DUST Search - Amarr Energy Vampires

Canari Elphus wrote:

MINA Longstrike wrote:

Garrett Blacknova wrote:

I want to spend a lot of time defending a bad piece of equipment

Hahaha, no, bad equipment is bad. I like how you really really tried to make situations where it might be useful but unless it's providing 400-800hp/s it won't be - and those are average numbers for how much damage various weapons do per second, with the upper end belonging to the HMG that cal heavy is likely to be packing and he can shoot that for longer than 1 second.

Plain and simple it's a very, very poorly thought out idea that tries to shoehorn something awesome from eve into dust, where it would be less than awesome. There is *no* situation that you can describe where this would be more useful than simply shooting the ****ing enemy in front of you, except potentially against vehicles, where it might still suck if it works as you've described it.

But it does work if you make it vehicle versus vehicle if cap was introduced where vehicle mods drained it.

Tank vs Tank battle. Tank A nos' Tank B which drains down its cap. This means that Tank A can run its Hardeners/Reppers longer while Tank B can only do it for a shorter period of time. Or, a Logi DS drains Tank B while providing remote reps or remote shield boosts to Tank A.

This isnt something that will be immediately implemented but does give some good thought to how warfare can play out on larger maps with more players on the map. Having tank squads on large maps would become a thing and would necessitate the need for something like a Logi DS and EWar


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 4706	Posted - 2014.03.31 03:15:00 - [1] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: No, I'm sorry but energy vamps steal energy, not shields or armor. And shields are made of what exactly? BOOM. Don't call it a Nosferatu, but create an equipment item that drains the target's shields while replenishing the user's shield up to the point where both are equal. It could have a description which refers back to EVE and mentions that it's based on the same tech as the Nosferatu.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 4708	Posted - 2014.03.31 03:22:00 - [2] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Garrett Blacknova wrote: MINA Longstrike wrote: No, I'm sorry but energy vamps steal energy, not shields or armor. And shields are made of what exactly? BOOM. Don't call it a Nosferatu, but create an equipment item that drains the target's shields while replenishing the user's shield up to the point where both are equal. It could have a description which refers back to EVE and mentions that it's based on the same tech as the Nosferatu. We have things that kill shields far more effectively than anti-rep tools, they're called guns and flux grenades. And how many things do we have that help us rep our shields when they're still on regen delay? Here, I'll list them for you: - Yep, that's all of them.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 4709	Posted - 2014.03.31 03:42:00 - [3] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: It's fixing something that isn't broken and doesn't need addressing. I'd rather see remote shield reppers or modified repair tools that are weighted towards shields but also rep small amounts of armor, rather than bastardized 'energy vampires'. It's not fixing something that isn't broken. It's suggesting a way to bring something interesting and cool from EVE into a form where it would make sense and work in DUST. If asking for new and interesting content is "fixing what isn't broken" then you're a hypocrite for wanting new repair tools or variants. We should also stop requesting webifiers, MTACs, etc. and nobody's allowed to say that adding capacitors to vehicles would be a good idea. This is all "fixing what isn't broken", according to you.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 4710	Posted - 2014.03.31 04:31:00 - [4] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: But it doesn't make sense, or work. I'm all for creating things that have a clearly defined and useful role - this idea doesn't. If I want someone dead I shoot them, If I want shields back I take cover, I don't try to stand there while someone is shooting me trying to open the equipment wheel to select a non-useful piece of equipment, lock the target while they're still shooting me just so I can drain their shields and maybe hope they have enough shield for the amount I'm stealing to keep me alive until they run out of bullets so I can switch back to an actual weapon and kill them. How about, you've got an enemy Scout on you, and your shields are low, and they have better shield regen stats than you, so they can duck into cover then pop back out to shoot you while you can't do anything that's going to last if they keep doing that? Pull the new equipment item out (and no, the equipment wheel isn't that hard to work if you know where you fitted things) and hold the trigger, run it over the Scout as they come out of cover, and if your shields are low, you'll be siphoning theirs off as they try to hurt you. They lose shields and take cover, then pop out with full shields again, and you just siphon their shields off once again, leaving them only hurting themselves instead of you. They can either retreat or stick around until you get reinforcements, but in the meantime, this neat little item turned a losing encounter into a stalemate. Maybe you've got a Caldari Heavy coming at you and you're at a disadvantage because you brought an armour-focused weapon. Pop out your shield siphoning tool, strip a chunk of their shields while keeping your own shields from dropping as fast as they normally would against HMG fire, then step back out with your gun ready to rip apart the now-vulnerable Heavy. It would need to be carefully balanced with how fast it drains (and replenishes) HP, but if it's high enough to provide significant damage mitigation, I can see plenty of scenarios where such a tool would be useful. Quote: If suits or vehicles had capacitor, capacitor warfare devices might be useful. But this piece of equipment(? is it supposed to be a weapon?) doesn't fill any real clearly defined useful role. It lets you combine damage (limited to shields) and self-repair into a single tool. It's not a killing blow, but it can help. And nobody is saying this IS cap warfare, it's clearly not. The comparison was drawn to the Nosferatu purely on the basis that both ideas involve siphoning something away from an enemy and into yourself. Quote: A shield repper fills a clear role - you use it to help out shield based teammates. A drop uplink fills a clear role - a new mobile deployable spawn point. A scanner fills a clear role - you use it to get advanced intel on suits you cannot see. A stasis webifier that slowed down enemy vehicles massively would fill a clear and useful role - a support tool that helps enable squadmates to apply damage to vehicles. This 'energy vampire' is a confused little device, it doesn't fill any clear role or (as described) any niche that really serves a purpose. If something which reduces an enemy's capabilities while increasing your own at the same time is confusing to you, then you probably wouldn't be able to understand EVE Online. Of course, you obviously DO have a clear understanding of how the Nosferatu helps a player in EVE, so that negates that possibility, which leaves only the possibility that you're actively trying to NOT understand how a similar item that's more tuned to the mechanics of DUST could be useful. Quote: When designing a prospective piece of equipment it should be very, very clear of purpose and fill a niche in a unique and purposeful way. Like how the cloak has the clear purpose of letting its user sneak around an enemy position and hit them from behind, and it fills that niche in the unique and purposeful way of being just as useful for sneaking AWAY after getting in close and killing without cloaking first, or for slipping past another player undetected to reach a hack point faster, and for many other nasty tricks. And like how the LAV has the clear purpose of being a fast-moving transport option, and it fills that niche in the unique and purposeful way of being an effective mobile weapon platform as well as a portable/deployable turret-mounted weapon. And like how REs have the clear purpose of being used to set traps by planting them somewhere and detonating them when an enemy is in the area, and that's why they made them stick to vehicles so they can also be used as an effective anti-tank weapon without needing to be set up in advance. And like how Flux grenades have the clear purpose of being used to take out an enemy's shields, and that's why they also take out any equipment in the blast radius and there's discussion about them possibly having the ability to disrupt cloaking as well. And like how Blaster Turrets have the clear purpose of being the anti-infantry turret, except that they clearly have the purpose of being good against both infantry and vehicles, but are only effective at close range. Seriously, have CCP even decided what Blaster Turrets are meant to be doing yet? If there weren't a handful of items in DUST and EVE which don't clearly fit a specific and defined single role, and if most dropsuits and vehicles in DUST and most ships in EVE were fitted into distinct roles with no flexibility to operate outside their intended purpose, then this argument would make sense. The Nosferatu doesn't fit a single clearly defined role. Depending on the scenario, it can be useful to weaken the enemy's cap or to top up your own - it's not specific about which it has to be used for. It can be an offensive weapon for weakening an enemy or a defensive tool for buffing yourself depending on how the ship is fitted and how the device is used.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 4710	Posted - 2014.03.31 04:52:00 - [5] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: I refuse to bother actually arguing againsy valid points, so I edit your post to try and make you sound stupid. Hey look! I can do it too. And AS I SAID, it would need to be balanced to have a significant effect, and it would need to be capable of mitigating significant damage from an enemy, but if they did, it would be viable in a lot of situations where a gun simply won't cut it. Just like how the Nosferatu is viable for a lot of different situations. Just like how a Scout suit can be viable for a lot of different roles. Just like how almost every item in both EVE and DUST will be used in different ways by different players using the same item in otherwise different fittings. And how almost every item in both EVE and DUST can be used in different ways by the same player on the same fitting in different scenarios.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 4710	Posted - 2014.03.31 04:59:00 - [6] - Quote BARDAS wrote: Can I get sparkly skin and rock hard abs to go with this? Don't believe what a terrible romance novelist tells you. Those are fairies, not vampires. Real vampires don't sparkle. Canari Elphus wrote: MINA Longstrike wrote: Garrett Blacknova wrote: I want to spend a lot of time defending a bad piece of equipment Hahaha, no, bad equipment is bad. I like how you really really tried to make situations where it might be useful but unless it's providing 400-800hp/s it won't be - and those are average numbers for how much damage various weapons do per second, with the upper end belonging to the HMG that cal heavy is likely to be packing and he can shoot that for longer than 1 second. Plain and simple it's a very, very poorly thought out idea that tries to shoehorn something awesome from eve into dust, where it would be less than awesome. There is no situation that you can describe where this would be more useful than simply shooting the ****ing enemy in front of you, except potentially against vehicles, where it might still suck if it works as you've described it. But it does work if you make it vehicle versus vehicle if cap was introduced where vehicle mods drained it. Tank vs Tank battle. Tank A nos' Tank B which drains down its cap. This means that Tank A can run its Hardeners/Reppers longer while Tank B can only do it for a shorter period of time. Or, a Logi DS drains Tank B while providing remote reps or remote shield boosts to Tank A. This isnt something that will be immediately implemented but does give some good thought to how warfare can play out on larger maps with more players on the map. Having tank squads on large maps would become a thing and would necessitate the need for something like a Logi DS and EWar The thread was proposing a weaponised version of the Nosferatu which reduces enemy health (I've suggested as a more reasonable option to only reduce shields) and NOT cap warfare, which both people you've quoted have acknowledged as something different. This is still a form of EWAR, but it's a more directly damaging EWAR option rather than the stealth/scanning, webifiers and cap warfare you see in EVE.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 4710	Posted - 2014.03.31 05:08:00 - [7] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Garrett Blacknova wrote: wah wah wah, my points were refuted, I'm just going to call names and try to justify shoehorning things I'm surprised you're not named NarutoKenshinInuyashaIchigo, you seem to like shoehorning things that much. I like energy vampires in eve - they fill an awesome role, I don't like things that are awesome being turned into steaming piles of crap just so they can be shoehorned into other things where they don't fit. Until there's a role for them to fill or a niche where they'll be awesome and worth using (and despite trying to portray them as being worth using, they aren't) we don't need them. This 'vampire' is not an idea worth the time spent to read about it, let alone the time spent to try convincing someone who thinks it's a steaming pile that 'really it's a good idea!'. It serves no purpose and fills no role that's useful. It's not shoehorning something. It's taking inspiration from a concept that exists in-universe to create something new which I think has the potential to be interesting. Your only "refuting" of my points is saying "that makes no sense" and not explaining what it is about the idea that you're failing to understand. That doesn't "refute" anything, it just shows that you're either lacking in basic reading comprehension skills or you're being wilfully ignorant because you think this would somehow magically negate the possibility of actual cap warfare coming to DUST somewhere along the way. This proposal - no matter the comparisons drawn by the OP - is not the same as the Nosferatu. My counter-proposal which takes a slightly different perspective on the same basic idea is slightly more in line with actually making sense by established lore, but is still just as much NOT THE SAME THING as the Nosferatu. Having a tool which allows you to siphon enemy shields and add them to your own could be a very useful thing in DUST, if implemented well.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 4711	Posted - 2014.03.31 05:25:00 - [8] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: ^I'm done, have fun playing with your steaming pile. This discussion is pointless because your 'great idea' (aka. piece of crap) won't ever make it into game. So, let me get your thought process straight. 1. Fail to understand a concept. Deny its validity with "I don't get it" as the only reason why you think it's a bad idea. 2. Refuse to even try and understand the concept when it's explained in a different way, and continue to argue that it's bad without any grounds to do so. 3. Start abusing the quote system for ad hominem attacks instead of trying to defend your position, while claiming that someone who's actually reasoning things out and responding to your points directly is doing what you yourself have just done. 4. Instead of going back on topic when given an opportunity and having your ad hominem treated as a joke instead of an insult, you not only make another ad hominem attack, but turn accusations of offensive behaviour against someone who actually has valid grounds to make that claim against you instead. 5. Instead of trying to reason things out or continue to defend your position against your not-easily-offended opponent in this discussion, you ragequit the thread and claim that this idea will never make it into the game just because you still haven't bothered to try and understand how it could be useful and interesting.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 4711	Posted - 2014.03.31 05:43:00 - [9] - Quote Canari Elphus wrote: Then I would have to side with the opposition to it as the idea stands right now. The main issues I have with a shield/armor/ehp vamp are that it would have to be an active module to begin with and would need to be AOE to not run into issues of clunkiness with lock/activation versus just shooting the guy in the first place. It would then need to be powerful enough to justify its use which, agian, is direct competition for just using a weapon. The only real way that drains/vamps would work is in the case of vehicles which have a much longer engagement time than infantry. An infantry battle lasts a handful of seconds at most which would make some sort of drain hard to balance between being useful and extremely overpowered. I like that people are trying to adapt EWAR ideas to Dust but I just dont think it would work well enough in this case. THANK YOU! This is a well-reasoned argument against the idea. The mechanics as currently proposed are a pretty rough idea, to be sure. While discussing this, I've been thinking about ways in which some kind of shield siphoning item could work in DUST. The most obvious option - if you're assuming infantry - is an equipment item like a Repair Tool. You hold the trigger and just have to swipe your crosshair over an enemy to lock and start draining their shields. A suit with low shield HP like a Gallente Assault could use something like this against a shield-tanked Caldari Heavy suit as a way to bridge the HP gap between the two suits, but only if the drain rate was at least 75% of the DPS of the enemy's weapon. Against a Heavy running HMG, that would mean something like 800 HP/s shield drain, which would basically result in both the Heavy and the Assault losing all their shields in a matter of seconds, and probably let a small amount of damage through onto the Assault while doing so. Another option - which would be great as a Gallente weapon, would be to use the Grenade slot for a deployable shield siphon drone that drains HP from nearby enemy shields and pours a reduced amount of that energy into its user. This would work well because it's a shield-focused weapon, which Gallente are good at thanks to their experience fighting Caldari, and because Drones are one of Gallente's specialties. Also, by not getting in the way of shooting, it allows for the device to be much less powerful while still remaining useful. It would also be possible to have a similar system scaled up to work with vehicles. Something like this could also have potential as an area denial weapon if it was capable of targeting multiple opponents in range, because that would simultaneously strengthen the user and weaken any attackers when they get into close quarters. A deployable shield siphon equipment item could also work. Place it down and it takes shields SLOWLY from enemies in the area while projecting the HP into nearby friendly units. It could be set up so it only works when there are both friendly and enemy units in the radius, or it could siphon HP from enemies whenever they're in range, but only replenish the shields of a friendly unit who's in range while an enemy is being drained. As with the previous proposal, this would be useful without needing to be as powerful as a handheld option, but without being as much of a Gallente-specific concept. Regardless of if this is implemented or how, I think it's an interesting idea and one that's well worth discussing. Not many online games have anything like this (there was a "drain" ability in a couple of the Transformers games made by High Moon Studios, but that's the only recent example I can think of).
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 4712	Posted - 2014.03.31 06:11:00 - [10] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: 1 & 2) I understood it. I pointed that it was useless, unnecessary, contrived and shoehorned in manners that don't make sense. There are plenty of reasons why it's bad. 3) You started the mudslinging first bud, and you refuse to concede any ground as to why it might be ***ing terrible with your 'well you could vamp scouts or heavies and out-rep their 400-800 dps weapons!' 4) I've been on topic for quite some time, especially when pointing out that it doesn't fill any role and that maybe if it was altered to be used against vehicles and reduce module times / rep amounts it might* be useful 5) Me choosing to walk away from a 'discussion' that is going in circles doesn't mean you've 'won' it, especially when you're re-treading ad-hominem, belligerence, bad ideas and misunderstanding. 1&2) You concede that it could be useful IF a certain condition is met, then WITHOUT EXPLAINING WHY, dismiss that possibility as "absurd". And insist that it's useless because of that. Your ONLY reason given for why it's bad is that you don't understand how it would be good. Beyond that, your argument is "there are lots of reasons" without you specifying what those reasons are. 3) Show me where I said something negative about you BEFORE you did the same to me. I said you were ignoring the arguments presented when you were. I never accused you of whining, crying or being stupid. I left that to you. You're the one being insulting, not me. 4) You had been on topic, but claiming not to understand. You got annoyed at me explaining things and started focusing on your frustration with me instead of the points I was making. You had only presented one argument which boiled down to "I don't understand" and didn't bother to explain further when that argument started falling apart on you. 5) I'm not saying I "won" anything. I'm saying that you're not arguing effectively, and are projecting your own flaws onto someone else to try and claim moral superiority while ragequitting a discussion that could go better if you actually brought up valid points instead of using "I don't understand" and "there are lots of reasons" as your entire argument. Quote: I understand quite well what your item is 'supposed' to do, that's why I've said it's worthless - to be of use it would have to bring in more hp than an opponent is reasonably able to dps down, which puts the numbers somewhere in the 400-1000 hp/s ballpark, which is an absurd number. You essentially want a device that makes you unkillable and you have enough time to switch to in a hectic firefight to use. Why is it unreasonable for an item to drain a significant amount of HP per second from an enemy when it's reasonable for a Flux Grenade to do more damage in an instant than the highest proposal you've allowed for this to drain over the course of a whole second? And why does it have to be used to 100% negate damage? And what would be wrong with something being useful to not NEGATE damage, but to effectively REFLECT some of that damage back on the attacker, when the device is limited to only affecting shields, and even then only when the enemy's shields are higher than your own? Also, why are you assuming that you'd switch to this in the middle of a hectic firefight, and not use it situationally when it's appropriate? It's perfectly reasonable to have items that work in encounters away from the front lines, or for battles to be fought as a series of small squad vs. squad encounters rather than always being 16 players per side all piled into one corner of the map. Quote: I want you to answer some questions, because I'm tired of trying to tell you why it's a bad idea, I'll have you do that yourself: What role would it have? Exactly what it's described as having. Reducing enemy shields while replenishing your own. That could mean it's good for high alpha damage on shield-tanked suits to soften them up before hitting with armour-damaging weapons. It could also be useful as a sneak attack option when you're low on health but have an opportunity to not only hurt the enemy, but heal yourself. You keep arguing that there are lots of reasons it's bad, and present no examples. I've presented examples before which show how this COULD be useful and your only argument is that something which is limited to only draining shields AND only draining them to the level of your own shields would somehow have to be OP to be useful. Now you have more reasons from me. Come up with a better counter to them this time, please? Is it necessary? Is EWAR "necessary" or would DUST function as a shooter without it? Are Flux Grenades "necessary" or can you kill shield-tanked enemies without them? Is it "necessary" for EVE Online to have its own FPS game at all? Was a full range of Rifles with only moderately different stats "necessary" or could they have just reskinned the AR variants and given us 4 Rifles that way? Hardly anything in this game is truly necessary. But at the same time, it's something that would provide diversity, and would fill a role that currently ISN'T being filled (active shield repair) while differentiating HOW that role is achieved from armour (self-repair as opposed to repairing others). Why would a race known for armour tanking develop a device which weakens enemy shields down to their level? After rewording that question, do you still need to ask? And why are you still assuming it HAS to be weaker than shooting? It has its own drawbacks. Would it be balanced? The fact that it is directly incapable of killing might help with that. You might be weakening your enemy, but you're letting them damage you as well in order to do it. Would CCP get the balance right first time? Maybe not. But it COULD be balanced if they worked on it. Does it add to the game experience in a meaningful manner? If done right, I think it could.

Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 4712	Posted - 2014.03.31 06:23:00 - [11] - Quote Canari Elphus wrote: My issue with the repair tool esque version is that I just dont think the merc would survive long enough to actually be able to use it. - Time it takes to switch from weapon to the vamp unit - Time it takes to lock on and activate unit - Time it takes to start receiving benefit of unit - Time it takes to switch back to weapon to engage enemy This process seems way to involved for a situation that is usually over and done with in the space of 2-3 seconds. The merc would proabably be dead towards the end of the second step. As a non-brick-tanked Scout who often uses a Shotgun, most of my fights are over pretty fast. When I'm running as an Assault or one of my non-Shotgun Scout fittings, killing a Heavy rarely involves less than a 10 second back-and-forth from cover to cover and back again. -Time it takes to switch to vamp unit (negated because you draw it before engaging) -Time it takes to lock on and activate (much like repair tool, lock is instant when you line up on target) -Time it takes to start receiving benefit (would need to be instant or nearly so to make the device useful) -Time it takes to switch back to weapon (and this is part of the reason it couldn't be OP - you can't kill the enemy with it, so you need to back off when switching weapons, possibly giving the opponent a chance to retreat as well. It would be useful for for lighter suits fighting against heavier suits because they can use the device against an unaware enemy to siphon off a lot of shield HP, then get into cover before taking significant damage, and use their short delay and fast regen to come back full-force before the enemy has a chance to recover. Quote: My concern of the deployable equipment type is how to avoid the chances for spamming it in cqc areas around objectives to the point that it becomes game breaking. Even if only one merc could deploy it at a time, you have 6, 6, and 4 deployed around 3 objectives and it becomes a ridiculous sway in the favor of the defending team. It also means that the more people that are pushing, the greater the benefit for the defenders. I just have the feeling that this would be incredibly abused. If enemies could only be targeted by a single device at a time, so multiples wouldn't stack, and if a player could only have their shields replenished at 80% efficiency as a base with stacking penalties applying when multiple enemies are being drained, that could balance out those concerns. The biggest issue I can see for deployables is what to award WP for. The hand-held self-repair version could easily just be "no WP, it counts as damage to enemy" so if you kill them you get nothing extra, but if a teammate kills the target you get the assist.