open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked Put Scramblers/Disruptors in a seperate slot
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4

Author Topic

Dingi223
Posted - 2008.03.24 18:36:00 - [31]
 

Originally by: Lyria Skydancer

Oh no, I forgot a question mark. You cant blame me for wondering if you read all the solutions it would bring when you dont explain how youre going to fix those problems. I mean do you think we could live without all the solutions listed?


The problem with this thread is that there appears to be a double motive.

1. You want the game to be more challenging whereby PvE fitted (let's say non-PvP fitted) ships can react to PvP. I mis-interpreted your warp distruptor to be a tracking disruptor, but now that I'm reading it more carefully, I see your point.

2. Your solution to the problem is to provide this module for free. However, this unbalances the game, since it would have greater impact on races with lower mid-slots.

You want a solution? Why, simply structure PvE to require PvP fitted ships. It makes no sense that PvE requires a set up different from PvP. Re-design the missions to make PvE more reflective of PvP, and your problem is solved, and in my opinion, the quality of the game is improved.

Trevor Warps
Posted - 2008.03.24 18:39:00 - [32]
 

Originally by: Dingi223
You want a solution? Why, simply structure PvE to require PvP fitted ships. It makes no sense that PvE requires a set up different from PvP. Re-design the missions to make PvE more reflective of PvP, and your problem is solved, and in my opinion, the quality of the game is improved.


I'd love to see missions with one bad ass 20m BS spawn that you duel instead of tons of weaklings.

Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Gunship Diplomacy
Posted - 2008.03.24 18:39:00 - [33]
 

Originally by: Dingi223


You want a solution? Why, simply structure PvE to require PvP fitted ships. It makes no sense that PvE requires a set up different from PvP. Re-design the missions to make PvE more reflective of PvP, and your problem is solved, and in my opinion, the quality of the game is improved.


Yes that would be another way to go. CCP fix slot layouts for all ships that are gimped and add pvp fit requirements for pve. But lets face it 95% of eve carebears are going to whine our heads off if you try making missions "harder".
Thats why I approached it this way instead.

Bronson Hughes
ADVANCED Combat and Engineering
Posted - 2008.03.24 18:42:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Every combat ship NEEDS it. Eve has too many must have modules. It giving less choice and less fun.


How often do long ranged fleet snipers have points on them?

Or Logistics ships?

Or CovOps scouts?

Or Capital ships?


Every combat ship in EvE does not NEED to have a point on it. It's an interesting idea and I applaud you for your creativity in trying to overcome the apparent necessity of certain modules, but this idea is broken and should never happen.

Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Gunship Diplomacy
Posted - 2008.03.24 18:44:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: Bronson Hughes
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Every combat ship NEEDS it. Eve has too many must have modules. It giving less choice and less fun.


How often do long ranged fleet snipers have points on them?

Or Logistics ships?

Or CovOps scouts?

Or Capital ships?


Every combat ship in EvE does not NEED to have a point on it. It's an interesting idea and I applaud you for your creativity in trying to overcome the apparent necessity of certain modules, but this idea is broken and should never happen.


Yeah but it wouldnt matter if a logistic, cov ops, fleet snipers had access to a scrambler. Uhm dont capitals have points?

Dingi223
Posted - 2008.03.24 18:45:00 - [36]
 

Edited by: Dingi223 on 24/03/2008 18:45:57
Well, I am not sure the missions will be any harder. If you restructured the missions to be more PvP orientated, there is no need for them to be harder. Obviously this would not be a simple change, but if you got the balance more or less close, I think carebears would complain less for the following reasons:

(a) Missions they do regularly are approximately the same difficulty. Sure, they will be different, require different skills, but in the end, on par with the current levels.

(b) The practice, experience, and PvP fitted ships will make carebears more able to react to pirates with PvP setups. As a result, this will make combat more fun, and their ability to defend themselves increased. If anything, this will make the ganking pirates whine for loss of easy bait, and true pirates will smile with the increased number of targets.

(c) This is more likely to make PvE carebears explore outside of high-sec and safety, since they are more able to defend themselves. Right now a PvE fitted CNR is not going to go anywhere PvP, his ship simply isn't geared toward it.

(d) Balancing the game will be easier. Instead of trying to balance ships and modules to meet your PvE and PvP requirements (and cross dependencies), you now only have to balance for one since PvP and PvE are the same.

I honestly think this will improve the game of EVE. People mission/grind for ISK (loot), not the experience. It gets repetitive, I would much rather have a closer to real-life example of missioning to at least prepare me for the 'no where is safe in EVE PvP'

Annowyn
Ammatar.
Posted - 2008.03.24 18:47:00 - [37]
 

Originally by: Dingi223
Edited by: Dingi223 on 24/03/2008 18:45:57
Well, I am not sure the missions will be any harder. If you restructured the missions to be more PvP orientated, there is no need for them to be harder. Obviously this would not be a simple change, but if you got the balance more or less close, I think carebears would complain less for the following reasons:

(a) Missions they do regularly are approximately the same difficulty. Sure, they will be different, require different skills, but in the end, on par with the current levels.

(b) The practice, experience, and PvP fitted ships will make carebears more able to react to pirates with PvP setups. As a result, this will make combat more fun, and their ability to defend themselves increased. If anything, this will make the ganking pirates whine for loss of easy bait, and true pirates will smile with the increased number of targets.

(c) This is more likely to make PvE carebears explore outside of high-sec and safety, since they are more able to defend themselves. Right now a PvE fitted CNR is not going to go anywhere PvP, his ship simply isn't geared toward it.

(d) Balancing the game will be easier. Instead of trying to balance ships and modules to meet your PvE and PvP requirements (and cross dependencies), you now only have to balance for one since PvP and PvE are the same.

I honestly think this will improve the game of EVE. People mission/grind for ISK (loot), not the experience. It gets repetitive, I would much rather have a closer to real-life example of missioning to at least prepare me for the 'no where is safe in EVE PvP'


Almost sounds good enough for a new thread. I like it!

Bronson Hughes
ADVANCED Combat and Engineering
Posted - 2008.03.24 18:47:00 - [38]
 

Edited by: Bronson Hughes on 24/03/2008 18:49:32
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Yeah but it wouldnt matter if a logistic, cov ops, fleet snipers had access to a scrambler. Uhm dont capitals have points?


So first they NEED them, not it doesn't matter if they have access to one. You can't have it both ways.

And no, non-solo capitals generally don't field points; that's what they have support ships for. Some solo Capitals do, but any solo Cap ship is begging to be ganked.


Again, I agree with you that to many PvP ships, points are necessary modules. But the need is nowhere near universal enough to justify a special slot just for them.

EDIT:
Originally by: Dingi223

Well, I am not sure the missions will be any harder. If you restructured the missions to be more PvP orientated, there is no need for them to be harder.

I have always fully supported this, but it will never happen.

Dingi223
Posted - 2008.03.24 18:54:00 - [39]
 

Originally by: Bronson Hughes
I have always fully supported this, but it will never happen.


I like the thinking of the OP. However, I believe that the suggestion is patching the problem, while I believe the root cause is the PvE / PvP differences.

I will not support a change that is patching a problem. When you patch something, you break something else, resulting in another patch. I believe that the solution that the OP is seeking requires the root cause to be addressed.

An alternative solution was asked for, I simply provided one that I thought made sense :)

Sergo Mor'Zert
Posted - 2008.03.24 18:56:00 - [40]
 

no becouse:

- it will broke balance some ships like ravens will become monsters... both gank and tank AND free point solo pwn mobile, and its only one of those ships while others like megathron will not receive much, all shield tankers will get upper hand in a seconf its implemented
- it will get lower the need to use tactics in squad setups, now if you have deicated tackling some of your ships can drop scrambler and fit more tank (caldari) or other essential/usefull modules, with you idea you wouldnt need to take a choice here as all ships will have free point so gangs will be less diverse

and more but this is sufficent imho to not introduce it and i fly absolution... would be nice to get it as solo pwn mobile it will be same as giving one free med slot AND more fittings to put point in... but it will be less fun i wouldnt need to think should i fit a point in this gang or i dont need, i will virtualy always have point

Gavin Darklighter
Ministry of War
Posted - 2008.03.24 18:56:00 - [41]
 

Edited by: Gavin Darklighter on 24/03/2008 18:57:39
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer

What would this change solve?

-Shield tanking minmatar ships would have easier to fit tackle, like sleipnir.

-Shield tanking caldari ships would have easier to fit tackle, the drake and raven.

-3 midslot amarr combat ships would have easier to fit tackle, like the absolution.

-Ships like coercer and retribution (with only 1 mid) would be able to fit propulsion and tackle.

-Ratting or mission running ships would also pose a threat to potential aggressors because they might be able to be force to fight to the end.

-The scrambling ability is a very crucial part of any combat ship and it should always be present on all ships.



Another consequence of such a change is that all the current 4 med slot armor tank ships would gain a utility med. I don't like this idea, even though it would boost my Maelstrom greatly

Kharak'khan
Federation of Freedom Fighters
Executive Outcomes
Posted - 2008.03.24 18:57:00 - [42]
 

make all scramblers and webbers highslots :P It would annoy the hell out of me and my 8 turret ships but would free up scrambling to caldari.

If HICs have it why not all!


Gavin Darklighter
Ministry of War
Posted - 2008.03.24 18:58:00 - [43]
 

Originally by: Kharak'khan
make all scramblers and webbers highslots :P It would annoy the hell out of me and my 8 turret ships but would free up scrambling to caldari.

If HICs have it why not all!




Another bad idea.

Richard Butt
Posted - 2008.03.24 18:58:00 - [44]
 

Balance =/= making all ships the same.

Heaven forbid anyone should have to sacrifice one thing in favour of another. Why not just give all ships 8 hi, med and low slots, integrated web, scram and AB, and unlimited grid/CPU so nobody has to bother making difficult fitting decisions any more.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.03.24 19:01:00 - [45]
 

This is a bad idea

Kahega Amielden
Minmatar Ship Construction Services
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2008.03.24 19:09:00 - [46]
 

Good suggestion. It means you are not totally ****ed if you have to PVP in a PVE setup. Since disruptors/scrams are necessary for PVP, there is no reason why they should take up a midslot.

Dingi223
Posted - 2008.03.24 19:14:00 - [47]
 

Originally by: Kahega Amielden
Good suggestion. It means you are not totally ****ed if you have to PVP in a PVE setup. Since disruptors/scrams are necessary for PVP, there is no reason why they should take up a midslot.


Sweet, so since guns are even more necessary for PvP, there is no reason they should take up a high slot. I mean, if simply warp disrupting the opponent is absolutely critical, then surely guns must be even more critical.

Let's think of this another way. Why do ships even have 3 slots, and rigs? It's taking a complex situations, and forcing a mould that people can absorb. This requires the player to identify, analyse and choose his fittings. If this wrap disruptor / scram were necessary, then it would be an inherent module, but it isn't, because it's not necessary. Just like guns are not necessary to mine.


Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
Posted - 2008.03.24 19:24:00 - [48]
 

I like the idea of scrambling being inherent to all combat ships in a way.

However.

Do you still get a option of fitting multiple points to catch stabmonkeys? How would that work? (Or you could just remove stabs completely and be done with it)

Tsanse Kinske
WeMeanYouKnowHarm
Posted - 2008.03.24 19:26:00 - [49]
 

Edited by: Tsanse Kinske on 24/03/2008 19:27:54
I think the OP has some merit, though the "free slot" idea is not what I would want.

- Give all ships an inherent ability to scramble by "pinpoint breaching their warpdrive" or somesuch nonsense.

- It's 1 point and 10k. (Honestly I think 2 point scrams should be 10k as well, but...different topic.)

- It requires a target lock, so it can't be used cloaked, and can be jammed or damped as normal. Cap use I'm not sure about, but I'm thinking it should be the same as a T1 Disruptor, and not affected by the Prop. Jamming skill.

- Warp Drive -on the scrambling ship- is inoperative while this is active and for 30 seconds after the effect is turned off. Jumping of any type is also disabled during that time.

Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Gunship Diplomacy
Posted - 2008.03.24 19:36:00 - [50]
 

Originally by: Tsanse Kinske
Edited by: Tsanse Kinske on 24/03/2008 19:27:54
I think the OP has some merit, though the "free slot" idea is not what I would want.

- Give all ships an inherent ability to scramble by "pinpoint breaching their warpdrive" or somesuch nonsense.

- It's 1 point and 10k. (Honestly I think 2 point scrams should be 10k as well, but...different topic.)

- It requires a target lock, so it can't be used cloaked, and can be jammed or damped as normal. Cap use I'm not sure about, but I'm thinking it should be the same as a T1 Disruptor, and not affected by the Prop. Jamming skill.

- Warp Drive -on the scrambling ship- is inoperative while this is active and for 30 seconds after the effect is turned off. Jumping of any type is also disabled during that time.


Yeah I thought about this inherent version too but didnt see a point to it. 10k range might be too short for some ships really.

Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Gunship Diplomacy
Posted - 2008.03.24 19:43:00 - [51]
 

Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 24/03/2008 19:43:20
Originally by: Sergo Mor'Zert

- it will broke balance some ships like ravens will become monsters... both gank and tank AND free point solo pwn mobile, and its only one of those ships while others like megathron will not receive much, all shield tankers will get upper hand in a seconf its implemented



Megas >>> Ravens in pvp. Maybe this will even it out a bit. Its not like mega isnt getting a free slot here...could pop in a eccm or whatever there and ravens could pop in a web+scram so people dont run away from them constantly.

Originally by: Sergo Mor'Zert

- it will get lower the need to use tactics in squad setups, now if you have deicated tackling some of your ships can drop scrambler and fit more tank (caldari) or other essential/usefull modules, with you idea you wouldnt need to take a choice here as all ships will have free point so gangs will be less diverse



Dedicated tackling, like inties: They have points because they have fast lock and are fast to reach targets, ie intercept. There is no reason why every combat ship shouldnt have a point inherently.

Gangs are less diverse right now where all mids are filled with WD, MWD, WEB, CB. The 4 must have modules. How is it diverse again? Its not. If anything my idea will free up slots and MAKE it more diverse again.

Originally by: Sergo Mor'Zert

and more but this is sufficent imho to not introduce it and i fly absolution... would be nice to get it as solo pwn mobile it will be same as giving one free med slot AND more fittings to put point in... but it will be less fun i wouldnt need to think should i fit a point in this gang or i dont need, i will virtualy always have point





Sleipnir will also get a boost and so will the nighthawk. So what? field commands have all been needing some loving. Absolution alone isnt going to stick out. Every ship gets a small boost and those with tank in mids and low mid slots will get a little extra. Its all ok because mid slots are worth alot in the way eve combat works today.


Sean Faust
Gallente
Super Batungwaa Ninja Warriors
Waterboard
Posted - 2008.03.24 19:44:00 - [52]
 

If Lyria's idea came to fruition then that would mean I would be able to active tank a thorax, seeing as how I'd be able to devote a mid to a cap booster. On the surface, that's a nice idea, but look at it this way:

The entire Caldari race is designed around a playstyle that involves around sitting at 50k+ out and sniping/using your EWAR from a relatively "safe" distance. A Caldari ship, assuming it's fitted the way the devs intended for Caldari ships to be played, should never EVER be within range to use a warp disruptor. Of course people attempt to fit them for close range gank, and some ships are able to pull it off reasonably well, but there will always be other Amarr/Gallente ships that can do it better, because it's what they were DESIGNED for. A ship that was designed to snipe from 50k+ away has no business fitting a warp disruptor and rightfully so, and that's just about EVERY Caldari ship.

What about Amarr? Amarr have ridiculously long ranges even with short range guns, and can hit from well beyond web range. To me, this says you don't need a webber. At all. If you want to get within web range and start pounding on people while bumping off their ship, that's what Gallente are for. It's their playstyle, what they were designed for. And if you COULD out-gank a Gallente blaster boat within web range, then that would mean YOUR ship was overpowered because nobody should be able to touch Gallente DPS at close range. It's simply the Gallente playstyle. Yes, something needs to be done about the single mid slot Amarr ships because THAT is just horribly horribly wrong.

So yes, choice is nice, but within reason. A Drake piloted by a high-SP player that is allowed to devote all 6 of its mids to tanking can mount a passive tank that not even a gank fitted BS can crack. But because of "necessary PvP mods" they can't, and that's a good thing. Allowing a Drake to be able to fit those while maintaining its tank would be OP.

Choices in EVE aren't about being able to make a ship do things it wasn't designed to be able to do, it's about sacrifice. Armor tanking ships have to choose between tank, gank, or speed when fitting their ships, and shield tankers have to choose between tackle or tank. This is a good thing. It keeps the balance.

My point is, CCP designed each race and each ship with a role in mind, and most ships that don't have the ability to fit warp disruptors probably weren't designed around a playstyle that involved getting in range to use them.

You know, now that I look back on it, half the stuff I mentioned above has absolutely nothing to do with what the OP stated, but I'm hitting the "post reply" button anyway because It's something I need to get off my chest and I'm sick of hearing cerb/eagle pilots whine about the fact that they fail in comparison to a Deimos/Sacrilege when trying to fit their ships for close range gank when they weren't intended for that.

Vanessa Vale
Posted - 2008.03.24 20:11:00 - [53]
 

Every ship has a slot for a scrambler. It is to the players choice to override that slot with something else. Yes, that slot is called a mid slot.

Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Gunship Diplomacy
Posted - 2008.03.24 20:37:00 - [54]
 

Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 24/03/2008 20:38:16
Originally by: Vanessa Vale
Every ship has a slot for a scrambler. It is to the players choice to override that slot with something else. Yes, that slot is called a mid slot.


Please explain to me how you fit a scrambler on a retribution. First off you either need to be faster then your enemy or you need a web or that scrambler isnt going to work. So how does it work on 1 mid slot ships?

btw, I thought youd like this. A good minmatar boost for the T2 shield tankers eh Very Happy

Bronson Hughes
ADVANCED Combat and Engineering
Posted - 2008.03.24 20:44:00 - [55]
 

Originally by: Lyria Skydancer

Please explain to me how you fit a scrambler on a retribution.


Dock your ship.

Open the fitting screen.

Remove whatever you have fitted in your single mid-slot.

Fit a Warp Scrambler.

See? It's that simple.


Of course, you will be limited to engaging things that are slower than you and you won't be able to keep anyone from simply running to a gate, but that's a choice you make when you choose to take a ship with one mid-slot into combat. Live with the consequences of your choice or choose a different ship.

Rastigan
Caldari
Ars ex Discordia
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2008.03.24 20:46:00 - [56]
 

There should also be a slot called the 'engine' slot so people can fit AB's and MWD's since everyone needs one and even if they didnt it wouldnt hurt to have it..
NO

Sorry this is a terrible idea, if you want to go solo, fly a ship that is effective with tackling gear on.. If not fly in a gang with dedicated tacklers like everyone else..

Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Gunship Diplomacy
Posted - 2008.03.24 20:49:00 - [57]
 

Originally by: Bronson Hughes
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer

Please explain to me how you fit a scrambler on a retribution.


Dock your ship.

Open the fitting screen.

Remove whatever you have fitted in your single mid-slot.

Fit a Warp Scrambler.

See? It's that simple.


Of course, you will be limited to engaging things that are slower than you and you won't be able to keep anyone from simply running to a gate, but that's a choice you make when you choose to take a ship with one mid-slot into combat. Live with the consequences of your choice or choose a different ship.


So what ships should I engage with that fit? You know, those slower then me. cant be that many.

Dingi223
Posted - 2008.03.24 20:51:00 - [58]
 

Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Please explain to me how you fit a scrambler on a retribution. First off you either need to be faster then your enemy or you need a web or that scrambler isnt going to work. So how does it work on 1 mid slot ships?

btw, I thought youd like this. A good minmatar boost for the T2 shield tankers eh Very Happy


Well, then you have a choice. Either you fit the scrambler and you can engage if the enemy enters range, or you fit the MWD / AB to engage the enemy. Such is the decision in EVE.

It's just like the Vagabond. If the opponent fits a TD, then the vagabond pilot has a choice - enter webbing range and fight, or flee. Sometimes you have decisions to make.

Bronson Hughes
ADVANCED Combat and Engineering
Posted - 2008.03.24 20:53:00 - [59]
 

Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
So what ships should I engage with that fit? You know, those slower then me. cant be that many.


Given the current nano-fad you would be hard-pressed to find any targets. Miners or haulers for said miners would be good targets as long as you stay out of HiSec.

If you're having trouble catching ships with the retribution, pick a different ship. It's obviously not meant to catch fast ships.

Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Gunship Diplomacy
Posted - 2008.03.24 20:54:00 - [60]
 

Originally by: Bronson Hughes
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
So what ships should I engage with that fit? You know, those slower then me. cant be that many.


Given the current nano-fad you would be hard-pressed to find any targets. Miners or haulers for said miners would be good targets as long as you stay out of HiSec.

If you're having trouble catching ships with the retribution, pick a different ship. It's obviously not meant to catch fast ships.


Sad


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4

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