open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked Warping & warp scrambling, proposal N+1
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2006.04.07 06:12:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Ephemeron on 07/04/2006 06:21:10
I am one of the people that thinks current warping and scrambling system could use a fix in favor of scrambling. I realize that there's no room for radical changes, only minor adjustments.

For warping, I propose a "minimum time needed to enter warp", which would start countdown from moment of "enter warp" command passed by the pilot. This timer would be independent of alignment. Ships would need to complete both warp timer and alignment before entering warp.

Each ship type would have a different timer, with general rule as follows:

pods: 0 seconds
shuttles, frigs: 1 second
cruisers, indys: 3-5 seconds
battlecruisers: 6-7 seconds
battleships: 8-10 seconds

This rule has little effect on pods and frigs. It has most significant effect on sniper battleships, that rely on alignment for insta-warps in case of danger. This idea nerfs battleships and to some extent cruisers. Before you start flaming, consider the next idea:

Warp scrambling.
All warp scrambling mods should have their strength increased by 1.
Warp scrambler: strength 3.
Warp disruptor: strength 2.

Ships would start using their "propulsion strength" attribute by making it equivalent to warp core stabilizers.

The general rule for propulsion strengths by ship types would be:
pods, shuttles: 0
frigs: 0-1
cruisers: 1-2
indys: 2-3
battlecruisers: 3
battleships: 4

This means 1 scrambler could never hold a battleship. But then, they can't warp for at least 10 seconds even if they are aligned.

That's not all, there is 1 last, yet very important idea in balancing warp core stabilizers with warp scramblers:

A "Warp Scramble Amplifier" module, fitting:
low slot
1 power grid
30 CPU
Effect: increases the strength of all warp scrambling modules by +1.

You can stack those just like you can stack your warp core stabilizers. They have same fitting, same slot placement. Now you can have an interceptor that can scramble a battleship with just 1 scrambler.

These three ideas are meant to be used together. They are meant to shift the balance toward better scrambling. Reasons for "why" we need such a shift in game design are not meant to be discussed here. This is just a proposal of "how" to do it.

Terminus Shade
Murientor Tribe
Posted - 2006.04.07 06:23:00 - [2]
 

I like the idea personally..

It would again promote the idea of working as a team with a wingman setted up for tackling, instead of soloing..

It doesnt directly prevent people from sniping with battleships though, they just have to start the warp a bit earlier.. It does stomp their capability by 10 seconds though..

Criborg
Posted - 2006.04.07 07:55:00 - [3]
 

So if i'm doing a lvl 4 mission in my BS and at some point i have to warp i can't do that even aligned instead i must wait 10 seconds while rats are hammering me. After losing my BS there is no problem warping in my pod. Nice thinking. Btw are u paying me insurance and fitted mods ?

PS. If u want balance u should look not only from pvp perspective

Laythun
Viziam
Posted - 2006.04.07 07:59:00 - [4]
 

Originally by: Criborg
So if i'm doing a lvl 4 mission in my BS and at some point i have to warp i can't do that even aligned instead i must wait 10 seconds while rats are hammering me. After losing my BS there is no problem warping in my pod. Nice thinking. Btw are u paying me insurance and fitted mods ?

PS. If u want balance u should look not only from pvp perspective


Being able to run easily from pve, with no consequences is stupid.
You should have to plan for eventualities. Enabling this in PVE would mean you guys have to CONCENTRATE

Criborg
Posted - 2006.04.07 08:14:00 - [5]
 

Yeah right eve is only about concentration. I thought missioning is a way to make money not to lose them. Correct me if i'm wrong.

Testy Mctest
Posted - 2006.04.07 08:19:00 - [6]
 

This is not one of the better ideas.

HippoKing
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2006.04.07 08:20:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: HippoKing on 07/04/2006 08:19:51
@criborg: you could hit warp 10 seconds earlier...

Voculus
The Illuminati.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2006.04.07 08:28:00 - [8]
 

I'm usually not in favor of adding timers, because there are already way too many stupid ones in game, but this idea has merit, I think. Actually, it shortens the "go to warp" time, so I like it.

It makes sense that larger ships with much more powerful warp drives would take more brute force to shut down.

Criborg
Posted - 2006.04.07 08:38:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: HippoKing
Edited by: HippoKing on 07/04/2006 08:19:51
@criborg: you could hit warp 10 seconds earlier...


Can u do that ? Can u estimate correctly when to press warp button and when not ? Maybe an experienced player can but a new one not. If u have to lose a few BS's in a mission to find the best setup or the best time to warp...
As i said missions are a way to make isk not to lose it.

Ithildin
Gallente
The Corporation
Cruel Intentions
Posted - 2006.04.07 08:47:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Voculus
I'm usually not in favor of adding timers, because there are already way too many stupid ones in game, but this idea has merit, I think. Actually, it shortens the "go to warp" time, so I like it.

It makes sense that larger ships with much more powerful warp drives would take more brute force to shut down.

On the other hand, look at it the other way.
Bigger ship with more power -> easier to start a chain reaction.

* The whole point of scrambling is that it's best done by dedicated tacklers. That means fast ships with good lock time. That in turn means NOT ships with many (mid) slots.
There's also this little issue with scrambling being one of the best ways of introducing people to PvP. I know, keeping the game open for the newer player base is soooo last month, but still.
Nearly any suggestion to make battleships more resistant to scrambling is a bad one. They're already much better at combat than any wee little interceptor (don't believe me? Fit half of your weapons with friggy weapons and watch them burn), so why on earth make them more capable of running away from combat.

Additionally, the old, beaten-horse, argument of cost and size and risk and investment and yada-yada etc etc. It needs to stop. Look at real life for tactics suggestions. You don't see multi billion dollar ships travel alone and expect to survive/flee from smaller crafts (and DO take note that a proper comparison CANNOT be made with real life, so don't stick your nose too deeply in this one). If the ship is expensive either take chance and know it runs a great risk of blowing up or have it escorted by ships more capable of dealing with tackler threats. Or, heaven forbid, actually do a fitting to deal with smaller ships.

* This is about where I stop commenting on you, Voculus, and start going on a more general note.

The key for balance in scramblers versus WCS is to make scrambling a high probability, anti-scrambling modules available but not redundant, and force/enable people to fit their ships to deal with threats properly rather than offer a cheap way out.
This is bloody hard to do, and might need a bit more than just limiting WCS use, but simply limiting WCS use is a very good first step (limiting, not penalizing and not removing!)

---

THAT said, I kind of miss the visual goody in regular warps that you get with jump drives. Would be cool if ships actually stopped when aligned, engaged warp drive, created a field, and then entered warp. The game play rammifications are a bit hard to forsee, but it would open up for some more possibilities, dangers, etc.

Also, why is there no module or ship in game that can lock on to an enemy ship and follow it through warp such as a Carrier's fighters do? Would be bloody dangerous following people in warp in systems where they have POS, but...

HippoKing
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2006.04.07 08:53:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Criborg
Originally by: HippoKing
@criborg: you could hit warp 10 seconds earlier...


Can u do that ? Can u estimate correctly when to press warp button and when not ? Maybe an experienced player can but a new one not. If u have to lose a few BS's in a mission to find the best setup or the best time to warp...
As i said missions are a way to make isk not to lose it.


heres the trick to it: you see those three little bars along the bottom? when the one you are tanking with gets low, i suggest warping. About 20% is usually OK on an armor tank, maybe less on a shield tank. With this change, you increase that number. Warping out early costs you nothing. warping out late costs you a lot.

Missions without risk 4tl - recently i've been doing lvl4s in a cerberus, alt tabbed out and on the forums almost all the time

Chuck Tucker
Posted - 2006.04.07 09:00:00 - [12]
 

That counter is already exist in game, and its name - agility.

Actually what the game is missing is t2 WCS +2 strength.



 

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only