EVE Search - Black Ops - Upcoming changes

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Black Ops - Upcoming changes

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 20 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 9 post(s)

CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2009.03.31 17:13:00 - [1] We promised an update to these and some love. If you have been following the forums, you should know or do now know that we are very open in our desire to revisit black ops. In particular we wanted to add a fuel bay at least and allow them to jump to cynojammed systems as the major additions. The functionality which allows us to add special cargobays to ships (such as a fuel bay, ore hold, fighter bay and so on). That functionality is not ready yet so a black ops fuel bay sits very high on our wishlist still. For now, we have been able to allow covert cynosural fields to be activated in cynojammed systems so a covert ops fleet could bridge/jump into a cynojammed system and perhaps one of the side benefits of certain changes to other certain ships will be that quite a deadly combination for taking out the jammers is possible for the innovative strategists amongst you. Perhaps the truest form of black ops and behind enemy lines operations is now possible to a greater degree :) We would very much like testing of this new functionality and feedback on it on sisi. We are very much not done yet with Black Ops but one step closer to perfection and we hope most of you agree.

The Snowman Gallente Wurmz.	Posted - 2009.03.31 17:29:00 - [2] awesome! more sneaky sneaky :) first.
TZeer BURN EDEN	Posted - 2009.03.31 17:29:00 - [3] Yes! Finally.
Relyen Caldari Heavy Influence	Posted - 2009.03.31 17:30:00 - [4] Awesome, might have to train for one now. ________________________________ I am own.
Fenix Zealot Caldari Aeon Of Strife Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.03.31 17:39:00 - [5] Is there a plan to allow them to use the covert ops cloaking device. It has been argued that due to the price of the ships, and their limited role offensively, as well as their vulnerability defensively, they should be allowed that feature. Personally I think they should have their bonuses tweaked a bit to give them a more specific role (except for the widow perhaps). For my own part, however, I believe that all things considered, the covert ops cloak should be allowed on the black ops if for no other reason, than to promote its actual use on the battlefield. I believe more people would use them if they could use the covert ops cloaking device. ~Fenix En Taro Adun!
Cerui Tarshiel Minmatar Asset Reallocation Specialists Apoapsis Multiversal Consortium	Posted - 2009.03.31 17:51:00 - [6] Edited by: Cerui Tarshiel on 31/03/2009 17:52:25 Rofl, I just remarked on this in the stealth bomber thread that it was hopefully coming soon. This is really good first step, you've definantly got a beer or two coming at next fanfest. Now the question is how soon will the other boosts be implemented and turn that into a 6pack
DNSBLACK Gallente Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Associates	Posted - 2009.03.31 18:07:00 - [7] Edited by: DNSBLACK on 31/03/2009 18:17:03 Reserved 1. Please take a look at lowering the fuel cost of the Force Recons as the go thru the bridge. If this cant be done look at the bridge using Liquid Ozone or heavy water to send ships thru not the faction iso that the ship uses to jump with. That would also lessen the need for a fuel bay. 2. A few more light years on the range. 3. Never really understood the agility bonus for Black Op levels on the sin. Agility is kind of usless with the recent changes brought on by QR. A combat bonus like scan res increase or lowering the re-cloaking time after decloaking with a covert op cloak (<---- just sneaking this in). There are a few more changes that i have written down at home will put them here when I get home from work. DNSBlack
Samiloth Justinian Evolution KenZoku	Posted - 2009.03.31 18:09:00 - [8] Originally by: CCP Chronotis For now, we have been able to allow covert cynosural fields to be activated in cynojammed systems so a covert ops fleet could bridge/jump into a cynojammed system and perhaps one of the side benefits of certain changes to other certain ships will be that quite a deadly combination for taking out the jammers is possible for the innovative strategists amongst you. I will hope this means more types of ships can be bridged by a Black Op (by somehow classing them as cov op ships), or is it the brawler falcon and short range torpedo bomber that will become the ships to use against POSes?
Vall Kor Minmatar ZipZoom Kaboom	Posted - 2009.03.31 18:12:00 - [9] Originally by: Samiloth Justinian Originally by: CCP Chronotis For now, we have been able to allow covert cynosural fields to be activated in cynojammed systems so a covert ops fleet could bridge/jump into a cynojammed system and perhaps one of the side benefits of certain changes to other certain ships will be that quite a deadly combination for taking out the jammers is possible for the innovative strategists amongst you. I will hope this means more types of ships can be bridged by a Black Op (by somehow classing them as cov op ships), or is it the brawler falcon and short range torpedo bomber that will become the ships to use against POSes? kinda wondering how an SB is going to tank some pos guns.
Mr Frog Asshats and Alcoholics Turbo.	Posted - 2009.03.31 18:17:00 - [10] How about giving SB bombs a bonus against POS structures, it would actually give them a purpose.

Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2009.03.31 18:18:00 - [11] You are ruining my master plan dammit!!!! Having trained for Black Ops under the assumption that they would forever remain useless hangar ornaments, allowing me to whine about them in public! I demand you scrap these wild and fanciful ideas immediately. PS: Sounds awesome Chron, will you be holding back the changes until you get your special-cargo bay thingie to work or are you going ahead with them using a temporarily enlarged cargo capacity on them? PPS: What is the signature radius on cyno-jammers?
Ephemeron North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.03.31 18:19:00 - [12] removing the scan res penalty of cloak or simply increasing scan res to offset the cloak penalty would be another good boost. After all, these ships are meant to fly with cloaks, and no targeting delay after decloak - that doesn't work well with gimped scan res
Tarkina Koslix Deep Space Supplies Paxton Federation	Posted - 2009.03.31 18:21:00 - [13] Hi, if you really wanne improve a black ops, pls give the widow a little bit of love. It's tank is weaker than the scorpions one due to less shield cap, and t2 resistences are missing at all bo bses. > > "will be that quite a deadly combination for taking out the jammers is possible for the innovative strategists amongst you" > If you wanne kill a cyno jammer by bringing stealth bombers with torpedos and BS class ships, these ships have to be able to attack it without dieing instantly. Most jammers are positioned at death star towers. It would be very surprising if you can bring a 100 rr black op bs fleet to your target system. And shield tanks are not welcome there i'm afraid ;) someone in the cov ops thread said, that 0.0 systems have real good information channels. It you take this into account, a 4 LJ jump means 3 systems at best, there will be no surprise ;) And, if you get 100 ships for an attack together, you don't need to use black ops, you will just go there with normal ones: better dps, better tank, insureable and way easier to fly. With more range on the other side it would be a surprise. Tarkina
Batolemaeus Caldari Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.03.31 18:23:00 - [14] Originally by: CCP Chronotis For now, we have been able to allow covert cynosural fields to be activated in cynojammed systems so a covert ops fleet could bridge/jump into a cynojammed system and perhaps one of the side benefits of certain changes to other certain ships will be that quite a deadly combination for taking out the jammers is possible for the innovative strategists amongst you. Stealthbombers with Siegemods c/d ---------------------------------------------- Originally by: CCP Prism X In New Eden, EVE wins you.
Eigof Tahr Dirt Nap Squad	Posted - 2009.03.31 18:28:00 - [15] We will take what we can get! Thanks for the long overdue progress on the pre-nerfed Black Ops BS. Pos Guns (un-manned) take too long to target a frigate before it can fire off a few volleys and warp out. Stop thinking of conventional tactics, covert ops isn't conventional. ------- A rose, by any other name, would be "deadly thorn-bearing assault vegetation."
Dierdra Vaal Caldari Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2009.03.31 18:43:00 - [16] Sounds good, but don't stop there :) Fuel bay, increase in jump range and perhaps the ability to fit a covops cloak would be greatly appreciated. Vote Dierdra for CSM! Director of Training :: EVE University
Samiloth Justinian Evolution KenZoku	Posted - 2009.03.31 18:55:00 - [17] Originally by: Eigof Tahr We will take what we can get! Thanks for the long overdue progress on the pre-nerfed Black Ops BS. That is true. Originally by: Eigof Tahr Pos Guns (un-manned) take too long to target a frigate before it can fire off a few volleys and warp out. Stop thinking of conventional tactics, covert ops isn't conventional. The thing is that there usually is an enemy fleet guarding the system. If there is no enemy fleet around, then you can simply move your main BS fleet through the front door to knock out that jammer (and at the same time also have an effective fleet to use in the system when the caps arrive). Why would anyone want to cyno in the small stuff when you simply can move in the good stuff? So we can work with the assumption that it isn’t an empty (or near empty) system, or else the conventional fleet would be sent. Brawler falcons, torpedo bombers and such will not do good against POS gunners and a hostile fleet (or rather, the light support of a hostile fleet). Now, I like this change, it is a step in the right direction, but to somehow try to make the Black Op cyno squad into an anti-POS squad just makes no sense. That is not what they should be doing IMO, if CCP plans for them to have that role, then they probably need to make some big changes.
SexxxSlave	Posted - 2009.03.31 19:05:00 - [18] Originally by: Dierdra Vaal Sounds good, but don't stop there :) Fuel bay, increase in jump range and perhaps the ability to fit a covops cloak would be greatly appreciated. So eve uni can use their Black Ops fleet? lol
Ephemeron North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.03.31 19:07:00 - [19] Samiloth Justinian is completely right about the state of POS warfare In addition to strong enemy presence, you can pretty much count on having at least 1 titan guarding the cyno jammer any Black Ops and recon gang that dares to approach would be instantly slaughtered. So one thing for sure, Black Ops role shouldn't be about taking out the cyno jammer, but find some way to bypass it completely. How about this: BlackOps can enter cyno jammed system, then anchor a special device (that only works outside POS shields) that acts like a beacon to which anybody can warp, and when it's done onlining in 2-4 mins, it creates a regular cyno, bypassing cynojammer, that every friendly cap ship jump to and get bridged to. This would be fair to the enemy as they would have 2-4 minutes to warp to that device and destroy it
Alastairon	Posted - 2009.03.31 19:10:00 - [20] Originally by: Eigof Tahr Pos Guns (un-manned) take too long to target a frigate before it can fire off a few volleys and warp out. Stop thinking of conventional tactics, covert ops isn't conventional. Kay. Since I've done the math on using bombers for this exact purpose, I figure I'm as good as anyone to talk on this subject. So siddown and listen. For 25 bombers with an alpha of 2500 it takes 60 min to take down a cyno jammer, give or take 5 minutes. It will take a medium battery ~15sec to target a bomber. This is half the recloak time for the proposed 30-sec recloak time for bombers. A large battery will be a crapshoot at ~30sec. I don't like those odds at all. So, logistically, this isn't doable. Warpin/out times being added into the mix means that you're taking at least DOUBLE the amount of time it would normally take with the current Imp Cloak IIs. This is untenable. Chronotis, not to be your ever-present detractor, the concept of a fuel bay to the black ops ships is a fantastic idea. Seriously, fantastic. I wholeheartedly support this. But I cannot help but wonder what ships you're planning on it warping behind enemy lines to take out a jammer. The "brawling falcon"? Maybe the combat recon "long range rook"? Because it's certainly not the new "torp 30-sec cloak bomber". The PERFECT ship to complement the proposed Black Ops change is the purpose-built for this idea as-currently-on-tranquility Stealth Bomber. There's a great idea in here, Chronotis, and you've got part of it. But there's a discontinuity between this change to the Black Ops and the proposed changes to Recons and Bombers. I honestly, truly hope that you can bring them all into a cohesive, positive vision of covert ops ships that makes them valuable additions to the game. All the best, Al


CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2009.03.31 19:11:00 - [21] Originally by: Samiloth Justinian Now, I like this change, it is a step in the right direction, but to somehow try to make the Black Op cyno squad into an anti-POS squad just makes no sense. That is not what they should be doing IMO, if CCP plans for them to have that role, then they probably need to make some big changes. Although I hinted at that, it was more at the possibilities and opportunities this allows rather than inferring the direct ability to take out cyno jammers solely with black ops. We merely think this will allow for some interesting strategies and less issues with the wall of cyno jammers around null sec in some cases.

Captain Vampire	Posted - 2009.03.31 19:18:00 - [22] Cloak for these ships, covops or not, is next to useless with the instant local in 0.0. I assume the design role of black ops ships are to enter hostile space undetected and bring firepower/ewar capabilities to a greater extent than their cruiser counterparts. The concept is awesome and very interesting, but it is pretty much impossible to achieve this per se due to local. Improving the ships with a fuel bay and the ability to jump to cynojammed systems will improve the "fun/buck" ratio, but the black ops ships (and their cruiser counterparts in lesser extent) will not really fill their designated role until delayed local is introduced in 0.0.
Vina Caldari Destructive Influence KenZoku	Posted - 2009.03.31 19:19:00 - [23] Edited by: Vina on 31/03/2009 19:20:46 disrupting enemy logistics should be the role of a black ops squad. Since logistics in eve now consists of either jumping a JF with loads of stuff to a station, or jumping normal freighters through cyno jammed systems with jump bridges on, this requires the ability to disrupt enemy logistics AT A POS DIRECTLY. There are two ways I see of accomplishing this: 1. Give black ops a new module that does AoE pos targeting disruption field of like 20km around the ship so that the black ops and fleet can warp in and stay near eachother. This field would not allow any pos structures to lock any covert/black ops ships within the field. however as a trade off they would have near instant lock from any other ships, or something like that (or maybe not be able to warp out.) 2. Increase the ability of hacking modules to be able to "hack" cyno jammers and jump bridge modules to pull them offline after a set amount of time or a mini-game or something. Without doing something liek this, jumping into a cyno jammed system will only be good for one thing: easy gank of NPCing players, which is pretty much pointless. If you allow black ops to do what I have suggested, they will really have a new and very important role. Also, add a new ship class, tech 2 tier 2 BC for structure bombing :> -----------------------------------
Lysah Tribute	Posted - 2009.03.31 19:21:00 - [24] Edited by: Lysah Tribute on 31/03/2009 19:21:31 wrong forum.

CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2009.03.31 19:22:00 - [25] Originally by: TZeer some inputs: - Better scan resolution, or take away the scan resolution penalty you get for fitting a cloak. the scan res's have been increased a little and a small increase in cargo capacity added. Nothing too drastic though.

Alastairon Up2-NoGood Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2009.03.31 19:22:00 - [26] Originally by: CCP Chronotis We merely think this will allow for some interesting strategies and less issues with the wall of cyno jammers around null sec in some cases. And we wholeheartedly agree. Being able to covert cyno into/out of jammed systems will make alliance warfare much, much more interesting. Provided, of course, we have a cohesive, logical set of covert ops ships to utilize once we get there. I think this is possibly the most important aspect of the changes to Black Ops. It must function logically with the full compliment of covert ops ships. An overall vision and focusing, if you will.
Dr Resheph Amarr YOU ARE NOW READING THIS LOUDLY	Posted - 2009.03.31 19:23:00 - [27] Stealth Bombers might be able to use cloak to keep themselves safe from POS. Lock times aren't exactly amazing, and two SB with torps do the same DPS as a CNR/Blasterthron. The only issue is lag, and the 2000m activation distance.
Souju	Posted - 2009.03.31 19:24:00 - [28] Originally by: Alastairon Originally by: CCP Chronotis We merely think this will allow for some interesting strategies and less issues with the wall of cyno jammers around null sec in some cases. And we wholeheartedly agree. Being able to covert cyno into/out of jammed systems will make alliance warfare much, much more interesting. not really. No one camps cyno jammed systems, no one in 0.0 travels alone unless they are looking for pvp. No one pvps liek that anymore. Everyone uses jump bridge networks. Pos are far too mcuh of a safe haven and are killing the game. There needs to be a way for small gangs to directly interfere with their operation.
Alastairon Up2-NoGood Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2009.03.31 19:33:00 - [29] Originally by: Souju not really. No one camps cyno jammed systems, no one in 0.0 travels alone unless they are looking for pvp. No one pvps liek that anymore. Everyone uses jump bridge networks. Pos are far too mcuh of a safe haven and are killing the game. There needs to be a way for small gangs to directly interfere with their operation. Which is exactly what you can do with a well-coordinated Black Ops ship and a strike force of SBs and Recons as they are currently envisioned in the game. You can literally wage POS warfare without having to deal with the ponderousness and exposure traveling in enemy space through stargates forces you to. If you can cyno into jammed systems and take out the jammer, for example? Or their JBs? Perhaps put all their POS into reinforced and jump back out? Plenty of uses for the new Black Ops, with the rest of the CovOps as they stand currently on TQ.
fuxinos Caldari Guys 0f Sarcasm	Posted - 2009.03.31 19:35:00 - [30] Edited by: fuxinos on 31/03/2009 19:37:10 While you guys are at balancing already, why not buff ALL ships that seriously need a buff? They only need a few numbers changed, but you guys are trying to avoid buffing them for ages... Ferox (Damage), Prophecy (Damage), Nighthawk (Powergrid), Cerberus (CPU&Powergrid), Omen (CPU&Powergrid), Blood Raider ships (Bonis), Dread Guristas ships (Bonis), Raptor (4th Turret slot&Powergrid), and so on... I see no plaussible reason as to way it takes you guys so long to fix stuff, that are obviously so easy to fix.



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 20 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.