It takes a truly horrific idea to bring together people this different against it.

Just a couple of thoughts:

As it currently stands with the latest scan and warp speed changes, the time it takes a hunter to enter a system, find a target, warp, and point is ridiculously low. Additionally, the warp changes have made warping away even harder for prey.

There seems to be a weird assumption that hunters should have it easy and prey should have it hard. All of the advice to prey who are doing anything besides PvP in a system is basically to warp or cloak when local spikes. And because thatGÇÖs the only option available to prey, AFK cloakers can shut down a system. The MSI actually provides options that reduce the GÇ£powerGÇ¥ of the AFK cloaker. He canGÇÖt just sit there and present a possible threat; he has to warp around to present an actual threat.

While I can understand some of the dismay over the upcoming "shell game," I don't see any inherent problems with making the hunter have to work more than 30 seconds to find and point prey. The shell game also has an easy counter: throwaway alts in shuttles. IGÇÖve also not seen anyone propose the counter use of MSIs against a shell game. They have a whole bunch of MSIs placed? You setup a whole bunch of MSIs. Better yet, you get there first and you put MSIs on every anomaly. Hide and seek works both ways. I can think of lots of other ways to use these against other players who are using them and for other offensive purposes.

As for the suggestion that ships inside the MSI field not be able to d-scan, thatGÇÖs absurd. The hunter has only a 30km bubble in the system that he canGÇÖt scan. The prey in that scenario would have an entire system he canGÇÖt scan. ThatGÇÖs not an equal tradeoff; especially since nothing prevents the hunter from scanning down the MSI or in any way prevents him from finding or engaging the prey.

Personally, IGÇÖm happy to see that a scout has to do more than enter local, read the local member list, and spam d-scan.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA OH GOD

You're validating my point: if you don't warp away shortly after I enter the system, I will catch you. And even if you make it off grid, I can cloak up and wait. Then you're done with whatever you were doing until I leave. If you had a couple of MSIs out or you and your buddies each had one while you run separate sites, I have a problem I have to solve before I can catch anyone. If you're clever about MSI use and have the capability (like, say, a mobile fitting unit), you have the option and the time to either hunt me in turn or run sites in a clever manner. If you were using MSIs and just had low SP alts docked in system, I would have to make a lot more decisions about how or whether to engage.

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"?

22 pages and the response thus far has been clearly lackluster or outright negative. Standard CCP dev policy will thus be to leave this for another week without comment, make a minor (read: token) adjustment - all the while indicating that testing and feedback indicate the new mobile structures will perform as intended (and that we can't see the "full" picture). Meanwhile, preparations to essentialy roll these out for Rubicon 1.1 in their present state proceed uninterrupted...

The only way you find out what is behind the scan disruptor bubble is by sending a scout which may well die. On the other hand, the pilots inside the bubble can easily decide if they want to engage or disengage.

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".

The MSI decreases risk to ratters, the group which is already at less risk between the two.

I have never, as a ratter, thought that I needed to be safer.

There's a big difference between having extra protection and having every advantage there is.

Yes, because not being prepared to fight and not stopping whatever you're doing and getting prepared to defend yourself or at least hide when someone comes in is not making a mistake. Of course.

.

~Interesting mechanics~

I can see a consensus here. CCP, do not add this deployables to game.

Well you can pretty much guarantee that in null and WHs every single MSI will have a large T2 bubble in it.
Either for a trap or to delay you from getting to the bling PvE ship.

Well said.

dude, it is already impossible to catch even a BS if it is within a deadspace pocket provided the pilot has more iq than an oister, thx local + dscan.

anyone else think it's silly that the scan inhibitor shown up on d-scan? This thing should only be detectable via probes.

well it pretty simple...

1. PVE'ers will just deploy multiple of these to make in harder for people to find them.
2. In PVP it will be used to bait using a inhibitor and a warp bubble
3. It can be used in place of a deep safe spot to hide your fleet

The problem is that if someone sees it on D-scan, they know someone is active, which kind of defeats the purpose imo.

Ships inside the area of a MSI's effect will have their own directional scanner and probe results disabled.
We're adding a minimum distance of 75km from wormholes.
We're reducing the sensor strength of the structure to 5 and increasing the signature radius to 500. Go ahead and apply as many projected ECCM to that as you want.
We're increasing the build cost to ~15m isk.
We're decreasing the structure's lifetime in space to 1 hour.
Minimum distance to another MSI is now 100km.
We're increasing the volume of the structure to 100m3.


I'll be updating the OP momentarily.

these structures are intentionally provocative so even after this round of adjustments we expect them to be very disruptive to the status quo in a valuable and exciting way.

Ships inside the area of a MSI's effect will have their own directional scanner and probe results disabled.

We're increasing the build cost to ~15m isk.
We're decreasing the structure's lifetime in space to 1 hour.



I'll be updating the OP momentarily.

The proposed updates to the MSI don't deal with a problem of carebears farming a wormhole site and you don't even know it before you scan it down (versus 1 click on d-scan now). Once again - upon opening the hole you have very little time to catch the ratting fleet before it escapes. Usuallyyou are very pressed for time with last-minute preparation for your fleet. Price is not a problem, when a fleet at risk can cost more then 20bil.

Nor FW problems are covered.

Maybe deny anchoring those within 75km of any signature? So that they are used only in fleet fights and other more unpredictable situations.

Seemed to me that the "small" fraction was a significant fraction of this thread. Or are you just calling yourself fat?

Even if I did not like to hunt carebears I would still have pushed for the tweak Fozzie made to the MSI, because in a PvP situation, there was simply not enough cost for the huge advantage that blinding your opponent's d-scan gives you.

+1. When the only vocal and serious support to a change is a noob corp account with zero other activity on the forums, no employment history, and a total of 17 days in the game, you know that there's something wrong with the idea.

I'm glad to see that there's some scaling back here, but the team based nature of Eve means that disabling the D-Scan of people inside the DSI is basically a token nerf. I believe that this kind of module fundamentally provides too much advantage to the people who "defending" and already on grid. I think that this kind of mobile module is too powerful and even in its nerfed state will be game breaking in wormhole space.

Well this D-Scan thing is now dead for me. Thought about it for Solomining in Low-Sec.

To much cost, to low durationtime.

Well then, go ahead.

unlike K-Space there's no way to know how many people are hidden, what they're flying, or who they are. And there's no way to know without warping to the structure itself and directly into the drag bubble set up by their HIC.

.

Argument against MSI: If we send a scout, it might tip our hand and let a bear escape. If we warp en mass, we might get slaughtered because it could be a trap set up by non-bears.


SOoooo...Risk averse bears are going to be too safe because risk averse PVPers won't commit without knowing exactly who/what/how many are hiding beneath the MSI skirt.

I absolutely love it when I can easily slaughter light fitting after light fitting.

Oh a more serious note, do you really, really not see that it is far easier for a PvE solo ship to GTFO when a pirate comes into system than it is for said pirate to catch that player? The PvEr has local on their side. they know the instant there is anyone else there. More than that, they have d-scan too, and rather than having to fiddle around working out exactly where their hunter is coming from, they just have to know that they're there and they can hit warp.

If you catch someone ratting, they are either stupid or AFK. It's that simple.

If you're doing any kind of PvE activity in a wormhole where you aren't constantly watching for signatures and don't have all the known entrances closed then you are AFK or stupid.

If you're ratting or mining or whatever with neuts or reds already in local, then you should be prepared for that fact. you still have d-scan. you only need to know they're there, they need to know where you are.

Try again.

Mobile Scan Inhibitor

Ships inside the area of a MSI's effect will have their own directional scanner and probe results disabled.
We're adding a minimum distance of 75km from wormholes.
We're reducing the sensor strength of the structure to 5 and increasing the signature radius to 500. Go ahead and apply as many projected ECCM to that as you want.
We're increasing the build cost to ~15m isk.
We're decreasing the structure's lifetime in space to 1 hour.
Minimum distance to another MSI is now 100km.
We're increasing the volume of the structure to 100m3.

It takes skill to learn to probe someone down quickly, and even more skill to d-scan.

If someone has to go take a **** or answer the door then they can just dock up, or warp to their POS. I mean they live in that system right? They already have a tool to protect themselves, you don't need any more.

Gives away the fact that you have seen them. Whether or not there turns out to be a bubble there.

EDIT: I'm not trying to suggest that's necessarily a bad gameplay mechanic, it's just that it forces the scouting to be done in one of two ships, and only one SP intensive ship if you want to be unseen. This is not exactly in the spirit of most parts of Eve.

Anyway- I am actually sympathetic to the issues the devices pose to solo/tiny gangs. Strangely enough, both units would have been more useful to this demographic prior to the changes. The changes (imo) are pretty much the inverse of what is needed for the solo/tiny gang. vOv

Both modules would have been more useful to solo/small gangs before the changes becuase they were more useful to everyone before the changes. The changes happened because they were too useful, to the point of being mandatory/ubiquitous, which is a sign of something being OP.

I am imagining them, but I am also imagining the frustration and losses when other people use the same stuff against me, and the latter is a more powerfully frightening vision than the former is warm and fuzzy.

.

Something that adds that "risk" you keep talking about

The chanceof beign a trap is still EXACLTY the same

Ohhh!! You're saying that because the MSI cuts off d-scan, no PvEers will use it, since they need d-scan to get ready to run from a gank!

I strongly doubt that. In fact, I'd bet good ISK against it. Exactly your train of thought is why PvEers in more agile ships would use the MSI, so they look like a trap and make pirates be more cautious and even possibly leave them alone.

Really don't understand the point of the Scan Inhibitor. Way too easy to scan down, doesn't last nearly long enough, and makes people inside blind? Why would anyone ever use this?

.these structures are intentionally provocative so even after this round of adjustments we expect them to be very disruptive to the status quo in a valuable and exciting way.

I don't see the use in concealing PVE activities. If someone see's the unit then they can simply use it as warpin straight to location of the PVE ships and gank them even more easily.

Yes it could be a trap, but I don't think anyone would take that risk of practically anyone warping in on them with an expensive PVE ship. For it to be useful it need to not show up on dscan, perhaps only by probing can it be found.