Features & Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Capitals and force projection

Author
#1 - 2014-02-11 20:58:46 UTC  |  Edited by: WilliamMays
Marlona Sky made a reddit thread on movement within eve. It got me thinking, and I felt the need to spout my idea here, where I will be flamed into oblivion....here goes:

Make an extra fuel bay (or juggle the numbers of the current bays) on capitals, this bay holds a new fuel that is made from isotopes by the ship or a new module (not a siege type module); the new fuel can not be removed from this new bay and there is no source for the fuel but your own ship. The fuel can not be made while in station or cloaked. This fuel replaces isotopes as jump fuel and the stront/topes used for various capital actions; the size of the fuel bay would create limits on jump range over time and force choices to be made along the way. If the bay holds just below the fuel required for 2 jumps, this would slow movement across the map, while still allowing for capitals to jump in and go right into combat, or jump and cycle the fuel generator to jump again. The time for a single jump is unchanged, two jumps is slightly increased over the current docking methods and cap recharge fits; further jumps take significantly longer.

Examples:
Dreadnaughts would be able to jump in and siege just as they do now, so long as it is a single jump. More than one jump will require extra fuel to be made, at the midpoint or on the field, before going into siege.

Carriers would be able to jump and go into triage or start using drones (yes, I am saying carrier drones and fighters should use fuel, ratting carrier tears incoming; as strong as carriers are at multiple roles they need a drawback and this is not a big one) Multiple jumps would require fuel generation at some point.

Supercarriers, same as regular carriers, would be able to jump and drop fighters and FBs immediately. Multiple jumps would require fuel generation at some point.

Titans are much more complicated, and I don't own one. I'm not one for spouting gibberish details on things where I dont have direct experience. I'll just say I think similar ideas should be applied to the various roles of titans.


discuss, flame, or troll as your heart desires
Goonswarm Federation
#2 - 2014-02-11 22:09:43 UTC
Please fly capitals before you make proposals that would leave them essentially useless on the attack, while handing a tremendous advantage to defenders and large blocs.
Fidelas Constans
#3 - 2014-02-11 22:19:14 UTC
If i'm reading this right, it's almost like a cooldown timer that works based on how much the capital is jumping/sieging, correct?
#4 - 2014-02-11 22:45:45 UTC  |  Edited by: WilliamMays
Danika Princip wrote:
Please fly capitals before you make proposals that would leave them essentially useless on the attack, while handing a tremendous advantage to defenders and large blocs.


Please read a post before you make snide comments suggesting you know the writer's experience level on the topic.

If you had done that, you would see the part on titans where I did not suggest details, also implying that I do fly the other capitals. In fact, I have multiple rorqual, dread, carrier and blops characters, own several of each type, and one super carrier; I have used them frequenly over the past couple years, and continue to use them.

Rowells wrote:
If i'm reading this right, it's almost like a cooldown timer that works based on how much the capital is jumping/sieging, correct?


Yes, tying the jumping, combat and utility cooldowns together.
#5 - 2014-02-11 22:47:59 UTC
#6 - 2014-02-11 22:48:15 UTC
how does this fight the blob's projection?

They'd have "extra" pilots for reserve. smaller crew would not.


So you jump and are stuck in system. So are the "blob" crew. The "blobb" crew who also has backup to jump in after first assualt wave. You are screwing yourself basically as you are stuck.

If getting dynamite fished currently for example, if not pinned down by bubbles/hics you can get out of the trap when your capacitor is good. Your idea....well, you are making that trap easier since you can't jump out and are praying to whatever higher powers will listen you get the align and warp off. Also worth noting with deep safes killed long ago...probing a cap is not hard even if you get warp out to build up your new special fuel.

Now you could say cloak fit the cap. Guess what, the "blob" still wins. If you cap is cloaked up somewhere in space its not on the field doing anything useful.
Goonswarm Federation
#7 - 2014-02-11 22:49:44 UTC
So, if you are an experienced cap pilot, could you explain why it should be borderline impossible to use caps offensively? Or why smaller groups should be actively punished for trying to be mobile? Or, hell, why bashing structures in two systems consecutively is bad?
#8 - 2014-02-11 23:27:26 UTC
Zan Shiro wrote:
how does this fight the blob's projection?

They'd have "extra" pilots for reserve. smaller crew would not.


So you jump and are stuck in system. So are the "blob" crew. The "blobb" crew who also has backup to jump in after first assualt wave. You are screwing yourself basically as you are stuck.

If getting dynamite fished currently for example, if not pinned down by bubbles/hics you can get out of the trap when your capacitor is good. Your idea....well, you are making that trap easier since you can't jump out and are praying to whatever higher powers will listen you get the align and warp off. Also worth noting with deep safes killed long ago...probing a cap is not hard even if you get warp out to build up your new special fuel.

Now you could say cloak fit the cap. Guess what, the "blob" still wins. If you cap is cloaked up somewhere in space its not on the field doing anything useful.


As far as blobs projection, I assume you are talking about titan bridges; I mostly left titans out of my post because I have no personal experience flying them. However, the situation in your question is the exact situation now, the CFC has a blob sitting on a titan every fleet.

Caps currently have to wait for capacitor to jump out. The only difference is cap regens while you are cloaked, and insta regens when you dock. The fuel generator should be running while you are doing whatever you are doing. I'm not suggesting that timeline be any different than it is currently. However caps moving system to system, quickly across the map, docking at every cyno, giving them near invulnerabilty until they reach their destination, this seems very unbalanced to me.
#9 - 2014-02-11 23:43:35 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
So, if you are an experienced cap pilot, could you explain why it should be borderline impossible to use caps offensively? Or why smaller groups should be actively punished for trying to be mobile? Or, hell, why bashing structures in two systems consecutively is bad?


My suggestion is that the fuel bay should fit enough fuel for a single max range jump straight into combat. As an example, your own coalition has been basing out of AF0. Dread range from AF0 is quite extensive and has allowed you to take almost that entire region (and parts of neighboring regions) quite fast. Supercarriers have the same range, and regular carriers can go 30% farther. Note that I'm not saying that range should be changed. I'd say that is quite a good offensive use of caps and my suggestion does nothing to change that.

If caps should be able to near instantly jump farther, why not increase their jump range that distance and just let them skip the meaningless dock/undock step?

See the above reply for how I'm not suggesting a change in the timeline for caps on the battlefield or structure bashing.

Bashing structures in consecutive systems is still perfectly doable. There may be some edge cases of repeatedly jumping to max range, with short siege cycles in between, could be slowed down. This really depends on how the numbers of fuel generation are tweaked. Other than that, learn to plan better.
#10 - 2014-02-12 03:37:34 UTC
WilliamMays wrote:
However caps moving system to system, quickly across the map, docking at every cyno, giving them near invulnerabilty until they reach their destination, this seems very unbalanced to me.



YOu can get at them on the midpoints. Have had the pleasure of being evicted once or twice. Hostiles knew what the alliance favored midpoints were so on day 1 of evac ops lots of caps leaving had issues of landing into ambushes. Day 2 smart cap pilots ran thier own midpoints. Really smart and/or paranoid pilots did not share their cyno and/or routes either lol.

There is always the fun lets see how many window lickers jump on cyno beacons not getting intel first (oddly enough, this can work quite well).

There is also good old fashioned spyzoring. Have seen a cap movement go awry as the wagon train of caps landed into a nice ambush. Enemy was jsut too lucky to bring what was needed to smash it hard by pure random chance. It had a mole. High level one too as the "grunt" cap pilots jsut knew what desto was (we were going to war....and the wt was not exactly a state secret) ...fc said jump on broadcast the next hop was very much a mystery to them.


"ease" of transit out of empire is there by design. Its a carrot to have people out there. It also benefits smaller crews more. the blobs have thier titans to run point to point freighter ops. It be the titan-less crews who need to run several cap/jf runs to keep up supplies that suffer really.
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
#11 - 2014-02-12 05:33:37 UTC
Counter proposal.... cause if you think that is a good idea then you should love this Twisted:
All gates operate on a similar principle: they all have x amount of fuel that is used based on the mass of the ship jumping. It can store up to X amount and over time build up the lost amount to X again. This way, all High Sec, Low Sec, and Null Sec jumps ultimately limit player transit over space.

Gives a whole new meaning to the word "gate camp".


Edit: and what you are essentially saying is turn the fuel bay into a form of capacitor: something takes time to refil on it's own.... this would lead to a new type of fuel block that can be injected like a cap booster to this new jump drive capacitor.

heh... no... I am not for this idea, but in way of drawing comparisons to other forms of travel... well... there it is.
#12 - 2014-02-12 17:46:54 UTC
Zan Shiro wrote:
... window lickers....

"ease" of transit out of empire is there by design. Its a carrot to have people out there. It also benefits smaller crews more. the blobs have thier titans to run point to point freighter ops. It be the titan-less crews who need to run several cap/jf runs to keep up supplies that suffer really.



You seem to have found more idiots than I have. I've seen numerous idiots die on unscouted jump beacons, my suggestion does nothing to change this.

In countless cap ops, I have seen only a handful bounce off the station out of docking range, and only one of them died. Two people have to screw up for this to happen, one the cyno is positioned wrong, two the cap is to slow clicking dock. I've personally had my archon bounce at 1400 m/s away from the station and was still able to dock. I have never not been able to dock.

In 3 years of running multiple JF trips per month, my JF has only been shot at once, in low sec on a station with a huge docking radius. I was at zero risk, and this had nothing to do with jumping, as I was undocking to warp to the hi sec gate. My only loss was the time to dock up and undock to retry warping to that high sec gate.


Petrified wrote:
Counter proposal.... cause if you think that is a good idea then you should love this Twisted:
All gates operate on a similar principle: they all have x amount of fuel that is used based on the mass of the ship jumping. It can store up to X amount and over time build up the lost amount to X again. This way, all High Sec, Low Sec, and Null Sec jumps ultimately limit player transit over space.

Gives a whole new meaning to the word "gate camp".


Edit: and what you are essentially saying is turn the fuel bay into a form of capacitor: something takes time to refil on it's own.... this would lead to a new type of fuel block that can be injected like a cap booster to this new jump drive capacitor.

heh... no... I am not for this idea, but in way of drawing comparisons to other forms of travel... well... there it is.


Gates require fuel? Far to annoying, far to easy for the home team to use it to their excessive advantage, MUCH harder on noobs and smaller groups. yeah....no thanks

Yes, my suggestion basically turns fuel into the new constraint, as opposed to capacitor which is easily recharged. Changing capacitor mechanics would be....well my head is hurting after just thinking about what nightmares that would cause for every ship in the game.
Suddenly Spaceships.
#13 - 2014-02-12 17:56:00 UTC
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=321042&find=unread

Marlona also has a thread up on this forum, this subforum even. Let's use it please.

The Law is a point of View

#14 - 2014-02-12 18:02:27 UTC
Kenrailae wrote:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=321042&find=unread

Marlona also has a thread up on this forum, this subforum even. Let's use it please.


My idea is very different from his
Suddenly Spaceships.
#15 - 2014-02-12 18:06:06 UTC
WilliamMays wrote:
Kenrailae wrote:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=321042&find=unread

Marlona also has a thread up on this forum, this subforum even. Let's use it please.


My idea is very different from his



So why not add to the discussion there, started by a character who many people are much more likely to read on principle that it's that character starting it, rather than create a whole new thread on the same topic?

You're after the same goal in a similar process. Instead of the Player having a restriction you want the ship to have a restriction?

I don't get why people feel the need to start new threads on the same topic when the idea is pretty similar, just executed slightly different? :/

The Law is a point of View

#16 - 2014-02-12 18:17:36 UTC
Kenrailae wrote:
I don't get why people feel the need to....


I guess everyone is entitled to their point of view (reads your signature) on how to forum. Anyway, I cross posted it there too

btw, check the start dates on the two threads

thanks for the bumps
Suddenly Spaceships.
#17 - 2014-02-12 18:28:26 UTC
Yeah I misread the start dates. Read the 12th on both, not 11th on yours and 12th on Marlona's. Mah bad on that.

The Law is a point of View

#18 - 2014-02-13 19:37:18 UTC
I think I'm more surprised at the lack of carrier tears than anything. I was sorta looking forward to them
Amarr Empire
#19 - 2014-02-13 19:42:42 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Please fly capitals before you make proposals that would leave them essentially useless on the attack, while handing a tremendous advantage to defenders and large blocs.


So you mean like the current situation.

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~

#20 - 2014-02-13 19:44:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Batelle
WilliamMays wrote:
I think I'm more surprised at the lack of carrier tears than anything. I was sorta looking forward to them


no point in crying over something that will never happen.

Adding a second fuel bay, converting isotopes to other fuel to be used, making drones/fighters use fuel, all of this is just too clunky to even take seriously.

Plus, you didn't give any idea how long converting fuel to a usable state would even take.

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.

Forum Jump