EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2008-01-23 15:48
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-11-16 11:05
  • Number of Posts: 414
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 0

Cardano Firesnake

Security Status 5.0
  • Viziam Member since
  • Amarr Empire Faction

Last 20 Posts

  • Gameplay changes I would love to see. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:



    what it will do is give your ratters a huge heads up when some one is coming


    no need for intel ch just set an alt on the gate and he can see if some one is hacking it



    but i get the feeling thats what he is after


    There is alreday an alt in the system before the system where the guys are farming.

    Force Hacking should take a few second no more than 10 s. When you sucessfully hack the door you can jump through but the owners that are in the system or that look in the star map are aware of an intrusion (timecode of the jump).
    Stealth Hacking should take 60s. When you successfully hack the door you can jump and there is no alarm.
    Of course if there is an alt cloaked on the gate they will know you jump (as it is right now.)

    The difference is you can create an intel map, and it is the first step to create a gameplay with a wargame logic.
    Imagine anchorable modules that maintain the gate wide open or entirely locked. Fighting for the accesses of a place mekes more sens to me than the Fozzy SOV system.
    Of course such modification of the game play need adjustements in many ways. But I don't think it would a bad thing. I think that the Fozzy SOV system is so artificial that is one of the reason of my lack of interest on sovereingty gameplay.

    The range for the hacking should be the same than the directional scan.

  • Gameplay changes I would love to see. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Donnachadh wrote:
    Cardano Firesnake wrote:
    In fact as I see the thing it is more as if people who own a place would not let the door wide open. But that does not mean that a bulglar can't enter.

    It is this word "own" that keeps tripping you up. In EvE you do not "own" an area of space, in EvE you "control" that area of space and when you can no longer "control" it then someone will take it away from you.

    You claim you cannot protect your space 24 / 7, that is a valid point, and my counter argument is simply this. If you cannot defend your space 24 / 7 how are you going to defend the gates from the hackers 24 / 7?
    Let's be honest here, if you do not have people online 24 / 7 your enemies will determine when you are not online and when you are not online they will come, hack your gate and destroy your stuff and then take your area of space. So the simple reality is that the only thing your gate idea does is slow them down for a few minutes it would take them to hack it.

    That's true. It will not protect the area you control more thant it is protected today. It is not the point. The goal is to make the way you protect your systems different. Today it is as if you place a strongbox in your house and you let the doors wide opened with no camera.
    The idea is to protect the accesses of your house, before puting a safebox in it.
    It is all about logic, to protect your country, you don't build a wall around your capital and let all the roads on the way without protection. If you do, the town is yours, but not the lands around.

  • Gameplay changes I would love to see. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Daichi Yamato wrote:
    This is the game where you protect your space 24/7. Make friends across time zones or people who can do the night shift.

    You say there are always guys on the frontier 24/7 in real life, but also in real life i can overcome that with a big enough force, guns blazing, or slip in when its quiet. This can already be done in game, like fluffers says, 'organically', with no gimmicky hacking.

    If you were to propose hacking enemy jump bridges and what have you, then I'd be intrigued.


    Well to invade a enemy system, you stealthy enter in the system and open a cyno, a mother ship arrive that deploys a gate. It is how I see the game mechanics. Or you hack the existing gate and anchor a module that lock it widely open...
    It is like here when you want to invade a country: you take control of strategic places, destroy or take control of the accesses (bridges, roads airport etc.), or you create a new access to surprise your ennemies (Tunels, road in swamps or in mountains or through forests)

    And I am agree that we sould be able to hack the jump bridges too.

    In fact, all structures should be hackable with more or less difficulties. It is not far from the Entosis system, but more realistic. Instead random modules that magicly appears in systems the nodes would be sort of anchorable modules used to hack the protections of the attacked systems.

  • Gameplay changes I would love to see. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
    Cardano Firesnake wrote:

    But to me the biggest problem in the game is that modules, items, and ships, are designed with no real logic but with a gameplay logic.



    crap your right that would only be a good thing if this was a game


    Yes it is a game, but wouldn't it be more interestening if the difficulties were not artificialy created.

    I would rather a game where you can't warp through planets or moons, and use them to hide, where you can take damage of the environment (gaz, radiation, sunburn,) and where you could use these phenomenon to gain tactical advantage... for example...

  • Gameplay changes I would love to see. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Donnachadh wrote:
    A goon asking for a safe place to play the game in, gotta love the irony in that one.

    But in the end I say no to being able to lock gates because you are not supposed to be safe anywhere in EvE and locking your gates behind you when you enter would add an unacceptable level of safety to living in what is quite possibly the safest area in the game, nul sec space.

    .


    In fact as I see the thing it is more as if people who own a place would not let the door wide open. But that does not mean that a bulglar can't enter.
    It is true that if you have to hack all the gate, it would be boring. So the force hacking should be very easy but would give direct intel to owners instead of intel chans that exist for the moment. And don't forget That it would come with the remove of local chan.

    That means that if someone who enter in force will be intel instantly but a stealth hacker could enter discrectly, find a target, open a cyno and make his fleet jumping...

  • Gameplay changes I would love to see. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    You are wrong it is not about having a safe place. It is about creating a game mechanic more logic and more interestening. You must not think about this idea in the game as it is now but as it could be after.
    Being Goon has nothing to do with this idea.
    Within the things i would change there is also the anoms framing that I think it is as boring as mining and with no logic.
    I am agree that defending a system must be an active thing and this idea don't change that.
    But to me the biggest problem in the game is that modules, items, and ships, are designed with no real logic but with a gameplay logic.
    I don't know if I am clear.
    When an engineer create a thing, he have a purpose. The thing must have a mission and must be design to be the more easy to use for this purpose. The difficulty, must be created by another item created by another engineer to counter the first item or by a situation where the item should not be use.

  • Gameplay changes I would love to see. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Daichi Yamato wrote:
    1. Nope.
    Practicing sovereignty is enforcing your law. Someone breaks your law, hunt them down and punish them. Want to block their access? Get on gate and blockade it. No magic-super protected carebear havens.

    Definitely can get behind nerfing local and cloaks and generally overhauling intel. And i also think different ships could have varying D-scan ranges.



    I don't agree. there is no logic to let a free access to your systems. In real life there are guys 24/7 on the frontier. but it is not possible in a game. You misunderstand the goal. It is not about creating carebear havens because I would change the local chan in the same time and it would be possible to enter the system by hacking the gate. I would change all the ship to give them un utility slot to put a hacking device so all ships could have the force hacking system, and specialized shipcould have stealth hacking modules.
    I also think that hacking a gate should give you a scan of the other side. but it is another story.

  • Gameplay changes I would love to see. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    There are lot of things that I would love to change in Eve online. But there are 3 things that I think would change the face of the game.

    1- Sovereignty and gates.
    Puting a flag in the middle of nowhere never gave you the sovereignty on a place. It is your ability to choose who can enter your property or not that gives you the control and the power.
    So the Ihub should give the opportunity to choose who could pass through the gates or not.
    If you are not allowed to enter you should have three ways to overpassĀ : stealthy Hacking, force Hacking or using a Wormhole...
    Once in the system you could hack the Ihub to open all the gates to everybody for a time.
    Stealth hacking could give you the opportunity to enter without giving the alarm.
    Force Hacking should be very easier but give the alarm.

    In highsec the same system should apply. So someone with low security status should hack the concord gates to pass.

    2- Scans and local channels.
    Detection and Deception are the basis of war.
    The Local chanel that warns you directly when an hostile enter your system is a very bad thing.
    But you should be able to detect an hostile when he is coming.
    Directional scan should be able to make the difference between hostiles and friendly ships and should make a sound when an hostile is at range.
    Bigger ship should have bigger scan range than smaller. (example: frigates 8AU range, cruiser 15A, BC 30, BS60, capitals 120AU)
    And Cloaky ships should be detected by scans. Three different modules should exist to lure overview, directional scan and probe scan.
    So to be entirely invisible you chould have a cloak, a directional scan scrambler, and a probe scan scrambler.

    3- Anchorable scanners to give intel .
    An anchorable module should exist that would be able to directional scan, and probe scan in the systems.
    This module could be use by someone that have the control of the Ihub.
    Statistics about hostiles detected by these modules should be find in the map...

  • [December] Balance Smorgasbord in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Ok if for this nerf; but The Gila need a bit more agility.

  • Dev blog: The Dominix, Work In Progress And A New Art Director in EVE Information Center

    Why not using the Thrasher redesign options to change the Rupture. Make it a bit bigger and go...

  • Dev blog: The Dominix, Work In Progress And A New Art Director in EVE Information Center

    The new Dominix is great.

    Stiletto and Probe: Very Good!

    But I love the Thrasher as he is now. I don't know why it should change.

  • [Scylla] Beta Map Release - feedback wanted! in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I always had difficulites to move the probes in 3d....
    But with the new map it is harder than ever.
    Most of the time I cannot catch the probes so needless to speek about placing them at the good level

  • Jump fatigue max timer.... in EVE Technology and Research Center

    My corpmate have Thirty days of jump fatigue, more than three days before next jump.... I don't even imagine the jump fatigue timer if he makes his next jump in 4 days...
    Should not the jump fatigue have a maximum timer? Even 7 days of jump fatigue would be enough to stuck a fleet.
    I don't see the point.
    Why?

  • [April] [Updated] Confessor and Svipul Balance Tweaks in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I must say that the Svipul is far more powerful than the Confessor. These changes will make the gap bigger..
    It is a shame that the confessor is more beautiful than the Svipul.

  • Wow! that grid! in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I know the grid problems since a long time ago. It is not the first time It hapens to me.
    But I still don't find it OK.

    I don't mind how, but this should be fix.

    And the fact is that neither me or my openent did this grid modification on purpose. I don't even understand what happened as I just put a bubble @ 100km from a gate and engaged there.

  • Wow! that grid! in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I was fighting when my ennemy disapeared. Then he came back again. I was just at 5km of the end of the grid.
    I don't know why the grid work like that but it is really awful. Isn't it possible to change that now?

    The grid couldn't simply be 500km around each ship?

  • [Scylla] Skynet - Removing Fighter Assist in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Dreadnaughts, Carriers, Super Carriers, Titans...
    All these ships are losing all their interest.
    It is important to give a function to all these ships.

    CCP created a special UI for Relics and Hecking Sites. Even if I think that the mini game is not very interestening because of it's lacks of strategy (the game is more a matter of luck and skill than tactical refelxion) I think that the idea is excellent.

    Titans should have a special command UI. The Fleet cammander in the mothership could give his orders from this UI and attribute special bonuses for players that follows the ordders.

    Dreadnaughts could have its own UI that give them the power to shoot at a bookmark with area effect weapons. The time between shoot and impact depend on the range were the dreads are.

    Super carriers and Carriers could have a special UI to use their fighters and bombers to engage targets that are not on their grid. Smaller ships could design a target that the carriers could attack.

  • Dev Blog: Balance Changes Coming In Scylla in EVE Information Center

    I think the way you analyze things is the problem.

    For example you are nerfing Rail guns because they are making more DPS over time. The reason is that there is more Tengu Fleet than other fleets as the heavy missiles when their were Drakes everywhere.

    Just look at caracteristics of modules objectively with all 5 skills and best modules, then with the lowest skills, how they apply on best speed/signature average speed/signature lowest speed/signature.

    I don't think it is so hard.

    BS and BC need better Range, slightly better firepower and better tank because they will not be able to run.

    Mobility is the biggest power on the battlefield, if you can't run or catch your enemy you'd better be very strong.

    BS, BC and Capitals should be the kings on large scale engagements. Cruisers should be there to support the biggest ships not taking their place.

    Cruisers should be the basic fleet for incursions, harrassments, and scouting. BS/BC/Capitals should be the conquest fleet.

  • Why EvE will be a game of noobs in 10 years in EVE Technology and Research Center

    To me a good game is a game that is easy to learn but difficult to master.

    But:

    Tracking, signature radius, explosion velocity, scan resolution, sensor strengh, hitpoints, resistances, Powergrid, CPU, drone bay, special capacities of each ship, Capacitor recharge, all these things you must understand to just begin to play the game!!!

    And then modules, their caracteristics, the way they affect the caracteristics of your ship, the skills and the way they affect your ship and the modules...

    Having a basic fit for each ship would really help new players. With the experience they will learn to modify this basic fit to be more adapted of their purposes.

    It is quite logic to that engineers that created these ship had a basic pupose for it with a basic fitting.

    But to me the real problem that could make Eve less interestening is the fact that the sandbox could be stuck as it is now.
    Big coalitions do not have any reason to move or to fight as they amass enormous wealth where they are.

    I think that it is time to introduce chaos to force the move.


  • Fitting a Hookbill in EVE Gameplay Center

    Caldary Navy Hookbill is quite strange for me.
    Here is a ship that have no way to fit its native weapon, some tank, and a propulsion without a modifier module (Micro Auxilliary Power Core, Ancillary Current Router, Co-processor etc).
    Most of the other ships (even tech 1) are able.

    Perharps is there something I don't understand.

Forum Signature

Posted - 2010.07.01 11:24:00 - [4] Erase learning skills, remap all SP. That's all.