Oh i dunno....

they seem to be working

http://www.tk.konstipation.com/killboard/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=2586

They may be, but your link isn't!

They may be, but your link isn't!

It's a forum bug with ampersands. Can't be helped.

Works fine for me but that KB site needs some work. Either decrease the opacity of the black so we can read everything on that page or drop the very noisy space background.

Maybe you should take those sunglasses off?

I can read it fine

It's a forum bug with ampersands. Can't be helped.

We continue to have a great deal of success using Black Ops battleships to ambush unwitting prey. Its not a ship for the solo pilot. When properly utilized by a gang of stealthy ships its hilariously effective.

Do want longer LY range.

I can't help but wonder why, Mr. Total Pacifist. Someone has pvp alts...

I can't help but wonder why, Mr. Total Pacifist. Someone has pvp alts...

I wonder if you can use the black ops bridge with, oh, lets say a crane. Logistics just got a lot sexier, awww yeah. Also, black ops work fine for what they were intended to do. Learn to work the mechanics.

Considering the only other ship class that can do bridges are titans, Black Ops are well worth the price tag imo.

First person in the thread to understand what blackops are for.

You obvius havnt bridged a fleet of recons and bombers with a black op...... pls if you dont know where your talking about, dont post anything

Hurf Blurf, I never once bridged into 319.

Blackops are for bridging bombers and covops around. Its their role. Combat is not.

your wrong, since your a bad troll anyway i save me the effort of explaining again why your wrong... hf figuring it out

give them covert op cloaking device, then all will be good.

First person in the thread to understand what blackops are for.

give them covert op cloaking device, then all will be good.

Nope sorry no PVP alt. Only for the sake of being able to open a Black portal covering Emperor station in Amarr haha since it's just outside range atm

sometimes I wonder if you're a Frog. The Big one.

I don't even know what that means.

Am I ugly? Will I turn into a prince? Can I jump far? I die if you cover my pores?(that's probably true tho) (I gotta get out of this basement)

Black ops are OP as hell.
Look at Burn Eden stats using them and how efficient they are and how very rarelly they lose a back ops ship!
Sorry but their stats speaks miles on how good they are already, nevermind buffing them further!

you obviously know nothing about BLOPS please biomass

lol
Is BE capable of a great efficinecy at it? Yes or No? Answer is obviously Yes.
So, remind me who does not know anothing about blops again
Just cos you suck at it, does not mean blops are crap

roche you are a rly big troll, pls donr steamwalls in my polite topic and troll the **** out of people. The are in need of revision. It doesnt realy mean that if a group used it efficienty its a pro ship. It mean merly that be knows how to use it and pich the right fights with enough ppl. You should check my panther kills, i have super efficienty and im not even using guns! :p and also, why are they always using redeemers an widows and hardly never sins? ... You cant rly judsay bo or god or bad as the differance between them ishugh... One of the resons i trained them all & to l5, i guess theres nothing wrong having 6 bo in my hangar :p

Ask yourself this question. Should all ships be expected to do as good as the others withing the same ship class? THATS IS NOT EVE and never has been! Why are other faction ships not used as much as others? Why are some carriers used more than others? Why are some supers used much more than others? Why some t3 crusers used more than others? Its all down to situations and tactics.

Also you should check out RK. They are good at fielding efficiently widows and getting nice kills. They are effectivly shown that widows can be used with different tactics.

Also i hav seen videos of solo panthers and you claim also to do well using panthers. Its all down to tactics and how you use them. They do not suck! It only means some are better than others in some situations.

Within the first 3 pages there is at least 5 people that have said that black ops do well atm. So is that means they are ALL trolls or do they happen to agree that they dont need a buff? Its not a troll, its a fact and the stats support it.

Check this out.
http://www.cyno.psych-corp.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=29294
I dont know exactly whats their strategy here thought. Maybe they know something we dont know or they simly have the balls to do it anyway. Well done by Suddenly Spaceships XD. I got to admit I love this alliance name

As a everyday black ops pilot this ship needs more love.
You have my support on this matter.

Black Ops should have:

- Larger Fuel Bay
- Bridge recons and t3 amount should be lower
- Increased ly

Does Black Ops needs Covert cloak ?

My answer is NO, as they are atm is perfect. Having covert cloak makes them too powerful.

LOL, so you think;
the sin is a good ship?
10 ppl finding it not needed to balance is representive
blobbing 2 maurauders with 15 BO is making them fine?

As a everyday black ops pilot this ship needs more love.
You have my support on this matter.

Black Ops should have:

- Larger Fuel Bay
- Bridge recons and t3 amount should be lower
- Increased ly

Does Black Ops needs Covert cloak ?

My answer is NO, as they are atm is perfect. Having covert cloak makes them too powerful.

Another neat perk, which I think will probably make them OP, is having each have an ewar bonus. So a redeemer with a neuting bonus, panther with a web bonus and sin with a pointing range bonus. This would eliminate the need for recons on the fleet.

People will hate you for that comment.

But really, the only thing that would allow BO to do that they can't already is warp cloaked. Which every other ship in a BO gang can do.

It would also allow CCP to remove the cloaked velocity bonus, and replace it with something useful. Like a combat bonus, so it can do something besides open bridges. Or a fuel consumption bonus, so you can take the gang further out. Or something, anything, other than a bonus that just what you can already do with a module that the ship is fitting anyway.

Ironic the "Black Ops" ship, which Black Ops implies bad assed is in actuality nothing more than a kind of jump gate industrial.

Tank sucks...
Clock sucks...
DPS sucks...

See, it is a jump gate industrial with a bad assed name.

I don't even know what that means.

Am I ugly? Will I turn into a prince? Can I jump far? I die if you cover my pores?(that's probably true tho) (I gotta get out of this basement)

Black ops are OP as hell.
Look at Burn Eden stats using them and how efficient they are and how very rarelly they lose a back ops ship!
Sorry but their stats speaks miles on how good they are already, nevermind buffing them further!

Enough said!

Obvious troll is far too obvious.

1/10.

Keep practising!

I get it wrong that you're a useless troll/mindless fanboi/girl, O great NPC-corp generic forum-alt?

No, I think not.

Next!

Counterpoints to a discussion will always be read as trolling in the minds of imbeciles.

Exept when his counterpoints were stupid, one sided and an obvius brainfart...

Anyhow, reported it anyway so this litter wont derail this topic... Damn trolls, ccp need to make a cave section here and implement prinesses ingame so they can kidnap them and hide in the caves!!

agree completely with this. Covert Ops cloaks are not needed, although it be nice not to erase the scan res penalty from cloaking devices.

Having to have 1-2 cloaky haulers and BO with cargo expanders for a deep insertion (lol) seems rather silly to me.

the dps and tank of the BO is fine. But I'd love to see people using BO more.

Another neat perk, which I think will probably make them OP, is having each have an ewar bonus. So a redeemer with a neuting bonus, panther with a web bonus and sin with a pointing range bonus. This would eliminate the need for recons on the fleet.

in the end, improve the BO in nearly any way and ill be happy.

you defenetly dont know what you are talking about regarding black ops.

lol, enlighten us, are you saying the cloak is ok?

Or maybe you think it has great DPS?

Or the tank, *snicker*, is that good?

Shields base:
Widow = 5312
Scorp = 6641
Scorp Navy = 9961
Rattlesnake 12750

The tank is less than the base T1 ship by nearly 20%.

It is outclassed as a fighting ship in all cases with ships of similar size.

lol, enlighten us, are you saying the cloak is ok?

Or maybe you think it has great DPS?

Or the tank, *snicker*, is that good?

Shields base:
Widow = 5312
Scorp = 6641
Scorp Navy = 9961
Rattlesnake 12750

The tank is less than the base T1 ship by nearly 20%.

It is outclassed as a fighting ship in all cases with ships of similar size.

Hi Guys.
I am part of a small lowsec corp and we sometimes use blackops to break gatecamp that would not be possible to attack in other ways (because of scouting and ~100AU warp)
And they work great for that!
Yes, the fuelbay is not that big, but we drop a container with more fuel before bridging, so that solves that problem.
Tank is a little bit meh .. but if we can we also bridge logistics.

I totaly agree on the DPS part, it is low. But would it be good for the game if they would make more damage?

Maybe we should have 2 different kind of Blackops, one with large fuel bay and cover cloak and one with DPS/Tank Bonus?

Can you provide us with killboard examples of such battles to se you composition plz.
thx

lol, enlighten us, are you saying the cloak is ok?

Or maybe you think it has great DPS?

Or the tank, *snicker*, is that good?

Shields base:
Widow = 5312
Scorp = 6641
Scorp Navy = 9961
Rattlesnake 12750

The tank is less than the base T1 ship by nearly 20%.

It is outclassed as a fighting ship in all cases with ships of similar size.

Black Op Window

Back from vacation and thought this thread could use some dev love.


Yes, Black Ops definitely need some attention; the main problem with them is the lack of role focus. Some (like the Redeemer or Window) are trying to achieve a purpose directly on the battlefield, similar with recons by having an electronic warfare or damage related bonus. On top of that, they also are trying to fulfill a fleet support role with their cyno capability, which is quite in contradiction with the previous one.

And they aren't great at both: their raw HP is quite lower than tech 1 battleships (and tech 2 resistance boosts aren't stellar either), have less turret and missile hardpoints than tech 1 counterparts and remain more expensive to run, which doesn't make them appealing for direct engagement purposes. They also lack autonomy in their support role, as they are quite short ranged, fuel hungry and this issue is amplified by their small fuel bay forcing them to rely on other ships to resupply frequently during an operation.

The current plan is to take one these two listed roles out of the Black Ops ship class and reshape them to do the remaining one well. If they are disruption ships using EW, they should have more presence on the battlefield for their pricetag. If they are support tools for surprise attacks and small gang movement into enemy space, then they should have the proper bay, range and tools to do so accordingly.

The role dropped out of the Black Ops would then be moved to a new class in the tech 2 battleship range to replace for the loss.

We acknowledge some entities out there are using Black Ops with great effect when backed up with the proper organization, structure and out-of-the-box thinking to make use of them in unorthodox situations. While we don't want to take that away, Black Ops should be more effective without such heavy commitment into them (a statistic query we ran at the beginning of this year shown there are more Titan than Block Ops pilot on TQ). They should be great force multiplier tools for small groups to take on larger ones by surprise, and should be able to do so relatively well without relying on a dedicated support structure.

So, when would this be coming out? Unfortunately, not for a while. As explained in the various blogs before, our current priority is to fix tech 1 ships as a whole before moving to more advanced hulls. That is because we need a solid frame of reference to rely on and compare hulls to before we can move to more delicate and complex ships, like Black Ops or tech 3 hulls.


Also don't forget this is just our long term plan for now, and things may change in the future. In all cases they are not forgotten, but will take time to get to.

Hope that helps!

So, when would this be coming out? Unfortunately, not for a while.

So, when would this be coming out? Unfortunately, not for a while. As explained in the various blogs before, our current priority is to fix tech 1 ships as a whole before moving to more advanced hulls. That is because we need a solid frame of reference to rely on and compare hulls to before we can move to more delicate and complex ships, like Black Ops or tech 3 hulls.


Also don't forget this is just our long term plan for now, and things may change in the future. In all cases they are not forgotten, but will take time to get to.

Hope that helps!

a statistic query we ran at the beginning of this year shown there are more Titan than Block Ops pilot on TQ

Thank you for this response, as a member of one of the groups you mention that uses Black Ops all the time this is very encouraging.

Once T1 is sorted (and hopefully the drake nerfed!) could you please prioritise Black Ops in the T2 rebalancing. There isn't really any T2 class that is as broken as the Black Ops!!!

PLEASE EXCUSE ME ASKING, BUT DOES THIS MEAN THERE ARE MORE PLAYERS SITTING IN A TITAN AT ANY GIVEN TIME, MORE PLAYERS THAT LEARNED THE TITAN SKILL THAN THOSE THAT INJECTED BLACK OPS, OR REALLY MORE TITANS IN SPACE THEN THERE ARE BLACK OPS IN HANGARS SOMEWHERE?
TITAN PILOTS ARE DEDICATED ALTS, WHILE BLACK OPS PILOTS MIGHT JUST HAVE IT STASHED AWAY SOMEWHERE.

I HUMBLY AWAIT YOUR CLARIFICATIONS IN THIS MATTER.

PLEASE EXCUSE ME ASKING, BUT DOES THIS MEAN THERE ARE MORE PLAYERS SITTING IN A TITAN AT ANY GIVEN TIME, MORE PLAYERS THAT LEARNED THE TITAN SKILL THAN THOSE THAT INJECTED BLACK OPS, OR REALLY MORE TITANS IN SPACE THEN THERE ARE BLACK OPS IN HANGARS SOMEWHERE?
TITAN PILOTS ARE DEDICATED ALTS, WHILE BLACK OPS PILOTS MIGHT JUST HAVE IT STASHED AWAY SOMEWHERE.

I HUMBLY AWAIT YOUR CLARIFICATIONS IN THIS MATTER.

Have to agree here, since blackops are so far out on the replacements behind all T1's and then even when it ets to T2's they are battleships so will be hit nearly last.. .

Why not just do some basic number shuffling atleast on fuel bays and maybe a small bonus per level to reduce fuel usage more... its kinda nuts at this point atleast show them some short term love considering how negected they are, i mean no one expects a fix right now but a bandaid for the time being till you get around to T2 BS's would be cool.

So, when would this be coming out? Unfortunately, not for a while.

Yitterbium...

So you're saying we'll see a T2 Abaddon/Maelstrom/Hyperion hull...

PLEASE EXCUSE ME ASKING, BUT DOES THIS MEAN THERE ARE MORE PLAYERS SITTING IN A TITAN AT ANY GIVEN TIME, MORE PLAYERS THAT LEARNED THE TITAN SKILL THAN THOSE THAT INJECTED BLACK OPS, OR REALLY MORE TITANS IN SPACE THEN THERE ARE BLACK OPS IN HANGARS SOMEWHERE?
TITAN PILOTS ARE DEDICATED ALTS, WHILE BLACK OPS PILOTS MIGHT JUST HAVE IT STASHED AWAY SOMEWHERE.

I HUMBLY AWAIT YOUR CLARIFICATIONS IN THIS MATTER.

Thanks a ton for the dev reply. I just hope down the line that when you do get to them, you remember that there is already a dedicated ewar platform in the black ops gang. Really zero need for another one.

Back from vacation and thought this thread could use some dev love.


Yes, Black Ops definitely need some attention; the main problem with them is the lack of role focus. Some (like the Redeemer or Window) are trying to achieve a purpose directly on the battlefield, similar with recons by having an electronic warfare or damage related bonus. On top of that, they also are trying to fulfill a fleet support role with their cyno capability, which is quite in contradiction with the previous one.

And they aren't great at both: their raw HP is quite lower than tech 1 battleships (and tech 2 resistance boosts aren't stellar either), have less turret and missile hardpoints than tech 1 counterparts and remain more expensive to run, which doesn't make them appealing for direct engagement purposes. They also lack autonomy in their support role, as they are quite short ranged, fuel hungry and this issue is amplified by their small fuel bay forcing them to rely on other ships to resupply frequently during an operation.

The current plan is to take one these two listed roles out of the Black Ops ship class and reshape them to do the remaining one well. If they are disruption ships using EW, they should have more presence on the battlefield for their pricetag. If they are support tools for surprise attacks and small gang movement into enemy space, then they should have the proper bay, range and tools to do so accordingly.

The role dropped out of the Black Ops would then be moved to a new class in the tech 2 battleship range to replace for the loss.

We acknowledge some entities out there are using Black Ops with great effect when backed up with the proper organization, structure and out-of-the-box thinking to make use of them in unorthodox situations. While we don't want to take that away, Black Ops should be more effective without such heavy commitment into them (a statistic query we ran at the beginning of this year shown there are more Titan than Block Ops pilot on TQ). They should be great force multiplier tools for small groups to take on larger ones by surprise, and should be able to do so relatively well without relying on a dedicated support structure.

So, when would this be coming out? Unfortunately, not for a while. As explained in the various blogs before, our current priority is to fix tech 1 ships as a whole before moving to more advanced hulls. That is because we need a solid frame of reference to rely on and compare hulls to before we can move to more delicate and complex ships, like Black Ops or tech 3 hulls.


Also don't forget this is just our long term plan for now, and things may change in the future. In all cases they are not forgotten, but will take time to get to.

Hope that helps!

PLEASE EXCUSE ME ASKING, BUT DOES THIS MEAN THERE ARE MORE PLAYERS SITTING IN A TITAN AT ANY GIVEN TIME, MORE PLAYERS THAT LEARNED THE TITAN SKILL THAN THOSE THAT INJECTED BLACK OPS, OR REALLY MORE TITANS IN SPACE THEN THERE ARE BLACK OPS IN HANGARS SOMEWHERE?
TITAN PILOTS ARE DEDICATED ALTS, WHILE BLACK OPS PILOTS MIGHT JUST HAVE IT STASHED AWAY SOMEWHERE.

I HUMBLY AWAIT YOUR CLARIFICATIONS IN THIS MATTER.

Back from vacation and thought this thread could use some dev love.


Yes, Black Ops definitely need some attention; the main problem with them is the lack of role focus. Some (like the Redeemer or Window) are trying to achieve a purpose directly on the battlefield, similar with recons by having an electronic warfare or damage related bonus. On top of that, they also are trying to fulfill a fleet support role with their cyno capability, which is quite in contradiction with the previous one.

And they aren't great at both: their raw HP is quite lower than tech 1 battleships (and tech 2 resistance boosts aren't stellar either), have less turret and missile hardpoints than tech 1 counterparts and remain more expensive to run, which doesn't make them appealing for direct engagement purposes. They also lack autonomy in their support role, as they are quite short ranged, fuel hungry and this issue is amplified by their small fuel bay forcing them to rely on other ships to resupply frequently during an operation.

The current plan is to take one these two listed roles out of the Black Ops ship class and reshape them to do the remaining one well. If they are disruption ships using EW, they should have more presence on the battlefield for their pricetag. If they are support tools for surprise attacks and small gang movement into enemy space, then they should have the proper bay, range and tools to do so accordingly.

The role dropped out of the Black Ops would then be moved to a new class in the tech 2 battleship range to replace for the loss.

We acknowledge some entities out there are using Black Ops with great effect when backed up with the proper organization, structure and out-of-the-box thinking to make use of them in unorthodox situations. While we don't want to take that away, Black Ops should be more effective without such heavy commitment into them (a statistic query we ran at the beginning of this year shown there are more Titan than Block Ops pilot on TQ). They should be great force multiplier tools for small groups to take on larger ones by surprise, and should be able to do so relatively well without relying on a dedicated support structure.

So, when would this be coming out? Unfortunately, not for a while. As explained in the various blogs before, our current priority is to fix tech 1 ships as a whole before moving to more advanced hulls. That is because we need a solid frame of reference to rely on and compare hulls to before we can move to more delicate and complex ships, like Black Ops or tech 3 hulls.


Also don't forget this is just our long term plan for now, and things may change in the future. In all cases they are not forgotten, but will take time to get to.

Hope that helps!

Also don't forget this is just our long term plan for now, and things may change in the future. In all cases they are not forgotten, but will take time to get to.

Hope that helps!

Why not just do some basic number shuffling atleast on fuel bays and maybe a small bonus per level to reduce fuel usage more... its kinda nuts at this point atleast show them some short term love considering how negected they are, i mean no one expects a fix right now but a bandaid for the time being till you get around to T2 BS's would be cool.

Yitterbium...

So you're saying we'll see a T2 Abaddon/Maelstrom/Hyperion hull...

do you even know what a "fanboi" is?
yeah and your 3 corp alt is not generic! ohh boy...
you are not too clever are you

Back from vacation and thought this thread could use some dev love.


Yes, Black Ops definitely need some attention; the main problem with them is the lack of role focus. Some (like the Redeemer or Window) are trying to achieve a purpose directly on the battlefield, similar with recons by having an electronic warfare or damage related bonus. On top of that, they also are trying to fulfill a fleet support role with their cyno capability, which is quite in contradiction with the previous one.

And they aren't great at both: their raw HP is quite lower than tech 1 battleships (and tech 2 resistance boosts aren't stellar either), have less turret and missile hardpoints than tech 1 counterparts and remain more expensive to run, which doesn't make them appealing for direct engagement purposes. They also lack autonomy in their support role, as they are quite short ranged, fuel hungry and this issue is amplified by their small fuel bay forcing them to rely on other ships to resupply frequently during an operation.

The current plan is to take one these two listed roles out of the Black Ops ship class and reshape them to do the remaining one well. If they are disruption ships using EW, they should have more presence on the battlefield for their pricetag. If they are support tools for surprise attacks and small gang movement into enemy space, then they should have the proper bay, range and tools to do so accordingly.

The role dropped out of the Black Ops would then be moved to a new class in the tech 2 battleship range to replace for the loss.

We acknowledge some entities out there are using Black Ops with great effect when backed up with the proper organization, structure and out-of-the-box thinking to make use of them in unorthodox situations. While we don't want to take that away, Black Ops should be more effective without such heavy commitment into them (a statistic query we ran at the beginning of this year shown there are more Titan than Block Ops pilot on TQ). They should be great force multiplier tools for small groups to take on larger ones by surprise, and should be able to do so relatively well without relying on a dedicated support structure.

So, when would this be coming out? Unfortunately, not for a while. As explained in the various blogs before, our current priority is to fix tech 1 ships as a whole before moving to more advanced hulls. That is because we need a solid frame of reference to rely on and compare hulls to before we can move to more delicate and complex ships, like Black Ops or tech 3 hulls.


Also don't forget this is just our long term plan for now, and things may change in the future. In all cases they are not forgotten, but will take time to get to.

Hope that helps!

Nope sorry no PVP alt. Only for the sake of being able to open a Black portal covering Emperor station in Amarr haha since it's just outside range atm

Thank you for this response, as a member of one of the groups you mention that uses Black Ops all the time this is very encouraging.

Once T1 is sorted (and hopefully the drake nerfed!) could you please prioritise Black Ops in the T2 rebalancing. There isn't really any T2 class that is as broken as the Black Ops!!!

And they aren't great at both: their raw HP is quite lower than tech 1 battleships (and tech 2 resistance boosts aren't stellar either), have less turret and missile hardpoints than tech 1 counterparts and remain more expensive to run, which doesn't make them appealing for direct engagement purposes. They also lack autonomy in their support role, as they are quite short ranged, fuel hungry and this issue is amplified by their small fuel bay forcing them to rely on other ships to resupply frequently during an operation.

I've trained for blackops and but don't fly them due to cost/effectiveness. However, I'm very interested in flying them once their fixed.Sounds like you aren't sure where to take these ships, so let me offer my opinion:



The heart and soul of blackops is the ability to portal ships around and launch those surprise attacks. That's the role you should choose. It isn't even a choice. But simply having the ability to portal ships around effectively won't fix these ships. They will forever be a niche ship unless they can be viable on the battlefield. As you pointed out, they are inferior in many ways to their T1 counterparts, and this shows in combat.

They need to be T2 ships, with resistances, hitpoints, hardpoints, etc that match up with other T2 ships. I'd like to see them with the covert ops cloak so they can move around with their covert group - because once you get your covert group in place, you want to be able to move around with them. In exchange, their blackops battleship skill bonuses focus on portaling ability rather than weapon/fighting ability. That'll keep them from being overpowered, but still dangerous.

...

The role dropped out of the Black Ops would then be moved to a new class in the tech 2 battleship range to replace for the loss.

...!

The Drake doesn't need nerfing. It could use a slight buff (increase speed slightly, reduce signature radius significantly)--take that completely irrational zealotry elsewhere, please.

yay words!

CCP Yitterbium,

Mildly Intoxicated which is likely one of the most active Clandestine Warfare alliances preforming black ops drops on a daily basis in the as you described as the 'out-of-the-box thinking' way to make them effective would appreciate the opportunity to help influence the future of these ships. The challenge of making them worth there price-tag is a difficult and time consuming task however they are in there current form (besides the Widow and the Sin) which are in need of some adjustments they offer some of the most intensive PvP this game has to offer.

However it should be clear that Black Ops BS, and the role they preform is an extremely specialist role in this game, and that factor should not be removed from the ship, though it's defiantly agreeable that change is needed. Mildly would be honored to speak with CCP in regards to the current use/and possible future use of these ships because we love these ships!

As a long time black ops pilot, the dev post raises some concern with me. I'm not sure that forcing me to afford another black ops capable battleship just so both can enforce their roles with maximum capability is the right way to go. Black ops gangs are already small and specialized, and having one player sacrifice himself to be nothing but a mobile command center / transportation facilitator is going to cause some ire.

But you already have a cloaky hauler tracing your steps, so if he could be in the "mobile command centre" nothing is lost, right?

Given that that ship would have enough fuel for multiply jumps of course.

Most active Clandestine warfare dropping carebears tengus in anoms with a dozen of black ops .

Funny how black ops operations turned into Ninja-kills-fest from some clueless carebears . You don't see any BOs in actual fights , aside from some widows cloaked a 100k from low sec gates .

You have several problems to solve before touching BLOPS.

-People tend to pvp less because clone insurance?

-People tend to not train BLOPS because takes too long?

-Because there's nothing you can do with a BLOPS you can't do with a cheaper ship, except hot drop raters at 10:1 and this is maybe some game play style only a few enjoy?

I think you'll have to wait a couple years until battleships and T2 variants are looked at, battleships are not worthy to train for anything else than pimpy rating/mission BS, and this is the problem that needs to be solved in the first place.
Make you desire train battle ships because they're good and not because it's carrier prerequisite or just to get a pirate version to kill red crosses.

Black Ops is not just for PVP, black op transport rocks!.

I think what you're looking for is a jump freighter.

Back from vacation and thought this thread could use some dev love.


Yes, Black Ops definitely need some attention; the main problem with them is the lack of role focus. Some (like the Redeemer or Window) are trying to achieve a purpose directly on the battlefield, similar with recons by having an electronic warfare or damage related bonus. On top of that, they also are trying to fulfill a fleet support role with their cyno capability, which is quite in contradiction with the previous one.

And they aren't great at both: their raw HP is quite lower than tech 1 battleships (and tech 2 resistance boosts aren't stellar either), have less turret and missile hardpoints than tech 1 counterparts and remain more expensive to run, which doesn't make them appealing for direct engagement purposes. They also lack autonomy in their support role, as they are quite short ranged, fuel hungry and this issue is amplified by their small fuel bay forcing them to rely on other ships to resupply frequently during an operation.

The current plan is to take one these two listed roles out of the Black Ops ship class and reshape them to do the remaining one well. If they are disruption ships using EW, they should have more presence on the battlefield for their pricetag. If they are support tools for surprise attacks and small gang movement into enemy space, then they should have the proper bay, range and tools to do so accordingly.

The role dropped out of the Black Ops would then be moved to a new class in the tech 2 battleship range to replace for the loss.

We acknowledge some entities out there are using Black Ops with great effect when backed up with the proper organization, structure and out-of-the-box thinking to make use of them in unorthodox situations. While we don't want to take that away, Black Ops should be more effective without such heavy commitment into them (a statistic query we ran at the beginning of this year shown there are more Titan than Block Ops pilot on TQ). They should be great force multiplier tools for small groups to take on larger ones by surprise, and should be able to do so relatively well without relying on a dedicated support structure.

So, when would this be coming out? Unfortunately, not for a while. As explained in the various blogs before, our current priority is to fix tech 1 ships as a whole before moving to more advanced hulls. That is because we need a solid frame of reference to rely on and compare hulls to before we can move to more delicate and complex ships, like Black Ops or tech 3 hulls.


Also don't forget this is just our long term plan for now, and things may change in the future. In all cases they are not forgotten, but will take time to get to.

Hope that helps!

Here, I will make it easy for you. Double the fuel bay, give them all a remote rep range bonus and boost the resists to bring them in line with other Tech 2 ships. Give the Redeemer an ewar bonus so it can be useful (think Bahlgorn without the webs) and there you go. Treat them sort of like mini carriers. Remote reps grant survivabilty, and ewar grants force multiplication. The extra fuel does not allow them all access without impunity, but does give the ship a little more allowance for expedient movement without the complexities of dropping cans for fuel etc. during the very short covops cyno window.

Here is the trick CCP, you don't have to buff or nerf something in leaps and bounds in order to improve balance. Simply making a small change, giving it a month to simmer and see the results then gently nudge again will suffice.

Are you seriously saying an RR range bonus on a bs hull is a small change??

Seriously am i the only person in EVE that specialises in Black Ops ships cuz i do realise that it will fulfill my solo piracy ways
Am i the only person that realises the power of the Cloak speed bonus ?(This is the main reason I LOVE THOSE SHIPS)
Am i the only person that realises the power of no recolaboration time on the claok ?(Isnt that obvious ? This is total badass !)

However they can get sum love by sum stats buff ,BUT REMOVING those amazing Skill bonuses is a no no ! So girls get ur faces
out of ur asses and start using sum love and creativity when u fit ur ships !

UPDATE Ship SET Fuel_Bay_Capacity=2000, Maximum_Jump_Range=4 WHERE Type="BlackOps"

You've obviously never used the static data dump.

Back from vacation and thought this thread could use some dev love.


Yes, Black Ops definitely need some attention; the main problem with them is the lack of role focus. Some (like the Redeemer or Window) are trying to achieve a purpose directly on the battlefield, similar with recons by having an electronic warfare or damage related bonus. On top of that, they also are trying to fulfill a fleet support role with their cyno capability, which is quite in contradiction with the previous one.

And they aren't great at both: their raw HP is quite lower than tech 1 battleships (and tech 2 resistance boosts aren't stellar either), have less turret and missile hardpoints than tech 1 counterparts and remain more expensive to run, which doesn't make them appealing for direct engagement purposes. They also lack autonomy in their support role, as they are quite short ranged, fuel hungry and this issue is amplified by their small fuel bay forcing them to rely on other ships to resupply frequently during an operation.

The current plan is to take one these two listed roles out of the Black Ops ship class and reshape them to do the remaining one well. If they are disruption ships using EW, they should have more presence on the battlefield for their pricetag. If they are support tools for surprise attacks and small gang movement into enemy space, then they should have the proper bay, range and tools to do so accordingly.

The role dropped out of the Black Ops would then be moved to a new class in the tech 2 battleship range to replace for the loss.

We acknowledge some entities out there are using Black Ops with great effect when backed up with the proper organization, structure and out-of-the-box thinking to make use of them in unorthodox situations. While we don't want to take that away, Black Ops should be more effective without such heavy commitment into them (a statistic query we ran at the beginning of this year shown there are more Titan than Block Ops pilot on TQ). They should be great force multiplier tools for small groups to take on larger ones by surprise, and should be able to do so relatively well without relying on a dedicated support structure.

So, when would this be coming out? Unfortunately, not for a while. As explained in the various blogs before, our current priority is to fix tech 1 ships as a whole before moving to more advanced hulls. That is because we need a solid frame of reference to rely on and compare hulls to before we can move to more delicate and complex ships, like Black Ops or tech 3 hulls.


Also don't forget this is just our long term plan for now, and things may change in the future. In all cases they are not forgotten, but will take time to get to.

Hope that helps!

Hope that helps!

"If they are support tools for surprise attacks and small gang movement into enemy space"

Sounds like black ops could use a two hulls to fulfill the different roles. Is there any real need to add another class of hull when HACs, recons, command ships and many others have two hulls per class?

It seems like a fleet support blackops cyno hull and a combat oriented hull would be a pretty nice way to solve the dual role problem.

Back from vacation and thought this thread could use some dev love.


Yes, Black Ops definitely need some attention; the main problem with them is the lack of role focus. Some (like the Redeemer or Window) are trying to achieve a purpose directly on the battlefield, similar with recons by having an electronic warfare or damage related bonus. On top of that, they also are trying to fulfill a fleet support role with their cyno capability, which is quite in contradiction with the previous one.

And they aren't great at both: their raw HP is quite lower than tech 1 battleships (and tech 2 resistance boosts aren't stellar either), have less turret and missile hardpoints than tech 1 counterparts and remain more expensive to run, which doesn't make them appealing for direct engagement purposes. They also lack autonomy in their support role, as they are quite short ranged, fuel hungry and this issue is amplified by their small fuel bay forcing them to rely on other ships to resupply frequently during an operation.

The current plan is to take one these two listed roles out of the Black Ops ship class and reshape them to do the remaining one well. If they are disruption ships using EW, they should have more presence on the battlefield for their pricetag. If they are support tools for surprise attacks and small gang movement into enemy space, then they should have the proper bay, range and tools to do so accordingly.

The role dropped out of the Black Ops would then be moved to a new class in the tech 2 battleship range to replace for the loss.

We acknowledge some entities out there are using Black Ops with great effect when backed up with the proper organization, structure and out-of-the-box thinking to make use of them in unorthodox situations. While we don't want to take that away, Black Ops should be more effective without such heavy commitment into them (a statistic query we ran at the beginning of this year shown there are more Titan than Block Ops pilot on TQ). They should be great force multiplier tools for small groups to take on larger ones by surprise, and should be able to do so relatively well without relying on a dedicated support structure.

So, when would this be coming out? Unfortunately, not for a while. As explained in the various blogs before, our current priority is to fix tech 1 ships as a whole before moving to more advanced hulls. That is because we need a solid frame of reference to rely on and compare hulls to before we can move to more delicate and complex ships, like Black Ops or tech 3 hulls.


Also don't forget this is just our long term plan for now, and things may change in the future. In all cases they are not forgotten, but will take time to get to.

Hope that helps!

Within the first 3 pages there is at least 5 people that have said that black ops do well atm. So is that means they are ALL trolls or do they happen to agree that they dont need a buff? Its not a troll, its a fact and the stats support it.

[multi-quote snippy-snippy]

Most active Clandestine warfare dropping carebears tengus in anoms with a dozen of black ops .

Funny how black ops operations turned into Ninja-kills-fest from some clueless carebears . You don't see any BOs in actual fights , aside from some widows cloaked a 100k from low sec gates .

Ytterbium,

I'm a bit concerned by your post that you guys are going to do the old 'sledgehammer to crack a nut' job on Black Ops and break something in the process. They aren't as 'broken' as a lot of the masses would have (Covert Ops cloak - god no, they don't need that at all) and actually tweaking is the order of the day.

As Emperor Ryan has already eluded to, these are very specialist ships for specialist roles; Mildy have great success with their BOPS doctrine, Noir. has slowly been developing our own take on Black Ops, Dirt Nap Squad do completely their own thing too. The biggest issue, which I think all would agree on, is the fuel usage - it simply isn't sustainable for longer term, larger scale operations. Range could possibly do with a tweak upwards, HP's might do well to also be included.

They aren't exactly slouches in the DPS department - I've flown my Sin on combat drops and in-system fights since 2010 (sadly, kill-mails were broken in the early days and show as GÇÿunknownGÇÖ), recently it just got a whole lot better and a well flown, properly fitted Sin is a beast. I do hope you donGÇÖt turn it into a glorified taxi service.

If I had one general complaint itGÇÖs that they're too expensive for what they are, in my opinion the simplest solution is to reduce the build costs, with a [wet finger in the air] target market price of 350-400M, making their use more palatable. It would also from a game balance be much less risker than tearing up the script and going off on a tangent making new ships.

TL:DR

Don't go OTT on 're-balancing' Black Ops, tweaks now, don't break in the longer run.

Back from vacation and thought this thread could use some dev love.


Yes, Black Ops definitely need some attention; the main problem with them is the lack of role focus. Some (like the Redeemer or Window) are trying to achieve a purpose directly on the battlefield, similar with recons by having an electronic warfare or damage related bonus. On top of that, they also are trying to fulfill a fleet support role with their cyno capability, which is quite in contradiction with the previous one.

And they aren't great at both: their raw HP is quite lower than tech 1 battleships (and tech 2 resistance boosts aren't stellar either), have less turret and missile hardpoints than tech 1 counterparts and remain more expensive to run, which doesn't make them appealing for direct engagement purposes. They also lack autonomy in their support role, as they are quite short ranged, fuel hungry and this issue is amplified by their small fuel bay forcing them to rely on other ships to resupply frequently during an operation.

The current plan is to take one these two listed roles out of the Black Ops ship class and reshape them to do the remaining one well. If they are disruption ships using EW, they should have more presence on the battlefield for their pricetag. If they are support tools for surprise attacks and small gang movement into enemy space, then they should have the proper bay, range and tools to do so accordingly.

The role dropped out of the Black Ops would then be moved to a new class in the tech 2 battleship range to replace for the loss.

We acknowledge some entities out there are using Black Ops with great effect when backed up with the proper organization, structure and out-of-the-box thinking to make use of them in unorthodox situations. While we don't want to take that away, Black Ops should be more effective without such heavy commitment into them (a statistic query we ran at the beginning of this year shown there are more Titan than Block Ops pilot on TQ). They should be great force multiplier tools for small groups to take on larger ones by surprise, and should be able to do so relatively well without relying on a dedicated support structure.

So, when would this be coming out? Unfortunately, not for a while. As explained in the various blogs before, our current priority is to fix tech 1 ships as a whole before moving to more advanced hulls. That is because we need a solid frame of reference to rely on and compare hulls to before we can move to more delicate and complex ships, like Black Ops or tech 3 hulls.


Also don't forget this is just our long term plan for now, and things may change in the future. In all cases they are not forgotten, but will take time to get to.

Hope that helps!

I'm sorry but black ops need improvement (no tank or dps ) We are all objectively agree about that .

But if you look at Sin don't look at me in the eyes and tell there is no improvements to do

Ok black ops is technically a bringer , but when you 'drop your friends what to do with your Ship ?

Why not leadership bonuses, or logistics bonuses and for the SIN for god sake do something ( gallente ships generally )

indeed

But the problem is you have some really really goos ships without cross ( always the same race)

Drake , tengu .....

Me i need to protect my corpmates in op+¬ so i have to train ewar and the best BS for that ... scorpion ( caldari .. again !!!)

So when you go on the path of black ops .. Black Widow is the better choice , because really Drones ... need a real fix be honest
Why go with a sin when you can go with the Black widow...

But if the sin had real bonus like Drone Optimal range bonus not the creapy 5% .... and a bonus to targetig range ... maybe i said maybe we can balance the Black ops.

ok , but why the most used black ops are widows and Redeemers ?

And really need some real drones Bonuses for the SIN !!

Now the sin is by many ways a good ship

It's funny that =AAA= is whining about the current standing of Black Ops when they have been the target of malicious black op strikes for the past 3 months.

Just saying....

Back from vacation and thought this thread could use some dev love.


Yes, Black Ops definitely need some attention; the main problem with them is the lack of role focus. Some (like the Redeemer or Window) are trying to achieve a purpose directly on the battlefield, similar with recons by having an electronic warfare or damage related bonus. On top of that, they also are trying to fulfill a fleet support role with their cyno capability, which is quite in contradiction with the previous one.

And they aren't great at both: their raw HP is quite lower than tech 1 battleships (and tech 2 resistance boosts aren't stellar either), have less turret and missile hardpoints than tech 1 counterparts and remain more expensive to run, which doesn't make them appealing for direct engagement purposes. They also lack autonomy in their support role, as they are quite short ranged, fuel hungry and this issue is amplified by their small fuel bay forcing them to rely on other ships to resupply frequently during an operation.

The current plan is to take one these two listed roles out of the Black Ops ship class and reshape them to do the remaining one well. If they are disruption ships using EW, they should have more presence on the battlefield for their pricetag. If they are support tools for surprise attacks and small gang movement into enemy space, then they should have the proper bay, range and tools to do so accordingly.

The role dropped out of the Black Ops would then be moved to a new class in the tech 2 battleship range to replace for the loss.

We acknowledge some entities out there are using Black Ops with great effect when backed up with the proper organization, structure and out-of-the-box thinking to make use of them in unorthodox situations. While we don't want to take that away, Black Ops should be more effective without such heavy commitment into them (a statistic query we ran at the beginning of this year shown there are more Titan than Block Ops pilot on TQ). They should be great force multiplier tools for small groups to take on larger ones by surprise, and should be able to do so relatively well without relying on a dedicated support structure.

So, when would this be coming out? Unfortunately, not for a while. As explained in the various blogs before, our current priority is to fix tech 1 ships as a whole before moving to more advanced hulls. That is because we need a solid frame of reference to rely on and compare hulls to before we can move to more delicate and complex ships, like Black Ops or tech 3 hulls.


Also don't forget this is just our long term plan for now, and things may change in the future. In all cases they are not forgotten, but will take time to get to.

Hope that helps!

serious gfo you ******* stupid troll, if you read my first post instead of just trolling you would know im trying to get them fixed for the past 3 years.........

this game is soo terrible due the amount of trolls trolling serious idea's / fixes/ issues on this forum seriuos... (yes you just made me mad)

Counterpoints to a discussion will always be read as trolling in the minds of imbeciles.

QFT

Their mobility is what's screwing them at the moment, having to bring several cloaky haulers along just to move a few jumps is lame. There is nothing wrong with the ships, just the fuel requirements.

A bigger fuel-bay or allowing to compress jumping fuel would be appropriate. Reducing the cost for jumping is not.

Please be VERY careful when changing BlackOps. Your analysis of them being 'broken' because there are even more titan pilots than BO pilots is what is broken, not the BlackOps themselves.

You twist cause and effect here: There are NOT too few BlackOps Pilots, there are TOO MANY Titan pilots and there are mainly two reasons for this:
a) ISK is on corporate or alliance level or even for a skilled player NO LIMITING FACTOR any more. Your argumentation "they are expensive they must be a lot stronger" is not valid. ISK is generated and thrown around like peanuts these days, every second LowSec PvP-Corp with more than 20 players have 1-2 titans ready for bridging and most 0.0 entities already count titans in the dozens. THAT is the reason for the difference in BO- and Titan-Pilots. Not that BOs are somehow "broken". Titan are too good and too common.
b) Titans are THE ONE gankingtool. 100% save in the POS, able to bridge a fully prepared gang including tacklers, ewar, logistics and damage in a second over many lightyears. An option to run a nearly 100% save assault on some unprepared opponent with the chance of killing entire fleets without loosing a single ship. That (and the incredibly good boost for logistic efforts aka bridging freighters etc...) is the reason everyone who can afford it buys a titan sooner or later. And the trend goes on.

These are the two main reasons why you see so much more Titanpilots than BlackOps pilots. ISK is no factor and Titans allow EASY GANKING. BOs require attention, planning, skill and their usage is a LOT more risky since they are weaker than normal combat ships, what also applies to the ships you can bridge with them and your abilities for taking fleetboosters or logistics with you are close to zero. That is why people go titan and do not go BlackOps. Most people are LAZY. They want easy wins, not hard fights and they hate long and hard preparations and planning. They do not want to have effort for their shiny kills.

BlackOps do NOT need "much love". They are already a powerful tool in the hands of a skilled gang with adequate preparation. Their ability to show up without warning and moving through hostile or camped areas, almost unscoutable and unstoppable ALREADY outweights by far their lesser performance in battle.

They are not yet the gankingtool the titan already is, because they are hard to master, easy to lose if used wrong and require some attention and planning. Do not make them the next easygankmachine that jumps on every second tackled battlecruiser with 10:1 numbers because he was stupid enough to try a 1on1.

If you need to touch them, make them more self-sufficient by increasing their cargo (allowing to grab and bring home more loot and field more capboosters), increasing their dronebay (not bandwith! to let them replace lost drones for a longer time), give them adequate T2 resists, a marauder-like highslot setup (4guns/3utils with a 100% Damagebonus so they can field NOS/Neuts/Smartbombs more easily) or a bit more buffer or even a covert cloaking device.

But DO NOT give them more range! Their current limited range is what stops them from sitting around every corner just waiting for some poor guy engaging the cynobait. Their current range is absolutely okay because that forces the pilots to MOVE AROUND in order to use the BOs instead of sitting in a lonely system and covering just 50 other systems with cloaked cynoscouts! The problem is not that BOs can jump not far enough. All OTHER ships can jump way TOO FAR! Thats the problem with the current way of power projection via titanbridges or moving ov cap/superfleets from one end of eve to the other in a few minutes.

Mark my words: increase range and bridge abilities and you will do EvE no good! You just create one more tool for gankers who want easy kills with almost no risk and effort.

Just the few cents of one player who has FCed quite a few BlackOps Gangs very successfully and can assure you: They are FINE. They are NOT BROKEN. Do not make it worse by "fixing" something that do not need to be fixed.

/Syz

Giving them covert-cloak is a bad bad idea. The reason is simply. The rarelly get caught with all the ganking they do today so why make them even harder to catch? Covert-Ops cloak will make them even harder to catch. Eitherway they dont need covert ops cloak since they already can jump anywhere and use gates.

I always find it funny when people think slapping on a covert cloak will fix any ship.

CCP BO CSM Minuts:

"Finally on the Black Ops class, much to the joy of Trebor and Kelduum.

CCP Ytterbium quite bluntly stated GÇ£Black Ops are lameGÇ¥ and explained that they GÇ£try to do two things and fail at both.GÇ¥

Two step also added that their mass is anomalously high, and Aleks chimed in that the fuel consumption for bridging needed to be looked at as well. Two step also had concerns on the Covert Cyno module requiring Cyno V, but Trebor was quick to disagree and insisted that the Covert Cyno skill requirements were a non-issue, to which Seleene, Elise, Aleks and UAxDeath agreed.

Trebor added that there was a tension in the Black Ops-using community that if the ships become too powerful then more people will use them and their specialized niche would become overcrowded. Trebor jokingly added that many people in his corporation would like the ships nerfed. TreborGÇÖs main concern with the Black Ops was the fuel use and a dearth of Black Ops-capable Logistics ships. Trebor added that he likes the mechanic of needing to plan to use Black Ops.

Summarizing the meeting, CCP Xhagen asked the CSM what they thought of the general plan that CCP Ytterbium laid out, and asked CCP Ytterbium and CCP Soundwave what their timeframe for implementing these changes was.

Two step asked about the change to skill prerequisite for ships, and CCP Ytterbium responded that the skills would not change until the ships themselves are rebalanced. Addressing concerns that it would widen the gap between new players and veteran players, CCP Ytterbium was adamant that it wouldnGÇÖt widen the gap, it would simply make the skill-training path more consistent.

He added that, while it would be more time consuming to be specialized in all of the Battlecruisers, it would take less time to specialize in the T2 Battlecruisers of the given race.
Two step ended the meeting by continuing to express his objections to the idea."


http://community.eveonline.com/council/transcripts/2012/CSM_CCP_Meetings_May_June_2012.pdf

that is just another proof that a good portion of the CSM do believe that black ops are powerfull atm, which in many ways disagrees with 1 or 2 CSMs.

They implicitly say they are a "specialized niche" - meaning they work in a number of strategies and is not like many in this thread who say black ops are crap or other words they may use. Otherwise you cant call it a specialized niche as it wouldnt make sence to call that something that does not work!

Black ops are very good in the hands of people that are organized and know how to use them and without a doubt they are crap at the hands of people that are disorganized and cant use them.

To nerf or buff something for the sake of doing when there is over 4 years if good statictics of their performance is not only a bad idea but also unprofesional specially when a good portion of the CSM clearly say that they are good at what they do!

so if i understand other ships are good without you need to be organized etc etc but if you want to play black ops you have to be prepared well organized , well skilled well supported well corporated etc etc

so i resume ...
frigate no need to be prepared , titans no neet neither, carriers no need to know how to play neither ...
But but for Black ops it's fine if you get well prepared organized .....


are you aware of the stupidity of you ? !!!!

so if i understand other ships are good without you need to be organized etc etc but if you want to play black ops you have to be prepared well organized , well skilled well supported well corporated etc etc

so i resume ...
frigate no need to be prepared , titans no neet neither, carriers no need to know how to play neither ...
But but for Black ops it's fine if you get well prepared organized .....


are you aware of the stupidity of you ? !!!!

a carrier or supers are capital class ships. I dont even know why you include these in this conversation cos they are a class way above black ops.

further, blackops is commonly know to be a class of ship used for jump and "snipe"(and i dont mean long rang).
Its a completely different approach to the game. Jump, snipe and jump out! They do this very very well. We got 4 years at least of data that proves it. Even the CSM for the most part agree with this as they clearly say they are good at what they do!

you cannot really compare frigate to capital or supers nor you can compare either of these with black ops. The way you wage war with them is completelly different. Even capitals, supers and blackops even when they can be cynoed in the mythology on how to use them is different. The reason is very simple. Its the only class of ship thats not capital and that can cyno in mass people even to a blocked system which is something capitals or supers cant be. This is a huge advantage believe it or not. If we buff these then why should anyone wanna fight with normal ships with other classes? It would be too easy to jump into a blocked system and kills without no loss. IT ALREADY IS THAT WAY, in many respects so why make it worst?
Have you not experienced what is like to be jumped by 6+ Black ops and recons and covert ships? Its terribly tought to deal with! Why make op more op?

CCP BO CSM Minuts:

"Finally on the Black Ops class, much to the joy of Trebor and Kelduum.

CCP Ytterbium quite bluntly stated GÇ£Black Ops are lameGÇ¥ and explained that they GÇ£try to do two things and fail at both.GÇ¥

Two step also added that their mass is anomalously high, and Aleks chimed in that the fuel consumption for bridging needed to be looked at as well.

http://community.eveonline.com/council/transcripts/2012/CSM_CCP_Meetings_May_June_2012.pdf

lol
Is BE capable of a great efficinecy at it? Yes or No? Answer is obviously Yes.
So, remind me who does not know anothing about blops again
Just cos you suck at it, does not mean blops are crap

-Maybe its horrible to get dropped, but why dont you hide when a neut gets into system.. why did you get pointed at first place?

You obvius havnt bridged a fleet of recons and bombers with a black op...... pls if you dont know where your talking about, dont post anything

[



Dear Mr Andrea Roche,

Pls stop trolling this thread. You have obvius no idea were your talking about (so gtfo). Let me explain why you are trolling as you obvius dont have the mental capabilities to realise this....

-BO can "snipe", you prolly mean gank, not very well. They can just do it (kinda bad aswell). Not decent, not good, not very well....
-You have 4yrs of data that BO are being used, thats it.... as you can see behind the kills what was going on or how the kill was made.
-WOW you rly say that even CSM thinks they are good at what they do..., i added for you above the latest CSM minut quotes about BO. I can also add quotes how terrible CSM finds them in past 4 yrs.... fail troll is faill
-BO can cyno in cynojammed systems, not what extra ability makes this "powerfull".. pls explain as it obvius isnt that powerfull. BO can only bridge bombers, recons, cov op T3's and themselves. So pls explain the "advantage" you are talkign about? You dont have logistics, so you want to bridge into a cynojammed system 100 black op battleships without logi to fight other ships? Have you even got common sence about current fleet warefare? Do you realzie most fleets have logi's? do you realize the 1B each BO will simply melt vs a even 50 man drake fleet with logies. (drakes are battlecruizers (for you knowlage))....
-Maybe its horrible to get dropped, but why dont you hide when a neut gets into system.. why did you get pointed at first place?

Prove me wrong otherwise, post with main not some neut trolling alt or i simply get all your trolling comments removed

-There is a reason i put snipe in quotes! To say that they do this job bad is a BIG misrepresentation of stats! If they did such a bad job at it, then we ill not have such a high success rate stats with them! Dont under sell them please.
-I have experinced many such BO fights with different techniques like the BE and Dirt Nap
-You claim CSM are no good at what they do, yet you quote them to support you "points" for buffs. Make up your mind please! You either support their decision and quote them or not support theur decision and not quote them. Dont be a hypocrite and tell me they are no good and at the same time quote them to support your views on black ops! Its terribly hypocritic from you.
-FYI you dont need logistic ships to use your blackops. Your remote repping drones will do that for you very well. 5 drones per black op ship is a lot of rep. You can also use your widow or blackbirds to jam and all the other EWARs to jam/disrupt enemy logies. Even AAA old allies Dirt Nap use this.
Yes the ability to jump a whole fleet into a cyno jammed system is a big advantage. I know it cos i have been there. It is very easy to jump, snipe and cloak for 4 minutes(capacitor recharge) and jump out. Many years of stats have show this to us and i have experienced it. I am not making it up and killboards from BE and many other factions prove it! I am not making this up as you claim by calling me a "troll".
I sincirelly dont know why you need to clarify to me what drakes are. You seem to be too tied up on the idea of jumping many blackops (more than 10 or 12) into an enemy. Black ops is a niche tool to take out small gangs. I never said it was for use in the hundreds or even more than 10 or 12. Black ops is a great way to herass and engage small gangs. If you want to engage hunreds or even 50 drakes, i believe you will be disapointed. Its simply not for that. I wouldnt engage a carrier vs 12 bs either. Its simply the wrong way to go about it unless i had an Ace to fall back on. There are some fleet compositions that fit a certain scnario and in black ops this is no different just like in other fleet compositions.
-I am not even gonna speak about your last point cos its a dumb point.

I have said to you that i will not post with my main alt and i have reasons for it.
AAA is not know for their use of black ops. Yes they have used it but not effectively. Maybe they were effective when BE was in AAA but that was for a short and long time ago. So dont post with your AAA alt and claim you are good at black ops when AAA is probably the last alliance to look for black ops action!!!
I will love to see how you are gonna "i simply get all your trolling comments removed" Goodluck with that!
As somebody said before, only in the eyes of an idiot could counter points be concidered as a troll!

Blob warfare has made it to the forums and what a text blob it is.

-I have experinced many such BO fights with different techniques like the BE and Dirt Nap

-You claim CSM are no good at what they do, yet you quote them to support you "points" for buffs. Make up your mind please! You either support their decision and quote them or not support theur decision and not quote them. Dont be a hypocrite and tell me they are no good and at the same time quote them to support your views on black ops! Its terribly hypocritic from you.

-FYI you dont need logistic ships to use your blackops. Your remote repping drones will do that for you very well. 5 drones per black op ship is a lot of rep. You can also use your widow or blackbirds to jam and all the other EWARs to jam/disrupt enemy logies. Even AAA old allies Dirt Nap use this.

Yes the ability to jump a whole fleet into a cyno jammed system is a big advantage. I know it cos i have been there. It is very easy to jump, snipe and cloak for 4 minutes(capacitor recharge) and jump out. Many years of stats have show this to us and i have experienced it. I am not making it up and killboards from BE and many other factions prove it! I am not making this up as you claim by calling me a "troll".

I sincirelly dont know why you need to clarify to me what drakes are.

post main you big troll


Troll post, i nvr said that see above


Troll post, you ****** noob, blackbirds cant be bridge you moron.....

[quote=Andrea Roche]
Yes the ability to jump a whole fleet into a cyno jammed system is a big advantage. I know it cos i have been there. It is very easy to jump, snipe and cloak for 4 minutes(capacitor recharge) and jump out. Many years of stats have show this to us and i have experienced it. I am not making it up and killboards from BE and many other factions prove it! I am not making this up as you claim by calling me a "troll".

i meant falcon not blackbird. Yes that was my mistake.
its funny how you call everything I say a troll. I can do the same with all your points but I am not gonna lower myself to your level.
I bet you alliance with the "vast experince" or more directly "lack of experince" using black ops can say that black ops are bad.
Fact still is, AAA is not know for their effective use of black ops while others can. The ships are good, its only the pilots behind them that are bad! Build a bridge and get over it. Stop blaming the ship for your bad piloting skills
I am not the only one saying that black ops are good. Look in the whole thread and you will find many.

Keep on trolling, it realy matter if a ally has experiance with bo dropping or not doesnt it........such a ******* ******, me an my corp are laughing at you right now on ts

lol as if i care.
The fact is still fact the blackops are good at what they do and many well known entities have said so too in this thread and the CSM have said so too.
Enjoy that cookie
And yes AAA are not known for their black ops so you should be the last person to talk about black ops ... Laugh about that one too

CCP BO CSM Minuts:

"Finally on the Black Ops class, much to the joy of Trebor and Kelduum.

CCP Ytterbium quite bluntly stated GÇ£Black Ops are lameGÇ¥ and explained that they GÇ£try to do two things and fail at both.GÇ¥

http://community.eveonline.com/council/transcripts/2012/CSM_CCP_Meetings_May_June_2012.pdf

-FYI you dont need logistic ships to use your blackops. Your remote repping drones will do that for you very well. 5 drones per black op ship is a lot of rep. You can also use your widow or blackbirds to jam and all the other EWARs to jam/disrupt enemy logies. Even AAA old allies Dirt Nap use this.

You should ask provi ppl and AAA members instead of random talking **** that comes up in your failbrain

I have been both in DNS and -A- (what you call AAA).

I've never seen you. If you're an alt email me your main's name. Because what you clam about how that corp and alliance operate is stated from an outside perspective with no clue whatsoever in what is involved.