| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
844
   |
Posted - 2014.10.16 17:21:00 -
[1] - Quote
Capital neut bombs are really going to screw over smaller setups while bigger entities will just build in extra redundancy but I can see the griefers will be gleeful... really bad, really really bad, idea IMO I can see what its intended to do but it really is like cutting off a head to cure a headache.
Cloaking changes are a step backwards also - while I lived with it before and can deal with it again progress this ain't. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
844
|
Posted - 2014.10.16 18:10:00 -
[2] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Jessica Danikov wrote:Now that I think about the capital neut bombs, I'm not sure they're the greatest idea ever. I mean, Triage and Sieged capitals are going to be essentially screwed as they can receive no remote assistance for the entirety of the cycle. You can possibly expect for the meta to shift towards buffer-tanked Naglfars and Phoenixes due to their capless weapons with dreads, while for carriers, Slowcats and the like remain quite healthy due to capchaining and become even more prevalent as the alternatives get nerfed even harder into the ground. i feel siege and triage either need to negate or significantly reduce the effect of these bombs they will still be use full on caps out of such states as well as on suppers but it wont make triage useless outside of LS
On paper it should be feasible to protect them somewhat with smartbomb but in practise it gives an easy mode way to screw over a single triage carrier - which is really not a good idea IMO. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
844
|
Posted - 2014.10.16 18:45:00 -
[3] - Quote
Khiluale Zotakibe wrote:Mike Azariah wrote:
I am askign for what are the top two changes you would like dialed back or modified? If you don't want to say it here, feel free to send me an evemail
m
I would say, the cloak change is the main issue here and needs to stay as is it right now in TQ and not this suggested change as it "Headshots" cloaky group activities (not just bombers).
Not sure I'd go as far as to say headshotted - I did a lot of cloaky stuff with cloaking as it used to be and its not insurmountable to operate with far from it - but the older cloaking mechanics felt incomplete/work in progress and how it is currently just works, feels like a polished system, going back to the old mechanics feels to me like a huge step backwards. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
844
|
Posted - 2014.10.16 19:35:00 -
[4] - Quote
Nys Cron wrote:
This is exactly what I meant earlier. For a larger entity like SSC having dedicated smartbombers or multiple carriers might be feasible but for smaller entities it isn't. They will simply lose one more option to have a chance against larger numbers.
For us on the other hand it could mean that we a guaranteed to win all fights against smaller entites relying on capitals because we can just bring a couple bombers (ideally multiboxed by a single person) and guarantee neuting out their carrier without risking expensive Bhaalgorns and such.
Indeed neuting out a capital should require fielding a bhaal or neut legions or whatever, being able to cap nuke them with bombers and hold em capped with 1-2 incidental neuts is just cheap and nasty.
I can see the intended application against apex forces, etc. but the knock on effect is potentially quite tragic. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
844
|
Posted - 2014.10.16 21:28:00 -
[5] - Quote
Obil Que wrote:
Right. Thanks. I don't have EFT in front of me to see what the total cap might be on a typical carrier pilot but the tone of the criticism was making it seem like a less than full wave of bombers was going to decimate a cap fielded by a smaller group. If you're dropping a carrier on a group that can *also* send a wave of 7 bombers at you, maybe you made a bad decision to begin with because if those pilots where in other ships, you'd probably be screwed too.
We've faced off a number of times with null groups who have dropped a 70+ man BC fleet on our triage + 10-15 t3s (with mixed results) those extra 7 pilots in dps is not really here or there, in neuting ships a bigger issue but something that can be dealt with tactically and the outcome might not always be in our favour but its usually a pretty good fight either way - bombers popping up out of nowhere relatively speaking and cap shocking triage is just meh.
Unfortunately most of the time we've not lost ships to the main bulk of hostiles so BRs don't really tell the story this one is closer to a complete picture: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=20762916 |
| |
|