|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Strata Maslav
Born-2-Kill
0ccupational Hazzard
9
   |
Posted - 2012.01.16 21:23:00 -
[1] - Quote
A high slot weapon that limits Nova Fox from posting a replies to a thread to one every 20 minutes. |
Strata Maslav
Born-2-Kill
0ccupational Hazzard
13
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 15:19:00 -
[2] - Quote
"Damage over time"
These are nothing new to the standard MMO. There are many ways DOTs are implemented over the genre:
- Simple DOT: In its simplest form it is a effect put on a target which damages the target for a set amount over time. Any reapplication of said DOT refreshes the timer of the DOT, not increasing the overall damage over time.
- Stacking DOT: Multiple applications of a simple DOT 'stack up' increasing the tick damage of the DOT and refreshing the overall DOT timer
- Ramping DOT: The tick damage ramps up over time causing more damage towards the end of the DOT time span. This requires watching your DOT timers more attentively as the refreshing the DOT before it is done will actively lower its damage
- Hybrid DOT: Multiple effects from one offensive attack such as an Instant effect (damage or capacitor drain) followed by a DOT or a Slow effect over time with a DOT component.
DOTs in EVE
Bringing these concepts into the EVE style game is not simple. In some ways we can look at current turret and missile systems as 'channeled' DOTs. You put them on the target that you want to kill and leave them on until they do the job.
In other games you find yourself trying to output maximum damage. This entails using your instant damage abilities in the correct order whilst maintaining your DOTs on the target.
If you were to implement a new ammo type with a DOT component you wouldn't find much difference. With the exception of slow rate of fire weapons having their damage split up over a period of time. Could this damage therefore be greater then the pure alpha from this low rate of fire gun? Sure, but then what would be the difference between this a faster and higher dps weapon. I can imagine such ammo would be useful where DPS is more important then Alpha (small fleet fight) and the ammo could be swapped out accordingly.
EVE Implementation
In order to get a similar feel to other games you need to have a module which you don't 'turn on and forget' but something with more of a pulse feeling. Similar to the way that most people use their microwarp drive or armor repair. They turn it on when needed but then turn it off because the unnecessary cap drain caused by the module would not benefit them in any way and actually hinder them via cap drain.
You could have different variants of the DOT module (EM, Therm, etc) these would have different damage amount/timers so the capsuleer would have to pulse his DOT module every time it expired for maximum damage.
Stackable DOTs:
Alternatively you could have module which was left on. This would feature a stackable DOT with a short range. This would give some interesting game play. The aggressor would be trying to keep within the module range to increase on and maintain the current stacks on the target whilst the victim should be trying to keep the stacks low by breaking from the modules optimum range to cause a lapse in the stacks.
EVE DOT Image:
To keep within the feeling of EVE this module would have to cause damage to metallic ship over time. There are multiple ways I can think a ship could sustain continuous damage caused by a single attack:
- Module launches a drone that latches itself onto the ship cause damage over a period of time. (My favorite could even have an animation on the victims ship showing the attacking his hull. Could give drone boat users a high slot module to specialize in over guns. Think Sentinel from "The Matrix")
- An energy pulse which cause the ship to become super heated. The excessive heat causes damage overtime. This concept would work well with a stacking DOT (could a module heat up and lock up or break ships modules? Not sure if OP)
- Fire a round which hits the ships hull (see harpoon) attaching to the ship and burning (Thermal) or electrically pulsing (EMP) damage.
Counter-DOT
The hard counter to DOTs in any other game is their premature removal. In EVE we have a similar arms race with ECM. If you know a fleet is going to have a lot of ECM you fit ECCM to your ship in an effort to counter it. So with the implementation of said DOTs I would also suggest the addition of modules that would remove DOTs. These can be tweaked endlessly to get the right feeling.
- %chance to remove a DOT
- Number of DOTs removed per cycle
- Cycle Rate
So you could have an internal module which would clear 4 DOTs from your ship but it is on a 1 minute cycle timer. Alternatively you have a remote system with high cycle rate to clear the DOTs off one by one. |
Strata Maslav
Born-2-Kill
0ccupational Hazzard
13
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 15:52:00 -
[3] - Quote
Moonaura wrote:Game changing modules are fine by me. Onwards and upwards.
How will logistics see who has DoTs on them to remove them? Broadcasting is already an issue in larger fleets, it just flies by at a frantic pace. Add into that mix new mechanics, and you have to consider the already demanding role of logistics and triage carriers, command ships etc. I would welcome more tactical focused ships that aren't all about DPS, but how these interact in a fleet, has to be visualised for the FC and others.
In a fleet, I need to see what is going on. I need to be able to see the big picture, what has just entered the fight, from what direction, how fast are they travelling, what e-war is on the field, where are the enemy logistics. Who is being targeted, who just died and where.
In terms of logistics DOTs would account for more predictable damage and therefore should be easier to repair. I do agree that logistic pilots should be able to spot who has DOTs on their ship or be able to use an item to that would pulse a DOT clearing effect.
The watchlist could potentially have some sort of colour change or symbol to show the presence of a DOT and/or a broadcast added to allow for pilots to request remote DOT removal.
In the end you could stick to current system where we find that ships are simply repped through the damage as is happening now, and remote DOT removal would be applied because the ship is more then likely the recipient of the DOTs. |
Strata Maslav
Born-2-Kill
0ccupational Hazzard
13
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 16:15:00 -
[4] - Quote
Nestara Aldent wrote:DoTs and HoTs are a bad idea, because they can't be explained from fiction point of view. BTW even if you can explain these effects in a particular setting, they're just a gimmick.
Stackable damage caused by heating (radiation) of a vessel is not a difficult concept. It also has the effect of changing the play style of a vessel where they try to stay at a certain range or the stacks fail and the damage ramp has to start from the beginning once the ship is in range again.
A ship with a stackable weapon would find itself able to kill slower ships as it could dictate range but its damage output would be exponentially lower at against another ship dictating the range.
Exponential damage is the complete opposite of Alpha and would have more of a role where smaller ships are fighting larger and in small fleet combat.
Channeled HOTs are the way ships are actually currently healed. |
Strata Maslav
Born-2-Kill
0ccupational Hazzard
13
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 16:55:00 -
[5] - Quote
Moonaura wrote:
Just talking from experience, in intense fights, logistics pilots struggle to keep up with broadcasts and modules, trying to keep people alive, lock targets, unlock targets and get repairs to their friends in time. Asking them to do even more, if additional things are on the field (such as mines and deployable items), as well as their range and cap pairing, ECM jams, being cap drained, broadcasting themselves and watching if they are being locked up, etc... I think it is to much information and to much.
To be honest I chose DOTs over alpha any day. With DOTs you are able to repair the ship affected and even if damage is greater then your repairs the ship will stay up longer then an instant alpha of the ship dying instantly. If you want to look at the way Eve works currently fast firing guns are actually channeled DOTs on the target.
The opposite of a DOT is an instant attack, imagine turning your guns on firing once and then having to wait a cooldown to fire again, this would be concidered a normal attack.
I personally am in favor of a weapon that either stacks up on ship increasing its exponential damage (easier to repair then alpha) or a module that has a longer duration of sustained damage then its cycle time.
The non-stackable DOT actually requires the aggressor to fly with more skill as leaving the DOT module turned on would eat cap unnecessarily without adding any additional damage similar to using a repairer when it will over repair your ship. The pilot would have to watch the DOT and make sure to apply it every time it dropped off the ship.
I like this approach more then the simple 'turn on and forget' system that all standard weapons in EVE have as it allows the pilot more room to fly his/her ship better then the next pilot and is therefore a more rewarding experience flying overall.
A single module could be designed to accommodate both types of DOT in theory with a non-stackable DOT being the standard and overheating the module stacking the DOT to certain amount for increased damage.
A DOT is the only way that can make a pilot manually control an offensive module as leaving any instant damage module will always net more damage then turning it off and on between volleys.
|
Strata Maslav
Born-2-Kill
0ccupational Hazzard
13
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 18:12:00 -
[6] - Quote
Moonaura wrote:But the point of DoT's is they can be applied to many ships at once, typically instantly, with a small cool down... it's not a single target mechanic in other MMO's, so this is a massive difference from say, fast firing guns.
In my view the DOT is a DPS ability on a cooldown. If can manage you cooldown effectively you will output more damage. If you panic in a fight and don't think straight you will find that you are doing less effective dps.
By adding cooldowns you give the great chance for a pilot to use his skill to win a battle.
If you are worried about spamming DOTs on all enemies all you need to is affect the cooldown (cycle time) of the module. If the module puts a 10 second DOT on the target and has a 5 second cycle time you can only have 2 DOTs running at a time. If you are less skilled or by accident leave your module running on the target you will drain you cap twice as fast for the same amount of DPS. If you forget to reactive the module after 10 seconds has passed then you will lose dps.
|
Strata Maslav
Born-2-Kill
0ccupational Hazzard
13
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 15:47:00 -
[7] - Quote
Solinuas wrote:Gerrick Palivorn wrote:
Even I support anti-cloaking methods if you remove the role of local as an intel tool. W-Spacers on the other hand will have to adapt, this is where the most opposition will come from.
Good luck
Now if local is removed as a intel tool a lot of what makes W-space unique is gone, and besides, it cuts both ways evenly you can use it just as much as other people can. However i do support anti AFK cloaking measures
Wormhole space has many unique features other then the local mechanic. That being said the removal of local intel without the addition of another better means of gathering system information should be avoided.
The one big difference between 0.0 and W-space is that people travel through 0.0 to get to other systems. This traveling is often solo and without the use of a scout. Local being great tool for understanding potential activity within a system.
Lets get back on topic. So modules... |
|
|
| |
|