EVE Search - Sticky:[Kronos] Medium Micro Jump Drives

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Kronos] Medium Micro Jump Drives

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 6 post(s)
Ines Tegator Towels R Us 452	Posted - 2014.05.18 22:41:00 - [1] - Quote Vol Arm'OOO wrote: Just adding my voice to the haters. Seems to me that it just makes it too easy to get out of fights. It also trivializes the long point, the hics and dictors. As a low sec dweller, much of the combat starts on gates, basically this acts as a nerf on lowsec combat - getting in range fast enough to apply a scram is not going to be easy or fun. At the very least - it should be made so that two long points acts as a functional scram (since its two points of disruption) and the hic infinity point should be made to work again to stop the mjd. +1 It is doubly true since fast tackle - inties, frigates - don't mix well with gate guns. Because of that, there is effectively no counter to this module that works in lowsec. - Mission Overhaul - Bridging the PVP / PVE Gap - -áIf the game stops teaching people to fear lowsec, maybe people will start going there?
Ines Tegator Towels R Us 455	Posted - 2014.05.19 02:48:00 - [2] - Quote Yun Kuai wrote: Why because you can no longer perma-tackle with your insert long point, snaked, and/or boosted insert annoying frig here against a brawler? Shame on you. No one is stopping you from committing to a fight like a brawler has to. Now the brawler has the same ability to disengage from the kiter when he knows he can't catch him. EDIT: p.s. Bring a scram and all of your problems are solved. It's not like every ship in game minus a BS is faster than a BC or CS.... -----------------------------WHOOOOSH--------------->>>>>> O < (your head) To stop a MJD ship, you have to get in range and get a scram on it before the spool up time. Frigates are the ships to do this with; they have the speed to get in range in time. Frigates are almost instapoped by gate guns, and as the first ship on the target, are also guarunteed to be shot at by gate guns. So tackle frig goes ZOOM > Scram > Dead > Target escapes. IOW, the intended counter to this module is nonfunctional in lowsec. This is about tackling on a gate, not the module's use in a fight, so your post completely misses the point. - Mission Overhaul - Bridging the PVP / PVE Gap - -áIf the game stops teaching people to fear lowsec, maybe people will start going there?
Ines Tegator Towels R Us 455	Posted - 2014.05.19 05:37:00 - [3] - Quote Chessur wrote: So many bad posts in this page. So many people with no PvP experience mouthing off to players that are vastly more knowledgeable and experienced. Since you cannot post killboards, can we instead simply post kills of the more belligerent and misguided? Challenged: 104 Kills / 58 Deaths Arthur Aihaken: 65 Kills / 171 Deaths epicurus ataraxia: 12 Kills / 17 Deaths Does experience, and in game knowledge have any weight placed on the comments here? Because from what I am seeing- most if not all of the PRO MMJD are people have rather poor PvP skill / knowledge / experience. While the OVERWHELMING majority of people against MMJD have quite a bit more skill / knowledge / experience. Can anyone help clarify this for me? As we all know, EVE is a single character-per-account and single account-per-player world. This means that anything posted by a character with no discernable pvp history is, in fact, stupid. Also, this is a form of ad hominem. The facts of the discussion are what matters, the source is irrelevent. Everyone could be anonymous and the content would not change. - Mission Overhaul - Bridging the PVP / PVE Gap - -áIf the game stops teaching people to fear lowsec, maybe people will start going there?
Ines Tegator Towels R Us 455	Posted - 2014.05.19 05:48:00 - [4] - Quote Back on topic. I want to reinforce the feedback about it's range. Normal BC combat range (not counting ABCs) is 50km and under. This module does nothing to encourage BC combat. It is an escape device, and cannot be anything else due to the limitations of the platform on which it is mounted. At the range this module operates at, on-grid tactical bookmarks already serve the same in-combat purpose. Which once again leaves it primarily as an escape tool. Maybe (I'm being charitable and trying to find a combat role where this module makes sense) this is meant to give BCs mobility on a large fleet field, against larger ships that are more spread out. If so, it's poorly implemented and unfocused. It's not worth unbalancing the rest of gameplay for this single niche purpose. The MMJD as implemented will not fulfill the intended purpose of encouraging CBC's on the battlefield. It will make avoiding PVP easier; it will not significantly change the composition of gangs (jump range / weapon range mismatch prevents sniper tactics). Suggestions to correct these flaws: Make it vulnerable to HIC scripted points. Reduce the jump range to 75km. Make it vulnerable to bumping, just like standard warp alignment. Adjust Lowsec Gate Guns to allow 10-15 seconds on target for an Interceptor that agresses, allowing the Interceptor to serve as a counter to this module. - Mission Overhaul - Bridging the PVP / PVE Gap - -áIf the game stops teaching people to fear lowsec, maybe people will start going there?
Ines Tegator Towels R Us 455	Posted - 2014.05.19 06:04:00 - [5] - Quote badboymark wrote: Ines Tegator wrote: That would be a simple warp strength thing. Which is a good idea as well (2+ long points deactivates it). +1 I'm not sure that would work because wouldn't that meann you can turn off MWD ? it would have to be a special trait or something right ? Yeah, it would suck if it worked on MWD too. Definately a MJD only thing. At the least the general is already in game for warp stabs. note: if implemented, don't allow stabs to work on the MJD module. so many problems... - Mission Overhaul - Bridging the PVP / PVE Gap - -áIf the game stops teaching people to fear lowsec, maybe people will start going there?
Ines Tegator Towels R Us 455	Posted - 2014.05.19 15:03:00 - [6] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks for the continued feedback. We're going to remove Attack Battlecruisers from the list of ships that can use this module in the first iteration, since there are some legitimate concerns with how this would interact with ABCs in small gang combat. Well that's half a step. Can you at least confirm that you've read the posts about long points and fast tackle? That's the most important issue, and even if no decision is made yet, I want to know that you're aware of it. - Mission Overhaul - Bridging the PVP / PVE Gap - -áIf the game stops teaching people to fear lowsec, maybe people will start going there?
Ines Tegator Towels R Us 455	Posted - 2014.05.19 15:04:00 - [7] - Quote Gregor Parud wrote: There's no need for that, the MJD is the counter to a problem, introducing a counter to a problem's counter would be... counter productive YEEAAAH! oh you. - Mission Overhaul - Bridging the PVP / PVE Gap - -áIf the game stops teaching people to fear lowsec, maybe people will start going there?
Ines Tegator Towels R Us 455	Posted - 2014.05.19 18:11:00 - [8] - Quote Randolph Sykes wrote: Those who are proposing 50 km range - how it makes it any different from 100 km? What can you achieve with this? 20 km is fine, 25 km is fine, 30 km is fine, 40+ km is not fine at all. 50km is the range of a sniper fit BC. I flew with a corp that did 50km bc fleets for a while, it worked extremely well. Aside from the whole all-fights-start-at-0km-on-a-gate thing, anyway. 50km jumps would be perfect for this fleet setup. Also, 50km jumps give easy access to 25-50km jumps as well. By jumping at an angle to the target, instead of in a straight line, you can control the final range surprisingly well (yay Pythagoras). Try it on a BS in game. This means it would be useful to medium range fits and not just long range fits. For the same reason, 75km jumps would be a reasonable compromise as well. 100km is so far out of a BC combat range that it has no combat purpose. Escape is the only possible use for the module if the stats dont change. note to CCP: Pay attention to the two bolded words. They are imporant. - Mission Overhaul - Bridging the PVP / PVE Gap - -áIf the game stops teaching people to fear lowsec, maybe people will start going there?
Ines Tegator Towels R Us 455	Posted - 2014.05.19 18:16:00 - [9] - Quote Sniper Smith wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: To be clear, we're not ruling out expansion to Attack Battlecruisers in the future. We'll start with these classes and see how it goes from there. See I like Fozzie.. cause we actually are getting some feedback from the devs in this thread, rather than the silence that has been going on for weeks/months in some of the other threads :( Unfortunately it's not feedback on the things that are actually being talked about, so it's only a small improvement. - Mission Overhaul - Bridging the PVP / PVE Gap - -áIf the game stops teaching people to fear lowsec, maybe people will start going there?
Ines Tegator Towels R Us 456	Posted - 2014.05.19 19:28:00 - [10] - Quote Here are two rough (paint.net ftw) diagrams of the range envelope of this module. One is a proposed 50km MJD, the other is the announced 100km MJD. Look at these diagrams and remember that CBC engagement range is roughly 0-20km (brawler fit) or 25-50km (sniper fit). Which one of these would be more useful in combat? 50km: http://imgur.com/n0eFTaV 100km: http://imgur.com/irFFd6o Not to scale, obviously. The diagrams assumes a starting distance to target of 50% the MJD's range. The 50km is ideal for a brawler. 100km has a couple moves that are useful to a sniper if the target is also a sniper, but it's 100% useless to and against a brawler, except as an escape device. if the target starts out closer then the diagram assumes, then the 100km jump has no options that place the target within weapon range, regardless of fit. I submit that either 50km or 75km is the ideal choice, since it would allow both types of tactics to be used by modifying the angle of attack and initial range to target. - Mission Overhaul - Bridging the PVP / PVE Gap - -áIf the game stops teaching people to fear lowsec, maybe people will start going there?

Ines Tegator Towels R Us 456	Posted - 2014.05.19 21:35:00 - [11] - Quote Rowells wrote: Ines Tegator wrote: 50km: http://imgur.com/n0eFTaV 100km: http://imgur.com/irFFd6o ... I submit that either 50km or 75km is the ideal choice, since it would allow both types of tactics to be used by modifying the angle of attack and initial range to target. I dont know if you did any math there but: http://imgur.com/Q5XLbYv (and yes those measurements for the radii are to scale) ... And no matter what range you choose there will always be holes that you cannot reach properly. No I didn't do any math, those were just quick-n-dirty jobs to illustrate the concept. Look at it more as "This kind of jump is closer range then you started." "That kind of jump is longer range then you started." and so forth. My main point is that 100km is so far out of a BC's effective combat range that it has no useful purpose in normal small gang fights. - Mission Overhaul - Bridging the PVP / PVE Gap - -áIf the game stops teaching people to fear lowsec, maybe people will start going there?

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.