Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Liang Nuren
The Aduro Protocol Talon Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 00:08:00 -
[31]
Your entire argument is fundamentally flawed and shows a severe misunderstanding of the game. Some examples: - Being unprobeable wasn't introduced ex post facto - it actually included in the first introduction of the scanning system and people found ways to make it happen with T3s (along side many ships up to battlecruiser sized). - Capping sensor strength vs sig radius means that you cap how well someone can resist being jammed. Smooth move there, slick. - Becoming unprobeable comes with significant sacrifices - a "tight specialization" if you will. This is a significant enough penalty that I'd wonder if they wouldn't make more ISK in high sec than missioning in 0.0/lowsec. Especially if they fit the covops mod and interdiction nullifier. - Being unprobeable doesn't offer many advantages over being cloaked from a PVP perspective. You can't effectively attack someone, but you can give bonuses and collect intel in local. Well, I suppose I have to give this one to the cloaked ship seeing as how it can do all that but doesn't so significantly affect its actual combat abilities. - Dealing with unprobeable mission runners (this seems to be your primary beef) is extremely easy. They are still vulnerable on gates and stations, and people regularly kill recons on gates and stations and T3 are not any different. To put it bluntly, if you can't kill an unprobeable ship in your stomping grounds, it's because YOU fail. - Complaining about someone having nor isk of ninjaing or item stealing is pretty ****ing LOL. There's lots of ways to do that, and my Golem has never had anyone enter the mission and steal loot or salvage. - T3 has a much heftier penalty for loss. Show me another ship that forces skillpoint loss.
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 00:55:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha on 11/03/2010 01:01:27
Quote:
- Being unprobeable wasn't introduced ex post facto - it actually included in the first introduction of the scanning system and people found ways to make it happen with T3s (along side many ships up to battlecruiser sized).
I know this, and does not change it should not be possible to do it, on any ship.
Actually I always found it quite peculiar that boosting sensor strength on yourself you affect another stat, but I suppose this is just another residual of who knows what ancient past.
Quote:
- Becoming unprobeable comes with significant sacrifices - a "tight specialization" if you will. This is a significant enough penalty that I'd wonder if they wouldn't make more ISK in high sec than missioning in 0.0/lowsec. Especially if they fit the covops mod and interdiction nullifier.
If it was significant enough, people would not apply it on every opportunity.
Quote:
- Being unprobeable doesn't offer many advantages over being cloaked from a PVP perspective. You can't effectively attack someone, but you can give bonuses and collect intel in local
Never said being cloaked should not be looked at all of its advantages and eventually nerfed. It's another escamotage to reward for no risk after all.
Quote:
- Dealing with unprobeable mission runners (this seems to be your primary beef) is extremely easy. They are still vulnerable on gates and stations
Because safe spots don't exist and you MUST dock with the T3 ship even just to get more ammo, no way you could do that with an alt in a cheaper ship. Oh wait...
Quote:
and people regularly kill recons on gates and stations and T3 are not any different
Recons are strong ships but don't go beyond "the rules" after all. Killing a T3 on a gate? I dare say it might be harder.
Quote:
To put it bluntly, if you can't kill an unprobeable ship in your stomping grounds, it's because YOU fail.
Apparently, the "can't kill an unprobeable ship" works so well that everyone and their dog fit that kit. It's like nano again or like falcons again. When it becomes a MUST to do a certain way, it means the game is imbalanced towards that way and you know that sooner or later it will get axed. Nevertheless, for every blatantly overpowered feature, there's always a fat group of benefitters who find it just fine. What I can read here is really nothing, nothing new that I have not found in the many years I play MMOs. A new game feature is introduced, insufficient testing does not let the developers cover every hole and of course there's a mob of people working 24/7 to find every possible opening to take advantage. Of course they find it perfect, fine and appropriate to use these misfeatures and will beat on everyone who is not hypocrital enough to join the clapping mob.
Quote:
- Complaining about someone having nor isk of ninjaing or item stealing is pretty ****ing LOL. There's lots of ways to do that, and my Golem has never had anyone enter the mission and steal loot or salvage.
Yup, you have to use some very, very basic diligence in your Golem though. That's what makes the Golem fine.
Quote:
- T3 has a much heftier penalty for loss. Show me another ship that forces skillpoint loss
The loss is because you fly a small signature yet powerful and tanked ship, not because you are permitted to circumvent being found.
- Auditing & consulting
When looking for investors, please read http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h + http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
Liang Nuren
The Aduro Protocol Talon Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 01:40:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
If it was significant enough, people would not apply it on every opportunity.
I've seen lots of requests for unprobeable mission runners, but very few in space. And the ones I've seen in space i can probe. I think you're jumping at theoretical shadows here.
Quote:
Never said being cloaked should not be looked at all of its advantages and eventually nerfed. It's another escamotage to reward for no risk after all.
Nerfing cloaking also nerfs the ability of the few to wage war against the many in *any* fashion. I'd be -1 to a cloak nerf.
Quote: Because safe spots don't exist and you MUST dock with the T3 ship even just to get more ammo, no way you could do that with an alt in a cheaper ship. Oh wait...
Because missions are all in the same system and you don't have to dock to get more missions, and involving more than one character doesn't always bring more advantages..... Oh wait...
Quote: Recons are strong ships but don't go beyond "the rules" after all. Killing a T3 on a gate? I dare say it might be harder. Apparently, the "can't kill an unprobeable ship" works so well that everyone and their dog fit that kit.
Dare say it all you want, it doesn't change the FACT that it's not any harder than killing a recon - and in some ways it's actually easier. But in the end all your post is boiling down to is BBBBBAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!! Besides, don't you have 7B isk to pay off before you can waste our time about how you fail at PVP?
Quote: It's like nano again or like falcons again. When it becomes a MUST to do a certain way, it means the game is imbalanced towards that way and you know that sooner or later it will get axed.
Yep, all the PVE threads are about unprobeable Tengus. That's right folks, you heard it here. Haven't seen a CNR/Raven/Domi/Abaddon/Paladin/Nightmare/Nighthawk/Caracal/Drake/Bomber/Blah PVE thread in months!
Quote:
What I can read here is really nothing, nothing new that I have not found in the many years I play MMOs. A new game feature is introduced, insufficient testing does not let the developers cover every hole and of course there's a mob of people working 24/7 to find every possible opening to take advantage. Of course they find it perfect, fine and appropriate to use these misfeatures and will beat on everyone who is not hypocrital enough to join the clapping mob.
Oh, and btw, I *DO* choose to be scannable (and not in a Tengu no less!) in hostile systems so that I can have an edge in PVE. WHOOPS BECAUSE NOBODY DOES THAT.
Quote: The loss is because you fly a small signature yet powerful and tanked ship, not because you are permitted to circumvent being found.
Yes, because nobody has ever been able to fly around in good small ships before.
-Liang
-- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire |
Chirjo Durruti
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 05:05:00 -
[34]
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 10/03/2010 18:37:36
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha Salvaging while doing the mission is a good start. Shooting the wrecks at least denies them the stuff but I have yet to resort to it due to the above.
Ummm, so your solution for someone doing say, level 3 missions is to fit salvagers and tractor beams on their Caracal and race the ninjaer to them, or let me guess, they should L3 on Marauders?
I do lvl3 missions with a Myrmidon. It has tractor and salvager on it. I did some lvl3 with a vexor (even "Probing Question"), it had a salvager.
|
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 07:55:00 -
[35]
Setups with great sensor strength should be much harder to probe (like they're harder to jamm), not completely immune.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 08:01:00 -
[36]
Quote:
I've seen lots of requests for unprobeable mission runners, but very few in space
That's the whole point of the thread. You are not meant to see them in space, they would not even buy a T3 if you could.
Quote:
Nerfing cloaking also nerfs the ability of the few to wage war against the many in *any* fashion. I'd be -1 to a cloak nerf.
At DR we started in like 5-10 people in early 2009 and ended in 150 men fleets by Nov 2009. Failure to attract players with a solid corp should not be hedged by using a module imho.
Quote:
Because missions are all in the same system and you don't have to dock to get more missions, and involving more than one character doesn't always bring more advantages..... Oh wait...
Last time I checked, you don't have to dock in a T3 to turn in a mission.
Quote:
Besides, don't you have 7B isk to pay off before you can waste our time about how you fail at PVP?
Oh, but by missioning (the other overpowered thing you frothe at the mouth to defend so much) I am half done already. With 1 BPC + minerals + some self made T2 modules and a 150k shield (what is it in total?), in 2 hours a day, I am earning almost 30% a month of what Varo Jan is earning with a 150 BILLIONS investment in the research alliance he purchased.
Quote:
Yes, because nobody has ever been able to fly around in good small ships before.
Of course those inties and cov ops have a battleship-alike tank and gank!
Quote:
Setups with great sensor strength should be much harder to probe (like they're harder to jamm), not completely immune.
That's exactly my whole point.
- Auditing & consulting
When looking for investors, please read http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h + http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
Daniel Cordova
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 12:59:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Kadesh Priestess Setups with great sensor strength should be much harder to probe (like they're harder to jamm), not completely immune.
Then the same should be for cloaking.
|
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 13:08:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Daniel Cordova
Originally by: Kadesh Priestess Setups with great sensor strength should be much harder to probe (like they're harder to jamm), not completely immune.
Then the same should be for cloaking.
I don't see any parallels or logic here, care to explain?
|
Daniel Cordova
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 14:09:00 -
[39]
Cloaks/recons have the ability to collect valuable intel in null sec and even prey on miners/ratters. It's what they're for. And they also cannot be probed.
If your argument is that it isn't fair some ships cannot be probed then logically your argument should also extend to recons not being able to be probed. Why would you include one and exclude the other?
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar Special Projects Executive The Obsidian Legion
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 14:59:00 -
[40]
I wasn't going to comment on this issue, just because I know nothing I say is going to convince anyone of anything - but whatever. I've never been known for my ability to keep my mouth shut, even when I should.
I found this loadout on battle clinc of an unprobable Loki that had received decent ratings (23+, 0-). http://eve.battleclinic.com/loadout/33477-Unscannable-Uber-Skirmish-Boosting-Loki-100km-point.html
I have no idea what you lot are on about. This ship has absolutely no tank at all, and has one frigate sized T2 autocannon. I get that it can provide significant bonuses to a fleet, but in reality there's nothing stopping you from adding one of your own.
Additionally, as has already been point out, you can catch them on gates if you have a skilled interceptor pilot that can catch cloaking ships, so the ship isn't invulnerable and the niche it fills is a tiny one - if it deviates from that role, even slightly, it's absolutely screwed.
I'm sorry, and I know I won't convince you (specifically the OP) but I can't support your proposal because, frankly, I don't see the problem. --Vel
Forum Mom: Spanking the snot out of little brats. |
|
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 16:03:00 -
[41]
Edited by: Kadesh Priestess on 11/03/2010 16:04:39
Originally by: Daniel Cordova Cloaks/recons have the ability to collect valuable intel in null sec and even prey on miners/ratters. It's what they're for. And they also cannot be probed.
If your argument is that it isn't fair some ships cannot be probed then logically your argument should also extend to recons not being able to be probed. Why would you include one and exclude the other?
Then why wouldn't you fit cloak to your missionrunning ship instead of loads of ECCMs? Because it doesn't allow you to do anything except for flying around?
When you fit ECCMs - you should sacrifice efficiency of your ship, gaining more time to bail when you see probes (not to become completely immune to them, because your ship is still able to do various things including killing NPCs). When you fit cloak - you reduce PvE/gang boosting efficiency of your ship to zero, making it impossible to scan you. I don't see any irrationality here.
|
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 16:48:00 -
[42]
Why does your sensor strength have anything to do with how difficult it is to probe you down? That's what I would like to know. Why isn't it simply a function of your sig radius? If CCP just changed the equation, none of this would be an issue. If you want to disappear, use a cloak.
Fix Local |
Daniel Cordova
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 17:14:00 -
[43]
Edited by: Daniel Cordova on 11/03/2010 17:24:53
Originally by: Kadesh Priestess Then why wouldn't you fit cloak to your missionrunning ship instead of loads of ECCMs? Because it doesn't allow you to do anything except for flying around?
Because just as a recon ship needs to be cloaked in order to perform its job properly (itÆs why itÆs called a recon) an NPCÆing setup T3 needs sensor boosters to NPC properly (i.e., what it's meant for). The bonus of the dissolution sequencer applies to ECCM modules, not cloaks. ItÆs like fitting ECCM on a recon instead of the covert ops cloak. Why would you do that?
Quote: When you fit ECCMs - you should sacrifice efficiency of your ship
Then youÆll be happy to know you are sacrificing efficiency. Run a plex with max tank/gank and then run the same plex with ECCMs fit instead. Compare results. When T3 ships fit ECCM modules they are gimping their tank/gank. They cannot hurt you and therefore will not be a threat to you.
Quote: gaining more time to bail when you see probes (not to become completely immune to them, because your ship is still able to do various things including killing NPCs). When you fit cloak - you reduce PvE/gang boosting efficiency of your ship to zero, making it impossible to scan you. I don't see any irrationality here.
Recons arenÆt specialized in PVE/gang boosting, therefore the fact that they lose efficiency in those areas is irrelevant. What they donÆt lose efficiency on even when cloaked is the ability to recon (i.e. gather intel). In fact, because they are cloaked they are even better suited to do their job and thus their efficiency is higher in the area they are meant to fulfill.
D.C.
|
Lugalzagezi666
|
Posted - 2010.03.11 18:25:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha But what is the counter to an unscannable ship? None that I know.
You can still catch it on gates or stations.
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha Wasn't the bubble advantage big enough?
No. And id say its still isnt enough when you take into consideration that t3s are around 500m and cost you 4 days of training when you die.
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha Since those scan immune ships can still accomplish the missions, it means the downsides are negligible vs the advantage of denying PvP.
Its understandable that pve ship is avoiding pvp. But player still have to dock/jump the gate to complete mission, get new missions, refit and get ammo = it definitely isnt invulnerable.
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha In fact it's basically a "de facto" standard to make the ship immune to scan as soon as the ship is going to "risk" PvP
It isnt standard, you are giving up alot of ships potential by making it unprobeable.
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha unscannable in missions = no risk of ninjaing, no risk of mission item stealing, all mechanics CCP wanted to have
Its counter to this mechanic. Again, you are giving up alot of ships potential by countering ninjaing through making ship unprobeable.
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha This also brings a negative impact on other ships who have to pay dearly (aka tight specialization) for their ability to perform tasks that can still be effectively done in a lone T3 ship.
No.
Generally - its a whine of 'pvper' /hard to call ppl who hunt down pve ships real pvpers/ who is not able to probe down mission runners in system he lives and is too lazy to do a proper camp.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.03.12 13:04:00 -
[45]
Quote:
But what is the counter to an unscannable ship? None that I know. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can still catch it on gates or stations
You could also catch pre-nerf nano ships and falcons!
Quote:
Its understandable that pve ship is avoiding pvp. But player still have to dock/jump the gate to complete mission, get new missions, refit and get ammo = it definitely isnt invulnerable.
The player can dock, turn in missions and get ammo in a cov ops or even a shuttle, all it takes is an alt. In my case it's even easier, as (expecially for non empire agents, so I can just switch standings alt and reuse the pilots) I do everything in station with an alt, the pilots just kill the stuff.
As for changing system, it's what having multiple L4 Q20 agents in the system is for, and in case of real need to leave, it's still possible to come and go near downtime with impunity.
Quote:
It isnt standard, you are giving up alot of ships potential by making it unprobeable
You trade the complete impossibility of doing a PLEX or mission there, with the possibility to do it. Sure, on paper it's giving up a lot but it's the enabler to do what you could not otherwise.
Quote:
Generally - its a whine of 'pvper'
All you need is to head on the mission forum to see what I am doing ATM: exclusively mission.
Of course you cannot even begin to believe that someone can be different from the standard "what makes me immediate easy profit I approve and justify regardless of whether it's good or bad" and thus call nerfs against his own professions for the sake of game long term good.
- Auditing & consulting
When looking for investors, please read http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h + http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
XXSketchxx
Gallente Remote Soviet Industries Important Internet Spaceship League
|
Posted - 2010.03.12 13:28:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
You could also catch pre-nerf nano ships and falcons!
what a terrible argument
nanoships and falcons completely skewed pvp...unscannable ships are rare and hardly affect anyone
Quote:
The player can dock, turn in missions and get ammo in a cov ops or even a shuttle, all it takes is an alt. In my case it's even easier, as (expecially for non empire agents, so I can just switch standings alt and reuse the pilots) I do everything in station with an alt, the pilots just kill the stuff.
As for changing system, it's what having multiple L4 Q20 agents in the system is for, and in case of real need to leave, it's still possible to come and go near downtime with impunity.
Regardless, the pilot is being limited. They are having to be extremely careful and take extraordinary precautions to stay alive. Unscannable ships have opened up a new door for missioners, albeit with a few strings attached.
_____________________________________________
-Sketch, Certified Pharmacist
Need a Boost?
|
MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.03.12 15:16:00 -
[47]
Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 12/03/2010 15:20:09
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha The player can dock, turn in missions and get ammo in a cov ops or even a shuttle, all it takes is an alt. In my case it's even easier, as (expecially for non empire agents, so I can just switch standings alt and reuse the pilots) I do everything in station with an alt, the pilots just kill the stuff.
Your problem seems to be with alts. But your real intention is to nerf something you can't gank with your PVP ship while it's at its most vulnerable, doing PVE. So CCP comes up with a ship that counters that and naturally now you want a counter to that counter.
Quote: As for changing system, it's what having multiple L4 Q20 agents in the system is for, and in case of real need to leave, it's still possible to come and go near downtime with impunity.
This isn't a problem inherent to T3 ships. In fact, this isn't a problem at all. But you're better off arguing that placing too many hi quality agents in one system creates an unfair ability to pick and choose missions. But like I said, your true motive and gripe is not being able to gank PVE ships with your PVP gank squad of death. But you won't say this. You come under different pretenses. But meh, whatever.
Quote: You trade the complete impossibility of doing a PLEX or mission there, with the possibility to do it. Sure, on paper it's giving up a lot but it's the enabler to do what you could not otherwise.
On paper? Have you even ever tried stuffing a T3 with ECCM and compared its efficiency with a non-ECCM version? You don't seem to even understand you're giving up DPS AND tank. You say you're a mission runner, but are you really? From what you say you don't seem to run missions a lot.
Quote: Of course you cannot even begin to believe that someone can be different from the standard "what makes me immediate easy profit I approve and justify regardless of whether it's good or bad" and thus call nerfs against his own professions for the sake of game long term good.
And by "game long term good" you really mean be able to gank even the one ship that specializes in countering attacks to a PVE setup. Gotcha.
Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today! |
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
|
Posted - 2010.03.12 15:25:00 -
[48]
Edited by: Kadesh Priestess on 12/03/2010 15:26:05
Originally by: Daniel Cordova Because just as a recon ship needs to be cloaked in order to perform its job properly (itÆs why itÆs called a recon) an NPCÆing setup T3 needs sensor boosters to NPC properly (i.e., what it's meant for). The bonus of the dissolution sequencer applies to ECCM modules, not cloaks. ItÆs like fitting ECCM on a recon instead of the covert ops cloak. Why would you do that? ... Recons arenÆt specialized in PVE/gang boosting, therefore the fact that they lose efficiency in those areas is irrelevant. What they donÆt lose efficiency in even when cloaked is the ability to recon (i.e. gather intel). In fact, because they are cloaked they are invulnerable and thus able to perform their job at a much higher efficiency!
I'm talking about PvE aspect only here. Titan also can bridge ships from safety, performing its role well, recons/covops can too (but guess what? Covops don't have bubble immunity subsystem and can be caught easily after jumping to other systems by some nice camp).
And - dissolution sequencer doesn't boost ECCM bonus, it just boosts your sensor strength.
Originally by: Daniel Cordova Then youÆll be happy to know you are sacrificing efficiency. Run a plex with max tank/gank and then run the same plex with ECCMs fit instead. Compare results. When T3 ships fit ECCM modules they are gimping their tank/gank. They cannot hurt you and therefore will not be a threat to you.
I still can do 4 lvl missions in it. Its efficiency is less, but far from being zero.
|
MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.03.12 15:44:00 -
[49]
Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 12/03/2010 15:58:27
Originally by: Kadesh Priestess I'm talking about PvE aspect only here.
Of course you are. Wouldn't want your advocated nerf to interfere with YOUR playstyle. That's what it boils down to.
"CCP, please nerf PVE... But leave my cloaks and PVP alone".
Quote: Titan also can bridge ships from safety, performing its role well, recons/covops can too (but guess what? Covops don't have bubble immunity subsystem and can be caught easily after jumping to other systems by some nice camp).
Ever heard of inties? I hear they're great with bumping and quick locks. And before you bring the "you can't use bubbles in lo sec" I'll just point out the bubble immune subsystem is useless in lo sec as well.
Quote: I still can do 4 lvl missions in it. Its efficiency is less, but far from being zero.
How about a friggin recon? IT DOES ITS JOB BETTER BECAUSE IT CLOAKED. IN 100% SAFETY. Let's NURF IT! But let me guess... You think those are fine .
In lo sec you pretty much have all the advantages to win a fight against a PVE fit but that still isn't enough. You seem to be so incompetent that you scream and whine to CCP to give you even a greater edge when you fight against a PVE ship. Seriously, just ask CCP to make all PVE ships on a system you jump into just flock to you and automatically line up so you can one-shot them display your killing prowess on your killboard.
Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today! |
Brisco County
Up2-NoGood Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 00:11:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Brisco County on 14/03/2010 00:15:24 Of course there is a counter to cloaking. It's called probing. At least, that's what they tell me. I have yet to probe a cloaked ship. Not much of a counter, really.
Never mind the fact that the only ships that get probing bonuses are all cloakers. Does it seem sort of strange that a ship should be its own counter?
|
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 00:14:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Brisco County Of course there is a counter to cloaking. It's called probing. At least, that's what they tell me. I have yet to probe a cloaked ship. Not much of a counter, really.
it is the other way around, cloaks are the counter to probing.
|
Brisco County
Up2-NoGood Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 01:12:00 -
[52]
What is the counter to cloaks, then?
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 01:13:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Brisco County What is the counter to cloaks, then?
sensor recalibration penalty scan res penalty speed penalty under cloak
not enough penalty for you?
|
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Amarr Dissonance Corp Primary.
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 10:16:00 -
[54]
Edited by: Nicolo da''Vicenza on 14/03/2010 10:16:37
Originally by: Liang Nuren
- Dealing with unprobeable mission runners (this seems to be your primary beef) is extremely easy. They are still vulnerable on gates and stations, and people regularly kill recons on gates and stations and T3 are not any different. To put it bluntly, if you can't kill an unprobeable ship in your stomping grounds, it's because YOU fail
ITT: camping all of your own gates and stations 23/7 to catch one ship - 'extremely easy'.
|
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Amarr Dissonance Corp Primary.
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 10:22:00 -
[55]
Originally by: darius mclever
Originally by: Brisco County What is the counter to cloaks, then?
sensor recalibration penalty scan res penalty speed penalty under cloak
not enough penalty for you?
it's a button you press that makes your ship invulnerable forever
|
Rutger Centemus
Dvice Shipyards
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 10:28:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Nicolo da'Vicenza Edited by: Nicolo da''Vicenza on 14/03/2010 10:16:37
Originally by: Liang Nuren
- Dealing with unprobeable mission runners (this seems to be your primary beef) is extremely easy. They are still vulnerable on gates and stations, and people regularly kill recons on gates and stations and T3 are not any different. To put it bluntly, if you can't kill an unprobeable ship in your stomping grounds, it's because YOU fail
ITT: camping all of your own gates and stations 23/7 to catch one ship - 'extremely easy'.
ITT: 30 second (tops) probing strikes for inability to run higher level missions in low sec solo in any semi-efficient form. As for 'impossible to catch them'? Untrue. Harder: yes; impossible: no ('even' whilst the prey is running a mission).
Originally by: Crumplecorn I prefer launching bathtubs of antimatter at my opponents over pointing an open DVD player at them, even if the bathtubs do miss a lot. So no.
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 12:48:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Nicolo da'Vicenza it's a button you press that makes your ship invulnerable forever
and one competent ceptor to decloak me on the gate.
|
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Amarr Dissonance Corp Primary.
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 14:15:00 -
[58]
Originally by: darius mclever
Originally by: Nicolo da'Vicenza it's a button you press that makes your ship invulnerable forever
and one competent ceptor to decloak me on the gate.
lol
|
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 15:50:00 -
[59]
Edited by: Kadesh Priestess on 14/03/2010 15:52:06
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Of course you are. Wouldn't want your advocated nerf to interfere with YOUR playstyle; just the one you don't like.
You still didn't answer my question... why won't you use cloak if it's so effective then?
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Ever heard of inties? I hear they're great for declaoking/bumping and quick locks. And before you bring the "you can't use bubbles in lo sec" I'll just point out the bubble immune subsystem is useless in lo sec as well.
Proper decloaking is efficient only when target which jumped into camp cannot warp from its spot and has to fly ~10 km just to get out of the bubble. T3 has interdiction nullifier which helps to get out of the bubble anyway because even if you're decloaked, it's too late for campers.
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 How about a friggin recon? IT DOES ITS JOB BETTER BECAUSE IT'S CLOAKED. IN 100% SAFETY. Let's NURF IT! But let me guess... You think those are fine .
Ye, what's wrong with force recons?
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 In lo sec you pretty much have all the advantages to win a fight against a PVE fit but that still isn't enough. You seem to be so incompetent that you scream and whine to CCP to give you even a greater edge when you fight against a PVE ship. Seriously, just ask CCP to make all PVE ships on a system you jump into just flock to you and automatically line up so you can one-shot them and display your killing prowess on your killboard.
Raging is poor argument. Go fit a cloak on your PvE ship and prove that it's still efficient (and even more efficient than immune to probers setups)!
|
MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 16:44:00 -
[60]
Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 14/03/2010 16:55:35
Originally by: Kadesh Priestess You still didn't answer my question... why won't you use cloak if it's so effective then?
The same reason a recon wouldn't load up on ECCMs instead of a cloak, because the wrong tool for the job, no matter how good won't do you any good. If what you need is a hammer and someone brings you the best screwdriver in the world you're still SOL. So, how exactly will a T3 fit for plexing do his job cloaked? And why would you not want a T3 to do the job it's meant to do while you seem to not have a problem with a recon doing his job with 100% safety?
Quote: Proper decloaking is efficient only when target which jumped into camp cannot warp from its spot and has to fly ~10 km just to get out of the bubble. T3 has interdiction nullifier which helps to get out of the bubble anyway because even if you're decloaked, it's too late for campers.
Actually this just isn't true. So arguing with you that it is possible while you argue it isn't is pointless. I'll have to leave it at that.
Quote: Ye, what's wrong with force recons?
There is absolutely nothing wrong with them. I'm pointing out that they do their job extremely well while being 100% safe. But that's what they're meant to do. Wouldn't you agree? But what I'm having trouble understanding is why would you think recons are fine and that they *should* be able to do their jobs in 100% safety while T3s shouldn't. Your response a couple of posts above was "I'm only talking PVE here" which leads me to believe you're OK with invulnerabilities in PVP but not PVE.
Then you change the conversation to "well, the interdiction nullifier makes it invulnerable". And then my response to you is that your problem is with the interdiction nullifier and why not ask CCP to nerf that instead? You still haven't proven that the dissolution sequencer is overpowered. And you really won't be able to. Because as long as you think 100% safe intel-gathering is OK but 100% safe plexing isn't your argument is hypocritical.
Quote: Go fit a cloak on your PvE ship and prove that it's still efficient (and even more efficient than immune to probers setups)!
Go fit ECCMs on a recon instead of a cloak and prove that it's still efficient (and even more efficient than immune to probers setups).
Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today! |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |