Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Becq Starforged
Minmatar Ship Construction Services
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 03:48:00 -
[211]
(Note: I've not read the eight pages of commentary, and am responding to the OP only.)
I like the idea in principle, though I think that the implementation you suggested would make make MWDs completely obsolete for combat ships. Combat ships would need to have an AB to increase mobility in combat, and mounting both is prohibitive on most ships for grid and slot reasons.
As an alternative, I'd propose that MWDs be changed to operate in several modes. The full-speed mode would work as you suggested, granting high combat speeds at the expensive of firepower. A reduced-speed mode would give AB-level mobility but allow full combat capability. Switching modes would be accomplished either by use of a script, or automatically (the speed boost is damped whenever the ship activates weapons, and remains damped for some cool-down period after they are deactivated).
In effect, this would allow a ship to mount a normal AB and a non-combat MWD in a single slot.
(As you said, certain things like polycarbs and snakes will still need some adjustment.)
-- Becq Starforged Ushra'Khan
The Flame of Freedom Burns On! |
Zarlis
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 06:39:00 -
[212]
Originally by: Becq Starforged (Note: I've not read the eight pages of commentary, and am responding to the OP only.)
I like the idea in principle, though I think that the implementation you suggested would make make MWDs completely obsolete for combat ships. Combat ships would need to have an AB to increase mobility in combat, and mounting both is prohibitive on most ships for grid and slot reasons.
As an alternative, I'd propose that MWDs be changed to operate in several modes. The full-speed mode would work as you suggested, granting high combat speeds at the expensive of firepower. A reduced-speed mode would give AB-level mobility but allow full combat capability. Switching modes would be accomplished either by use of a script, or automatically (the speed boost is damped whenever the ship activates weapons, and remains damped for some cool-down period after they are deactivated).
In effect, this would allow a ship to mount a normal AB and a non-combat MWD in a single slot.
(As you said, certain things like polycarbs and snakes will still need some adjustment.)
i like your alternative of 2 mode + off drive as long as cap is returned for AB mode
|
kill0rbunny
Jagdkommando RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 06:46:00 -
[213]
Originally by: Becq Starforged I like the idea in principle, though I think that the implementation you suggested would make make MWDs completely obsolete for combat ships.
That's bogus, mwd will still be better for positioning in a fight and reaching your target in any possible way.
Supportin' the op.
Go places. Kill people. |
Clinically
ANZAC ALLIANCE Southern Cross Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 06:51:00 -
[214]
Sarm is smarter than me, thus I must concur. ________________ Q. How do you clear a system of 400 Northern Monkeys? A. Remind them its not cyno jammed. |
Laari Neros
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 12:09:00 -
[215]
Edited by: Laari Neros on 12/08/2008 12:09:19 tl;dr, but if Sarmaul started it i support it with my hadns and feet. Sarmaul > CCP, tbfh
|
Loyal Servant
PURE Legion Pure.
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 13:24:00 -
[216]
Nothing is going to change their minds, but ok.
|
kill0rbunny
Caldari Jagdkommando RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 21:05:00 -
[217]
Originally by: Loyal Servant Nothing is going to change their minds, but ok.
From the looks of it you could be wrong on this one.
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=601088&page=7#189
Go places. Kill people. |
Neesa Corrinne
Einherjar Rising
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 23:35:00 -
[218]
I'm honestly sick and tired of this:
Corp: "We're forming a roaming gang." Me: "What should I bring?" Corp: "You fly a Vaga... duh" Me: "I can actually fly two entire races worth of ships, need anything else?" Corp: "Oh yeah, then bring the Ishtar." Me: /facepalm
I would really like to see some of the other ships, that I can theoretically fly, become somewhat useful this century.
|
Dr Nightmare
Digital assassins
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 00:51:00 -
[219]
this idea is ok... better than ccp's at least
still needs some tweaks: the activation time of the MWD would need to be decreased
If you get in range by using your mwd then u click it off...(wait 10secs) your target has warped off or gone out of scramble range.
But the idea has some substance :)
|
Djerin
Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 11:11:00 -
[220]
I like the idea more than what CCP had in mind. But it doesn't solve two problems:
1) Ludicrously fast ships are still ludicrously fast. I don't like it to see that most ships just horribly die if they jump into a gatecamp whereas the nano***s could still jump in without needing to particularly worry about it. Thing is, it doesn't matter how big the camp is, a nano*** who isn't completly stupid will always escape. This imbalance wouldn't be removed by Sarmauls idea.
2) Frigs can kite outside anyones webrange using afterburners this way. Except for some Amarr pulse laser platforms they were extremely difficult to hit. This is for assault ships especially. With AB giving 300% instead of 150% faster assault ships like the Minmatar ones would be tremendously better than slower ones. Especially the Jaguar would kick ass while the Vengeance or the Harpy still were mediocre. So you'd be creating new imbalances with it.
But tbh, i'd love to see Sarmaul's idea coming to use. Lots of pilots would have to reconsider their approaches to combat and their fittings. With the AB becoming useful in PvP it would create a whole new level of diversity. I'd welcome this.
---- Sarmaul's crosstrainorgtfo |
|
Marya Sklodowska
|
Posted - 2008.08.13 18:59:00 -
[221]
Originally by: Djerin I like the idea more than what CCP had in mind. But it doesn't solve two problems:
1) Ludicrously fast ships are still ludicrously fast. I don't like it to see that most ships just horribly die if they jump into a gatecamp whereas the nano***s could still jump in without needing to particularly worry about it. Thing is, it doesn't matter how big the camp is, a nano*** who isn't completly stupid will always escape. This imbalance wouldn't be removed by Sarmauls idea.
I agree that any change that affects speed will require a lot of rebalancing over a wide range of ships, but I want to address this point quickly.
With the balancing of polycarbons and snakes, the ultra-extreme speeds will be moderated. Allowing fast ships to more easily move through gatecamps at the expense of their combat ability seems like a good tradeoff to me, preserving the viability of guerrilla style warfare without allowing superfast Ishtars to fly circles around most opponents.
----------------------------------- Raivi's Research Alt -Explosion Matrix- Support Sarmaul's MWD MKII |
Yukiko Kanezaki
Runcible Quench
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 04:31:00 -
[222]
Supporting this thread because it's sarm.
|
TimMc
Genos Occidere
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 04:42:00 -
[223]
/sign
|
Rabid Rich
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 06:41:00 -
[224]
OP's suggestion is as it always should have been
|
D0INK
Vale Heavy Industries Molotov Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 16:53:00 -
[225]
Edited by: D0INK on 14/08/2008 16:53:29 Sarmaul.... I kinda love you right now.
GREAT ideas and Minmatar nanopilot supported -------------------------------------------------- Run. |
Sykes
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 17:34:00 -
[226]
Simpler is usually better. At least give it a try on Sisi. It certainly sounds like it's more likely to meet the criteria that 'guerilla warfare must remain viable' than what was on Sisi last week.
|
Raivi
Universal Securities
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 14:38:00 -
[227]
Supporting this now that my main is back online.
Perhaps once the 1.1 testing is done CCP could put this proposal on either SISI or multiplicity for some testing. ---------------------------------------------
Red vs. Blue! |
Lachesis VII
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 20:16:00 -
[228]
Beautiful and simple. Totally agree.
Makes sense and is internally consistent with the other mechanics of the game (re: ability to activate modules in warp).
Drones could simply "lose signal" to the drone carrier due to warp interference for the duration of the MWD maneuver, then reacquire it as soon as the MWD de-cycles.
I'd like to see the base ship speed rebalancing that's occurring on SiSi make it to TQ, simply because it makes sense.
As a final note, the whole orbiting-tracking thing is broken and makes no sense, from a real world perspective. If you're standing on the edge of a moving carousel pointing a gun towards the center of it, you don't need to adjust your aim as it carries you around the edge.
Of course that's an entirely different can of worms.
|
Rebus Valstay
Deneb Kaitos Engineering
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 21:58:00 -
[229]
Sounds more reasonable than the alternative.
/signed
|
Seren Khi
SniggWaffe
|
Posted - 2008.08.17 00:17:00 -
[230]
I like it.
|
|
chiefyuk
Amarr The Doctrine
|
Posted - 2008.08.17 14:23:00 -
[231]
Looks like the best way to fix the "nano problem". ------------------------------------------------ You can kill the protester but you cant kill the protest ------------------------------------------------ |
eliminator2
Gallente You're Doing It Wrong
|
Posted - 2008.08.17 14:40:00 -
[232]
/not signed
as soon as i sore the MWD turns of all guns and drones i thought WTF
we are trying to reduce nano speed not completly get ride of them this will make ships like interceptors go obsolete id rather have CCP's idea than this crap
|
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.08.17 22:36:00 -
[233]
Proposal was voted down by the CSM. 2/7. Ank and I voted yes but the others were not convinced.
Specific bit of the meeting log covering the issue is here
Sorry, but I tried.
Star Fraction | Dare to Dream!
|
Pretty Ivan
|
Posted - 2008.08.18 12:36:00 -
[234]
Support
|
Creat Posudol
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.08.18 15:23:00 -
[235]
This is really a great idea! It returns the MWD back to it's intended original use: getting in and out of combat quickly!
|
Arn Novelus
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.08.19 15:29:00 -
[236]
much better idea |
Jindo Minian
Tenacious Tendencies
|
Posted - 2008.08.22 07:31:00 -
[237]
Yes! That's all i have to say.
|
Naurhir
Minmatar Amarthtel
|
Posted - 2008.08.23 20:07:00 -
[238]
I support this idea |
Cal Hydar
|
Posted - 2008.08.25 07:25:00 -
[239]
I support this solution
|
Thirzarr
|
Posted - 2008.08.25 07:43:00 -
[240]
This solution sounds rather reasonable.
Now if this kind of MWD worked in deadspace... nom nom
And if the short range scram still disabled it.... nom nom nomier.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |