Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 37 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
Neuron Stew
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
1
|
Posted - 2014.11.04 17:29:17 -
[1051] - Quote
Why not add in a set of damage bombs that scale damage based on a ship's mass instead of Sig radius for anti-captial and anti-armor fleet use?
|
Medalyn Isis
Rosewood Productions
419
|
Posted - 2014.11.04 20:23:12 -
[1052] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. Here are our latest updates to the plan.
Firstly and most significantly, the change to decloaking mechanics has been put on hold indefinitely. We are going to take some more time to work on the best way to have ships interact with cloakies and it's very possible that our eventual changes will be significantly different than what we talked about earlier. For now, cloaked ships will not decloak each other.
We're also going to be removing some of the earlier increase in signature radius and shifting it to a penalty on the bomb launcher itself. The T1 bomb launcher will add +10m signature radius and the T2 will add 12m.
We're increasing the capacity of the T2 bomb launcher to 300m3.
The Focused Void Bomb will have an explosion radius of 5000m, 1000m more than originally proposed.
Both the new bomb and new interdiction probe will be made available exclusively in the Syndicate LP store.
The new interdiction probe will be delayed slightly as we've run into some graphical issues with it that we'll need more time to properly fix.
We've sourced a lot of these changes from this thread, thanks to everyone who has been providing feedback. Very nice. Faith restored Fozzie, faith restored. |
Medalyn Isis
Rosewood Productions
419
|
Posted - 2014.11.04 21:01:14 -
[1053] - Quote
Neuron Stew wrote:Why not add in a set of damage bombs that scale damage based on a ship's mass instead of Sig radius for anti-captial and anti-armor fleet use?
Hmm, I'm thinking gravity influxion bomb, damage based upon the mass of the ship. Now that'd be very awesome and very sci fi. |
Psyatt
penguins are your nefarious end Serenitas Solutus
1
|
Posted - 2014.11.05 02:49:57 -
[1054] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote:Neuron Stew wrote:Why not add in a set of damage bombs that scale damage based on a ship's mass instead of Sig radius for anti-captial and anti-armor fleet use?
Hmm, I'm thinking gravity influxion bomb, damage based upon the mass of the ship. Now that'd be very awesome and very sci fi.
Look up a few posts. Barely beat you to the posts, but I bet many have thought of similar things.
I figured this was a prevalent idea.
To my limited understanding, it seems that a frigate that mounts battleship weapons should be used against larger ship types.
Instead, we have stealth bomber wings that can obliterate any small-ship gang that uses MWD as a tactic.
Switch all bomb calculations to mass instead of sig radius, along with adjustments of DPS scaling for balance of course. You do not want a pair of SBs insta-popping a plated Megathron while leaving a shield tanked Raven sitting there pretty. The cap ship bombs can be used for high DPS against just those ship types.
That makes counters by the score. Small ships can hunt SBs with this change. No need for random smarty fits on everyone that can fit a medium or better.
More bomb types, all with lower resists. The more fun the individual bomb is, the less you want in one place. Get the volleys down to 4 or so inside the same AOE, but play with other stats.
This would be a major overhaul/change, and I can understand that the changes being made now are simpler to accomplish.
-
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6480
|
Posted - 2014.11.05 18:21:08 -
[1055] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote:Neuron Stew wrote:Why not add in a set of damage bombs that scale damage based on a ship's mass instead of Sig radius for anti-captial and anti-armor fleet use?
Hmm, I'm thinking gravity influxion bomb, damage based upon the mass of the ship. Now that'd be very awesome and very sci fi. Not bad, an avatar would take like twice (not more than three times, anyway) the damage an archon would.
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Heathkit
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
91
|
Posted - 2014.11.07 13:48:42 -
[1056] - Quote
Doyle Aldurad wrote:I am pretty good with all of these changes but one. These are still Frigates. Making them slower in warp than any generic T-1 frigate seems inappropriate and unbalancing. Suddenly even keeping up with my allies in a roam is a lot more difficult. Making them "slower" I do understand, given you're desire to weaken them overall, but dropping their warp speed that of a destroyer seems completely wrong. You've already made them both notably easier to discover and destroy, plus made their signature weapon easier to evade.
Please remove that aspect of the 'balancing'
There's nothing written in stone saying that bombers need to be frigates. Maybe it would be more appropriate for them to be destroyers or cruisers, and have the survivability and agility that comes with that. |
Crynsos Cealion
Matari Munitions The Obsidian Front
18
|
Posted - 2014.11.09 13:40:13 -
[1057] - Quote
In case this hasn't been posted here yet, a good idea from reddit to hurt ISBoxer bombers the same way as originally intended:
How about having a pop up window come up after launching a bomb, asking you to enter a randomized 4 number code within 10 seconds so that the bomb gets armed, otherwise it would not explode? That would be easy for any normal human player to do (and distracted them a little from escaping while we're at it), but quite hard for ISBoxers without some scripts, which would be classified as botting anyways. |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
946
|
Posted - 2014.11.09 14:33:50 -
[1058] - Quote
Heathkit wrote:Doyle Aldurad wrote:I am pretty good with all of these changes but one. These are still Frigates. Making them slower in warp than any generic T-1 frigate seems inappropriate and unbalancing. Suddenly even keeping up with my allies in a roam is a lot more difficult. Making them "slower" I do understand, given you're desire to weaken them overall, but dropping their warp speed that of a destroyer seems completely wrong. You've already made them both notably easier to discover and destroy, plus made their signature weapon easier to evade.
Please remove that aspect of the 'balancing' There's nothing written in stone saying that bombers need to be frigates. Maybe it would be more appropriate for them to be destroyers or cruisers, and have the survivability and agility that comes with that.
they would also be quicker too lock .. less agile and they would have slower warp speed i'm sure and slower lock time .. kind of all the things you don't want
Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists
ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic.
Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please
|
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
205
|
Posted - 2014.11.10 11:06:38 -
[1059] - Quote
Crynsos Cealion wrote:In case this hasn't been posted here yet, a good idea from reddit to hurt ISBoxer bombers the same way as originally intended:
How about having a pop up window come up after launching a bomb, asking you to enter a randomized 4 number code within 10 seconds so that the bomb gets armed, otherwise it would not explode? That would be easy for any normal human player to do (and distracted them a little from escaping while we're at it), but quite hard for ISBoxers without some scripts, which would be classified as botting anyways. That is a really stupid idea. While your at it, lets add a CAPTCHA to any mining ship, or anyone docked to make sure they are not afk and scaring people away from the system in local.
Or how about you just list all the play styles you don't like and ban them. It makes about as much sense.
Death and Glory!
Well fun is also good.
|
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots Black Legion.
223
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 23:08:48 -
[1060] - Quote
Captcha is not enough. You should be required to answer a skill-testing question in order to even undock. |
|
Darth Schweinebacke
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
18
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 23:41:06 -
[1061] - Quote
Elise Randolph wrote: Let's just say you won't be seeing "CCP HazedScrub" anytime soon.
If you would ever work for CCP I would rather vote for you naming yourself "CCP MistakesWereMade" ;). |
Heinrich Rotwang
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
26
|
Posted - 2014.11.12 12:51:57 -
[1062] - Quote
Crynsos Cealion wrote:In case this hasn't been posted here yet, a good idea from reddit to hurt ISBoxer bombers the same way as originally intended:
How about having a pop up window come up after launching a bomb, asking you to enter a randomized 4 number code within 10 seconds so that the bomb gets armed, otherwise it would not explode? That would be easy for any normal human player to do (and distracted them a little from escaping while we're at it), but quite hard for ISBoxers without some scripts, which would be classified as botting anyways.
May I suggest that everyone that comes up with wild ideas like that would please attach a killmail of his own successful solo bomb run on a BS or BC that wasn't AFK? |
Soldarius
Deadman W0nderland The 99 Percent
884
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 15:41:44 -
[1063] - Quote
Herrin Asura wrote:Noone goes out on a bomb run to kill a frigate.
I'll just leave this here.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
Soldarius
Deadman W0nderland The 99 Percent
884
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 15:58:10 -
[1064] - Quote
Psyatt wrote:EMP - De-stabilizes ship systems thereby de-cloaking any ship in detonation range. Cannot sweep without the proper broom. SB vs SB. There is a counter. Use SBs against themselves.
This gave me an idea.
What if cloaks used cap? Then void bombs could potentially decloak a bomber. In a close formation, this could result in an entire wing of bombers and/or other cloaked ships getting decloaked.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
251
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 16:01:13 -
[1065] - Quote
Bombs in low sec yet? |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
108
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 19:58:24 -
[1066] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:Psyatt wrote:EMP - De-stabilizes ship systems thereby de-cloaking any ship in detonation range. Cannot sweep without the proper broom. SB vs SB. There is a counter. Use SBs against themselves. This gave me an idea. What if cloaks used cap? Then void bombs could potentially decloak a bomber. In a close formation, this could result in an entire wing of bombers and/or other cloaked ships getting decloaked.
how many normal bombs would it take to destroy a stealth bomber? |
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
212
|
Posted - 2014.11.26 09:50:09 -
[1067] - Quote
Lady Rift wrote:Soldarius wrote:Psyatt wrote:EMP - De-stabilizes ship systems thereby de-cloaking any ship in detonation range. Cannot sweep without the proper broom. SB vs SB. There is a counter. Use SBs against themselves. This gave me an idea. What if cloaks used cap? Then void bombs could potentially decloak a bomber. In a close formation, this could result in an entire wing of bombers and/or other cloaked ships getting decloaked. how many normal bombs would it take to destroy a stealth bomber? a MSE fit bomber it is about 5 or so in my hound. It is AB fit of course.
Death and Glory!
Well fun is also good.
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1904
|
Posted - 2014.11.26 09:55:14 -
[1068] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:Psyatt wrote:EMP - De-stabilizes ship systems thereby de-cloaking any ship in detonation range. Cannot sweep without the proper broom. SB vs SB. There is a counter. Use SBs against themselves. This gave me an idea. What if cloaks used cap? Then void bombs could potentially decloak a bomber. In a close formation, this could result in an entire wing of bombers and/or other cloaked ships getting decloaked.
Not a bad idea. Make it a low usage of cap, and fast cycle rate, so that gettign with zero cap even for a handful of seconds woudl decloak you.
Great idea.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
GeeShizzle MacCloud
500
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 13:18:10 -
[1069] - Quote
Just a quick FYI for you guys, the fact that the new warp disrupt probes and new capital void bombs have to be bought in the syndicate LP store as items and not as bpc's or bpo's are quite literally the main reason why they have very very very very rarely been seen used (if at all).
Faction ammo typically being bought in this form from faction LP stores are understandable as you can normally buy a lot for the cargo space it takes up, however this is not the case with warp disrupt probes and bombs.
Plz use some sense and logic and add bpc's / bpo's of these items to the syndicate LP store. |
Eyes to Escape
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.12.10 13:50:28 -
[1070] - Quote
Cloak should use capacitor. Enough that you cannot run it indefinitely but it can be ran for a very long time.
In addition, Id like to see cloaking devices overheat as a function of the number of entities on grid, the character's thermodynamics skill, and the sig radius of the cloaked ship. Bombers could arrive on grid and launch torpedoes/bombs but it would be very difficult for a ship to remain on grid cloaked for an extended period of time.
If the ship happens to be in a safe spot with no entities nearby the cloak simply runs off capacitor. |
|
GeeShizzle MacCloud
500
|
Posted - 2014.12.10 14:08:08 -
[1071] - Quote
Eyes to Escape, if u wanna pedal your own f**king ideas and play amateur developer plz make your own thread to do it. |
Eyes to Escape
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.12.10 18:49:50 -
[1072] - Quote
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:Eyes to Escape, if u wanna pedal your own f**king ideas and play amateur developer plz make your own thread to do it.
Incredibly unconstructive.
Either way, back on topic the only way to decloak a stealth ship is to spam a warp/jump in with entities and hope they get within 2km. That just invites exploits.
Just give cloak a reasonable counter. They should not be risk free and undocked |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
124
|
Posted - 2014.12.10 19:25:25 -
[1073] - Quote
Eyes to Escape wrote:GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:Eyes to Escape, if u wanna pedal your own f**king ideas and play amateur developer plz make your own thread to do it. Incredibly unconstructive. Either way, back on topic the only way to decloak a stealth ship is to spam a warp/jump in with entities and hope they get within 2km. That just invites exploits. Just give cloak a reasonable counter. They should not be risk free and undocked
the counter is a cloak cant do anything when in use |
Eyes to Escape
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.12.10 23:05:30 -
[1074] - Quote
Lady Rift wrote: the counter is a cloak cant do anything when in use
Thats not a counter, thats a restriction.
There's literally no active counter to cloaking. Nothing any player in the game can do to actively counter someone cloaked on grid with them.
There's a passive counter... spamming entities and pray they run into something.
Don't get me wrong, cloaking is incredibly fun on the hunter side. Stealth Bombing is awesome, being able to literally hunt players. But there's nothing they can do about it. At all.
I dont know if my idea's the right idea, but damned if there shouldn't be something. Being the hunted is awful, because there's nothing you could have done.
They're undocked and riskfree. That there alone should speak volumes to the problem.
|
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
223
|
Posted - 2014.12.11 08:28:59 -
[1075] - Quote
Please tell me this hasn't moved to Yet Another AFK Cloak thread.
Cloaks where never the issue here. That is why the original idea, that would affect all cloak ships was dropped. cloaks are not OP. Many feel bombers are OP (I disagree but meh). this thread is not about counters to cloak because they don't need one.
For gods sake in k space you have local, the biggest single intel leak in the game. If you can't see the potential for bombers and you sit around waiting for them to set up. Well you get what you deserve.
Death and Glory!
Well fun is also good.
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1911
|
Posted - 2014.12.11 09:26:55 -
[1076] - Quote
Eyes to Escape wrote:GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:Eyes to Escape, if u wanna pedal your own f**king ideas and play amateur developer plz make your own thread to do it. Incredibly unconstructive. Either way, back on topic the only way to decloak a stealth ship is to spam a warp/jump in with entities and hope they get within 2km. That just invites exploits. Just give cloak a reasonable counter. They should not be risk free and undocked
That is why the suggestion of a VERY small cap usage. Not enough that the ship wil EVEr get out of cap. But enough that if you are hit by a void bomb you will uncloak. Then they can increase the void bomb radius of effect (since almost no one uses them anyway)
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
GeeShizzle MacCloud
501
|
Posted - 2014.12.13 17:36:56 -
[1077] - Quote
Delt0r Garsk wrote:Please tell me this hasn't moved to Yet Another AFK Cloak thread.
Thats exactly why i told the guy to kindy f**k off and make his own thread.
All I'd requested were 2 new items detailed by CCP Fozzie in this Threads OP to become more accessible to all players, not just the few that are within 5-10ly from a syndicate LP store.
So for the final time Eyes, make your own thread / post in the cloak b*tching and moaning threads that already exist plz. |
Blastcaps Madullier
Royal Black Watch Highlanders DARKNESS.
159
|
Posted - 2014.12.13 23:30:32 -
[1078] - Quote
After the last mineral rebalance on asteroids, there's currently a issue where the current amounts of mexallon being refined from ores is currently too low, the primary source of mexallon used to be reprocessed rat loot drops, and with the nerf to the amount of minerals from reprocessing them, as well as the nerf to the amount of mods etc that drop, this has caused the availability of mexallon to decrease resulting in a corrisponding price increase market wise. Can you please relook at the amount of mexallon you get from refining ores and consider upping the amount from refining ores, possibly with spod being the highest refining amount?
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1833
|
Posted - 2014.12.13 23:33:00 -
[1079] - Quote
Blastcaps Madullier wrote:After the last mineral rebalance on asteroids, there's currently a issue where the current amounts of mexallon being refined from ores is currently too low, the primary source of mexallon used to be reprocessed rat loot drops, and with the nerf to the amount of minerals from reprocessing them, as well as the nerf to the amount of mods etc that drop, this has caused the availability of mexallon to decrease resulting in a corrisponding price increase market wise. Can you please relook at the amount of mexallon you get from refining ores and consider upping the amount from refining ores, possibly with spod being the highest refining amount?
You are in the wrong threw methinks |
krickettt
Hounds of War. Hashashin Cartel
20
|
Posted - 2014.12.14 03:21:15 -
[1080] - Quote
RIP battleship fleets. Some day you will be flown again... |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 37 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |