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) |
ElextriX
Snuff Box
50
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 18:51:00 -
[631] - Quote
Milton Middleson wrote:Grarr Dexx wrote:afkalt wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:When do you see kiting ships RUn away rom fights? The minute it stops going well. How many times do you see someone who can disengage and is losing NOT do so. Now other people can disengage in a similar fashion. Quick, call the police! They've levelled the playing field, this is unacceptable! A ship that fits to kite forces the user to give up plenty of options: a strong tank, capacitor, sustainability... If you were to truly 'even the fight', you'd give all of those to kiting ships in return for being able to fit an MMJD on your ratting/fleet ship of flavor. But you don't want to do that, cause it's ********. Just like your get out of jail free card. Don't be obtuse. Fitting to kite forces a ship to give up absolutely nothing that actually matters in practice, and a close range brawling ship needs everything a kiting ship does and more besides.
Lol what? No.
That is not even close to being true. Kiting ships have to give up a lot to be effective, you think people use nano's/overdrives and similar mods because they think it enhances their ship in brawl mode? Or how about all the ewar and tackle advantages of being a brick tank that kiting setups have a lot less opportunity to use.
|
Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans
639
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 19:23:00 -
[632] - Quote
Does a focused hictor point jam a MJD? |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
5667
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 20:20:00 -
[633] - Quote
Rita Zechs wrote: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.
No it's not if the bombing run is done with any level of competency (you can't get out in time if you don't get advance warning). Will you apply to RIOT and go ruin another game already? Which means you can't just slop out a half assed bombing run and get good results simply because someone dropped a bubble on your targets.
Also, mind your manners. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Draco Knight
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
3
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 20:24:00 -
[634] - Quote
On grid teleporting is the worst idea ever conceived PERIOD. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
5667
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 20:27:00 -
[635] - Quote
ElextriX wrote:Milton Middleson wrote:Grarr Dexx wrote:afkalt wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:When do you see kiting ships RUn away rom fights? The minute it stops going well. How many times do you see someone who can disengage and is losing NOT do so. Now other people can disengage in a similar fashion. Quick, call the police! They've levelled the playing field, this is unacceptable! A ship that fits to kite forces the user to give up plenty of options: a strong tank, capacitor, sustainability... If you were to truly 'even the fight', you'd give all of those to kiting ships in return for being able to fit an MMJD on your ratting/fleet ship of flavor. But you don't want to do that, cause it's ********. Just like your get out of jail free card. Don't be obtuse. Fitting to kite forces a ship to give up absolutely nothing that actually matters in practice, and a close range brawling ship needs everything a kiting ship does and more besides. Lol what? No. That is not even close to being true. Kiting ships have to give up a lot to be effective, you think people use nano's/overdrives and similar mods because they think it enhances their ship in brawl mode? Or how about all the ewar and tackle advantages of being a brick tank that kiting setups have a lot less opportunity to use. Perhaps you could point out the inherent advantages you gain to tackling when flying a ship outfitted as a brick tank?
You might also have a conversation with other pilots that equip for kiting, so that they can share their opinion on the advantages of being able to engage/disengage from combat at will. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
5667
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 20:39:00 -
[636] - Quote
Draco Knight wrote:On grid teleporting is the worst idea ever conceived PERIOD. No, the ability to move massive amounts of material or capitol ships immense distances in the blink of an eye was the worst idea ever. The ability to chose to be able to tactically reposition on grid every 3 minutes (give or take) as a fitting option is a complex option to balance properly, but not necessarily a bad idea. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
10008
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 20:45:00 -
[637] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:Draco Knight wrote:On grid teleporting is the worst idea ever conceived PERIOD. No, the ability to move massive amounts of material or capitol ships immense distances in the blink of an eye was the worst idea ever. The ability to chose to be able to tactically reposition on grid every 3 minutes (give or take) as a fitting option is a complex option to balance properly, but not necessarily a bad idea. Both are complex options to balance properly. I'm arguing at least that battleships being given this option was a really good idea and has worked somewhat to make them more popular. Extending this option to lower classes of ships will just move battleships back into obscurity. "Pretty much all 14 of the CSM were in favor of a drone assign nerf for OBVIOUS gameplay reasons" - Sala Cameron
|
Maraner
The Executioners Capital Punishment.
289
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 21:41:00 -
[638] - Quote
100km minimum or scripts to allow a determine of he range.
Anything else no thanks, certainly no to 50-70. That is just people that like kiting setups trying to nerf it before its out.
Great idea this, a big fight with BC's booshing all over the place will be great. |
Elise Randolph
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
1222
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 22:50:00 -
[639] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:
Tornado scan res (base) : 288 Typical 1400 camping instalock setup: 700mm Align time: 6.77s
Maelstrom scan res (base): 113 Typical 1400 camping setup: 368mm (far from instalock) Align time: 13.2s
This is why ABCs reign supreme for lowsec (and indeed, all) arty camps. QED you can go back to dropping supers in Amamake, pls.
Why would you want an MJD on an aligned, insta-locking ship? The MJD wouldn't buy you enough time to get another volley off, and your ship isn't designed for sustained damage. Also you'd want to use a Tempest over a Maelstrom, and utilize the extra slots you get from having to fit no fitting modules. Regardless, your argument is that people that sit aligned with insta-locking snipers on a gate would get a benefit is pretty ridiculous.
Gregor Parud wrote:
If it's not that amazing as you put it, why are you advocating it then?
Because people are against it on the tier-3 BCs while being in favor of it on command ships/BCs for reasons that doesn't exist, in doing so securing that a potentially dynamic shipclass gets relegated to garbage dumpster tier. It just makes no sense.
Skia Aumer wrote: When you compare ABCs to Command ships - it's range. CSs have to fight within long scram range and ceptors can get them too. ABCs are outside of reach of both.
Vultures can hit at 220km. Compared to traditional sniper-fit Tier-3s, Vultures out-tank (by a huge margin, ~1700%), out DPS (at range, at least), and even out-range (220km)
Quote: When you compare ABCs to Battleships - it's speed... and cost. I know, PL can welp titans every day, but for us, ordinary people, difference of 100+ mil per ship is THE difference. And by speed, I mean all of it - velocity, agility, warp speed, lock time. If you were not that hypocrite, you'd have noticed that it's not 10%, but 1.5 times for align time Tornado vs Tempest.
This is why fitting matters. To fit a sniping tempest with MJD requires no additional fitting mods, so you can put in two nanos. 6.8 s vs 7.8s
Quote: Now, the enlightenment. 1. "Solo" PVP on gate. A ceptor points some poor dude. Tornado warps in from the offgrid spot, insta lock, alpha wreck, warp away. It's quite hard to tackle him with long point or bubble. It's next to impossible to scram. BS is a looser here, cause it takes longer to warp in, to lock and to GTFO, which leaves a chance for victim to escape, and for hunter to lose rather expensive BS to some upper-hand.
The argument I made was not that BS are superior sniper ships, I was refuting that the addition of the MMJD on the tier-3s would be game-breakingly OP as people seem to suggest. Surely if that were the case, people would be willing to sacrifice 10% align time (is actually 14%, soz) to have access to this whoopingly ~overpowered~ module. If you want to warp in from a perch, blap, and warp out Tier-3 BCs are the way to go, but the MMJD would have /no effect whatsoever/ here.
As far as #2 (won't let me quote RIP) your posit a scenario with a fleet of 50+ Tornados sniping my short-range high-sig fleet. I can't get a warp-in on the bad guys in your scenario because ??? (they're super good at kiting I guess), but I /do/ have a prober and a bombing wing and a dictor. Your assumption here is that my dictor is good enough to bubble them, the ~kiting~ target is too dumb to warp as the dictor lands, while being simultaneously too dumb to MWD out of said bubble, and my perfectly timed bomb-run lands. In spite of this great coordination and luck, my bomber squad is incapable of being setup in such a way as to catch them as they all blink to a predictable position. Also the snipers are hilariously gimped because they have to fit both an MJD and an MMJD.
Seems legit.
While this may seem ideal on paper, this situation is very rare to see in reality. In fact, it requires such ineptitude that I'd argue having an MMJD wouldn't save the fleet. What if I told you that there already exists a doctrine that can snipe the way you described while being both impractical to probe and bubble immune 100% of the time, instead of once every 3 minutes. Surely there would be a 30 page thread about how game-breakingly overpowered it was? Spoiler alert! There DOES exist such a ship, the Tengu, and there are no such threads because, well, it's not game-breakingly overpowered.
So the tl;dr of all this is that the ships only get more annoying /on paper/. In reality, though, nothing really changes. And if you can think of a way that makes it so broken, there exists a platform that you can use to exploit this inequality. Instead, a once-robust shipclass will keep drudging along as a predictable sniping platform. ~ |
Gregor Parud
514
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 23:03:00 -
[640] - Quote
So if it doesn't make a whole lot of difference, as you put it, why are you investing so much effort in frantically trying to convince ppl that ABC should get MMJD? Hmm?
ABC are fine, more than fine. Giving ABC, capable of high projected dps, MJD would create a massive new meta. And that is of course what you're angling for; you're not interested in balancing, you just want a new lol toy to abuse the **** out of.
|
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates RAZOR Alliance
451
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 23:26:00 -
[641] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Does a focused hictor point jam a MJD?
No. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine. |
GreenSeed
1018
|
Posted - 2014.05.20 23:56:00 -
[642] - Quote
Gregor Parud wrote:So if it doesn't make a whole lot of difference, as you put it, why are you investing so much effort in frantically trying to convince ppl that ABC should get MMJD? Hmm?
ABC are fine, more than fine. Giving ABC, capable of high projected dps, MJD would create a massive new meta. And that is of course what you're angling for; you're not interested in balancing, you just want a new lol toy to abuse the **** out of.
the thing is, giving an MJD to a snipping ABC changes very little, if anything it helps with the set up time. giving the MJD to a Command ship makes anything under CS an instant wreck.
as explained already, Vultures are monsters. astartes equally so. and absolutions used to be vulnerable to bubbles, now with MJDs not so anymore.
if you think CS are a non issue its because you live in low where if you see a CS its fitted with short range weapons (sleipnirs, EOS and the odd astarte). out on null, concerns about command ships in doctrines are very real. after all this game is 10 years old, even the goons managed to pull T3 as a doctrine, the SP is there. |
Arthur Aihaken
Erebus Solia
3607
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 00:02:00 -
[643] - Quote
There is a really simple solution that was already touched on: reduce the distance of the MMJD to 50km. This should work on Command Ships, Combat Battlecruisers and Deep Space Transports only (as proposed). Drop the spool-up time by 25% to compensate, but do not even remotely consider scripting these. Battleships get 100km, Battlecruisers get 50km - and Tornados get nadda. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Iam Widdershins
project nemesis
859
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 00:11:00 -
[644] - Quote
Annedalda Dixenme wrote:The act of fitting and using the MMJD to escape is itself an interaction with the PVP player. That is a terrible excuse for an argument. People fit MJD to their Marauders all the time, but I don't feel very interacted-with. Do you? Lobbying for your right to delete your signature |
Gregor Parud
514
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 00:11:00 -
[645] - Quote
GreenSeed wrote:Gregor Parud wrote:So if it doesn't make a whole lot of difference, as you put it, why are you investing so much effort in frantically trying to convince ppl that ABC should get MMJD? Hmm?
ABC are fine, more than fine. Giving ABC, capable of high projected dps, MJD would create a massive new meta. And that is of course what you're angling for; you're not interested in balancing, you just want a new lol toy to abuse the **** out of.
the thing is, giving an MJD to a snipping ABC changes very little, if anything it helps with the set up time. giving the MJD to a Command ship makes anything under CS an instant wreck. as explained already, Vultures are monsters. astartes equally so. and absolutions used to be vulnerable to bubbles, now with MJDs not so anymore. if you think CS are a non issue its because you live in low where if you see a CS its fitted with short range weapons (sleipnirs, EOS and the odd astarte). out on null, concerns about command ships in doctrines are very real. after all this game is 10 years old, even the goons managed to pull T3 as a doctrine, the SP is there.
CBC and CS lack the speed, warp speed and damage projection to ever become any sort of hilarious bullshit meta. Right now they have no place, no use in combat because they're too slow in many ways, they're under performing. With MJD they'll STILL be too slow in many ways but they have a gimmick that says that if you try to kite them it won't work. How is that a problem, kiting is a counter to slow ships and there's nothing much those ships can do against that, now they can. And all you have to do in your kiting ship is go "well, perhaps I won't be able to kill this guy".
Also, given that CBC and CS are in a somewhat bad spot atm, they will be buffed somehow. So you can choose, do you want to increase speed/agility on CBC/CS making them hilarious OP completely raping cruisers? I bet you don't, at least not if you're capable of being unbiased, so somehow they need a buff. This is a good one because it won't turn into a new meta and at the same time it plays into their current strengths.
Why is this so difficult to comprehend? |
Maraner
The Executioners Capital Punishment.
289
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 00:15:00 -
[646] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:There is a really simple solution that was already touched on: reduce the distance of the MMJD to 50km. This should work on Command Ships, Combat Battlecruisers and Deep Space Transports only (as proposed). Drop the spool-up time by 25% to compensate, but do not even remotely consider scripting these. Battleships get 100km, Battlecruisers get 50km - and Tornados get nadda.
No no no.
50km will be meaningless, we need to be able to close the range towards ships that will be at least 80km range.
combact BCs are essentially helpless against kiting setups at the moment. Can't catch them, often cant shoot at them etc etc.
If you don't want ABC to have them you could argue that a 1400mm Nados will be OP for certain. However for the combat BCs they need the 100km to land them next to the kite setups and perhaps get a scram on or at least do some damage.
After all lets face it it's the kiting setups that risk the least, they get to keep range, have crazy damage projection and risk very very little especially in low sec.
100km or scripted system with variable range please at the very least.
It also needs to be 100km to allow mixed BS and BC MJD fleets. After the nerf to warp speed these ships took this might let us see mixed fleets again rather than blobs of one type or the other.
|
Onictus
Sigillum Militum Xpisti Black Legion.
901
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 00:22:00 -
[647] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Does a focused hictor point jam a MJD?
Nope, I thought it was dumb as well. |
Maraner
The Executioners Capital Punishment.
289
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 01:19:00 -
[648] - Quote
Onictus wrote:Rowells wrote:Does a focused hictor point jam a MJD? Nope, I thought it was dumb as well.
Agree tbh, I think the focused script should work for certain even if the bubble does not. Poor old Hics are getting to be a bit of a rare sight.
|
Alexis Nightwish
State War Academy Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 01:50:00 -
[649] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Battlecruisers have been a little overshadowed by battleships and cruisers in recent months... lol wut?
If you want to be totally honest it should be like this:
CCP Fozzie should have wrote:non-Tier3 Battlecruisers have been a little overshadowed by Dominix battleships and Tech3 cruisers in recent months...
The MMJD module idea is really really bad. BSs needed it because of their horrible speed and agility. BCs and command ships do not have horrible speed or agility so they don't need this. DSTs probably won't use it due to the nature of gate camps. Please do not add this module. |
Arthur Aihaken
Erebus Solia
3610
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 01:52:00 -
[650] - Quote
Maraner wrote:No no no.
50km will be meaningless, we need to be able to close the range towards ships that will be at least 80km range.
combact BCs are essentially helpless against kiting setups at the moment. Can't catch them, often cant shoot at them etc etc.
If you don't want ABC to have them you could argue that a 1400mm Nados will be OP for certain. However for the combat BCs they need the 100km to land them next to the kite setups and perhaps get a scram on or at least do some damage.
After all lets face it it's the kiting setups that risk the least, they get to keep range, have crazy damage projection and risk very very little especially in low sec.
100km or scripted system with variable range please at the very least.
It also needs to be 100km to allow mixed BS and BC MJD fleets. After the nerf to warp speed these ships took this might let us see mixed fleets again rather than blobs of one type or the other. OK, you sold me. So basically the latest proposed iteration then, yes? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
10009
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 02:26:00 -
[651] - Quote
Beaver Retriever wrote:Cyaron wars wrote:Dear CCP Fozzie,
Please stop this. Stop promoting coward ways of PVP. We already have "blanket on your face" called Falcon and EC drones, utterly ******** tank modules like dual X-large ASB on ships so ppl can deagro and dock/jump through gate. With this kind of approach you are making nearly every kiting ship useless against BCs. Could you please tell me the outcome of engagement between Prophecy and NOMEN for example after MMJD will be introduced? Can you please define the role of Warp Disruptor in future? We already have anchorable device with similar functionality for people who want to MJD out in any other class then BS. While I understand the reason of fitting such module to field command ships, I don't see any reasonable argument why it must be present on other BCs.
Please do us all a favor and stop trying to re-invent the wheel. We already have it and it is working. Please focus all your efforts and precious time (that we all pay for) on something better then yet another module or ship (like there are few disposable ships in this game). Ahahaha I love how at first you talk warmly about no more 'coward ways of PVP', then later in the post you reveal this is really all about protecting your pet form of coward PVP. Go fly a brawler ship if you don't like 'coward PVP'. Oh, wait, you'll just get kited by the cowards with link alts? GEE. All this does is give brawling ships a fighting chance against the hordes of idiots in Nomens and Ishtars like yourself. Skirmish ships take more skill than just "press button, jump 100 km away." "Pretty much all 14 of the CSM were in favor of a drone assign nerf for OBVIOUS gameplay reasons" - Sala Cameron
|
Onictus
Sigillum Militum Xpisti Black Legion.
901
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 03:06:00 -
[652] - Quote
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.
I really don't see it changing anything on ABCs anyway, in long range fits 100km jump is going to put them out of lock range anyway. In shortrange mode, if they MJD, I really don't care they aren't shooting me anymore they are out of range.
Personally I call any engagement where I keep my ship a win. |
Eurynome Mangeiri
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
58
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 08:18:00 -
[653] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Battlecruisers have been a little overshadowed by battleships and cruisers in recent months and having the option to use MJDs combined with their dps and low cost should create some interesting chances for clever players to show off their abilities.
sorry we are here to speak about EVE online, you might be in the wrong channel
|
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
913
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 09:38:00 -
[654] - Quote
Allow them on all BC hulls and then:
"Due to the higher energy-expended -to- mass ratio of the Medium MJD compared to regular MJDs, the ships signature blooms as if a regular MWD had been activated during the spool-up phase. Tech 2 hulls do not experience this bloom due to having military grade and hardened internal components (ie. better wiring)."
Else, restrict to T2 and transports to start with and see where it goes. |
Cardano Firesnake
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
163
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 10:30:00 -
[655] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Does a focused hictor point jam a MJD?
I don't think so but it should |
Kane Fenris
NWP
150
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 11:28:00 -
[656] - Quote
Cardano Firesnake wrote:Rowells wrote:Does a focused hictor point jam a MJD? I don't think so but it should
it doesnt cause its no scram
i hink this whole point and jam system is inconsistent as **** cause the artificial difference between dis an scra effekt |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
10018
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 13:00:00 -
[657] - Quote
Why does that same question get brought up every couple of pages? No, scripted WDFG does not stop an MJD, same as it does not stop an MWD. The only thing that stops MJD and MWD is a warp scrambler (any meta).
Please, nobody ask this again. "Pretty much all 14 of the CSM were in favor of a drone assign nerf for OBVIOUS gameplay reasons" - Sala Cameron
|
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
2216
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 13:04:00 -
[658] - Quote
First post says "restricted to combat battlecruisers" and then says it will provide great options for "attack battlecruisers".
|
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
366
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 15:29:00 -
[659] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:First post says "restricted to combat battlecruisers" and then says it will provide great options for "attack battlecruisers".
plz confirm all will be forgiven! |
Damen Apol
Dayman Industries
32
|
Posted - 2014.05.21 15:34:00 -
[660] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:First post says "restricted to combat battlecruisers" and then says it will provide great options for "attack battlecruisers".
It's because Fozzie has no idea what he is doing and is simply flying by the seat of his pants.
"Oh man that WoW game has some teleport thing we need one too." |
|
|
|
|
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 |