Tracking Device


(abandonship) #1

I would like to see a new weapon introduced.

Basic idea would be too have a launcher module loaded with tracking device that can be fired onto a ships hull.

So you cold use a passive targeter on the undock and launch it.

This would be an non aggressive act so you would not suffer a Concord Blap.

Once in place you would be able to get live intel on your tracker for a limited period of time.

Or you could have a non live version that sends a report via mail with the track results after the device expires.

Update: you could also have the ability to warp to the tracking device. Edit ok maybe this warp to is too OP

What you think


(Mike Voidstar) #2

I think no to any form of consequence free aggression.

However, for something like this perhaps a suspect timer or something would be appropriate.

I don’t hate the idea of being tracked, but things like cargo scanners and ship scanners not having consequences is bad enough and should be fixed.

However, you are probably about to eat a whole bunch of posts pointing out locator agents.


(Lugh Crow-Slave) #3

or he could just use a locator agent.

this idea screams cool > balance and that’s how you end up with a broken game


(abandonship) #4

I am aware of agents and have used them before its not ideal, the tracking device would give you route data or the live data as opposed to the agent, which only gives you where the target is at any given time. which is delayed.


(Scipio Artelius) #5

Seems a bit OP.

Mission hunters could easily sit outside major mission hubs and fire these on unsuspecting mission runners, then just follow them and warp direct to the mission site without needing combat probes.

I think that level of ability to just warp to the probe is way too strong.

So unless the targetted ship has a way to know that they are carrying a tracker, it’s a bit unbalanced.


(abandonship) #6

mission runners would still see the agressor ship arrive at the mission gate so that gives plenty of time to fanny out of the mission site. tbh mission runners have to much protection as it is.


(Scipio Artelius) #7

Not if they are in the site. They’ll see them land in the site. That’s the first they’ll see.

I’m all for aggression, but the proposal as it is, is too OP.

From a Level 5 mission perspective, many don’t even have gates, so the aggressor can just warp straight into the site without probing the mission runner down. That makes things very unbalanced in lowsec.


(Black Pedro) #8

Not sure about the warp thing, but a general tracking device essentially functionally identical to a locator agent might be fun. Perhaps it would be faster and cheaper than an agent, with a more sci-fi immersive UI, and maybe could show you a 1AU circle or whatever on the system map if you are in system with you. The trade off being you have to get within a short distance of the target to attatch it and they could detect it perhaps somehow and even learn your name.

Not sure of the details but the general idea I like. +1


(Salt Foambreaker) #9

It’s WAY WORSE than cloaking :rofl:

-1 make friends or get alts, follow the ship if you want to track it.

No ezmode tracking device.


(Lugh Crow-Slave) #10

you realize you can’t aggress while cloaked right?

so that is not an example of consequence free aggression


(Mike Voidstar) #11

He’s making fun of me. He isn’t serious.

But you are right. He should have said it’s way worse than using bumping as tackle or something similar.


(Salt Foambreaker) #12

* WOOOSSSHH *


(Lugh Crow-Slave) #13

ain’t no woosh it was a poor comparison. he even listed off far better examples that would have actually fit


(Salt Foambreaker) #14

Nope, it was a joke from the Cloaking Thread, Mike got it.