EVE Search - Sticky:[Rubicon 1.1] Mobile Micro Jump Unit and Mobile Scan Inhibitor

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Rubicon 1.1] Mobile Micro Jump Unit and Mobile Scan Inhibitor

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 11 post(s)
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8136	Posted - 2014.01.06 22:43:00 - [1] - Quote Mobile scan inhibitor should disable dscan or probe scanning for anyone inside of it. My EVE Videos
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8143	Posted - 2014.01.06 23:03:00 - [2] - Quote Sabriz Adoudel wrote: James Amril-Kesh wrote: Mobile scan inhibitor should disable dscan or probe scanning for anyone inside of it. The MMJD is alright I guess. Needs closer inspection. At first I thought it was a "get away free" tool for fleets but with the restrictions that you can't anchor two within 6 km, and it can't be used more than once every 20s renders that somewhat less overpowered. If the fleet isn't densely packed, they can still extract a lot of ships with these. Think in a 25 v 22 fight, where the 25 decide they are losing and want to extract. Presently, they order MJD ships to evacuate to sniper range and shoot at both anchored bubbles and ships with local bubbles, then they try to warp, and they lose 7 or 8 stragglers that get pointed or scrammed as well as the 7 or 8 ships that get popped while they are shooting bubbles and/or dictors, so perhaps 10 ships escape. In the MMJD era, the 25 all drop MMJDs. 18 actually start anchoring (the others are too close), 13 MMJDUs actually anchor and 5 get popped while anchoring. Then those ships with local MJDs use those, then the remaining ships all use an MMJD if they can. Chances are you get a good 16 to 18 of your fleet out alive, a big increase on 10 in the first example. I agree with your point that the MMJD should need more means of preventing its usage, but keep in mind again there is the fact that you have 12 second spool up for the MMJD, 8 seconds more until someone else can use it, and another 12 second spool up for that second person. So assuming everyone activates as soon as they possibly can, that's 12 seconds it takes to jump for the first person on that MMJD, and 20 more seconds for the next person, 20 more for the next, etc. My EVE Videos
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8144	Posted - 2014.01.06 23:26:00 - [3] - Quote Vatek wrote: It clearly states in the OP that there is no limit on how many people can use it at once and no cooldown, so I'm not sure where you're getting this 20 second thing from. Yeah, you're right. I was looking at the anchor time. I'm ********. My EVE Videos
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8144	Posted - 2014.01.06 23:29:00 - [4] - Quote Vatek wrote: Michael Harari wrote: Vatek wrote: If a shiny new thing is far enough along in development to get an F&ID thread they will never ever scrap it so I look forward to having these new deployables forced on us with few (if any) changes. With 2-3x the anchoring time and 10-20% the hp, the MMJD thing would be pretty balanced. Scramming the MMJD itself should block it from being used, that's my genius idea. This is actually a really good idea. My EVE Videos
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8146	Posted - 2014.01.06 23:49:00 - [5] - Quote darius mclever wrote: Michael Harari wrote: Also bastion should prevent use of the MMJD for obvious reasons. so far ... ships with active cynos are allowed to use it. so... at the current logic it seems they should be allowed it. Well they shouldn't. Nor should ships in bastion. Nor should cloaked ships. Nor should HICs with bubble or infinipoint active. And the way to stop the MMJD from working should be, as suggested above, scramming it. My EVE Videos
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8156	Posted - 2014.01.07 02:15:00 - [6] - Quote EI Digin wrote: You should be very careful when introducing additional complexity onto a system that isn't quite understood in the first place, that you don't know the future to, and especially to a system that is way due for an overhaul. In this case, intelligence (via local, dscan, probing) is definitely something that both the players and the devs know must eventually change. Do not try to fix a broken existing system or try to implement a bandaid solution without first completely understanding how intel should work on a massive scale because more often than not you will just end up causing more harm than good. In short, create a vision of what you think the game would be like before implementing features like these, because it seems to me like this is another "wouldn't it be cool if" idea rather than what actually needs to be done. Yeah, definitely this. My EVE Videos
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8158	Posted - 2014.01.07 04:34:00 - [7] - Quote Omnathious Deninard wrote: Te more I think about the MSI the less I like it. It seems that it would be useful to a complex runner or ratter, but it is only good by the hundreds to make it impossible to chose the right one. From an offensive standpoint it is good as a trap, but then again it is too obvious a trap. I'm not really sure the direction you were trying to go with this module. There is no direction. They obviously put about 5 minutes of thought into it and went "yeah sounds good we'll worry about balance later". My EVE Videos
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8163	Posted - 2014.01.07 05:54:00 - [8] - Quote An effective balance would be not being able to scan what's outside if you're inside, since nobody who's outside can scan what's inside. My EVE Videos
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8187	Posted - 2014.01.07 20:24:00 - [9] - Quote Erasmus Phoenix wrote: The MSI would be so, so hard to balance anywhere between utterly broken and totally useless, and either way it's going to make people less inclined to actually fight. Really... CCP should be wondering if it's worth it at all for what it will add. I don't think it is. No, it isn't. It's a terrible idea that should never have gotten to the "post on forums" stage. My EVE Videos
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8187	Posted - 2014.01.07 20:25:00 - [10] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Anything that makes the already laughably easy life of an NPCer easy is out of the gate a bad idea. They're hard enough to catch, if they want safety they go to high sec, if they want riches and danger, 0.0, but safe riches and danger is dumb, so the MSI is bad, because if you think cost will prohibit these from being used in broken ****** ways to make NPCing easy then I'd like to sell you a bridge. MMJD is bad, the ships using it get something for nothing, they suffer no penalties and make no fitting concessions to gain the ability to MJD. Coupled with the fact that it instantly obsoletes the LMJD module because why ever bother fitting one if you can just drop this thing and get it done? Scrap both mods, they're garbage. Holy ** it's Grath and I'm agreeing with him. My EVE Videos

James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8191	Posted - 2014.01.07 22:20:00 - [11] - Quote Vincent Athena wrote: By the way, the MSI hides cosmic signatures...sort of. The sig still shows on the scanner. It shows as a red sphere in the solar system map. But scan probes cannot see a sig near a MSI. Drop one on a wormhole and that wormhole cannot be scanned out. Of course if they have an expanded probe launcher and combat probes they can find the MSI, warp to it and find the wormhole. If they got that equipment and are willing to do it. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA OH GOD My EVE Videos
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8191	Posted - 2014.01.07 22:24:00 - [12] - Quote mynnna wrote: Dinsdale Pirannha wrote: I would be curious to read some CSM members' takes on these new mechanisms. I would think that some of them would have VERY strong opinions about them. Sorry I'm a bit off my game lately, can you please inform me what strong opinion lead financier of the nullsec cartel is supposed to have on them so that I may adopt it? Thanks. Okay. What if Dinsdale weren't the one asking the question? Because that's something I was wondering myself. Were you consulted? What was your input? My EVE Videos
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8191	Posted - 2014.01.07 22:26:00 - [13] - Quote Priestess Lin wrote: well said. It is about time this game stopped being so easy for aggressors. What game have you been playing? My EVE Videos
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8191	Posted - 2014.01.07 22:47:00 - [14] - Quote Priestess Lin wrote: James Amril-Kesh wrote: Vincent Athena wrote: By the way, the MSI hides cosmic signatures...sort of. The sig still shows on the scanner. It shows as a red sphere in the solar system map. But scan probes cannot see a sig near a MSI. Drop one on a wormhole and that wormhole cannot be scanned out. Of course if they have an expanded probe launcher and combat probes they can find the MSI, warp to it and find the wormhole. If they got that equipment and are willing to do it. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA OH GOD goon tears best tearsyummy! Come prepared into wormholes and you won't have any problems. Don't be angry just because the game got a little more challenging for aggressors. This is about balance. For far too long EVE has been a game where aggressors had all the power. Maybe now being a successful EVE pirate will actually mean something. I don't think I need to explain why this post is stupid. My EVE Videos
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8191	Posted - 2014.01.07 22:58:00 - [15] - Quote Gizznitt Malikite wrote: Domanique Altares wrote: Gizznitt Malikite wrote: the prepared pilot with bookmarks in the area. So basically we're back to Malcanis' law, and only the people who have been around long enough to be 'prepared' and already have a few thousand BMs all over nullsec will benefit. Good job, then. Any newb in a t1 frigate can make a set of bookmarks around a region within a night or three. You can also sell them to corp/alliance mates if you want to make some income doing it. You hardly need to be a vet to have access to such things. Furthermore, even if you don't have them, you can use common sense: Primarily, don't warp gate to gate with hostiles in local. These things don't change the landscape when you are attempting to safely navigate hostile null / lowsec. People don't just bubble gate to gate inlines. My EVE Videos
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8191	Posted - 2014.01.07 23:17:00 - [16] - Quote Priestess Lin wrote: Petrus Blackshell wrote: Cameron Freerunner wrote: PvE shouldn't be easy, but neither should PvP. It should take more than my presence to lock you out of content in your system. I found a wormhole to nullsec once, and that system had an 8/10 plex in it. Never having been on the PvE side of the issue, I decided to see what this whole "gankers are going to ruin your day" thing is really all about. So I fit up my Abaddon for PvE and went to run it. Turns out that gankers will come ruin your day, but without needing any of the fancy Rubicon modules that make everything much easier, the day ended with a Navy Omen, Deimos, two Zealots, and a Pilgrim killed, and my Abaddon still alive, with its site completed. Of course, the attackers weren't all together, and being able to kill them all was a combination of luck, preparation and skill, but even if I had not managed to kill any of them, the completion of my site and safety of my Abaddon were never in question. It turns out that with some foresight and preparation, you can safely engage in only fights you want to engage in. The ganker has little to no control. Had I had access to mobile depots, mobile micro jump units, and mobile sensor inhibitors, much of that fighting would simply not have happened -- especially if I were more risk-averse about welping an Abaddon. Is this the sort of effect we want from "omg wow shiny new" mechanics introduced with no reasoning or niche other than "it's cool"? Pay 2 win multiple accounts helps too, I understand. Too bad you cancelled 27 of your accounts because of this change, huh? Looks like you are going to need them. These mechanics are introduced for a very good reason if you were paying attention. The MSI will force aggressors to take risks or scout first and the MMJU has several excellent uses. If you are so good at EVE, why are you crying that EVE is getting more skill demanding? You honestly make no sense, but your tears are delicious all the same. Why are you demanding that EVE be made even easier for the carebear? My EVE Videos
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8200	Posted - 2014.01.08 04:21:00 - [17] - Quote There is no positive aspect to the MSI as far as PVP is concerned. It is certainly not going to encourage more PVP. My EVE Videos
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8200	Posted - 2014.01.08 05:13:00 - [18] - Quote Priestess Lin wrote: Don't be so afraid to lose your ship, its just pixels. MSI is about providing risk vs reward and balance. Its about time. Repeating the mantra doesn't make it true. The MSI decreases risk to ratters, the group which is already at less risk between the two. Also making the choice not to lose ships unnecessarily is not the same as being afraid to lose ships. For most of us winning fights is more fun than losing them pointlessly (not saying that can't be fun though). Priestess Lin wrote: The MSI is easy enough to scan down. You can have probes in space less time than it would take to scan someone down normally, which means you have a better chance of getting the jump on them, IF you are willing to take a risk. Hahaha no. Because if there are more than one (you'd be stupid to deploy just one) that decreases the chance of getting the right one significantly. In any case ratters will see you coming long before you've scanned them down. I should also mention that prior to this you could use regular core scan probes to find the complex, whereas now you'd need the Comcast scan probes to find the MSI. Priestess Lin wrote: If you bear-rats want that SAFETY you are so accustomed to, What about the bears that want even more safety than they already have, who are clamoring for this change without any regard for balance? Priestess Lin wrote: you will have to send a scout first, in which case your prey will also be given options. Whoever thought of this mechanic should be given an award as this gives much needed balance to the game on more than one level. Adapt or die. They already have several options. I have never, as a ratter, thought that I needed to be safer. My EVE Videos
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8200	Posted - 2014.01.08 05:16:00 - [19] - Quote Priestess Lin wrote: Petrus Blackshell wrote: Erasmus Phoenix wrote: James Amril-Kesh wrote: There is no positive aspect to the MSI as far as PVP is concerned. It is certainly not going to encourage more PVP. Well... I suppose that depends if you count suiciding "Alts in shuttles" as PvP... I can't decide if "Alts in Shuttles Online" is better than "OGB Alts Online". or cry. pirate tears are the best tears. I only see stupid gloating from worthless carebear scrubs. The same people who would cry the loudest should CCP reconsider going through with this plan. My EVE Videos
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8200	Posted - 2014.01.08 05:47:00 - [20] - Quote Petrus Blackshell wrote: James Amril-Kesh wrote: Comcast scan probes Not Xfinity scan probes? Those are much better! (they have a different skin) Haha, autocorrect. My EVE Videos

James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8200	Posted - 2014.01.08 06:07:00 - [21] - Quote There's a big difference between having extra protection and having every advantage there is. My EVE Videos
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8224	Posted - 2014.01.08 19:14:00 - [22] - Quote David Magnus wrote: Ahh, thanks for the update! That clears a lot up, though I think most reasonable people would have assumed a lot of this wouldn't be final Nobody did. Giving feedback isn't predicated on that assumption. My EVE Videos
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8229	Posted - 2014.01.09 06:42:00 - [23] - Quote Priestess Lin wrote: Yes, please don't compromise on these excellent new tools to the point of making them ineffectual. The CSMs mostly represent themselves and maintaining the status quo. No, the CSM represent those who voted for them. If you didn't vote you don't deserve a say. My EVE Videos
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8232	Posted - 2014.01.09 14:43:00 - [24] - Quote Solution: bubbles originating inside the area of effect of the MSI have no effect. The changes look excellent so far Fozzie. My EVE Videos
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 8277	Posted - 2014.01.11 11:04:00 - [25] - Quote Rek Seven wrote: Feel free to take your time and come up with a better example as to how these will be used in PVP. I'll wait... Maybe they won't get used. Hopefully they won't. Good riddance. My EVE Videos