|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11548
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 19:56:00 -
[1] - Quote
Could we get rid of that cargo scanner immunity?
Its a rather pointless thing to have on a ship that is always cloaked (and thus, unscannable anyway) Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11555
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 20:27:00 -
[2] - Quote
CynoNet Two wrote:Harvey James wrote: seems excessive .. inty speed almost on a cruiser hull?? .. i suggest a look at the angel ships for a more reasonable figure
How many people do you think will train Transport Ships 5 to get that? Most will only have it to 3 or 4.
Probably me. The less time spent shipping stuff the better. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11574
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 03:56:00 -
[3] - Quote
Utremi Fasolasi wrote:Gypsio III wrote:Please remove the immunity to cargo scanning. This will make it much safer to autopilot around in highsec in an empty BR, while not affecting anyone who is flying manually with valuable cargo, because of the cloak.
Currently, the scan immunity bonus essentially means that you can't AP around in an empty BR, you have to fly it manually everywhere. This can be a real pain. You can't cloak at the Jita undock, where cargo gets scanned the most.
Cant scan it if it instantly warps to an undock safe. Flown correctly there is no chance to even lock a blocade runner let alone scan it. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11574
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 03:58:00 -
[4] - Quote
Catherine Laartii wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:The velocity bonus doesn't help much, and on all at1 industrials it was awitched to agility which is mountains better on this kind of ship. Yes, an agility bonus would be more powerful. That doesn't mean it's the best bonus to give the ship. And why exactly would that be, considering their role is the expedient and covert delivery of cargo? Would it not make far more sense to have a bonus to align time which applies directly to the foundation of its role, rather than something awkwardly specific like speed under covops cloak? The current speed bonuses are only useful if you're traveling through null or wh and need to get out of a bubble.
They already align like frigates. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11648
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 09:41:00 -
[5] - Quote
Arnpior wrote: All the 'remove the immune to scanning' cries are making me laugh.
The first thing I noticed is that most of the posts are from corps that are known to gank blockade runners. I figured no one would take these obvious troll posts seriously. But somehow the terrible joke grew into many posts.
The only people that benefit from removing immunity to cargo scanning are the gankers. Currently there is no way to know if that BR is full up with officer mods or used minmitarr shuttles. The first thing a ganker does is calculate the isk lost by the suicide to the isk gained/destroyed in the gank. If the BR is empty.... they lose the isk war so they do not gank. If its full.... POP.
Also the scanning of blockade runners almost always happens when undocking from a major trade hub like JITA or AMARR, with server lag, the crowd of ships etc there is lots of time to be scanned before you warp to your safe undock bookmark. The cloak does not help at all in this situation. You also decloak when you arrive at a gate.... again vulnerable to insta lock scanners.
Right now BR cannot be specifically targetted. The gankers have to take a chance meaning sometimes they will lose the isk war... while others they might win. Remove scanning immunity and their job will be far easier, they'll never have to take a chance again..... they will know if the target is worth suiciding or not.
Also..... why is my prowler getting an agility nerf ?
I warp the second I undock to an undock safe and cloak, it is impossible to get a scan. When docking I warp to a bookmark I have either inside or right next to the station which again, makes it impossible to get a scan.
Flown right a blocade runner cannot be locked at all so having a scan immunity just doesnt make any sense, you cant even lock it to scan in the first place. It is an entirely pointless thing to have and as others have stated, it puts empty blockade runners at greater risk if they decide to afk to wherever they are going while you wander off to do something else.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11649
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 09:52:00 -
[6] - Quote
Yongtau Naskingar wrote: So basically you want to make it easier to AFK autopilot with an empty hold. How about you use a interceptor or a Leopard for that, hmm?
How would that get my blocade runner to where I want it?
No, I dont want it gone just for that. I want it gone because, frankly, I think that people who fly these ships well should be rewarded by having an unscannable, uncatchable ship for shipping things while bad pilots should be able to be scanned and pirated. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11649
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 10:03:00 -
[7] - Quote
Yongtau Naskingar wrote:baltec1 wrote:t puts empty blockade runners at greater risk if they decide to afk to wherever they are going while you wander off to do something else. baltec1 wrote:No, I dont want it gone just for that. I want it gone because, frankly, I think that people who fly these ships well should be rewarded by having an unscannable, uncatchable ship for shipping things while bad pilots should be able to be scanned and pirated. So... first you say that it puts people who autopilot on empty are at greater risk. And now you say that people who don't fly a ship well [i]should be at greater risk. Surely people who autopilot don't "fly it well", and therefore are justified in needing to take the bigger risk.
They are flying empty so the risk is almost non existent. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11649
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 10:07:00 -
[8] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Forget it. The scan immunity is a differentiator for this ship that makes gank attempts a real gamble and gives haulers much needed semi-safety. There is no need to buff ganking further.
The fact that it aligns like a frigates, warps like an intercepter and comes with a cov ops cloak is more than enough. Having cargo scan immunity on top of all of that just makes no sense and takes away the reward for flying these ships well.
This isnt a buff to ganking because any blockade runner worth its salt would be uncatchable and unscannable anyway. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11649
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 10:09:00 -
[9] - Quote
Yongtau Naskingar wrote:baltec1 wrote:They are flying empty so the risk is almost non existent. Then, since they are not flying it well, they should get more risk. According to your posts.
No, they are empty, there is near no risk of being ganked. Not flying it well would be autopiloting it with a bay full of sisters probes. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11651
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 10:18:00 -
[10] - Quote
Yongtau Naskingar wrote:baltec1 wrote:No, they are empty, there is near no risk of being ganked. Not flying it well would be autopiloting it with a bay full of sisters probes. So autopiloting an empty ship (100M hull alone) is "flying it well" and "shouldn't get you ganked." That's an odd position for a goon.
A ships hull cost means nothing in a gank. Only the things that can drop matter so the ship and rig cost means nothing to gankers. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11651
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 10:30:00 -
[11] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:baltec1 wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:
Forget it. The scan immunity is a differentiator for this ship that makes gank attempts a real gamble and gives haulers much needed semi-safety. There is no need to buff ganking further.
The fact that it aligns like a frigates, warps like an intercepter and comes with a cov ops cloak is more than enough. Having cargo scan immunity on top of all of that just makes no sense and takes away the reward for flying these ships well. This isnt a buff to ganking because any blockade runner worth its salt would be uncatchable and unscannable anyway. It makes all the sense as it is a unique feature of this ship, that suits the role and lets it stand out from the crowd. The alignment and 6 AU warp speed (which is nowhere near that of a ceptor) is not enough of a unique feature to achieve that. And yes, it is a buff to ganking, simply because of the fact that it is possible to scan the ship and find out whether it is worthwhile to attack or not. This risk might be minuscule, but it is there and it is unnecessary to be there. Ganking these ships, even if flown badly (in your opinion) (what kind of capacity do you have, by the way, to decide whether AP is bad piloting or not?), is supposed to be a gamble and this gamble can only exist because of the scan immunity. If this gamble is gone, ganking is buffed. Simple.
My current bloacade runner goes 13.6 Au/s, so yea interceptor speeds.
Frankly, I do not and have never like a safety net for stupidity which is exactly what is being provided by this scan immunity. There is zero reason why bad pilots should be immune to being scanned given just how good this ship is in avoiding being locked in the first place. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11651
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 10:33:00 -
[12] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Aren't you contradicting yourself there, considering all the ganked freighters, which are empty or only carry low value cargo? a sizable number of gankers don't gank for profit, they just gank because of the gank.
This is a myth. That vast vast bulk are purely for profit. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11651
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 10:34:00 -
[13] - Quote
Yongtau Naskingar wrote:baltec1 wrote:A ships hull cost means nothing in a gank. Only the things that can drop matter so the ship and rig cost means nothing to gankers. But you agree that autopiloting an empty ship is a Good IdeaGäó and should not get you in trouble.
Why should it? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11651
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 10:39:00 -
[14] - Quote
Yongtau Naskingar wrote: I don't know? All that is quoting from YOUR posts, not mine. I'd say anybody who autopilots knows the risk involved.
Given that I have never been attacked when on autopilot in any ship I will say the risk is very very low. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11651
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 10:40:00 -
[15] - Quote
Yongtau Naskingar wrote:baltec1 wrote:Frankly, I do not and have never like a safety net for stupidity which is exactly what is being provided by this scan immunity. There is zero reason why bad pilots should be immune to being scanned given just how good this ship is in avoiding being locked in the first place. But you said the scanning immunity is a downside for empty BRs, so not having it would be a safety net for them. And I'd say autopiloting a 100M ship designed for high collateral cargo is pretty stupid. So by removing it, CCP would provide a safetynet for bad pilots.
Dont try to twist my words. It wont work and will only make you look daft. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11651
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 10:43:00 -
[16] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:baltec1 wrote: My current bloacade runner goes 13.6 Au/s, so yea interceptor speeds.
Frankly, I do not and have never like a safety net for stupidity which is exactly what is being provided by this scan immunity. There is zero reason why bad pilots should be immune to being scanned given just how good this ship is in avoiding being locked in the first place.
Mine goes 6 AU and has rigs for faster align time. And one with cargo rigs for max cargo, obviously. What is bad piloting with these? And why are people bad pilots when they use ingame mechanics for moving around? I ask you again: Who are you to decide what is bad and what not?
A bad pilot would be someone who lets someone lock them in the first place. Blockade runners in high sec are impossible to lock let alone scan if they are flown well.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11651
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 10:46:00 -
[17] - Quote
Arnpior wrote:baltec1 wrote:It is an entirely pointless thing to have and as others have stated, it puts empty blockade runners at greater risk if they decide to afk to wherever they are going while you wander off to do something else. .... Frankly, I do not and have never like a safety net for stupidity which is exactly what is being provided by this scan immunity. There is zero reason why bad pilots should be immune to being scanned given just how good this ship is in avoiding being locked in the first place. WUT ? Greater risk...... or safety net ? Clearly you are contradicting yourself.
Please learn the difference between an empty blackade runner being scanned and a full blockade runner being scanned.
There is no contradiction, just you trying to wriggle out of an impossible position you find yourself in. You are effectively insisting that bad pilots should be protected while moving high value items. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11651
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 10:49:00 -
[18] - Quote
Yongtau Naskingar wrote:baltec1 wrote:A bad pilot would be someone who lets someone lock them in the first place. Blockade runners in high sec are impossible to lock let alone scan if they are flown well. So then the scanning immunity is not a downside, and we should leave it on.
The scanning immunity is entirely pointless. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11651
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 10:53:00 -
[19] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:baltec1 wrote: A bad pilot would be someone who lets someone lock them in the first place. Blockade runners in high sec are impossible to lock let alone scan if they are flown well.
You are evading my question.
You asked what a bad pilot was, I just provided you with a bad pilot.
Now, let me ask you, why do you feel that bad pilots should be protected from "evil gankers" scanning them when they are flying a ship that is impossible to lock when flown well? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11652
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 11:00:00 -
[20] - Quote
Yongtau Naskingar wrote:baltec1 wrote:The scanning immunity is entirely pointless. If it is entirely pointless, why did you spend an hour of your live arguing against it? There's a tons of things that are pointless in Eve, are you going to fill threads about all of them?
I am against it because it removes a lot of the negative impact of flying a blockade runner badly. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11653
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 11:08:00 -
[21] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:baltec1 wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:baltec1 wrote: A bad pilot would be someone who lets someone lock them in the first place. Blockade runners in high sec are impossible to lock let alone scan if they are flown well.
You are evading my question. You asked what a bad pilot was, I just provided you with a bad pilot. Now, let me ask you, why do you feel that bad pilots should be protected from "evil gankers" scanning them when they are flying a ship that is impossible to lock when flown well? If you would please have a look again at my post (for your convenience: #189), you will notice that I have not only asked what a bad pilot is, but also, for one, why people are bad pilots who use ingame mechanics, and secondly, what kind of capacity you have to decide that for all players. The very same question I already asked you in post #177. Selectively answering questions is not going to help your cause. I could ignore that if you had added a "in my opinion", as you are entitled to and to voice your opinion; however, what you have written so far is not an opinion, but rather a verdict. So, what kind of capacity do you have to speak such a verdict? And again: No, the scan immunity is not "entirely pointless", as demonstrated before. What you want is just easier ganks of people who don't follow your questionable ideals and verdicts. That is not a proper reason to remove this outstanding feature of a single ship class.
How exactly am I getting easier ganks on a ship I cannot even lock when it is flown well?
Why exactly do you need more protection than the ability to not even be locked in the first place? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11653
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 11:19:00 -
[22] - Quote
Yongtau Naskingar wrote:
Except that a) people don't AP BRs with high value in their cargo (risk ain't worth it) so these people you wish pain on don't exist.
They do exist. They also park up on the jita gate and go afk.
Yongtau Naskingar wrote: And b) you think you get to decide what good or bad is
You honestly think flying afk in a full blockade runner is a good pilot? It common sense, something far too many people seem to be lacking these days.
Yongtau Naskingar wrote:
Which, of course, is the real reason anyone argues against the immunity, it would making ganking more profitable (as they can filter out BRs which aren't profitable). Basically, there's ships that are flown well, and they are rarely ganked, and there's ships that are flown badly, and they want gankers to see which of those ships are profitable, so they don't have to take any risk (but still get the reward).
And why should the bad blockade runner pilots be protected from gankers scanning them? They are in a ship that when flown well is impossible to catch. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11653
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 11:21:00 -
[23] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:You evade again. You are obviously trying to wear away the stone by constantly dripping your emtpy words on it. That is not going to work.
Said the guy who cant answer why bad pilots need to be protected from scanner when flying a ship that is impossible to lock when flown well. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11654
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 11:50:00 -
[24] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Who are bad pilots?
People who get locked and scanned in a ship that when flown well is impossible to lock.
Rivr Luzade wrote: You, in contrast, cannot even answer why I should see you as capacity to judge people's behavior and play style.
I am a blockade runner pilot and memeber of the corp that industrialised ganking and gave everyone the gank catalyst.
Now, answer us, Why do people need more protection than the ability to be be unlockable, warp as fast as an interceptor, and align like a frigate? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11655
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 12:19:00 -
[25] - Quote
Yongtau Naskingar wrote: That's not the question in this thread. The question in this thread is, why do you (the ganker) need protection against bad luck? Answer that, and then you can argue for removing the unscannable bonus.
No, that is the question here.
You two are demanding that CCP protects you from scanners in a ship that when flown well is impossible to lock.
Attacking blockade runners from a gankers point of view is a waste of time, isk and status right now. If you lose that scanner immunity then the vast majority will still be just as safe from gankers because we cant even lock you. There is no reason at all for the blockade runner to have scanner immunity. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11655
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 12:39:00 -
[26] - Quote
Yongtau Naskingar wrote:baltec1 wrote:If you lose that scanner immunity then the vast majority will still be just as safe from gankers because we cant even lock you. So it makes no difference for the most of us, but you argue against it vehemently. Why? Because you want to have it easy, that's why. There's one ship that you actually have to put in some effort to gank, and you can't stand that sometimes when you put in the effort, you get unlucky. Cry me a river.
Yes, I would like scanning of blockade runners to go from impossible to hard.
Also, what makes you think removing scan immunity would make ganking a target require less effort? We would use the exact same ship and tactics. A gank is only ever as easy as the victim lets it be. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11679
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 20:21:00 -
[27] - Quote
Myrthiis wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Yongtau Naskingar wrote:baltec1 wrote:I am a blockade runner pilot and memeber of the corp that industrialised ganking and gave everyone the gank catalyst and just about every single new gank tactic in the last three years as well as the people behind burn jita.. Hm-mm, so even though the first few posts in this thread by you were meant to imply that you're arguing this as a BR pilot, you're now admitting you're arguing this as a ganker. Alright, that's some progress at least. So basically, you want to have it easy and see which autopilot BRs are packing and which aren't. Why not? Morons who autopilot should get their BRs blown up if they're carrying expensive ****. You should really be for removing the scan immunity because otherwise your empty AP BR would be getting blown up as well. Yongtau Naskingar wrote:That's not the question in this thread. The question in this thread is, why do you (the ganker) need protection against bad luck? Answer that, and then you can argue for removing the unscannable bonus. Nobody is arguing that they should. We're arguing that player safety should be influenced by their decisions. If you want to autopilot in an empty BR then objectively speaking your risk goes down if you can be cargo scanned. If you want to autopilot in a loot pinata BR then your risk will go up as it should be. Your risk of being ganked autopiloting shouldn't be independent of your decision to carry juicy trinkets. We have understood that Goonswarm are bored to gank empty BR ,but no thanks keep the immunity on BR as there is no valid reason to remove it .
We just gave you two.
Nobody has yet given a reason why a ship that cannot be locked when flown well need to also be impossible to scan. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11679
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 00:05:00 -
[28] - Quote
Its rather amusing watching spineless bears trying to defend a safety net for bad pilots while calling gankers risk adverse because we want to at least have a small chance of being able to look at their cargo. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11682
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 00:41:00 -
[29] - Quote
Myrthiis wrote:Finally showing your true face ,short on arguments going for insults ...Eve is a sandbox meaning all kind of players are mixing together deal with it. Concerning the alleged safety net for bad pilots your talking about ,you are the one asking for it .Your are the one who wants autopiloting safer than active piloting .So who is the bad pilot ?And if you want so badly to look inside a BR catch it ,destroy it then you will know what is was carrying. Oh and by the way as you are a representative of goons if found it funny that you are asking for this change just after "Burn jita" Understand those who can ...
I dont want autopiloting to be safer than activly flying a ship. At the same time I also dont want an empty ship being put at greater risk simply because some people dont want people looking at their cargo on a ship that when flown right is unlockable anyway.
Now if you were arguing to have immunity from npc navy scanning I could get behind that for the DST. But I do not support people who want a safety net for their own stupidity and lazyness. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11684
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 01:00:00 -
[30] - Quote
Davion Falcon wrote:Meh. Remove cargo scanners.
Make gankers put some real effort into determining what to gank.
And how do we determin what to gank with zero intel?
Removing the ability to scan dose not increase effort, it turns ganking into hoping you get lucky. You effectivly remove it as a profession. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11684
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 01:37:00 -
[31] - Quote
Davion Falcon wrote:baltec1 wrote:Davion Falcon wrote:Meh. Remove cargo scanners.
Make gankers put some real effort into determining what to gank. And how do we determin what to gank with zero intel? Removing the ability to scan dose not increase effort, it turns ganking into hoping you get lucky. You effectivly remove it as a profession. Go get intel, wardec, or gamble on the gank.
How do you get intel on the contents of somes cargohold without a scanner? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11684
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 01:39:00 -
[32] - Quote
Myrthiis wrote:You are contradicting yourself here,let me quote you . "baltec1" wrote:At the same time I also dont want an empty ship being put at greater risk simply because some people dont want people looking at their cargo on a ship that when flown right is unlockable anyway. Don't you see the contradiction in what you are saying,if flown properly you are "unlockable" so empty or not your ship isn't put a greater risk as obviously you will not be on autopilot no matter what in low or null sec .For the simple reasons than scannable or not if you are autopiloting in these systems you will be ganked for the lolz. But in the case of autopiloting in high sec ,unscannability force gankers to take a gamble (risk vs reward policy) . So unscannability isn't a safety net for anyone . - For gankers it force them to take a gamble. "Should i loose a few catalyst to crack open this BR on autopilot even if it could be empty ?" -For lazy pilot (autopilote) who wants to bring back a distant BR. "Does a pirate will shoot my ship to look inside ,as they are greedy for juicy trinkets as a bear with honey ?" -For proprer and dedicated pilote . " i don't care anyway , i fly my ship as a boss " This is the kind of questions a player should be happy to respond ,plus they are in phase with the Risk vs Reward policy. So yes i think Unscannability is a good characteristic ,it brings interesting game choices and reward active piloting over lazyness .
There is no contradiction. Read everything I say rather than little snippets.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11684
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 01:43:00 -
[33] - Quote
Davion Falcon wrote:baltec1 wrote:Davion Falcon wrote:baltec1 wrote:Davion Falcon wrote:Meh. Remove cargo scanners.
Make gankers put some real effort into determining what to gank. And how do we determin what to gank with zero intel? Removing the ability to scan dose not increase effort, it turns ganking into hoping you get lucky. You effectivly remove it as a profession. Go get intel, wardec, or gamble on the gank. How do you get intel on the contents of somes cargohold without a scanner? I'm sure you're familiar with the concept of espionage.
And how do we spy on the hundreds of thousands of pilots in high sec and read their minds? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11684
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 01:50:00 -
[34] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:baltec1 wrote:Its rather amusing watching spineless bears trying to defend a safety net for bad pilots while calling gankers risk adverse because we want to at least have a small chance of being able to look at their cargo. *it's *averse To wit: It's rather amusing watching spineless bears trying to defend a profit-maximising idea for bad gankers while calling people auto piloting their blockade runners risk averse because they don't want to gamble their suicide ganking fleet on what might be an empty hauler. The point being that unscannable cargo means the blockade runner pilot is taking more risk when AP, because the ganker doesn't know whether the ship has a cargo or not. There's no need for name-calling, just state the facts and provide your story about how a particular feature will or will not work for you. The ganker can scan the fit, which should provide some clues as to whether this particular blockade runner is carrying shiny pretties or not.
There are no clues to what is inside the hold of any ship based on their fittings.
Randomly ganking blocade runners and hoping you get lucky will always end in the ganker losing all their isk. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11684
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 02:05:00 -
[35] - Quote
Myrthiis wrote:"baltec1 " wrote:There are no clues to what is inside the hold of any ship based on their fittings.
Randomly ganking blocade runners and hoping you get lucky will always end in the ganker losing all their isk. A BR cost 100 M + 40 M with T2 rigs .A catalyst fitted cost 2 M you ll probably need two maybe three of these to blow it up . Thats is a serious lose streak before getting unprofitable .
Please tell us where you get your 2 mil T2 cats from. Also the cost of a blockade runner and its rigs means nothing. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11684
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 02:08:00 -
[36] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:baltec1 wrote:There are no clues to what is inside the hold of any ship based on their fittings.
Randomly ganking blocade runners and hoping you get lucky will always end in the ganker losing all their isk. That depends your your profit from the really juicy ones, really. Scanning the fit will at least give you some idea which are the easiest nuts to crack.
No, it doesnt depend. You will lose if you go and randomly gank blockade runners.You also gain zero intel on cargo from looking at a ships fittings. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11685
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 11:22:00 -
[37] - Quote
Myrthiis wrote:Honnestly i'm dissapointed ,you know very well than the cost of t1 cats is 2 M.And you perfectly know than 2 t1 cats would be enought to blow a Blockade runner in a 0.7 system . So please be honnest there is absolutly not a chance that you would'nt be profitable ganking BR even blind and tied. The cargo value is comprised between 100 M and 2 B thats a ratio of 10 to 100 lost Cats even t2 before being unprofitable So there is no relation between scannability and profitability ....
We experimented with this when the change happened. We lost isk.
You know nothing about ganking, hence your comment about swapping out ammo on a cat. Not only would you lose isk randomly ganking blockade runners but you would also have to grind up your sec status after a few ganks so we have a large downtime. The entire enterprise is a waste of time and isk. I also doubt you even fly a blockade runner, you simply see this as a negative impact to a group of players you do not like and thus, you want to support it no matter if it is a bad game design. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11691
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 04:26:00 -
[38] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:Belinda HwaFang wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:
My one concern with having the bonus prevent scanning by NPC customs officers is that you've now removed any issues with transporting illegal goods through high-sec. Hold full of drugs? Throw it in a Blockade Runner and auto-pilot straight to Jita 4-4.
And get suicide ganked. No BR pilot worth their salt is going to autopilot through pipes to Jita. Except that the risk-averse gankers such as Baltec1 will instead be sleeping fitfully with nightmares of the juicy shiny things that might have been in those blockade runners that they were too scared to shoot because :efficiency:.
Yea, the person asking for the removal of a safety net for stupidity and laziness on their own blockade runner is the one who is risk adverse..
The only risk adverse players here are the ones who support scan immunity on a ship that can already be impossible to lock. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11691
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 12:45:00 -
[39] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote: Where's the fun in trying to smuggle goods to market if there's no risk of getting caught?
So why do you support it being impossible to detect what is inside a blockade runners cargo hold? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11691
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 12:49:00 -
[40] - Quote
Carniflex wrote: Inreases risks on both sides btw as well
It does not increase risk for ganking, it turns it into purely pot luck that you will lose damn near every time. That is not good game design. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11692
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 14:19:00 -
[41] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:CCP please remove scan immunity from BR to reintroduce risk that was completely eliminated from players that choose to fly their blockade runners in inattentive and/or stupidly incompetent ways. CCP please keep scan immunity for BRs so James and Baltec1 can continue crying their entitled gankbear tears!
Entitled?
We are asking for a slim chance to scan them. They are STILL able to be completely unlockable and thus, unscannable. The only entitlement here is people wanting to be unscannable even when flying the ship badly. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11692
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 14:27:00 -
[42] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:You're just asking to keep what you have now, which is a ship that literally won't be ganked ever regardless of if you're flying it like a moron or not. There was a Prowler, Viator and Crane ganked in Uedama today, with a track record of one or two being ganked per day in Uedama. There's a cottage industry of ganking BRs in Deltole. There's a BR being ganked in Jita every other day. So BRs do get suicide ganked. You could have verified this with about 30 seconds of querying zkillboard.
Still doesn't change the fact that ganking based upon pure luck is bad game design. The ship can already be unlockable and thus unscannable when flying it well. Bad pilots should not be protected from their own stupidity. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11695
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 18:05:00 -
[43] - Quote
Myrthiis wrote:Once again when shorts on arguments,you're going for personnal attacks.We already demonstrated that"unscannability" is a good characteristic for BR. -1:Force BR players to actively fly their ships. -2:Do not hurt profitability for gankers . -3:Avoid abuses and automation . -4: Do not avoid risk for BR pilot ,quite easy to uncloack a BR in HS who do not pay attention .
There is not any reasons to remove the characteristic from BR. As i suspected your hiding your true intention ,and use propaganda to prove your point ...
Randomly ganking blockade runners in not profitable. You only want this so you can get away with flying you BR badly. Its a safetynet for your own stupidity. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11699
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 22:14:00 -
[44] - Quote
Myrthiis wrote:Randomly ganking BR is profitable killboard proved it.Median cargo value dropped is around 100 M two cat t2 as you fail with t1 cost 20 M .Have a good day . P-s :please refrain from insulting me .
What killboard?
Linking a hanful of kills proves nothing, as I said, we have tested this and it is a loss. Just like gambling in real life you will awaly lose money. There is no skill involved, it is purely luck.Most blockade runners do not have have an average of 100 mil in them, thats a number you just made up on the fly.
Again, the only reason you want to keep this is brcause you want a CCP to protect you from your own bad choices. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11699
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 03:25:00 -
[45] - Quote
Myrthiis wrote:Well i didn't link anything,but anyone can go on zkillboard>class>blockade runner and see by himself ,there is no gambling in suicide ganking BR the fact that you need t2 cats to do it ,or that the cargo didn't drop as nothing to do with "unscannability". The only reason you want the characteristic to be removed is only to scan juicy multibillion ones to brag to your friends .There is nothing related to game design or game balance in your propaganda.You just want the whole blanket for yourself And to finish i didn't ask protection to CCP,they are the one who come first with this design .And until now you fail to give an argument who make sense to remove it ,except your greed for juicy trinket .
But blockade runners can already be unscannable without this.
Ganking a BR is entirely a gamble because there is nothing you can do to see what is in the hold, this is bad gameplay. You are insisting that you should have a safety net for flying these ships badly. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11701
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 12:07:00 -
[46] - Quote
Rena'Thras wrote:
I'm confused, why is it bad gameplay?
You take a risk, you might get a reward. Sounds like good gameplay to me.
It is impossible to see what they are carrying which means every time you gank one you are relying upon luck, It doest add risk it simply turns it into a gamble that you will lose in the long run.
The ship already lets people be easily immune to a ship scanner if you fly it well so it does not need this safety net for people who fly the ship badly. Removing it would not remove the ships ability to avoid ship scanners and we would at least have a chance to grab a scan.
Both sides would get what they want. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11703
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 14:48:00 -
[47] - Quote
Ivan Isovich wrote:Kaito Rei wrote:It is somewhat funny to read the whole discussion of 'should they be scannable or not'.
I find it funny because I didn't see anyone recently mention the isk-reward difference. A ganker intent on boosting killmails would always win the isk war against even a heavily tanked transport...a ship that's worth at least 100m versus 2-3 catalysts worth 30m. The question of scannable or not is rather irrelevant since they would win whether the hold was empty or not. If it has something juicy in it, then they get a bonus. Any competent BR pilot would never autopilot their ship. What might be interesting is swapping the unscannable cargo from the covert ops boats to the other blockade runners since the covert ops boats will be able to cloak up and essentially be unscannable anyway. Not suggesting this...but something to think about.
I would like it to be put on the DST and be for NPC scanners but not player scanners. This would give the DST a role as the go to ship for smuggling drugs ect. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11707
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 04:03:00 -
[48] - Quote
Myrthiis wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:I said as much before. I don't have it backwards, both perspectives are correct. It increases risk for empty/low-value cargo hauling, and it decreases risk for high-value hauling. You should rewrote your phrase and say .It increases risk for autopiloted empty/low-value cargo hauling, it doesn't change anything for high-value haunling ( you have stated yourself than covops is the thing who does protect them from ganking) except it promote active gameplay over automation who is obviously a very good thing .
So why do you want an automatic safety net for when you fly a blockade runner badly?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11709
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 11:46:00 -
[49] - Quote
Oxide Ammar wrote:You have a cause which is to remove the scan immunity from BR so you can be freely out of gamble risk ganking autopilots BRs left and right, and I have the whole right to interfere and take the other side to defend the scan immunity because it has it usefulness in particular cases...and NO it's not afk piloting 50 plexes one of them, you just damn thick to comprehend.
And as always I will point out that the blockade runner will STILL be unscannable without this scan immunity. All the scan immunity is is an automatic and impossible to beat safety net for protecting bad pilots from themselves. We simply want a chance to scan a ship that can choose to be unscannable. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11710
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 11:59:00 -
[50] - Quote
Oxide Ammar wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:"You're too damn thick to comprehend" is not a defense, it's a cop-out. Cop out ? lol ..If someone is coping out it's you who want it the easy way to gank, what hilarious response. Pls continue deflecting that and point it back to us post after post.
There is nothing easy about ganking a ship that will align like a frigate, warps cloacked and warps as fast as an interceptor. What we ask for is to at least be able to scan the ships we do manage to lock. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11710
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 13:16:00 -
[51] - Quote
Rena'Thras wrote:
Answer this question:
What is the risk to gankers if scan immunity is removed?
The exact same as any other gank. The only difference will be that the blockade runner has to be flown badly in order to even lock it. Then we need to get a scan before it warps and then we need to look at the scan results and if it is worth it then gank it. By this time the blockade runner will often be either landing on the out gate or is in the next system warping away.
Right now gankers rely upon pure luck and just like the lottery almost every blockade runner you can catch isnt worth ganking. You are not adding risk you are making it purely based upon luck and you will lose money in the long term. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11710
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 15:44:00 -
[52] - Quote
Jatok Reknar wrote:The cargo scan immunity is one of the things that make the blockade runner unique imo. It gives it a personality that is different than just - agile, fast, cloaky vs slow, tough, large hold (DST) that most other ships in eve has. I really like the fleet hanger idea CCP proposed for DST. It really makes that ship have niche applications just like having the cargo scan immunity and covert ops cloak gives the BR.
Please preserve the cargo scan immunity on the BR for this reason. If you autopilot an inherently weak ship like a BR you deserve to get popped. If you fly it well, the scan immunity only gives you a benefit imo and there is no convincing argument to take that away.
With the newly proposed industry changes, CCP is introducing clear benefits to moving an industrial base of operation once in a while, for those indy players out there. If someone wanted to do so and move the occasional high value BPO, I think the BR should be the ship of choice. Taking away the cargo scan immunity, there is no reason why such a player should pick a BR vs a covert op frigate for example.
At the same time, gankers have the mystery element on how kind the loot fairy will be if take the effort to pop a BR which also adds a unique gameplay element. Let's please not make all ships generic.
No, what makes the blockade runner unique is the fact it can fit a cov ops cloak, align like a frigate and warp like an intercepter. These things allow it to be the only hauler that cannot be caught when flown well in high sec.
The scan immunity is not needed and is simply an unneeded and imbalanced safety net for bad pilots. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11710
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 17:27:00 -
[53] - Quote
Jatok Reknar wrote:Sorry, I disagree. And BRs are used in low and null as well - not just high sec.
Without the scan immunity, a BR becomes too much like a covert ops frigate with a larger cargo hold.
Edit : With the warp speed low slow modules being introduced, (or just warp speed rigs) I can get a fast warping BR at the tradeoff of cargo capacity. I'd much rather not lose what makes the ship class really unique (the scan immunity) for this proposed rebalance that adds warp speed for the transport skill.
I think this rebalance pass is excellent btw, since the tanking bonus was truly useless for the ship. If the ship was gaining something significantly strategic (say bubble immunity) then I agree, we will have to add more severe tradeoffs. But I'm happy we are not doing that - since such tradeoffs will wreck the wide utility of this ship class.
There are already alternate ways to achieve the warp speed increase today. So all this change is doing is moving a completely useless bonus (that gives very little reason to train up Transport ships skill beyond say level 3) to something that has some utility for the role of the ship, without being OP. So if we absolutely had to lose something for this rebalance (which I don't think we do, since the change is pretty balanced as is) the cargo immunity should not be the thing we lose since it makes the ship too generic.
But you arnt losing the scan immunity are you?
They still cant be locked and thus cannot be scanned if you fly them well. This is the crux of the argument you just arnt grasping. We arn't demanding the removal of what makes this ship so good, we are simply asking for CCP to remove a safety net for bad pilots. The ship will stll be just as hard to catch as it is now but you will at least have to put in some effort for the reward of being unscannable. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11712
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 21:34:00 -
[54] - Quote
Rena'Thras wrote:
What is the risk to the ganker?
Losing the target while you scan/look at the scan results. missing tackle on the target. failing to kill the target. open to attack from everyone. someone stealing the cargo. someone attacking your own transport. open to attack from the victim. victim may sell your kill right which may be taken up at any time for several months. 50% chance on every item to not drop. target is packing ecm target has an escort.
On top of that we also get;
Sec status loss. 15min downtime where concord will blow up any ship you enter. Our ship blown up. Past a point, are open to attack from anyone all the time. Most gankers are always at -10.
Ganking has enough risk. Now, tell me why you think you need this safety net for blockade runners to protect you from your mistakes when ganking ( the only risk you face in highsec) has zero room for mistakes and bad piloting? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11713
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 22:21:00 -
[55] - Quote
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote:Rena'Thras wrote:Personally...I don't really care.
The reason BRs got scan immunity in the first place is because the Orca used to have it with the Corp Hangar, and when that became scannable, for whatever reason, CCP wanted a ship to still exist that wasn't scannable. So they went with the BR as their choice for that.
I can't think of any time that it's ever helped me since I have a habit of always being cloaked when I'm flying ANY ship with a Covops cloak. I guess CCP just wants that functionality. They could give it to DSTs instead, too, but that would just make them more attractive targets to some people, and they don't have the BR's agility to counter that. They do have more tank, requiring a higher investment to gank. I fully support DST's having scan immunity, because the current changes to them just seem lackluster. Blockade runners make no use of the feature.
Makes more sense for the dst to have a customs scan immunity but still be scannable to players. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11714
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 23:57:00 -
[56] - Quote
Myrthiis wrote:Makes more sense to me ,to give it to both of them
Then why would you fly a dst over the uncatchable blockade runner? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11719
|
Posted - 2014.05.25 16:24:00 -
[57] - Quote
Juliandelphki wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Juliandelphki wrote:ah yet another one of the goon gankers. Oh don't let us undercut your income. Scan invulnerability was something haulers used to have but lost because of factions like yours. Now that we were able to get it back, we're going to fight to keep it. You do get to keep it if they take away the role bonus, you just have to turn it on.That's what you're whining about, the fact that you would have to turn it on upsets you. Juliandelphki wrote:And as much as you want to cuss about it, ganking does have nearly 0 liability/risk outside of the 50% drop. everything else is beyond that is moot. You can't just ignore consequences and pretend they don't exist. Security status is also a consequence of ganking, for example. No the point of this thread is they want to take it away. Period!
You have the cov ops cloak, you will still be unscannable. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11719
|
Posted - 2014.05.25 16:31:00 -
[58] - Quote
Juliandelphki wrote:baltec1 wrote:Rena'Thras wrote:
What is the risk to the ganker? = VERY LITTLE
Losing the target while you scan/look at the scan results. = false. If they're on AP (only way to get em) you have several minutes to get scan before they jump out of system. Besides you guys all use neut scanners 1-3 systems ahead.missing tackle on the target. = false, you alpha your targets no tackle require.failing to kill the target. = true, this is possible but very unlikely. I can't think of anyone who has failed to kill an AP runner.open to attack from everyone. = true, only attackable during the attack itself and the 15 mins after. Which mean nothing to the ganker. As serious gankers have insta undocks from their station they're safe until they land on field to shoot their target. Afterwards it's nearly impossable to catch a pod in high sec.someone stealing the cargo. = true, this is possible. I have only seen stealers in work 5 times in 5 years.someone attacking your own transport. = good get a taste of your own medicine.open to attack from the victim. = this only applies if you stay in system to continue ganking. This still fall under the nearly invulnerable method of travel in system mentioned above.victim may sell your kill right which may be taken up at any time for several months. = Falsification. The Kill rights apply for 6 weeks. not several months. Besides that doesn't stop people from ganking. Its called insta undock bookmark. From there you go onto grid. shoot. dock up. very little time/chance to get you. Only at the gate which anyone can do anytime you're trying to gank. But is the same as the answer directly above and the one further up. this doe not affect the ganker. 50% chance on every item to not drop. = hmm. Well that means 50% change to gain the items. wash, no need to put this up. target is packing ecm = ECM is highly unlikely to work on a none ECM specific ship. Additionally if the pilot is on AP they won't be there to ECM. Lastly since most ganks go down in 1 shot ECM is invalid because the target only has about .5 seconds to realize they're targeted, target back and apply ecm. By then they're already in a pod.target has an escort.= possible. Can't say i've ever seen this happen, but it's still a moot point. The escort again cannot do anything to prevent the ship from being 1 shotted. They can only retaliate once the BR is popped.On top of that we also get; Sec status loss. = meant nothing before. Means even less now that you can use tags to get sec standing back up. As most gankes are spec'd just for that they're not the main toon on an account.15min downtime where concord will blow up any ship you enter. = does not apply. I've since gankers go right back out onto the field to perform another gank immediately. The bookmarks make it possible. Our ship blown up. = natually, hence suicide gank. This is natrually implied in the act itself so why put this up? obviously since losing the ship to concord (who don't pod) is a part of doing business this is already accounted for in your finacing the operation.
Past a point, are open to attack from anyone all the time. Most gankers are always at -10. Ganking has enough risk. Now, tell me why you think you need this safety net for blockade runners to protect you from your mistakes when ganking ( the only risk you face in highsec) has zero room for mistakes and bad piloting? To surmise, Ganking has very LITTLE risk. The biggest risk is little to no drop value on your target. Seein the potenetial rewards, this risk is minimal. Tell ya what. let's compromise and go old school. You can get your blockade Runner scann back but can's are now immune (again).
Im sorry but no. All of those things happen, you clearly are not a ganker and know nothing about it given you out of the box carebear views.
Shall we now look at the risks a well flown blocade runner in high sec faces?
None. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11720
|
Posted - 2014.05.26 11:38:00 -
[59] - Quote
Myrthiis wrote:WHy not ? Not so long ago ,people who were asking for rigs and/or modules on freighter were laughed at look now what was introduced a few days ago...
It would effectively remove an entire profession. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11720
|
Posted - 2014.05.26 11:41:00 -
[60] - Quote
Maximus Aerelius wrote:I'm sure it's been mentioned already and the "Click to 1st Dev post" took me to Post #1 (*facepalm*) so:
Anyone flying a BR is cloaking, if you're not then you're failing. I think shifting the Scan Immunity to the DST from the BR would be a better move as it's a redundant bonus on a ship that should be cloaking as soon as it's moving.
DST's would become a wonderbox of risk = reward where it could be carrying billions or it could be empty...if you can pop it OFC.
I 'd love to know the numbers on how many BR's and DST's are used currently.
Flame on.
BRs get used a lot, DST rarely.
Also you idea needs tweaking, the scan immunity only works for NPC customs. This way the DST will have its specialized area but it will face risk from other players. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11721
|
Posted - 2014.05.27 04:37:00 -
[61] - Quote
Myrthiis wrote:So Fozzie, are we going to get any word on extending the scan immunity to both BR and DST ? Because it's quite frankly an incredible mechanic to promote active flying over autopilot .
How does it promote active flying when its active when the pilot is afk too? Promoting active playing would be to remove it from BR so that the only way to be unscannable would be to activate the cov ops cloak and manually pilot the ship.
Also if you put an NPC customs scanner blocker on both ships the the DST will go unused because the BR would be so much better at not getting caught. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11721
|
Posted - 2014.05.27 04:39:00 -
[62] - Quote
Rapscallion Jones wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Which I might add I've used many times when hauling expensive cargo, so don't tell me that it doesn't work. Allow me to introduce you to the tactical bump, I'm sure you're well versed in its application. If not, I'm certain a man named James will be pleased to school you in its use.
That doesn't work on a ship that aligns like a frigate and warps cloaked. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11721
|
Posted - 2014.05.27 04:41:00 -
[63] - Quote
Rapscallion Jones wrote:
Obviously you don't undock at hubs very often...
Jita almost every day.
I have an undock safe that lets me warp off station and cloak instantly. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11723
|
Posted - 2014.05.27 04:55:00 -
[64] - Quote
Rapscallion Jones wrote:baltec1 wrote:Rapscallion Jones wrote:
Obviously you don't undock at hubs very often...
Jita almost every day. I have an undock safe that lets me warp off station and cloak instantly. Then you sir are a most fortunate pilot. Do instawarps work, yeah. But only when you don't turn into a pinball on undock. Don't be so disingenuous as to assume all pilots are as fortunate as you, I'm confident you've seen others experience the Jita conga line.
You have 30 seconds in which you will warp away to your safe perfectly every single time when undocking. Luck has nothing to do with it, you have to be a special kind of bad to mess up an instawarp from a station. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11723
|
Posted - 2014.05.27 05:15:00 -
[65] - Quote
Rapscallion Jones wrote:
Blockade runners die on undock from Jita daily. Do they all use instawarps? No, I seriously doubt that although they should. I've not been killed on undock, however I'm aware of several individuals who have been and it was strictly a consequence of being caught in the congestion, unable to get aligned and warped in time. Mind you this was pre-scan immunity so the shooter knew they were worth shooting. Personally I'd have flown a Retriever BPO out of Jita in a bricked T3, not a BR.
For 30 seconds you will fly through everything on the undock, the only way to be bumped is if you move yourself, in which case you have a terrible undock safe or you wait 30 seconds before you do anything.
Both cases is the pilot being bad at flying their ship. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11756
|
Posted - 2014.05.31 23:09:00 -
[66] - Quote
Kodacrome wrote:Vlad Draculesti wrote:I still think they should be immune to bubbles.
We have the "technology" to put that on a t3 cruiser and an interceptor but not the ship whose soul purpose is running blockades?
What harm would it really do? If anything it would allow small groups to be able to more reliably operate in 0.0 where now they don't bother.
What good is it to ninja mine in the new t2 mining frig if I have no way of hauling the materials out of 0.0? Hits the nail on the head !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How would you stop such a hauler? It would be overpowered. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
|
|