EVE Search - Black ops should be able to use covert ops cloak

All Channels

Assembly Hall

Black ops should be able to use covert ops cloak

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Bobby Katelo	Posted - 2011.05.10 16:42:00 - [1] Self explanatory, its dumb they cant.
Val'Dore Word Bearers of Chaos Word of Chaos Undivided	Posted - 2011.05.10 19:30:00 - [2] Indeed. ~No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously.~ Tiericide
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition.	Posted - 2011.05.10 19:49:00 - [3] Over powered battleship much?
Martin Mckenna V0LTA VOLTA Corp	Posted - 2011.05.10 19:59:00 - [4] Make them have a doomsday aswell and ill support this.
Val'Dore Word Bearers of Chaos Word of Chaos Undivided	Posted - 2011.05.10 20:19:00 - [5] Originally by: Marlona Sky Over powered battleship much? It wouldn't be overpowered. ~No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously.~ Tiericide
Goose99	Posted - 2011.05.10 20:19:00 - [6] Originally by: Marlona Sky Over powered battleship much? It's more like an underpowered BC in term of tank or gank. Supported.
Danika Princip Minmatar Tactical Narcotics Team	Posted - 2011.05.10 20:23:00 - [7] Originally by: Marlona Sky Over powered battleship much? As opposed to virtually useless battleship?
Varrik Kayne	Posted - 2011.05.10 22:53:00 - [8] Hey they finally did it for Stealth bombers. Any ship with a class that implies stealthy or has a cloack bonus to it, should logically be geared to fit a Cov Ops Cloak. If it then needs a tweek to not be OP'd then so be it, but this should happen. Signed.
Mars Theran Caldari EVE Rogues EVE Rogues Alliance	Posted - 2011.05.10 23:17:00 - [9] Black Op's is more like quasi-ops. Without proper cloaking, it is relatively pointless and the ships are generally underpowered, with limited combat capability. The primary, (make that only if you like), benefit is the lack of targeting delay when decloaking. Surprise is good, but it only goes so far, and doesn't do anything to make this ship worth the cost. Current best reason to buy: It's cool.
Phatstabley Gallente D00M. Northern Coalition.	Posted - 2011.05.10 23:33:00 - [10] Originally by: Bobby Katelo Self explanatory, its dumb they cant. Black ops have lots of problems. ...A covert ops cloak is not one of them.
Sarina Rhoda	Posted - 2011.05.11 07:55:00 - [11] Not supported Blackops are fine as they are (except the sin, that does need some work). But all the others I feel are balanced. The only change that BÆops need is a bigger fuel bay and bigger jump range so they can actual achieve their intended purpose of being able to surprise jump people and bridge recon fleets. They were not meant to be solo gank machines and should require use of support and proper planning. I run fleets with BÆops with corp mates quite a bit and the only thing that we feel greatly limits us is lack of jump range and stupidly small fuel bays. (Tbh its more the fuel bay than the jump range but you get the idea)
Samillian	Posted - 2011.05.11 07:56:00 - [12] Supported
Aineko Macx	Posted - 2011.05.11 11:45:00 - [13] Supported. Would make people actually use them offensively instead of just covert portaling in the bombers... ________________________ CCP: Where fixing bugs is a luxury, not an obligation.
Sarina Rhoda	Posted - 2011.05.11 11:51:00 - [14] Originally by: Aineko Macx Supported. Would make people actually use them offensively instead of just covert portaling in the bombers... People already do use them offensively. In fact in my corps recent B'op fleet we've been asking for B'op BS only and not offering any portals as it too much hassle controlling fuel consumption.
Sepheir Sepheron Genco	Posted - 2011.05.11 20:37:00 - [15] Originally by: Marlona Sky Over powered battleship much? Have you ever fit a black ops?
Kryhane Gallente New Eden Experiments	Posted - 2011.05.11 20:44:00 - [16] Not supported. Black ops don't need covert ops cloaks. I don't really understand the argument that having a covert ops cloak would make more people use them, which would somehow make them better. I'd love to get an explanation from someone who supports this endeavor. Rarely, if ever, are you using gates with your black ops. Even when you do use gates, being able to align at more than 75% speed while cloaked makes it simple. Utilize your jump drive and drop onto the people you want to kill. Why warp around cloaked when you can covertly drop your black ops anywhere in a system without the need to warp. Originally by: Bobby Katelo Self explanatory, its dumb they cant. I just don't see the logic. Actually make an argument so we can discuss your thoughts. Blacks ops needs/wants: 1) Modest jump range increase. I'd even be happy with 5.5 max. JC5 is, and should continue to be, absolutely essential for intended black ops use. (If you want to be able to "insert forces into hostile territory, make it so I don't need to be next door with JC5) 2) Fuel bay increase. To be honest, I'm on the fence about this. While I'd love to see my BO carrier 13k topes without playing with my fit, I don't believe it's entirely necessary. If I'm just bridging, I fit my Sin for Gas Can and can carrying upwards of 30,000 Oxy topes. If I'm bridging and fighting, I need to bring a transport ship for the ride. If I'm just dropping solo, the standard fuel bay is typically fine.
Obsidian Hawk RONA Legion RONA Directorate	Posted - 2011.05.11 21:51:00 - [17] There is already a thread on these which can be found Here Please remember to check the thread hot topics of the assmebly hall before posting duplicate threads.
Mocam	Posted - 2011.05.12 02:08:00 - [18] Sure - just remove the no targeting delay bonus and replace with a covert cloak. The only one with both is the SB - a paper thin frigate with weapons that suck against other frigates so leave it that way.
Kamikaze jihawt	Posted - 2011.05.12 02:30:00 - [19] Originally by: Marlona Sky Over powered battleship much? You are a ******. Black ops ships have always needed a covert ops cloak. I support this thread.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2011.05.12 04:31:00 - [20] Originally by: Goose99 It's more like an underpowered BC in term of tank or gank.. Say that was true, do you think the game would be better if BCs were able to warp cloaked? It was a bad idea when it was first proposed all those moons ago and since nothing significant has changed .. Give them better ability to 'support the troops' through specialized ganglinks, refitting and ammo hauling ..
Val'Dore Word Bearers of Chaos Word of Chaos Undivided	Posted - 2011.05.12 05:12:00 - [21] CCP is scared to death of making a decent T2 Battleship. Their whole 'we want Tech advancement to matter' philosophy has all but disappeared. Give us a T2 BS that is worth a damn. Not all of us are wanting to be Capital Lag Generators. ~No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously.~ Tiericide
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2011.05.12 08:58:00 - [22] No, we dont need a cloaking solo pwnmobile.
Trin Javidan	Posted - 2011.05.12 08:59:00 - [23] Originally by: Furb Killer No, we dont need a cloaking solo pwnmobile. we allready have, its called T3's, they can even warp trough bubbles aswell! something a slow bs cant do. Ps its realy easy to decloak a battleship in a bubble
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition.	Posted - 2011.05.12 10:14:00 - [24] Ok let me break this down for you on the pre-nerf Black Ops recieved when it was released: 1. Shield, armor and hull were reduced by 25% from their tier 1 counterpart. 2. The lock range was reduced by 25% from their tier 1 counterpart. 3. The power grid was reduced on some of the Black Ops compared to their tier 1 counterparts, which makes for fitting issues. 4. The base resistances were never given a proper T2 resists like the rest of T2 ships compared to their T1 counterparts. 5. Their base jump range was 1.5 light years if I remember correctly. I am sure there is a couple other things I have missed but the only thing CCP has addressed to help Black Ops out was add a fuel bay and increase the base light year range to 2.0. Thats it. Yes I understand it is a role boat for covert bridging and I am fine with that, but the other pre-nerf stuff compared to their tier 1 counterparts needs to be lifted. Also have a look at the ship bonuses to help balance them out and make them a bit more useful on the battlefield if the pilot chooses to put it on the front line instead of bridging. The Sin is an absolute disgrace! Then, they will have a higher survivability and offensive capability like what people want. Adding a covert ops cloak as some golden bullet to fix Black Ops and calling it a day is just plain naive. And yes, I do fly Black Ops, I just mainly use my alt with a covert cyno on a recon and use this character to do the bridging.
Vaju Katru	Posted - 2011.05.12 13:56:00 - [25] Hulk's should be able to use doomsday devices.
Ms Lum Virtual Warriors IMPERIAL LEGI0N	Posted - 2011.05.12 15:25:00 - [26]
Spazz21 The Grid	Posted - 2011.05.13 13:41:00 - [27] ****, do something to make them good. That's not even an opinion or a "you say that cuz you can't use it well". No I'm pretty sure the fact there are more Titans then BOPs pretty much says that there is something seriously wrong with BOPs.
Sarina Rhoda	Posted - 2011.05.13 14:30:00 - [28] Originally by: Spazz21 **, do something to make them good. That's not even an opinion or a "you say that cuz you can't use it well". No I'm pretty sure the fact there are more Titans then BOPs pretty much says that there is something seriously wrong with BOPs. You sir are a fool. Quoting myself from the other B'ops thread :- Originally by:** Myself from the other B'ops thread IIRC the QEN works by taking a snapshot at a given moment of how many of a certain ship is being piloted. BÆOps are an extremely niche ship and will only be flown when being used as apposed to titans that have to have a pilot in them at all times. My point ? a) The QENÆs snapshot can be borderline useless as it doesnÆt take into account length of time the ship is flown or the number of a particular ship owned. I am pretty sure if you counted up the number of BoÆps owned it would exceed titans by a extreme margin. b) Quoting QEN as a reason to buff BÆOps is a flawed argument. However I am in favour of buffing BÆOps, but not their base stats. I would only buff their jump range and either decrease the amount of fuel it takes to bridge people or the increase the amount of fuel they can hold in their fuel bay. The fact they canÆt bridge a proper recon fleet to their max jump range due to fuel limitations I think is what cripples them the most. They are and should be IMO a mini titan (overpriced and only really useful for bridging gangs on-top of people) and should relatively weak for any type of solo work. TLDR: ONLY buff jump range and either increase their fuel bay or decrease the amount of fuel they require to jump Giving Covert ops cloak would do almost nothing in the way of fixing B'ops. They need bigger jump range and more fuel allowance..... thats is all ....
andeira	Posted - 2011.05.13 15:00:00 - [29] people already hate falcon alts and now you want the black opses to have a cov cloak? those falcon alts will turn into widow alts and I would love to show up in my widow with it's 14 points of jam strength and ruin your day ------------- Originally by: Stitcher For frak's sake, it took millions of years of evolution for that brain to get inside your skull, would it kill you to actually USE the damned thing?
Shepard Book	Posted - 2011.05.13 18:36:00 - [30] They should get the cov op cloak and a buff to fitting, and either gank or tank

Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.