Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 [100] 200 .. 275 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 41 post(s) |
Kaely Tanniss
Aurora Novae Aetatis
47
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:42:00 -
[2971] - Quote
knobber Jobbler wrote:Valleria Darkmoon wrote: I'm very much afraid that if these changes go through as presented here the game will stagnate because it will be too slow. . This. Some people like the larger scale battles, in fact the only times EVE has hit the headlines and brought in more subcribers than CCP's marketing department ever has is the big fights. With these changes, these sorts of battles will likely never happen again. Those with local supercap dominance will always have a trump card and no one will be able to escalate. It begs the question of why can't CCP see what the real problem here is: Supercaps and not Carriers, Dreads, JF's or anything else with a jump drive.
Agreed. All this will do is insure a corp/alliance can dig into a region, pack in the supercaps, and make it so no other force will be able to effectively fight or attempt to take the system/region. Force projection has been an issues yes, but this is not the solution. I do not fly caps, nor have I ever had any interest to, but I can see both sides of the fence on this one. The bottom line is CCP is going to lose no matter what they chose. Their best bet is to try for a middle ground that compromises to both sides. Limits are a good idea, but based on their preliminary examples of what they want to do...well...try again CCP. I fear Eve will become "moving pretty spaceships around" online.
If I had a nickel for every time someone said women don't play eve, I'd have a bag of nickels to whack the next person who said it.. |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders Mordus Angels
2163
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:42:00 -
[2972] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:Selexid wrote:
Well if someone is attacking a cap defended system with caps of their own, they might have subcap support and even scouts on the other side....... Gezuz man.
Tell you what.. after this change go and attack Deklein and tell me how it s goes :) Go and attack Deklein before this change and tell me how it goes :) |
Prince Kobol
2251
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:42:00 -
[2973] - Quote
Lord TGR wrote:Prince Kobol wrote:Lord TGR wrote:Prince Kobol wrote:lmao.. yeah like to see a fleet of capitals jumping into a **** load of bubbled and then getting popped... Well, considering the fact that we're hopefully going towards a sov system where multiple daily fights are in order, not one huge fight every week like we're seeing now, this scenario's not going to be that big of a problem. If you've got enough force, go through, if not, go back to harassing them some more or see if you can't get down that jammer so you can set things up more to your liking. lmao Let me guess, you're one of those who actually either want 4k fights, or you want to be able to hotdrop everyone from across the map whenever there's a chance of getting anything even remotely juicy. Right?
Me or TGR? |
Selexid
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
26
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:43:00 -
[2974] - Quote
Forum: You've nerfed rapidly deploying over vast distances to a complete impossibility.
CCP Greyscale: Hopefully, yes.
This is a very good one. In other others stick to your damn turf or plan like a madman if you want to be in someone's else mess. |
rezell
Basgerin Pirate
3
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:43:00 -
[2975] - Quote
Very nice CCP . This will help low sec . No more uber MOM fleets or so many people you have no chance to win . As soon as the patch comes out its time to attack every SC POCO you see . Lets see how many they can rep up now |
Prince Kobol
2251
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:43:00 -
[2976] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote:Prince Kobol wrote:Selexid wrote:
Well if someone is attacking a cap defended system with caps of their own, they might have subcap support and even scouts on the other side....... Gezuz man.
Tell you what.. after this change go and attack Deklein and tell me how it s goes :) Go and attack Deklein before this change and tell me how it goes :)
The same, the only difference is right now it that it wont days to get into position were as after it will |
Michus Danether
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
26
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:44:00 -
[2977] - Quote
I love this thread, it is full of so many emotions :D!
A few thoughts, somewhat in order:
1. A purely linear jump fatigue cooldown of 1 per minute seems to be making a lot of people uneasy. Even if in practice people won't be trying to give themselves a massive timer it's still very, very likely to happen among the thousands of EVE players, and then there are the people who will do it on purpose. Either way cap pilots might end up with month long jump fatigue timers.
Why not just change the formula from reducing 1 fatigue/minute to reducing (0.1% of [[totalFatigue] + 1 fatigue]/minute) instead? Just tweak the percentage from 1% to 0.1% as needed to get the jump delay you want for your golden timer of 40 LYs made by jump instead of by gate.
2. This is going to make general logistics a pain in the friggin ass, thanks! :( I will HTFU of course but forgetting the awesome fact that massive capital blobfests will be evaporating with these changes (good thing) it does really nerf the little guy's ability to lug around assets. A Rorq or carrier full of small corp assets will take a very long time to transport stuff. So an already somewhat complex operation is going to get more tedious and complex. I am not saying it's necessarily that bad... but in order to compensate (and since we are making wild changes and slippery changes here!) I might suggest a few other tweaks:
2a. Make more wormholes that can fit 1-3 capitals worth of mass through them, but have these wormholes dedicated to linking up between null-null, null-lowsec and lowsec-lowsec. This will give the little corps a solid advantage in that they can locate these awesome wormholes and move to new areas, get 1 freighter worth of assets through from lowsec(empire) to wherever they live in nullsec... and so on. Large alliances can't use these wormholes for their massive cap ganks since the wormholes collapse after 3~ caps worth of mass. Yay! Solving design goals left and right here!
2b. Increase the ship hanger size for carriers (and maybe super carriers) and perhaps reconfigure a few other design elements here to encourage situations where a single carrier or supercarrier can jump in, and somehow (either by jumpclones to the C/SC, or riding the jump-field-wake or whatever) pod pilots can drag their ships out of the carrier and start fighting. If some part of that process prevents the dozens of subcap pilots from accruing jump fatigue, or has some other similar benefit it might encourage people to do what your design goals want them to do and start spreading out their cap ships to have response-ready fleets in the event of an incursion.
3. Intel is going to get super messy... and this whole jump fatigue system is going to make the aggressor of a territory-claiming war accrue a LOT!!!! of jump fatigue. Can you imagine the nightmare it will be for a large sprawling alliance to try to position their cap fleet within 1 or 2 jump range of an invading fleet? They have to know for certain where that enemy fleet will be attacking. The whole concept of war and territory taking is probably going to grind to a halt until the future SOV changes hinted at in the dev blog.
Going back to 2b... it would be really neat CCP if you could get it working so pod pilots can 'ride along' inside jump-clone capable capital ships, and if they could do so then maybe they don't accrue jump fatigue? That would allow a subcap fleet to move around fairly quickly and repeatedly but in the process risk the actual physical presence of a capital ship to do it... no more titans hiding inside bubbles back in starbase, now the supercarrier would have to land on grid to disgorge its pilot friends
---
Don't get me wrong, I'm actually largely in favour of these changes. It will definitely and dramatically change the game in a way that I haven't seen since titans first showed up. Change is good just for change sake sometimes, but this has a specific goal and a plan for changing the very nature of warfare in EVE. I actually adore this change, as anything that breaks the massive blobs down into smaller chunks is good for the game and the server hamsters who can run a little slower.
I wonder, if making rapid-reinforcements and the threat of titan-bridge hotdrops less likely... will people be more inclined to turn around and engage a pursuing force? I have been in lots of fleets where it is said "If we fight they will just drop on us."... removing that option might make those fleets turn around and slam into each other, which is what everybody wants anyway.
Either way... interesting times coming up in November! |
Zhul Chembull
Phantom Power Incorporated Rebel Alliance of New Eden
22
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:44:00 -
[2978] - Quote
DeadDuck wrote:Nice to see, EVE starting to be back on his roots. It was really needed.
For all the doomdsday prophets, just a little reminder: NULL SEC used to be occupied before the JF or Capitals were around. Logistics were being made on a daily basis without JF, or JB's or Titans, the prices of ships were similar to what they are today...
Like a lot of the 0.0 scrubs/overlords like to say: adapt or die.
Yes, losing ground will hurt now. Evacing stuff will be a nightmare. Logistics will be a challenge. Who knows maybe you will start to see freighter convoys again in 0.0. But you know what ? It will be fun again. FUN. Remember that word when playing EVE ? FUN.
Yeah and the population on the server also use to top at 1k, if you were around that long. Logistics will not be a challenge, you have no idea what you are talking about. Redundent mechansims in place of solid game mechanics is not the way to go. |
yogizh
Northstar Cabal Tactical Narcotics Team
19
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:45:00 -
[2979] - Quote
Page 150 |
Plukovnik
Everyone vs Everything THE R0NIN
3
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:45:00 -
[2980] - Quote
Needmore Longcat wrote:Is today April 1? Capitals taking gates? Jump fatigue? These are some of the worst ideas.
How is a stagnant nullsec going to be fixed by making things take even longer than they do already? How does that make any sense at all?
Absolutely terrible.
This is proof that CCP should do absolutely opposite things than those that sov holders want. Things MUST take longer, because game mechanics must dicourage making coalition with someone who is based over three regions far. Current state of stagnation is because people from Outer Passage can easily reach Catch in less than one hour. Therefore it makes sense to have diplomatic relationships with them. New mechanic will make no sense to that, because no matter how long would take the battle in Catch, people from Outer Passage would arrive hours, maybe days after it ends.
I believe this will finally break the current state of stagnation. Coalition will fall apart, because reason of their existence will ceise. Well prepared attack will cause havoc and will require well prepared defence, not just jabber ping and voil+í - hundreds of caps and supers arrive from regions 50 LY away. Today, there is no such thing like "surprise attack" because batphoning tens of alliances and their arrival requires almost no effort.
After this change, lets say that INK, PL, NC and N3 will come to help HERO in Catch, when Providence and AAA attacks them. This situation will be used by TRI+BL to attack Cache. Coalition members will have to decide - help HERO and risk losing systems in Cache, or go home to save their own lands and abandon HERO. In any case, dedicated attack will require dedicated defense, planning and even sacrifices. The german emperor Frederick the Great said "who wants to defend everything, defends nothing" and EVE should go back to state where this works. Now it doesnt, because hundreds of capitals can move across the universe in matter of minutes and that is simply wrong. |
|
Lord TGR
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
19
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:46:00 -
[2981] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Lord TGR wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Ezio Dicostanzo wrote:CCP I'm 100% with you on this one! Don't backdown, DO IT!!
now we clearly understand what this "null deal" was all about, and why opposing blocks were all standing behind Mittani's "listen to us cause we're the boss" bullsh*t. Dont listen to them, and dont add more NPC systems/stations !!
btw after reading the null deal and now this dev blog, isn't it obvious that certain CSM members are breaking the NDA and letting Mittani &friends know what you are planning ahead? Just FYI, the dev blog also states that the sov changes are likely to be occupancy based - exactly what the null deal calls for. And if you were even remotely awake during fanfest you'd know that power projection changes were very much on the cards. I'm honestly surprised it's taken this long for them to come up. So your tinfoil hat theories that the CSM are breaching the NDA are unfounded. Honestly I would've thought the sov system changes would suffice, and that the "force projection" change is shaking the stick from the wrong end, but I'm interested to see how the meta'll change to match the new rules, and just how punitive the rules WILL be. Nah, force projection was always needed. It's too easy to go from one end of the universe to the other with a mass of ships. It's still going to be pretty easy to fly interceptors back and forth and leave ships dotted about all over, but at least it will require travelling rather than sitting on a titan. Occupancy sov without force projection changes would be a recipe for disaster, since it wouldn't stop larger group jumping half way across the map to nuke someone and jumping back at a moments notice. With these changes you'll have to at least partially commit to it. I'm not completely in disagreement, I just would've throught the sov system would yield more bang for the developer buck, as it were. But I'm actually very much in favor of a majority of the changes, since I'm in agreement with capitals being too easy to fling from one end of the map to the other, but I never thought CCP would actually have the balls to make a change of this nature, and I definitely didn't think they had the balls to let caps/supers take gates.
I'm actually rather enthused about the strategic impact this'll have, I'm just not quite on board with the extent the fatigue'll go to, and I'm not sure about including JFs and other industrials in this (which is after all needed to keep a local economy going in null, still). I'm not sure null's self-sufficient enough yet for them to be affected as well, but we'll see. |
Aiyshimin
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
120
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:46:00 -
[2982] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:TheFairyClinkerBell wrote:Prince Kobol wrote:Aiyshimin wrote:Prince Kobol wrote: Timers.. how are you going to attack somebodies system which is cyno jammed and defended with Capitals with your small subcap fleet?
With capitals (read the devblog) In other words you have no idea I think they are referring to the changes which would allow capitals to use gates. Cyno jammed system would be no issue, you just jump through both sub-capitals and capitals via your chosen gate to a next door system. lmao.. yeah like to see a fleet of capitals jumping into a **** load of bubbled and then getting popped...
Using scouts is optional and you don't exactly have to, but in some cases they can be valuable.
|
yogizh
Northstar Cabal Tactical Narcotics Team
19
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:48:00 -
[2983] - Quote
Plukovnik wrote:Needmore Longcat wrote:Is today April 1? Capitals taking gates? Jump fatigue? These are some of the worst ideas.
How is a stagnant nullsec going to be fixed by making things take even longer than they do already? How does that make any sense at all?
Absolutely terrible. Prayers
Where are you going to steal ESS then ?
|
Stoffl
Snuff Box
35
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:48:00 -
[2984] - Quote
Aivo Dresden wrote:I hope all these people unsubbing bring the PLEX prices down a bit. xD
|
Sigras
Conglomo
904
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:48:00 -
[2985] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:Lord TGR wrote:Prince Kobol wrote:Aiyshimin wrote:[quote=Prince Kobol] Timers.. how are you going to attack somebodies system which is cyno jammed and defended with Capitals with your small subcap fleet?
With capitals (read the devblog) In other words you have no idea No, capitals can still get in, they just can't cyno in (or back out in a panic if they suddenly decide (ackbar)IT'S A TRAP(/ackbar).
The FC is ever going to jump a fleet of capitals in a system that is heavily defended, gates bubbled and with no way of extracting./quote] GASP! you might actually need to use ships other than cap ships! What ever shall we do? Perhaps we may even need to resort to thinking!
Perhaps while your opponent has all of his eggs in one basket you may strike somewhere else... |
Lord TGR
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
19
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:48:00 -
[2986] - Quote
Kaely Tanniss wrote:knobber Jobbler wrote:Valleria Darkmoon wrote: I'm very much afraid that if these changes go through as presented here the game will stagnate because it will be too slow. . This. Some people like the larger scale battles, in fact the only times EVE has hit the headlines and brought in more subcribers than CCP's marketing department ever has is the big fights. With these changes, these sorts of battles will likely never happen again. Those with local supercap dominance will always have a trump card and no one will be able to escalate. It begs the question of why can't CCP see what the real problem here is: Supercaps and not Carriers, Dreads, JF's or anything else with a jump drive. Agreed. All this will do is insure a corp/alliance can dig into a region, pack in the supercaps, and make it so no other force will be able to effectively fight or attempt to take the system/region. Force projection has been an issues yes, but this is not the solution. I do not fly caps, nor have I ever had any interest to, but I can see both sides of the fence on this one. The bottom line is CCP is going to lose no matter what they chose. Their best bet is to try for a middle ground that compromises to both sides. Limits are a good idea, but based on their preliminary examples of what they want to do...well...try again CCP. I fear Eve will become "moving pretty spaceships around" online. If CCP changes the sov system from a might makes right system to an occupancy-style system, then supers and caps etc won't matter as much as you think it will. I think you're still in the old style of thinking where large fights decided wars, as opposed to a lot of small fights. |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders Mordus Angels
2166
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:49:00 -
[2987] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote:Prince Kobol wrote:Selexid wrote:
Well if someone is attacking a cap defended system with caps of their own, they might have subcap support and even scouts on the other side....... Gezuz man.
Tell you what.. after this change go and attack Deklein and tell me how it s goes :) Go and attack Deklein before this change and tell me how it goes :) The same, the only difference is right now it that it wont days to get into position were as after it will So....what your saying is nothing at all will change and your original statement about attacking deklein as an example really has no merit?
See, here's the thing: it's examples like these which illustrate why we need this change. You say no one will attack deklein after these changes. Well, guess what? No one's attacking deklein now either. So that argument doesn't have a leg to stand on.
As the dev blog said, this is the first part of a multi-step approach to fixing sov. I'm willing to see where it goes, simply because that path, the path where at least we have to adapt to something, is preferable to the utter stagnation we have now. |
Lord TGR
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
19
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:50:00 -
[2988] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:Lord TGR wrote:Prince Kobol wrote:Lord TGR wrote:Prince Kobol wrote:lmao.. yeah like to see a fleet of capitals jumping into a **** load of bubbled and then getting popped... Well, considering the fact that we're hopefully going towards a sov system where multiple daily fights are in order, not one huge fight every week like we're seeing now, this scenario's not going to be that big of a problem. If you've got enough force, go through, if not, go back to harassing them some more or see if you can't get down that jammer so you can set things up more to your liking. lmao Let me guess, you're one of those who actually either want 4k fights, or you want to be able to hotdrop everyone from across the map whenever there's a chance of getting anything even remotely juicy. Right? Me or TGR? You. I'd much rather have wars be constant fights with a constant stream of smaller fleets, rather than one huge 4k fight which decides the fate of not just one but multiple regions at a time. And I have no problems with those fights not being cap on cap every time. |
Selexid
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
27
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:52:00 -
[2989] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:Selexid wrote:
Well if someone is attacking a cap defended system with caps of their own, they might have subcap support and even scouts on the other side....... Gezuz man.
Tell you what.. after this change go and attack Deklein and tell me how it s goes :)
See this is the point, if coalitions stay the same you wont need to attack decklein, but fountain and branch and catch and w/e in smaller group. I mean one huge blob can be only in one system @ the time.
So if the big guys want to stay big which they can, they will need to work a bit harder for it that is all and plan some things not insta porting in Curse, because some director has a friend with a tower there.
|
Ferrocerium Spark
State War Academy Caldari State
13
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:53:00 -
[2990] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Ferrocerium Spark wrote:Someone probably mentioned this before...
CCP please don't make new jump drive changes nightmare for logistic/industiral operations. EvE is already feels like second job so please don't make it more time consuming when it comes to using jump freighters and rorquals. because Eve didnt exist before jump freighters and rorquals right? talk about entitlement issues...
Well, I don't know how it used to be before (playing since 2013).. and I don't want to go back but to move forward (or at least keep something as it is now). |
|
are34
Tempest Legion Psychotic Tendencies.
124
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:53:00 -
[2991] - Quote
will capital ships be able to go through any acceleration gates after the proposed changes?
will any acceleration gates be changed to allow any class of capitals? |
Zhul Chembull
Phantom Power Incorporated Rebel Alliance of New Eden
22
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:53:00 -
[2992] - Quote
Plukovnik wrote:Needmore Longcat wrote:Is today April 1? Capitals taking gates? Jump fatigue? These are some of the worst ideas.
How is a stagnant nullsec going to be fixed by making things take even longer than they do already? How does that make any sense at all?
Absolutely terrible. This is proof that CCP should do absolutely opposite things than those that sov holders want. Things MUST take longer, because game mechanics must dicourage making coalition with someone who is based over three regions far. Current state of stagnation is because people from Outer Passage can easily reach Catch in less than one hour. Therefore it makes sense to have diplomatic relationships with them. New mechanic will make no sense to that, because no matter how long would take the battle in Catch, people from Outer Passage would arrive hours, maybe days after it ends. I believe this will finally break the current state of stagnation. Coalition will fall apart, because reason of their existence will ceise. Well prepared attack will cause havoc and will require well prepared defence, not just jabber ping and voil+í - hundreds of caps and supers arrive from regions 50 LY away. Today, there is no such thing like "surprise attack" because batphoning tens of alliances and their arrival requires almost no effort. After this change, lets say that INK, PL, NC and N3 will come to help HERO in Catch, when Providence and AAA attacks them. This situation will be used by TRI+BL to attack Cache. Coalition members will have to decide - help HERO and risk losing systems in Cache, or go home to save their own lands and abandon HERO. In any case, dedicated attack will require dedicated defense, planning and even sacrifices. The german emperor Frederick the Great said "who wants to defend everything, defends nothing" and EVE should go back to state where this works. Now it doesnt, because hundreds of capitals can move across the universe in matter of minutes and that is simply wrong.
Wrong. they will scoot their empires up closer to low sec and effectively stop anyone from getting into null. The idea of moving rorquals and JF through low sec gates is ridiculous. You know how many people will get popped from all the people that make a living hitting ships that come to their gate. Can you say stupid ?
|
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
5463
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:54:00 -
[2993] - Quote
EarthQuake51a wrote:What about giving capitals some warpcore bonus? As far as I know, a capital ship warp core should be harder to disrupt than a battleship one.
It doesn't mean safe warping capitals in lowsec, but at least not getting pinned by stupid rats at a gate in which take a while to lock. (armor caps will have a significant advantage for that, reinforcing the fact that armor stuff is generally better than shield)
I agree, warp core strength should be proportional to ship size/mass/something. Then we can remove EWAR and scram immunity from super caps and leave them with 1000+ warp core stability. And of course we could have difference size scrams & disruptors with various tradeoffs of scram strength, range, fitting requirements, etc. Give Interceptors, Arazu and interdictors the benefit of fitting one-size-up tackle modules.
Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Kaely Tanniss
Aurora Novae Aetatis
47
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:55:00 -
[2994] - Quote
Stoffl wrote:Aivo Dresden wrote:I hope all these people unsubbing bring the PLEX prices down a bit. xD
You would think so..but with less people buying plex, it may cause those selling them to drive the cost up to offset the loss in sales. Idk, could go either way.. Honestly, it doesn't matter to me, I pay a sub and plex is useless to me. If I had a nickel for every time someone said women don't play eve, I'd have a bag of nickels to whack the next person who said it.. |
KanashiiKami
116
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:55:00 -
[2995] - Quote
Michus Danether wrote:I love this thread, it is full of so many emotions :D! A few thoughts, somewhat in order: 1. A purely linear jump fatigue cooldown of 1 per minute seems to be making a lot of people uneasy. Even if in practice people won't be trying to give themselves a massive timer it's still very, very likely to happen among the thousands of EVE players, and then there are the people who will do it on purpose. Either way cap pilots might end up with month long jump fatigue timers. Why not just change the formula from reducing 1 fatigue/minute to reducing ([[0.1% of totalFatigue] + 1 fatigue]/minute) instead? Just tweak the percentage from 1% to 0.1% as needed to get the jump delay you want for your golden timer of 40 LYs made by jump instead of by gate. 2. This is going to make general logistics a pain in the friggin ass, thanks! :( I will HTFU of course but forgetting the awesome fact that massive capital blobfests will be evaporating with these changes (good thing) it does really nerf the little guy's ability to lug around assets. A Rorq or carrier full of small corp assets will take a very long time to transport stuff. So an already somewhat complex operation is going to get more tedious and complex. I am not saying it's necessarily that bad... but in order to compensate (and since we are making wild changes and slippery changes here!) I might suggest a few other tweaks: 2a. Make more wormholes that can fit 1-3 capitals worth of mass through them, but have these wormholes dedicated to linking up between null-null, null-lowsec and lowsec-lowsec. This will give the little corps a solid advantage in that they can locate these awesome wormholes and move to new areas, get 1 freighter worth of assets through from lowsec(empire) to wherever they live in nullsec... and so on. Large alliances can't use these wormholes for their massive cap ganks since the wormholes collapse after 3~ caps worth of mass. Yay! Solving design goals left and right here! 2b. Increase the ship hanger size for carriers (and maybe super carriers) and perhaps reconfigure a few other design elements here to encourage situations where a single carrier or supercarrier can jump in, and somehow (either by jumpclones to the C/SC, or riding the jump-field-wake or whatever) pod pilots can drag their ships out of the carrier and start fighting. If some part of that process prevents the dozens of subcap pilots from accruing jump fatigue, or has some other similar benefit it might encourage people to do what your design goals want them to do and start spreading out their cap ships to have response-ready fleets in the event of an incursion. 3. Intel is going to get super messy... and this whole jump fatigue system is going to make the aggressor of a territory-claiming war accrue a LOT!!!! of jump fatigue. Can you imagine the nightmare it will be for a large sprawling alliance to try to position their cap fleet within 1 or 2 jump range of an invading fleet? They have to know for certain where that enemy fleet will be attacking. The whole concept of war and territory taking is probably going to grind to a halt until the future SOV changes hinted at in the dev blog. Going back to 2b... it would be really neat CCP if you could get it working so pod pilots can 'ride along' inside jump-clone capable capital ships, and if they could do so then maybe they don't accrue jump fatigue? That would allow a subcap fleet to move around fairly quickly and repeatedly but in the process risk the actual physical presence of a capital ship to do it... no more titans hiding inside bubbles back in starbase, now the supercarrier would have to land on grid to disgorge its pilot friends --- Don't get me wrong, I'm actually largely in favour of these changes. It will definitely and dramatically change the game in a way that I haven't seen since titans first showed up. Change is good just for change sake sometimes, but this has a specific goal and a plan for changing the very nature of warfare in EVE. I actually adore this change, as anything that breaks the massive blobs down into smaller chunks is good for the game and the server hamsters who can run a little slower. I wonder, if making rapid-reinforcements and the threat of titan-bridge hotdrops less likely... will people be more inclined to turn around and engage a pursuing force? I have been in lots of fleets where it is said "If we fight they will just drop on us."... removing that option might make those fleets turn around and slam into each other, which is what everybody wants anyway. Either way... interesting times coming up in November!
it will also mean, the swarms will start stacking up cap ships along all the corridor of entries to possible aggression zones. it will also mean, alot more of carriers will be bought off hand to be stocked along them borders. esp NPC stations filled overflowing with carriers. WUT ??? |
Bort Malice
VINING ENGINEERING AND SALVAGE TEAM
48
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:56:00 -
[2996] - Quote
rezell wrote:This will help low sec . No more uber MOM fleets
This Devblog pretty much clearly states those Uber MOM fleets will be jumping into your lowsec.
Enjoy. |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1666
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:56:00 -
[2997] - Quote
Karash Amerius wrote:I think people fail to realize that less mobile fleets mean that fleets are easier to pin down by superior planning and intel. Blueballs are going to suck under the new system, this I agree, but being able to corner a fleet more effectively when all the chess pieces are in place will be more rewarding to those involved.
Looking forward to seeing how things pan out. I personally don't like capitals online, and a bitter vet of the days with battleship fleets actually mattered in Null.
Not at all! The blue ball fleet will NOT be smaller. They will just wait and get later, but with the same massive superiority that will CRUSH the smaller groups EQUALY!
"If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Selexid
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
27
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:56:00 -
[2998] - Quote
are34 wrote:will capital ships be able to go through any acceleration gates after the proposed changes?
will any acceleration gates be changed to allow any class of capitals?
If yes you could recover That JF loss in no time :DDD |
Tyby
Little Willies Out of Sight.
1
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:58:00 -
[2999] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Ferrocerium Spark wrote:Someone probably mentioned this before...
CCP please don't make new jump drive changes nightmare for logistic/industiral operations. EvE is already feels like second job so please don't make it more time consuming when it comes to using jump freighters and rorquals. because Eve didnt exist before jump freighters and rorquals right? talk about entitlement issues...
before posting ******** comments and try to look smart, allow me to point out a small thing:before rorq and jfs existence most of the logistic was done by carriers and dreads; a dread/carrier was able to move up to about 100k m3, so yea, there is your logistic ships before jfs; but guess what? they where nerffed severall times so ppl start using the jfs on a large scale... but yea, don't let the facts stop you, keep telling us about those "funny freighter ops" that you never took part on. |
are34
Tempest Legion Psychotic Tendencies.
125
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 09:58:00 -
[3000] - Quote
btw these changes are going to be amazing CCP this is really going to make the game more challenging for alot of capital heavy power houses and I myself am extremely excited about this.
havn't been able to sleep since i read the post.
seriously +1, the only people that don't like the changes are for the most part the more lazy of eve pilots. That said perhaps putting a flat rate on the fatigue would be an easier option, specificly surrounding the 5 minute triage and seige cycle timers, I would be happy with a set amount of minutes on fatigue, specificly with 5 minutes being the cap. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 [100] 200 .. 275 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |