Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 32 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
3347
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 21:08:00 -
[811] - Quote
One really interesting compromise:
Make the MSI block dscan, but allow scan probes to still scan objects there. This would be a very nice boost to covops for intel gathering & scouting... a role in which they are overshadowed by nullified t3s.
If you did this, then you should give the ability to dscan back to those within the MSI's influence. |
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
53
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 21:12:00 -
[812] - Quote
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:Theon Severasse wrote:Gizznitt Malikite wrote:gascanu wrote:Quote:As for the bubbles, I would say make it so it can't be anchored within the radius of the bubble effect (of a T2 Large). Now obviously people who have a bit of common sense are thinking "But Theon, surely they can just anchor the bubble in front of/behind the MSI!", which is true, but at the very least you are going to know that you are warping into a bubble trap, in the same way that you do now. Again I reiterate, facechecking is not a good way of gathering intel, and requiring a player to have particular character skills and be in a particular ship is not a good idea. how about dictor bubbles? I think people putting up MSI's with bubbles in the center is a very good thing. I see no reason to prevent this, as it adds an extra layer of risk to anyone that wants to get intel on the MSI, and it goes very well with bubble camps and similar activities. It's not risk though. You force people to use nullified ships to scout them. Hell you can't even safely scout them in CovOps ships, the ships that are meant to be designed for scouting.. Think about this: I'm exactly the type of person that would setup an MSI, anchor a bubble, and light a cyno in the bubble with a small gang of fast-locking gank ships to kill scouts checking it out. I currently do this without the MSI, by deploying the trap in deepsafes so you can't actually scan me down anyway. You learn how to scout it, or you lose a few ships in the scouting process. This isn't something game breaking or unfair. Now with nullified inties, it is even easier to check it out, and I have no sympathy for your inability to easily and safely get eyes. I will say this though, I think it is a shame that inties are better scouts than covops.... and fully support nerfing the interdiction nullification mechanics to give covops their role back.
oh boy.... you see there is a very easy way to scan your trap, and you don't even need a scouting ship to do it; you can even scout that "trap" of yours in a bs if needed: you empty your capacitor and warp to the cyno, and you do it till the cyno is in 14au range of the d-scan; problem solved
now, like a already said the inty is not really an option: hell , the alt in the shuttle that someone was proposing this days here will be better than the inty; at least you lose only a shuttle... and that leave us only with nullified t3 |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
2874
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 21:15:00 -
[813] - Quote
Gizznitt Malikite wrote: One really interesting compromise:
Make the MSI block dscan, but allow scan probes to still scan objects there. This would be a very nice boost to covops for intel gathering & scouting... a role in which they are overshadowed by nullified t3s.
If you did this, then you should give the ability to dscan back to those within the MSI's influence.
That would probably be balanced as well, but the total sensor blackout is a cooler concept, I think. That said, Eve doesn't need either of these mechanics, so I'm not sure whose wishes for shiny~~ we're satisfying here. Rifterlings - small gang frigate PvP - lowsec pirate operation, newbie-friendly, free ship program; Join today! www.rifterlings.com
Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army Heretic Initiative
4336
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 21:29:00 -
[814] - Quote
Gizznitt Malikite wrote: One really interesting compromise:
Make the MSI block dscan, but allow scan probes to still scan objects there. This would be a very nice boost to covops for intel gathering & scouting... a role in which they are overshadowed by nullified t3s.
If you did this, then you should give the ability to dscan back to those within the MSI's influence.
That is an interesting compromise, but I disagree that the ability to d-scan should be given back to those within the MSI's influence.
-Liang
Ed: That doesn't mean I endorse the compromise. It just means it doesn't offend me. Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Zircon Dasher
320
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 21:30:00 -
[815] - Quote
Petrus Blackshell wrote: That said, Eve doesn't need either of these mechanics, so I'm not sure whose wishes for shiny~~ we're satisfying here.
This one.... or any variant found in that thread? Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
Priestess Lin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 21:52:00 -
[816] - Quote
Petrus Blackshell wrote: Both modules would have been more useful to solo/small gangs before the changes becuase they were more useful to everyone before the changes. The changes happened because they were too useful, to the point of being mandatory/ubiquitous, which is a sign of something being OP.
well then, have fun looking for hours for prey. Imagine the kills you guys would have gotten if you hadn't cried about it so hard.
BTW, just because something is useful and changes the game in a dynamic way doesn't mean it is OP. |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
2875
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 21:59:00 -
[817] - Quote
Priestess Lin wrote:well then, have fun looking for hours for prey. Imagine the kills you guys would have gotten if you hadn't cried about it so hard. I am imagining them, but I am also imagining the frustration and losses when other people use the same stuff against me, and the latter is a more powerfully frightening vision than the former is warm and fuzzy.
Priestess Lin wrote:BTW, just because something is useful and changes the game in a dynamic way doesn't mean it is OP. Correct, but there is such a thing as "too much". The initial idea went beyond being useful and dynamic, and into the realm of "mandatory to use in a majority of gameplay areas to stay competitive", which is pretty much the definition of "OP". Rifterlings - small gang frigate PvP - lowsec pirate operation, newbie-friendly, free ship program; Join today! www.rifterlings.com
Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com |
Priestess Lin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 22:03:00 -
[818] - Quote
Petrus Blackshell wrote: I am imagining them, but I am also imagining the frustration and losses when other people use the same stuff against me, and the latter is a more powerfully frightening vision than the former is warm and fuzzy.
.
That is how EVE really is for pirates, isn't it? Not quite so harsh and dangerous for all. Still a greifers paradise. Though it almost wasn't
See you in high-sec |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
2875
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 22:13:00 -
[819] - Quote
Priestess Lin wrote:Petrus Blackshell wrote: I am imagining them, but I am also imagining the frustration and losses when other people use the same stuff against me, and the latter is a more powerfully frightening vision than the former is warm and fuzzy.
.
That is how EVE really is for pirates, isn't it? Not quite so harsh and dangerous for all. Still a greifers paradise. Though it almost wasn't See you in high-sec. Unlikely, since my sec status is somewhere in the stomach of an angler fish on the bottom of the Marinara Trench.
Could you clarify and detail a specific instance of "griefers" and how their life is paradise, please?
Also, could you explain how MSI's blocking d-scan from the inside helps griefers? They still have absolutely no idea what's inside, so they gained nothing. The one inside the MSI can't see the griefer coming, so I assume there's something someone in the MSI could do in response to seeing a griefer on the way. So... what does a griefer target do to prepare for an incoming griefer that they cannot do anymore? Something that adds that "risk" you keep talking about to the griefer's day?
Or, more shortly, if you saw a griefer coming your way, with him not aware of what you were in what would you do to increase his risk, and is that thing you do prevented by you not seeing the griefer on d-scan?
I can myself not think of anything I could do if I saw someone on their way to grief me other than either a) prepare to fight them, or b) prepare to run away. Since (a) does not require d-scan ability, as the extra prep time can also be obtained by sitting farther away from the warp-in, the only thing that removing my d-scan does is take away (b).
But... I'm not sure how me being able to run away adds risk for the griefer. I just don't get it. Enlighten me, please. Rifterlings - small gang frigate PvP - lowsec pirate operation, newbie-friendly, free ship program; Join today! www.rifterlings.com
Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com |
SFM Hobb3s
Vanguard Frontiers Black Legion.
49
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 22:20:00 -
[820] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hatsumi Kobayashi wrote:Can cloaked ships use the MJD unit and and if yes remain cloaked while doing so?
Can HICs use it with their bubble up?
Questions needing answers In its current iteration the answer to both is yes. We're not dead set on keeping that as is however.
Awesome. you can now keep your hics 100km from the centre of your target and mjd them in with their bubble already up for maximum hic rage. Love it.
|
|
Priestess Lin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 22:31:00 -
[821] - Quote
Petrus Blackshell wrote: Something that adds that "risk" you keep talking about
\
The MSI in its original form, with the prospect that solo PVErs might be using these, pirates might have taken a risk for a reward instead of sending a scout in first. Now, with these new proposed changes to the MSI, when you see these things, its always going to be more reasonable to scout first with an expendable pilot.
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1054
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 22:35:00 -
[822] - Quote
Priestess Lin wrote:Petrus Blackshell wrote: Something that adds that "risk" you keep talking about
\ The MSI in its original form, with the prospect that solo PVErs might be using these, pirates might have taken a risk for a reward instead of sending a scout in first. Now, with these new proposed changes to the MSI, when you see these things, its always going to be more reasonable to scout first with an expendable pilot.
That statement is insane. Makes no sense. Nothign changed in that regards. The guy from outside still does nto know what is behind door number 1. Does not matter the changes. The chanceof beign a trap is still EXACLTY the same "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Priestess Lin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 22:39:00 -
[823] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote: The chanceof beign a trap is still EXACLTY the same
No, it clearly isn't. Because no solo PVErs are ever going to use the MSI its its current iteration. Thus, increasing the likelyhood that it will be a trap.
I know EVE pirates are not known for their great intelligence, but wtf? |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
2875
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 22:49:00 -
[824] - Quote
Priestess Lin wrote:Petrus Blackshell wrote: Something that adds that "risk" you keep talking about
\ The MSI in its original form, with the prospect that solo PVErs might be using these, pirates might have taken a risk for a reward instead of sending a scout in first. Now, with these new proposed changes to the MSI, when you see these things, its always going to be more reasonable to scout first with an expendable pilot.
I think I get the logic, but let me confirm: If I am a pirate with a scout, and I see a MSI inside a complex, with the first MSI iteration, the PvEer would see me coming and run away, so I would go in blind myself for a better chance at catching him, taking the risk that it's a trap. With the second iteration, the PvEer does not see me coming, so there's no need to put myself in the path of danger, making sending the scout in (and not falling into a trap myself) obvious.
A couple points:
1) The scout himself is a pirate, and for him the risk is still high, since if it is a trap, he will lose his ship senselessly and proceed to waste time re-shipping. Yeah, this can be mitigated by using an alt, but if we're using alts, the PvEer could have a cloaked alt outside the complex, watching d-scan.
2) Scouts are almost always also tackle. They are the best equipped to catch things, and that is precisely why they always go in first. I would send the scout in first especially with the first iteration of the MSI, and with greater urgency
Since it does not seem you are familiar with how a cautious deployment into a solo/small gang fight goes, the order is this:
- Send scout(s)/tackler(s) in. They rush to lock down the most valuable targets (by whatever criteria).
- Send main combat ships in. They rush to get secondary tackle, since by this point the scout(s)/tackler(s) are probably in a world of hurt, and possibly dead.
- Send vulnerable support in. Electronic warfare, remote repair, etc comes in last to draw the least attention. They "seal the deal".
If I'm solo, remove steps 2 and 3. If at any point it's revealed to be a trap, or a fight I/we definitely can't handle, I/we cancel all further steps in deployment, and make all efforts to escape. With luck, only a scout or two actually die in a trap.
None of this approach changes between the first and second iteration of the MSI. The gang is just as blind in both cases, and just as likely to send scouts in first. Rifterlings - small gang frigate PvP - lowsec pirate operation, newbie-friendly, free ship program; Join today! www.rifterlings.com
Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
2875
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 22:52:00 -
[825] - Quote
Priestess Lin wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote: The chanceof beign a trap is still EXACLTY the same No, it clearly isn't. Because no solo PVErs are ever going to use the MSI its its current iteration. Thus, increasing the likelyhood that it will be a trap. I know being an EVE pirate doesn't require much intelligence, but wtf? Ohhh!! You're saying that because the MSI cuts off d-scan, no PvEers will use it, since they need d-scan to get ready to run from a gank!
I strongly doubt that. In fact, I'd bet good ISK against it. Exactly your train of thought is why PvEers in more agile ships would use the MSI, so they look like a trap and make pirates be more cautious and even possibly leave them alone. Rifterlings - small gang frigate PvP - lowsec pirate operation, newbie-friendly, free ship program; Join today! www.rifterlings.com
Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2112
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 23:03:00 -
[826] - Quote
Priestess Lin wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote: The chanceof beign a trap is still EXACLTY the same No, it clearly isn't. Because no solo PVErs are ever going to use the MSI its its current iteration. Thus, increasing the likelyhood that it will be a trap. I know being an EVE pirate doesn't require much intelligence, but wtf? Lol, this is just dumb. No solo PvEr should even consider using this, it is a guaranteed death trap.
Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
845
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 23:11:00 -
[827] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Ok everyone, here is our first round of changes since the beginning of public feedback. These are some quite large changes but we think the end result is a much stronger design.
Eh, Over-nerfed IMO. Some Thoughts:
Mobile Micro Jump Unit
We're cutting the EHP of the structure by 80%, to 5000hp. ~Fine. We're increasing the time that the MJU takes to activate to 1 minute. ~Bit much, maybe 30-45 seconds? We're increasing the range at which the MJU can be used to 5000m. ~Fine. We're increasing the minimum range from other MJU structures to 10km. ~Fine. We're disabling the ability to jump while cloaked. ~Fine.
Mobile Scan Inhibitor
Ships inside the area of a MSI's effect will have their own directional scanner and probe results disabled.~Excellent We're adding a minimum distance of 75km from wormholes. ~Fine. We're reducing the sensor strength of the structure to 5 and increasing the signature radius to 500. Go ahead and apply as many projected ECCM to that as you want. ~Fine. We're increasing the build cost to ~15m isk. ~Nope. We're decreasing the structure's lifetime in space to 1 hour. ~Nope. Minimum distance to another MSI is now 100km. ~Fine. We're increasing the volume of the structure to 100m3. ~Woah. Nope. Nope. Nope.
Let's look at the MSI. Why would anyone ever bother with a 15 mil, 100m3 structure that only lasts 1 hour? Will never be used by anyone on a regular basis. Reduce those 3 values to their previous iteration.
Just my 2 isk. |
Priestess Lin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 23:12:00 -
[828] - Quote
Petrus Blackshell wrote:Priestess Lin wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote: The chanceof beign a trap is still EXACLTY the same No, it clearly isn't. Because no solo PVErs are ever going to use the MSI its its current iteration. Thus, increasing the likelyhood that it will be a trap. I know being an EVE pirate doesn't require much intelligence, but wtf? Ohhh!! You're saying that because the MSI cuts off d-scan, no PvEers will use it, since they need d-scan to get ready to run from a gank! I strongly doubt that. In fact, I'd bet good ISK against it. Exactly your train of thought is why PvEers in more agile ships would use the MSI, so they look like a trap and make pirates be more cautious and even possibly leave them alone.
Not just that, I realize you can have a cloaky alt outside the MSI, which technically isn't solo and would also cut into potential profits, but the MSI is now 15m isk and only lasts an hour in addition to that. I can't see Solo PVErs ever using it as the reward for the risks is not worth it when you factor in this cost. People will just stay in high sec rather than having to worry about mashing d-scan every second for a little more isk/hr.
I would also argue that the MSI would enable PVErs to not be forced to mash D-scan constantly and therefore increase the likelyhood that a skilled pirate could enter the system and quickly scan down the MSI, being faster to warp to than if you were scanning a ship itself, and catch their prey in a moment where they forgot to hit D-scan.
When you know you have to hit d-scan constantly when you do it constantly, but if you have to do something intermittently, you are more likely to miss your timing. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2112
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 23:35:00 -
[829] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote:We're increasing the build cost to ~15m isk. ~Nope. We're decreasing the structure's lifetime in space to 1 hour. ~Nope. Minimum distance to another MSI is now 100km. ~Fine. We're increasing the volume of the structure to 100m3. ~Woah. Nope. Nope. Nope. These were all necessary steps to prevent systems from being spammed with them rendering any kind of PvP in that system impossible. Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
Domanique Altares
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
2282
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 23:37:00 -
[830] - Quote
Priestess Lin wrote:potential profits
LOL.
Profits. Rifterlings pirate corporation is now recruitng members for lowsec PvP operations. Newbie friendly, free T1 frigate and dessy hangar, solo tutoring and PvP classes for new members. Join our in game channel 'weflyrifters' and speak to a recruiter today. |
|
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
845
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 23:41:00 -
[831] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote:We're increasing the build cost to ~15m isk. ~Nope. We're decreasing the structure's lifetime in space to 1 hour. ~Nope. Minimum distance to another MSI is now 100km. ~Fine. We're increasing the volume of the structure to 100m3. ~Woah. Nope. Nope. Nope. These were all necessary steps to prevent systems from being spammed with them rendering any kind of PvP in that system impossible. In its current iteration, no one will bother using the MSI. At 100m3 per hour, I need an industrial alt to tag along with me to use the damn thing. That's just dumb.
If the goal of the change is to make it unusable for general applications, why bother releasing it in the first place? Scrap the concept and re-use the art assets for something else. |
Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
2745
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 23:51:00 -
[832] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote:Let's look at the MSI. Why would anyone ever bother with a 15 mil, 100m3 structure that only lasts 1 hour? Will never be used by anyone on a regular basis. Reduce those 3 values to their previous iteration. Those were also my points. $1-2m ISK, 50m3 and 2 hours is more reasonable. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Felsusguy
Aliastra Gallente Federation
325
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 23:55:00 -
[833] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Ok everyone, here is our first round of changes since the beginning of public feedback. These are some quite large changes but we think the end result is a much stronger design.
Mobile Micro Jump Unit
We're cutting the EHP of the structure by 80%, to 5000hp. We're increasing the time that the MJU takes to activate to 1 minute. We're increasing the range at which the MJU can be used to 5000m. We're increasing the minimum range from other MJU structures to 10km. We're disabling the ability to jump while cloaked.
Mobile Scan Inhibitor
Ships inside the area of a MSI's effect will have their own directional scanner and probe results disabled. We're adding a minimum distance of 75km from wormholes. We're reducing the sensor strength of the structure to 5 and increasing the signature radius to 500. Go ahead and apply as many projected ECCM to that as you want. We're increasing the build cost to ~15m isk. We're decreasing the structure's lifetime in space to 1 hour. Minimum distance to another MSI is now 100km. We're increasing the volume of the structure to 100m3.
I'll be updating the OP momentarily. I am now disappointed with the uselessness of these structures. How droll. |
MisterAl tt1
Pretenders Inc W-Space
137
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 23:56:00 -
[834] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Let's look at the MSI. Why would anyone ever bother with a 15 mil, 100m3 structure that only lasts 1 hour? Will never be used by anyone on a regular basis. Reduce those 3 values to their previous iteration.
Just my 2 isk.
Any guy with a 20bil capital fleet farming wormholes will do so that, unless he is 1. lazy 2. stupid. |
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
846
|
Posted - 2014.01.10 00:01:00 -
[835] - Quote
MisterAl tt1 wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote:
Let's look at the MSI. Why would anyone ever bother with a 15 mil, 100m3 structure that only lasts 1 hour? Will never be used by anyone on a regular basis. Reduce those 3 values to their previous iteration.
Just my 2 isk.
Any guy with a 10+ bil capital fleet farming wormholes will do so that, unless he is 1. lazy 2. stupid. Your drones/fighters will show up on dscan, mate. Also wrecks, lots of wrecks. Combine with how easy the MSI is to scan down with its 500m sig and 5 sensor strength, yeah good luck with that. |
Zircon Dasher
320
|
Posted - 2014.01.10 00:10:00 -
[836] - Quote
MisterAl tt1 wrote: Any guy with a 10+ bil capital fleet farming wormholes will do so that, unless he is 1. lazy 2. stupid.
So tell me.... do many people in your corp box caps 30km from the warp-in and not use d-scan?
EDIT: DOH! You got me. Should have looked at your corp name first. Well played. Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
Sid Crash
57
|
Posted - 2014.01.10 00:17:00 -
[837] - Quote
Fozzie, you can iterate/nerf it all you want, they're both silly ideas that'll create hilariously broken game play while there's zero valid reasons to introduce them in the first place. It's one of those ideas that'll keep haunting you for years if you let it in. Just forget about them, move on.
Just don't. |
Jori McKie
Friends Of Harassment
115
|
Posted - 2014.01.10 00:25:00 -
[838] - Quote
@Petrus Blackshell
The EHP on the MMJU is pretty good with 5k that equals to ~72 DPS to kill in 70s. Think about that Fozzie had to cover 1kiting vs 1brawling T1 Frigs. With more EHP or a shorter deploying time it would have been a 100% get out of jail free card for the brawling Frig, everytime. I can understand you hate the LML Condors and especially the dual damp Hook, me too. But you must give the kiting ship a chance to kill the brawling ship.
You have two options, deploy it pre fight if you aren't sure what kind of ship is coming and you are truesolo (Hooks can still be AB+scram+web+TD) and test the enemy before you get out. Second option, you deploy midfight and let the kiter think "i'm losing, i have to get out" and the kiter has to kill the MMJU while you gain 72sec to get a friend in a non obvious anti kiting ship (MWD Incursus, Kestrel, Merlin etc)
Fozzies changes to the MMJU now forces you to think about it, should i pre deploy to get a 100% out of jail for free card and loose some ISK or not. The testing window (at worst ~60s) vs 1x T1 Frig is enough time to make the gtfo decsion.
Congratulations Priestess Lin, you are the first person on the EVE-O forum i'm blocking. |
MisterAl tt1
Pretenders Inc W-Space
137
|
Posted - 2014.01.10 01:07:00 -
[839] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote: Your drones/fighters will show up on dscan, mate. Also wrecks, lots of wrecks. Combine with how easy the MSI is to scan down with its 500m sig and 5 sensor strength, yeah good luck with that.
With one of currently popular ways to farm - all wrecks are within 30km from the spot capitals come to. At first it was not so easily scanned. Still it is not the scan-time, it is the fact of Alarm Wrecks and Capitals! ALL WARP TO THE HOLE versus "well, MSI on d-scan, might be something".
Zircon Dasher wrote: So tell me.... do many people in your corp box caps 30km from the warp-in and not use d-scan?
EDIT: DOH! You got me. Should have looked at your corp name first. Well played.
You don't need d-scan on site, mainly, just click to update signature list. But yeah, I have to agree that keeping a separate window out of MSI to track new signatures will be a pain for solo farmers, that they don't have now. For bigger guys like us... for years we have been keeping a dedicated scanner with probes out for all the time we are on-site.
|
Dorian Wylde
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
403
|
Posted - 2014.01.10 01:27:00 -
[840] - Quote
Really don't understand the point of the Scan Inhibitor. Way too easy to scan down, doesn't last nearly long enough, and makes people inside blind? Why would anyone ever use this? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 32 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |