| Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ovno ConSyquence
Amarr
Imperial Shipment
   |
Posted - 2009.01.09 09:31:00 -
[1]
The problems...
No trade through lowsec.
Constant forum whining about suicide ganking.
No way to defend others from attack because all buffing modules work after the fact.
A solution?
Modules to allow players to defend other players.
Such as
A damage transfer module, allowing you to absorb the damage done to another player, until you get popped of course.
A remote resistance booster, allowing you to boost the resistances of another player, by reducing your own.
A remote shield and armour reenforcer module, allowing you to up the shield or armour hp of another player, by reducing you own.
A remote sig radius reducer, allowing you to decrease the sig radius of a another player making them harder to hit, at the expense of increasing your own
A remote sensor blocker, allowing you to make another player harder to lock at the expense of making you easier to lock.
A remote warp core stab, allowing you to increase the warp core strength of another player while at the same time preventing yourself from warping for 30 seconds or so.
With these simple tools industrials and the like could hire wingmen to protect them when carrying valuable cargo through suicide ganking hot spots or even through lowsec making piracy more interesting, creating a new career of escort (not that kind  ) and enabling traders to utilise profitable dangerous trade routes.
Obviously these mods would have to stake properly even when used by multiple escorts to prevent abuse. |
Grek Forto
22nd Black Rise Defensive Unit
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 09:34:00 -
[2]
What about Transport Ships then? Being invisible isn't good enough? The ideas are good tough. |
Ranik Sandaris
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 09:37:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Ranik Sandaris on 09/01/2009 09:37:01
I like this idea. It would make things more interesting. And hell it would make piracy much mroe fun and provide a bit more of a challenge.
Im all for it.
***edit***
And no being invisible ISNT good enough. :P |
Ocih
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 09:46:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Ocih on 09/01/2009 09:45:55
Jam, scram, thank you m'am.
It really wouldn't matter what they did for remote mods if those mods require a lock because you can't lock when you are jammed.
Nice ideas. I think remote warp core stabs has been mentioned before too but again. You need the lock.
Maybe a more diversified FC list of mods? Not sure. |
Ovno ConSyquence
Amarr
Imperial Shipment
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 09:47:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Ovno ConSyquence on 09/01/2009 09:49:53
Well of course being invisible is very handy but for larger loads its impractical and also by doing this you encourge players to deal with piracy rather then just hiding and whining to ccp for a fix.
Edit...
As for jamming the escorts, great already tactics which counter the counter, just what eve is about.
But in the case of a suicide gank you'd need to suicide jam the escort in order to suicide gank the hauler, and you'd also need to know which of the many ships at jita 4-4 was doing the escorting. |
DjLowballer
Amarr
FLASHTROOPER CORP
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 09:51:00 -
[6]
I also think something like this would be an interesting idea, but you would also have to remove WTZ when those modules are active. Also have it so that no jumps are allowed for 30 seconds or so after activation, preventing somebody popping one on at the last minute.
Otherwise I think this would be neat. As a hauler pilot I think it would be more fun to have rolling convoys in space. |
Mikal Drey
Minmatar
Priory Of The Lemon
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 09:56:00 -
[7]
hey hey
there are already tools like this ingame and alot better than you suggested.
Gang links, Leadership skills, Shield Transporters
Remote repping isnt a criminal act either so you have added security there.
|
clone 1
Laughing Leprechauns Corporation
Lotto Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 10:02:00 -
[8]
 Originally by: Ovno ConSyquence
The problems...
No trade through lowsec.
Constant forum whining about suicide ganking.
No way to defend others from attack because all buffing modules work after the fact.
A solution?
Modules to allow players to defend other players.
Such as
A damage transfer module, allowing you to absorb the damage done to another player, until you get popped of course.
A remote resistance booster, allowing you to boost the resistances of another player, by reducing your own.
A remote shield and armour reenforcer module, allowing you to up the shield or armour hp of another player, by reducing you own.
A remote sig radius reducer, allowing you to decrease the sig radius of a another player making them harder to hit, at the expense of increasing your own
A remote sensor blocker, allowing you to make another player harder to lock at the expense of making you easier to lock.
A remote warp core stab, allowing you to increase the warp core strength of another player while at the same time preventing yourself from warping for 30 seconds or so.
With these simple tools industrials and the like could hire wingmen to protect them when carrying valuable cargo through suicide ganking hot spots or even through lowsec making piracy more interesting, creating a new career of escort (not that kind ) and enabling traders to utilise profitable dangerous trade routes.
Obviously these mods would have to stake properly even when used by multiple escorts to prevent abuse.
To be taken seriously you must first know what you are talking about.
Next.
--------------------------------------------------
The Angels Have the Phone Box |
Ocih
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 10:05:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Ovno ConSyquence
Edited by: Ovno ConSyquence on 09/01/2009 09:49:53
Well of course being invisible is very handy but for larger loads its impractical and also by doing this you encourge players to deal with piracy rather then just hiding and whining to ccp for a fix.
Edit...
As for jamming the escorts, great already tactics which counter the counter, just what eve is about.
But in the case of a suicide gank you'd need to suicide jam the escort in order to suicide gank the hauler, and you'd also need to know which of the many ships at jita 4-4 was doing the escorting.
If you are talking about high sec ganking, no you won't get tackled but you should be able to keep a freighter up anyway. As far as low or 0.0 sec, tackle is in front of dps in terms of fleet build. If you can't Jam and scram, the fleet won't act. That's not a counter to a counter. That's current EvE. All fleets have tackle. Back in High sec. I don't know. Other than a freighter I can tanks almost anything to survive long enough for fleets to get a lock and rep me. I don't need dps, I don't need ECCM in a high sec gank. Maybe I am missing something you are encountering.. |
Ovno ConSyquence
Amarr
Imperial Shipment
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 10:06:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Mikal Drey
hey hey
there are already tools like this ingame and alot better than you suggested.
Gang links, Leadership skills, Shield Transporters
Remote repping isnt a criminal act either so you have added security there.
Well there are a few but ather than a few percentage points from leadership skills they don't really provide any preemptive protection which is what is really needed to prevent a hauler getting one shotted with an alpha strike, these really need to be mods which if used on a ship gimp the pilot using them to seriously increase the defenses of another pilot.
Originally by: Clone 1
...
To be taken seriously you must first know what you are talking about. Next.
Would you to care to eloborate on what it is in particular that you think I don't understand so that I can adapt the idea into something you think would be workable? |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 10:11:00 -
[11]
you know maybe ccp should just add more flight mechanics.
For instance, read the description of the thrasher, it's smaller vessel that hides behinds it's big brother and fends off smaller ships.
So why not make some complex math where if you in a smaller ship, you can activate a fleet type formation thing, or just orbit or something, and based on sig radius, and distance from the two ships, the bigger ship can take fire for the smaller ship. So... simulated cover? |
Tippia
Raddick Explorations
BlackWater.
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 10:12:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Tippia on 09/01/2009 10:14:24
Originally by: Ovno ConSyquence
Well there are a few but ather than a few percentage points from leadership skills they don't really provide any preemptive protection which is what is really needed to prevent a hauler getting one shotted with an alpha strike
Well, you can already squeeze some 25k+ EHP out of the T1 indies, and you shouldn't be using those in these situations anyway, but rather have something with proper tanking capabilities. If you come across something that will one-shot a well-tanked hauler, you're in trouble no matter what…
Quote:
these really need to be mods which if used on a ship gimp the pilot using them to seriously increase the defenses of another pilot.
What's wrong with the current logistics options available to us? |
Ranik Sandaris
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 10:13:00 -
[13]
Originally by: clone 1
To be taken seriously you must first know what you are talking about.
Next.
Dont be a smeg |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 10:26:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Destination SkillQueue on 09/01/2009 10:29:26
I'm not too keen on most of OPs ideas, since they would effect a ton of things in the game. Haulers are cheap and weak ships and they should pop pretty easily. If you make modules that can keep a hauler alive in a gank, think what people could do in general PvP. Random forum whines from people, that don't put any effort in learning the game, should be taken with a grain of salt. The game can't be made ****** proof and CCP shouldn't try. Remember that most of the whines come from people, that would propably not bother to use a convoy system either.
I am all for some kind of convoy mechanism though, but I don't have any good ideas what kind of mechanism that could be. I have some ideas, but after thinking about them they have a huge potential of being overpowered in other situations. And I hear haulers don't tank well. So would all this effort be worth it in the first place? |
ry ry
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 10:29:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Ovno ConSyquence
The problems...
No trade through lowsec.
Constant forum whining about suicide ganking.
No way to defend others from attack because all buffing modules work after the fact.
A solution?
Modules to allow players to defend other players.
Such as
A damage transfer module, allowing you to absorb the damage done to another player, until you get popped of course.
A remote resistance booster, allowing you to boost the resistances of another player, by reducing your own.
A remote shield and armour reenforcer module, allowing you to up the shield or armour hp of another player, by reducing you own.
A remote sig radius reducer, allowing you to decrease the sig radius of a another player making them harder to hit, at the expense of increasing your own
A remote sensor blocker, allowing you to make another player harder to lock at the expense of making you easier to lock.
A remote warp core stab, allowing you to increase the warp core strength of another player while at the same time preventing yourself from warping for 30 seconds or so.
With these simple tools industrials and the like could hire wingmen to protect them when carrying valuable cargo through suicide ganking hot spots or even through lowsec making piracy more interesting, creating a new career of escort (not that kind ) and enabling traders to utilise profitable dangerous trade routes.
Obviously these mods would have to stake properly even when used by multiple escorts to prevent abuse.
like remote shield, armour and hull reps you mean?
genius. |
ry ry
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 10:31:00 -
[16]
Edited by: ry ry on 09/01/2009 10:31:58
also, i have a large stack of pithii b-type small shield transfers no f*cker wants.
they allow another ship to 'absorb' damage to your hauler, and the best bit is rather than damaging their shields it only 'damages' their cap. i'll even throw in some best-named eccm for free. make me an offer. |
Mikal Drey
Minmatar
Priory Of The Lemon
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 10:38:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Ovno ConSyquence
Well there are a few but ather than a few percentage points from leadership skills they don't really provide any preemptive protection which is what is really needed to prevent a hauler getting one shotted with an alpha strike, these really need to be mods which if used on a ship gimp the pilot using them to seriously increase the defenses of another pilot.
Its more than a few extra % points you get a bonus to shield and armor hp and resistances on both. it adds up pretty well. and its all preemptive as the bonusses are all applied automagically when you all load the grid. The shield transporter is even faster than the gankers because you get the logistics pilot to lock you and hit the reps the second you decloak the gate. run the reppers while you align and then fleet warp everyone to the next gate.
[Mammoth, Anti Gank (cheap)]
Expanded Cargohold II
Damage Control II
'Halcyon' Core Equalizer I
'Halcyon' Core Equalizer I
Magnetic Scattering Amplifier II
Magnetic Scattering Amplifier II
Kinetic Deflection Amplifier II
Heat Dissipation Amplifier II
Medium Shield Extender II
Prototype Cloaking Device I
Apart from the cloak every thing is passive and requires no activation. you get :
10,477 EHP
70.7/61.5/71.1/56.3 Resists Shield
66/48.8/36.3/23.5 Resists Armor
60% Resist Hull
207 Signature
If i add a Vulture, Claymore, Damnation you get :
12,711 EHP
73.6/67.3/75.5/63.8 Shield
71.9/54.3/47.2/36.7 Armor
60% Hull
You can see the difference the command ships make and i didnt even crank the skills up that high either :) when you add the mindlink for each command ship it gets better. you also have a decently fitted escort should pew pew happen. if you play more with the setup you can crank it up to 18,806 EHP as well.
Also thats just a standard mammoth, Mastodon etc just gets better
Originally by: Clone 1
...
To be taken seriously you must first know what you are talking about. Next.
I almost agree with Clone 1
|
SentryRaven
KIA Corp
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 10:45:00 -
[18]
Hmm..... well, in fleets and squads you have squad boosters, which apply bonuses to your squad in flight.
To spin this idea a bit around, disregarding any balancing for the moment:
Form a fleet... Switch Fleet type to escort. This gives you the possibility to set ONE ship as the ship to be defended.
After this, you could set other ships like the op described it, maybe an abaddon for the tank as an "absorber ship", where damage meant to reach the escorted ships is diverted onto the absorber ship, e.g. escorted ship takes only 25% of the damage, but the absorber ship takes 125% of the damage (put in any percentages you like, I am not balancing here). The absorber will pop faster than normally, but will absorb some of the damage meant for the escorted ship.
A resistance ship can be assigned, giving 25% of it's resistances to the escorted ship, but lowering own resistance by 75%.
Ofc, there shouldnt be too many of such bonuses and maybe the size of an escort fleet should be limited to 10 ships or any number necessary for balancing this out.
But the general idea is "I like". |
Gojyu
Ever Flow
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 10:49:00 -
[19]
As a carrier pilot, I'm all for your ideas. Will make small groups of carriers utterly invincible to other ships, carry on.
For those who can't understand facetiousness. While your ideas work well in the role you have envisioned, their usage outside of the escort role would spell the dawn of capitals online |
Brayiel
The White Rabbits
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 10:58:00 -
[20]
There is an escort role, jump in a squad of tanked battlecruisers/battleships etc. kill all hostiles on gate camp, jump second squad of transport ships through  That's what escorts do, make sure the way is clear  |
Ovno ConSyquence
Amarr
Imperial Shipment
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 10:58:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Destination SkillQueue
Edited by: Destination SkillQueue on 09/01/2009 10:29:26
I'm not too keen on most of OPs ideas, since they would effect a ton of things in the game. Haulers are cheap and weak ships and they should pop pretty easily. If you make modules that can keep a hauler alive in a gank, think what people could do in general PvP. Random forum whines from people, that don't put any effort in learning the game, should be taken with a grain of salt. The game can't be made ****** proof and CCP shouldn't try. Remember that most of the whines come from people, that would propably not bother to use a convoy system either.
I am all for some kind of convoy mechanism though, but I don't have any good ideas what kind of mechanism that could be. I have some ideas, but after thinking about them they have a huge potential of being overpowered in other situations. And I hear haulers don't tank well. So would all this effort be worth it in the first place?
I agree they could be used in pvp as well but as long as they seriously gimp the pilot doing the buffing then I don't see a problem, all you would need to do is kill them first, maybe it would have to be that if you are using one of these mods you can't then have one used on you.
As for if people would be bothered I was more thinking that people could hire themselves out as escorts as this would make an escort useful as something other than a scout.
Originally by: ry ry
like remote shield, armour and hull reps you mean?
genius.
No i don't, as I said they need to be premptive remote reps act after the fact meaning that if they can get an alpha in (like when high sec ganking) then your dead anyway.
As for the other suggestions you can indeed make a well tanked hauler but why shouldn't you be able to take out a spandered hauler as long as you bring a couple of friends along who actually ahve the ability to protect you?
And even though some options do exist now many people aren't combat pilots and therefore don't use them what these ideas would do enable the carebears to not care about this sort of things cus there escorts can do it for them...
Really the idea i'm trying to get across is that we need some way to sacrifice ourselves to save our mates cus as it is at the moment if you want to kill someone who has a fleet with him all you need to do is get everyone to primary the target which doesn't exactly lead to the most diverse of tactical situations... (lock primary, shoot primary, lock primary, shoot primary, try and wait out agression timer so you can jump out of combat)
And ty sentry raven something like what you suggested could make this work even better, but of course it would all need to be balanced well.
|
Reti
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 11:13:00 -
[22]
these guys seem to have worked out the transport run and coordinated to ensure payload survival.
Surviving campers is about having structure and strategy, that's all, whiners die because of ignorance.
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=6m8lXUvntaQ
|
Ovno ConSyquence
Amarr
Imperial Shipment
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 11:15:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Brayiel
There is an escort role, jump in a squad of tanked battlecruisers/battleships etc. kill all hostiles on gate camp, jump second squad of transport ships through That's what escorts do, make sure the way is clear
Indeed this would be perfect in 0.0 or lowsec but in highsec this does not work unless you bring enough people to suicide gank everyone on the gate in jita.
The main problem with doing this though is that you'd need to hire a whole gang of people to escort you on your trade route each wanting to be paid out of your profits, which rapidly becomes unprofitable...
|
Tzar'rim
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 11:22:00 -
[24]
What, you mean you need more than scouting, a bit of effort and non-afk playing?
|
Qordel
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 11:26:00 -
[25]
I would definitely support consideration of something along these lines.
--
What's your EVE New Year's Resolution for 2009? |
Ovno ConSyquence
Amarr
Imperial Shipment
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 11:28:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Tzar'rim
What, you mean you need more than scouting, a bit of effort and non-afk playing?
You do if you want it to get there and not just stop because theres a camp, for lowsec.
And more than that I mean it would be nice if there were other options so that people can be inventive about these things and maybe even use teamwork (for something other than scouting)
Also it might get more peeps into lowsec if they feel they can be protected. |
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 11:45:00 -
[27]
Originally by: ry ry
Originally by: Ovno ConSyquence
No way to defend others from attack because all buffing modules work after the fact.
like remote shield, armour and hull reps you mean?
genius.
Read the OP before commenting.
The remote reppers are useful only after the damage is done and are slow (especially the armor and hull reppers).
The OP is suggesting the idea of buffing modules for convoy escort. Balance can be tricky as they could be used outside the intended role, but the idea is worth considering.
Command modules do some of the work, but especially for freighter escort they do very little, as most of the freighter HP are in the hull and no command link modify that.
The same modules suggested by the OP for convoy escort could be used for low sec miners protection, where the barges and exumers have 0 survivability is targeted by attackers.
|
Reti
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 11:45:00 -
[28]
Originally by: ry ry
Edited by: ry ry on 09/01/2009 10:31:58
also, i have a large stack of pithii b-type small shield transfers no f*cker wants.
.
Stuffz??
Give them to me, I'll use them |
clone 1
Laughing Leprechauns Corporation
Lotto Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 11:50:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Venkul Mul
The remote reppers are useful only after the damage is done and are slow
Really?
|
SentryRaven
KIA Corp
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 11:50:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Ovno ConSyquence
Really the idea i'm trying to get across is that we need some way to sacrifice ourselves to save our mates cus as it is at the moment if you want to kill someone who has a fleet with him all you need to do is get everyone to primary the target which doesn't exactly lead to the most diverse of tactical situations... (lock primary, shoot primary, lock primary, shoot primary, try and wait out agression timer so you can jump out of combat)
And ty SentryRaven something like what you suggested could make this work even better, but of course it would all need to be balanced well.
Why do people always split my name? ;)
Yes, the general idea is that of "sacrifice" for another mate.
It's similar to the Thrasher Pilot and the Battleship Pilot above, the BS is sacrificing himself to protect the Thrasher from damage, although the situation is different.
To the man who argued that carries get invincible, well... with my approach, it would not be the case, as one carrier would be boosted by this, the other seriously nerfed and be faster to pop.
Scenario: Group of 2 Carriers, one has a valuable T2 BPO in his hold and is tackled by a suprise Black-Ops fleet....
Both switch to Escort mode and a call in alliance is made to assist the carriers.
One of the carriers starts slowly sacrificing himself to buy the other carrier a few more minutes so the backup / rescue can arrive and safe the day.
One carrier will eventually pop, but it doesnt have to be the valuable one. |
ry ry
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 11:52:00 -
[31]
Edited by: ry ry on 09/01/2009 11:52:39
If you fit out a hauler with 10k EHP, which really isn't difficult, that'd be the alpha from 3x max-skilled t1 tempests before your resists & any potential misses, so make that 4 tempests to be sure of the kill, which they are guaranteed to lose. What ccp should do is remove the insurance payout for suicide ganking and bingo! it's balanced.
you can still gank people with t1 indys full of capital component BPOs, but it no longer becomes worthwhile ganking a hauler full off trit.
you want to haul something *really* valuable? jump it, or take a plated battleship, or take a blockade runner, or have scouts, or a cloak, or ecm bursts. or all of the above. a bestower is not appropriate for moving hundreds of millions of isk around lowsec. |
Ovno ConSyquence
Amarr
Imperial Shipment
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 11:52:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: ry ry
Originally by: Ovno ConSyquence
No way to defend others from attack because all buffing modules work after the fact.
like remote shield, armour and hull reps you mean?
genius.
Read the OP before commenting. ty
The remote reppers are useful only after the damage is done and are slow (especially the armor and hull reppers).
The OP is suggesting the idea of buffing modules for convoy escort. Balance can be tricky as they could be used outside the intended role, but the idea is worth considering.
Command modules do some of the work, but especially for freighter escort they do very little, as most of the freighter HP are in the hull and no command link modify that.
The same modules suggested by the OP for convoy escort could be used for low sec miners protection, where the barges and exumers have 0 survivability is targeted by attackers.
Exactly, if CCP give us a way to actually protect our mates it would open up all sorts of areas of play which before now have been impractical.
And would be very much in the true spirit of eve as it would be the players taking the power back instead of whining to CCP to nerf peoples play styles. |
ry ry
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 11:57:00 -
[33]
Edited by: ry ry on 09/01/2009 12:04:47
Edited by: ry ry on 09/01/2009 12:04:06
Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: ry ry
Originally by: Ovno ConSyquence
No way to defend others from attack because all buffing modules work after the fact.
like remote shield, armour and hull reps you mean?
genius.
Read the OP before commenting.
The remote reppers are useful only after the damage is done and are slow (especially the armor and hull reppers).
The OP is suggesting the idea of buffing modules for convoy escort. Balance can be tricky as they could be used outside the intended role, but the idea is worth considering.
Command modules do some of the work, but especially for freighter escort they do very little, as most of the freighter HP are in the hull and no command link modify that.
The same modules suggested by the OP for convoy escort could be used for low sec miners protection, where the barges and exumers have 0 survivability is targeted by attackers.
i read the post, i just didn't think it was a terribly good idea... i'm going to take this completely gank fitted commandship with no tank whatsoever and mids full of sensor boosters & tracking computers and transfer all the damage i take to that neutral triage carrier over there. now a bunch of my mates do the same. when you arrive we point and web you, melt your damage-transfer ship and then kill you at our leisure. the lowsec gatecamping issue hasn't gone away - it's just got much bigger numbers.
oh, and he can start remote reps on his gangmates before he's even been targetted.
edit: the posts in this thread seem to swing between lowsec not being friendly and suicide ganking being bad. lowsec isn't supposed to be friendly, and suicide ganking could easily fixed without introducing a ridiculously overpowered module.
|
Angelic Orange
Minmatar
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 12:01:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Ovno ConSyquence
The problems...
No trade through lowsec.
Constant forum whining about suicide ganking.
No way to defend others from attack because all buffing modules work after the fact.
A solution?
Modules to allow players to defend other players.
Such as
A damage transfer module, allowing you to absorb the damage done to another player, until you get popped of course.
A remote resistance booster, allowing you to boost the resistances of another player, by reducing your own.
A remote shield and armour reenforcer module, allowing you to up the shield or armour hp of another player, by reducing you own.
A remote sig radius reducer, allowing you to decrease the sig radius of a another player making them harder to hit, at the expense of increasing your own
A remote sensor blocker, allowing you to make another player harder to lock at the expense of making you easier to lock.
A remote warp core stab, allowing you to increase the warp core strength of another player while at the same time preventing yourself from warping for 30 seconds or so.
With these simple tools industrials and the like could hire wingmen to protect them when carrying valuable cargo through suicide ganking hot spots or even through lowsec making piracy more interesting, creating a new career of escort (not that kind ) and enabling traders to utilise profitable dangerous trade routes.
Obviously these mods would have to stake properly even when used by multiple escorts to prevent abuse.
LOL please post you latest suicide death.
|
Tzar'rim
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 12:07:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Ovno ConSyquence
Originally by: Tzar'rim
What, you mean you need more than scouting, a bit of effort and non-afk playing?
You do if you want it to get there and not just stop because theres a camp, for lowsec.
And more than that I mean it would be nice if there were other options so that people can be inventive about these things and maybe even use teamwork (for something other than scouting)
Also it might get more peeps into lowsec if they feel they can be protected.
If a route is blocked you either reroute, you wait or you attack the blockade. This is for all ships in any situation; someone poses a challenge and you either avoid it or deal with it.
If you're unable to reroute then you need to learn tactics, if you're unwilling to wait then you need to learn patience, if you're incapable of attacking the blockade you need to put in more effort into getting friends who are actually active and any good.
So I'll restate my question: "What, you mean you need more than scouting, a bit of effort and non-afk playing?"
|
Tippia
Raddick Explorations
BlackWater.
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 12:09:00 -
[36]
Originally by: ry ry
you want to haul something *really* valuable? jump it, or take a plated battleship, or take a blockade runner, or have scouts, or a cloak, or ecm bursts. or all of the above. a bestower is not appropriate for moving hundreds of millions of isk around lowsec.
This. I wonder how much of this (supposed) problem really comes down to simply using the wrong tool for the job?
———
“If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡…
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.”
— Karath Piki |
Gojyu
Ever Flow
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 12:28:00 -
[37]
Quote:
To the man who argued that carries get invincible, well... with my approach, it would not be the case, as one carrier would be boosted by this, the other seriously nerfed and be faster to pop.
Scenario: Group of 2 Carriers, one has a valuable T2 BPO in his hold and is tackled by a suprise Black-Ops fleet....
Both switch to Escort mode and a call in alliance is made to assist the carriers.
One of the carriers starts slowly sacrificing himself to buy the other carrier a few more minutes so the backup / rescue can arrive and safe the day.
One carrier will eventually pop, but it doesnt have to be the valuable one.
I'll agree that your suggestion is vastly more balanced, but it's still not going to help much. Your idea forces one of two tactics, either the fleet splits their dps against the two carriers or they focus on one. If they split their dps, they just drop fleet or turn escort off, and the carriers now have a significant advantage. If they focus on one, you set the dps'd ship to receive the buff. If the fleet changes dps to the escort, carriers drop fleet, regroup and set the new target to receive the buff while it reps back the damage. If they don't change and continue to fire on the buffed ship, you just pulse escort on and off while the carriers rep each other |
Bado Sten
Minmatar
Dead poets society
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 12:44:00 -
[38]
We want escorts, and lap dancers! 
|
Ovno ConSyquence
Amarr
Imperial Shipment
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 12:46:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Gojyu
Quote:
To the man who argued that carries get invincible, well... with my approach, it would not be the case, as one carrier would be boosted by this, the other seriously nerfed and be faster to pop.
Scenario: Group of 2 Carriers, one has a valuable T2 BPO in his hold and is tackled by a suprise Black-Ops fleet....
Both switch to Escort mode and a call in alliance is made to assist the carriers.
One of the carriers starts slowly sacrificing himself to buy the other carrier a few more minutes so the backup / rescue can arrive and safe the day.
One carrier will eventually pop, but it doesnt have to be the valuable one.
I'll agree that your suggestion is vastly more balanced, but it's still not going to help much. Your idea forces one of two tactics, either the fleet splits their dps against the two carriers or they focus on one. If they split their dps, they just drop fleet or turn escort off, and the carriers now have a significant advantage. If they focus on one, you set the dps'd ship to receive the buff. If the fleet changes dps to the escort, carriers drop fleet, regroup and set the new target to receive the buff while it reps back the damage. If they don't change and continue to fire on the buffed ship, you just pulse escort on and off while the carriers rep each other
Easily solved by cool down on the change from/to escort of say 15 mins, problem solved.
Quote:
LOL please post you latest suicide death.
Never been suicided so not really posible, you see i'm a (returning) combat pilot (and sometimes pirate) not a carebear, i was just trying to come up with a way of helping industrialists defend themselves other than by avoidance, if piracy was more chancy it would be a lot more fun for everyone, because there'd be more targets if they had more ways of defending themselves.
|
SentryRaven
KIA Corp
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 12:51:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Gojyu
Quote:
To the man who argued that carries get invincible, well... with my approach, it would not be the case, as one carrier would be boosted by this, the other seriously nerfed and be faster to pop.
Scenario: Group of 2 Carriers, one has a valuable T2 BPO in his hold and is tackled by a suprise Black-Ops fleet....
Both switch to Escort mode and a call in alliance is made to assist the carriers.
One of the carriers starts slowly sacrificing himself to buy the other carrier a few more minutes so the backup / rescue can arrive and safe the day.
One carrier will eventually pop, but it doesnt have to be the valuable one.
I'll agree that your suggestion is vastly more balanced, but it's still not going to help much. Your idea forces one of two tactics, either the fleet splits their dps against the two carriers or they focus on one. If they split their dps, they just drop fleet or turn escort off, and the carriers now have a significant advantage. If they focus on one, you set the dps'd ship to receive the buff. If the fleet changes dps to the escort, carriers drop fleet, regroup and set the new target to receive the buff while it reps back the damage. If they don't change and continue to fire on the buffed ship, you just pulse escort on and off while the carriers rep each other
Hmm... your points are valid, indeed. Well the obvious answer to the problem would be timers, or once aggression timer kicks in, you cannot make such obvious changes anymore...
Unfortunately we all know that timers are not the solution to every problem and sometimes create more sorrow than good, so I'll skip this approach.
But... The whole idea of the approach to escorts and my scenario would be that if the escort variant is not used, BOTH carriers would face a timely end by the hostile force and to limit damages and losses, it would use one carrier to buy time for the other... In a scenario where the hostile fleet cannot destroy both carriers, the escort approach will not work anyway, I assume.
But it still remains something I need to think more about, thanks for bringing it up.
--------
EBANK Forum Manager |
Angelic Orange
Minmatar
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 13:00:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Ovno ConSyquence
Never been suicided so not really posible, you see i'm a (returning) combat pilot (and sometimes pirate) not a carebear, i was just trying to come up with a way of helping industrialists defend themselves other than by avoidance, if piracy was more chancy it would be a lot more fun for everyone, because there'd be more targets if they had more ways of defending themselves.
Avoidance is the best option an industrialist has, and now that blockade runners can fit a cov ops cloak they can basically avoid all but the best trained gate camp. Or warp right out to a black ops ship from the get go.
|
Eben Rochelle
Gallente
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 13:02:00 -
[42]
Originally by: clone 1
To be taken seriously you must first know what you are talking about.
Next.
Obvious troll is obvious....
Next.
I agree with the OP rather than yet another pointless restriction/nerf to SG'ing (ie no insurance faster concordokken and permanent instajam) a chance for the average carebear to do something about defending themselves. Multiplaying a MMO... surely not!!!!11eleventyone
|
ry ry
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 13:09:00 -
[43]
Edited by: ry ry on 09/01/2009 13:13:07
Originally by: SentryRaven
BOTH carriers would face a timely end by the hostile force and to limit damages and losses, it would use one carrier to buy time for the other...
there is already a module for one carrier to buy a little time for the others.
i think this capship stuff is muddying the waters a little anyway. the module he suggested was for haulers and stuff, and although people jump **** all over the place in caps they don't tend to get suicide ganked doing it.
he wanted the ability to be 'immune' to suicide ganking, by redirecting the massive alpha his time hauler (paper thin and designed to move large quantities of Quafe around the universe cheaply) was about to take to a battleship (heavily armoured and designed specifically for the task of surviving under heavy fire).
like it or not ships have roles, and a module which can somehow give a hauler/shuttle/pod/whatever the ability to tank like a battleship is a crap idea.
|
Matthew
Caldari
BloodStar Technologies
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 13:13:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Mikal Drey
hey hey
there are already tools like this ingame and alot better than you suggested.
Gang links, Leadership skills, Shield Transporters
Remote repping isnt a criminal act either so you have added security there.
Remote repping is also ineffective as an escorting tactic on the majority of ships you might want to be escorting, due to the low HP buffers on those ships.
The problem with current escort mechanics is that there is no way to force attackers to engage the escort first, and the ships being escorted cannot survive long enough for the escort to stand a chance of eliminating the attackers.
Originally by: Tippia
you come across something that will one-shot a well-tanked hauler, you're in trouble no matter whatą
If they have a large fleet that can one-shot that well-tanked hauler, then you're going to lose the hauler even if it is being escorted by an even larger friendly fleet.
I also note that while you can put appreciable HP buffers on some non-combat ship, doing so generally gimps them in respect of doing their intended job. The whole point of being able to support your non-combat ships with an escort is so that the non-combat ships can focus on their own roles instead of having to focus on combat themselves.
Not having effective escort mechanisms means you end up with the only viable defence for non-combat ships being to not be on the same grid as the attackers. And once you've gone into run-and-hide mode, the escort becomes fairly redundant anyway, so are ditched, and no-one gets any fight at all.
Originally by: Gojyu
As a carrier pilot, I'm all for your ideas. Will make small groups of carriers utterly invincible to other ships, carry on.
Clearly such modules would need limitations to avoid this. Specifically, having one of these remote boost modules active prevents you from receiving the benefit of one yourself - hence no circle-boosting. They could also be configured to only affect certain classes of ship.
Originally by: ry ry
i read the post, i just didn't think it was a terribly good idea... i'm going to take this completely gank fitted commandship with no tank whatsoever and mids full of sensor boosters & tracking computers and transfer all the damage i take to that neutral triage carrier over there. now a bunch of my mates do the same. when you arrive we point and web you, melt your damage-transfer ship and then kill you at our leisure. the lowsec gatecamping issue hasn't gone away - it's just got much bigger numbers.
Well, for starters the ideas proposed in the OP are for modules that act to draw the damage away, not to project your damage to someone else. Hence your triage carrier would only be able to help a limited number of ships due to only being able to fit a limited number of escort modules, and the proposed penalties would leave it significantly vulnerable to a comparably-sized attack force.
Secondly, these escort mechanics are aimed at defending ships who's function is defined as requiring protection rather than being able to provide it themselves. Hence, they could be focussed to benefit the non-combat ship classes rather than all ship classes.
Originally by: Tzar'rim
If a route is blocked you either reroute, you wait or you attack the blockade. This is for all ships in any situation; someone poses a challenge and you either avoid it or deal with it.
But in all of those situations, the only viable defence for the non-combat element of the fleet is for it not to be on the grid. At which point there is no incentive for the blockade to stick around and defeat the escort, because they know even if they win, their "reward" of the hauler simply won't warp in.
-------
There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines. |
Matthew
Caldari
BloodStar Technologies
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 13:21:00 -
[45]
Besides, escort mechanics applies to more than just trying to get a hauler through a gatecamp. Many industrial processes involve players sitting in space for significant periods of time in vulnerable ships. Because these ships can be effectively ganked out from under any escort force, you tend to end up without escorts, and all such potential targets safespot or dock every time a potential attacker pops up in local. Which just leads to the worst outcome for both parties - the industrialists lose efficiency, and the attackers don't have any targets.
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: ry ry
you want to haul something *really* valuable? jump it, or take a plated battleship, or take a blockade runner, or have scouts, or a cloak, or ecm bursts. or all of the above. a bestower is not appropriate for moving hundreds of millions of isk around lowsec.
This. I wonder how much of this (supposed) problem really comes down to simply using the wrong tool for the job?
I'm not asking to be able to use the wrong tool for the job. What I'm aiming for is an alternative tool for the job, where you can leverage teamwork and numbers instead of a single super-focussed elite ship.
Yes, a bestower on it's own is not appropriate for high-value low-sec hauling. But a bestower escorted by 10 battleships should be more difficult to take out than just hitting it with a gank-squad before the escorts have a realistic chance of taking out the attackers.
I have suggested an alternative idea before that I will highlight again - a reinforcement module for non-combat ships, combined with shifting the HP balance of non-combat ships heavily towards structure (this seems to be the case with the newer non-combat ships but some of the older ones would need bringing into line). The reinforcement module would massively boost structure resistances at the expense of significantly locking down the ship - at the minumum it would not be able to move, warp or jump, and you could add -100% drone bandwidth, inability to lock targets etc to further reduce their already limited ability to fight back if necessary. Effectively a damage control on steroids.
The idea is to allow the non-combat ship to forefeit their own countermeasures in exchange for sufficient survival time under fire to allow their escorts time to be effective. Note that the module does not make the non-combat ship invulnerable - if they have no-one to help them out they'll be just as dead, eventually.
I've specifically aimed it at structure HP to try and keep it as a passive HP effect, so that it doesn't generate insane sustainable tanking abilities.
It gives the escort a reason to fight, because they can have some confidence they have a chance of defeating the attackers before the non-combat ship melts. It gives the attackers a reason to fight because they can have some confidence that the non-combat target they are going after will still be stuck on-grid at the end of the fight. |
Mikal Drey
Minmatar
Priory Of The Lemon
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 13:25:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Matthew
Well, for starters the ideas proposed in the OP are for modules that act to draw the damage away
You mean like a extender mods, resist amps/hards/reppers/rigs etc.
not only does the op want the escorted ship to be tanked but he wants it to be much more inulnerable. :/
having additonal mods to buff the tank on the escorted ship will cause some very bad game inbalances. how much and how far is the op really talking ? with all the existing tools already in place to help protect traveling as well as multiple tactics its working quite well atm.
the op seems to have the intention that the ship that gets called primary should have a hugely increased chance of survival. At the expense of everyone else :/ in a way its a forced meatshield.
|
ry ry
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 13:30:00 -
[47]
Edited by: ry ry on 09/01/2009 13:35:09
Originally by: Matthew
Well, for starters the ideas proposed in the OP are for modules that act to draw the damage away, not to project your damage to someone else. Hence your triage carrier would only be able to help a limited number of ships due to only being able to fit a limited number of escort modules, and the proposed penalties would leave it significantly vulnerable to a comparably-sized attack force.
Secondly, these escort mechanics are aimed at defending ships who's function is defined as requiring protection rather than being able to provide it themselves. Hence, they could be focussed to benefit the non-combat ship classes rather than all ship classes.
it's a far-reaching, complicated and inherently flawed idea to solve a problem that doesn't warrant such measures.
> Suicide ganking is too prolific? make it more expensive by removing insurance for ships lost comitting a criminal act. you can now easily make yourself a less worthwhile target for would-be gankers.
> Can't fly around lowsec with impunity? working as intended.
> A hauler cannot survive an alpha strike from a dozen battleships? working as intended. what exactly are you expecting from a giant flying cargo can?
> Want to make a hauler more duable? there are already ways and means which have been mentioned several times.
|
SentryRaven
KIA Corp
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 13:33:00 -
[48]
Edited by: SentryRaven on 09/01/2009 13:35:55
Edited by: SentryRaven on 09/01/2009 13:35:27
Originally by: Mikal Drey
the op seems to have the intention that the ship that gets called primary should have a hugely increased chance of survival. At the expense of everyone else :/ in a way its a forced meatshield.
It's not a forced meatshield, but rather being meatshield by choice.
And the definition of "hugely increased" is always based on what numbers you spin around and how you balance things...
Invulnerability should not be the goal of this proposal, but rather increased survivability using an escort fleet as a tool.
NINJA EDIT:
Quote:
> A hauler cannot survive an alpha strike from a dozen battleships? working as intended.
A hauler flying along with 6 escort BS, all prepped to remote rep and defend.... 1 hostile Brutix, all pimped for GANK, with 800 DPS... What would be the purpose to have an escort in the first place then, if the hauler gets popped before the BS can act? And this in Highsec??
--------
EBANK Forum Manager |
Batolemaeus
Caldari
Free-Space-Ranger
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 13:38:00 -
[49]
If only we had a Forum to suggest features and ideas... |
ry ry
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 13:38:00 -
[50]
Edited by: ry ry on 09/01/2009 13:41:01
okay, what about a remote module that could increase shield HP of the target ship and works in the same way as a remote rep with the effect of the mindlink thingy, basically.
that way you can make ships less vulnerable to alpha without all this damage-transfer *******s.
ninja edit: what is this hypothetical hauler carrying? could it have just transferred the cargo between the 6 battleships escorting it? |
Khlitouris RegusII
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 13:40:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Mikal Drey
hey hey
there are already tools like this ingame and alot better than you suggested.
Gang links, Leadership skills, Shield Transporters
Remote repping isnt a criminal act either so you have added security there.
it is if you rep a criminal. |
SentryRaven
KIA Corp
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 13:41:00 -
[52]
Originally by: ry ry
okay, what about a remote module that could increase shield HP of the target ship and works in the same way as the mindlink thingy, basically.
that way you can make ships less vulnerable to alpha without all this damage-transfer *******s.
What is the sacrifice here? The slot on the remote ship? I wouldn't call this a sacrifice really.... |
ry ry
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 13:46:00 -
[53]
Edited by: ry ry on 09/01/2009 13:46:32
Originally by: SentryRaven
Originally by: ry ry
okay, what about a remote module that could increase shield HP of the target ship and works in the same way as the mindlink thingy, basically.
that way you can make ships less vulnerable to alpha without all this damage-transfer *******s.
What is the sacrifice here? The slot on the remote ship? I wouldn't call this a sacrifice really....
how'd you mean?
if you mean what is the downside you could make it a sacrifice by increasing the target's sig radius,
adding the points to the max hp rather than just adding them to the current,
you could make the remote shield extender a complete ****ing pig to fit or have it suck cap like nobody's business,
it could slow one or the other ships down,
you could not include the additional points when calculating shield regen, pre-nerf the stacking,
whatever you want. the penalty is less relevant then the effect not being OP. |
Ovno ConSyquence
Amarr
Imperial Shipment
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 13:47:00 -
[54]
Edited by: Ovno ConSyquence on 09/01/2009 13:47:47
Edited by: Ovno ConSyquence on 09/01/2009 13:47:11
Originally by: ry ry
it's a far-reaching, complicated and inherently flawed idea to solve a problem that doesn't warrant such measures.
> Suicide ganking is too prolific? make it more expensive by removing insurance for ships lost comitting a criminal act. you can now easily make yourself a less worthwhile target for would-be gankers.
So instead you want a much further reaching change of removing insurance for gankers (and stupid people who fire by mistake)
> Can't fly around lowsec with impunity? working as intended.
Nobody hauls round lowsec at all, not working as intended
> A hauler cannot survive an alpha strike from a dozen battleships? working as intended. what exactly are you expecting from a giant flying cargo can?
Even when escorted by a hundred useless friends
> Want to make a hauler more duable? there are already ways and means which have been mentioned several times.
All of which don't encourage group play and haven't helped bring more people to lowsec
Originally by: SentryRaven
Edited by: SentryRaven on 09/01/2009 13:35:55
Edited by: SentryRaven on 09/01/2009 13:35:27
Originally by: Mikal Drey
the op seems to have the intention that the ship that gets called primary should have a hugely increased chance of survival. At the expense of everyone else :/ in a way its a forced meatshield.
It's not a forced meatshield, but rather being meatshield by choice.
And the definition of "hugely increased" is always based on what numbers you spin around and how you balance things...
Invulnerability should not be the goal of this proposal, but rather increased survivability using an escort fleet as a tool.
Exactly
Originally by: ry ry
Edited by: ry ry on 09/01/2009 13:41:01
okay, what about a remote module that could increase shield HP of the target ship and works in the same way as a remote rep with the effect of the mindlink thingy, basically.
that way you can make ships less vulnerable to alpha without all this damage-transfer *******s.
Yep that would be perfect I just thought the damage transfer thing made it fairer because if you were really determined the escorts would start to pop if you focused fire on the hauler.
|
Mikal Drey
Minmatar
Priory Of The Lemon
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 13:50:00 -
[55]
Originally by: SentryRaven
It's not a forced meatshield, but rather being meatshield by choice.
Yes you have the choice and by being there you should be prepared to die to save the hauller.
the agressors comming across this escorted ship that they have full intention to kill try to call it primary (as they would) but because its protected up the wahzoo they need to kill escort first ?
at what point does the op believe that this escorted ship isnt supposed to die before the escort. If the lone brutix has to kill a command ship before he gets to kill a TI hauller then there is something seriously unballanced.
lets say for example we have the same mechanic applied to a Megathron. you now have a megathron that is free to pew pew the crap out of stuff before he gets to die. :/
if you have valuable cargo then FFS use something thats capable of haulling it safely. Transport, blockade, freighter etc. yes they are still able to be suicide ganked but thats eve. If you travel smart and use some degree of common sense then your not going to get your ass ganked.
I helped escort a Freighter through 0.0 and the fleet assembled to escort it done its job sufficiently. I completely accept that if a hostile fleet came through and wanted that freighter dead then if its primary then it will most likely die.
High sec suicide ganking is a whole different issue tbh but the current tools and tactics are more than sufficient than adding additionall survivability.
|
Mikal Drey
Minmatar
Priory Of The Lemon
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 13:55:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Ovno ConSyquence
Originally by: ry ry
okay, what about a remote module that could increase shield HP of the target ship and works in the same way as a remote rep with the effect of the mindlink thingy, basically.
that way you can make ships less vulnerable to alpha without all this damage-transfer *******s.
Yep that would be perfect I just thought the damage transfer thing made it fairer because if you were really determined the escorts would start to pop if you focused fire on the hauler.
Thats exactly what leadership skills do :/
the very prescence of the command ship pilot will increase the HP of both shield and armor.
|
ry ry
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 13:56:00 -
[57]
Edited by: ry ry on 09/01/2009 13:56:29
So instead you want a much further reaching change of removing insurance for gankers (and stupid people who fire by mistake)
yes. if i'm stupid enough to pod myself between stations without an upto date clone there is no faculty to get any reimbursement. if you crash your car but tell the insurers "it's alright, nobody else was at fault, i just i steered into that lampost by mistake" they're unlikely to pay up. less so if you crashed it whilst ramraiding a Tesco Metro.
Nobody hauls round lowsec at all, not working as intended
nobody? nonsence, i've killed loads of haulers in lowsec/0.0
perhaps if their support gang had scouted the gate, or killed us all, or they had cloaked they would have survived. but the vast majority of them didn't have a support gang, they had 1 noobalt and flew straight into us.
Even when escorted by a hundred useless friends
see above tbh. if even a relatively small gang sweeps through the pipe ahead of you, you are unlikely to be killed.
|
ry ry
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 13:57:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Mikal Drey
Thats exactly what leadership skills do :/
the very prescence of the command ship pilot will increase the HP of both shield and armor.
;)
|
Confuzer
Volition Cult
The Volition Cult
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 13:59:00 -
[59]
Hire your Concord escort party today!
2mil/jump from highsec.
-----------------
Destiny is not a matter of chance. It is a matter of choice. It's not a thing to be waited for - it is a thing to be achieved. |
SentryRaven
KIA Corp
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 14:04:00 -
[60]
Originally by: ry ry
see above tbh. if even a relatively small gang sweeps through the pipe ahead of you, you are unlikely to be killed.
I think it doesn't help that we are trying to use the same model for scenarios in high-/low-/nullsec.
In nullsec, you are quite correct, a smaller group jumping ahead, paving the way and a main group escorting the target works like a charm and as intended, including teamplay.
In lowsec, your approach works as well, with the tiny drawback that you will get fired upon by Sentry guns, when trying to pave the way. But you will have to accept this fact or let the main group reach the attackers and THEN combine the foward and the main group to obliterate the attackers. The chance of the target being destroyed before you can repair it or obliterate the attackers in increased, by them having the element of first shot, but then again lesser, because THEY get the aggro from Sentry guns.
In high sec... you cannot pave the way, as any aggression would invoke concord, your only chance is to have sufficient remote repair capabilites and fast lock on the target upon de-cloak to nullify the Alpha strike.
The downsides you mention are similar to a absorbed or diverted damage model, they create a boost for the target while a nerf for the escort. It doesn't matter what bonuses you try to apply, as long as the boost-to-nerf approach is considered sacrificing one ship for the other, or at least make it suffer in order to safe/aid/defend the target.
--------
EBANK Forum Manager |
ry ry
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 14:12:00 -
[61]
Edited by: ry ry on 09/01/2009 14:17:49
Quote:
In high sec... you cannot pave the way, as any aggression would invoke concord, your only chance is to have sufficient remote repair capabilites and fast lock on the target upon de-cloak to nullify the Alpha strike.
look at it like this - you have a t1 hauler that can carry loads of bits and bobs worth a small fortune. you bring along 4 battleships as support, the hauler gets instapopped. what if you'd just fitted up the 4 BS something like this...
[Typhoon, Haulphoon]
Expanded Cargohold II
Expanded Cargohold II
Expanded Cargohold II
Expanded Cargohold II
Expanded Cargohold II
Expanded Cargohold II
Expanded Cargohold II
100MN MicroWarpdrive II
Large Shield Extender II
Large Shield Extender II
Large Shield Extender II
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II
Anti-Thermal Screen Reinforcer II
Core Defence Field Extender II
they'd have a cargo capacity of a little over 3400. *4 = 13600. that's more than a max skilled, fully expanded bestower. they'd also have about 49k EHP each, and if one popped you'd still have 3/4 of your cargo still safely in ships. you wouldn't even need to bring the industrial alt along to fly the hauler.
the trick is finding the right tool for the job, and for transporting valuables t1 haulers ain't it.
|
SentryRaven
KIA Corp
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 14:18:00 -
[62]
Edited by: SentryRaven on 09/01/2009 14:18:28
True again, the limitation is only that to haul bigger items (although I don't know if there is any that are so huge) you will need to resort to industrials or transports or freighters again, or if it's "bobs and bits", do more runs.....
49k EHP.... that gankable?
--------
EBANK Forum Manager |
ry ry
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 14:20:00 -
[63]
i ninja edited the tank on there, and changing one of the cargo expanders for a DC2 adds another 10k EHP.
|
ry ry
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 14:24:00 -
[64]
a fully t2 fitted max skilled Tempest does 4980 alpha before resists, misses etc.
so yeah the haulphoon is still gankable, but it'd take a lot of battleships to kill it.
|
baltec1
R.U.S.T.
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 14:29:00 -
[65]
why dont you just use a blockade runner fitted with a cov ops cloak and mwd in high sec? They are almost impossible to stop. |
Corwain
Gallente
Dark Skullz Empire
Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 14:34:00 -
[66]
TBH losec is the safest place in EVE if you've got a freaking clue. The ONLY 2 things that could potentially catch you off guard are HICs remote sensorboosted out the wazoo and (if you're in a small untanked ship) smartbombing BS. |
ry ry
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 14:35:00 -
[67]
Edited by: ry ry on 09/01/2009 14:37:02
baltec1, i reported your post by mistake the first time i tried to reply. hopefully the mod who gets the ticket will realise! :x
because you need to train for them? lack of required skills must be the only reason the guys piloting these t1 indies full of Phat Lewt aren't flying blockade runners.
seriously the whole argument seems to revolve around the sort of logic that would have people who fill their lows with warp stabs complaining that all the enemy needs to bring is one more point than they have lows and suddenly they can't escape and their warp stabs are useless. |
SentryRaven
KIA Corp
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 14:38:00 -
[68]
Originally by: baltec1
why dont you just use a blockade runner fitted with a cov ops cloak and mwd in high sec? They are almost impossible to stop.
Because they are obviously not the solution to every job... ;) |
Tzar'rim
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 14:39:00 -
[69]
How fricking difficult can it be!
- scout checks next system's ingate and scans for any group of ships which might be capable of ganking
- freighter warps to outgate and when at gate scout scans again
- if scanner is clear, freighter jumps, gets webbed by the scout and insta warps to a station
- freighter waits till the scout is in front again and checks the next system
Now they either have to time their warp-in/attack perfectly OR they need to sacrifice 2 groups of ships (one at the outgate forcing the freighter to jump and one at the ingate completing the job).
All you fricking need is a scout, a station to warp to and some fricking effort!
|
SentryRaven
KIA Corp
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 14:43:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Tzar'rim
Edited by: Tzar''rim on 09/01/2009 14:41:05
How fricking difficult can it be!
- scout checks next system's ingate and scans for any group of ships which might be capable of ganking
- freighter warps to outgate and when at gate scout scans again
- if scanner is clear, freighter jumps, gets webbed by the scout and insta warps to a station
- freighter waits till the scout is in front again and has checked the next system
Now they either have to time their warp-in/attack perfectly OR they need to sacrifice 2 groups of ships (one at the outgate forcing the freighter to jump and one at the ingate completing the job).
All you fricking need is a scout, a station to warp to and some fricking effort!
Indeed, because your scout is the only one that is capable to get a lock before the attackers do. |
baltec1
R.U.S.T.
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 14:46:00 -
[71]
Originally by: ry ry
Edited by: ry ry on 09/01/2009 14:37:02
baltec1, i reported your post by mistake the first time i tried to reply. hopefully the mod who gets the ticket will realise! :x
uh oh |
Tzar'rim
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 14:47:00 -
[72]
Originally by: SentryRaven
Originally by: Tzar'rim
Edited by: Tzar''rim on 09/01/2009 14:41:05
How fricking difficult can it be!
- scout checks next system's ingate and scans for any group of ships which might be capable of ganking
- freighter warps to outgate and when at gate scout scans again
- if scanner is clear, freighter jumps, gets webbed by the scout and insta warps to a station
- freighter waits till the scout is in front again and has checked the next system
Now they either have to time their warp-in/attack perfectly OR they need to sacrifice 2 groups of ships (one at the outgate forcing the freighter to jump and one at the ingate completing the job).
All you fricking need is a scout, a station to warp to and some fricking effort!
Indeed, because your scout is the only one that is capable to get a lock before the attackers do.
Have you actually read my post and tried to understand the tactics part or are you just good at blobbing? |
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 15:01:00 -
[73]
A new logistics module that you can fire once every 15 minutes, and it makes the target ship immune to all forms of e-war for 60 seconds.
Wyvern & Chimera fitting flowchart
|
SentryRaven
KIA Corp
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 15:12:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Tzar'rim
Have you actually read my post and tried to understand the tactics part or are you just good at blobbing?
I have read it, and even if it's two groups that try to gank, your webbing alt will not help it.... will it?
--------
EBANK Forum Manager |
Cpt Lollercakes
Warriors of COAD
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 15:36:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Sokratesz
A new logistics module that you can fire once every 15 minutes, and it makes the target ship immune to all forms of e-war for 60 seconds.
Would turn carriers into MOM's. |
Marchocias
Silent Ninja's
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 15:59:00 -
[76]
Er... extra modules for this? Probably pointless.
However, adding new capabilities to the contracts system might work.
EG, the person hauling sets up a contract for his defender (or defenders, if contract is taken by a corp), which defines a container full of stuff to be hauled, a destination (station / pos / system), a reward for the defender (if the stuff makes it), and possibly some collateral to be put up be the defender, etc.
Obviously, you'd also need something which checks that the defender, or at least one of multiple defenders, is never in a different solar system for more than a minute, and never leaves gang, or the contract is voided.
If we want the game to be more about co-operation, then modules are not really the answer... game mechanics are, and contracts looks like the best bet in this situation.
----
Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa*coughcough*aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrr!! |
Larkonis Trassler
Neo Spartans
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 16:03:00 -
[77]
Ref insurance payouts and not getting them if Concorded... It was actually what the playerbase wanted for the last suicide gank nerf, many gankers included. Instead we got the increased concord response time, I believe in an effort to make suicide ganking more of a team effort and so little nubbins and carebears don't quit when they shoot their mate's mission wreck or accidently set off a smartbomb.
Calm Your Passion |
Ovno ConSyquence
Amarr
Imperial Shipment
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 16:06:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Marchocias
Er... extra modules for this? Probably pointless.
However, adding new capabilities to the contracts system might work.
EG, the person hauling sets up a contract for his defender (or defenders, if contract is taken by a corp), which defines a container full of stuff to be hauled, a destination (station / pos / system), a reward for the defender (if the stuff makes it), and possibly some collateral to be put up be the defender, etc.
Obviously, you'd also need something which checks that the defender, or at least one of multiple defenders, is never in a different solar system for more than a minute, and never leaves gang, or the contract is voided.
If we want the game to be more about co-operation, then modules are not really the answer... game mechanics are, and contracts looks like the best bet in this situation.
Problem is even if the defender is by your side for the entire journey the best he can do is pop your can when you get ganked so that the pirates don't get the loot anyway...
Which is probably what I'd do with my alt if it ever happened to me
Or I suppose you could fly an empty hauler along side ready to try and scoop it if needs be, either way would deny the pirate the loot and thus damage their sec status loss to isk ratio. |
Marchocias
Silent Ninja's
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 16:16:00 -
[79]
Edited by: Marchocias on 09/01/2009 16:18:15
Certainly some of the modules you described wouldn't be too bad (although I'm sure there are consequences that I've not considered)... but I think it really needs something in the contracts system to make it viable.
Contracts are the answer to everything.
Got ganked in lo-sec? Should've taken out a protection contract!
Getting smacked by some tard? Contract killers ftw!
Can't get enough exotic dancers? Contract some pimp to deliver them to you once a week! |
Ovno ConSyquence
Amarr
Imperial Shipment
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 16:18:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Marchocias
Certainly some of the modules you described wouldn't be too bad (although I'm sure there are consequences that I've not considered)... but I think it really needs something in the contracts system to make it viable.
I'm of the opinion that pretty much everything needs contracts.
I'd be all up for contracts (with collateral) to go with it would improve the whole thing a fair bit.
And maybe allow the shooting/looting of cans if contracted to that player. |
Arvald
Caldari
MasterBlasters Inc.
CORPVS DELICTI
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 16:41:00 -
[81]
 2 drakes with damamge transfer mods, not even jesus could pop them
i edit spelling for no one |
Tzar'rim
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 17:29:00 -
[82]
Originally by: SentryRaven
Originally by: Tzar'rim
Have you actually read my post and tried to understand the tactics part or are you just good at blobbing?
I have read it, and even if it's two groups that try to gank, your webbing alt will not help it.... will it?
If it's 2 groups then there must be something really bloody valuable in that freighter, in which case it goes back to the old "be careful what you move at once" rule. Using effort takes away MOST of the risk but (obviously) not all, nor should it.
Asking for all kinds of game interventions and options instead of just using logic and some tactics is not the way to go.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 17:34:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Ovno ConSyquence
The problems...
No trade through lowsec.
Constant forum whining about suicide ganking.
No way to defend others from attack because all buffing modules work after the fact.
A solution?
Modules to allow players to defend other players.
Such as
A damage transfer module, allowing you to absorb the damage done to another player, until you get popped of course.
A remote resistance booster, allowing you to boost the resistances of another player, by reducing your own.
A remote shield and armour reenforcer module, allowing you to up the shield or armour hp of another player, by reducing you own.
A remote sig radius reducer, allowing you to decrease the sig radius of a another player making them harder to hit, at the expense of increasing your own
A remote sensor blocker, allowing you to make another player harder to lock at the expense of making you easier to lock.
A remote warp core stab, allowing you to increase the warp core strength of another player while at the same time preventing yourself from warping for 30 seconds or so.
With these simple tools industrials and the like could hire wingmen to protect them when carrying valuable cargo through suicide ganking hot spots or even through lowsec making piracy more interesting, creating a new career of escort (not that kind ) and enabling traders to utilise profitable dangerous trade routes.
Obviously these mods would have to stake properly even when used by multiple escorts to prevent abuse.
There are already plenty of tools for combat escort.
Remote armor reps, remote shield reps, remote cap transfers.
Everything you suggested would be horribly overpowered when used by gangs. Just look at a 10 man remote rep BS gang as it is. |
Togg Bott
Minmatar
League of the Tiger and Tentacle
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 18:42:00 -
[84]
ok...didnt read every post...so if someone here already said this... then ignore me...instead of fitting buffing mods to a ship to transfer HP to a freaghter....have the freighter install mods to RECIEVE the buff's... this would take precious slots that no combat pilot would want to lose... but a freighter and maybe a miner would sacrifice to be able to survive. that solves the problem of pvp ships using it. |
Dibsi Dei
Salamyhkaisten kilta
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 18:53:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Grek Forto
What about Transport Ships then? Being invisible isn't good enough?
this |
Soporo
Caldari
The Graduates
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 18:59:00 -
[86]
The problem isnt freighters so much, as they have a ******ed amount of hp or Bloackade Runners, it's Transports and Miners.
Some way to force the attacker to deal with the cover would be a good thing, imo. Less insta-pop, more real pew. |
Felix Dzerzhinsky
Caldari
Destructive Influence
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 19:06:00 -
[87]
These proposed changes may fix high sec empire ganking - which is relativly rare. But will completely transform lowsec and null sec pvp - I think you have not thought the impacts through sufficiently.
|
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 19:08:00 -
[88]
There are already plenty of protection for haulers of all kinds.
The blockade runner transports can haul 7-8k m3 and if you lose one of those in high sec, then you are afk and deserve to die. Cov ops cloak makes you invulnerable in high sec. Invulnerable. I have one. Invulnerable.
The deep space transports have huge amounts of hit points and great resists. 40,000 effective hit points and over 20,000 m3 carried. Really, look them up. In addition to the +2 warp strength you will need tackle and a lot of instant dps to even have a shot at killing one. Bring along the corresponding logistic ship (shield for bustard/mastodon, armor for the impel/occator) and there is no way you will be suicide ganked. Maybe there are only noob logistics pilots on this forum, but it is called pre-locking, and hey why don't you throw on the reps anyways just to make sure? You don't alpha a tanked ship, plenty of time to get repairing modules active on the ship you are escorting.
The methods for avoiding suicide ganking are already in the game. Training for transport ships is not difficult: spaceship command 3, industry V and racial industrial to V. Cloaking 4 if you want to use the cov ops cloak. Come on, is that so difficult? I know I train much more than that to fly a HAC/recon/HIC efficiently.
Furthermore, I like the assumption that people would actually fly such a "escort ship". People afk haul hundreds of millions of isk in cargo in un-tanked tech 1 haulers because they are lazy and dumb. People will never "hire" an "escort ship" because it is much more profitable to just use that other player to haul and make 2x the money. It is extremely rare that someone on the ball with a good ship gets suicide ganked. There is no more 2 minute jita undock blackout screen. Concord comes much faster and the security penalties are a lot worse. If you get suicided under current mechanics you are dumb and deserve it.
Lastly, as someone above may have mentioned, there is an escort ship: the hyena, rapier and huginn all suffice. If you don't know the webbing trick then that is too bad, but you can make a freighter insta warp from each and every gate. A suicide ganker has to scan you and then use his crystal ball to figure out what your destination is and then use a magic portal to get ganking ships in ahead of you. If you are not afk, most suicide ganking teams won't even have time to scan you let alone have time to figure out if you are worth attacking.
In conclusion, there is no problem with a very experienced team grouping up together to surprise an un-tanked ship without proper escort. In fact, it is fully intended to be like this. If you cannot handle current mechanics then you completely fail at the game and need to stfu or gtfo.
--
http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 19:26:00 -
[89]
Originally by: SentryRaven
Edited by: SentryRaven on 09/01/2009 14:18:28
True again, the limitation is only that to haul bigger items (although I don't know if there is any that are so huge) you will need to resort to industrials or transports or freighters again, or if it's "bobs and bits", do more runs.....
49k EHP.... that gankable?
That set up can transport 1 frigate in each BS against 5 in the Bestower, 0 destroyers against 2, 0 cruisers against 1, (and a max expanded Iteron V, even without rigs, reach 25K m3, 8 BS to replace it).
|
Tippia
Raddick Explorations
BlackWater.
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 19:37:00 -
[90]
Originally by: Venkul Mul
That set up can transport 1 frigate in each BS against 5 in the Bestower, 0 destroyers against 2, 0 cruisers against 1, (and a max expanded Iteron V, even without rigs, reach 25K m3, 8 BS to replace it).
…so use a DST. They start out at 40-50k EHP and you can push those into the 100k EHP region. |
Matthew
Caldari
BloodStar Technologies
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 19:47:00 -
[91]
Originally by: ry ry
> Suicide ganking is too prolific? make it more expensive by removing insurance for ships lost comitting a criminal act. you can now easily make yourself a less worthwhile target for would-be gankers.
While an escort mechanic would give you an extra tool to combat suicide ganking, that is not it's primary purpose.
Originally by: ry ry
Can't fly around lowsec with impunity? working as intended.
I'm not talking about flying around lowsec with impunity. Just being able to fly around in a level of safety commensurate with the combat force that is present to guard you.
Originally by: ry ry
> A hauler cannot survive an alpha strike from a dozen battleships? working as intended. what exactly are you expecting from a giant flying cargo can?
The problem isn't so much that the hauler cannot survive the alpha strike, it's that the attackers can perform that alpha strike even if the hauler is escorted by enough battleships to physically make a 360-degree wall of armor-plated battleship hull around the hauler.
In an ideal world, the escort effect would be achieved through that sort of mechanic. However, it really isn't feasible within Eve's physics engine, hence the move to alternative game mechanics that attempt to simulate that effect.
Originally by: ry ry
> Want to make a hauler more duable? there are already ways and means which have been mentioned several times.
And I have also mentioned that while those are good work-arounds within current mechanics, they have undesirable consequences, and further alternatives would offer good gameplay possibilities.
Originally by: ry ry
okay, what about a remote module that could increase shield HP of the target ship and works in the same way as a remote rep with the effect of the mindlink thingy, basically.
When you add shield HP, you don't automatically gain those HP, you have to wait for your shield to be recharged. If it wasn't like that, you could repeatedly add and remove the shield HP bonus as a form of tanking. Though if these were powerful enough it could be enough to make remote rep from escorting ships in combination with this viable.
Another problem would be that it would be disproportionately powerful when used on ships that are already strongly passive shield tanked anyway (the extra HP would significantly increase natural recharge). Armor or structure HP boosting would be a better choice.
Certainly an approach that it would be interesting to try out though.
Originally by: SentryRaven
What is the sacrifice here? The slot on the remote ship? I wouldn't call this a sacrifice really....
I would suggest a tanking nerf on the escort ship. So it boosts the HP on the target ship, but reduces HP/reduces resistances/reduces cap/increases sig radius on the ship using it.
So while the attackers are effectively forced to engage the escort ships first, those escort ships are weaker than they would otherwise have been.
Originally by: ry ry
ninja edit: what is this hypothetical hauler carrying? could it have just transferred the cargo between the 6 battleships escorting it?
Maybe the hauler is carrying all the extra stuff that didn't fit in the 6 battleships? Maybe you're just trying to move the hauler itself, rather than cargo?
Similarly, for escorts in other situations, escorts and barges is going to be a more effective mining force than trying to mine in ships still viable for combat.
-------
There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines. |
Matthew
Caldari
BloodStar Technologies
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 19:49:00 -
[92]
Originally by: Mikal Drey
at what point does the op believe that this escorted ship isnt supposed to die before the escort. If the lone brutix has to kill a command ship before he gets to kill a TI hauller then there is something seriously unballanced.
Why do you think the escorted ship should be killed before the escort? There is no point having an escort if it lacks the ability to force you to engage them before the weaker target. In most games where escorting works, the guard either has the ability to physically interpose themselves between the attacker and victim, or the attacker makes themselves more vulnerable to attack by ignoring the guard.
Originally by: Mikal Drey
lets say for example we have the same mechanic applied to a Megathron. you now have a megathron that is free to pew pew the crap out of stuff before he gets to die. :/
There is no reason why the escort mechanic has to be able to benefit a megathron. It is also not really aimed at being able to make light combat ships more survivable (that should be achieved through the tracking mechanics). It is targeted purely at non-combat ships, which lack any significant pewing ability. One of the penalties of benefiting from the escort mechanic could also easily be the removal of the ability to pew at all.
Originally by: Mikal Drey
if you have valuable cargo then FFS use something thats capable of haulling it safely. Transport, blockade, freighter etc. yes they are still able to be suicide ganked but thats eve.
Why should the only option be to focus a lot of skill and ability into a single ship? Eve is a multiplayer game, so solutions built around teamwork would seem to be entirely desirable.
Now, having thought some more about my reinforcing module idea, I'm changing my mind a bit. The problem with it is that it allows you to reinforce up to a ridiculous EHP even on your own. It also still just needs a fixed size of gank to overwhelm it. Having it based on remote boost modules allows the power of the escort mechanic to scale much better with the size of your escort relative to the size of the attacking force.
However, I also like the idea of penalties being applied to the ship being boosted. The problem is that if you make a remote boost module that also disables the target's ability to move, you've got a highly abusable module.
Therefore, it would need to be a 2-module solution. The remote boost module of whatever form, and a receiver module. The ship to be escorted would have to activate the receiver module (and thus consent to the detrimental effects of receiving the boost) before the remote boost modules had any effect. The ship could also deactivate their receiver module to unilaterally release themselves.
Another alternative that comes to mind that would not require any new modules is to allow remote reppers to "over-boost". i.e. it becomes possible to remote rep someone to above their maximum HP. These excess HP would decay away quite quickly, and at an increasing rate the further above maximum HP they get. The aim of this is to bypass the problem of remote repping a ship with insufficient HP to make use of the amount of repairing being put onto it, while avoiding granting them a massive HP buffer that could be sustained without the escort.
The decay rate curve could then become a new attribute on each ship, allowing you to balance it so that it is easier to over-boost some ships than others, e.g. to avoid the effect being too powerful on combat ships while ensuring the decay rate isn't too fast on non-combat ships. Roleplay-wise this could be described along the lines of non-combat ships have the arrays to control more power, but not the generators to produce it themselves due to favouring non-combat processes. Whereas combat ships would have already maximised all elements of those systems and thus find it harder to make use of the excess.
-------
There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines. |
Tippia
Raddick Explorations
BlackWater.
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 20:07:00 -
[93]
Originally by: Matthew
The aim of this is to bypass the problem of remote repping a ship with insufficient HP to make use of the amount of repairing being put onto it, while avoiding granting them a massive HP buffer that could be sustained without the escort.
Well, that's the key issue isn't it? What is "insufficient HP"?
To me, it suggests that you're simply using the wrong ship for your transport. The game already offers everything from die-if-you-sneeze/insignificant-cargo shuttles to 250k+ EHP/40k+ m³ Orcas to freighters… there are already ships out there that have "sufficient" HP. And no matter what, even with sufficient HP and even with your additions, they'll be possible (and quite easy) to kill if bring enough ships to bear, so what does your suggestion actually add that we don't already have? |
Minmatar Citizen 290574
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 20:12:00 -
[94]
Originally by: Ovno ConSyquence
A remote resistance booster, allowing you to boost the resistances of another player, by reducing your own.
A remote shield and armour reenforcer module, allowing you to up the shield or armour hp of another player, by reducing you own.
A remote sig radius reducer, allowing you to decrease the sig radius of a another player making them harder to hit, at the expense of increasing your own
A remote sensor blocker, allowing you to make another player harder to lock at the expense of making you easier to lock.
they already have these things more or less... they are called command mods...
|
Matthew
Caldari
BloodStar Technologies
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 20:31:00 -
[95]
Originally by: Tippia
Well, that's the key issue isn't it? What is "insufficient HP"?
To me, it suggests that you're simply using the wrong ship for your transport. The game already offers everything from die-if-you-sneeze/insignificant-cargo shuttles to 250k+ EHP/40k+ m¦ Orcas to freightersą there are already ships out there that have "sufficient" HP. And no matter what, even with sufficient HP and even with your additions, they'll be possible (and quite easy) to kill if bring enough ships to bear, so what does your suggestion actually add that we don't already have?
Well, the point I've been coming round to is that there is no one fixed level of "insufficient HP". Having the HP of the ship being escorted presenting a fundamental limit on the effectiveness on remote repping limits is the fundamental problem breaking escorting and it's scaleabilty.
Which really makes "insufficient HP" being any HP level which cannot take full advantage of the level of remote repping being applied to you.
Which is why I'm becoming more in favour of the "overboosting" idea, as it allows a temporary flexing of HP in order to accommodate levels of remote boosting, without shifting buffer tanks in other situations.
-------
There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines. |
Matthew
Caldari
BloodStar Technologies
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 20:32:00 -
[96]
Originally by: Minmatar Citizen 290574
they already have these things more or less... they are called command mods...
Command mods offer the ability to give a modest boost to a large number of ships. What is being proposed is fundamentally different, allowing you to offer a much larger boost to an individual ship within the group, at a cost to the other members of the group.
-------
There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines. |
Gnomes Rock
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 20:44:00 -
[97]
I don't get the problem, with the new cloaks blockade runners can move around easily, only standing to be caught if they make a mistake or the enemy goes to immense measures to catch them. I suppose this is fair.
You're trying to make highsec more safe, and at doing so would completely change how PvP works in this game - or if you only put the changes onto industrial ships, make highsec even safer for absolutely no reason. There is no reason to implement your changes.
TL;DR, bring a falcon when going through 0.0/low-sec, don't afk haul in highsec.(Nonexistant) Problem solved.
|
Joe Starbreaker
Starbreaker Frigateers
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 20:52:00 -
[98]
Originally by: Ovno ConSyquence
As for if people would be bothered I was more thinking that people could hire themselves out as escorts as this would make an escort useful as something other than a scout.
I will be happy to escort your hauler, loaded with expensive stuff, into lowsec with my battleship and I may even bring a few friends to help. My fee is quite reasonable, and I am willing to negotiate down. Contact me in-game if you need this service. |
Silva Riley
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 23:07:00 -
[99]
What circumvents all problems with things like suicide ganking, order of attack or general effectiveness is a new type of logistics ship.
The shield ship.
A ship that nothing but project a shield around another friendly vessel. Effect: The shielded vessel is immune to any damage until the projected shield is gunned off. Drawback: It can't shoot out either.
In addition, the shield ship itself is not good at much, apart projecting this shield and standing it's own ground. It does not dish out damage, nor does it's protege.
|
Gnomes Rock
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 23:15:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Silva Riley
What circumvents all problems with things like suicide ganking, order of attack or general effectiveness is a new type of logistics ship.
The shield ship.
A ship that nothing but project a shield around another friendly vessel. Effect: The shielded vessel is immune to any damage until the projected shield is gunned off. Drawback: It can't shoot out either.
In addition, the shield ship itself is not good at much, apart projecting this shield and standing it's own ground. It does not dish out damage, nor does it's protege.
However, suicide ganking is not a problem. If CCP did not intend suicide ganking to exist, they would make activating guns in highsec force your ship to instantly self destruct.
|
Blastil
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 23:36:00 -
[101]
Most of the mods you ask for are already in the game in some form or another. You already can remote rep. You can already provide gang boosts from gang assist modules on BC and Command ships. You can laready sensor damp, and you can already jam.
The tools EXIST, the agro mechanic needs to be worked on. The removal of gate guns would do wonders to lowsec...
Also, carebears aren't creative or manly enough to actually FIGHT pirates, they'd just rather avoid the whole thing since there's less risk. |
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Minmatar
MasterBlasters Inc.
CORPVS DELICTI
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 23:50:00 -
[102]
Tool for armed escorts.... turrets |
DedGuy
Millennium
|
Posted - 2009.01.10 01:52:00 -
[103]
Back in 2007 I had a very similar idea and I 'shopped a screenshot into what I thought would be a good way of approaching the problem. See here. But I decided to have a bit of fun and play a joke, see here. The thread got locked, and I tried to open a proper discussion, see here. But it got locked for reopening a closed thread.
Idea still bounces around in my mind sometimes...
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |