Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
![Abduakla Abduakla](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1636428895/portrait?size=64)
Abduakla
|
Posted - 2010.09.30 17:07:00 -
[1]
Should Interdictors lose anti-frig bonuses in place for an immunity to their warp bubbles and other warp bubbles. This would make people much more willing to fly them and enemy fleets less likely to primary them (because they'll waste time targeting a ship that will warp off in a split second).
If they introduce a T2 destroyer hull for the pure sake of killing frigates, would you agree that this ship should have no ability to drop bubbles (thus also making 99% less likely to be primaried at start of a fight).
|
![darius mclever darius mclever](https://images.evetech.net/characters/342815744/portrait?size=64)
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.09.30 17:12:00 -
[2]
properly fit dictors can make a nice job of destroying enemy light support. making them immune to their own bubbles would make their job almost risk free.
personally i like dual role ships, especially for small gangs.
|
![Abduakla Abduakla](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1636428895/portrait?size=64)
Abduakla
|
Posted - 2010.09.30 17:18:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Abduakla on 30/09/2010 17:19:49
Originally by: darius mclever properly fit dictors can make a nice job of destroying enemy light support. making them immune to their own bubbles would make their job almost risk free.
personally i like dual role ships, especially for small gangs.
If you've ever flown a dictor (which I can tell you haven't), the moment you hang around long enough to target something (about 1 -3 seconds) you will be instant popped.
A dictor pilot flies into the MIDDLE of an enemy fleet and drops a bubble. At this point you attempt to burn out of your bubble and warp out immediately. If you don't, you'll get doubled pointed/webbed/killed.
The approach to drop a bubble is hard enough, nvm getting out. Don't comment on ships you don't fly. Also, aince you seem to comment on every single thread in the EvE forums, you don't have have much in-game experience.
|
![darius mclever darius mclever](https://images.evetech.net/characters/342815744/portrait?size=64)
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.09.30 17:22:00 -
[4]
Edited by: darius mclever on 30/09/2010 17:23:39 maybe you should get into smaller gangs for a change. ;)
p.s.: i am bored as the server is down. actually i wait for the OP to start in about 30minutes =)
|
![Abduakla Abduakla](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1636428895/portrait?size=64)
Abduakla
|
Posted - 2010.09.30 17:35:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Abduakla on 30/09/2010 17:37:57
Originally by: darius mclever Edited by: darius mclever on 30/09/2010 17:23:39 maybe you should get into smaller gangs for a change. ;)
p.s.: i am bored as the server is down. actually i wait for the OP to start in about 30minutes =)
When you say smaller gangs, you must be speaking of sub-10 in numbers. The point of frigate sized ships is that they are to be fast and agile and ready to escape, this should apply to any sized fleet warfare.
Here is my current issue. Pandemic Legion is invading our home, Providence. I warp in on a cloaky and drop my bubble, I proceed to burn out of my own bubble with MWD so I can warp out. Here are the problems with that.
BY using MWD my sig radius blows up to battleship size. Thus, get insta-targeted and insta pwned by their sniper HAC's.
What would be the ideal (and balanced) solution: Immunity to their own bubble OR no sig radius increase from using MWD's. The destroyer sig radius is bad enough as it is.
|
![Abduakla Abduakla](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1636428895/portrait?size=64)
Abduakla
|
Posted - 2010.09.30 19:58:00 -
[6]
This statement in particular:
Quote: Making them immune to their own bubbles would make their job almost risk free
is clearly false. You still need to approach an enemy fleet (lowering your transversal to near zero) in order to drop a well placed bubble.
|
![darius mclever darius mclever](https://images.evetech.net/characters/342815744/portrait?size=64)
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.09.30 20:03:00 -
[7]
Edited by: darius mclever on 30/09/2010 20:06:12
Originally by: Abduakla This statement in particular:
Quote: Making them immune to their own bubbles would make their job almost risk free
is clearly false. You still need to approach an enemy fleet (lowering your transversal to near zero) in order to drop a well placed bubble.
you never ever approach the hostile fleet. if you do that you deserve to die. ![Laughing](/images/icon_lol.gif)
p.s.: i wouldn't approach a hostile fleet with an interceptor either. that tends to get you killed just as quickly.
|
![Sazuka Kirr Sazuka Kirr](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1907447072/portrait?size=64)
Sazuka Kirr
Caldari Trans-Solar Works Rooks and Kings
|
Posted - 2010.09.30 20:12:00 -
[8]
Just because you can't figure out how to fly a ship, it doesn't mean that the ship is broken.
|
![Abduakla Abduakla](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1636428895/portrait?size=64)
Abduakla
|
Posted - 2010.09.30 20:23:00 -
[9]
Originally by: darius mclever Edited by: darius mclever on 30/09/2010 20:06:12
Originally by: Abduakla This statement in particular:
Quote: Making them immune to their own bubbles would make their job almost risk free
is clearly false. You still need to approach an enemy fleet (lowering your transversal to near zero) in order to drop a well placed bubble.
you never ever approach the hostile fleet. if you do that you deserve to die. ![Laughing](/images/icon_lol.gif)
p.s.: i wouldn't approach a hostile fleet with an interceptor either. that tends to get you killed just as quickly.
There's a strong disconnect between Idealism and Reality, look at Plato's Cave.
|
![GizzyBoy GizzyBoy](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1452809026/portrait?size=64)
GizzyBoy
|
Posted - 2010.09.30 21:32:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Abduakla Edited by: Abduakla on 30/09/2010 17:37:57
Originally by: darius mclever Edited by: darius mclever on 30/09/2010 17:23:39 maybe you should get into smaller gangs for a change. ;)
p.s.: i am bored as the server is down. actually i wait for the OP to start in about 30minutes =)
When you say smaller gangs, you must be speaking of sub-10 in numbers. The point of frigate sized ships is that they are to be fast and agile and ready to escape, this should apply to any sized fleet warfare.
Here is my current issue. Pandemic Legion is invading our home, Providence. I warp in on a cloaky and drop my bubble, I proceed to burn out of my own bubble with MWD so I can warp out. Here are the problems with that.
BY using MWD my sig radius blows up to battleship size. Thus, get insta-targeted and insta pwned by their sniper HAC's.
What would be the ideal (and balanced) solution: Immunity to their own bubble OR no sig radius increase from using MWD's. The destroyer sig radius is bad enough as it is.
So what you want to do is immobalise a fleet of ships so they can't escape, but you get away with out any risk? that sounds balanced..
|
|
![Abduakla Abduakla](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1636428895/portrait?size=64)
Abduakla
|
Posted - 2010.09.30 22:26:00 -
[11]
Originally by: GizzyBoy
Originally by: Abduakla Edited by: Abduakla on 30/09/2010 17:37:57
Originally by: darius mclever Edited by: darius mclever on 30/09/2010 17:23:39 maybe you should get into smaller gangs for a change. ;)
p.s.: i am bored as the server is down. actually i wait for the OP to start in about 30minutes =)
When you say smaller gangs, you must be speaking of sub-10 in numbers. The point of frigate sized ships is that they are to be fast and agile and ready to escape, this should apply to any sized fleet warfare.
Here is my current issue. Pandemic Legion is invading our home, Providence. I warp in on a cloaky and drop my bubble, I proceed to burn out of my own bubble with MWD so I can warp out. Here are the problems with that.
BY using MWD my sig radius blows up to battleship size. Thus, get insta-targeted and insta pwned by their sniper HAC's.
What would be the ideal (and balanced) solution: Immunity to their own bubble OR no sig radius increase from using MWD's. The destroyer sig radius is bad enough as it is.
So what you want to do is immobalise a fleet of ships so they can't escape, but you get away with out any risk? that sounds balanced..
As you apparently believe destroyers and interdictors are balanced in their current state allow me to redirect you here: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Review_destroyers_%28CSM%29
Go tell CSM and CCP that they are wrong.
|
![darius mclever darius mclever](https://images.evetech.net/characters/342815744/portrait?size=64)
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.09.30 23:21:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Abduakla As you apparently believe destroyers and interdictors are balanced in their current state allow me to redirect you here: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Review_destroyers_%28CSM%29
that is talking about T1 destroyers and has not really much to do with your current proposal. you seems to be running out of arguments.
|
![Vladimiru Vladimiru](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1558442761/portrait?size=64)
Vladimiru
Gallente Nanite Industries Important Internet Spaceship League
|
Posted - 2010.09.30 23:45:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Vladimiru on 30/09/2010 23:47:05
Originally by: darius mclever
Originally by: Abduakla As you apparently believe destroyers and interdictors are balanced in their current state allow me to redirect you here: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Review_destroyers_%28CSM%29
that is talking about T1 destroyers and has not really much to do with your current proposal. you seems to be running out of arguments.
Many of the problems with T1 destroyers have carried into T2 Interdictors.
1) Extreme sig radius (especially with MWD) 2) T1 destroyers have less ehp than a t1 frig(but higher sig radius?), less speed than a t1 frig (but higher sig radius?) and less agility than a t1 frig (but higher sig radius)? Corollary to #2, Interdictors have less ehp than a T2 frig (but a higher sig radius), less speed than a t2 frig(but a higher sig radius) and less agility than a T2 frig (but higher sig radius). To make it worse, there's no way to fly an Interdictor WITHOUT a MWD, so when they use it they become as the OP said "as large as a battleship."
3) The slot layout on all dictors suck except for Sabre (same with t1 dessies to Thrasher)
4) They need more powergrid and cpu (just like what t1 dessies suffer from).
I would propose an AB bonus to Interdictors of +20% per level so they don't have to use MWD's.
|
![darius mclever darius mclever](https://images.evetech.net/characters/342815744/portrait?size=64)
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.09.30 23:53:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Vladimiru lots of stuff that hasnt much to do with his proposal
and still the t1 destroyer proposal doesnt have much to do with his proposal for the interdictors. the sigradius stuff is slighty related but thats about it. the sigradius could be lowered as described in the proposal.
from what he said about flying a dictor he would die with the sigradius reduction bonus from ceptors or your AB bonus.
|
![STONED OPERATOR STONED OPERATOR](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1083458180/portrait?size=64)
STONED OPERATOR
|
Posted - 2010.10.03 08:25:00 -
[15]
make another type of bubble deployment similar to a bomb, this way everyone has a chance to escape ...
|
![Hirana Yoshida Hirana Yoshida](https://images.evetech.net/characters/663671624/portrait?size=64)
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.10.03 09:02:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Abduakla Go tell CSM and CCP that they are wrong.
Since its been over a year (check date) and even the CSM hasn't deemed it necessary to handle it yet (no votes, ID) I would say that neither are wrong because there is nothing to be wrong about. Read up on how the CSM system is supposed to work before trying to use it as an argument.
As for balancing Interdictors: Reducing signature will go some of the way. Adding a defensive feature will take it the rest of the way .. - New bonus (the GTFO): +10% optimal/falloff and +5% strength of ECM Burst. - Add a flat 100 to all capacitors. - Bring all hulls up to par with the Sabre in regards to possible tank, damage, versatility.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |