Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Mr Painless
Temnava Legion
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 14:15:00 -
[61] - Quote
@Princess Cellestia
Beleive it or not, being blind (local-wise) is a thing you can get used to pretty quickly, and it's not that dramatic. Ask any WH dweller. You constantly seem to forget that proposed cloaky local blindness works also for the "bad guys", not just you, giving you a very good chance for fighting back. It's your home they're attacking, you should ultimately have the advantage (all other things being equal). Also, the proposed change doesn't kill local entirely anyway.
As for morons living in big alliances... Morons live everywhere, big alliances are not immune to them. Teach them some sense or kick them out, it's that simple.
As for intel gathering of large fleets - well, since defenders have the advanage of fighting on their home turf, with POSes, JBs, and outposts at their disposal, the attackers should at least have the option to attack with at least some element of surprise. |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
878
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 15:03:00 -
[62] - Quote
Cearain wrote:People will just start sitting cloaked around gates or bait ships. So small gangs will just get blobbed even more than they currently do. At least now small gangs can see many people in local in the same corp or alliance. Now even that limited information that helps reduce blobbing will be gone. Here is the post that explains the problem. Of course, the op just ignores the questions it raises. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=222866#post222866 I understand your concerns, but don't necessarily agree with your conclusions.
I did have a longer post, but the forum ate it.
We know one thing for sure, local is changing and it is a problem in null sec. Until we know what changes are going to be implemented, these ideas are simply forum fodder.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Maul555
Nuts and Vindictive Remix Technologies
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 17:09:00 -
[63] - Quote
just throwing my +1 in here. This idea should be seriously considered. |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
24
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 18:20:00 -
[64] - Quote
+1 I like this idea....
However: RECONS absolutely should NOT be completely exempt from the spool-up timer (up to a 50% reduction is more reasonable, depending on the full spoolup length). Recons can be well tanked, already have significant use, and really don't need the instant backup boon. The removal of a spool-up timer is perfect for BOs.
IMO, all cyno's should have a 60ish second spoolup timer, with Recons having a max 50% reduction in the timer. But that's for another thread.
Remember, Only regular cyno's can be jammed. Covert Cyno's can always be lit by a Covert Ship (CovOps, Recons, T3s).
As for whether all cloaks work to remove pilots from local.... Either way is fine... But given the common practice of cloaked alts for intel, I'd think it would be far more interesting for all cloaks to remove the pilot from local & local intel. |
Takashi Kaeda
Perkone Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 23:47:00 -
[65] - Quote
I think this is a good idea, but needs to be implemented along with a change to NPC rats to keep people ratting (and keep the targets for the uboats.) I'd also recommend that it only applies to cov ops cloaks, and regular cloaks remove your ability to see local but keep you listed.
Anyways, make it feasible to rat in PVP fits. At the very least make rats do omni or random damage-types and make them warp out in structure if you don't tackle them. That way when a bump proteus decloaks you, you'll at least stand a fighting chance.
|
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
220
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 02:49:00 -
[66] - Quote
Only one fundamental problem with it.
Local is getting removed. Sometimes the only difference between a budding genius and a blooming idiot is where they chose to take a stand. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
68
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 11:30:00 -
[67] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Cearain wrote:People will just start sitting cloaked around gates or bait ships. So small gangs will just get blobbed even more than they currently do. At least now small gangs can see many people in local in the same corp or alliance. Now even that limited information that helps reduce blobbing will be gone. Here is the post that explains the problem. Of course, the op just ignores the questions it raises. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=222866#post222866 I understand your concerns, but don't necessarily agree with your conclusions. I did have a longer post, but the forum ate it. We know one thing for sure, local is changing and it is a problem in null sec. Until we know what changes are going to be implemented, these ideas are simply forum fodder.
Well they said they were going to change it due to incarna. But now there has been a massive reassignment so its not so clear they will need to.
So I don't see what this wll accomplish other than resolve an imagined problem and make solo/small scale pvp harder to find. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Franky Sugaz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 12:34:00 -
[68] - Quote
Princess Cellestia wrote:snip
for the level of reward that an alliance like your gain owning entire regions(moon go, high level pve etc) your risk level is far too low; an alliance can owne a region for years farming it's resources to the bone to the point that they can even mass produce supercaps. Not talking about the fact that alliance war on big scale are so rare that you rarely use those supers. |
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
421
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 12:34:00 -
[69] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Mag's wrote:Cearain wrote:People will just start sitting cloaked around gates or bait ships. So small gangs will just get blobbed even more than they currently do. At least now small gangs can see many people in local in the same corp or alliance. Now even that limited information that helps reduce blobbing will be gone. Here is the post that explains the problem. Of course, the op just ignores the questions it raises. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=222866#post222866 I understand your concerns, but don't necessarily agree with your conclusions. I did have a longer post, but the forum ate it. We know one thing for sure, local is changing and it is a problem in null sec. Until we know what changes are going to be implemented, these ideas are simply forum fodder. Well they said they were going to change it due to incarna. But now there has been a massive reassignment so its not so clear they will need to. So I don't see what this wll accomplish other than resolve an imagined problem and make solo/small scale pvp harder to find.
I'm not convinced it would make small scale PvP harder to find. On the contrary, it'll work against blob warfare... good luck moving a cloaked blob around. There still should be that blink in local when someone enters a system and transitions between being "entry cloaked" and activating their own cloak, so the observant will see that... with a spool up timer on most ships before they can light off a cyno you'll have abuse minimized, and ships prepared to escape the single covops that decloaks will survive. Yeah, things would change a bit. Not only would "afk cloaking" become a thing of the past, but so would "afk mining", "afk ratting", etc. Bots would be hit most brutally. Their programming that focuses on who's in local as to whether or not it's "safe" to undock... oh, they'd feel the pain. There would be a feast of bots available, which would ultimately result in mineral prices going up and maybe, just maybe, more industrial people thinking it's worth the risk now to mine in null, however instead of it being a solo affair it would be shared with a bodyguard or three.
Ultimately, as the economy shifts and null becomes more tempting to mine in (due to bots being laid waste to) you'll find smaller PvP chances increasing I'd think... but it wouldn't be free ganks on a hulk, you'd have to deal with his friends too. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
102
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 15:27:00 -
[70] - Quote
Ingvar Angst wrote:Cearain wrote:Mag's wrote:Cearain wrote:People will just start sitting cloaked around gates or bait ships. So small gangs will just get blobbed even more than they currently do. At least now small gangs can see many people in local in the same corp or alliance. Now even that limited information that helps reduce blobbing will be gone. Here is the post that explains the problem. Of course, the op just ignores the questions it raises. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=222866#post222866 I understand your concerns, but don't necessarily agree with your conclusions. I did have a longer post, but the forum ate it. We know one thing for sure, local is changing and it is a problem in null sec. Until we know what changes are going to be implemented, these ideas are simply forum fodder. Well they said they were going to change it due to incarna. But now there has been a massive reassignment so its not so clear they will need to. So I don't see what this wll accomplish other than resolve an imagined problem and make solo/small scale pvp harder to find. I'm not convinced it would make small scale PvP harder to find. On the contrary, it'll work against blob warfare... good luck moving a cloaked blob around. There still should be that blink in local when someone enters a system and transitions between being "entry cloaked" and activating their own cloak, so the observant will see that... with a spool up timer on most ships before they can light off a cyno you'll have abuse minimized, and ships prepared to escape the single covops that decloaks will survive. Yeah, things would change a bit. Not only would "afk cloaking" become a thing of the past, but so would "afk mining", "afk ratting", etc. Bots would be hit most brutally. Their programming that focuses on who's in local as to whether or not it's "safe" to undock... oh, they'd feel the pain. There would be a feast of bots available, which would ultimately result in mineral prices going up and maybe, just maybe, more industrial people thinking it's worth the risk now to mine in null, however instead of it being a solo affair it would be shared with a bodyguard or three. Ultimately, as the economy shifts and null becomes more tempting to mine in (due to bots being laid waste to) you'll find smaller PvP chances increasing I'd think... but it wouldn't be free ganks on a hulk, you'd have to deal with his friends too.
This would also bring cohesion in more allainces and possibly condense them for protection against shadows. We can then start suggesting stealth hunter ships and modules if this was implimented. |
|
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
434
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 03:39:00 -
[71] - Quote
I don't suppose some CCP devs would mind sharing their perspective on this, or on what current thoughts are regarding local? Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
Tahna Rouspel
BWE Special Forces
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 03:58:00 -
[72] - Quote
I don't know if this will fix anything, but it sounds like an interesting mechanism that would add some complexity to the cloaking game.
Being from a wormhole, I always assume there might be a cloaked hostile. Unfortunately, there's no way of preparing for the cloakie ganks. The only defence is not playing, and not playing isn't fun. I just assume about 10% of my income will be paying ship lost and whatnot.
I try to reduce the lost by fitting my ships properly and not fighting in systems with any activity. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
68
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 11:06:00 -
[73] - Quote
Ingvar Angst wrote:Cearain wrote:Mag's wrote:Cearain wrote:People will just start sitting cloaked around gates or bait ships. So small gangs will just get blobbed even more than they currently do. At least now small gangs can see many people in local in the same corp or alliance. Now even that limited information that helps reduce blobbing will be gone. Here is the post that explains the problem. Of course, the op just ignores the questions it raises. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=222866#post222866 I understand your concerns, but don't necessarily agree with your conclusions. I did have a longer post, but the forum ate it. We know one thing for sure, local is changing and it is a problem in null sec. Until we know what changes are going to be implemented, these ideas are simply forum fodder. Well they said they were going to change it due to incarna. But now there has been a massive reassignment so its not so clear they will need to. So I don't see what this wll accomplish other than resolve an imagined problem and make solo/small scale pvp harder to find. I'm not convinced it would make small scale PvP harder to find. On the contrary, it'll work against blob warfare... good luck moving a cloaked blob around. There still should be that blink in local when someone enters a system and transitions between being "entry cloaked" and activating their own cloak, so the observant will see that... with a spool up timer on most ships before they can light off a cyno you'll have abuse minimized, and ships prepared to escape the single covops that decloaks will survive. .
Blobs won't have to move under this plan. They can just camp gares and bait ships that solo or small gangs may attack.
There will be no need for a cyno to blob people.
I think you should try some small gang and especially some solo pvp before you just say things that sound cool to you and oher wormholers. Then you will understand why its important that that we have at least some idea through local that there are not a bunch of cloaked ships sitting on grid with that ship we are about to attack.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
68
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 11:09:00 -
[74] - Quote
Nova Fox wrote:
This would also bring cohesion in more allainces and possibly condense them for protection against shadows. We can then start suggesting stealth hunter ships and modules if this was implimented.
Yes it will condense them into blobs. This is because for any group they attack they will never know if there is a huge blob of cloakies sitting on grid with them.
But do we need more blobs? Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Wu Phat
Super Batungwaa Ninja Warriors
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 11:24:00 -
[75] - Quote
The only poeple I see upset about afk cloaking are bot owners. if you support trying to fix somthing that does not need to be fixed then you are a bot owner that is upset that some one is trying to stop you. |
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
435
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 11:42:00 -
[76] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Nova Fox wrote:
This would also bring cohesion in more allainces and possibly condense them for protection against shadows. We can then start suggesting stealth hunter ships and modules if this was implimented.
Yes it will condense them into blobs. This is because for any group they attack they will never know if there is a huge blob of cloakies sitting on grid with them. But do we need more blobs?
So what kind of blobs are you talking about anyhow? The kind that uncloaks then has to wait 30 seconds before they can do anything while you giggle and warp off or burn to the gate? You're normal blob, if sitting there cloaked, will still fall victim to the decloak delay in being able to target. Take advantage of that delay, and fit properly. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
Shey Danu
New Eden Industrial Navy GREATER ITAMO MAFIA
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:31:00 -
[77] - Quote
+1 |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
68
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 00:48:00 -
[78] - Quote
Ingvar Angst wrote:Cearain wrote:Nova Fox wrote:
This would also bring cohesion in more allainces and possibly condense them for protection against shadows. We can then start suggesting stealth hunter ships and modules if this was implimented.
Yes it will condense them into blobs. This is because for any group they attack they will never know if there is a huge blob of cloakies sitting on grid with them. But do we need more blobs? So what kind of blobs are you talking about anyhow? The kind that uncloaks then has to wait 30 seconds before they can do anything while you giggle and warp off or burn to the gate? You're normal blob, if sitting there cloaked, will still fall victim to the decloak delay in being able to target. Take advantage of that delay, and fit properly.
What are you talking about?
What in your op would prevent someone who unlcoaks from doing anything for 30 seconds after they uncloak?
If you engage someone at a gate you will not be able to burn to it and jump through before the blob that is sitting there on grid uncloaks and kills you.
Your posts and your killboard suggests you might not understand the actual pvp mechanics in eve.
Right now there are some people who still do solo and small scale pvp. At least now, without local being nerfed, they have some chance of being able to tell if a blob is sitting there on grid with whatever they intend to fight. Sure they are still taking a risk because they are solo or in a small gang but you are just making it even harder for them.
Whether it's sbs rapiers and arazus warping to the bait or the cloaked gang just sitting on grid with he bait until a small gang engages this would make pvp in eve stupidly blobby. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
mxzf
Shovel Bros
60
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 01:36:00 -
[79] - Quote
Cearain wrote: What in your op would prevent someone who unlcoaks from doing anything for 30 seconds after they uncloak?
Check out the info on cloaks. See that Sensor Recalibration Time? That's how long it takes between uncloaking and when you can lock anything. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
68
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 01:47:00 -
[80] - Quote
mxzf wrote:Cearain wrote: What in your op would prevent someone who unlcoaks from doing anything for 30 seconds after they uncloak?
Check out the info on cloaks. See that Sensor Recalibration Time? That's how long it takes between uncloaking and when you can lock anything.
Even a battleship with no senor booster can lock a frigate in under 30 seconds with a cloak. This is why I am wondering if he understands the mechanics relevant to pvp in eve.
I am asking the op where he gets the idea cloaked ships can't do anything for 30 seconds after they uncloak. Do you know what he is talking about?
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
|
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
446
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 03:53:00 -
[81] - Quote
Cearain wrote:mxzf wrote:Cearain wrote: What in your op would prevent someone who unlcoaks from doing anything for 30 seconds after they uncloak?
Check out the info on cloaks. See that Sensor Recalibration Time? That's how long it takes between uncloaking and when you can lock anything. Even a battleship with no senor booster can lock a frigate in under 30 seconds with a cloak. This is why I am wondering if he understands the mechanics relevant to pvp in eve. I am asking the op where he gets the idea cloaked ships can't do anything for 30 seconds after they uncloak. Do you know what he is talking about? edit: Ok looking at eft an uncensorboosted battleship won't lock a frigate in under 30 seconds. However, thats a battlship versus a frigate. Sealth bombers and rapiers will do fine
Only a covops cloak can instantly begin trying to lock someone when uncloaking. When a non-covops equipped vessel uncloaks, there's a 30 second cooldown before you're even allowed to try and lock someone. So your battleship, for example, has to wait 30 seconds before it tries to lock a frigate, then the timer begins on the locking attempt. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
68
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 04:38:00 -
[82] - Quote
Ingvar Angst wrote:Cearain wrote:mxzf wrote:Cearain wrote: What in your op would prevent someone who unlcoaks from doing anything for 30 seconds after they uncloak?
Check out the info on cloaks. See that Sensor Recalibration Time? That's how long it takes between uncloaking and when you can lock anything. Even a battleship with no senor booster can lock a frigate in under 30 seconds with a cloak. This is why I am wondering if he understands the mechanics relevant to pvp in eve. I am asking the op where he gets the idea cloaked ships can't do anything for 30 seconds after they uncloak. Do you know what he is talking about? edit: Ok looking at eft an uncensorboosted battleship won't lock a frigate in under 30 seconds. However, thats a battlship versus a frigate. Sealth bombers and rapiers will do fine Only a covops cloak can instantly begin trying to lock someone when uncloaking. When a non-covops equipped vessel uncloaks, there's a 30 second cooldown before you're even allowed to try and lock someone. So your battleship, for example, has to wait 30 seconds before it tries to lock a frigate, then the timer begins on the locking attempt.
Ok, I think you are mixing up sensor recalibration delay (12 seconds with cloaking 4)and the ability to recloak after you have uncloaked. (30 seconds)
But even if what you imagined the mechanics were was reality, you are still not understanding why this really wouldn't help someone who aggressed someone on the gate or in a bait ship. That agression timer is 60 seconds.
Its not usually easy to get out of range of tackle so you can "giggle and warp off."
These mechanics are pretty well known to people who do pvp. Your failure to understand any of this just shows you are proposing something that just "sounds cool"
Moreover none of this will make much difference once that rapier or 3 has you pointed and webbed and the bait you bit can then just burn away leaving you for the blob that remains. Whether that blob is a bunch of stealth bombers or battleships it doesn't matter.
There are many things about what you are saying that make it clear you do not do small scale pvp outside of wormholes - if you pvp at all. But if you do small scale or solo pvp (other than ganking pve ships) you will not want to nerf local so blobs can sit there on grid cloaked and you have no way to tell they are there until you aggress someone. Trust me.
Your proposal may "sound cool" but it will suck for solo and small scale pvp in eve.
Local allows you to at least make educated guesses as to who may be flying together, based on their corps. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
446
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 12:21:00 -
[83] - Quote
Cearain wrote: Ok, I think you are mixing up sensor recalibration delay (12 seconds with cloaking 4)and the ability to recloak after you have uncloaked. (30 seconds)
But even if what you imagined the mechanics were was reality, you are still not understanding why this really wouldn't help someone who aggressed someone on the gate or in a bait ship. That agression timer is 60 seconds.
Its not usually easy to get out of range of tackle so you can "giggle and warp off."
These mechanics are pretty well known to people who do pvp. Your failure to understand any of this just shows you are proposing something that just "sounds cool"
Moreover none of this will make much difference once that rapier or 3 has you pointed and webbed and the bait you bit can then just burn away leaving you for the blob that remains. Whether that blob is a bunch of stealth bombers or battleships it doesn't matter.
There are many things about what you are saying that make it clear you do not do small scale pvp outside of wormholes - if you pvp at all. But if you do small scale or solo pvp (other than ganking pve ships) you will not want to nerf local so blobs can sit there on grid cloaked and you have no way to tell they are there until you aggress someone. Trust me.
Your proposal may "sound cool" but it will suck for solo and small scale pvp in eve.
Local allows you to at least make educated guesses as to who may be flying together, based on their corps.
Yes, I think you're right on the recalibration mix up, my bad there.
I still disagree on this negatively affecting small and solo PvP though. I think, again opinion, that it's likely to improve it. You'll have more people checking out null sec if they have the ability to hide a little better (more covops that is), and as such you may have more people choosing to move in there. Hey, if they can sneak through in some cloaky haulers and avoid many ganks, some just might give it a go. I don't think you'll see the blobs you fear... it would be a lot more work to set up than it's worth... people would have to refit ships to have cloaks that wouldn't use them normally, for some fits this would break what they want to do and would be avoided. (Mainly, I don't think everyone would slap cloaks on everything, so to speak.) I'd expect to see smaller scale ganks and baits. You could, for example, have a couple miners out doing their thing and, like you mention, someone covops uncloaks right on them, locks them down and (if black ops, for example) immediately fire up a cyno. Of course, if the miners bodyguard of a cloaked proteus or tengu or two then uncloaks and pops the first ship... hey, working nicely as intended. (This could actually serve as a blob deterrent, as things may begin to favor quicker kills and not waiting for the blob to arrive.)
So... we definitely disagree on the potential effects on PvP this would have. That's a given. I'd be curious to see how it would play out if given the chance. I think it would return a little more danger to null, which sorely seems to need it, it would make cloaks more cloakie (with pros and cons), it would make intel a more active endeavor while cloaked and it would get rid of the AFK CLOAK whine threads, which are one of the great banes of Eve.
By the way, I appreciate the opposing view. It's better to get as many possible pros and cons out there while in the thought stage as possible so in the event something like this ever were to see the light of day it would already have a significant level of refinement. I'd just be curious to hear some devs perspective on this... (hint) Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
Svenjabi Xiang
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 16:26:00 -
[84] - Quote
I'm going to give you a free bump as I think this topic needs to be seen.
I am, however, going to question why you give the insta-cyno only to BLOPs. We tend to use cynos on bombers for the instant lock/cyno, taking the risk of having the bomber popped as the cost for the likely gank. We'd prefer to do this with recons, namely with pilgrims and arazu, but the recalibration delay gets in the way as it is. Why not simply remove the recalibration delay on force recon as well as BLOPs (retaining the instant cyno on covops-line ships across the board)? As it is presented, we're probably likely to retain the use of the bomber-cyno simply because there is no need to upscale the risk that extremely even if it's warranted to ensure the gank. I think you're perhaps trying to balance this against the align times of the biggest slugs in the game, which is going to break drop usage for smaller targets and smaller fleets.
Just to give a context, our drops tend to be in the very small scale against sub-cap targets. |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
142
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 16:30:00 -
[85] - Quote
Unless there ar no more complaints or balances to be suggested I think its time to get this over to the CSM. |
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
450
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 16:31:00 -
[86] - Quote
Svenjabi Xiang wrote:I'm going to give you a free bump as I think this topic needs to be seen.
I am, however, going to question why you give the insta-cyno only to BLOPs. We tend to use cynos on bombers for the instant lock/cyno, taking the risk of having the bomber popped as the cost for the likely gank. We'd prefer to do this with recons, namely with pilgrims and arazu, but the recalibration delay gets in the way as it is. Why not simply remove the recalibration delay on force recon as well as BLOPs (retaining the instant cyno on covops-line ships across the board)? As it is presented, we're probably likely to retain the use of the bomber-cyno simply because there is no need to upscale the risk that extremely even if it's warranted to ensure the gank. I think you're perhaps trying to balance this against the align times of the biggest slugs in the game, which is going to break drop usage for smaller targets and smaller fleets.
Just to give a context, our drops tend to be in the very small scale against sub-cap targets.
The only reason is that that's what I thought of, and it's better put to discussion of who would or wouldn't have a cyno delay. Nothing set in stone, but the idea is to minimize the shift in power an unseen/unknown cloaked vessel would have with being able to decloak, lock, grab and fire a cyno. I know I left bombers off, for example, because my initial impression is that they're so numerous that it would pretty much nullify any balancing efforts. Black Ops, however... people have been screaming for awhile now to give them some love. That's all, initial opinion and fully welcome to debate. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
68
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 18:06:00 -
[87] - Quote
Ingvar Angst wrote:Cearain wrote: Ok, I think you are mixing up sensor recalibration delay (12 seconds with cloaking 4)and the ability to recloak after you have uncloaked. (30 seconds)
But even if what you imagined the mechanics were was reality, you are still not understanding why this really wouldn't help someone who aggressed someone on the gate or in a bait ship. That agression timer is 60 seconds.
Its not usually easy to get out of range of tackle so you can "giggle and warp off."
These mechanics are pretty well known to people who do pvp. Your failure to understand any of this just shows you are proposing something that just "sounds cool"
Moreover none of this will make much difference once that rapier or 3 has you pointed and webbed and the bait you bit can then just burn away leaving you for the blob that remains. Whether that blob is a bunch of stealth bombers or battleships it doesn't matter.
There are many things about what you are saying that make it clear you do not do small scale pvp outside of wormholes - if you pvp at all. But if you do small scale or solo pvp (other than ganking pve ships) you will not want to nerf local so blobs can sit there on grid cloaked and you have no way to tell they are there until you aggress someone. Trust me.
Your proposal may "sound cool" but it will suck for solo and small scale pvp in eve.
Local allows you to at least make educated guesses as to who may be flying together, based on their corps.
Yes, I think you're right on the recalibration mix up, my bad there.
Yes and what about the timing on gates would you agree you didn't knwo the mchaics there? And what about just warping off after you have been tackled would you agree that might be a bit more tricky than you suggested at first.
I really didn't think the fact that you misunderstood how eve pvp mechanics work would have any effect on your conclusions that your proposal is wonderful.
Yes there will be more small scale ganks. That is there will be more solo and small scale pvpers ganked by blobs. That will lead to fewer solo and small scale pvpers.
You claim that it would be too much trouble to fit a cloak to your ship and sit in a blob. Its not more difficult to fit a cloak than than any other module just right click and select fit to active ship or drag and drop it on. By not letting other people know there is a blob in local more people will feed the blobs.
You don't think this will negatively effect small scale pvp because you do not do or understand how small scale pvp is done. But if you want eve pvp to become stupidly blobby this is a step in the right direction.
This proposal has the same problems that have been raised over and over every time a nerf/remove local proposal is raised. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
454
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 18:57:00 -
[88] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Yes and what about the timing on gates would you agree you didn't knwo the mchaics there? And what about just warping off after you have been tackled would you agree that might be a bit more tricky than you suggested at first.
I really didn't think the fact that you misunderstood how eve pvp mechanics work would have any effect on your conclusions that your proposal is wonderful.
Yes there will be more small scale ganks. That is there will be more solo and small scale pvpers ganked by blobs. That will lead to fewer solo and small scale pvpers.
You claim that it would be too much trouble to fit a cloak to your ship and sit in a blob. Its not more difficult to fit a cloak than than any other module just right click and select fit to active ship or drag and drop it on. By not letting other people know there is a blob in local more people will feed the blobs.
You don't think this will negatively effect small scale pvp because you do not do or understand how small scale pvp is done. But if you want eve pvp to become stupidly blobby this is a step in the right direction.
This proposal has the same problems that have been raised over and over every time a nerf/remove local proposal is raised.
I think that what's interesting is that you're the only one addressing these concerns so far. Now, that doesn't invalidate them, and if concerns are there they definitely need to be addressed, but so far it's seeming a vastly minority opinion which really makes me hesitate to think there are any significant changes needed to the proposal.
But... let's see if we can get me to figure out what you're talking about. So, you enter a system in null, uncloaked assumingly, and show up in local, seeing someone else in local, right? You find them, start attacking and a blob or the like decloaks, because they all modified their fits to have a cloak. So, during the 12 second recalibration, you warp to the gate and have to wait for the timer then get blobbed. Is that the scenario you're painting? That's what it sounds like, I'm just trying to be clear on this.
Or maybe it's not that they decloaked where you were, but they were a distance off cloaked and started to warp to you, so you saw them all appear on local and hauled ass to the gate... well, doesn't matter either way, the gate's not letting you out, and... what... you didn't fit a cloak so can't use that, and you didn't warp to a different celestial to let the timer run down...
I'm sorry, I'm not seeing whatever your scenario is correctly I think and how it'll wind up killing small scale PvP, even though wormholes, with their absense of local, is a hotbed of small scale PvP. I'm not getting the whole blob thing... their either covops, which limits the types of ships blobbing or they're not and you have the recalibration time to do something... or maybe you forgot to bring your friend in the cloaky tengu to pop the ship that grabbed you waiting for the blob to arrive, I'm missing something here. Clarity would help.
How exactly would this reduce small scale PvP and favor large blobby type things, and what scenarios would you envision as a result? Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
Igniskhin
Veyr The Veyr Collective
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 19:03:00 -
[89] - Quote
i love it. |
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy Black Sun Alliance
30
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 19:03:00 -
[90] - Quote
Princess Cellestia wrote:Local has a purpose, its not just to keep us alive. No local you dont know what to bring out, is it a 10 man gang? Is it 50 guys come to **** around? Or is it 400 subcaps supporting a capfleet with 100 ships come to try and take your moons/sov/slaughter everything. .
Nope, that is not the purpose of local.. but that is what it has come to be used for. Local is a chat window. No local = you don't know what to bring out? You don't know exactly what to bring out anyway. One minute you could have a couple in space the next minute you could have a hot drop of 100.. The point, as you've make in your long winded threrad, is you have to be prepared... well, what would be different in the no local scenario? You still have to be prepared for the unexpected. You may have to dscan for probes, watch local for blips, and look for cynos to see that you are not being scanned down and dropped on... but you should be doing that already anyway.
As I see it no local cloaked is the way it should be.. but carebearish players seem to want to hang onto free intel. You can keep standard local.. with the caveat that you loose the cloaked..while the cloaked loose local intel as well. They can't tell whose cloaked in the system anymore than you could.. and while cloaked they can't really see local uncloaked either.
Anyway stop whinning; you'll sound less like a boston fish wife. [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/OldST.jpg[/IMG] |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |