| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Batelle
Komm susser Tod
115
   |
Posted - 2013.01.16 18:39:00 -
[61] - Quote
Just because amarr recons have an neut bonus does not mean that neuts are ewar. They are just guns that shoot your capacitor. Ewar are effects that reverse themselves completely and instantly when they are shut off. There is no inconsistency in allowing neutralizers to hit sieged dreads or triaged carriers while not allowing remote repair or remote capacitor assistance.
Fighting is Magic |
Mocam
EVE University
Ivy League
211
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 02:54:00 -
[62] - Quote
Hatsumi Kobayashi wrote:Heh.
If your mind is blown by the fact that neuts arent classified as "ewar" and can affect sieged dreads, triaged carriers and supercapitals, wait until you learn that the target spectrum breaker can break the lock of all of these.
Oh.
I can see it going either way on that spectrum breaker. It's not a targeted effect, it's a defense. If you don't target that ship, the effect doesn't come into play. As such, I can see it going either way as an "EW" or held like shields/armor.
As for "immunity" -- if it's "EW" with neuts included, then webs and points should also be in that bag along with the rest and it should be tied to the "immunity" -- as in no ability to do anything to a super capital -- "god mode" style.
If it effects a super cap, it should effect these ships in siege/triage modes and removal from capitals should also be removal from supers. As such, I wouldn't be in favor of removing negatives from them -- getting rid of positives and balancing *THAT* way? Yes but not negatives.
Bigger should not equal "I win" nor even come close to it. Smaller ships should have the ability to mess with/cripple bigger ships.
|
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
379
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 05:22:00 -
[63] - Quote
With that "drop multiple dreds" and "bring supercapitals" suggestions as counters to (imaginary so far) cap-chaining triage carriers, don't forget that carriers are important parts of environements that don't practically (or at all sometimes) support massive dred fleets and supercaps: relatively large lowsec/NPC0.0 groups and their warfare and wormholes. Don't forget that there carriers are still massive things that don't go around in fleets and are more akin to what you could see carrier as IRL. Those hypothetical monsters that are discussed ITT will easily ruin environements I mentioned, especially wormholes. |
Hatsumi Kobayashi
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
241
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 15:29:00 -
[64] - Quote
Goldensaver wrote:MeBiatch wrote:Goldensaver wrote:Oh god, the Triage Carriers. Brick tanked mega-triage Carriers. If they could energy transfer to each other then that would be ridiculous. Both just run the Triage modules and run the local reps (with a full tank setup since they don't need cap mods) allowing them to tank almost anything, meanwhile giving out remote reps constantly to everyone else while sharing cap between each other. sounds like guardians... a ddd can alpha a carrier right? I think I've heard of Archons being able to brick against a single DD, but that's a single fit designed to do almost nothing else.
It's terribly easy to set up a carrier to tank a doomsday and it has nothing to do with one-trick ponies.
CAUTION
SNIGGS |
XxRTEKxX
Fenrir's Dogs of War
Union 0f Revolution
46
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 06:53:00 -
[65] - Quote
Since when did Capacitor Warfare start being referred to as Electronic Warfare? |
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
386
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 11:31:00 -
[66] - Quote
XxRTEKxX wrote:Since when did Capacitor Warfare start being referred to as Electronic Warfare?
Why basing balancing decisions (or suggestions of ones) upon semantics would be a better question. |
Cambarus
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
249
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 18:43:00 -
[67] - Quote
Barrogh Habalu wrote:XxRTEKxX wrote:Since when did Capacitor Warfare start being referred to as Electronic Warfare? Why basing balancing decisions (or suggestions of ones) upon semantics would be a better question.
The argument is that it's an imbalanced mechanic, because neuts work but cap transfers do not. |
RubyPorto
Sniggwaffe
YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2448
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 18:58:00 -
[68] - Quote
Cambarus wrote:Barrogh Habalu wrote:XxRTEKxX wrote:Since when did Capacitor Warfare start being referred to as Electronic Warfare? Why basing balancing decisions (or suggestions of ones) upon semantics would be a better question. The argument is that it's an imbalanced mechanic, because neuts work but cap transfers do not.
The problem is that if you "balanced" it, then a couple Triage carriers could keep each other capped up and coasting out of Triage (to receive RR) against virtually any force short of Blap Dreads or Supers (with proper re-fitting and Triage cycle management, of course). Subcaps simply cannot reasonably defeat a 20kEHP/second tank on top of 2m EHP in the 5 minutes it takes to coast out and start receiving reps from the other triage carriers if the carriers are able to negate the effects of neuts while in triage (i.e. receiving Cap Transfers).
They would be an almost absolute I-Win-Button against subcaps. And that es no bueno, Senhor.
This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Craggus
Lead Farmers Origin
Kill It With Fire
94
|
Posted - 2013.01.23 06:51:00 -
[69] - Quote
Yes, Cap sized capacitor injectors. Those pesky Bhaal's..
 |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |