| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 38 post(s) |
Komi Toran
Paragon Trust
The Bastion
300
   |
Posted - 2014.10.10 01:57:00 -
[1] - Quote
I still think that what is needed is giving players the tools for force interdiction, not a sledgehammer to force projection. And I still think roaming carrier gangs will be the new meta (you're definitely never going to see a BS fleet unsupported by a carrier or ten), and the virtual obliteration of any distinction between cap and subcaps is going to be bad for the game. But these modifications have netted the changes a new rating of "Only Mostly Terrible." So... yay?
Industrials (t1 or otherwise) will likely be the local conveyance of choice through JBs (I have a funny picture of a fleet of indies backed by an Orca or two jumping from bridge to bridge to cut off a hostile fleet, swapping ships just before engaging), with Blockade Runners perhaps being used for mid-range shuttle service over inties. Long distance travel is still relegated to interceptors.
Anyone expecting nullsec to change from this, to become more dynamic, still doesn't get that the problem lies in the static nature of the space itself and a sov system that encourages players to maintain the status quo, not the capabilities of the ships. Aside from a short-term shakeup, nothing will change with this except for a demand for more alts. And any future attempts to break up null stagnation will similarly succeed or fail whether this change is made or not. |
Komi Toran
Paragon Trust
The Bastion
303
|
Posted - 2014.10.10 02:21:00 -
[2] - Quote
Querns wrote:You can't fit one in a Wreathe either -- you need a DST to do that. Which, I hasten to add, aligns a lot slower, and has one less rig for boosting warp speed.
Assuming the Wreathe is fit for max capacity, I wouldn't call the difference between 7.5s and 5.8s "a lot slower" to align. |
Komi Toran
Paragon Trust
The Bastion
303
|
Posted - 2014.10.10 03:12:00 -
[3] - Quote
Vlad Vladimir Vladinovsky wrote:yes my bad it was the prowler, I'll have to amend that
Currently as it stands it can be quite fun and advantageous to set up a cyno for a covops jump to move these T2 haulers
I feel as though with the current jump drive nerfs this entire ability which sees little time from my in game observations will be 100% useless...
Why? You get a 50% reduction from the cov-ops bridge on top of the 90% reduction from the hauler bonus. So that means you have to wait 4 minutes between 8ly jumps. Is that really a huge burden? |
Komi Toran
Paragon Trust
The Bastion
304
|
Posted - 2014.10.10 12:54:00 -
[4] - Quote
xttz wrote:Yep absolutely. HACs did cost 300m isk. However 30 day timecards also cost 100m isk. Using these as a baseline...
...would be an incredibly ignorant thing to do, as the value of PLEX does not correspond with the value of other goods. It's why PLEX can increase 200 mil in price during a time of slight deflation.
|
Komi Toran
Paragon Trust
The Bastion
306
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 18:34:00 -
[5] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:
- Roaming fast-warp carrier gangs
-- It's a gimmick, there's probably a good counter
-- Delete carriers from game (kidding, unfortunately, but we'll think of something)
Or you could just balance carriers. Something as simple as making capital reps reduce drone bandwidth would be a good start. Right now, it's ridiculous that you have a ship that can effectively engage every other class of vessel while having massive repair capability (plus all the other things carriers have). Forcing people to choose between being an offensive platform or a defensive one would balance it out.
Anyway, the point is, it's carriers that are broken, whether they are fast-warping or not.
|
Komi Toran
Paragon Trust
The Bastion
307
|
Posted - 2014.10.12 00:03:00 -
[6] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Ahh not sure if you have ever looked at a carrier but what you just suggested as change, already exists.
Carrier goes to "massive repair capability" mode (triage), he has NO drones for the 5 min cycle.
Yeah, no. I'm talking about either/or. You either fit your carrier for one or the other, and that's it. You're talking about less/more, and you can change from one to the other when it's convienient.
Sgt Ocker wrote:Remote repping carriers are a tool, not op just a viable tool ( or used to be anyway), remove or reduce drones when remote reps are fit, you remove the need for and ability of carriers as combat ships altogether.
Yes, just like how no one uses Logistic ships because they have terrible DPS. We all know titans only die when they get outside the fighter coverage of the carrier support fleet.
Sgt Ocker wrote:I'm curious as to what the "plus all the other things carriers have" is.
Here's something to help you get started: http://themittani.com/features/eves-ghost-riding-explained
|
Komi Toran
Paragon Trust
The Bastion
336
|
Posted - 2014.10.28 16:52:11 -
[7] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:All that said, on the wider topic of capital alts, if alliances have the capability to fund many new capital alts, what's the reason they're not already doing so in the current system?
Because it's not needed in the current system. ROI is pretty much nill on such a thing when you can jump across the galaxy in five minutes. But this system now creates a demand for capital alts, so capital alts will be purchased/trained. They might not be a common sight at the beginning, but players will adjust their training queues accordingly. Right now with MCT, I'm in the process of divorcing my capability to earn ISK from my main, so that my main essentially becomes a capital alt (and you're forcing that change on her, too, as with carriers taking gates, we know what the new meta is going to be). And then I've got the MCT alt's capital training planned out on top of that. Give it a year or two, and the capability will be commonplace. This is why what you're doing now is just a temporary disruption. And my cynicism regarding your changes emerges from the fact that overcoming them means I have to give CCP more money.
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Secondary goals:
- Make disruption of logistics a more viable weapon for nullsec alliances, on the grounds that it opens up a more interesting range of options for waging war, provided that we don't make the experience of managing alliance logistics too negative
This seems to run counter to your stated goals to make nullsec more self-sufficient. You make logisitics vulnerable now, but then in the future it seems you want to make logistics less important. Especially as you're considering seeding the various isotopes/ices into a more homogenous distribution if this change proves too disruptive. Have I misinterpreted your goals?
|
Komi Toran
Paragon Trust
The Bastion
336
|
Posted - 2014.10.28 17:40:08 -
[8] - Quote
SFM Hobb3s wrote:...Or you can do what CCP intends for you to do, function as a local alliance and not a region-hopping coalition.
And miners could do what CCP intended for them to do and warp back to station every time their hold gets full. CCP's intent means absolutely nothing when it comes to how best (as in efficiency) to play the game.
|
Komi Toran
Paragon Trust
The Bastion
337
|
Posted - 2014.10.28 22:59:24 -
[9] - Quote
Dwissi wrote:@Komi Taran
I am sorry - but nobody forces anyone to have alts - this is by far the worst thing i have read so far. Learn to play with others instead of trying to solve a problem solely by yourself. Corporations and alliances are group oriented gameplay. Just because people lack the social skills to play as a team and dont trust each other to be able to do something right doesnt mean that you need to have an alt. Those are personal issues that in the real world actually lead to some serious questioning ones abilities to interact in a social environment.
Yes. Indeed. You got it 100%. I am obviously referring to my own 1-man alliance in 0.0 that holds several regions. All on my own. All on a single account. And I'm upset that CCP is finally going to force me to play with others. Bravo ::slow clap:: Bravo ::slow clap::
Saddly, your post is not the dumbest thing I've read here. But it does try. |
Komi Toran
Paragon Trust
The Bastion
338
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 16:02:55 -
[10] - Quote
Niskin wrote:So if I jump into a system I can just tell the EVE client to warp me to a deep safe spot?
I think he's saying that you don't even make it to the system. Instead, you wind up at a point between systems, and it takes a prober with combat probes that have scan ranges measured in lightyears to find you.
|
| |
|