| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Fang Alliance
   |
Posted - 2007.09.29 10:25:00 -
[1]
I was thinking what 'real life' examples of threats to the 'blob' exist. Essentially blobs besiege a system by massing in close formation on a stargate. One of the greatest threats to the siege was the threat of disease.
So my suggestion is for a weapon that in small doses is relatively ineffective, but if allowed to propogate increases its effect exponentialy.
The plague weapon launches an area effect virus that infects weapon targeting subsystems on the target in the same manner as a remote sensor dampner. It then replicates in the host launching another virus 10secs after the ship is struck.
The effect of one viral hit is -5% bonus to targeting range and sig radius, and the effects (or symptoms) last for 120sec.
The Plague Weapon has the follwing stats (same as a medium cap injector):
High Slot
Power Grid: 150
cpu: 25
capacity: 32m3
Activation Time/Duration: 15sec
Its ammunition (same as a cap 800 booster charge):
volume 32m3 (so thats 1 charge in the Plague Weapon at any given point)
Area of effect: 9500m
-5% Sig Resolution, -5% targeting range bonus for 120sec.
Replicating
Any ship hit by a viral pulse, launchers its own pulse. In 1vs1, or small gang warfare a Plague Weapon would have a limited effect - but against a static blob of concentrated ships the continuos replication (if left to its own devices) would quickly cripple a fleet. The bigger and closer the blob the faster and stronger the effect.
In theory 'fire ships' loaded with Plague Weapons could be launched into large blobs forcing their dispersal.
C.
- sig designer - eve mail |
fire 59
Destructive Influence
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.09.29 11:17:00 -
[2]
Interesting idea 
|
Hellaciouss
Genco
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.09.29 12:36:00 -
[3]
If you don't like 0.0 warfare then I suggest staying in lowsec.
There ya go, blob problem solved.
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.09.29 13:55:00 -
[4]
 Originally by: Hellaciouss
If you don't like 0.0 warfare then I suggest staying in lowsec.
There ya go, blob problem solved.
It's a suggestion to a recognised problem, I enjoy 0.0 warfare but I also value small gang warfare.
Why don't you go and troll somewhere else huh?
C.
- sig designer - eve mail |
Sewotai Didthair
|
Posted - 2007.09.29 15:05:00 -
[5]
Use of technoviral* weapons had better be against empire policy, or Jita will get really interesting.
*Yeah, I made that word up, but I think it's accurate.
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.09.30 12:52:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Sewotai Didthair
Use of technoviral* weapons had better be against empire policy, or Jita will get really interesting.
*Yeah, I made that word up, but I think it's accurate.
Even if it was enabled for Empire use, it wouldnt have a major impact as the effect is non damaging - a neutral caught in a blast would just suffer a short duration of sensor dampning.
C.
- sig designer - eve mail |
Hellaciouss
Genco
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.09.30 14:24:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Hellaciouss on 30/09/2007 14:25:15
Originally by: Cailais
Originally by: Hellaciouss
If you don't like 0.0 warfare then I suggest staying in lowsec.
There ya go, blob problem solved.
It's a suggestion to a recognised problem, I enjoy 0.0 warfare but I also value small gang warfare.
Why don't you go and troll somewhere else huh?
C.
Because there doesn't need to be more AoE weapons. The only reason people haven't been using bombs a lot is because they are so expensive. Since bombs came out I have seen 1 bomb deployed ever.
Also, capital blobs require another blob to kill. If you want to fix the blob problem, start there, otherwise, blobs will never be fixed.
How will your weapon effect the 30+ dreads, 30+ carriers, 6+ MoM's, and 2 titans? It won't, and that's the problem right now. The only thing that can is another capital blob of near the same size or larger.
|
Sewotai Didthair
|
Posted - 2007.10.02 23:36:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Cailais
Originally by: Sewotai Didthair
Use of technoviral* weapons had better be against empire policy, or Jita will get really interesting.
*Yeah, I made that word up, but I think it's accurate.
Even if it was enabled for Empire use, it wouldnt have a major impact as the effect is non damaging - a neutral caught in a blast would just suffer a short duration of sensor dampning.
C.
Alright, didn't read the actual effects too carefully did I? The light-show would probably cause havoc with people's computers even if it didn't do damage, though, and lag is bad enough as it is.
Another question, won't two ships sitting near each other start a perpetual loop of getting hit? Ship A gets hit, its pulse hits ship B, its pulse hits ship A, etc. In battles big enough for this weapon to make a big difference, the lag would make it difficult to move ships far enough away to break the cycle.
Hellaciouss also has a point that AoE weapons only force blobs to spread out a bit, which doesn't really affect anything except ships that were designed for gangs (logistics and such). In order to stop blobs, you'd need to effect an entire grid, and superweapons like that only breed bigger blobs to take them down.
|
Buyerr
|
Posted - 2007.10.03 00:17:00 -
[9]
nice idea ^^ would work with some tweaking
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.03 17:13:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Sewotai Didthair
Originally by: Cailais
Originally by: Sewotai Didthair
Use of technoviral* weapons had better be against empire policy, or Jita will get really interesting.
*Yeah, I made that word up, but I think it's accurate.
Even if it was enabled for Empire use, it wouldnt have a major impact as the effect is non damaging - a neutral caught in a blast would just suffer a short duration of sensor dampning.
C.
Alright, didn't read the actual effects too carefully did I? The light-show would probably cause havoc with people's computers even if it didn't do damage, though, and lag is bad enough as it is.
Another question, won't two ships sitting near each other start a perpetual loop of getting hit? Ship A gets hit, its pulse hits ship B, its pulse hits ship A, etc. In battles big enough for this weapon to make a big difference, the lag would make it difficult to move ships far enough away to break the cycle.
Hellaciouss also has a point that AoE weapons only force blobs to spread out a bit, which doesn't really affect anything except ships that were designed for gangs (logistics and such). In order to stop blobs, you'd need to effect an entire grid, and superweapons like that only breed bigger blobs to take them down.
Yes a perpetual cycle loop could occur, but if the % penalty and timers were tweaked then the overall effect would never reach a critical level.
If the 'blob' spreads out it looses a real reason for existing - that of concentrating focused fire.
No real requirement for a major light show, the effect could be more insidious.
In grid terms the range might be tweaked also, requiring ships to stay of grid to avoid its effects.
C.
- sig designer - eve mail |
|
|
Sewotai Didthair
|
Posted - 2007.10.04 03:44:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Cailais
If the 'blob' spreads out it looses a real reason for existing - that of concentrating focused fire.
C.
This is the thinking that leads to new things like bombs and DDs and this new weapon we're discussing - and it is unfortunately flawed. There is nothing a blob can do to someone in a literal blob that they can't do as a cloud, because this:
----------
Simply becomes this:
----------------
----------------
----------------
The only ships penalized by the new formation are range-limited ships targeting blob-mates: logistics and such, as I said.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |