Mobile Entanglement Generator

Makes it too easy to create safe PvE zones by deploying a couple of these in designated ‘combat’ systems which makes the rest of the systems in range be much safer from random filamenting groups.

Agreed, but I think 30 seconds may be too short.

In my opinion, ideally these filaments should not be a way to get away from people who are competently chasing you with combat probes.

The delay should therefore take long enough that a skilled combat prober in a regular combat capable cruiser or T3D can get out of the previous warp, scan their current safe down, warp to them, lock them up and start shooting.

30 seconds may not be enough time for all that.

I didn’t say it has a bubble attached. There’s nothing stopping the filamenter just warping off and using a stargate, into your hypothetically safe system.

I think you’re missing the point that these ‘content attractors’ would probably be camped and bubbled by a bunch of PvPers which stop you from going next door.

And, in the next door in the region people can safely PvE without groups filamenting in as the people who do filament for a roam land in designated PvP (camped) systems.

hmm, Mobile Entanglement Generator… M.E.G.

dammit-meg

1 Like

“I think you’re missing the point that these ‘content attractors’ would probably be camped and bubbled by a bunch of PvPers which stop you from going next door.”

No. That IS the point. The more opportunities for people going about their business to to get n+1’d the better. That is after all how ever is designed.

I’m not really sure what your point is.

My point is:

  • the noise and signal filaments allow people to randomly land in any null sec system, including remote and rarely visited null sec systems
  • it is good if people have no 100% safety and that filamenting groups can randomly land in system with a Rorqual or other big ship that assumed they were safe in a dead-end constellation behind the bubbled gates and scouts

Now add content atractors:

  • the random filamenting groups now have a small chance to land on the structure you propose instead, which likely has exits bubbled and camped
  • if they’re not landing on that content attractor, they land on the content attractor in the next system, or on the content attractor in the next system…

Result:
Their destination is no longer a ‘random null sec system’ which means the Rorqual and other big ships in dead end systems are once again completely safe from filamenting groups. Which in my opinion is bad.

Filaments are good because of their random destination. Add ‘content attractors’ and suddenly the destination is much less random.

(Also, this thread isn’t about the filament destination, which is fine in my opinion, but is about using the filaments to escape content. So maybe another thread to continue discussing your content attractor idea?)

this has like 46 replies (a lot for a suggestion thread) i think that – even if we don’t agree on the change needed – we all know that a change is needed.

ccplease consider talking to ur csms and finding a solution. :grinning:

it would be well received by da commoooonity of done correctly

Your initial problem is that not enough ships, in your opinion, are exploding.

My suggestion is how to ensure more ships explode, I am fulfilling your aim am I not?

Well no, the amount of exploding ships is not the goal, it matters which ships get a higher chance of exploding due to the filaments.

Where filaments increase the chance of unexpected conflict in low traffic null sec regions, your suggestion does the opposite.

Currently inbound filaments are great - they increase the chance of encountering random groups in any part of null sec space, so no part of space is really safe.

The issue is outbound filaments, which allow players to avoid conflict.

Your suggestion does nothing about the outbound issue of filaments (the issue this thread is about) and it changes the mechanics of the inbound filaments so that they no longer spread people randomly through space but make them land in -often carefully placed- ‘content attractor’ traps.

Even if people would still be willing to filament if they have a large chance to land in a bubble camped system due to your suggestion, the fact that those people usually land in systems picked by other players (content attractors) means that they have a lesser chance of landing in random area of space, which makes those random areas of space safer.

Your suggestion breaks the inbound filaments, which currently are fine, and does nothing about the issue of outbound filaments, which is what this thread is about.

I don’t implementing your suggestion would be positive for the game, Dredwerkz.

And when they filament “out” and land on your trap? This is what you want isn’t it?

Well no.

The game could automatically blow up 20% of the ships that use a filament and it would still be too easy to get out of fights. That still doesn’t fix the issue that people can use it to get out of a fight too easily, but additionally it also randomly gets people killed. Your suggestion is similar: it doesn’t stop people from using filaments to get out of the way, it merely adds an additional risk to where they land. And on top of that it makes low traffic areas of EVE safer, which I think is bad.

What we need is a way to stop outbound filaments being too easy, without messing with the mechanics of inbound filaments as those are fine.

Mobile entanglement generators (or other ideas in the thread like a delay before the filament teleports the group) could solve that problem.

(In case my terminology isn’t clear: Outbound in this case means people using filaments to get out of a system. Inbound is where they land.)

It seems like what you want is access to the concord module so that if you see someone on overview the only thing they can do to escape is self destruct their pod.

I only really have one thing to say: don’t let them get away. If they’ve warped off, that’s as good as escaped already. Don’t let them warp away and you won’t need these training wheels to prop up your failure to secure the target.

No, that’s not what I am asking for.

It REALLY sounds like you are.

If you don’t let your target warp away, your new mechanic is useless right?

This is what I wrote in my first post in this thread. And this is what I want to be changed.

so there is a lot of back and fourth here so I’d like to chime in with my thoughts

to quick recap TLDR: Mobile Entanglement Generator
by definition would be a device used to prevent people from filamenting away.

incedently I have been thinking about something along these lines a lot lately, however i’m personally against the idea of an anchorable, we already have interdiction spheres which last 30 days, further more, it is my understanding that CCP is trying to reduce structure spam of all kinds across the board

something which does come to mind however is some kind of abyssal weather effect, which basically prevents people from using a filament in that system, which would have a much more direct impact on game play. however I don’t believer there is any way for players to effect the weather in game.

i did think what would be cool is some kind of space mine, however space mines have been taken out of the game before and also would then add to the issue of structure spam.

i could see an Ihub upgrade in sov null for anti filament tech (people come in but not out) or perhaps through the use of a titan some kind of system wide burst being used for anti - cloak or anti - filament this would only be up for so long, which is also a good thing because it would mean that a system if its going to be 100% secure like that would require active players and titans. (which would be awesome considering titans need some kind of epic awesome in the rework.)

with this in mind, combined with the OP suggestion

perhaps there could be a new factor of timers where if you have a combat timer, you cannot use a filament for 30 minutes, this way you have to rely on gate networks as the norm.

9 times out of 10 and the people who put the thing down are mift

1 time out of 10 the filamenters get pulled in and they feel cheated by rng

I see only downsides

1 Like

I fully support the removal of all mechanics in eve that use rng.

1 Like

… time to make another game then, I can’t think of many things, (hardly any in combat) where RNG doesn’t play a roll.

2 Likes