Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page |
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |

Gorski Car
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
285
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 18:09:00 -
[331] - Quote
I am actually going to make a serious post for once since everyone seems to be crying about mjds not being counterable by piloting and killing solo/small gang pvp.
How about you put the ship speed at 0 after landing with a micro jump. This would prevent the align + mjd + warp insta gtfo and make mjds counterable by good piloting. Press look at, see mjd eftect then burn towards their align so you can catch them after jumping. #GORSKI4CSM https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4265138#post4265138
|

Firebolt145
Calamitous-Intent Feign Disorder
86
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 18:21:00 -
[332] - Quote
Gorski Car wrote:I am actually going to make a serious post for once since everyone seems to be crying about mjds not being counterable by piloting and killing solo/small gang pvp.
How about you put the ship speed at 0 after landing with a micro jump. This would prevent the align + mjd + warp insta gtfo and make mjds counterable by good piloting. Press look at, see mjd eftect then burn towards their align so you can catch them after jumping. Never knew you had a 'serious post' in you. |

Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
354
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 18:24:00 -
[333] - Quote
Gorski Car wrote:I am actually going to make a serious post for once since everyone seems to be crying about mjds not being counterable by piloting and killing solo/small gang pvp.
How about you put the ship speed at 0 after landing with a micro jump. This would prevent the align + mjd + warp insta gtfo and make mjds counterable by good piloting. Press look at, see mjd eftect then burn towards their align so you can catch them after jumping. since this is the future, would be nice that the second a mjd activates a orange blip appears right where they will land for obvious reasons.
still do not support this on ABC's. |

PaulsAvatar
IXCO
4
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 18:27:00 -
[334] - Quote
I think I like this new module.
+1 |

Grarr Dexx
Snuff Box
414
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 18:48:00 -
[335] - Quote
Gorski Car wrote:I am actually going to make a serious post for once since everyone seems to be crying about mjds not being counterable by piloting and killing solo/small gang pvp.
How about you put the ship speed at 0 after landing with a micro jump. This would prevent the align + mjd + warp insta gtfo and make mjds counterable by good piloting. Press look at, see mjd eftect then burn towards their align so you can catch them after jumping.
still a get out of jail free card for attack 'align like a frigate' battlecruisers |

James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
9953
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 19:02:00 -
[336] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:One thing I wanted to make clear is that Micro Jump Drives were never intended to be a battleship only module. When CCP Soniclover introduced them he intended to see how they went and then add more in the future. Keyword being "see how they went". We can see that they've been mildly effective in increasing the popularity of battleships, and they're especially nice when paired with marauders. As soon as you start giving this ability to other ships (we were really worried about this with the mobileMJD but you nerfed it to the point of this not being a problem) you diminish one of the few advantages that battleships had which made them more attractive and viable for PVP.
CCP Fozzie wrote:I'm seeing two major arguments revolving around the use of MJDs as a disengagement tool. The fleet level argument I am honestly not swayed by at this time. Providing inexpensive fleet options that don't automatically get wiped when they find themselves in a bad situation is something we consider very valuable. Then maybe you should look at properly rebalancing the mobility attributes of these ships. For one you also increased the signature radius of ABCs to make them more vulnerable to bombs, something which wasn't really necessary because they were quite vulnerable to begin with. Giving these ships MJDs does little to alleviate the bomb threat, but it gives them far too much mobility to be balanced.
ABCs don't have issues with picking fights and being able to disengage at will. CBCs have a much more difficult time of this but I still don't believe an MJD is the answer. You're trying to do open heart surgery with a pickaxe while the scalpel is sitting right next to you..
CCP Fozzie wrote:It creates good options for newer FCs to learn with and in particular MMJDs are a very valuable counterbalance to bombs for battlecruisers at the fleet level. What are you talking about? No they aren't. Even at MJDO 5 the window to activate this module is extremely small - more than likely what would happen is that if anyone tried to MJD they'd activate it too late (one second is not enough time for a reaction especially when coupled with the fact that your server runs in one second ticks), guaranteeing that they'll die to bombs because of the increased signature radius.
In other words, trying to MJD away from bombs is as dumb as trying to MWD away from them.
CCP Fozzie wrote:In general, having a wide variety of possible outcomes for any fight beyond the extreme "We kill them all with minimal losses" and "We lose everyone with minimal kills" is very healthy for EVE's combat environment at all scales. We understand that, but we feel that this skews the balance far, far too heavily in favor of "we were severely outmatched but it didn't matter since we can always disengage with minimal losses." "Pretty much all 14 of the CSM were in favor of a drone assign nerf for OBVIOUS gameplay reasons" - Sala Cameron
|

Damen Apol
Dayman Industries
30
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 19:03:00 -
[337] - Quote
Absolutely terrible idea, completely opposed to this module. |

Samuel Nathas
The Disciples of Hasselhoff
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 19:12:00 -
[338] - Quote
Fleet of X people with MMJD BC's jumps over, and realizes its a gate camp. Their FC screams "Everyone run MMJD!" and they do exactly that.
Now you have a chance to pick several targets, and scram them so they can't jump. :) Also, the rest of your fleet can tactically warp (dictors) to other gates and put up bubbles as the timer cooldown for those MMJD is 3 minutes. You can set up a trap basically. Don't you think? Also, all these people spooling up the MJD can't deactivate it (as far as I know), and those caught are most likely to be destroyed. Not to mention that fitting MMJD takes up one valuable mid slot.
So what is the problem? Adapt or die. |

Bionic Wolf
Drunk Till Dawn
16
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 19:31:00 -
[339] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: The argument focused on small gang and solo is more persuasive in this case, although the idea that this module will somehow kill all kiting gameplay is fairly silly. There are definitely situations where Attack Battlecruisers in particular could become a problem with this module, and we will definitely be considering the option of leaving ABCs off the list for the initial release..
The thing is every expansion seems to bring a new way of avoiding combat and risk. Bugger all development goes into increasing danger and risk to the game especially in small gang/solo situations. I would give you the ceptor changes but even that has been largely offset by so many people using them as a near invulnerable, very cheap, taxi service to travel from one place to another. By increasing survivability in so many ships you've made it so there is hardly any realistic targets for small gang pvpers, particularly in 0.0.
I agree that BC's needed a buff, but this isn't the right one, personally I think a large part of the problem is that cruisers are too fast, I don't think it makes much sense that cruisers are faster than destroyers for example. You could even have provided the BC's with a new unique role of their own, maybe a new tackle related one.
And just because the original plan for MJD's wasn't for them to be unique to battleships doesn't mean that feedback and results shouldn't affect how you develop (or not develop!) them further. There is a lot of people who believe that the reasons MJD's have been on the whole successful is because they're unique to battleships, and that they allow them to compensate for vulnerabilities.
Just please stop calling giving players more opportunites to escape/avoid combat, while rarely increasing risk 'development'. |

Onslaughtor
Occult National Security Affirmative.
87
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 19:35:00 -
[340] - Quote
Having the MMJD work exactly the same as the LMJD is a little boring and doesn't help most BCs in any PVP situation other than escape. My suggestion (I'm going to say it again) is to make the jump range around 60km, the spool up around 10sec, and the cool down 2 mins. That's about ~30% off each stat, this should make it competitive for PVP, PVE, and escape tactics. |

Michael Harari
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
1204
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 19:46:00 -
[341] - Quote
Samuel Nathas wrote:Fleet of X people with MMJD BC's jumps over, and realizes its a gate camp. Their FC screams "Everyone run MMJD!" and they do exactly that.
When is the last time you ran a fleet without a scout, and where do you run these fleets? |

Kyria Stenory
ICE is Coming to EVE Goonswarm Federation
5
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 19:52:00 -
[342] - Quote
Could be nice... but it looks like you've forgotten about implications.
Btw, we already have mobile MJD for all ship, why do we need a module that'll only help people avoiding being tackled ? |

Gregor Parud
505
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 19:58:00 -
[343] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Ok, I'm now caught up with this thread. Thanks for the feedback so far.
I'll be taking the good points brought up in this thread and discussing them with the CSM and the other designers here at the office.
One thing I wanted to make clear is that Micro Jump Drives were never intended to be a battleship only module. When CCP Soniclover introduced them he intended to see how they went and then add more in the future.
I'm seeing two major arguments revolving around the use of MJDs as a disengagement tool. The fleet level argument I am honestly not swayed by at this time. Providing inexpensive fleet options that don't automatically get wiped when they find themselves in a bad situation is something we consider very valuable. It creates good options for newer FCs to learn with and in particular MMJDs are a very valuable counterbalance to bombs for battlecruisers at the fleet level. The argument focused on small gang and solo is more persuasive in this case, although the idea that this module will somehow kill all kiting gameplay is fairly silly. There are definitely situations where Attack Battlecruisers in particular could become a problem with this module, and we will definitely be considering the option of leaving ABCs off the list for the initial release.
In general, having a wide variety of possible outcomes for any fight beyond the extreme "We kill them all with minimal losses" and "We lose everyone with minimal kills" is very healthy for EVE's combat environment at all scales.
Like I said, we'll be taking all this feedback into account. Thanks to all the good posters who can manage to discuss their opinions in a reasonable and coherent manner.
The solo argument is a non-argument as well tbh. Kiters are all about having options, they can pick and choose what to attack, when to do so and when to GTFO. MJD gives a BC a similar option but only against kiters, beyond that they're still slow, easy to engage or stay away from. Besides, lets be honest; most people in this thread don't give a fck about soloing, they just try to play the solo card because MJD might mess up their bubble/crow blob backbone and they're desperately trying to come up with :reasons:.
It's a funky idea and sits well with the concept of CBC as it is right now; it can't really engage anything but if something wants to attack it'll have to commit to that fight.
Just do NOT put it on ABC, you'll create a monster if you do. |

Samuel Nathas
The Disciples of Hasselhoff
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 20:01:00 -
[344] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:Samuel Nathas wrote:Fleet of X people with MMJD BC's jumps over, and realizes its a gate camp. Their FC screams "Everyone run MMJD!" and they do exactly that.
When is the last time you ran a fleet without a scout, and where do you run these fleets?
scouts don't have MJD's :) and that is the point :) |

Gavin Dax
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
27
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 20:53:00 -
[345] - Quote
I'm not sure if this is good or bad. More could be done to encourage good fights and prevent running away though, that's for sure.
It does seem that recent changes have focused just on the one side (running away) but not on the other (more options for locking down targets, better mechanics to encourage fights/PvP), which is probably more important. |

Michael Harari
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
1205
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 21:02:00 -
[346] - Quote
Samuel Nathas wrote:Michael Harari wrote:Samuel Nathas wrote:Fleet of X people with MMJD BC's jumps over, and realizes its a gate camp. Their FC screams "Everyone run MMJD!" and they do exactly that.
When is the last time you ran a fleet without a scout, and where do you run these fleets? scouts don't have MJD's :) and that is the point :)
I dont understand. The interceptor jumps into the gatecamp, and his fleet mjds in the previous system in a panic? |

X ATM092
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
306
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 21:03:00 -
[347] - Quote
Bcs are in a really ****** place right now because of their inability to apply damage to anything small and their terrible base speed. The current meta is defined by the agility of cruisers and the application bonuses of a few niche ships, most noticeably the ishtar. The propagation of sig reduction bonuses and the general increase of speed of every ship since tiericide has left cbcs slow and ineffective. With slow warp speeds, slow movement speeds and no application to speak of the cbc is left with dps and tank it can't use, the idiot younger brother of the battleship doctrine, less effective and more bombable.
To make them relevant again you need to go back and say "Okay, what proportion of the max speed of the omen did the harbinger used to have? What proportion of the max agility of the omen did it used to have? How did it apply relative to the omen (omen's optimal range creates better tracking in real terms)?" and realise the degree to which they've been completely overshadowed by tiericide. Currently the game is "are you fast? if not do you have a crazy application bonus? if not are you insanely tanky?". If the answer to all 3 is no then it's not used and with cbcs it's no and mmjds won't change that. |

Vivianne Athonille
Athonille Logistics and Provisions
15
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 21:26:00 -
[348] - Quote
I and a few others who Liked my post on Page 1 are still curious if you intend to allow "all" Command Ships to fit this MJD. And by "all" we mean the Industrial Command Ship -- Orca.
I believe you have been looking for ways to encourage players to put the Orca on-grid. Having this available as an escape tool may be a step in that direction. |

Vol Arm'OOO
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
241
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 21:39:00 -
[349] - Quote
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. I don't play, I just fourm warrior. |

Reppyk
The Black Shell Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
574
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 22:04:00 -
[350] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: In general, having a wide variety of possible outcomes for any fight beyond the extreme "We kill them all with minimal losses" and "We lose everyone with minimal kills" is very healthy for EVE's combat environment at all scales.
logistics nerf when? This. Stacking penalties on remote repairs please. I AM SPACE CAPTAIN REPPYK. -áI AM A LOWSEC GANKER, HIGHSEC SCUM, NULLSEC BASTARD, WORMHOLE INVADER. Welcome to, welcome to, welcome to my scramble. GÖÑ |

James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
9967
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 22:19:00 -
[351] - Quote
No. "Pretty much all 14 of the CSM were in favor of a drone assign nerf for OBVIOUS gameplay reasons" - Sala Cameron
|

Yelika Khan
Babylon Knights The Unthinkables
5
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 22:34:00 -
[352] - Quote
This is bad and you should feel bad about it.  |

Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
1160
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 22:36:00 -
[353] - Quote
Vivianne Athonille wrote:I and a few others who Liked my post on Page 1 are still curious if you intend to allow "all" Command Ships to fit this MJD. And by "all" we mean the Industrial Command Ship -- Orca.
I believe you have been looking for ways to encourage players to put the Orca on-grid. Having this available as an escape tool may be a step in that direction.
I asked and got a negative on that one. Sorry, but at least you do have an answer. (And yes, I like flying an Orca now and again as well.)
m Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9 |

Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
1160
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 22:37:00 -
[354] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:No.
Your logic and brevity stun me.
Sadly the argument contains nothing I feel obligated to kick up the ladder.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9 |

ZecsMarquis
Destroyer's Inc.
17
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 22:38:00 -
[355] - Quote
I've gotten 16 pages in and wanted to get my thoughts out before continuing. I have a couple added suggestions, some not quite as great as others.
If there is not a serious balance issue that I am aware of can we introduce that a focused T2 Hictor point stop a spool up as well as scrambler? I feel like this is an idea worth considering as the focused script only tackling supers is very niche and Hictor's as a whole are used for this purpose probably more than the actual bubbling. Though I know for wormholing it is more common. The focused disruption script for the T2 module is what I mean if that sounds confusing.
Second idea: Introduce a Jump Disrupt Probe for the Interdiction Sphere Launcher (oldschool name dunno if its still called this) that stops all MJD spool ups or at least if it isnt already spooling it cannot be activated, similar to the warp if you initiate warp before a bubble goes down it basically negates it. I mention this idea as it gives more credibility to some earlier posts about the Dictor being more obsolete. Introduce an expanded launcher variant but it takes more fitting and even with crazy implants/rigs you can only fit one as opposed to the standard two launcher cloaky fit. Or give the role penalty of only one may be fitted as some other classes have for other modules.
Also final idea: maybe give the MJD similar mechanics of an acceleration gate. Once the spooling has started only a scrambler can deactivate as is now but if Hictor points it with its script the spooling continues but also prevents it from being activated like a scrambler if it is not already spooling. Just in case none of these were proposed in the thread or in internal discussions already I thought I'd take a whack at it.
Thoughts? |

Ines Tegator
Towels R Us
452
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 22:41:00 -
[356] - 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? |

James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
9967
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 22:48:00 -
[357] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Sadly the argument contains nothing I feel obligated to kick up the ladder. That's fine, because I was replying to the people asking for RR stacking penalties. I've edited the post to make that clear. If you want my comprehensive reply regarding MMJD it's on the previous page. "Pretty much all 14 of the CSM were in favor of a drone assign nerf for OBVIOUS gameplay reasons" - Sala Cameron
|
|

ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1338

|
Posted - 2014.05.18 22:55:00 -
[358] - Quote
I have removed some rule breaking posts.
The Rules: 26. Off-topic posting is prohibited.
Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued.
34. Posting of kill reports outside of the Crime & Punishment forum channel is prohibited.
More often than not, posts of this nature are made with inflammatory intent and are designed to promote trolling and flaming. Therefore, the posting of links to kill reports from any third party site, or the direct copy-pasting of kill reports from in game is prohibited on all forum channels of the EVE Online Forums, with the exception of the Crime & Punishment Channel. Specific rules regarding the omission of pilot names apply in this instance. Further details can be found in the rules stickies in the Crime & Punishment forum channel.
ISD Ezwal Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|

James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
9968
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 23:04:00 -
[359] - Quote
I seriously disagree that we shouldn't post killboard links here. In balance discussions they can be quite helpful. I think CCP should revisit their rules in this case. "Pretty much all 14 of the CSM were in favor of a drone assign nerf for OBVIOUS gameplay reasons" - Sala Cameron
|

epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
778
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 23:07:00 -
[360] - Quote
The MMJd will have the side effect, of bringing more BC into the field. Sure they will have the possibility to escape, but they do not need to escape if they are not there at all! So more battlecruisers to Fight, more battlecruisers to be used in more space.
Sure fewer easy kills of new players who stray into dangerous space, but more use of them and more GF.
What's not to like? There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |