarek on 15/02/2007 17:52:29 I think the problem, or at least part of it lies right there. Most people don't care about structure. Well, apart from that - if you even go a step further and generalise the issue, it boils down to creating extremes. If CCP takes away nano-whatevers, people will pick the next extreme. So this is not a complete seperated issue, it's about the principle of game mechanics. If extremes don't bring along enough drawbacks and if their usage isn't restricted to rather special tasks, they often turn out to be overpowered, unbalanced and too attractive. One thing I have learned in the past year - the prospect of being invincible or able to dictate the outcome is most sought after in EVE. ECM, Nos-Domi, Nano-ships .. many many players don't want close and thrilling fights, they want to wtfpwn. Devs should always have that in mind. If they're not a bit paranoid, they're going to fail. But.. perhaps the devs want to wtfpwn, too? Who knows ___________________________________ _/_/ Game balance isn't just a luxury \_\_
Mr Xtreme Union Of Xtreme Military	Posted - 2007.02.15 18:03:00 - [12] I'm sorry to say i dont agree with you Rekam. If you are fitting the Ceptor right you can easely get it to go more then 10k m/s without the snake implants. If you have snake implants you easely get a ceptor with gang module online to go more then 20k m/s speed. That Ini. Stabs are doing to the BS ir realistic. Its like a Rally car in real life. You can make almost any usuall car into a rally car for fast agility and speed. You are stipping it down, lowering the waight etc etc.. and walla.. you have a low waight car with the same angine and its going like hell. Not the best comparison but it shoud make the point When you are intalling initial Stabs on a BS you are lowering its mass etc. and the agility are rizing. ... You are STILL using BS gear on it so then its going ALOT faster. To make a BS go faster then a usually ceptor you need to spend HUNDREDS or million of isk. Its like you are using hundred millions of isk on Crystall implants and using a T3 BS with faction gear. With that you can tank several BS attacking you forever. (As long you have cap) The speed is a feuture in the game that is made. Its cool. But need isk. Its no use to nerf this. And minmatar ships are MADE for speed & Damage. Not super tanked. Like other races are made for other things. Like Caldari is good tankers. Mr X
Rekam Evarg Caldari Union Of Xtreme Military The Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2007.02.16 08:26:00 - [13] Originally by: Mr Xtreme That Ini. Stabs are doing to the BS ir realistic. Its like a Rally car in real life. You can make almost any usuall car into a rally car for fast agility and speed. You are stipping it down, lowering the waight etc etc.. and walla.. you have a low waight car with the same angine and its going like hell. Not the best comparison but it shoud make the point Yup thats just my point, thanks for that. The rally car need servicing very often to prevent failure and has a short (but hard) life. When did you see a BS broken down due to mechanical failure or have realiability issues. Its plain to see by all that want to see it, these super fast nano type large ships are/will spoil the balance of the game and something needs to be done, I have made one suggestion, if its no good, thats fine, but Something needs to be done to address this before its to late... RIP EvE RekamEvarg Oh Hello, You can see the pub from here. No Animals were harmed in the writing of this post
Angelus Xenotov	Posted - 2007.02.16 14:49:00 - [14] Originally by: Rekam Evarg I have made one suggestion, if its no good, thats fine, but Something needs to be done to address this before its to late... RIP EvE No, really, it doesn't, you JUST NEED TO DEAL WITH IT.
Allantia FW Inc Kith of Venal	Posted - 2007.02.16 16:22:00 - [15] Quote: If you are fitting the Ceptor right you can easely get it to go more then 10k m/s without the snake implants. And then the nanoship hits you with heavy NOS, and you're dead in the water within 15 seconds. Nanoships would probably be ok if NOS were nerfed so that it didn't absolutely ***interceptors, or if the ceptor had the ability to do any webbing at all without getting into NOS range. At current though, they are extremely powerful and only have a chance to be countered by a few specific setups - and then you still need 3-4 ships minimum to counter them. Quote:** No, really, it doesn't, you JUST NEED TO DEAL WITH IT. I would suggest you be the one prepared to deal with it, since the nerf is already in the works.
Tarron Sarek Gallente Solid Industries Inc.	Posted - 2007.02.17 01:45:00 - [16] Originally by: Mr Xtreme You can make almost any usuall car into a rally car for fast agility and speed. You are stipping it down, lowering the waight etc etc.. Yes, but there are limits. Also a rally car doesn't go 10x faster. ___________________________________ _/_/ Game balance isn't just a luxury \_\_
Maya Rkell Forsaken Empire The Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2007.02.17 01:57:00 - [17] Originally by: Sokratesz some suggestions... - Reduce all battleship base speed by 30% I completely fail to see the case for this. The problem is in the stacking on various speed bonuses, rather than the base speeds of the ships. BS are allready slow enough per base. //Maya
NIkis Minmatar Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering	Posted - 2007.02.17 02:06:00 - [18] The only sensible changes i see are either (1) making nanos/OD give a % of base speed instead of flat amount, say 5%-7.5% for the different nano types (which roughly translates into 5-10m/s for a BS and 15-30m/s for a frig) and 10%-12.5% for OD (with a possible beef of inertia nerf to 5-7.5% on ODs). Or (2) making the speed/mass/inertia bonuses stack-nerfed, which would gimp a bit the speed inty/frig setups, but would gimp a lot the speed BS/BC setups. I disagree on weakening the mods too much because they would upset the balance in many other ships - transports, inty, dictor, whatever else uses them (while probably hitting the BS/BC only minimally harder).
QueenSylvanas	Posted - 2007.02.17 02:23:00 - [19] Edited by: QueenSylvanas on 17/02/2007 02:20:27 Now let's demolish tuxford's blog He says However they can be, so when in doubt nerf the microwarpdrive! Oh really, lets make the MWD bonus on some gallente and faction ships even less useful. (1) Make it (MWD) require charges. Like intys - who basically most of the time use mwd (and why not cruisers - see again the useless MWD bonus thing) would really like that .. with their awesome cargo space (which also needs to hold ammo and possible loot). (2) Make its cap consumption dependant on velocity Even more of a nerf on intys who are supposed to go very fast but have only a trickle of cap. And implementing different algorithms for this in order to save some ship classes' cap will give headaches to their programming team (3) Not allow people to use cap booster when mwd is active When did cap boosters arrive into the equation ? I thought the main problem with nano-BS was NOS This is only 1/4 of a fix and anyway MWD already got a penalty on cap. The only problem with MWD might be the magnitude of its speed boost. I would agree to a lowering of this to say 300-400%, but only with a corresponding lowering of the cap penalty (to 15-20%). Edit: alt post ftw
NIkis Minmatar Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering	Posted - 2007.02.17 02:42:00 - [20] And here comes the cherry: There's been a huge public roar on nano-phoons and other ships (nano-curses and so on), on how overpowered and uber they are. But there's not been many cases involving a specialized ship (huginn/rapier) for taking these speedy guys down. Even a nano-BS pilot admitted that he got wasted in a matter of seconds when he was webbed by a specialized ship - he mistakenly believed a inty had webbed him . So most of this crying has a false base to start from. You want to promote diversity in this game ? What diversity is it when people only train for gank ships and then cry out because they cannot take out a nano-ship because they are not using SPECIALIZED ships ?
Maya Rkell Forsaken Empire The Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2007.02.17 02:56:00 - [21] NIkis, an expensive, uninsurable ship which the Nano BS can tear apart if it realises what's happening isn't really a soloution. //Maya
NIkis Minmatar Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering	Posted - 2007.02.17 02:58:00 - [22] Originally by: Maya Rkell NIkis, an expensive, uninsurable ship which the Nano BS can tear apart if it realises what's happening isn't really a soloution. I think everyone agrees those ships shouldnt be uninsurable. But you are right, and this is one more thing killing the diversity. Way to go CCP
KenDoll	Posted - 2007.02.19 18:07:00 - [23] i support the op's idea.. its sound and well thought. cpp.. get to it!! :)
Angelus Xenotov	Posted - 2007.02.20 00:31:00 - [24] Originally by: Allantia Quote: No, really, it doesn't, you JUST NEED TO DEAL WITH IT. I would suggest you be the one prepared to deal with it, since the nerf is already in the works. Any fix they make is inherently going to just unbalance the game for another set of people, Nanophoons are the most moaned about ship because some people just can't deal with them. they're far from an I-win for any combat situation, but because people cry, they'll get 'fixed', probably at the expense of other ship setups.
Rekam Evarg Caldari Union Of Xtreme Military The Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2007.02.20 15:46:00 - [25] Originally by: Angelus Xenotov Originally by: Allantia Quote: No, really, it doesn't, you JUST NEED TO DEAL WITH IT. I would suggest you be the one prepared to deal with it, since the nerf is already in the works. Any fix they make is inherently going to just unbalance the game for another set of people, Nanophoons are the most moaned about ship because some people just can't deal with them. they're far from an I-win for any combat situation, but because people cry, they'll get 'fixed', probably at the expense of other ship setups. The original post suggest a way to allow people to still use nano type ships (but with a risk) It also only addresses the said problem, it should not effect any other type of ship set up (pure nerfing of instabs etc prob would). Its not just a nerf, its a compromise, its not there to completely stop anything, but to give a balance whilst still allowing choice. It may not be the only solution, its just a idea of a way to keep both sides happy to a degree. Thanks everyone for your input, both positive and negitive :) Rek RekamEvarg Oh Hello, You can see the pub from here. No Animals were harmed in the writing of this post
Terazuk Amarr FIRMA Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.02.20 18:14:00 - [26] I simply dont agree with the OP and think it's the nerf bat that should get nerfed! NIkis post however is right on the button. Finesse is being taken out of Eve by the whingers and whiners and THAT is what is killing eve. The game needs to be more open and dynamic! As for how I suggest 'fixing' the nerf bat, it's simple... GET RID OF IT. and replace it with the WOW bat! It's function is simple, whenever a new round of whinging about something starts up, take it as a sign that you are doing something right and make it a feature! pick a couple of other things to apply this 'feature' to and KAPOWIE, those crying WAAAAH are now shouting WOW! -~- Take the above post seriously at your peril -~-
EadTaes Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2007.02.20 19:24:00 - [27] For me teh only way to fix this without ******* up the mobs for the ship classes that these mods are intended for is to give the ships that aren't suposed to go that fast a MAX achivable speed. OR to amke it when they reach a certain speed and mass ratio (mass / m/s) they start taking damage to structure ina significat way that will make people not to go over that said speed.
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2007.02.22 23:12:00 - [28] LINK to my idea on this in another thread. If you can't be bothered to follow it - basically we have frigate, cruiser and BS sized MWD's and AB's - so why not apply the same logic to the inertial mods? Seems silly to me that a module that reduces the inertia of a 1,000,000kg frigate can have an equal effect on a ship 100 times that size for the SAME power, CPU and CAP output... --- I don't mind you disagreeing with me. Just don't say I don't have the SKILLS to comment until you've looked at them.
Sola Sun	Posted - 2007.02.23 00:16:00 - [29] Edited by: Sola Sun on 23/02/2007 00:13:24 I see 2 ways: 1) Give agility mods small stackable penalty to powergrid and CPU (like 5%). Attempt to stack, for example, 5, will result in (0.95^5) - 22% penalty to PG-CPU, which is huge. OR 2) Disable activation of high slot modules at speeds over certain set (about 5000 m/s) for all ships, since it will be unsafe for pilot itself - fairly easy to code. Still can run if you need to run, but if you want to do damage (or suck capacitor) - please slow down.
SpaceDudeDanny	Posted - 2007.02.23 08:32:00 - [30] Originally by: Sylvanara Originally by: Rekam Evarg Lets look at the pure mechanics. Get somthing that us designed and engineered to travel at a given speed, and take given loads, stresses etc. Weaken it by removing all the structure then ask it to do 4 or 5 times the speed, thus taking maybe upto 20 or 30 time the stress strains loading etc. Now tell me it wouldnt start to break up. I will point out, as you are in space, and hence, a vacuum, the speed would have no effect on the ship's structural integrity; there's no air resistance. However, what would be affected is the acceleration, so these ships would be very limited in terms of how long it takes them to reach their maximum speed, and how well they can maneuver at high speeds, provided they don't want pieces of the ship flying off when they activate their boosters or make a turn. I will admit I have not engaged any of these ships myself, so I may be completely offbase here, but what about assessing fitting requirements (esp. CPU) for the use of nanofiber structure? Armor plates require CPU, presumably to adjust navigation, wouldn't it also make sense if a change was made in the structure of the ship itself, that it would have to adjust to its new form and handling? If you put a decent sized CPU requirement on nanofibers, it would allow players to continue to use that setup, but they would have to sacrifice other strengths, such as firepower, to compensate. I would just like to point out that EvE is not a real vacuum :) have you not noticed that if you turn off your MWD you slow down, thus there is some form of background resistance, therefore other stresses and straines etc would apply. A "Nano" setup also uses Inertial Stabilizers and they accelerate very rapidly, even a modestly setup "nano" BS can turn align and warp faster than a standard cruiser and they can quiet happy orbit and attack ships from 15km. There are some great ideas in this thread on how to address this issue, some original, some not so, Some just plain nerf and others alittle more inventive, I do know that something needs to be done and I think the majority of people agree (although not all)

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: 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.