Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
MisterNick
The Sagan Clan Pax Romana Alliance
211
|
Posted - 2013.02.09 18:42:00 -
[61] - Quote
This would only replace Falcon alts with Kitsune alts. Only since the Kitsune is less expensive there will be even more of them "Human beings make life so interesting. Do you know that in a universe so full of wonders, they have managed to invent boredom." |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
488
|
Posted - 2013.02.09 23:14:00 -
[62] - Quote
Mikhael Taron wrote:
My above point is a sound one. Is that why you think it's stupid? Or is the reason that it's demonstrated by how much your rant has consumed your basic reasoning? Must we all make unsound points to stop you becoming emotionally unstable?
Please continue posting.
Fuckin troll.
Everyone word of your inteceptor analogy was an argument for EAF dps. You must be delusional. Your initial point was wrong or inane take your pick.
Please stop posting. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
488
|
Posted - 2013.02.09 23:15:00 -
[63] - Quote
You mean t1 eafs I hope. Because I think EAF's are on of the least flown ships in the game. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mikhael Taron
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
17
|
Posted - 2013.02.10 06:55:00 -
[64] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Mikhael Taron wrote:
My above point is a sound one. Is that why you think it's stupid? Or is the reason that it's demonstrated by how much your rant has consumed your basic reasoning? Must we all make unsound points to stop you becoming emotionally unstable?
Please continue posting.
Fuckin troll. Everyone word of your inteceptor analogy was an argument for EAF dps. You must be delusional. Your initial point was wrong or inane take your pick. Please stop posting.
Why are you continuing to avoid my very reasonable point regarding mediocre dps? Unless you have already forgotten it? I'll quote it again, just in case:
Mikhael Taron wrote:Consider this: if EAF had good/excellent dps do you honestly believe people wouldn't be falling over themselves to fly one? An e-war brawler? Of course they would! This shows that mediocre dps IS a reason for not flying one.
Please share your thoughts on this. I'm always ready to be educated by those with a superior knowledge of the game; such as yourself.
Please continue posting.
You can fool some of the people all of the time. You can fool all of the people some of the time. You can make a fool out of yourself anytime.
|
Iminent Penance
Interstellar Military Assistance Corporation Black Core Alliance
25
|
Posted - 2013.02.10 09:04:00 -
[65] - Quote
Mikhael Taron wrote:Commander Ted wrote:Mikhael Taron wrote:
My above point is a sound one. Is that why you think it's stupid? Or is the reason that it's demonstrated by how much your rant has consumed your basic reasoning? Must we all make unsound points to stop you becoming emotionally unstable?
Please continue posting.
Fuckin troll. Everyone word of your inteceptor analogy was an argument for EAF dps. You must be delusional. Your initial point was wrong or inane take your pick. Please stop posting. Why are you continuing to avoid my very reasonable point regarding mediocre dps? Unless you have already forgotten it? I'll quote it again, just in case: Mikhael Taron wrote:Consider this: if EAF had good/excellent dps do you honestly believe people wouldn't be falling over themselves to fly one? An e-war brawler? Of course they would! This shows that mediocre dps IS a reason for not flying one.
Please share your thoughts on this. I'm always ready to be educated by those with a superior knowledge of the game; such as yourself. Please continue posting.
Bring back permalockdown ecm scorps! but make them frig sized! Nothing wrong with a fight where only one side can shoot! |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
489
|
Posted - 2013.02.11 00:39:00 -
[66] - Quote
Mikhael Taron wrote:Consider this: if EAF had good/excellent dps do you honestly believe people wouldn't be falling over themselves to fly one? An e-war brawler? Of course they would! This shows that mediocre dps IS a reason for not flying one.
Oh I thought you didn't think they should have dps and you weren't arguing for it, When I do add a point for why EAF's shouldn't do dps you pull some **** about how you apparently aren't arguing for it. Then when I argue that doing that is inane you paint it like im just calling you stupid and how I won't listen to your well thought out points (while you also ignored my points on why the things SHOULD NEVER EVER DO DPS). I shouldn't have to restate why they shouldn't be capable of good dps since I already have 3 times and you simply ignore it.
In fact multiple other users are also posting reasons why this shouldn't be the case like the one directly above me.
It is now perfectly obvious to me your only objective here is to be an ass.
So please, stop posting. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mikhael Taron
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
19
|
Posted - 2013.02.11 13:35:00 -
[67] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Mikhael Taron wrote:Consider this: if EAF had good/excellent dps do you honestly believe people wouldn't be falling over themselves to fly one? An e-war brawler? Of course they would! This shows that mediocre dps IS a reason for not flying one.
Oh I thought you didn't think they should have dps and you weren't arguing for it, When I do add a point for why EAF's shouldn't do dps you pull some **** about how you apparently aren't arguing for it. Then when I argue that doing that is inane you paint it like im just calling you stupid and how I won't listen to your well thought out points (while you also ignored my points on why the things SHOULD NEVER EVER DO DPS). I shouldn't have to restate why they shouldn't be capable of good dps since I already have 3 times and you simply ignore it. In fact multiple other users are also posting reasons why this shouldn't be the case like the one directly above me. It is now perfectly obvious to me your only objective here is to be an ass. So please, stop posting.
I have read - not listened, after all we're typing not speaking! - your comments and understand them fully. However, you appear to be forgetting, unintentionally or otherwise, your original high-IQ smug response to my comment, so I'll refresh your memory.
smug wrote:Mikhael Taron wrote:
Mediocre dps?
Ewar ships aren't supposed to do dps. They do ewar. Are you saying that you think blackbirds should do good dps, be able disable multiple ships from fighting, and have a tank?
Now did I in ANY sense advocate increasing the dps of the EAF? In two words? You immediately read into that what you wanted to enable you to respond with that obvious attempt to paint me as someone lacking in intellect. This, you thought, would make you appear smarter than you really are; not difficult given your obvious difficulty in understanding written English.
Another possibility is a desperate need by yourself to be recognised as some type of EVE guru,and this was a golden opportunity to say
Real smug wrote:blackbirds should not be able to do good dps and have a tank while being able to disable multiple ships from fighting.
However, lacking the confidence to voice this opinion (in case someone shot it down?), you resorted to hding it in rhetoric by pretending to be arguing a non-existent point.
Again: where in my point did I advocate doing ANYTHING with EAF dps? Show me!!
Please continue posting You can fool some of the people all of the time. You can fool all of the people some of the time. You can make a fool out of yourself anytime.
|
Inmei T'ko
Catch.22
6
|
Posted - 2013.02.11 14:19:00 -
[68] - Quote
All spirited debate aside, let's not get too far off track with regard to DPS arguments and get back to the issue at hand which is looking at making the EAF line more viable by adding a covert ops cloak.
The advantages are: increased usage of the EAF line, increased viability of the EAF line as a combat platform for PvP, increased PvP accessibility, black ops capability more easily accessible, advantages to black ops tactics.
Some have expressed concerns that these changes would make EAFs OP, however as they have less DPS and tank than any of the existing force recons (pilgrim, falcon, arazu, rapier) which can currently fit covert ops cloaks and as well do the same jobs somewhat better... why aren't we screaming those ships are OP? Are we seeing widespread all-force recon fleets swarming across New Eden? Not that I have noticed... |
Meditril
T.R.I.A.D
239
|
Posted - 2013.02.11 14:46:00 -
[69] - Quote
In my opinion there are two simple ways to fix Electronic Attack Ships:
a) Leave them as they are but hey they are Electronic Ships, so why the f*** do they have such a big signature and align that slow? Reduce their signature significantly, I would even say, they should have the smallest signature of all frigates in game due to using heavy Electronics to cover / distract their emissions. Their base signature should be less than 30 m. Finally their agility should be significantly increased, they do not have heavy weapons nor a tank so should they be much more agile than they currently are.
b) If you think these ships should be slow, sluggish and have a signature like a whale then please give them at least some buffer tank so that they have a slimm chance to survive more then just one or two hits.
I prefer solution a). |
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
964
|
Posted - 2013.02.11 15:09:00 -
[70] - Quote
I'm all for making EAF actually good, though there's probably better ways than just giving them cloaks. Giving them tiny sigs and good agility would be great imo |
|
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
107
|
Posted - 2013.02.11 15:22:00 -
[71] - Quote
Inmei T'ko wrote:All spirited debate aside, let's not get too far off track with regard to DPS arguments and get back to the issue at hand which is looking at making the EAF line more viable by adding a covert ops cloak.
The advantages are: increased usage of the EAF line, increased viability of the EAF line as a combat platform for PvP, increased PvP accessibility, black ops capability more easily accessible, advantages to black ops tactics.
Some have expressed concerns that these changes would make EAFs OP, however as they have less DPS and tank than any of the existing force recons (pilgrim, falcon, arazu, rapier) which can currently fit covert ops cloaks and as well do the same jobs somewhat better... why aren't we screaming those ships are OP? Are we seeing widespread all-force recon fleets swarming across New Eden? Not that I have noticed...
because recons are support vehicles. Like your eaf.
Falcons are jammers with crap dps. 5 rainbow falcons can blind the **** out of 5 targets...but unless terribad and sitting completely still, the enemy is in very little danger of dying to those guns. rails guns, lr ammo and no tracking bonus. It cannot fit mag stab (its tank or jam mods in lows). the mids are the jams and prop mod...ergo no TC. basically if it does hit you its hitting like utter crap. But as a falcon pilot I accept this. same as I do in scorpion. I bring the jams, my boys bring the pain.
Rapier is not omfg dps. Here is why they cloak. They are great at bubble sitting and picking off easy targets.. They see a target they can't kill, they let it run out the bubble to live a longer eve life. Then something comes in it can kill. POp the cloak, ride out delay, kill it. If they need real dps, they call it in. When rapier pilots think too much of thier web+paint+dps....they usually end up dead real fast. |
Inmei T'ko
Catch.22
6
|
Posted - 2013.02.11 17:27:00 -
[72] - Quote
Zan Shiro wrote:Inmei T'ko wrote:All spirited debate aside, let's not get too far off track with regard to DPS arguments and get back to the issue at hand which is looking at making the EAF line more viable by adding a covert ops cloak.
The advantages are: increased usage of the EAF line, increased viability of the EAF line as a combat platform for PvP, increased PvP accessibility, black ops capability more easily accessible, advantages to black ops tactics.
Some have expressed concerns that these changes would make EAFs OP, however as they have less DPS and tank than any of the existing force recons (pilgrim, falcon, arazu, rapier) which can currently fit covert ops cloaks and as well do the same jobs somewhat better... why aren't we screaming those ships are OP? Are we seeing widespread all-force recon fleets swarming across New Eden? Not that I have noticed... because recons are support vehicles. Like your eaf. Falcons are jammers with crap dps. 5 rainbow falcons can blind the **** out of 5 targets...but unless terribad and sitting completely still, the enemy is in very little danger of dying to those guns. rails guns, lr ammo and no tracking bonus. It cannot fit mag stab (its tank or jam mods in lows). the mids are the jams and prop mod...ergo no TC. basically if it does hit you its hitting like utter crap. But as a falcon pilot I accept this. same as I do in scorpion. I bring the jams, my boys bring the pain. Rapier is not omfg dps. Here is why they cloak. They are great at bubble sitting and picking off easy targets.. They see a target they can't kill, they let it run out the bubble to live a longer eve life. Then something comes in it can kill. POp the cloak, ride out delay, kill it. If they need real dps, they call it in. When rapier pilots think too much of thier web+paint+dps....they usually end up dead real fast.
I on't understand your argument. EAFs are support ships. Force Recons are support ships with a covert ops cloak. EAFs, lacking the cloak, are rarely flown.
What is the difference? A cloak. We aren't asking that EAFs be given DPS just the ability to cloak and the ability to black ops hotdrop.
|
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
489
|
Posted - 2013.02.11 22:35:00 -
[73] - Quote
Inmei T'ko wrote:
I on't understand your argument. EAFs are support ships. Force Recons are support ships with a covert ops cloak. EAFs, lacking the cloak, are rarely flown.
What is the difference? A cloak. We aren't asking that EAFs be given DPS just the ability to cloak and the ability to black ops hotdrop.
A covert ops cloak does far more than just allow for black ops drops. It is a powerful defensive shield, falcons are very expensive, fairly slow, expensive and have a large signature radius, this makes them extremely susceptible to long range weapons. Having a swarm of EAF's that can't be tracked by snipers and can easily evade frigate tackle is a very dangerous proposal. Not only that but it is a extremely powerful weapon with the intel war. If you can't see someone you can't account for them in a fight, I am willing to wager everyone who uses alts in FW plexing already would drop their links for a kitsune alt and camp plexes all day with their daredevil unless they care about points on a killboard. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Sean Parisi
Fugutive Task Force
178
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 01:25:00 -
[74] - Quote
Did not read the rest of the thread. So apologize if some things have been said / refuted.
I would like to see something happen to electronic attack frigates. Currently I do not believe that their cost justifies their ridiculously low survival rate. For the price of a Kitsune I can throwaway 15 griffins.
Electronic Attack Frigates either need to have their cost decreased, be given more survive-ability, covert ops cloak, more agility / speed.
Just give them something that can justify the cost. Yes, they are superior to their T1 counterparts - but the cost does not pay for this advantage.
I do like the idea of the covert ops cloak, because I have a strong soft spot for the Recon play style. These would act as smaller recon vessels.
That being said I do understand the implications this might have and get why people might not want this. Which is fair.
TLDR;
This ship class needs to be looked at. |
Mikhael Taron
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
21
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 07:57:00 -
[75] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote: A covert ops cloak does far more than just allow for black ops drops. It is a powerful defensive shield, falcons are very expensive, fairly slow, expensive and have a large signature radius, this makes them extremely susceptible to long range weapons. Having a swarm of EAF's that can't be tracked by snipers and can easily evade frigate tackle is a very dangerous proposal. Not only that but it is a extremely powerful weapon with the intel war. If you can't see someone you can't account for them in a fight, I am willing to wager everyone who uses alts in FW plexing already would drop their links for a kitsune alt and camp plexes all day with their daredevil unless they care about points on a killboard.
"can't be tracked by snipers" applies to any cloaked ship.
"can't be tracked by snipers" applies to any uncloaked, moving frigate; not directly towards sniper ofc.
"can easily evade frigate tackle" only when it's cloaked, uncloaked it's another ship with ewar. Then drones will make sure it has an interesting, if short, life. Even if you have no drones, its mediocre dps means it's not a threat, even if you are jammed. Hell, the kit could fly in uncloaked and do that to you.
Any cloaky ship can do intel, so it's irrelevant to this discussion, which is EAF with covops cloak.
If it's a lone ship then it's in trouble when it decloaks, due to its small tank and mediocre dps. RUN is the order of the day. If it's part of a fleet then the cloak is immaterial. At best you could argue that it can serve two roles: scout and ewar. This is a big deal?
Your argument also contains a duplicate point, "very expensive, fairly slow, expensive" illustrating your desperation to produce a credible list of supporting reasons. This shows you have no substantive objection to this idea and are posting because you perceive some type of threat to your preferred playstyle. Fair enough, but be honest about your motives.
You can fool some of the people all of the time. You can fool all of the people some of the time. You can make a fool out of yourself anytime.
|
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2345
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 07:59:00 -
[76] - Quote
Inmei T'ko wrote:I am talking about pure PvP, clearly.
Anythingthing that pits you up against another player directly or by proxy is PvP. This purity idea people have is silly. Apparently booking your flight & accomodation to Iceland BEFORE you buy the tickets for the convention which is pretty much the only reason you wanted to go there in the first place is popular. |
Boobiq
Imperial Express
1
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 08:16:00 -
[77] - Quote
Reduce the max locked target to 2 and give them cov ops cloak. This way they will be rather good as bomber support in cloaked small-medium gang. Max locked targets reduction will avoid them for locking down whole fleets. If one wants to lock more ships, there are modules for that. |
Mikhael Taron
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
21
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 08:22:00 -
[78] - Quote
Boobiq wrote:Reduce the max locked target to 2 and give them cov ops cloak. So they cant lock down whole fleet but still be viable. Do not change anything else.
Can't lock anything while cloaked, so no need to nerf the EA part of its design. Your idea would have it become a floating cloak. You can fool some of the people all of the time. You can fool all of the people some of the time. You can make a fool out of yourself anytime.
|
Boobiq
Imperial Express
1
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 08:26:00 -
[79] - Quote
Mikhael Taron wrote:Boobiq wrote:Reduce the max locked target to 2 and give them cov ops cloak. So they cant lock down whole fleet but still be viable. Do not change anything else. Can't lock anything while cloaked, so no need to nerf the EA part of its design. Your idea would have it become a floating cloak.
Dont follow, never said anything about locking in cloak.
|
Inmei T'ko
Catch.22
6
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 14:30:00 -
[80] - Quote
I honestly think that EAFs are nerfed enough as they are. Reducing max locks or worrying about impacts on plex campers is way besides the point in my opinion.
Adding the cloak just makes them interesting enough to be used as a viable PvP platform.
They have high sigrad, low speed, poor DPS, relatively poor agility, and terrible EHP. The cloak would allow them to get where they need to be and possibly allow them to escape after combat. I don't see it making much of a difference other than that.
And expense is my whole point. A cheaper alternative to force recons makes PvP more accessible which is what we should all want.
|
|
Quintessen
Nakamori Ventures
12
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 18:02:00 -
[81] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote:I'm all for making EAF actually good, though there's probably better ways than just giving them cloaks. Giving them tiny sigs and good agility would be great imo
I think this is the way to go, though fitting special modules only for EAF's would also be helpful. Maybe they could have a target breaker making them unlockable for 15 seconds with a two minute recharge time. It would at least fit with their EWAR theme. |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
491
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 18:08:00 -
[82] - Quote
Mikhael Taron wrote:Boobiq wrote:Reduce the max locked target to 2 and give them cov ops cloak. So they cant lock down whole fleet but still be viable. Do not change anything else. Can't lock anything while cloaked, so no need to nerf the EA part of its design. Your idea would have it become a floating cloak. gotta work on your reading comprehension and communication skills a lil mike. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
491
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 18:10:00 -
[83] - Quote
Inmei T'ko wrote:I honestly think that EAFs are nerfed enough as they are. Reducing max locks or worrying about impacts on plex campers is way besides the point in my opinion.
Adding the cloak just makes them interesting enough to be used as a viable PvP platform.
They have high sigrad, low speed, poor DPS, relatively poor agility, and terrible EHP. The cloak would allow them to get where they need to be and possibly allow them to escape after combat. I don't see it making much of a difference other than that.
And expense is my whole point. A cheaper alternative to force recons makes PvP more accessible which is what we should all want.
It is very much NOT besides the point since plexes are one of the most common places frigates fight. Also they were never nerfed since they were never good. just sayin. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mikhael Taron
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
22
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 20:06:00 -
[84] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Mikhael Taron wrote:Boobiq wrote:Reduce the max locked target to 2 and give them cov ops cloak. So they cant lock down whole fleet but still be viable. Do not change anything else. Can't lock anything while cloaked, so no need to nerf the EA part of its design. Your idea would have it become a floating cloak. gotta work on your reading comprehension and communication skills a lil mike.
On the contrary. Their ability to lock down a fleet and cloak are mutually exclusive. Reducing the maximum locks on the ship finishes it as an EAF. What's left is the cloak.
I think both of you need to go back to school. You can fool some of the people all of the time. You can fool all of the people some of the time. You can make a fool out of yourself anytime.
|
Tsobai Hashimoto
FATAL Warfare Hopeless Addiction
119
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 20:39:00 -
[85] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:You mean t1 eafs I hope. Because I think EAF's are on of the least flown ships in the game.
I have to agree with you on that Ted..... I loved the Kitsune but with the t1 rebalance the T1 counterparts are 90% as effective for 1/5 the cost and easier SP wise to get in (great for new FW pilots)
and in many ways the T1 counterpart is better!
Maulus is one of my fave dplexing ships, anyone that knows what it is wont enter a novice with me for a 1v1, and my maulus has won a 2v1 vrs two rifters
5 times I have had a 1v1 with a dessie, once i died do to me screwing up with bad piloting (was new to the maulus) now I try my luck but then disengage at will, still cant seem to pop one, one day.....one day)
while the Keres has some nice bonuses like long point. its DPS is about 1/3 my maulus and it is slower and cant enter a novice plex! |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
496
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 20:41:00 -
[86] - Quote
Mikhael Taron wrote:Commander Ted wrote: gotta work on your reading comprehension and communication skills a lil mike.
On the contrary. Their ability to lock down a fleet and cloak are mutually exclusive. Reducing the maximum locks on the ship finishes it as an EAF. What's left is the cloak. I think both of you need to go back to school.
Er no... what he is talking about is giving these ships a drawback to compensate for the covops cloak. Permenatly shutting off two ships is plenty find for a frigate sized ewar ship that you don't even see. Its not like they need to do any dps...
I mean one ship that you may not even know is their able to neutralize 3+ frigates? op much? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Mikhael Taron
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
23
|
Posted - 2013.02.13 08:57:00 -
[87] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Mikhael Taron wrote:Commander Ted wrote: gotta work on your reading comprehension and communication skills a lil mike.
On the contrary. Their ability to lock down a fleet and cloak are mutually exclusive. Reducing the maximum locks on the ship finishes it as an EAF. What's left is the cloak. I think both of you need to go back to school. Er no... what he is talking about is giving these ships a drawback to compensate for the covops cloak. Permenatly shutting off two ships is plenty find for a frigate sized ewar ship that you don't even see. Its not like they need to do any dps... I mean one ship that you may not even know is their able to neutralize 3+ cruisers and smaller? op much?
Quote:is plenty find for a frigate sized ewar ship that you don't even see
Can't jam when cloaked is a point you appear to be overlooking. Decloak, target, hope the jammer hits; it's percentage-based after all. Once it decloaks it's vulnerable for 5 secs. That's enough to target - stops it recloaking - and begin to lay on the hurt. If drones are involved they'll target the ship and it's run or die time.
As few use EAF they are obviously UP for their purpose. The topic is about getting people to use them, not keeping them the same. Nerfing their primary function hardly achieves the stated objective. You can fool some of the people all of the time. You can fool all of the people some of the time. You can make a fool out of yourself anytime.
|
Cassini Huygens
Hades Effect
0
|
Posted - 2013.02.13 09:29:00 -
[88] - Quote
I like this idea.
The only participation that a pilot without the ISK or skill set for a Recon can hope for in a BLOPS fleet would be that of a bomber pilot. A specialist ship class that has the ability to deploy using a covert cyno would offer increased accessibility to this niche play style and add variety to the composition of BLOPS fleets.
What would happen to the use of covert ops ships though? Are the probing bonuses enough for them not to become obsolete if EAF's can fulfill the role of cloak-warp frigate? |
Drake Doe
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
23
|
Posted - 2013.02.13 12:44:00 -
[89] - Quote
After really thinking about it, the main reason they're not flown is because they're fleet support ships, as in they fill one roll and need dps dealing ships to really be effective. |
Inmei T'ko
Catch.22
6
|
Posted - 2013.02.13 14:06:00 -
[90] - Quote
Cassini Huygens wrote:I like this idea.
The only participation that a pilot without the ISK or skill set for a Recon can hope for in a BLOPS fleet would be that of a bomber pilot. A specialist ship class that has the ability to deploy using a covert cyno would offer increased accessibility to this niche play style and add variety to the composition of BLOPS fleets.
What would happen to the use of covert ops ships though? Are the probing bonuses enough for them not to become obsolete if EAF's can fulfill the role of cloak-warp frigate?
You make a really good point with this. The only thing I can think of for covops would be to give them the same bubble immunity you can get with certain T3 configurations. This advantage for a ship with no weapons would make it very difficult to counter as a black ops cyno. On the flipside it is not such a major jump, as covert fitted T3's with the same nullification capability will very soon be able to fit covert cyno's as well.
I am not interested in plexes or anoms or whatever people are doing if they live in nullsec. Increased hotdrop capability seems to be the aim of the new patches affecting BlOps, and increased combat effectiveness of stealth bomber fleets mixed with covert ops EAFs is what I think fulfills that role. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |