Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ostraka Kadesh
Dextarius
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 09:51:00 -
[1] - Quote
Chaff is a discharge of short strips of a metallic material, and is used by fighter pilots to confuse incoming missiles by messing with their onboard tracking systems, e.g. radar.
The Chaff Launcher would take up a high slot and would require ammo (chaff charges). Any missiles in flight towards the vessel would be confused and either have their effectiveness reduced, or would explode harmlessly in the chaff.
Target Painters would reduce or negate the effectiveness of chaff, as would the target vessel using an MWD. |
uglybass
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 10:07:00 -
[2] - Quote
Or you could use defender missles (if your ship can handle missile launchers). Dunno how effective they are atm, last time i checked they wasnt worth it.
|
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos BricK sQuAD.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 10:29:00 -
[3] - Quote
Good concept, but for it to only affect missiles might be too complicated to implement.
A simpler implementation would be that the chaff (or whatever) reduces your ship's effective signature radius while active.
This makes perfect sense. Releasing chaff confuses all weapons and targeting systems, making it harder for your opponent to get clean hits on you. Practical effects would be to reduce incoming damage (by improving sig tanking) and increase incoming lock times.
It would also serve as an effective counter to target painters, which are currently the only kind of EWar to which there is no real counter (apart from using gang links and boosters). |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 12:49:00 -
[4] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:Good concept, but for it to only affect missiles might be too complicated to implement.
A simpler implementation would be that the chaff (or whatever) reduces your ship's effective signature radius while active.
This makes perfect sense. Releasing chaff confuses all weapons and targeting systems, making it harder for your opponent to get clean hits on you. Practical effects would be to reduce incoming damage (by improving sig tanking) and increase incoming lock times.
It would also serve as an effective counter to target painters, which are currently the only kind of EWar to which there is no real counter (apart from using gang links and boosters). so make another matar only defense system.... |
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos BricK sQuAD.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 12:52:00 -
[5] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:so make another matar only defense system....
Huh? |
el alasar
The Scope Gallente Federation
46
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 14:24:00 -
[6] - Quote
what could makes sense is a module to increase defense stats ( signature -xx% / resist +xx% / ?), making you live longer, at the cost of not being able (or at reduced amount) to deal damage - prolonging a battle.
it should consume some component (chaff charges) in cargohold.
penalty: either shut down 50% of the guns or increase their cycle time. more little ideas that need your support: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=261507#post261507 enjoying the order cancellation confirmation? sometimes CCP listens - there is hope after all :) www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1431503 |
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos BricK sQuAD.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 14:41:00 -
[7] - Quote
el alasar wrote:what could makes sense is a module to increase defense stats ( signature -xx% / resist +xx% / ?), making you live longer, at the cost of not being able (or at reduced amount) to deal damage - prolonging a battle.
it should consume some component (chaff charges) in cargohold.
penalty: either shut down 50% of the guns or increase their cycle time.
Why does it need a such a harsh penalty? Besides the opportunity costs of fitting, what are the penalties of using cap boosters to counter neuts, ECCM to counter ECM, or sensor boosters to counter RSDs?
That said, this could be quite a powerful defensive module, so balancing it is important. I would agree with the OP in that it should be a highslot mod and use charges (which should be fairly bulky). I'd also say it shouldn't be able to run constantly. If it had, say, a 10-15 second cycle time, and then a 10 second downtime while it loads a new charge, then it could only be used in bursts. I would say no more than a 30% bonus (reduction) to sig radius while it's active. |
el alasar
The Scope Gallente Federation
46
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 14:55:00 -
[8] - Quote
increasing defense capabilities for some time make me think of triage mode (there you cannot move anymore).
i dont think you should be able to tank a lot more while being able to deal damage as before. the option itself to prolong a battle (while rendering yourself a bit helpless) would open room to many new tactics and gameplay. such a module could allow making distress calls useful the first time in eve - which i would love!
you could argue that by putting out chaffs your own guns and missles are disturbed and cannot hit as good anymore.
i could think of quite high bonuses to your tanking ability, maybe make the module kind of scriptable / different charges / bonuses given.
this would be also another option to counter high alpha (also ganking), for which imho there is currently none.
some similar thoughts on increasing defensive capabilities in this interesting thread, see also my post #18, there we thought about remote resists logistics... more little ideas that need your support: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=261507#post261507 enjoying the order cancellation confirmation? sometimes CCP listens - there is hope after all :) www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1431503 |
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos BricK sQuAD.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 15:02:00 -
[9] - Quote
Triage for subcaps? No, just no. Improved resists? They're called 'hardeners'.
You're making it far too complicated. This thread is about something very simple: Bursts of chaff which make your ship harder to hit - that is all. Implementing that through sig radius is just the simplest way of doing it. |
el alasar
The Scope Gallente Federation
46
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 15:56:00 -
[10] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:Triage for subcaps? No, just no. Improved resists? They're called 'hardeners'. You're making it far too complicated. This thread is about something very simple: Bursts of chaff which make your ship harder to hit for a short period - that is all. Implementing that through sig radius is just the simplest way of doing it. And the application of such a module in defence against an alpha fleet hadn't escaped me. And then there's bombing runs... decreases signature. yes. good.
i have NOT been talking about wanting to introduce any kind of triage mode for normal ships! i were merely saying that when reducing signature and thus reducing incoming dps it effectively enables you to tank that hostilty around you better, making you last longer. it was a mere association that the effect was slightly similar to triage mode.
and thinking of possible penalties i thought of decreasing the damage that you can do yourself.
sure, this thing would not help you in any way against area of effect damage. more little ideas that need your support: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=261507#post261507 enjoying the order cancellation confirmation? sometimes CCP listens - there is hope after all :) www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1431503 |
|
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos BricK sQuAD.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 16:29:00 -
[11] - Quote
That still makes no sense. Does using ECCM stop you using ECM yourself? Does your own tracking computer penalise your own tracking disruptor? Does a shield booster lower your rate of fire? No, no, no.
I can't think of any comparable module that has penalties like the ones you're suggesting. Opportunity cost in fitting and capacitor use are usually the only downsides.
There are already several balances that have been suggested by the OP or myself: - It would be a highslot, which hurts your damage output just by fitting it, through the opportunity cost of the gun or launcher you could have put in that slot instead. - It would consume charges, and the bulk of such charges would limit its use. No other countermeasure (except fail defender missiles, which are also tiny) does this. - Because it would consume charges, it couldn't be run permanently, forcing the pilot to be smart about when to use it.
I guess, as well, only one of them should be able to be fitted.
With all those drawbacks for a temporary 20-30% reduction to sig radius, I think that's pretty well balanced, yes? |
el alasar
The Scope Gallente Federation
46
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 19:01:00 -
[12] - Quote
i guess there are 2 different ideas/use-cases involved. if i understand you correctly your idea is to have a little defensive support function (minus 20-30% sig radius) in pvp, not disrupting your abilities. ok. maybe that works.
my idea would be more a module with a much stronger purely defensive effect (minus 60-80% sig), which would allow you to sustain heavy dps much longer. basically taking you out of battle for a while (except against area of effect). in this case i feel there should be another penalty: if there is a "wall of chaff" around you, less gets in, less gets out.
but lets keep the discussion open on possible penalties, if any.
the amount of chaff needed should depend on your original signature radius (bigger sig needs more stuff dumped around you). either make chaff to be loaded into the module first or have it used from cargohold directly. for 200m sig i could imagine to use up 120m-¦ of chaff per minute. for 400m sig i could imagine to use up 240m-¦ of chaff per minute.
i think the mod should use PG like weapons or cap boosters do. i would favor you could turn it on and off any time - like a cloak, but with some delay, too, once it was turned off. chaff itself should have a size of 0.1m-¦ per unit.
ideas? more little ideas that need your support: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=261507#post261507 enjoying the order cancellation confirmation? sometimes CCP listens - there is hope after all :) www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1431503 |
Ostraka Kadesh
Dextarius
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 10:43:00 -
[13] - Quote
My rationale was this: missile tracking systems are smaller and weaker than those of ships, else TPs wouldn't be needed.
Chaff would disrupt the tracking signals of missiles by providing a false ghost or duplicate signature for the missile to lock on to. It would only affect missiles, not rockets, turret based weapons, or bombs. The charge would be fired 'at' the incoming missile, disrupting its tracking signal and either negating damage (if the missile 'locks on' to the chaff and the target ship moves away) or mitigating damage (if the missile explodes farther away from the ship than it normally would have done).
The launcher would be a fast tracking, rapid launching high slot turret, with the potential to run out of charges very quickly. The charges would be of different sizes, depending on the size of the missiles being defended against and consequently the distance from the ship at which the chaff would need to be deployed.
Quote:for 200m sig i could imagine to use up 120m-¦ of chaff per minute. for 400m sig i could imagine to use up 240m-¦ of chaff per minute. ... but may not quite so bulky.
It would be for pilots who didn't want to train missile+launcher skills, or who didn't have a launcher hard point on their ship. |
Anshio Tamark
Avitus Lugus
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 11:21:00 -
[14] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:That still makes no sense. Does using ECCM stop you using ECM yourself? Does your own tracking computer penalise your own tracking disruptor? Does a shield booster lower your rate of fire? No, no, no.
I can't think of any comparable module that has penalties like the ones you're suggesting. Opportunity cost in fitting and capacitor use are usually the only downsides.
There are already several balances that have been suggested by the OP or myself: - It would be a highslot, which hurts your damage output just by fitting it, through the opportunity cost of the gun or launcher you could have put in that slot instead. - It would consume charges, and the bulk of such charges would limit its use. No other countermeasure (except fail defender missiles, which are also tiny) does this. - Because it would consume charges, it couldn't be run permanently, forcing the pilot to be smart about when to use it.
I guess, as well, only one of them should be able to be fitted.
With all those drawbacks for a temporary 20-30% reduction to sig radius, I think that's pretty well balanced, yes? Technically, the charges don't have to be that big. As long as the launcher's capacity is only big enough to hold very few charges, it is less important how big the charges are. Ideally, would be to make the capacity so the they can only hold 1-3 charges, depending on balancing issues and effective period.
Just one question for this concept, however: What about stacking penalties? Would you be able to fit more, and if so, how effective should each be? Should you only be able to fit one? These are some things that might need some consideration as well. Just saying. |
Ostraka Kadesh
Dextarius
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 11:25:00 -
[15] - Quote
Anshio Tamark wrote:Just one question for this concept, however: What about stacking penalties? Would you be able to fit more, and if so, how effective should each be? Should you only be able to fit one? These are some things that might need some consideration as well. Just saying.
The idea is that you would need only one, so yes, maybe only one should be allowed to be fitted to a ship. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |