| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 20 post(s) |
Fa Xian
The Bene Gesserit
Sanctuary Pact
22
   |
Posted - 2013.10.09 16:35:00 -
[1] - Quote
There are two versions of exploration. One is exploration hacking. The other is exploration combat.
Odyssey introduced and defined exploration hacking. Hacking is about avoiding combat and escaping PVP. You only care about opening cans, so virus strength and cohesion are all that matter - you'll never want something other than a T2 cov ops frigate.
But "can opener" exploration misses combat exploration. You cannot use a combat site you find with your hacking exploration ship. It has no weapons. These ships are clearly intended to let you do combat sites you find with exploration. That's why they have minimal can opening bonuses. They aren't can opening ships. They are combat site ships. That they have a bonus to virus strength at all is probably more to tip off players than actually empower can opening.
Will they beat T3 ships? No. T3s aren't intended to be comparable - a T3 is a specialized, "super" tool. It is end game content. It requires the highest investment in skills and isk. This is an entry point to doing combat sites without having to qualify for T3.
|
Fa Xian
The Bene Gesserit
Sanctuary Pact
22
|
Posted - 2013.10.09 17:16:00 -
[2] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
False premise 1 explorers only care about no risk hacking.
False premise 2 players that explore for data and relic sites do not wish to do combat sites in these new ships too.
False premise 3 the ships are only designed to do combat exploration sites. They are not meant to do data sites.
False premise 4 the virus strength bonus is only to tip players off that there was good stuff but it just blew up sorry....
Premise 5 that if you want to do relic and data sites you will only use a covert ops frigate, unfortunately, it seems that you are completely correct.
I can see that an atmosphere of highly confrontational, argumentative shouting that is the nature of this forum easily gets in the way of being clear.
I am observing that currently in the game CCP does not provide a solid, middle tier option for combat based exploration. These ships appear to me to be intended for that role. That is why they do not step on the hacking based exploration specialty by having a high bonus to virus strength or cohesion. If they have the same +10 my Helios has, why would I use the Helios? This isn't about players but rather CCP filling out all the play styles with options and variants without invalidating previous work.
1) Of course players want exploration combat ships, not just hacking. Thus, these ships to give them what they want.
2) Of course players want to do all kinds of sites. CCP does not appear to want you to have 1 ship that does all of exploration. That's not dissimilar to, say, mining. You have mining ships and hauling ships, not one ship that does both.
3) These ships aren't only for exploration combat. They specialize in that. It would invalidate the significance of other ships if they did all jobs better. They aren't better than a tricked out T3 at beating combat sites as is either.
4) What is an "exploration" ship? You could just put exploration modules (scanner, hacker) on a Battleship and go. CCP signals to the players a ship is an "exploration" ship by putting hacking game bonuses on it.
5) Yes... if you want to do hacking as your primary focus, you'll only need the things I mentioned to excel.
The real complaints here should be about wormhole data and relic sites and gas sites - which have both rats and hacking. That's the bit that you'll still need a T3 for, the highest end of exploration. |
Fa Xian
The Bene Gesserit
Sanctuary Pact
22
|
Posted - 2013.10.09 17:17:00 -
[3] - Quote
MiMozO wrote:Is it me, or something is wrong here?
I agree. I was personally expecting a T2 faction cruiser for exploration combat. It seems like this is just a midstep to T3... and I don't want to train Amarr and lasers. |
Fa Xian
The Bene Gesserit
Sanctuary Pact
22
|
Posted - 2013.10.09 17:19:00 -
[4] - Quote
Deviant X wrote:Assuming the current T1 and T2 frigs are for non-combat.
It's not much of an assumption. They can't punch their way out of a wet paper bag. They're frigs for goodness sake.
Quote:Would it be fair to assume that the SoE are combat related and fall into specific roles?
That would be my guess too.
|
Fa Xian
The Bene Gesserit
Sanctuary Pact
22
|
Posted - 2013.10.09 17:27:00 -
[5] - Quote
MiMozO wrote:Since Sisters are best at exploring, those ships MUST have the best exploring. And since Sisters do not like shooting people, those ships MUST NOT have primary combat capabilities. It was said that those ships are all about self-defense. Well give them the self-defense than. Give them ability to disable their pursuers in different ways, with electronics and speed.
Defender missiles could be used here with some interesting mechanics, like attacking and disabling ships which attacking Sisters ship. But, I guess good old style: "Let's add a ship, I don't know what for, but let's add it" is the most liked by CCP.
Oh, I think they know exactly what it's for... it's just not in line with anything in the lore. Look, they struggled to define a Gallente/Amarr hybrid from a lore perspective. This is all a mechanical choice to empower a play style on CCP's part - it's not a lore thing, it's a game play thing.
SoE gives endless missions to kill pirates and villains. They are "good guys", but not against violence. These are White Hat ships - as opposed to Black Hat bad guy pirate ships (that's an analogy to Western films)...
I would have liked to see things like built in warp stabilizers and/or ewar abilities, personally. They don't need to excel at hacking; I'd prefer the tougher fighting version we have here. But I'd like to see them allow lone explorers to evade or escape PVP while in combat sites in low or null... as it is, you're just going to get your expensive faction ship blown up. |
Fa Xian
The Bene Gesserit
Sanctuary Pact
22
|
Posted - 2013.10.09 17:33:00 -
[6] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:No really, the issue is that people assume CCP have assigned a fixed role and just posting it to the forum for a slugfest. They have asked for constructive ideas, not for people to assume that what they believe is what CCP Have decided.After 75 pages and over 1500 posts of struggling peoples patience is a little frazzled
So why not suggest they double the shields, armor, and hull? Do you think CCP will listen to that?
It's silly to just ask for something without understanding what is going on in the first place. CCP is not going to give +10 because it would invalidate the exploration role of all other existing exploration ships. You can keep asking and asking, but you won't get it because it's not on the table for negotiation.
You have a valid point; +10 is what defines a good exploration ship for hacking. Guess what? These aren't for hacking. |
Fa Xian
The Bene Gesserit
Sanctuary Pact
22
|
Posted - 2013.10.09 17:38:00 -
[7] - Quote
Fa Xian wrote:You have a valid point; +10 is what defines a good exploration ship for hacking. Guess what? These aren't for hacking.
+5 base, with +1 virus strength per level of Cov Ops skill
That would be a reasonable compromise perhaps. |
Fa Xian
The Bene Gesserit
Sanctuary Pact
22
|
Posted - 2013.10.09 18:20:00 -
[8] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:For all those who feel +10 is necessary to do null sec hacking sites.
It's not necessary. It's what defines "good" - a T2 module and +10 means a standard 80 cohesion blocking node is 2 clicks. At +5 it is 3 clicks. That's 2 cohesion hits instead of 1. Of course, you can luck your way through the hacking game sometimes with no blocking nodes And failing the game sometimes is intended even at the best strength and cohesion when doing the hardest content.
It's only natural for people to want +10 on an exploration ship. It isn't useful to show how you could possibly make do with less - people don't want to make do. They want to excel.
It is more useful to say "If I put +10 on this, why would anyone fly a T2 cov ops?" This has +5 to keep the +10 on the other ships relevant. +5 is the "T1" version of hacking abilities. These ships are T1 ships. So, they get the T1 bonus. If they get the T2 bonus, what will you give the T2 ships? If someone gets +15, will that require changes to the hacking game? If you change the hacking game, will you just be back here on the forums insisting that +10 is not good enough?
|
Fa Xian
The Bene Gesserit
Sanctuary Pact
22
|
Posted - 2013.10.09 18:35:00 -
[9] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Several posts in this thread mention that +10 is required to do null hacking sites.
What does "required" mean? It means "I will fail at it more than I am happy with if I don't have it". The only really required thing is an analyzer... and a ship to mount it on.
Understanding why people are asking for +10 helps engage the conversation in a productive manner. Or you could just keep shouting past one another to no point. |
Fa Xian
The Bene Gesserit
Sanctuary Pact
26
|
Posted - 2013.10.25 21:50:00 -
[10] - Quote
Why is there a laser bonus on the cruiser? I just can't see skilling up in lasers when I don't even fly laser based ships and I don't know anything about how to use lasers to fight. Can't we get some other kind of bonus in place of single faction laser on a hybrid ship? |
Fa Xian
The Bene Gesserit
Sanctuary Pact
26
|
Posted - 2013.10.25 21:59:00 -
[11] - Quote
Xorionna wrote:that wont be the only faction ship with bonuses for only 1 weapon system.
They're all stupid. They're not hybrid ships that way. It's not 50% Amarr, 50% Gallente. It's 75% Amarr, 25% Gallente.
It's basically saying "Here you go Amarr pilots... a new ship for you. Everyone else? You should have rolled Amarr, sorry."
A lot like giving me an Amarr ship when we got the Gnosis... what was the point of that but to tell people "Sorry you picked the wrong faction." |
| |
|