Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Zorok
LEGI0N SOUL CARTEL
|
Posted - 2010.12.04 20:40:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Zorok on 04/12/2010 20:46:00 As it currently stands in Eve, you can either specifically have your ship fit to deal with a particular enemy ship setup or you can generically omni tank all damage types making sure that the weaker ship damage types are well covered. In the end, while this is good, I think that I could take this idea one step forward with the idea of tactical ship resistance configuration. This would be analogous to Star Trek where they will "tune" their shields in order to withstand attacks from a particular enemy weapon system.
This is how I would envision such a system to work- A skill and possibly an advanced skill subset would be created to enable tactical resistance during battle. Obviously, the higher the skill is trained, the less of a penalty would be applied in doing so but the penalty would never be eliminated.
I can see 1 of 3 scenarios for how the penalty will be applied when using this technique. #1 Forcing the ship to account on it's own to tactically resist certain damage types will cause a cap drain or cap recharge penalty. #2 Doing so will cause thermal damage to all the modules equipped that pertain to armor or shields depending on what resists (whether armor or shields) are being manipulated. #3 CCP creates and assigns tactical points to every ship in the game, in this instance, the skills trained will help add bonus tactical points to the ship or can pertain to a certain duration that such tactical resistances can be applied.
The enemy will be well aware of what tactical resists have been deployed based on a ball of energy that surrounds the ship when using tactical manipulation. Blue hue= EM Red= Thermal Yellow=Explosive Dark Purple/Black = Kinetic.
The way tactical resists will be applied will work similarly to the way armor/shield resists currently work (except no stacking penalty applied). Each resist point will add 1% resist point to the unresisted amount. Since the effect is only designed to be limited, it won't be necessary to penalize the other resists.
Adding this element can add a new dimension to gameplay. Industrial ships could be given a new element, for example, that gives them many resist points to help them survive just a bit longer. Smaller ships could enable this feature when they are taking heavy damage to increase survivability if only for a set period of time. While I'm sure that this system may have its flaws I'm open to any suggestions of course on improving the idea.
|
Arnold Predator
Special Situations
|
Posted - 2010.12.05 13:04:00 -
[2]
I have a feeling that your idea would take more coding then CCP would be willing to commet to. Also i don't think the players would want it anyway.
But hay... Walking in station is both those things and its being worked on.
|
Herping yourDerp
|
Posted - 2010.12.05 16:14:00 -
[3]
see amarr ship set to thremal/em resistance win
wont work because amarr can only deal em/themal and gaylente can only do themal kinetic
|
Zorok
LEGI0N SOUL CARTEL
|
Posted - 2010.12.05 18:01:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Herping yourDerp see amarr ship set to thremal/em resistance win
wont work because amarr can only deal em/themal and gaylente can only do themal kinetic
This is patently false...The reason being that the effect is only temporary, and being that you will only get so many resist points, you won't be able to get 99% resists because it works the same as other hardeners in the game. Each point only grants a percentage of resist to the un-resisted amount. Finally, they too will have the same capabilities should they train the skill set. Please read the details before trolling please... |
Zorok
LEGI0N SOUL CARTEL
|
Posted - 2010.12.05 18:06:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Arnold Predator I have a feeling that your idea would take more coding then CCP would be willing to commet to. Also i don't think the players would want it anyway.
But hay... Walking in station is both those things and its being worked on.
I think this could provide just as much a tactical advantage as the heat system used in the game. It won't create an "I-Win" button because of the way it works, it will only allow your actual skill to have a slight effect on the outcome. Obviously if you're outnumbered, it probably won't help much since you may well be receiving various damage types that will make the points difficult to distribute but it will perhaps keep you alive for a second or two longer (depending on how many tactical points CCP allows that ship to have). |
Mielono
SWARTA
|
Posted - 2010.12.09 09:16:00 -
[6]
A version of this idea seems interesting, being able to on the fly change your resist even just a little bit to eek out that much more survivability to lend itself to that gripping onto your seat feeling you get during some pvp encounters.
Originally by: Culmen
A cat is like that carebear who sticks around only while there's food, and at best kills a few rats.A dog F*cking enforces NBSI, and deep down is slightly disappointed you aren't tak |
Zorok
LEGI0N SOUL CARTEL
|
Posted - 2010.12.12 06:35:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Mielono A version of this idea seems interesting, being able to on the fly change your resist even just a little bit to eek out that much more survivability to lend itself to that gripping onto your seat feeling you get during some pvp encounters.
Thanks for the support! I don't think that this will be giving anyone an unfair advantage since all players will be able to use this.
|
Dardol
|
Posted - 2010.12.13 16:12:00 -
[8]
This does give an un-fair advantage to shield tankers as there is nothing in your solution for armor tankers. I don't think this solution really fit's in the eve universe, IMHO.
Not Supported
|
Zorok
LEGI0N SOUL CARTEL
|
Posted - 2010.12.14 01:20:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Dardol This does give an un-fair advantage to shield tankers as there is nothing in your solution for armor tankers. I don't think this solution really fit's in the eve universe, IMHO.
Not Supported
Au contraire- yes it does apply ARMOR and SHIELDS please read the OP closely before sticking said foot in mouth.
|
Dardol
|
Posted - 2010.12.14 13:32:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Zorok
Originally by: Dardol This does give an un-fair advantage to shield tankers as there is nothing in your solution for armor tankers. I don't think this solution really fit's in the eve universe, IMHO.
Not Supported
Au contraire- yes it does apply ARMOR and SHIELDS please read the OP closely before sticking said foot in mouth.
lol,
guess i did about the armor/shield tanking reference. most have been the "star trek" reference that got me.
but my second opinion still stands "I don't think this solution really fit's in the eve universe, IMHO."
Cheers!
Dardol
|
|
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Amarr Dissonance Corp BLACK-MARK
|
Posted - 2010.12.14 15:28:00 -
[11]
they already have this it's called overheating your active resists |
Zorok
LEGI0N SOUL CARTEL
|
Posted - 2010.12.15 02:49:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Nicolo da'Vicenza they already have this it's called overheating your active resists
Except with my idea, you'll be able to add a bit extra tank to ANY resist for a period of time and not just the particular modules you have equipped.
|
Tres Farmer
Gallente Federation Intelligence Service
|
Posted - 2010.12.15 08:20:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Zorok
Originally by: Nicolo da'Vicenza they already have this it's called overheating your active resists
Except with my idea, you'll be able to add a bit extra tank to ANY resist for a period of time and not just the particular modules you have equipped.
So to make it worthwhile it more or less is redundant to overheating those resistance modules? Or if applied 'right' would create even more overpowered setups for PvE?
/solution looking for problem, not supported
support Public Idea Tracker | 24hr PLEX |
Rip Minner
Gallente ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
|
Posted - 2010.12.15 08:25:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Arnold Predator I have a feeling that your idea would take more coding then CCP would be willing to commet to. Also i don't think the players would want it anyway.
But hay... Walking in station is both those things and its being worked on.
We are geting mainly becouse they had to make it for Dust514 anyways. It's not like they said Hay lets push Walking in stations on EVE. It's the crumbs that Fell off the table into are game. It's a benfit of Dust514 for EVE.
Is it a rock? Point a Lazer at it and profit. Is it a ship? Point a Lazer at it and profit. I dont realy see any differnces here. |
Tres Farmer
Gallente Federation Intelligence Service
|
Posted - 2010.12.15 09:04:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Rip Minner
Originally by: Arnold Predator I have a feeling that your idea would take more coding then CCP would be willing to commet to. Also i don't think the players would want it anyway.
But hay... Walking in station is both those things and its being worked on.
We are geting mainly becouse they had to make it for Dust514 anyways. It's not like they said Hay lets push Walking in stations on EVE. It's the crumbs that Fell off the table into are game. It's a benfit of Dust514 for EVE.
You mean WoD, not Dust.. Dust has got another Engine afaik (correct me if I'm wrong)
support Public Idea Tracker | 24hr PLEX |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |