Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Casiella]

New combat mechanics? HERESY!

Seriously though, best of luck. That will probably happen about the time we get some active mechanic around mining and mini-professions, but it's worth the try.

[Mathra Hiede]

Hmmm, the idea I have isn't technically a new gun but more of a module that actually will make every FC ever jizz in their pants.

Slave-Module:

Ships remotely hyperlink their on-board targeting and weapon systems to that of a dedicated fleet member [requires Command-Module] allowing that member to lock and shoot at their designated targets without relying on their nubbins of friends.
Medium/High CPU usage medium slot module, active with energy draw.

Command-Modules:

Max: 5 Synced ships
Massive CPU requirements, bonus' for command ships on reduced CPU usage.
High slow module.


In reality I am very much aware that this is almost impossible within the current EVE engine but I can hope

[Merdaneth]

Slave-Module:

Ships remotely hyperlink their on-board targeting and weapon systems to that of a dedicated fleet member [requires Command-Module] allowing that member to lock and shoot at their designated targets without relying on their nubbins of friends.
Medium/High CPU usage medium slot module, active with energy draw.

Slave-Drive:
Consumes slaves in cargohold for a temporary boost in speed. Changes engine trail color.

[Mathra Hiede]

Slave-Module:

Ships remotely hyperlink their on-board targeting and weapon systems to that of a dedicated fleet member [requires Command-Module] allowing that member to lock and shoot at their designated targets without relying on their nubbins of friends.
Medium/High CPU usage medium slot module, active with energy draw.

Slave-Drive:
Consumes slaves in cargohold for a temporary boost in speed. Changes engine trail color.

 

[Desiderya]

That would be the mirror to the ASB, slave fueled armor repairer.
Instead of an overheat button it features the "Whip it!" option.

[scagga]

Ships would be cooler if you could improve module performance at the expense of the performance of other modules.

I would also be interested in increasing components used in making T2/?T3 weapons to make 'over-clocked' versions of existing weapons.

E.g. 2000mm artillery, dual neutron blaster etc.  So exaggerated that it would cause noticeable recoil when fired.  With such attributes these weapons would degenerate with usage, and require maintenance (using minerals) every 1000 shots perhaps or their performance would start to fall. 

[Z.Sinraali]

Intensify the forward batteries. I don't want anything to get through...intensify forward firepower!

TOO LATE!

[Lyn Farel]

Intensify the forward batteries. I don't want anything to get through...intensify forward firepower!

TOO LATE!

Well now I want to be able to ram my own ships in flames into the command bridge of that stupid Nyx. >.>

[Gottii]

Intensify the forward batteries. I don't want anything to get through...intensify forward firepower!

TOO LATE!

Ammarian shuttles should have a bonus to ramming.

[ArtOfLight]

Intensify the forward batteries. I don't want anything to get through...intensify forward firepower!

TOO LATE!

Ammarian shuttles should have a bonus to ramming.

Hehe, I agree!

[kalaratiri]

In the latest eon issue, ccp sound wave discusses the new mining ships, and talks a little bit about the future of mining itself. Right at the end, he goes back to the fanfest video of the revenant in the asterod belt. He mentions that they would like to have asteroids properly impact on ships, and when asked how the would relate to eve ships 'bumping' said that if it was possible for them to do ramming it is something he is all for 

[Victoria Stecker]

Sadly, ramming isn't something that can be implemented as long as hisec exists.

Explanation:
Let's say that it is possible for ships to be damaged by collision. The problem is that this can happen by accident.

This either means that you can get concorded by bumping someone coming out of jita by complete accident, or that you can destroy someone's ship without concord interference because it considers ramming accidental. Either way, you've completely fucked up something.

The only possible option is to have some toggle-able option to control whether you want to bump someone or ram them, complete with concord warning (like activating a smartbomb in hisec). OFC, this makes no fucking sense IC, but oh well.

It would also make the plated bump-stabber the ultimate weapon of suigankage.

[Esna Pitoojee]

Sadly, ramming isn't something that can be implemented as long as hisec exists.

Explanation:
Let's say that it is possible for ships to be damaged by collision. The problem is that this can happen by accident.

This either means that you can get concorded by bumping someone coming out of jita by complete accident, or that you can destroy someone's ship without concord interference because it considers ramming accidental. Either way, you've completely fucked up something.

The only possible option is to have some toggle-able option to control whether you want to bump someone or ram them, complete with concord warning (like activating a smartbomb in hisec). OFC, this makes no fucking sense IC, but oh well.

It would also make the plated bump-stabber the ultimate weapon of suigankage.

There was a forum thread on Features and Ideas at some point, which I am to lazy to find right now, but which outlined a module that you could fit to a ship:
The module would have relatively light fittings requirements and once activated would serve as a combination of targeted MWD, accelerating you towards a target it was activated on - and extremely short-ranged AOE weapon that would do damage proportional to your ship's mass once you reached a certain (very low) range from the target.
To counterbalance this, it would also have the effect of slicing off a good portion of the fitted ship's hit points and drastically reducing your CPU and PG output, making fitting a significant tank through modules impossible.

A good number of posts in that thread were dedicated to arguing whether it should be allowed in highsec, with most people arguing it should not be. It ended up being a moot point in the end, as CCP stepped in and gave a software/networking explanation of why it was unlikely - very vaguely, I think it was that to make the module effective it would have to place an overwhelming number of calls to the server to determine if it was in detonation range, and they didn't want to do that to the server.

[Lyn Farel]

As much as I am not sure to be a big fan of that kind of module, I have a hard time to believe their server excuse thing. They already have dozens of server request for the exact same range/radius issues with bubbles, forcefields and the likes.

[Jev North]

They probably don't, actually.. but judging by various utterances in that vein they've made, I think that to most of CCP the server and protocol are holy writ they're not allowed to touch. That does limit things rather a bit.