| Author |
Topic |
Incub
Minmatar
DarkStar 1
Goonswarm Federation |
Posted - 2006.08.07 00:01:00 - [ 211]
this issue is a tough nut to crack...
anyway, i was thinking make it so you warp to a gate a 0km (no skills involved)
then make it so that it takes you longer to align so people can catch you at the other side of the gate.
maybe even increase warp speeds a bit to counteract the time it takes to get to warp.
basicly this makes you vunrable coming through a gate instead of warping to one...
because different ships have different align times this would balance out whats hard to catch or not.
i know its not perfect but you do keep travel times short while making warfare at gates better.
now to contradict myself, this means you wont see a gatecamp coming. if this would be implemented it would also mean local wont function like it does today (so its possible to scrap it).
anyway, i use insta's like anybody else that lives out in 0.0
its a tactical advantage that just has to much impact on how the game is played :-/ |
Iianko |
Posted - 2006.08.07 00:16:00 - [ 212]
If I can chime in here rather late in the thread, I personally think that the stargate system itself is the biggest problem in the game and is the reason instas are used (and abused) in the first place.  People don't like long travel times, so they use instas. People also don't like getting massacred in 5-10 seconds at gate chokepoints, so they use instas. The only way I can see instas being safely eliminated from the game without nerfing everything from attack damage to defensive capabilities, is to just have a total conversion to a jumpdrive-based mode of travel (go ahead and flame me now) where people can jump from one point in a constellation to another without needing a huge collection of bookmarks. Players would still have to warp to specific points in space to jump, just like with stargates, and would have a jumpdrive cool-down and "spool up" timer so they couldn't bunny hop to avoid trouble. But there'd be no need for the instas since there'd be no more gates. Travel would be sped up and the servers would sigh with relief. Yippie. More importantly, the possibility of a camp/bottling players up in systems for corporate wars and more nefarious goals still exists (control the jump-out points and you control the system), but it would just take more gang cooperation and more brainpower to secure an area of space than simply shooting anything that comes out of a gate. This would also help move the game more towards constellation/solar system-based hegemonies (that were promised before...) rather than Eve's current game model, where 10 to 15 guys sit on a specific chokepoint for hours and can control an entire region as a result. It would also prod more people out into lowsec space, because instead of them having to travel from Point A, to Point B, C, D, E, ect., and possibly being massacred for travelling in such a linear fashion, their chances of survival would be greatly increased since they can jump from Point A to Point C, and then E, or any combination inbetween, until they reached their destination or jumped to another constellation. In my humble opinion, I think this would really get the ball rolling in 0.0 and will eliminate a lot of nagging problems with the game. That's just my two cents, anyway. Feel free to ignore me  |
Aliea Konovalev
Amarr |
Posted - 2006.08.07 00:57:00 - [ 213]
Temporary fix:
Let each player corp create their own set of offical bookmarks and let each corp member have access to them. This will at least reduce some of the load till we come up with a real solution. |
Auraurious
Infinity Enterprises
Atlas Alliance |
Posted - 2006.08.07 01:28:00 - [ 214]
 Originally by: Iianko
If I can chime in here rather late in the thread, I personally think that the stargate system itself is the biggest problem in the game and is the reason instas are used (and abused) in the first place.
People don't like long travel times, so they use instas.
People also don't like getting massacred in 5-10 seconds at gate chokepoints, so they use instas.
The only way I can see instas being safely eliminated from the game without nerfing everything from attack damage to defensive capabilities, is to just have a total conversion to a jumpdrive-based mode of travel (go ahead and flame me now) where people can jump from one point in a constellation to another without needing a huge collection of bookmarks. Players would still have to warp to specific points in space to jump, just like with stargates, and would have a jumpdrive cool-down and "spool up" timer so they couldn't bunny hop to avoid trouble. But there'd be no need for the instas since there'd be no more gates. Travel would be sped up and the servers would sigh with relief. Yippie.
More importantly, the possibility of a camp/bottling players up in systems for corporate wars and more nefarious goals still exists (control the jump-out points and you control the system), but it would just take more gang cooperation and more brainpower to secure an area of space than simply shooting anything that comes out of a gate.
This would also help move the game more towards constellation/solar system-based hegemonies (that were promised before...) rather than Eve's current game model, where 10 to 15 guys sit on a specific chokepoint for hours and can control an entire region as a result. It would also prod more people out into lowsec space, because instead of them having to travel from Point A, to Point B, C, D, E, ect., and possibly being massacred for travelling in such a linear fashion, their chances of survival would be greatly increased since they can jump from Point A to Point C, and then E, or any combination inbetween, until they reached their destination or jumped to another constellation.
In my humble opinion, I think this would really get the ball rolling in 0.0 and will eliminate a lot of nagging problems with the game.
That's just my two cents, anyway.
Feel free to ignore me
This post wins the thread! As a side note, why not just change warping from align based to a sort of "charge up warpcore" style, that isn't effected by either speed or agility . Really in my opinion the system as current is a bit fubar (well not totally fubar, but it's not great either). Anyone who has ever gotten stuck on a gate/station should be able to feel at least a bit of empathy for this. Also the "bump" system could even be preserved ("Warp core alignment delayed due to navigational disturbance  "). Different ships could have different "core warm up" times and there could perhapse be different modules that would effect the "core warm up". Perhapse passive lowslot modules, or perhapse even an mdw style one. I figure that it would also be pretty simple to implement a gang style warp that doesn't warp anyone until everyone is ready. As a side effect of this, there would be no aligned ships, thus nerfing snipers. |
Maya Rkell
Third Grade Ergonomics
|
Posted - 2006.08.07 02:57:00 - [ 215]
Edited by: Maya Rkell on 07/08/2006 02:58:30
Yea, jumpdrives.. oops, about 99% of the PvP in the game just vanished. Jump drive ships are virtually impossible to catch. When something happens, they leave the system entirely, and not in a way you can trace. You make it crucial to control ever larger areas, to spot things inbound (otherwise first sgn of the enemy fleet is when they're in your home system).
Auraurious, a stack-based system? Yea, suggested that before. Warp scramblers act as a multiple on the time, WCS as a divisor (active modules). |
Auraurious
Infinity Enterprises
Atlas Alliance |
Posted - 2006.08.07 04:23:00 - [ 216]
Edited by: Auraurious on 07/08/2006 04:23:05 Originally by: Maya Rkell
Edited by: Maya Rkell on 07/08/2006 02:58:30
Yea, jumpdrives.. oops, about 99% of the PvP in the game just vanished. Jump drive ships are virtually impossible to catch. When something happens, they leave the system entirely, and not in a way you can trace. You make it crucial to control ever larger areas, to spot things inbound (otherwise first sgn of the enemy fleet is when they're in your home system).
Auraurious, a stack-based system? Yea, suggested that before. Warp scramblers act as a multiple on the time, WCS as a divisor (active modules).
I think Iianko was suggesting that there would need to be certain "zones" where warpdrives could be used, that people could camp. I figure it would probably be a bit tricky to balance it out perfectly to get the right amount of risk using them, but I think it's possible. As far as tracing jumpdrive ships, why not just implement a system "cyno field to xxx from xxx" and make the warmup take a bit of time, thus giving the defenders a chance to muster a bit of a force (yay more balancing ). It might be nice to have a map feature that shows a bit more large scale detail on this. I also figure that in the long run, if ccp implements constellation sovernity, they could even use that to effect the jump time and map accuracy. As far as the idea for warp scramblers and stabs to act as multipliers/divisers. Well I personally think it would be great. |
Chiron Typhon
Caldari
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2006.08.07 05:29:00 - [ 217]
I'm a 90% Empire carebear but I do relish the tingle of excitement that I get when going low sec with regards to the possibility of being blasted in PvP. I've never once been killed in my low sec adventures (and I low sec rat a lot) because I'm cautious. I look at the map for the systems I'm jumping to, I watch local, I scan gates from nearby safespots etc etc.
Now call me crazy but I really don't like instas, they trivialise that excitement even though I'm pretty much always the one benefiting from the ability to insta (being the one who's sneaking, not hunting). I don't mind bookmarks and safespots in general but instas are a pretty lame mechanic.
The above qualifications being made, my main problem with deleting instas:
1) Gate campers are usually snipers so it is essentially impossible to fight back with ECM or utilising clever transveral or even shooting back because odds on you won't have the same extreme range setup they do.
2) Annoying travel times on your regular routes.
3) Gate camps don't harm the hardcore because they're either in control of that space or coming through in force, it's pretty much the low sec loners and industrial base that are affected. If you don't give them some hope of survival it affects their game play in a far more dramatic way than it would a major PvP corp player or a pure Empire player. There's a lot of talk in this thread of how to make it "harder" to get away by making aligning penalties and so forth. That's going completely the wrong way, you need to make it easier to escape not harder to encourage people and take the sting out of losing instas.
Without revisiting the design of half the ships and long range weapon systems I think the only way to get around this is to make combat at gates a far more chaotic affair as opposed to a binary yes/no, win/lose system. There needs to be substantial uncertainty for both sides without being a crapshoot. The other objective is to bring the pirates much, much physically closer to the action. That way transversal starts to play a role and the victims can fight back rather than being faced with far, far out of range snipers.
I've heard it mentioned many times but the best one I've heard is stargate interference. Targeting range on any target within 15km of a gate is quartered. Targeting times are doubled. Accuracy is halved so a massive artillery volley doesn't connect with every gun. You get an X% chance of a total targeting failure (a la NPC jamming or ECM bursts) every 30 or 60 seconds etc. That way now the pirates are in range of the victim's ECM or own weapons and a fast ship can use transversal against massive wrecker-guns. The victims have a decent chance to make a run for it before they're targeted if the pirates are asleep at the wheel and there's a chance for a speed boost when a webber ship loses its targeting.
It'd force pirates to use two or more webber ships, escort vessels can easily fight back against the pirates and the indy has multiple chances to slip through the web.
I'm just pulling numbers out of the air at this point, I'm sure more experienced players have a better idea of where the numbers should lie for balance purposes but I believe the key factor is more chaos + less range.
Also the ideas posted about WCS/Scramblers being multipliers/divisors of lockdowns is great. More randomness rather than binary shutdown/home-free.
You could even retune the gates in high sec to reflect "more engineering effort in tuning their grav-signature" in order to reduce the monotony of general trade travel. High sec gates allow 10km jump ins, low and zero sec remain at 15km. |
Nanobotter Mk2 |
Posted - 2006.08.07 07:18:00 - [ 218]
"Yea, jumpdrives.. oops, about 99% of the PvP in the game just vanished. Jump drive ships are virtually impossible to catch. When something happens, they leave the system entirely, and not in a way you can trace. You make it crucial to control ever larger areas, to spot things inbound (otherwise first sgn of the enemy fleet is when they're in your home system)."
There in lies the problem demonstrated yet again... people seem to call jacking up some guy traveling pvp, sorry it is NOT pvp. Real pvp involes people trying to fight back and beat you. 99% of the problem is people want to beleive they are engaging in pvp and defending territory when really they are just pwning some passer by who had zero chance to fighting back.
Territory control is eve is all but pointless it is comical people bring it up like it has some crucial compnent to the game. It might in the future but right now territory control si nada, having some guy slip in and mine roids you wouldnt bother touching and havent touch for months doesnt hurt same for some guy ratting, and better yet neither one if they did matter would have a bearing on insta's for traveling anyway, in both case's you warp to the belt and pwn the guy. If enemy's are camping in your turf.. you put together a battle squad and go kick them out. THAT is how EvE was most likely intended to be played, not sitting at a choke point with 3 warp bubbles and a blob of guys right clicking and pwning a few ships coming through.
Obviosuly the whole jump anywhere you want is not a good solution though.
Oddly enough another poster touched on what i also beleive is the true problem in eve... Ie the entire decision to make systems only enterable via gates. That is the problem in the end one that will never be fixed i will guess ( integral part of their server design i'll wager ) EVE would be immensley better game without gates to get into systems, and honestly the entire massive universe requiring warping to every destination is the other problem, since warping is a non interactive mode, thus everything in eve must occur at destinations instead of en route.
Anyrate still havent seen a single reasonable reason to not have something like insta's beyond the classic "I WANT EZ MODE" to get kills camping gates. Nada every defense for removing insta's ( besides easing server load) has been essentially i want to gank at gates and i am tired of sitting at gates for hours having msot people get away! it might be wrapped up in a poorly thought out waaaaaaah what about corp wars or defending territoy but ultimately like i pointed out none of those activities have anything to do with insta's used to travel. |
Nanobotter Mk2 |
Posted - 2006.08.07 07:22:00 - [ 219]
Everything you said makes sense chiron..... but that would put the gate campers at risk, and well heaven forbid the camper is every at risk of being killed... goto remeber unless your also traveling with tacklers they will just warp away anyways, hence why i think the entire get out of trouble free card when in combat by warping is total BS. Being under fire should disrupt and slow your time to warp and scramblers can be removed from the game and we can get some REAL pvp going. |
Malachon Draco
eXceeded
|
Posted - 2006.08.07 07:40:00 - [ 220]
Originally by: Nanobotter Mk2
"Yea, jumpdrives.. oops, about 99% of the PvP in the game just vanished. Jump drive ships are virtually impossible to catch. When something happens, they leave the system entirely, and not in a way you can trace. You make it crucial to control ever larger areas, to spot things inbound (otherwise first sgn of the enemy fleet is when they're in your home system)."
There in lies the problem demonstrated yet again... people seem to call jacking up some guy traveling pvp, sorry it is NOT pvp. Real pvp involes people trying to fight back and beat you. 99% of the problem is people want to beleive they are engaging in pvp and defending territory when really they are just pwning some passer by who had zero chance to fighting back.
Incorrect. Jacking up some guy travelling is PvP of the most vital kind. People travelling will carry supplies, or will be enroute to a combat zone themselves. Inability to stop travellers makes all conflict pointless and prolongs it into infinity. Quote:
Territory control is eve is all but pointless it is comical people bring it up like it has some crucial compnent to the game. It might in the future but right now territory control si nada, having some guy slip in and mine roids you wouldnt bother touching and havent touch for months doesnt hurt same for some guy ratting, and better yet neither one if they did matter would have a bearing on insta's for traveling anyway, in both case's you warp to the belt and pwn the guy.
Are you joking? Territory control is vital. It enables your miners to mine in peace, it enables ratters to rat with less fear of being jumped by hostiles. And in your eyes, resources may be infinite in 0.0, I can assure you they are not. Good ratting systems are camped probably 20 hours a day, good asteroids will be practically mined to extinction in some areas. People don't come to 0.0 to mine veldspar you know. Quote:
If enemy's are camping in your turf.. you put together a battle squad and go kick them out. THAT is how EvE was most likely intended to be played, not sitting at a choke point with 3 warp bubbles and a blob of guys right clicking and pwning a few ships coming through.
And pray tell, how do you kick them out if they can escape at any moment and jump anywhere? Gates are the place where you can force PvP on invaders, and nowhere else. Quote:
Anyrate still havent seen a single reasonable reason to not have something like insta's beyond the classic "I WANT EZ MODE" to get kills camping gates. Nada every defense for removing insta's ( besides easing server load) has been essentially i want to gank at gates and i am tired of sitting at gates for hours having msot people get away! it might be wrapped up in a poorly thought out waaaaaaah what about corp wars or defending territoy but ultimately like i pointed out none of those activities have anything to do with insta's used to travel.
Reducing serverload is a VERY important reason for wanting to get rid of instas. Aside from that, the travel system is such currently that travel without instas in some regions means certain death, and travel with instas makes life rather easy if you fly the right ships. A new system, which wouldn't require people copying thousands of bookmarks would be welcome, but it should maintain a balance between the risk for travelers and the risk/reward ratio for pirates/gatecampers, as well as keep travel times within an acceptable limit to avoid extreme boredom while traveling. And I will be the first to admit that balance is extremely tricky to find, which is probably why we haven't seen any changes yet. |
Mecinia Lua
Galactic Express
Intrepid Crossing |
Posted - 2006.08.07 08:06:00 - [ 221]
Noone seemed to listen to my warning. But really whether initially intended or not, instas have become an integral part of the game. If you remove that part, you have the potential to anger a great many people and see subscribtions drop.
You could replace the system with something similar requirings skills, which would allow the same thing. Either you could have the skill control how close to the gate they came, or you could have skills that limited how many BMs an individual could have.
Removing it entirely is I fear changing something that has become integral to the game, and could have very dire consequences, much like SOE's CU and NGE changes to SWG.
Space is immensely vast. It would also be difficult for ships to meet in space. After all the shortest distance between any two points is a straight line, and barring any major gavity fields etc ships would travel in a straight line.
The Stargates are bascially wormhole technology. They operate by bending time and space such that two points that once were far apart are bent and come to touch one another. By starting the gate on both sides and having them meet in the middle you create a tunnel of sorts.
Now in the olden days in the days of Rome even unto the American Revolution it was common practice for armies to meet on the fields outside of their cities and fight decisive battles.
Using BookMarks you could do the same, You could meet the enemy at a designated battlefield and fight. The loser leaving the system. Considering the difficulty of security a solar system this most likely in a early space age would be the normal method of having battles, after all if you are after a planet you don't want it ruined by waste from the battle falling to the planet surface.
However everyone seems to want to gather around a few choke points and engage ships that generally are not equipped to fight or defend themselves well. IT is amazing that the stargates themselves haven't been destroyed in all this time. Considering that danger which would disrupt commerce, I could see COncord instigating some changes. Jamming the area around a Stargate out to 200km which prevent target locking. Anyone using an indiscriminate weapon such as a smart bomb would be targetted by the gate guns and destroyed immediately. You could similarly do so around stations, as they are strategic and important to maintaining the way of life.
Concord also needs to have the SCC stop paying out insurance claims on ships Concord destroys.
|
Malachon Draco
eXceeded
|
Posted - 2006.08.07 09:06:00 - [ 222]
Originally by: Mecinia Lua
However everyone seems to want to gather around a few choke points and engage ships that generally are not equipped to fight or defend themselves well. IT is amazing that the stargates themselves haven't been destroyed in all this time. Considering that danger which would disrupt commerce, I could see COncord instigating some changes. Jamming the area around a Stargate out to 200km which prevent target locking. Anyone using an indiscriminate weapon such as a smart bomb would be targetted by the gate guns and destroyed immediately. You could similarly do so around stations, as they are strategic and important to maintaining the way of life.
Concord also needs to have the SCC stop paying out insurance claims on ships Concord destroys.
There are 2 reasons fights occur: - Either you have something to fight over - And/or you can force your opponent to fight Nobody will fight in empty space, because there is no reason for it, and generally,t here is no possibility to force your enemy to fight either. A POS is a battlefield, because it is a reason to fight. A gate is a battlefield, because it allows you to force an opponent to fight. A station is something to fight over, and can be a place where you can force an opponent to fight to some extent (if he's holed up in it and needs to come out). Eve is not a game of chivalrous duels. So 'agreeing' on battlefields is not gonna happen, certainly not with one side often having a significant numerical or otherwise advantage over an enemy. |
Mecinia Lua
Galactic Express
Intrepid Crossing |
Posted - 2006.08.07 09:27:00 - [ 223]
Edited by: Mecinia Lua on 07/08/2006 09:27:36
You ever considered that fighting in empty space far from anything else might be less laggy than fighting near a Stargate or POS.
If for not other reason someone should try it and see how the lag does. It might be a good reason to arrange fights like that for those that like large scale battles if the lag is better.
( The question as to why concord didn't target jam space around all Empire stargates was more just rambling not a suggestion it be done. ) |
Darkrydar
Destructive Influence
IT Alliance |
Posted - 2006.08.07 09:31:00 - [ 224]
Edited by: Darkrydar on 07/08/2006 09:33:24 Originally by: Nanobotter Mk2
"Yea, jumpdrives.. oops, about 99% of the PvP in the game just vanished. Jump drive ships are virtually impossible to catch. When something happens, they leave the system entirely, and not in a way you can trace. You make it crucial to control ever larger areas, to spot things inbound (otherwise first sgn of the enemy fleet is when they're in your home system)."
There in lies the problem demonstrated yet again... people seem to call jacking up some guy traveling pvp, sorry it is NOT pvp. Real pvp involes people trying to fight back and beat you. 99% of the problem is people want to beleive they are engaging in pvp and defending territory when really they are just pwning some passer by who had zero chance to fighting back.
Territory control is eve is all but pointless it is comical people bring it up like it has some crucial compnent to the game. It might in the future but right now territory control si nada, having some guy slip in and mine roids you wouldnt bother touching and havent touch for months doesnt hurt same for some guy ratting, and better yet neither one if they did matter would have a bearing on insta's for traveling anyway, in both case's you warp to the belt and pwn the guy. If enemy's are camping in your turf.. you put together a battle squad and go kick them out. THAT is how EvE was most likely intended to be played, not sitting at a choke point with 3 warp bubbles and a blob of guys right clicking and pwning a few ships coming through.
Obviosuly the whole jump anywhere you want is not a good solution though.
Oddly enough another poster touched on what i also beleive is the true problem in eve... Ie the entire decision to make systems only enterable via gates. That is the problem in the end one that will never be fixed i will guess ( integral part of their server design i'll wager ) EVE would be immensley better game without gates to get into systems, and honestly the entire massive universe requiring warping to every destination is the other problem, since warping is a non interactive mode, thus everything in eve must occur at destinations instead of en route.
Anyrate still havent seen a single reasonable reason to not have something like insta's beyond the classic "I WANT EZ MODE" to get kills camping gates. Nada every defense for removing insta's ( besides easing server load) has been essentially i want to gank at gates and i am tired of sitting at gates for hours having msot people get away! it might be wrapped up in a poorly thought out waaaaaaah what about corp wars or defending territoy but ultimately like i pointed out none of those activities have anything to do with insta's used to travel.
What you need to get through taht very, very, VERY think head of yours is that PVP isn't consential in Eve. Got that yet? Not too mention most fleet fights happen at gate. moron  Add: If somone has instas and you want to kill them, you jsut jump through and pop them on the otherside nub. You really should try playing the game before you coe and share your ill-formed thoughts. |
Malachon Draco
eXceeded
|
Posted - 2006.08.07 09:33:00 - [ 225]
Originally by: Mecinia Lua
Edited by: Mecinia Lua on 07/08/2006 09:27:36
You ever considered that fighting in empty space far from anything else might be less laggy than fighting near a Stargate or POS.
Of course it will be less laggy. If it were to happen. But why would one fight there? Fleetfights are not like duels. A duel is 1 v 1. A fleetfight will often consist of say 20 BS + 10 cruisers + 2 dictors + 5 tacklers vs 4 BS, 3 HACs, 4 AFs and 4 Interceptors (random example of course). In such fights, one side has no interest in a fight, it would get slaughtered. So you have to force them to fight, i.e. camp a gate. Unless the second fleet were defending say a small POS, then they have something to defend, and they will warp in/warp out trying to pickoff ships. I understand fighting in empty space will be less laggy, but you won't get fights there because generally 1 side will have plenty of reasons to avoid fighting if they can. |
Zaldiri
Caldari
Automated Industries
|
Posted - 2006.08.07 10:02:00 - [ 226]
Consider this:
If the devs had, in early game development, decided to put a few extra lines of code in to make warp ins happen within a random area (so effectivley instas would never have been concived). What would happen if the instas were now proposed on the forums?
It would get flamed to oblivion.
"WTF, insta travel? WAY overpowered!"
"Your a ****ing idiot"
"go and play guildwars if you want insta travel noob"
ect.
So are we defending them now? |
Darkrydar
Destructive Influence
IT Alliance |
Posted - 2006.08.07 10:06:00 - [ 227]
Originally by: Zaldiri
So are we defending them now?
Only the naive defend them anymore. |
Zorai Miraden
Gallente
East Khanid Trading
Khanid Trade Syndicate |
Posted - 2006.08.07 10:10:00 - [ 228]
Well here's my solution to the insta problem.
1. More powerful gate guns on all gates even 0.0. Make gate camping a painful experience. I'm suprised I haven't seen many of these but Bubble camp. Jump between two gates drop a bm warp back set up a warp bubble and gank people mid warp.
2. Solar systems that actually orbit. Make the gates, planets ect... actually orbit thus making the insta's most the time no longer valid. The systems would still orbit slow enough that insta's might work for a couple of hours after you make them. And have the rotation so that things will be in different places at the same time on different days.
3. Purchasable instas. Instead of buying bms, you can buy game issued instas to get to the stations. These can only be bought though while at the particular station. Insta's can be issued to a POS, and outposts as well.
4. Cut the jump distance down to 5-10km.
5. Make autopilot so it can automatically engage the AB/MWD.
All this would increase the value of having a wicked fast ship while increasing autopilot travel speed, cuting down on server load and adding a bit more realism to the game. Bm's also in this way wouldn't be made useless, but you would have to recreate them after a while.
Oh and for the 0.0 crews I would support higherable NPC defenses of a system when you have soveriegnty, but that topic would be better for a different post. |
Avon
Caldari
Versatech Co.
Raiden. |
Posted - 2006.08.07 10:20:00 - [ 229]
Originally by: Zorai Miraden
Well here's my solution to the insta problem.
1. More powerful gate guns on all gates even 0.0. Make gate camping a painful experience. I'm suprised I haven't seen many of these but Bubble camp. Jump between two gates drop a bm warp back set up a warp bubble and gank people mid warp.
You don't see it because it can't be done. |
Cailais
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United |
Posted - 2006.08.07 12:18:00 - [ 230]
Edited by: Cailais on 07/08/2006 12:19:12I have tried looking at this 'problem' in terms of fundamentals. Please read this in terms of 'all things being equall - rather than simply saying that won't work because module 'x' does 'y' etc. gates are points of entry/exit from a system and, like any 'door' they are natural points of ambush. The peculiarity that you drop out of warp 15km from a gate produces a 'window' of opportunity to any potential aggressor. That 'window' is defined by the time it takes you to get from your point of origin (where you have exited warp) to the point where you jump through the gate. This 'window'is the only opportunity an aggrssor has to make an attack. In order for the aggressor to 'succeed' he must deal sufficient damage within that time frame (window) to destroy your ship. This naturally means the aggressor should aim to do as much damage as possible within the amount of time available. The options available to the aggressor to maximise his chance of success are to slow your ship, (web), prevent your escape (scram)- (both increasing the 'window') and / or deal more damage (i.e. use multiple ships or blobs). The options available to you, the defender, are to reduce the 'window' to as short a time as possible (abs/mwd) or instas. The 'window' of opportunity is therefore a definition of the 'risk' of travel. Long 'window' solutions (e.eg. removing instas from the game) will increase risk. Short 'window' solutions (e.g skill that allow you to warp closer to a gate) reduce it. The dilema then for the EvE community is not really about instas (a mechanic) but how dangerous do you want travel in EvE to be? This goes to the heart of the gaming community as some do not wish to engage in any non-consensual PvP, others would like much much more. How dangerous to you want travel in EvE to be? Actually we already have a 'guide' to this: the security rating of a sytstem. We instinctively understand that the higher the security state of a system - the safer travel should be within it. Security of Systems is graded from 1.0 to 0.0, and one might expect the level of 'risk' to be proportional to the security state. My suggestion is this: NO INSTAS: the 'window'/risk should be reflected in the security level of a system. In 1.0 you warp insantly from gate to 0km of the next gate. In 0.5 (for example) you warp 7.5km from a gate, 0.4 7km and so forth. CONCORD presence would be scaled in a similiar way. Therefore you have a sliding scale of risk vs reward: 1.0 space = fast, safe travel with v linited rewards, 0.0 slow, v dangerous but with excellent rewards. The final piece to this is to create 'higher-sec' space seperated by 'lower sec' space. Low sec and 0.0 would become dangerous oceans to traverse to get to comparative safety again. Perhaps 'islands of 1.0 would exist save haven for the meak and nefarious alike. just some thoughts.  |
evistin
Multiverse Corporation
The Core Collective |
Posted - 2006.08.07 12:53:00 - [ 231]
Edited by: evistin on 07/08/2006 12:55:58
What about limiting the number of bookmarks to 1,000.
You get to keep most instances of regions intact, but prevent players from creating 4k,5k or even 10k worth of instances.
If 20k players has 5k book marks thats 100,000,000 BM to sort through, a heavy load on any database. So by limiting it to 1k per player, you get 20,000,000 BM. A much much more manageable number in terms of data handling and load.
Combine with a limit on the number of Bookmarks per system and you got yourself a fairly controlled number of SQL queries on the Database. |
Ingols
Caldari
Half Moon Bay Ventures
|
Posted - 2006.08.07 12:54:00 - [ 232]
Well, I think we should do away with instas. Have everything warp in at 20km, special space distortion around 20km in keeps all MWD and Afterburners from working. All ships limited to 90m/s too. Oh and their Signature radius increases by 100X making insta lock easier. Lets throw in Armor and Shield repairer jamming too.
Next week, I'll address the new 8 minute docking protocol. |
Malachon Draco
eXceeded
|
Posted - 2006.08.07 12:58:00 - [ 233]
Originally by: Ingols
Well, I think we should do away with instas. Have everything warp in at 20km, special space distortion around 20km in keeps all MWD and Afterburners from working. All ships limited to 90m/s too. Oh and their Signature radius increases by 100X making insta lock easier. Lets throw in Armor and Shield repairer jamming too.
Next week, I'll address the new 8 minute docking protocol.
Shut up troll. Very few people, if any, are suggesting we just remove instas without other changes to make travel faster/safer. |
Cailais
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United |
Posted - 2006.08.07 12:59:00 - [ 234]
Sorry - just realised I aught to clarify a couple of points to my post above. In order for "Sec Level Warping to gate distances" to work, gates act rather like 'bubbles' - you cant warp closer than the sec level permits (in other words your buddy flying 15km past the gate in his inty cant act like a mobile bm/insta). Also you can't create bm's within the sec level of the gate (but you can elsewhere preserving safe spots, loot bm's etc). Some ships and modules might need a bit of a rethink - after all the interdictor becomes a touch redundant in this scenario. Perhaps by giving it a web range bonus or something (increasing that 'window' Ive spoken about). Those more mathematicaly inclined can proabably work out what their ship could survive - i.e. 'I can sustain X DPS for X seconds - its going to take me Y seconds to travel to the gate in a given Sec Level: my proability of surviving against a camp of however many ships is this.' Nobody got at least a flame? Maya Rkell - normally good for a "It won't work. period".  . Maybe a Dev with a 'that sucks.'???? Throw me a bone here - Im at work bored! Im a forum n00b- How do you host sigs? |
Maya Rkell
Third Grade Ergonomics
|
Posted - 2006.08.07 13:06:00 - [ 235]
Auraurious,
"cyno field to xxx from xxx"
Right...so basically letting alliances know where to kill any non-authorised capitals quite nicely, espceially since it takes time. Shame about anyone outside the major alliances using them. They're not only used by major corps, especially carriers.
Chiron, you know fullwell that small ships can't be used arround gate guns, and the sort of change you're talking about would need a fleet to pop an industrial...
Nanobotter Mk2, PvP is PLAYER VERSUS PLAYER, arguiably even NON-combat interaction on the market and so on is PvP! If you mean that it's not a fair fight, then well yea. Trying to force FAIR into player interactions gets you meaningless PvP als WoW. The artificial chokepoints of the gates are a deliverate design descison, and everything from instas to bubbles has reinforced this.
Mecinia Lua, I hear that warning, and well. Been telling it a long time, myself. But trying to force "empty space" engagements won't work.
Zaldiri, so? We've had them for years. And without them... well, check Shadowbane's subscription figures. |
Avon
Caldari
Versatech Co.
Raiden. |
Posted - 2006.08.07 13:14:00 - [ 236]
Originally by: Maya Rkell
Zaldiri, so? We've had them for years. And without them... well, check Shadowbane's subscription figures.
Shadowbane died because they got rid of instajumps??!?  Oh, sorry, you are attempting to make an asinine corrolation. |
Iianko |
Posted - 2006.08.07 13:24:00 - [ 237]
Originally by: Maya Rkell
Edited by: Maya Rkell on 07/08/2006 02:58:30
Yea, jumpdrives.. oops, about 99% of the PvP in the game just vanished. Jump drive ships are virtually impossible to catch. When something happens, they leave the system entirely, and not in a way you can trace. You make it crucial to control ever larger areas, to spot things inbound (otherwise first sgn of the enemy fleet is when they're in your home system).
I've already shown in my first post that PvP would not "disappear". Controlling the jump points controls the system, just like with stargates. When you add a 1-3 minute timer after jump drive activation before they're allowed to jump, that's plenty of time to score a kill (unless your gang sucks). Early warning systems could be added into the game as well. Beyond that, like I said before, small gangs sitting on gates shouldn't be able to control vast areas of space anyway. This is just my idea though. No need to get hostile about it. |
Andrue
Amarr |
Posted - 2006.08.07 13:54:00 - [ 238]
The BMs could take a leaf out of this forum and degrade over time or use. Maybe after a dozen uses instas just fade away. Or perhaps they only last a few hours. Add in a random factor. |
CB Cyrix
Viziam
|
Posted - 2006.08.07 14:00:00 - [ 239]
Edited by: CB Cyrix on 07/08/2006 14:00:48Just remove instas and leave it at that. IF you want fast travel get a ceptor, battleships can slow boat it to the gates with ceptor escorts like real life. you wanna dock safe then get you corp outside to cover your big ships. And whats the problem with that? A battleship with instas can currently out run a ceptor without them. Thats wrong |
Chiron Typhon
Caldari
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2006.08.07 14:51:00 - [ 240]
Originally by: Maya Rkell
Chiron, you know fullwell that small ships can't be used arround gate guns, and the sort of change you're talking about would need a fleet to pop an industrial...
So are you supporting instas or decrying them? I can't work out from your post. Bottom line is that currently instas are a single answer game. You have them, you beat the campers every single time. If instas are removed with no other changes made then the equation becomes reversed, gate campers win every single time and low sec becomes depopulated. Lets face it, 90% of this problem is about low, not zero sec and about small groups or loners, not massive corporate war fleets. If the intention of EVE is to have non-consenual PvP in low sec systems then something needs to be done. You need a system whereby small groups of pirates interacting with either lone players or other small groups have a reasonable chance of each gaining a satisfactory outcome. IE the hunters capturing their prey or the hunted escaping. So for example a single industrial not set up for running or tanking has a poor chance of escaping, a low-sec specialised blockade runner industrial has an even or better chance of escaping and a small group of industrials with some escorts has a damn good chance of escaping against a typical pirate flotilla of X ships. The only way you'll achieve having instas vanish and low-sec to still be at all populated is if the semi-adventurous industrialists and explorers and ratters believe that they have a decent chance of getting through a gate camp without their instas. If gate guns are a problem, adjust them slightly, it's better than revisiting every ship in the game |
|
All Channels
EVE General Discussion
