|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
Zircon Dasher
319
   |
Posted - 2014.01.06 20:42:00 -
[1] - Quote
 best idea...EVAH!
Looking forward to finding ways to abuse these!
Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
Zircon Dasher
319
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 15:19:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Mobile Micro Jump Unit
We're disabling the ability to jump while cloaked.
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 increasing the build cost to ~15m isk.
We're decreasing the structure's lifetime in space to 1 hour.
We're increasing the volume of the structure to 100m3.
That's some bat you have in your hand Fozzie! Oh well. I guess these devices were not intended to be used by solo/casual small gangs. Too bad.
Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
Zircon Dasher
319
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 19:04:00 -
[3] - Quote
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. 
Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
Zircon Dasher
319
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 20:11:00 -
[4] - Quote
Theon Severasse wrote:
If I am solo and I see an MSI on a gate, and people in local, I won't be thinking "how can I make this fight go my way". I will be thinking "I can't reasonably take this fight", and I will just turn around. This isn't being risk averse, the fight might have been one I would have take if I knew what was there,even if I was outnumbered, but I am weighing the fact that I have probably been flying around for an hour or so without finding a fight, and not wanting to just suicide my ship into a gang.
The fact that you immediately think "I can't do this", instead of "How can I figure out a way to get the information I need" is of some interest to me.
Curious: Assuming that you do not have BM's on gates in your roaming area (and are incapable of making off-line BM's to warp from), do you refuse to warp to a gate you can't scan first?
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
Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
Zircon Dasher
319
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 20:16:00 -
[5] - Quote
Priestess Lin wrote:
You can't have your cake and eat it too, if YOU are going to play it SAFE, by sending an expendible scout. You also give opportunities for your prey. If you want to get the jump on them, you might actually have to take a real risk for a reward for once. See how that works?
What you are saying is you want to take no risks and get kills. This seems to be the status quo mentality of EVE. That lamps are presented up for slaughter at the mere press of a button (d-scan).
I guess the "good" news for you pirates is that you should never expect to encounter a solo PVErs in one of these things are they are far too costly for their duration in addition to disabling all Intel. Therefore, these nerfs defeat the purpose of the MSI since the most rational thing to do for aggressors would be to ALWAYS send an expendable scout since multiple hostiles are to be expected.
Shitting in your own nest is the way of EVE, apparently.
Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
Zircon Dasher
320
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 21:30:00 -
[6] - Quote
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
That said, Eve doesn't need either of these mechanics, so I'm not sure whose wishes for shiny~~ we're satisfying here.
This one.... or any variant found in that thread?
Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
Zircon Dasher
320
|
Posted - 2014.01.10 00:10:00 -
[7] - Quote
MisterAl tt1 wrote:
Any guy with a 10+ bil capital fleet farming wormholes will do so that, unless he is 1. lazy 2. stupid.
So tell me.... do many people in your corp box caps 30km from the warp-in and not use d-scan?
EDIT:
DOH! You got me. Should have looked at your corp name first. Well played.
Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
Zircon Dasher
320
|
Posted - 2014.01.10 03:00:00 -
[8] - Quote
MisterAl tt1 wrote: But yeah, I have to agree that keeping a separate window out of MSI to track new signatures will be a pain for solo farmers, that they don't have now. For bigger guys like us... for years we have been keeping a dedicated scanner with probes out for all the time we are on-site.
That is pretty much the issue (as far as I can tell) that people have with the no-scan change. Med-Large groups are not effected at all by the change since they already have the manpower to bypass the drawback. It only really affects those who do not. vOv
IMO its not a huge issue since WH residents come prepared to run multiple accounts. The place where it will be more noticeable is Kspace.
Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
Zircon Dasher
320
|
Posted - 2014.01.10 05:06:00 -
[9] - Quote
ROXGenghis wrote: fairer fights
I have never heard the term before. Is that a fight between blonde people or women?
Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
|
|
| |
|