|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 20 post(s) |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1819
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 16:10:50 -
[1] - Quote
I, for one, am looking forward to watching ships at 20% armor explode the moment the duration on the Armor Reinforcement booster expires and they end up with negative HP. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1820
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 16:19:16 -
[2] - Quote
MidnightWyvern wrote:Obvioulsy that's 100% speculation, but why else would they need to add another Industrial Command Ship?
I'm not sure I'd be willing to speculate on its true porpoise. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1822
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 16:27:55 -
[3] - Quote
Winter Archipelago wrote:Secondly, will the new bursts appear on a killmail to see who is giving and receiving boosts?
Why would they appear on a killmail when remote reps don't? They're not a hostile effect.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1825
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 16:38:26 -
[4] - Quote
Lemme translate:
Escobar Slim III wrote:Half of my mess is a single sentence, the other half is only 2, and I don't understand that paragraphs make things readable and organized.
Thnk you CCP.
No, Escobar, 'thnk you'. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1828
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 16:51:28 -
[5] - Quote
Steroidastroid Ormand wrote:1) 15km range is a joke? Aren't you forgetting a 0 at the end?
You're likely not factoring in the effect skills will have.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1835
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 17:30:17 -
[6] - Quote
Steroidastroid Ormand wrote:I can repeat that 150km should be the minimum range, IMHO...
But can you justify why you should be able to have a ship in a central position able to apply boosts to two ships 300km apart? Not why it's convenient to only need that one ship doing it, mind you, but why it's preferable for people to be able to do that, rather than having boosters in among the ships they're boosting? |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1835
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 17:33:34 -
[7] - Quote
Draconas109 wrote: 1. it's been in the game for how long? 2. if it's not broke, why change it 3. if it has to change, why add mining boosts to it? with being near a citadel, you have to still pay attention or die as you're not tethered, putting a rorqual in a null belt is just guaranteed death 4. in the name of jesus tap dancing ******* christ, why is there an ammo requirement taped to it?
how's that for reasons?
1. Inertia's not a reason. 2. It's pretty darn broke. 3. Mining boosts currently tether, allowing a rorqual to sit between the two spires atop an Astrahus in perfect safety. 4. Hel if I know.
So call it 1 out of 4! |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1845
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 18:25:46 -
[8] - Quote
Draconas109 wrote:apparently you do boost and tether, my bad. you still have to pay attention for bumping
And this is why you sit between the spires the 'hus, right down at the base of them. good luck getting bumped out when you'll just bounce off the structure back into your original position. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1846
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 18:40:11 -
[9] - Quote
Oh, hey, just a crazy thought, but when you say:
Team Five 0 wrote:However, Command Burst bonuses do stack on top of bonuses from other sources (such as modules and implants) and this interaction may be subject to diminishing returns (stacking penalties) depending on the attribute being affected.
Does that mean...
Armor Energizing - Increases all armor resistances Shield Harmonizing - Increases all shield resistances
... are made useless by fitting hardeners?
Armor Reinforcement - Increases armor hitpoints Shield Extension - Increases shield hitpoints
... are worthless if you've got plates/extenders?
Sensor Optimization - Increases targeting range and scan resolution Electronic Hardening - Increases Sensor Strength and resistances to Sensor Dampeners and Weapon Disruptors
... are both gimped by fitting a Sebo?
ETA: as an example, the maxmum benefit shown on the chart for 'Shield Harmonizing' is a 22% (ish) bonus. The bonus from a single Adaptive Invuln is expressed as a -30% vulnerability. Can you please explain how those two will mesh, and whether 3 Adaptives will put the Command Bonus far enough into diminishing returns as to be negligible? |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1848
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 18:46:36 -
[10] - Quote
Querns wrote:For the armor and shield buffer ones, it's unlikely. Shield extenders and armor plates add absolute values of additional tank buffer and is not subject to diminishing returns. The +buffer links would multiply the effectiveness of each extender/plate.
For the other ones, they will be stacking penalized with other hardeners or sensor boosters, since they offer a percentage-based modifier.
Yeah, I expect that's the case for the buffer boosts, but it warrants clarification - and I added an example into the question to demonstrate the kind of clarification I'm looking for. |
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1848
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 18:47:37 -
[11] - Quote
Bishop Bob wrote:The current links are already stacking nerfed with active modules. This part of the change isn't new.
Yes and no - they don't stack directly (just as the DCU never stacked directly), so I'd like some clarification on the interaction there. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1848
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 18:49:11 -
[12] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Regardless, I'm no math whiz but the potential buff to tank looks absolutely terrifying
There's also the question of how they interact on ships like the ANI, which already has a raw bonus to Armor HP.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1854
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 22:03:27 -
[13] - Quote
Johiah Parmala wrote:Time to make a well formulated post with both the pros and cons. First of all, instead of an endless debate why not have a poll?
Congratulations on contradicting yourself in immediately consecutive sentences.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1868
|
Posted - 2016.08.30 06:59:05 -
[14] - Quote
IbbnSaifun wrote:Arrendis wrote:Steroidastroid Ormand wrote:I can repeat that 150km should be the minimum range, IMHO... But can you justify why you should be able to have a ship in a central position able to apply boosts to two ships 300km apart? Not why it's convenient to only need that one ship doing it, mind you, but why it's preferable for people to be able to do that, rather than having boosters in among the ships they're boosting? Easily - if you can scan an entire system to locate people real time that means you have FTL capabilities for 2 way systems - if they are gonna make this system actual - they need to appropriately NERF the real time scan for entire systems beyond BOOST ranges as proposed as that's only one way for effects. Logic duh.
I don't see what FTL scanning (and we know the lore has FTL communications capabilities - that's how your clone works) has to do with the radius of boosts.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1868
|
Posted - 2016.08.30 07:02:27 -
[15] - Quote
Drago Misharie wrote:Delt0r Garsk wrote:Drago Misharie wrote: Can't wait for the complaints about all the buffs this brings to cloaky campers.
How does this affect cloaky campers (btw i am one from time to time. Only way to bait a fight in null instadock anyone in local space). You can't even run links now cloaked. You won't be able to activate the mods cloaked. So i don't really see what your saying. Mining ships purposefully don't cluster to prevent bombing runs but with this change, they will have to. Most cloaky campers are in stealth bombers.
Because 90km radius from the Rorq is so cluttered, right? |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1868
|
Posted - 2016.08.30 07:05:29 -
[16] - Quote
Drago Misharie wrote:One Stealth Bomber can take out a fleet of macks or retrievers easily with a single bomb. Just aim for to boosting ship with all the sweet targets clustered around it.
Uhhhhh, no? Macks and Retrievers fit out to tank quite well - not as well as Skiffs and Procurers, but more than enough to handle some bombs. And they'll be rebalancing around the same time, as well, so don't go assuming anything on that score. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1870
|
Posted - 2016.08.30 07:08:40 -
[17] - Quote
Grookshank wrote:Quote:Command Bursts will not apply their bonuses to any fleetmates that are tethered or within a starbase force field, and ships cannot activate their Command Burst modules if they themselves are within a force field. Can we assume ships also can't use command burst modules if they are tethered themselves?
I'd imagine that just like activating a cyno, NSA, or smartbomb, the moment you turn one of these on, you break tether. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1877
|
Posted - 2016.08.30 14:13:23 -
[18] - Quote
Ashterothi wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:give me an example of some one doing something in eve that is not PvP any example at all Incursion communities Industry corps Signal Cartel Drifter Hive "tours"
Incursion communities are full of PvPers' alts, making money with which to PvP.
Industry is completely PvP - not only is it the engine that drives all of the PvP (somebody's gotta build those ships, guns, ammo, etc!) but you're competing with other players for the best prices on everything.
Signal Cartel is competitive - they pay for those holes. If you get paid for one, nobody else gets paid for it.
Hive "tours" - folks are stockpiling the elements they get out of the hives, and a lot of them are hoping it'll prove profitable... to fuel pvp. This one's the closest though... so far. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1877
|
Posted - 2016.08.30 14:15:02 -
[19] - Quote
Drago Misharie wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:O.o pvp is player vs player <- no where in that does it say anything about destruction
the most obvious form is violent however only people with a very shallow understanding limit it to that Ok, not to be insulting, but that's not what 99.9% of the members of eve define this as PVP. You are a very small minority with this definition.
No, he's not. All of the large players in nullsec understand industry and market manipulation are PvP. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1878
|
Posted - 2016.08.30 14:58:19 -
[20] - Quote
Bo Goodwin wrote:Ncc 1709 wrote:27 pages in 22 hours. surly ccp can see this is something people dont want They don't care because they always cater to the PvPers who whine and cry louder than any carebear I've ever seen.
Well, then you've clearly not looked very much. Heh.
There's a lot of good concepts here, but much like Aegis Sov was shackled to the FW model that even FW players abandoned for the chance at a war, right now they're tying those good concepts to terrible implementation.
+HP boosts tied to timers - either this is going to make ships blow up if they haven't been repaired up over 20% armor when the buff hits a gap, or it's going to result in effective 'repairs' when it's reapplied. Look for special hilarity to ensue with tackle leaving range just before the buff's reapplied.
Boosts tied to ammo made from ice - Ice products are already, in terms of cubic meters per second of effort, pretty much the most profitable thing you can mine, anywhere. The cluster will now be awash with even more utterly useless Heavy Water (esp as Rorqual use drops), because you know they're going to make this nonsense be made out of Stront. Why Stront? Because it's already needed for all sov warfare, triage, siege modules, bridging... if there's something you can be sure of, it's that since the lost their on-staff economist, CCP will make the most economically bone-headed moves.
The PANIC module - will it include bonuses to local reps so that when the effect finally drops, the Rorq has half a chance to survive? Will it give a weapons timer to prevent refitting, or is every Rorqual going to carry a CEHE, depot, and spare PANIC?
I get what they're trying to do - the burst likely can't auto-repeat because it has a reactivation delay instead of a cycle time. It has the reactivation delay so that you can change ammo while it's counting down. That way, with max skills, a dedicated boosting pilot who is on the ball can supply 2 different buffs for each command burst module on the ship, without either one ever dropping.
That's basically all that pilot will be doing, though, because that will be most useful in small-scale conflicts. In larger fleets, the null blocs will (if they haven't been already) simply be pushing more people toward Command Ships and bringing more boosters. Stay on-anchor and you'll get everything you can hope for. With no limitation to only 1 Wing, 1 Fleet booster applying boosts, there is literally no reason ever for groups that can field a 256-man fleet to not have 4 max-skill command ships applying all of their racial boosts, all the time. Double that number for safety.
The intent is to put the boosts on-grid and increase the engagement level of those on-grid boosters - to give them something to do and to make them actually have to do it. So it's not surprising that once again Fozzie, who comes from a small-gang FW background, crafts a model that most meets his goals in that scale of engagement. Again, we saw this with Aegis Sov, where the 'orbit button in space for X minutes' model has pretty much been roundly panned by everyone who's had to actually do it as more than just an occassional novelty thing.
The real question is: how do you fix those issues?
I'm not sure there's an easy answer that doesn't just make the boosting module what it was before - turn it on, ignore it, and be doing some other role in the fleet, just less efficiently because you've got a boosting module, not a gun/launcher. That could've been easily achieved by simply changing things so that warfare links have to be on-grid, but Team Five-0 clearly has a more ambitious plan. Ambition's good. We should encourage them to be bold, to take grand steps - but we should also not be afraid to say 'that step goes off a cliff, dude' (and clearly, we're not).
Right now, we don't have enough in the way of specifics to really offer tweaks and fixes to how this will all work. The best way to get around the reactivation delay/cycle time/reload time issue may well be a secondary module that throws the whole model into chaos, or a special non-module boosting slot for the charges to go into - something like the fighter launch tubes on a carrier. Put the ammo/charges/scripts in the boosting slots, and when you activate the Command Burst Projector, it gives those boosts. You'd only need 1 Burst module, but then rigs or modules like the Command Processors could give additional boost slots.
As for the ammo itself... oy. At least make it use Heavy Water, hey guys? That crap just sits around doing absolutely nothing all over New Eden. |
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1878
|
Posted - 2016.08.30 15:56:33 -
[21] - Quote
JoAnnaBeth wrote:perhaps 'Explain' things a bit better for us undereducated folks
The irony of this clause in a massive, unformatted, poorly-punctuated, hard to read, unbroken wall of text is just sublime. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1878
|
Posted - 2016.08.30 16:06:57 -
[22] - Quote
Irregular Apocalypse wrote:And while we're at it, bump tacklers should go suspect and not be defended by concord.
And exactly how would that work? You trigger the proximity alert on another ship, you go suspect? Who gets the suspect flag then, the freighter, or the battleship, since they both trigger one another? Wouldn't that just make bumping even more effective, as it immediately means the freighter no longer enjoys CONCORD's protections? What happens when two freighters undock at a similar time and bump one another?
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1878
|
Posted - 2016.08.30 16:12:13 -
[23] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:Thogn wrote: d) the booster is then proud to shout : " I am the primary target."
Seen a few people say this, and it doesn't make sense. Primarying the booster ship will not remove the boosts he's sure to drop before you get him, so it's not the obviously correct tactical decision you are suggesting. You're just removing a ship who has likely already done the bulk of the "damage" he was likely to do. Probably better popping a logi or ECM boat or something.
In small groups, you remove the force multipliers. Boosting ships are a force multiplier. If you can identify the booster, and have a reasonable level of confidence that a)they've only got one or two, and b)you can kill them despite any logi on-field, then it only makes sense to kill them, and kill them quickly. Yes, they've applied their boosts... once. If they can't apply them again, then you've reduced the effectiveness of the rest of the fleet with that one kill.
Obviously, order of priority on force multipliers (including EWAR and Logistics) depends on the fleet composition, and which of them represents the greatest weak point. If the fleet has few logi, each one you kill is a considerable loss of combat effectiveness. OTOH, if they have a lot of logi, you may need to focus on them to be able to kill anything else.
Everything is fluid, and situational. But killing the boosting ship(s) is definitely on the list of 'obvious moves'. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1881
|
Posted - 2016.08.30 17:10:49 -
[24] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:Arrendis wrote: In small groups, you remove the force multipliers .... Yes, they've applied their boosts... once. If they can't apply them again, then you've reduced the effectiveness of the rest of the fleet with that one kill.
You reduce the effectiveness of the fleet two minutes from now. That's a really long time in the small group fights you're talking about.
Yes it is - which is why, as I said, it's a fluid determination. Can you hold them for two minutes? Can you nail the booster and then stay our of their way for two minutes? Will popping the booster cause them to withdraw so as not to risk that 2-minute timer?
Did you pop him immediately after he boosted, or 60-90 seconds after? That comes into play, too. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1882
|
Posted - 2016.08.30 18:50:37 -
[25] - Quote
Tau Cabalander wrote:Please tell me you didn't just write that: activate module manually? Seriously?
OMFG. That would be grounds for me to self-destruct my Rorqual for basic insurance, or reprocess it.
That appears to be the likely result of a 'reactivation delay' rather than a 'cycle time'. Think of the MJD or Cloaks - they're the only modules I can think of right now with a 'reactivation delay'. They don't auto-cycle. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1882
|
Posted - 2016.08.30 18:53:14 -
[26] - Quote
Jalen Mynar wrote:KhanidLady wrote:your rorqual has bonuses to shield links. personally i would stick some on it yes, but whats the point of a mining boost ship with combat links?
To ensure your mining fleet lives long enough to run away - or, if you're flying a bunch of Procurers and Skiffs, to eat the attackers alive while they scream about drone hordes. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1889
|
Posted - 2016.08.31 00:57:04 -
[27] - Quote
Sylvia Kildare wrote:Don't most caps need more than 1 ceptor to tackle 'em (if not a Hictor)? Thought they were baking that into the hulls on kinda a larger scale of ventures having +2 warp core strength. Just make it where Rorqs need 5 or 10 ceptors to tackle them or something, and maybe they'd have a prayer of making it away (and/or shorten the 5 minute mining siege mode timer to 1 minute like bastion like people have been suggesting).
Only supercapitals. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1889
|
Posted - 2016.08.31 00:58:54 -
[28] - Quote
Denavit wrote:So much tears and peanut brained people. stop crying guys, be constructive and find new ways to do things, cheezzus...
That's exactly what they're doing: trying to find a new and better way to revamp boosts. When the devs ask for feedback, giving honest feedback is constructive. Telling people not to give that feedback is expressly working against trying to help the devs get the best exchange of ideas possible. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1905
|
Posted - 2016.08.31 18:34:36 -
[29] - Quote
Brodit wrote:Does that make leadership in real life a bad idea?
No, followers make leadership in real life a bad idea. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1944
|
Posted - 2016.09.02 08:42:25 -
[30] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:some one who is cloaked can't hurt you
Spoken like someone who's never been scouted for a pipebomb. |
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1946
|
Posted - 2016.09.02 19:13:38 -
[31] - Quote
Krystyn wrote:And 3 Tech 3 Destroyers with 1 logi frig can wipe out an entire mining fleets even of procurers and then if they brought enough ammo they kill the orca too.
'an entire mining fleet'?
I've seen upwards of 50-60 procurers in the same bunch of rocks. No, 3 T3Ds and a Logifrig can't even hope to kill that before the drones eat the logifrig alive, and then start on the T3Ds.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2560
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 03:17:37 -
[32] - Quote
Just out of curiosity...
CCP, are the T2 command bursts on Sisi still supposed to only be as effective as the T1 command bursts? Are they supposed to be identifying themselves as 'Tech Level: 1'?
Just kinda wondering, since these are gonna be going live in 2 weeks. |
|
|
|