| 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) |
Calsys
Monks of War
110
   |
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:21:00 -
[121] - Quote
Zakatka Night wrote:scrambl and 0 problem!
=tank vs dps
no brain
no tactics |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction
The Pursuit of Happiness
1367
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:22:00 -
[122] - Quote
Zakatka Night wrote:scrambl and 0 problem!
you dont get the simple pricnciple that this have removed the SINGLE reason to use a battleship?
"If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Liam Inkuras
Mafia Redux
1066
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:29:00 -
[123] - Quote
Fozzie I really hope you take a good long time to think of the true implications this module will have. Holding nimble T3 BCs is already difficult enough with a long point, and will now be next to impossible. If you really wish to make T3 BCs relevant again, please consider giving them a 3.3 au/sec warp speed, or making their base speed faster.
I wear my goggles at night.
Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction
The Pursuit of Happiness
1367
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:31:00 -
[124] - Quote
Liam Inkuras wrote:Fozzie I really hope you take a good long time to think of the true implications this module will have. Holding nimble T3 BCs is already difficult enough with a long point, and will now be next to impossible. If you really wish to make T3 BCs relevant again, please consider giving them a 3.3 au/sec warp speed, or making their base speed faster.
Dont write T3 battlecruiser. First T3 measn TECH 3. Secodsn there is no more TIER 3 either. THey are attack bc. Makes confusiing to read and make peopel think you have no clue .
"If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction
The Pursuit of Happiness
1367
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:33:00 -
[125] - Quote
I just want the balance team to answer me HONESTLY and not with hypotheticaltheories that are completely disfunctional from the game reality. Why would anyone use A battleship instead of a BC oustside larger fleets when these changes are implemented?
And please for the love of eve.. do nto even THINK on giving these to cruisers as well! SPECIALLY tech 3
"If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Anthar Thebess
413
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:35:00 -
[126] - Quote
I wonder when do we get to the point that there will be MJD for a shuttles.
Will all battles will look like hit & run?
Thats not nice |
Domanique Altares
Rifterlings
Point Blank Alliance
2689
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:36:00 -
[127] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:I really think the feedback in this thread sums up the feeling on an ABC having a MJD. I strongly recommend we wait on allowing the ABC to fit them. Give us 6 weeks with the medium MJD and then let's reexamine the idea of a MJD on ABC. Let's see what meta comes from the BC brawlers first.
You know better than that. This will be just like RLMLs. They'll **** it up and then have to come back and give a half-assed fix in six months or so.
Rifterlings pirate corporation is now recruitng members for lowsec PvP operations. Newbie friendly, free T1 frigate and dessy hangar, solo tutoring and PvP classes for new members. Join our in game channel 'weflyrifters' and speak to a recruiter today. |
Rab See
Fool Mental Junket
64
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:38:00 -
[128] - Quote
Once more.
Its amazing how pointless this make so many ships. Kiting is over, its just sad snipe or brawl. What recons will do I dont know.
Can you tell me what sense a long point makes on a ship? Why the hell fit it when half the ships you tackle just jump away.
Its just one of the worst things I have seen in F&I. |
X ATM092
Clan Shadow Wolf
Fatal Ascension
288
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:40:00 -
[129] - Quote
So, if I want to tackle an enemy command ship now I have to scram it and try brawling it down in my faster, more agile ship. Good idea m8. Clearly you guys are good at game design. To paraphrase Fozzie from fanfest regarding attempting to nano "do you even ram bro?".
This is an incredibly bad idea because of how worthless it makes longpoints and therefore any non committal form of PvP. Vs a nano gang you can now chase them forever in more heavily tanked brawling bcs without making any attempt to solve the issue of speed or range control because you aren't ever in any danger.
This idea is literally Stalin and unless significant changes are made to the MJD to stop the align/MJD/warpout combo it will be a colossal nerf to skill based pvp. |
General Nusense
Not Posting With My Main
180
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:43:00 -
[130] - Quote
worst
idea
ever
next to the freighter/jf changes. |
|
|
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
342
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:45:00 -
[131] - Quote
Also, is MJD still an experimental module? If it is, why does it have it's own skill book? If it's not, why doesn't it have a BPO?
Also, the skill needs more balacing. It's a friggen rank 5 skill which from L4-L5 reduces activaation time by 0.6 seconds? Cmon!
P.S. Look what I found on TQ while writing this post:
Mobile Large Jump Disruptor I |
Firebolt145
Calamitous-Intent
Feign Disorder
80
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:55:00 -
[132] - Quote
Please don't implement this. |
Rattman
Van Diemen's Demise
Northern Coalition.
25
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:56:00 -
[133] - Quote
Should be fittable to logistics as well, logistics should be able to keep up with the battleships that they are supposed to be repping |
X ATM092
Clan Shadow Wolf
Fatal Ascension
288
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:58:00 -
[134] - Quote
Awesome new fit idea for fighting nano gangs. Basically you take a nado and fit it with dcu/odis in the lows, scram/mwd/mjd/2x LSE in the mids and you just hit approach and try and scram one of them. Now you're really quite quick, faster than any bcs they could have and most cruisers so you pose a significant threat to them with that scram because your gang is following right behind you waiting to pile on after that scram.
And then if they do everything perfectly, warp out when they're about to be scrammed, keep a long point on you the entire time, primary you etc and make zero mistakes then you write "gf" in local, switch your align and spool up.
Clearly this is the change pvp has been waiting for. I guess it coincides with the mordus scram range bonuses because longpoints are now only good for killing things that can just mwd away out of their range.
I shouldn't really need to spell this out because anyone who knows jack about PvP ought to learn this on day one but the way longpoints work is that they allow you to hold down a slower ship than yourself at range which creates a dynamic in which weaker groups can fight stronger groups through range control. This is the whole point of the module, you get to stop them warping out without brawling in exchange for not impacting their mobility, if you change that you might as well remove the disruptor from the game and all buttons except ram and f1 from the hud.
TLDR
Currently if bigger than them, scram and brawl, if smaller than them but more agile/more pilot skill longpoint and nano
Proposed change is if bigger than them, scram and brawl, if smaller than them but more agile/more pilot skill unsub
|
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
1861
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:00:00 -
[135] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:I really think the feedback in this thread sums up the feeling on an ABC having a MJD. I strongly recommend we wait on allowing the ABC to fit them. Give us 6 weeks with the medium MJD and then let's reexamine the idea of a MJD on ABC. Let's see what meta comes from the BC brawlers first.
Pretty much this.
There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people...
Winter Expansion new ship request |
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
1861
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:01:00 -
[136] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:What if a long point slowed down the spool time for the mjd giving you Time to get close enough to activate the scram?
Think of the warp inhibitors in sins of a solar empire
There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people...
Winter Expansion new ship request |
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
1815
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:02:00 -
[137] - Quote
Yes the battlecruisers that are currently literally everywhere in pvp will become OP when they fit a second prop module with high fitting requirements that gimp their tank, dps, or both. 
Honestly, it breathes new life into a class that hasn't seen significant action in a while. |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Brave Collective
1167
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:02:00 -
[138] - Quote
Well, it sounds very promising and fun to do! I especially like the fact that logistics aren't getting this, it would be a bit OP.
Signature Tanking - Best Tanking.
Beware the french guy!
|
TAckermassacker
New Republic
The Initiative.
51
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:17:00 -
[139] - Quote
BTW noone is gonna be suprised if combat recons will get them also. |
Varesk
Carried Hate
550
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:20:00 -
[140] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone! We've happy to announce that in the Kronos release we will be introducing a new medium version of the Micro Jump Drive!
This module will begin restricted to Battlecruisers, Command Ships and Deep Space Transports. We will consider expanding it to some other classes in the future but that is a discussion for after we've seen how they work out on these initial groups.
The MMJD uses the same Micro Jump Drive Operation skill as the LMJD and has the same range (100km), spool up (12s base reduced by the skill) and cooldown (3 minutes) as the Large version.
It has the following requirements:
Powergrid: 165
CPU: 51
Capacitor: 197
We expect that these modules will be a very exciting option for battlecruisers (especially attack battlecruisers) in both fleets and small gangs.
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.
These modules will be on SISI for your testing pleasure soon. Let us know what you think!
Will you be buffing the PG on Blockade runners and Deep Space Transports? If I just want to fit a MJD and a cloak on my ship, I will have to add PG upgrades in the lows, which wont happen due to Cargo Capacity > All.
|
|
|
TehCloud
Mastercard.
Swipe Here
230
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:21:00 -
[141] - Quote
Giving T3 BCs access to a MJD is horrible.
Giving Nados and Nagas, more mobility is going to end horribly. I think they are a good addition for DSTs though.
My Condor costs less than that module! |
X ATM092
Clan Shadow Wolf
Fatal Ascension
289
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:22:00 -
[142] - Quote
Triple posting in the topic because of how absolutely awful this idea is.
Cruisers and frigs can already escape from longpoints using their speed, the whole point of longpoints is to hold down things that you can't brawl because they're bigger than you but which can't escape from them because you're faster and more agile than them. That is literally the module's role in this game.
You cannot give big slow ships a way of negating warp disruptors, starting with the biggest and working your way down, and if you think it's a good idea you have no clue what the purpose of warp disruptors in eve pvp is. If you absolutely must put it in the game it needs to be disabled by warp disruptors. It can then still be used as a mobility tool without ruining pvp. |
MuraSaki Siki
Minmatar Ship Construction Services
Ushra'Khan
47
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:29:00 -
[143] - Quote
attack BC already get decent amount of agility then combat BC, |
i Beast
Quantum Explosion
E X P L O S I O N
89
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:37:00 -
[144] - Quote
no brain
no tactics |
Jin So
Sev3rance
14
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:40:00 -
[145] - Quote
This is a very bad idea! |
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
1816
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:50:00 -
[146] - Quote
ITT: kiters that think they should be the only ones that can disengage from a fight. |
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
132
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:50:00 -
[147] - Quote
Wouldn't a capital size version of this make more sense? |
Arla Sarain
7
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:50:00 -
[148] - Quote
Additionally to everything being said -
Whats up with ship specific modules? This corners them into particular set-ups, which diminishes the whole purpose of freedom of fitting. |
X ATM092
Clan Shadow Wolf
Fatal Ascension
293
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:54:00 -
[149] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote:ITT: kiters that think they should be the only ones that can disengage from a fight.
Because brawlers don't have enough advantages? Being able to disengage comes at a pretty huge price in terms of tank and damage which we gladly pay because it lets us be ambitious and aggressive with target selection instead of just blobbing things. If you must commit to kill something, which is what this suggestion is proposing, then you will only fight when you know 100% ahead of time that you will win because of numbers/logi. That is not a good thing for the game. |
Justin Cody
AQUILA INC
Verge of Collapse
215
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:56:00 -
[150] - Quote
well looks like we have Fozzie's surprise meta change for the AT. Someway to get those slow BC's and command ships used. *gets bucket of popcorn* |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 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 |