| Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Oddsodz
The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare.
60
   |
Posted - 2013.06.26 18:43:00 -
[1] - Quote
So the point I am trying to make is I hate warp core stabed t1 frigs running sites in my local lowsec neighbourhood. And when I do get to catch them. If am lucky enough to get a lock on them, They still manage to warp off due to warp core stabs. Makes me have sad face. I have done all the work to
1, Scan them down.
2, get a ship that is fast enough to lock them before they warp away(a frig of my own).
But still no PvP.
Now the some folks here will say. Fit more Scrams. Well you could do that. But then you gimp your ship for tank or other e-war mods. No point going into PvP if you gimp your fit. Remember. Not all t1 frigs in theses sites are WCS fitted. Some of them are proper combat fit. They are there to bate you (and that is cool - Just don't see it much). You will never know until it is to late. Some will say. Get a bigger ship and just blap them. Yes, But running around in lowsec with anything bigger than a destroyer will lead to you dieing to gate camps. And again, You have to gimp your fit for the one hope that you might get a lock before they warp away. Seems far to much risk just to kill one warp core stabbed frig.
So my idea is to add a extra stat to the warp core stabilizer.
Add -80% to virus strength of ships for Hacking/Analysing
This will make it undesirable to fit Warp Core Stabilizers to ships as it will hurt the chances of actually successfully Hacking/Analysing an expo site. Yet sill keeps the main goal of what Warp Core Stabilizers. This will mean that folks can still have that escape root. But it will hurt them for running the sites. It's all about the risk/reward. Right now. It is still low risk ruining sites in lowsec (same can be said for high sec). This is not so much of an issue in 0.0 and wormhole space as you could use a dictor to catch them.
Anyway. That's my idea.
Flame suit on. |
Zircon Dasher
285
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 18:46:00 -
[2] - Quote
lolz. How terrible are you if you can't kill a non-tanked t1 before they warp off?
Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
Oddsodz
The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare.
60
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 18:48:00 -
[3] - Quote
Zircon Dasher wrote:lolz. How terrible are you if you can't kill a non-tanked t1 before they warp off?
Oh I am very bad,. |
Alberik
Eusebius Corporation
23
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 18:53:00 -
[4] - Quote
so you want a i-win-button?
whats your problem? if "most" ships are with stabs you will win "most" fights if you fit more scrams ..
if you meet a combat fitted ship and have to much scrams ... your risk you have to bear for getting other easy kills. |
Oddsodz
The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare.
60
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 18:58:00 -
[5] - Quote
Alberik wrote:so you want a i-win-button?
whats your problem? if "most" ships are with stabs you will win "most" fights if you fit more scrams ..
if you meet a combat fitted ship and have to much scrams ... your risk you have to bear for getting other easy kills.
And to a point you are right. But again., I say look a risk reward. The risk I run to PvP in the site compared to the Risk/Reward for a warp core stabbed t1 frig is way out of balance. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
Late Night Alliance
2731
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 19:51:00 -
[6] - Quote
Get a ranged artillery ship (I recommend a Wolf). Exploration frigs rarely have a tank so they die in a single volley. :D
Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. |
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
748
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 20:10:00 -
[7] - Quote
in my caracal i blow up ventures all day erry day before they can even align.
Using HAMS 
shouldn't be very hard to do the same to a covops.
i am somewhat tempted to buy a black ops fit with smartbombs and wait for someone to show up.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Gareth Burns
The Dark Space Initiative
Scary Wormhole People
5
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 20:18:00 -
[8] - Quote
Nope,
Just Nope,
This wouldn't just Nerf how I make money in the game, it would destroy it.
That Warpcore Stab is essential for WH Ninja's
Noblesse Oblige
Gū¦ Gareth Burns |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations
Surely You're Joking
158
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 20:57:00 -
[9] - Quote
0/10 |
Aaric Altair
EVE University
Ivy League
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 21:09:00 -
[10] - Quote
I recommend that you attend some EVE University classes. We have a great many classes, and some of them could help you learn how to counter WCS ships.
I disagree with your original post for the following reasons
-EVE has no one-module- to-rule-them-all mentality. All modules have strengths, weaknesses, and counters: warp disruptor, warp scrambler and warp disruption field generator included.
-EVE has no FTW fit design philosophy. Every ship has multiple set ups for use in different situations. One fit may be great in a certain situation, but will fail in other situations. Your fit fails v
-Non-consensual PVP also means non-consensual escape. You can't have one without the other. Otherwise you are advocating a system were there is no PvP, or a system where there is no escape from PvP.
|
|
|
Gorgoth24
Sickology
32
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 21:56:00 -
[11] - Quote
I support this sentiment fully
+1 |
Myrkala
Royal Robot Ponies
Happy Cartel
65
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 00:44:00 -
[12] - Quote
I actually support this, WCS are annoying.
Covert Ops Nullified Warp Core Stabbed T3s are more annoying though... |
Nolan David
Mandalorian Forge
3
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 00:58:00 -
[13] - Quote
The advantage should always go to the attackee, not the attacker. Thus with every factor equal, the attackee should escape the grips of the attacker. I believe your idea here would give an advantage to the attacker.
Frigates that are being used to intercept are not meant to be able to hold off any other frigate from warping out. They are meant to have a better chance of it. They are meant to hold off cruisers and above perhaps on a consistent basis.
I vote no. Find prey that haven't fitted themselves for the sole purpose of being able to escape. That is why they are able to escape...  |
Oddsodz
The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare.
60
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 02:09:00 -
[14] - Quote
Seems some folks have not got the idea.
I Do not want to nerf Warp core Stabs. I want to nerf the profit from fitting them. As I said in the 1st post. I Don't want to stop the folks using warp core stabs from escaping.
I Make it easy for you shall I?
Fit a few Warp Core Stabilizers? Then your chance for successfully "Hacking" or "Analyzing" a can in a site is greatly reduced. Not imposable. Just a lot less likely.
Don't fit any Warp Core Stabilizers and your win rate/Drop rate from "Hacking" or "Analyzing" is higher and so your profit from doing the site without using a ship with Warp Core Stabilizers goes up.
I Do not want to change the way Warp Core Stabilizers work in regards to escaping. That's what they are for. I Want to stop it beaning overly profitable to fit them.
Risk Reward is not balanced in the current system.
Again, This issue only really relates to LowSec. Hisec has it's own way of things. You can do the sites in any ship you like and not worry too much about PvP.
0.0 wormhole space has interdictors. Bubble beats any amount of Warp Core Stabilizers.
|
Travasty Space
Pilots of Epic
Tribal Band
16
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 02:31:00 -
[15] - Quote
Oddsodz wrote:Seems some folks have not got the idea.
I Do not want to nerf Warp core Stabs. I want to nerf the profit from fitting them. As I said in the 1st post. I Don't want to stop the folks using warp core stabs from escaping.
I Make it easy for you shall I?
Fit a few Warp Core Stabilizers? Then your chance for successfully "Hacking" or "Analyzing" a can in a site is greatly reduced. Not imposable. Just a lot less likely.
Don't fit any Warp Core Stabilizers and your win rate/Drop rate from "Hacking" or "Analyzing" is higher and so your profit from doing the site without using a ship with Warp Core Stabilizers goes up.
I Do not want to change the way Warp Core Stabilizers work in regards to escaping. That's what they are for. I Want to stop it beaning overly profitable to fit them.
Risk Reward is not balanced in the current system.
Again, This issue only really relates to LowSec. Hisec has it's own way of things. You can do the sites in any ship you like and not worry too much about PvP.
0.0 wormhole space has interdictors. Bubble beats any amount of Warp Core Stabilizers.
You should try the Mini-game before making suggestions as -80% Strength kills any chance of completing a site. |
Oddsodz
The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare.
60
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 02:53:00 -
[16] - Quote
Travasty Space wrote:Oddsodz wrote:Seems some folks have not got the idea.
I Do not want to nerf Warp core Stabs. I want to nerf the profit from fitting them. As I said in the 1st post. I Don't want to stop the folks using warp core stabs from escaping.
I Make it easy for you shall I?
Fit a few Warp Core Stabilizers? Then your chance for successfully "Hacking" or "Analyzing" a can in a site is greatly reduced. Not imposable. Just a lot less likely.
Don't fit any Warp Core Stabilizers and your win rate/Drop rate from "Hacking" or "Analyzing" is higher and so your profit from doing the site without using a ship with Warp Core Stabilizers goes up.
I Do not want to change the way Warp Core Stabilizers work in regards to escaping. That's what they are for. I Want to stop it beaning overly profitable to fit them.
Risk Reward is not balanced in the current system.
Again, This issue only really relates to LowSec. Hisec has it's own way of things. You can do the sites in any ship you like and not worry too much about PvP.
0.0 wormhole space has interdictors. Bubble beats any amount of Warp Core Stabilizers.
You should try the Mini-game before making suggestions as -80% Strength kills any chance of completing a site.
I have, It's not my cup of tea. I did say -80%. But the number should be adjusted for balance. |
Cage Man
237
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 02:56:00 -
[17] - Quote
Maybe CCP should just make it that when someone jumps into LS they are instantly blown up and podded and all "real" PVP'ers in the system get a KM. Then you really don't have to do anything.
The thick plottens... |
Anderson Footman
Eridanus Industries
12
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 02:58:00 -
[18] - Quote
HTFU, covops have paper tanks. |
Oddsodz
The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare.
60
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 03:00:00 -
[19] - Quote
Anderson Footman wrote:HTFU, covops have paper tanks.
lol, Any how many have you killing in a lowsec expo site? Not many that's for sure. |
Anderson Footman
Eridanus Industries
12
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 03:29:00 -
[20] - Quote
Oddsodz wrote:Anderson Footman wrote:HTFU, covops have paper tanks. lol, Any how many have you killing in a lowsec expo site? Not many that's for sure.
You seem to have plenty of experience with ad hominem.
Covops ships are supposed to be slippery and hard to catch. |
|
|
Gorgoth24
Sickology
33
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 04:01:00 -
[21] - Quote
I think people here are missing the point. WCS are intended for travel fits and travel fits only, with enormous reductions in performance if they're used in professions. The current nerfs worked fine when the primary professions were restricted to anomalies and missions (where you need all the slots you can get) but don't work when you don't need your slots (like in current exploration and FW plexing professions).
The idea is simply asking that if people fit these that they're penalized in their profession, just like how the current module is intended to penalize use of the module in PvE and PvP.
|
TheSkeptic
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
243
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 07:52:00 -
[22] - Quote
Gorgoth24 wrote:I think people here are missing the point. WCS are intended for travel fits and travel fits only,
No they aren't, they're intended to negate the effects of scrams and disruptors.
Just adapt and fit 2 scrams, stop asking for a nerf to something because you don't want to change your cookie cutter fit.
... |
Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks
The Volition Cult
460
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 07:58:00 -
[23] - Quote
TheSkeptic wrote:Gorgoth24 wrote:I think people here are missing the point. WCS are intended for travel fits and travel fits only,
No they aren't, they're intended to negate the effects of scrams and disruptors. Just adapt and fit 2 scrams, stop asking for a nerf to something because you don't want to change your cookie cutter fit.
I completely agree with this. If they've fit modules to counter your scram then fit more scram if you want to counter that. They've had to lose slots in order to counter you, you need to lose slots in order to counter the counter. Simples! |
Cekle Skyscales
Fleet Warfare Testing Whatever
7
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 08:20:00 -
[24] - Quote
Nah. Just fit 2+ scramblers. |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
548
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 08:24:00 -
[25] - Quote
The concept of a "travel fit" only exists because fitting a WCS to your ship horribly nerfs its ability to do anything except travel.
They're fine. Fit additional scrams. |
Kirkwood Ross
Golden Profession
39
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 08:48:00 -
[26] - Quote
If you want to kill defenseless warpcore stabbed ships and your only targets will be defenseless warpcore stabbed ships why don't you fit your ship to counter them? I mean they don't fight back so go max scan res and double faction scram for -6 warp core strength. |
Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
33
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 09:53:00 -
[27] - Quote
How about less penalties for warp core stabilizes instead... |
Johan Toralen
IIIJIIIITIIII
138
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 12:08:00 -
[28] - Quote
Gorgoth24 wrote:I think people here are missing the point. WCS are intended for travel fits and travel fits only, with enormous reductions in performance if they're used in professions. The current nerfs worked fine when the primary professions were restricted to anomalies and missions (where you need all the slots you can get) but don't work when you don't need your slots (like in current exploration and FW plexing professions).
The idea is simply asking that if people fit these that they're penalized in their profession, just like how the current module is intended to penalize use of the module in PvE and PvP.
Stabs come at a price when running the profession sites. Target range is reduced by a lot so takes a lot longer to scan containers and cherrypick in some sites where containers are far apart.
Someone here said stabs are annoying. So is getting pointed and ganked. It's a fair game in that regard. Want to gank people? Bring ship with fast lock time and decent alpha. Simple.
I agree that there isn't enough risk running the sites but that has more to do with the low price tag of the frigs. Loss of a frig doesn't hurt much. But that shouldn't mean pirates should be served easy kills on a silver platter. Better would be you have to work hard for a kill but then get rewarded with a juicy wreck. |
Vexidious
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
13
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 18:58:00 -
[29] - Quote
Oddsodz wrote:Seems some folks have not got the idea.
I Do not want to nerf Warp core Stabs. I want to nerf the profit from fitting them.
I'm not sure if you are a troll, or just terrible at the game. |
Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
144
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 19:04:00 -
[30] - Quote
Why not also include 80% reductions in mining yield, gas harvesting, and salvaging chance? |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |