EVE Search - Logistics ships thoughts from a Logistics ships pilot.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Logistics ships thoughts from a Logistics ships pilot.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Cr Turist Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 27	Posted - 2014.10.23 20:53:45 - [1] - Quote I think a lot of people will agree logistics ships need some attention. Being a avid logi pilot myself I thought I would put down some of my ideas. 1. Force T2 Logistics to use Medium reps . a.) The current range bonus is fine. (when using medium reps) b.) Give it a bonus to rep amount. c.) Add a high slot module that will give project Anit EWAR and loose the offensive and drone bonusGÇÖs as nobody uses them. (Some examples) Minmatar- anti web Gallente- anti damp Caldari- anti ecm Amarr- anti neut 2. Introduce t2 logistics frigs. Because that would just be amazing. 3. Introduce a battle cruiser sized MJD capable logistics ship. a.) Massively less mobile than the cruisers. b.) Logistics module similar to the bastion module. 1min cool down on MJD and increased rep amount and range when engaged with the inability to receive remote reps. (aww itGÇÖs a little triage carrier) c.) Can use large remote reps I hope it is not lost to CCP that some people specialize in certain fields. Some guys are nuts about cepters, some just fly ECM ships, some have a strange addiction to interdictors, and some of us love logistics. I know logistics is a touchy subject and I know it needs a REWORKING (not a nerf nuke). Kicking logi in the pants does not have to be painful make it exciting. Give the logi pilots of eve something to be excited about. PLEASE Love, Cr Turist. P.S please give the bassi some love that ship is hurting soooooo bad.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 153	Posted - 2014.10.23 21:00:09 - [2] - Quote I can get behind some of this. A t2 BC based on a third CBC hull (stealth request for more combat battlecruisers, teehee) would be an interesting thing. The issue then becomes making sure that these new Heavy Logisitics ships don't become too much more powerful in terms of rep/s relative to the potential incoming DPS for the engagements they would be good for. The other problem is that this sort of change, once worked out properly, also does things like affect PVE substantially, so it would need some fairly careful working over. Yes, I do incursions. Find out how to be as space rich as me here Things I support: Channel links directly from tab. Tech 3 battleships. Brains over blobs.
Cr Turist Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 27	Posted - 2014.10.23 21:20:41 - [3] - Quote James Baboli wrote: I can get behind some of this. A t2 BC based on a third CBC hull (stealth request for more combat battlecruisers, teehee) would be an interesting thing. The issue then becomes making sure that these new Heavy Logisitics ships don't become too much more powerful in terms of rep/s relative to the potential incoming DPS for the engagements they would be good for. The other problem is that this sort of change, once worked out properly, also does things like affect PVE substantially, so it would need some fairly careful working over. the key strength to current logistics is mobility. thats why i say kill this ships mobility and force it to use the (logi modual) where it gets no incoming reps. yes the ship should have SOME tank but not getting reps means u choose. do i wanna rep my fleet or save my own skin. could make for some fun fights
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 154	Posted - 2014.10.23 21:25:15 - [4] - Quote Cr Turist wrote: James Baboli wrote: I can get behind some of this. A t2 BC based on a third CBC hull (stealth request for more combat battlecruisers, teehee) would be an interesting thing. The issue then becomes making sure that these new Heavy Logisitics ships don't become too much more powerful in terms of rep/s relative to the potential incoming DPS for the engagements they would be good for. The other problem is that this sort of change, once worked out properly, also does things like affect PVE substantially, so it would need some fairly careful working over. the key strength to current logistics is mobility. thats why i say kill this ships mobility and force it to use the (logi modual) where it gets no incoming reps. yes the ship should have SOME tank but not getting reps means u choose. do i wanna rep my fleet or save my own skin. could make for some fun fights The issue is that this then massively favors shield logi over armor logi due to the existence of ASBs and their capless rep ability. It allows you to push out massively more reps than armor for the same amount of local tank and cap dedicated to this. Such a module would strongly hurt the already fairly rough off armor brawling meta, as having your logi primaried one by one off the field and cracking faster than the equivalent shield logi due to the nature of ASBs vs AARs would make for a bad fight. Yes, I do incursions. Find out how to be as space rich as me here Things I support: Channel links directly from tab. Tech 3 battleships. Brains over blobs.
Cr Turist Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 27	Posted - 2014.10.23 21:29:41 - [5] - Quote oo let me be clear. these ships should not have a local rep bonus. that would be sooo dumb. if he goes in to "logi mode" he is putting himself at risk to save others. the argument about ASB and AAR can be made about any ship. its like saying its not fair missiles dont use cap but hybrids do.
Daoden The Scope Gallente Federation 93	Posted - 2014.10.23 21:40:26 - [6] - Quote Progression of a logi pilot Logi frigate --> T1 logi Cruiser --> T2 Logi Cruiser --> Carrier a T2 logi frigate would be interesting but a logi BC is not needed and we don't really need anything between cruiser and carrier for logi. A small gang of nesters (if you actually manage to run across them) is already tough to crack and they really aren't considered to be a logi ship. Adding a bigger more tankier logi ship is not a good idea, if anything it would be abused in trade hubs for neutral logi.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 154	Posted - 2014.10.23 21:52:15 - [7] - Quote Daoden wrote: Progression of a logi pilot Logi frigate --> T1 logi Cruiser --> T2 Logi Cruiser --> Carrier a T2 logi frigate would be interesting but a logi BC is not needed and we don't really need anything between cruiser and carrier for logi. A small gang of nesters (if you actually manage to run across them) is already tough to crack and they really aren't considered to be a logi ship. Adding a bigger more tankier logi ship is not a good idea, if anything it would be abused in trade hubs for neutral logi. It isn't necessary, but would be an interesting choice. I support both of the concepts, but the proposed implementation is not to my liking in the slightest. Quote: oo let me be clear. these ships should not have a local rep bonus. that would be sooo dumb. if he goes in to "logi mode" he is putting himself at risk to save others. the argument about ASB and AAR can be made about any ship. its like saying its not fair missiles dont use cap but hybrids do. The point was more that the normally decent fittings on t2 ships, combined with the ability to push resists very high and the existence of XLASBs to put massive burst tank out makes the inability to receive incoming reps much much more problematic on armor ships than on shield ships, as it becomes much easier to cap coast out of a cycle when your reps don't use cap. Yes, I do incursions. Find out how to be as space rich as me here Things I support: Channel links directly from tab. Tech 3 battleships. Brains over blobs.
Cr Turist Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 27	Posted - 2014.10.23 21:53:18 - [8] - Quote Daoden wrote: Progression of a logi pilot Logi frigate --> T1 logi Cruiser --> T2 Logi Cruiser --> Carrier a T2 logi frigate would be interesting but a logi BC is not needed and we don't really need anything between cruiser and carrier for logi. A small gang of nesters (if you actually manage to run across them) is already tough to crack and they really aren't considered to be a logi ship. Adding a bigger more tankier logi ship is not a good idea, if anything it would be abused in trade hubs for neutral logi. i agree with ur progression chart however after the patch jump distances will be massively kicked in the balls as we all know. i can tell you what the answer will be to large alliances if they cant bring more triage. BRING MORE LOGI !!! the important part of the new BC concept is that if the ship is not in ""logi mode" then its reps are crazy weak, but it can get reps. going into logi mode give the ability to GIVE reps and not get them. its the same idea of a triage carrier only this does not get a bonus to local reps. and OFC the reps it does give have to be tuned to not be over powered. And please dont tell the SM3LL guy about nestor fleets.
Daoden The Scope Gallente Federation 93	Posted - 2014.10.23 22:00:45 - [9] - Quote No offense but ever since Bastion module came out everyone and their mother wants a "something" mode on a new ship or an existing one. If you want a logi ship you don't need a "mode". You just need a logi ship. trying to add in something for the sake of adding something doesn't make the game any better. The idea of having a BC with crappy reps is indeed possible already, but adding a module that will boost their repping power but make it so they cannot receive any assistance seems like a waste. Sounds more like I sacrifice my ship to save another, and there are other ways to do that, (RIP my kitsune but you saved our carrier) I would prefer more ships like the scimitar with a bonus to shield reps and tracking links, only instead of tracking links lets add something else to it like maybe a ship with a bonus to remote SEBOs or ECCM.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 154	Posted - 2014.10.23 22:02:43 - [10] - Quote Cr Turist wrote: Daoden wrote: Progression of a logi pilot Logi frigate --> T1 logi Cruiser --> T2 Logi Cruiser --> Carrier a T2 logi frigate would be interesting but a logi BC is not needed and we don't really need anything between cruiser and carrier for logi. A small gang of nesters (if you actually manage to run across them) is already tough to crack and they really aren't considered to be a logi ship. Adding a bigger more tankier logi ship is not a good idea, if anything it would be abused in trade hubs for neutral logi. i agree with ur progression chart however after the patch jump distances will be massively kicked in the balls as we all know. i can tell you what the answer will be to large alliances if they cant bring more triage. BRING MORE LOGI !!! the important part of the new BC concept is that if the ship is not in ""logi mode" then its reps are crazy weak, but it can get reps. going into logi mode give the ability to GIVE reps and not get them. its the same idea of a triage carrier only this does not get a bonus to local reps. and OFC the reps it does give have to be tuned to not be over powered. And please dont tell the SM3LL guy about nestor fleets. So, outside this "logi mode" how much do they rep, and do they have an inherent range bonus, or is it dependent on this mini-triage, or is it split between the two? Do they have 3 reps and this logi module to keep them underpowered outside it, or do they have the space for more? Yes, I do incursions. Find out how to be as space rich as me here Things I support: Channel links directly from tab. Tech 3 battleships. Brains over blobs.

baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 13699	Posted - 2014.10.23 22:05:40 - [11] - Quote What we need is something like stacking penalties on logi to end the unkillable fleets. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Cr Turist Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 27	Posted - 2014.10.23 22:09:25 - [12] - Quote outside of logi mode the reps and range should come at face value of that modual. having 4 reps with the modual so 5 highslots would be to me a natural go to. the key to the ship is the modual. its a effective logistics ship because of the modual. the other bonus it gets would be something that would require some more brainstorming.
Cr Turist Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 27	Posted - 2014.10.23 22:12:14 - [13] - Quote baltec1 wrote: What we need is something like stacking penalties on logi to end the unkillable fleets. i find most people that say a fleet is not killable dont know what a falcon are. maybe a keres? people dont put pressure on logi thats teh problem the people that do have no issue with them. you have to make the logi work. switch targets. use jamming drones, damp them. wear down their cap make them make a navagation error. thats how u kill logi and i think thats funny as hell coming from a goon.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 154	Posted - 2014.10.23 22:14:32 - [14] - Quote baltec1 wrote: What we need is something like stacking penalties on logi to end the unkillable fleets. If there was a way to do that without nerfing high end PvE into the ground, I would agree with you right now. As it is, I think something more like missile explosion size vs sig radius would be more appropriate and easier to balance with the current PvE, and also encourage more tactical game play as far as pulsing props to enhance sig radius, etc. Quote: outside of logi mode the reps and range should come at face value of that modual. having 4 reps with the modual so 5 highslots would be to me a natural go to. the key to the ship is the modual. its a effective logistics ship because of the modual. the other bonus it gets would be something that would require some more brainstorming. So, outside of this fairly niche role, you can get substantially more out of a standard logi cruiser with A type reps if your entire proposal is followed. The implementation, if not the concept, is not done baking and should probably be pushed back a step until you have the relation of these two very similar ship types balanced against each other. Yes, I do incursions. Find out how to be as space rich as me here Things I support: Channel links directly from tab. Tech 3 battleships. Brains over blobs.
Daoden The Scope Gallente Federation 93	Posted - 2014.10.23 22:18:12 - [15] - Quote Cr Turist wrote: baltec1 wrote: What we need is something like stacking penalties on logi to end the unkillable fleets. i find most people that say a fleet is not killable dont know what a falcon are. maybe a keres? people dont put pressure on logi thats teh problem the people that do have no issue with them. you have to make the logi work. switch targets. use jamming drones, damp them. wear down their cap make them make a navagation error. thats how u kill logi how ever i must say having a optimal range on logi would be kinda cool. the farther away you are the less effective your reps and i think thats funny as hell coming from a goon. Guardian setup I fly for PvP logi has ECCM, guess how many falcons itll take to jam 1 logi with that setup 100% of the time. no multiply by the number of logi on grid, subtract DPS for each falcon you have to field, and now watch your fleet get torn to pieces. You clearly have not gone up against a large fleet, and by large I don't just me 10-20 players.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 13699	Posted - 2014.10.23 22:19:33 - [16] - Quote Cr Turist wrote: baltec1 wrote: What we need is something like stacking penalties on logi to end the unkillable fleets. i find most people that say a fleet is not killable dont know what a falcon are. maybe a keres? people dont put pressure on logi thats teh problem the people that do have no issue with them. you have to make the logi work. switch targets. use jamming drones, damp them. wear down their cap make them make a navagation error. thats how u kill logi ECM doesnt work hence why it was retired from everyones fleets several years ago. Neuts are also no good in large fleet fights. Damps work but only if you dedicate an entire secondary fleet to it which means only the big powerblocks can use it and it is useless on a carrier force supported by supers. Logi is simply too powerful and is going to have to be delt with. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Cr Turist Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 27	Posted - 2014.10.23 22:22:06 - [17] - Quote Daoden wrote: Cr Turist wrote: baltec1 wrote: What we need is something like stacking penalties on logi to end the unkillable fleets. i find most people that say a fleet is not killable dont know what a falcon are. maybe a keres? people dont put pressure on logi thats teh problem the people that do have no issue with them. you have to make the logi work. switch targets. use jamming drones, damp them. wear down their cap make them make a navagation error. thats how u kill logi how ever i must say having a optimal range on logi would be kinda cool. the farther away you are the less effective your reps and i think thats funny as hell coming from a goon. Guardian setup I fly for PvP logi has ECCM, guess how many falcons itll take to jam 1 logi with that setup 100% of the time. no multiply by the number of logi on grid, subtract DPS for each falcon you have to field, and now watch your fleet get torn to pieces. You clearly have not gone up against a large fleet, and by large I don't just me 10-20 players. Wow your right. i have never been in a big fight u caught me.
Cr Turist Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 27	Posted - 2014.10.23 22:22:52 - [18] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Cr Turist wrote: baltec1 wrote: What we need is something like stacking penalties on logi to end the unkillable fleets. i find most people that say a fleet is not killable dont know what a falcon are. maybe a keres? people dont put pressure on logi thats teh problem the people that do have no issue with them. you have to make the logi work. switch targets. use jamming drones, damp them. wear down their cap make them make a navagation error. thats how u kill logi ECM doesnt work hence why it was retired from everyones fleets several years ago. Neuts are also no good in large fleet fights. Damps work but only if you dedicate an entire secondary fleet to it which means only the big powerblocks can use it and it is useless on a carrier force supported by supers. Logi is simply too powerful and is going to have to be delt with. the guys in Provi would not agree with you that neuts are not effective.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 926	Posted - 2014.10.23 22:23:14 - [19] - Quote baltec1 wrote: What we need is something like stacking penalties on logi to end the unkillable fleets. i agree .. but the question becomes how too apply the stacking penalty ? - using current stacking penalty ratios .. after about the 4th rep mod repping becomes pretty weak.. 1 logi per ship is too harsh a nerf - adding a reduced stacking penalty just for reps perhaps? ... so you might be able too double or triple the amount of mods before hitting the cliff - or perhaps adding a hard set limit of modules and everything after is useless 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
Daoden The Scope Gallente Federation 93	Posted - 2014.10.23 22:23:41 - [20] - Quote I vote they increase the lockbreaker bombs jam strength to make it useable

baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 13699	Posted - 2014.10.23 22:27:18 - [21] - Quote Cr Turist wrote: the guys in Provi would not agree with you that neuts are not effective. The people in provi haven't had a war with us. Neuts have never worked and not for a lack of trying. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 927	Posted - 2014.10.23 22:28:29 - [22] - Quote on T2 logis themselves .. some ideas - add 1 mid slot per ship ... particularly on the oneiros/scimitar too allow for use of remote TC's - better cap too reduce the amount of cap mods needed for solo reppers and allows for remote TC's - reduce the T2 resists .. they shouldn't be as tough as HAC's with half the sig radius .. also logis need more weaknesses - maybe add more utility support mod bonuses too them .. projected eccm for instance.. i also think the T1 logi has far too much rep range for the ease of SP and cost too get into them 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
Cr Turist Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 27	Posted - 2014.10.23 22:29:23 - [23] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Cr Turist wrote: baltec1 wrote: What we need is something like stacking penalties on logi to end the unkillable fleets. i find most people that say a fleet is not killable dont know what a falcon are. maybe a keres? people dont put pressure on logi thats teh problem the people that do have no issue with them. you have to make the logi work. switch targets. use jamming drones, damp them. wear down their cap make them make a navagation error. thats how u kill logi ECM doesnt work hence why it was retired from everyones fleets several years ago. Neuts are also no good in large fleet fights. Damps work but only if you dedicate an entire secondary fleet to it which means only the big powerblocks can use it and it is useless on a carrier force supported by supers. Logi is simply too powerful and is going to have to be delt with. The point of this post was to throw an idea out. logi is a great area in eve its fun its stressful if you mess up your fleet dies. i agree logi in its current form needs to be tweaked. but you cant kill it off. if you do then giant blocks will just blob harder than they already do NC. being one of those that would. what i want is for logi to take skill to fly make it something that if your pilots are good at it you have an advantage. adding in choices on ships is not a bad thing. adding in a new type of logistics ship would be great just for the fact it would give people another option.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 155	Posted - 2014.10.23 22:34:32 - [24] - Quote Harvey James wrote: on T2 logis themselves .. some ideas - add 1 mid slot per ship ... particularly on hte oneiros/scimitar too allow for use of remote TC's - better cap too reduce the amount of cap mods needed for solo reppers and allows for remote TC's - reduce the T2 resists .. they shouldn't be as tough as HAC's with half the sig radius .. also logis need more weaknesses - maybe add more utility support mod bonuses too them .. projected eccm for instance.. i also think the T1 logi has far too much rep range for the ease of SP and cost too get into them T2 logi with an extra slot just become even tougher to kill in PVP, and now I can put 6 links on an incursion scimitar. yey. Better cap negates the high skill requirements that currently one of the few things keeping logi in check. It is possible to permarun 4 large reps on a scimitar with 3 mods and the rigs for cap at full skills and a couple mill in your head. T2 resists are the one thing least likely to change on logistics ships, as they need every little bit of those resists to counter lower base HP and extreme neut susceptibility on scimi/oni or ECM on your partners ship in basi/guardi More bonuses on these ships will quickly make them even more brokenly powerful as these remove the counters currently in place for logi, such as jamming one out via concerted effort or a dedicated hamming squad. t1 logi are in a reasonable place for the most part (though I would like the rep amount reduced slightly so shiny medium reps don't out perform large reps, merely make parity) Yes, I do incursions. Find out how to be as space rich as me here Things I support: Channel links directly from tab. Tech 3 battleships. Brains over blobs.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 927	Posted - 2014.10.23 22:42:40 - [25] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Harvey James wrote: on T2 logis themselves .. some ideas - add 1 mid slot per ship ... particularly on hte oneiros/scimitar too allow for use of remote TC's - better cap too reduce the amount of cap mods needed for solo reppers and allows for remote TC's - reduce the T2 resists .. they shouldn't be as tough as HAC's with half the sig radius .. also logis need more weaknesses - maybe add more utility support mod bonuses too them .. projected eccm for instance.. i also think the T1 logi has far too much rep range for the ease of SP and cost too get into them T2 logi with an extra slot just become even tougher to kill in PVP, and now I can put 6 links on an incursion scimitar. yey. Better cap negates the high skill requirements that currently one of the few things keeping logi in check. It is possible to permarun 4 large reps on a scimitar with 3 mods and the rigs for cap at full skills and a couple mill in your head. T2 resists are the one thing least likely to change on logistics ships, as they need every little bit of those resists to counter lower base HP and extreme neut susceptibility on scimi/oni or ECM on your partners ship in basi/guardi More bonuses on these ships will quickly make them even more brokenly powerful as these remove the counters currently in place for logi, such as jamming one out via concerted effort or a dedicated hamming squad. t1 logi are in a reasonable place for the most part (though I would like the rep amount reduced slightly so shiny medium reps don't out perform large reps, merely make parity) there base HP is almost as good as HAC's actually .. its usually the lack of slots and the need for cap mods that restrict HP.. the low sig and strong speed makes them tank better than HAC's do.. but same high resists as HAC's are unjustifiable .. they are there too support the fleet rep others .. not too tank better than the ships they are supporting 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
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 155	Posted - 2014.10.23 22:53:13 - [26] - Quote Harvey James wrote: James Baboli wrote: Harvey James wrote: on T2 logis themselves .. some ideas - add 1 mid slot per ship ... particularly on hte oneiros/scimitar too allow for use of remote TC's - better cap too reduce the amount of cap mods needed for solo reppers and allows for remote TC's - reduce the T2 resists .. they shouldn't be as tough as HAC's with half the sig radius .. also logis need more weaknesses - maybe add more utility support mod bonuses too them .. projected eccm for instance.. i also think the T1 logi has far too much rep range for the ease of SP and cost too get into them T2 logi with an extra slot just become even tougher to kill in PVP, and now I can put 6 links on an incursion scimitar. yey. Better cap negates the high skill requirements that currently one of the few things keeping logi in check. It is possible to permarun 4 large reps on a scimitar with 3 mods and the rigs for cap at full skills and a couple mill in your head. T2 resists are the one thing least likely to change on logistics ships, as they need every little bit of those resists to counter lower base HP and extreme neut susceptibility on scimi/oni or ECM on your partners ship in basi/guardi More bonuses on these ships will quickly make them even more brokenly powerful as these remove the counters currently in place for logi, such as jamming one out via concerted effort or a dedicated hamming squad. t1 logi are in a reasonable place for the most part (though I would like the rep amount reduced slightly so shiny medium reps don't out perform large reps, merely make parity) there base HP is almost as good as HAC's actually .. its usually the lack of slots and the need for cap mods that restrict HP.. the low sig and strong speed makes them tank better than HAC's do.. but same high resists as HAC's are unjustifiable .. they are there too support the fleet rep others .. not too tank better than the ships they are supporting If the HACs used as much of their total slots for tank as the logi did, the HACs would generally have better tank. And I agree in the case of the basi/guardi they have almost the same base EHP as the HACs, but they also have almost the same sig as the HACs, and no MWD bonus if they are forced into a situation they need an MWD for. Scimi/oni are much thinner ships than HACs. Yes, I do incursions. Find out how to be as space rich as me here Things I support: Channel links directly from tab. Tech 3 battleships. Brains over blobs.
Tappits North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion 61	Posted - 2014.10.23 23:39:56 - [27] - Quote No more active rep mods bonus, can still fit them but nowhere near as good. Make the Rep drone bonus 100-200% per Level Make the drones bays bigger (bandwidth stays the same)
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 155	Posted - 2014.10.23 23:43:40 - [28] - Quote Tappits wrote: No more active rep mods bonus, can still fit them but nowhere near as good. Make the Rep drone bonus 100-200% per Level Make the drones bays bigger (bandwidth stays the same) So, absolutely destroy several styles of PVE overnight, making several kinds of content simply unreasonable in a single move? yey. Also, this still does nothing about the fact that any ship which can catch reps is nigh invulnerable once the reps catch in PVP. Yes, I do incursions. Find out how to be as space rich as me here Things I support: Channel links directly from tab. Tech 3 battleships. Brains over blobs.
Tappits North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion 61	Posted - 2014.10.23 23:56:28 - [29] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Also, this still does nothing about the fact that any ship which can catch reps is nigh invulnerable once the reps catch in PVP. There is 100% no counter to drones. James Baboli wrote: So, absolutely destroy several styles of PVE overnight, making several kinds of content simply unreasonable in a single move? Life finds a way. Some people say the upcoming jump changes are simply unreasonable too. does not stop it form happening. Trying to put stacking penalty's on the reps will be ok for super small scale stuff but eve is more than 1v1's it needs to scale up to 256man fleets or there's no point.
MJ Incognito Macabre Votum Northern Coalition. 27	Posted - 2014.10.24 00:00:11 - [30] - Quote Harvey James wrote: baltec1 wrote: What we need is something like stacking penalties on logi to end the unkillable fleets. i agree .. but the question becomes how too apply the stacking penalty ? - using current stacking penalty ratios .. after about the 4th rep mod repping becomes pretty weak.. 1 logi per ship is too harsh a nerf - adding a reduced stacking penalty just for reps perhaps? ... so you might be able too double or triple the amount of mods before hitting the cliff - or perhaps adding a hard set limit of modules and everything after is useless The way you penalize reps is to have a 2ndary recharge rate on shields/armor that affects max capacity only. This way, as damage comes in, you can degrade the max capacity limit without degrading the actual incoming shields/armor. This means a ship will die over extended time of applied damage, but will sustain durability which is/was the whole arguement for logistics to be implemented way back when. Simple calculator that takes something like 7-10% max HP degredation for all incoming damage. So lets say a fleet hits you're 10,000 shield HP ship for 5,000 post mitigated damage. That ship would then have a maximum shield capacity of 9500 before any more damage come's in. The recharge rate for this type of 2ndary recharge would be something in the range of 3-5 minutes... so over the course of a fight, your shields could recharge to maximum capacity if you stop taking damage... but if you're sustaining damage and do not warp out, then you're toast eventually... no matter how many repairs you get. That's especially important in a Capital vs sub-capital battle where one side is virtually unkillable atm.



Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.