|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |

Adrie Atticus
Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion
437
|
Posted - 2014.10.16 16:52:00 -
[1] - Quote
Even though these changes to decloaking might be a bit too harsh, I'm too much enjoying the tears in this thread to formulate anything more complicated. |

Adrie Atticus
Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion
438
|
Posted - 2014.10.16 20:46:00 -
[2] - Quote
SFM Hobb3s wrote:Tral Karith wrote:So lets all quit bringing 90 bombers to big fleet fights and fight like real men with guns and missiles
Maybe even some Rokhs and Maelstroms So lets all quit bringing 200 slowcats to big fleet fights and fight like real .MEN with guns and missiles Fixed that for ya ;)
Oh, you mean sniping with tengus 220+km away and then QQ about how someone brought a Virtue prober and countered you effectively? |

Adrie Atticus
Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion
438
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 08:14:00 -
[3] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:The nerf to cloaking is SOLELY to counter the ISBoxing bomber squads. SOLELY this. And therefore, it's not getting reversed because of whining. The anti-capital bomb with an AOE of 1m. Dude. Fozzie. Mate. How are you supposed to hit anything with this? lets do a thought game. I am in a Hound with a Cap Void Bomb. I am burning in from 50km away aligned toward my target, who is in triage/siege, blah blah. My bomb has a range of 30,000 +/- 1m. my ship has a speed, for argument's sakes, of 300m/s. I must therefore launch my bomb EXACTLY 30,000m away ffrom my foe! From 30km away if you launch it 1/300th of a second late or early, you miss. OH BUT WAT IS DIS? The server tick is 1 second! So does it launch on the server tick, or does the server (plus/minus 8-200m/s lag for Interwebs) calculate it on the actual milllisecond you press the key? Given the reaction time of the human being is 1/30th of a second, and you have 200ms lag, you have precisely ZERO chance of landing a bomb within <1m of anything at 30km range. Hurr durr! OK, so given a capital is a big ship, are we now saying that the bomb lands inside the foe? Or what? TL;DR 1,000m AEO for bombs, minimum, to make them practical. Me using a capital void bomb.
You travelling at 300 m/s and game giving you auto-aim with "approach" pointing your ship straight towards the enemy allowing pin-point accuracy will give you a window of 9.7 seconds.
(Hint, signature radius of a triage archon is 2900 meters). |

Adrie Atticus
Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion
438
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 08:17:00 -
[4] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Mike Azariah wrote:From the CSM8 winter minutesQuote:Discussion then moved to bombers, with PGL saying that they were arguably more of an issue than drone assist. He pointed out that as it is, you donGÇÖt see cruiser or BC or shield BS fleets in fights, entirely because of bomb risks. He highlighted where heGÇÖs seen bombs failing to destroy other bombs, resulting in more damage. Sort confirmed that bombers had made it effectively impossible to bring BC fleets, and mentioned the chilling effect on training new FCs with cheaper ships. Fozzie asked if bombers were weakened significantly, would we see anything other than battleship fleets. Various CSM members responded they would likely bring more fleets other than battleship fleets. There was general agreement that bombers should be able to punish careless or bad FC decisions, but that it is currently simply too easy for them right now. because PGL brought it up earlier AND someone asked why SB's were being worked on. m Let's not forget that this was prior to the introduction of the medium (and large?) MJD. With the addition of the 12 second flight time to bombs, this is no longer a valid concern as you have ample time to hit your MJD and escape before bombs land. But thanks for the link all the same.
Even if the bombs didn't deal any damage, they forced the fleet to move 100km and potentially be at a worse spot than before. You could, I don't know, launch bombs where the fleet is going to land so they have no way of getting away outside of warping instantly. You could also have a wing of heavy tackle stopping them at the other end of the MJD.
Yes, we're talking about fleet warfare here as bombing a 1v1 with 40 guys is not what these changes are intended to touch on. |

Adrie Atticus
Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion
438
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 08:35:00 -
[5] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Adrie Atticus wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Mike Azariah wrote:From the CSM8 winter minutesQuote:Discussion then moved to bombers, with PGL saying that they were arguably more of an issue than drone assist. He pointed out that as it is, you donGÇÖt see cruiser or BC or shield BS fleets in fights, entirely because of bomb risks. He highlighted where heGÇÖs seen bombs failing to destroy other bombs, resulting in more damage. Sort confirmed that bombers had made it effectively impossible to bring BC fleets, and mentioned the chilling effect on training new FCs with cheaper ships. Fozzie asked if bombers were weakened significantly, would we see anything other than battleship fleets. Various CSM members responded they would likely bring more fleets other than battleship fleets. There was general agreement that bombers should be able to punish careless or bad FC decisions, but that it is currently simply too easy for them right now. because PGL brought it up earlier AND someone asked why SB's were being worked on. m Let's not forget that this was prior to the introduction of the medium (and large?) MJD. With the addition of the 12 second flight time to bombs, this is no longer a valid concern as you have ample time to hit your MJD and escape before bombs land. But thanks for the link all the same. Even if the bombs didn't deal any damage, they forced the fleet to move 100km and potentially be at a worse spot than before. You could, I don't know, launch bombs where the fleet is going to land so they have no way of getting away outside of warping instantly. You could also have a wing of heavy tackle stopping them at the other end of the MJD. Yes, we're talking about fleet warfare here as bombing a 1v1 with 40 guys is not what these changes are intended to touch on. I don't see a problem. I'm sure people would prefer the mild inconvenience of jumping 100km and then having to use a bounce to regroup, over being destroyed by a good bombing run. If all the BSs and BCs in fleet hit their MJD they would scatter in all directions. If a bombing fleet is able to cover a 200km battle field, then they deserve any the kill they manage to get.
I've never flown in a MJD fleet where everyone are allowed to point into random directions, being able to reposition with the MJD is a big advantage which is ruined by just being stupid with the fleet. At the same it's easy to force the use of that MJD with bombers and you will know the direction they're jumping to. Cloaky dictors, more bombers, heavy tackle, you pick the trap. |

Adrie Atticus
Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion
438
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 09:14:00 -
[6] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Adrie Atticus wrote: I've never flown in a MJD fleet where everyone are allowed to point into random directions, being able to reposition with the MJD is a big advantage which is ruined by just being stupid with the fleet. At the same it's easy to force the use of that MJD with bombers and you will know the direction they're jumping to. Cloaky dictors, more bombers, heavy tackle, you pick the trap.
I still don't see your point. Is your issue with having to move? Is it the MJD that you have an issue with? Do you deny that the MJD would allow you to escape the initial bombing run? or do you think that there should be no counter to a blob other than another blob?
I have no issue with any of those, Im not sure what you're trying to do here.
What I said is that if MJD fleets come back, bombers still have their usage in denying the tactical usage of MJD by forcing them to be used early. Just because we have both MJD's and bombers neither of them are still nullified as a tactical tool and this change to bombers only causes some inconvenience to bomber squads. |

Adrie Atticus
Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion
438
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 17:24:00 -
[7] - Quote
wheniaminspoce wrote: *Accidentally dropping some RAM into a tractor unit
I'm here just to point out that the velocity which the hamburger left my mouth at when reading this caused permanent damage to the drywall. |

Adrie Atticus
Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion
439
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 17:52:00 -
[8] - Quote
El Space Mariachi wrote:Adrie Atticus wrote:wheniaminspoce wrote: *Accidentally dropping some RAM into a tractor unit
I'm here just to point out that the velocity which the hamburger left my mouth at when reading this caused permanent damage to the drywall. it could happen to anyone don't act like you've never dropped anything only to see a tractor unit instantly grab it and pull it away from your grasp leaving you no recourse but to shoot it
Yes, but not multiple times in a row in the same system and same spot. |

Adrie Atticus
Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion
443
|
Posted - 2014.10.18 07:47:00 -
[9] - Quote
BravoSierra wrote:I'm all for these changes. Keep it up CCP! Cloaking is OP in EVE. Reverting the change gives cloaky blobs more rope to hang themselves as their number grow. Just because T3s/recons aren't as pervasive as bombers doesn't make them good for the game either. The mechanic is bit clunky, but it's EVE after all and somehow we will suck it up. Changes for bubbles, firewall, etc. are great for tactical aspects of the game. I'm really happy to see them, and hope for more in the future. Stats tweaks don't deepen the game in the same way. Mike Azariah wrote:Seraph IX Basarab wrote:http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/1410/IBombers.png
This. Nice graphic, the only issue I have with it is when do they cloak? If (btw has this little gem been confirmed?) they can be decloaked in warp if they are in the same warp bubble would they all have to space out ahead of time or would they cycle in? m Like Lugh Crow-Slave said, there has to be a delay. But it takes fifteen seconds total, and anyone not listening will lose their ship anyway. The key thing this graphic gets wrong is only one bomber, if any, will be within 5-¦ of the warp out and actually insta-warp. It's not easy to set up the bookmarks for any of them to be at the right angle. If the target is exactly between the 15km bomber and warp out, the 10km and 20km bombers are 10-¦ off. To be insta-aligned, bombers have to be 2-2.6 km of each other. It's no better than fleet warping in except the squad isn't on DScan for that couple seconds. The insta-align workarounds spread damage out.
Warpout could be 10AU away, at that point we're talking about 1/1000 000 of degrees. Sure, you'd have the bombs spread a little bit more, but when has the enemy been in a pretty ball which is exactly the radius of the bomb outside of trying to catch them at a warp-in?
The bombers are just tools, expect to lose a few and this tactic becomes even more viable. |

Adrie Atticus
Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion
447
|
Posted - 2014.10.19 19:01:00 -
[10] - Quote
Heinrich Rotwang wrote:baltec1 wrote:Heinrich Rotwang wrote:baltec1 wrote: Bombers are very much an issue now given that they have invalidated a large number of options in fleet setups and tactics. CCP changed cloaking to what we have today, it has caused issues, CCP are reverting it again. Now, players got along just fine before and they will get along just fine again. The only type of fleet this will heavily impact will be bomber fleets in large fleet fights. The bombers themselves will be a bit more sturdy and a good deal better at small gang/solo roaming after these changes.
"Goon Swarm Federation" - stopped reading there. Lobbyist blabla. We make heavy use of bombers in near every fight but hey, I guess you were also against the tech nerf too because its all a grroons plot. Couldn't care less about tech. Thing is, you just got something nuked I care about. You win. I lose. And now you show up in the typical goon style we all got used to in order to add insult to injury and see if you can farm some more tears by explaining how the people affected by that change are just too stupid to see that taking the small signature away, bombers decloaking each other and nerfed bombs are actually an improvement of bombers. No, I don't think I feel like letting myself get trolled on top of losing the only compelling aspect of eve that kept me playing.
Changing a mechanic everyone uses only harms one side? |
|

Adrie Atticus
Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion
448
|
Posted - 2014.10.20 07:07:00 -
[11] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:
3. EVE won't and shouldn't snoop around your computer to look at everything that is running. for reasons.
But it does, and has for years, EULA section 7.:
Quote:D. MONITORING
You agree that CCP may remotely monitor your Game hardware solely for the purpose of establishing whether in playing the Game and accessing the System you are using software created or approved by CCP, or whether you are using unauthorized software created by you or a third party in contravention of Section 6. |

Adrie Atticus
Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion
463
|
Posted - 2014.10.23 19:30:15 -
[12] - Quote
Sieonigh wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. Just wanted to let you know that I'm back from Vegas and all caught up on the thread.
I want to remind people that any debates around isboxer are a separate issue from the changes listed in this thread. I completely understand that many of you have passionate opinions on that topic, but I should be clear that none of the people who are involved with CCP's policy towards isboxer are reading this particular thread.
We received a lot of great feedback so far in this thread and at EVE Vegas, and we're currently taking another look over the changes to make sure they hit all the marks we are aiming for.
Thanks again -Fozzie "but I should be clear that none of the people who are involved with CCP's policy towards isboxer are reading this particular thread" then how about you let them know what being discussed here, cause right now its become a merged issue which you are refusing to accept.
All of those legit bombing runs and bombers bar are not part of the discussion because you have linked two activities inseparably together? |

Adrie Atticus
Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion
471
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 13:51:11 -
[13] - Quote
Heinrich Rotwang wrote:EvilweaselFinance wrote:Heinrich Rotwang wrote: Because such an army of alts is very likely to be funded by real money and not paid for in isk.
do you idiots think ccp accepts isk for subscriptions? you bought a gift card off someone else for isk, ccp got actual dollars (and more than if you'd subscribed), you didn't give ccp worthless space money Actually I'm exclusively funding my gameplay by selling a lot plexes in Jita. Plexes I bought with Gé¼. There seem to be people out there that have a need to buy these PLEX with isk. Wonder how much money CCP is making of them.
Exactly the same amount as the PLEXes you bought. There's no magical button to spawn 100 PLEXes to your cargo hold outside of using a credit card or paying in other approved manners. |
|
|
|