Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ana Khouri
|
Posted - 2003.10.23 16:07:00 -
[61]
Well, that module is there already, the passive targeters. But sacrificing a low slot isn't as bad there, a scorp or bb would still have plenty of lows left.
It is true that cloaking seems to be pretty useless atm, but allowing it to instajam someone using cloaks to "counter" than would be wrong IMO. That's like allowing jumpin point camping to couter fundamental flaws in the combat system.
free speech not allowed here |
Zeus
|
Posted - 2003.10.23 16:59:00 -
[62]
Quote: Zeus have you personal test cloak in chaos?
1/3 the things you say are wrone.... please test them i will do the happy caerbear in my Megathron :P
on more time... when you cloak you lose ALL your sheild and all your capasity ok? if you uncloak you can warp in 0.2 sec my friend 20000 km away and you cant warp to me... (with out the new scaner) jump from stargate in 0.5 sec :P
with out the scaners to look for cloak people all we say are crap...
+ the new system scaner they are making
+ how in the hell with 0 capasite slowly recharging you are going to kill the indy or pirate? with 4 capasity bousters?
cloak IS NOT for fighting is tackical weapon
im my BS with 7 over drive i go 450 m/sec with cloak on i go 65 m/sec
with cloak you cant warp you cant lock you cant use enything because you have 0 capasity
only the low slot is working and 2-3 stuff that dont need capasity...
GO and test is before you speak
*****Reading CT BadIronTree's Post Standby****** ****Translating****
Well.. I tried to find some part of his post that actually talked about something I said being wrong but alas I could not find anything. You spoke truth's of wrap times etc. Yes you can warp quickly and jump quickly. But why am I going to sit around at a gate to wait for someone just so I can warp away from them when they come?
And my friend you are actually wrong, you will notice that your capacitor bars are blacked out but 10% is still there just unusable. So my friend you are in fact wrong. Its not the fact you have no capacitor to do anything its that the game gives you error msg's saying your not allowed to do those things.
So Yes I have tested it but unlike you it seems I have actual combat experience in fighting people who fight back in 0.0 space. You only seem to know how to ran away :)
But this forum is not for those thing so lets stay on topic plz
|
Zeus
|
Posted - 2003.10.23 17:39:00 -
[63]
Seems the Atrributes shows -100% cap now but what I said was true before. Regardless this change has called into question even the basic use.
And they have fixed the approach bug using scanner.
|
Discorporation
|
Posted - 2003.10.24 09:36:00 -
[64]
Does the cap regenerate whilst you are cloaked?
If so, it would be useful. If not, then erm
It'd be kinda pointless, right?
[Heterocephalus glaber]
|
ChaosOne
|
Posted - 2003.10.24 10:11:00 -
[65]
disapointed in how the cloak works. perhaps if they make advanced cloak in the future, they can make it so you can warp whilst cloaked and it has no detrimental effects to your ship apart from using cap. to even out the battle you could have a delay when your ship un-cloaks of 5 - 7.5 secs in this time you have no shields cant lock or activate weapons or modules etc. you could then add into the game anchored cloaking sensors (deployable from ship) which can detect cloacked ships upto a certain distance (or partially detect) and allow people to lock them but with a greatly reduced chance of hitting the ship (increasing as they get closer to the sensors) this could add a whole new side to combat and tactics. just my thoughts on the cloaking saga
|
Ruffles
|
Posted - 2003.10.24 14:07:00 -
[66]
Ok, having read the whole lot.
I think its pretty fair to say the general concensus is that a fleet of cloaked battleships undetectable unless you are within 1.5km is a bad thing. It is already a very powerful vessel.
Power and CPU requirements of the modules needs to be different. The impact on a battleship loosing one turret slot isn't as great as it is for a cruiser or frigate.
Some ideas:
1) Size should matter, and the systems should take that into account. I dread the day when we have fleets of cloaked battleships, and you telling me we can make things that big disappear without any energy emission detection? This surely should affect range massively if you decide battleships should cloak. It would be dire if the game completely degenerates into bigger-is-winner mentality.
2) Different negatives for different types of ships. Frigates perhaps having a loss of a medium module, but still remain high speed, but make the speed of movement increase the proximity detection (after all most of them are practially useless at present in fights anyway) and slightly increasing their lock times. After all a fast moving transparent thing might still catch the eye, or sensors.
Cruisers are harder to balance I fear, as they will suffer in most places from the use of this module type.
I really don't think battleships should have cloaking, it could be terribly bad for the game especially in light of the start they have taken, odds are that some possitive increases will come to the modules over time.
I think I read somewhere about someone having a seperate skill to increase the type of ship they would be able to use cloaking on. The idea is a very good basic premise, and is something that could be looked at. That way the most powerful ships in the game can't be invisible, and have to take the fact that being that big and bad comes at a cost.
3) ECM is possibly the hardest thing to balance here. What is a fair time to wait post decloak for them to try this? I see that passive targetting has a use, but I agree with others all it takes is two ships one jamming you and another loaded with missiles, and you are dead anyway, no matter how little power those ships have.
4) Local chat seems to be a problem with a lot of things, people trying to bounty hunt, people knowing an attack is coming before it is due. My idea. Dispose of the list of people in local full stop. Let anyone talk there that wants to, but doing so might give away the fact they are there. Still allow it to be useful for chats, but do not show anyone in it at all. That way you settle both sides of the arguement, and no one just uses the fact that 5 people from the same corp jumped in as a reason to do anything at all. Loose the list of people in local chat, just make it a talking place.
Just some thoughts, hope it helps stir up some more ideas.
|
Drutort
|
Posted - 2003.10.24 23:07:00 -
[67]
you have some points but some things are funny...
it is not possible to not have a number in local... think about it... it only takes a few sec...
if someone types what will you put? an X on that players name? or what? i mean come on... the # also shows the people on the right side... so you take that out... you still have peoples names show with there msg...
if you put an X what is the point in chatting if you have NO idea who said what... only know what you said LOL
maybe make an option when you are clocked to show your self in local or not... or just be able to read local... and not have your name show up... BUT if you type it... then your cover is blown and you show up in local.... that is the best idea i can see.
everyone without a cloaking device... and those who are do not have it active will show up in local as they do now... but when you cloak you will have disappear from local... or have option to show in local, just a toggle thing...
BUT you still show be able to READ local... as that shouldnĘt give away your local thatĘs like just intercepting a transmition. NOW if you had a device that could track a person who is reading a local channel that would be cool... of course then you would have to give option to completely cut your self from local but then you will be truly gone from local and not detectable, unless someone uses some module to find you, within range.
support Idea: QuickInfo an alternative to ShowInfo
my MoBlog |
Wild Rho
|
Posted - 2003.10.25 00:31:00 -
[68]
Maybe they should tie in cloaking abilites in with skill levels. When at level 1 u only have the basic use of a cloaking device such as u can still be seen in local and all that other crap. At max level u are virutally invisible and it takes a good counter module and skill to pick up on you or somthing.
I have the body of a supermodel. I just can't remember where I left it... |
Ana Khouri
|
Posted - 2003.10.25 02:12:00 -
[69]
Quote: it is not possible to not have a number in local... think about it... it only takes a few sec...
if someone types what will you put? an X on that players name? or what? i mean come on... the # also shows the people on the right side... so you take that out... you still have peoples names show with there msg...
if you put an X what is the point in chatting if you have NO idea who said what... only know what you said LOL¦[/qoute]
If you won't appear in local you cannot type something there as well, that is pretty clear.
free speech not allowed here |
xeno calligan
|
Posted - 2003.10.25 09:41:00 -
[70]
Quote:
Quote: it is not possible to not have a number in local... think about it... it only takes a few sec...
if someone types what will you put? an X on that players name? or what? i mean come on... the # also shows the people on the right side... so you take that out... you still have peoples names show with there msg...
if you put an X what is the point in chatting if you have NO idea who said what... only know what you said LOL¦[/qoute]
If you won't appear in local you cannot type something there as well, that is pretty clear.
I think if you read the original post again, you'll find the quote:
"Dispose of the list of people in local full stop"
While you wouldn't be able to see the listing of pilots currently in the system, you'd still be able to chat and see the name and the image of the pilot. It would work the same as if you have hidden the list by pressing the <person-icon> in the top-right corner of the chat window.
Other than that, the local channel should be labeled "local" and not "local [#of-pilots-in-system]".
|
|
Drutort
|
Posted - 2003.10.25 21:41:00 -
[71]
Quote:
Quote:
Quote: it is not possible to not have a number in local... think about it... it only takes a few sec...
if someone types what will you put? an X on that players name? or what? i mean come on... the # also shows the people on the right side... so you take that out... you still have peoples names show with there msg...
if you put an X what is the point in chatting if you have NO idea who said what... only know what you said LOL¦[/qoute]
If you won't appear in local you cannot type something there as well, that is pretty clear.
I think if you read the original post again, you'll find the quote:
"Dispose of the list of people in local full stop"
While you wouldn't be able to see the listing of pilots currently in the system, you'd still be able to chat and see the name and the image of the pilot. It would work the same as if you have hidden the list by pressing the <person-icon> in the top-right corner of the chat window.
Other than that, the local channel should be labeled "local" and not "local [#of-pilots-in-system]".
why i the world would you hide all the local number of players? what benefit will this give? there are times when you want to know who is in hte system just because... THEN you would have to take out the # of pilots in SPACE!!! on the map as well, and this will just be stupid.
The only thing that makes sense is that the person who activates cloaking then they should be gone from the # of people in space and in local... support Idea: QuickInfo an alternative to ShowInfo
my MoBlog |
xeno calligan
|
Posted - 2003.10.26 04:43:00 -
[72]
Quote: why i the world would you hide all the local number of players? what benefit will this give? there are times when you want to know who is in hte system just because... THEN you would have to take out the # of pilots in SPACE!!! on the map as well, and this will just be stupid.
The only thing that makes sense is that the person who activates cloaking then they should be gone from the # of people in space and in local...
The reason for hiding all information in #local about who is present would be to provide even more uncertaincy about a given system. The info on the map is delayed a few minutes, so it only gives you a rough idea of how many pilots are present -- it gives an assault force a small window of time to attack in without having the campers run because #local suddenly jumps from 5 to 15. IMO the problem with #local is more fundamental than pertaining to cloaking. Why should I be forced to let my presence be known? I think it should be an option -- if you wish, you can let yourself be listed in #local and by that also get access to the list.
|
Drutort
|
Posted - 2003.10.26 10:23:00 -
[73]
Quote:
Quote: why i the world would you hide all the local number of players? what benefit will this give? there are times when you want to know who is in hte system just because... THEN you would have to take out the # of pilots in SPACE!!! on the map as well, and this will just be stupid.
The only thing that makes sense is that the person who activates cloaking then they should be gone from the # of people in space and in local...
The reason for hiding all information in #local about who is present would be to provide even more uncertaincy about a given system. The info on the map is delayed a few minutes, so it only gives you a rough idea of how many pilots are present -- it gives an assault force a small window of time to attack in without having the campers run because #local suddenly jumps from 5 to 15. IMO the problem with #local is more fundamental than pertaining to cloaking. Why should I be forced to let my presence be known? I think it should be an option -- if you wish, you can let yourself be listed in #local and by that also get access to the list.
well even though i see your point, i dont think ccp will do that now... its been that way since i remember
though now i kind of agree with you
but this should be done when ccp fixes the issue with lag and your ship loading etc... once that is fixed and they put this in as well as cloaking i could see this a great strat to use, but until those peaces dont come together it would be bad to put 1 without the others IMO support Idea: QuickInfo an alternative to ShowInfo
my MoBlog |
Spaceman Jack
|
Posted - 2003.10.26 16:23:00 -
[74]
This would be a perfect oppertunity to make Frigates mean something again.
Limit cloaks to Frigates.. Cruisers maybe.. but no Battleships or Indys.
Or make the energy needs for such bigger ships restricivly high.
Now you have an actual tactical need for a mixed fleet.
|
Ana Khouri
|
Posted - 2003.10.26 17:53:00 -
[75]
For what? For frigates (or cruiser) sitting cloaked somewhere and can do nothing when they uncloak. because they have no cap or shields? Cloaking has atm no tactical use at all.
free speech not allowed here |
Xavier VanXian
|
Posted - 2003.10.26 19:18:00 -
[76]
Quote: For what? For frigates (or cruiser) sitting cloaked somewhere and can do nothing when they uncloak. because they have no cap or shields? Cloaking has atm no tactical use at all.
Thena make frigate cap and shields loses minimal or just small , cruiser loses may be on the other hand high, and battleships may be forbiden to cloak -- I'm minimal threat -- |
RoTorHeaD
|
Posted - 2003.10.27 01:02:00 -
[77]
Quote:
Quote: For what? For frigates (or cruiser) sitting cloaked somewhere and can do nothing when they uncloak. because they have no cap or shields? Cloaking has atm no tactical use at all.
Thena make frigate cap and shields loses minimal or just small , cruiser loses may be on the other hand high, and battleships may be forbiden to cloak
Then change fitting requirements to -50% cpu and powergrid requirements of the equiped ship as well as no more than 500 shields or cap allowed on the ship when so equiped, whether cloaked or not. Keep the speed penalties while cloaked.
Allow passive targeting while cloaked, but firing will uncloak it for a several seconds, but will auto recloak unless someone initiates a target lock or it takes damage.
Set ECM restrictions that won't allow any ECM to be initiated in conjunction with a passive targeter. Allow ship, cargo, roid scanners to operate while cloaked.
Allow cloaking while in warp, but prevent warping from one minute after cloaking.
This should make cloaking somewhat useful. |
Drutort
|
Posted - 2003.10.27 06:30:00 -
[78]
what good will, cloaked frig's and cruisers do? vs a BB fleet? that has full cap and sheilds?
I mean you uncloak with very slow speed and have no cap and no sheilds... how can that give you an advantage? when you are going to be fighting vs BB's
this idea to limit only to frig and cruisers will make this item useless for sure, just like others have said support Idea: QuickInfo an alternative to ShowInfo
my MoBlog |
Kunming
|
Posted - 2003.10.27 08:15:00 -
[79]
@Drutorn: I dont agree with ur last comment there, I would hate to see BSs cruising around in cloak an blowing up stations... Frigates and cruisers are doomed to extinction so CCP puts up a cloaking device to give them a role again, but this thing certainly needs balancing.
My suggestion is: -If u can cloak u should be fast and agile and use it as a hit 'n run device. -If u can cloak u shouldn't be able to have thick armor with lots of protection. -Just take Star Trek as example, where the cloaking ships are (mostly) very agile ones, ballancing out the forces.
Intercepting since BETA |
Ana Khouri
|
Posted - 2003.10.27 21:11:00 -
[80]
Like this warbird you mean, which is bigger than the Enterprise?
Actually there is no size/agility difference in ST I can see about the cloaking/noncloaking ships. The federation vessels are not more or less agile than the klingon or romulan ones and are not bigger either.
free speech not allowed here |
|
Drutort
|
Posted - 2003.10.27 22:20:00 -
[81]
Quote: @Drutorn: I dont agree with ur last comment there, I would hate to see BSs cruising around in cloak an blowing up stations... Frigates and cruisers are doomed to extinction so CCP puts up a cloaking device to give them a role again, but this thing certainly needs balancing.
My suggestion is: -If u can cloak u should be fast and agile and use it as a hit 'n run device. -If u can cloak u shouldn't be able to have thick armor with lots of protection. -Just take Star Trek as example, where the cloaking ships are (mostly) very agile ones, ballancing out the forces.
WHAT IS THE POINT? its not like you can blow up stuff when your cloaked!! why would you limit to what ship can cloak or not... there is no logic, unless you want to make different cloaking as in high slot and mid slot and have diff % and stuff...
but there is nothing that should stop a ship to be cloaked just based on size...
you could cloak a station, if you had enough power to keep it cloaked and a powerful enough cloaking device.. because that is just way out there in size... unlike a cruiser or a frig... they are not who konws how far fetched in size. support Idea: QuickInfo an alternative to ShowInfo
my MoBlog |
Eva Luna
|
Posted - 2003.10.28 12:12:00 -
[82]
How about balancing Cloaking with:
1) Skill
Say it lets you Cloak a certain sized Ship. Either do it by Ship type (Level 1 for Frigates, etc) or by Signature Radius.
You could add other Skills for improving Cloaked Speed, etc ("Controlled Engine Emissions" etc) 2) Penalties
I could believe a Frigate Cloaking easily... its NOT that big, engine heat and shield output, etc will be a lot less than a Battleship.
A Frigate Cloak would take less to maintain than a Cruisers Cloak. Scale the penalties to the Ship type (or to Signature Radius?).
This would encourage people to use Cloaking on Frigates, etc instead of Battleships, but not leave anybody out
Just a thought
WTB: Ewok Hangglider Blueprint! |
ChironV
|
Posted - 2003.10.28 17:04:00 -
[83]
Edited by: ChironV on 28/10/2003 17:05:13
For PVP its tactically useless. Carebear heaven. However. It did occur to me that if you load up with cap injectors you can recover from a dead cap to 50% or above with these injectors. Add on armor and you may have enough to instantly wjam, web and obliterate foes as you appear in front of them. Has anyone given cap injectors a try?
________________________________________________ It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion,
|
Kunming
|
Posted - 2003.10.29 07:56:00 -
[84]
I think u ppl forget that bigger ships are "really" slow, and need ABs or MWDs to get a decent speed, since the cloaking device is taking away all your energy that means bigger ships will go like snails. This limits the operation range of BSs and Cruisers in various missions, that means frigates will have a new role again. Maybe with the introducing of elite frigates some unbalances in the ship classes will be solved, since the fast frigates are actually not that fast cause they dont have the energy and capacitor advantage of the bigger ones (which can use numerous amounts of MWDs or ABs)...
Well that were my 2 cents.
Intercepting since BETA |
Bad Harlequin
|
Posted - 2003.10.30 21:29:00 -
[85]
you're targetted and under attack. Guns are firing, drones are circling, and missiles are inbound. You activate your cloak.
What happens???
You are in a maze of twisty little asteroids, all alike. |
Loana
|
Posted - 2003.10.31 01:04:00 -
[86]
They should just use the same principle as Earth and Beyond Cloacking... they wy they did it was wicked. Also For example do more damage with beams after u decloak... and stuff like that.
EnB had some great ideas, not sure how its now as i quit playing once EVE was out.
|
ElCoCo
|
Posted - 2003.10.31 11:07:00 -
[87]
Quick Q for you testers.... WHEN the cloak drops when you are within 1,5km of another ship...does it also drop if a fellow corp or gang member closes in on you? Too many posts so sorry if some1 already said that
|
Kunming
|
Posted - 2003.10.31 11:36:00 -
[88]
Quote: Like this warbird you mean, which is bigger than the Enterprise?
Actually there is no size/agility difference in ST I can see about the cloaking/noncloaking ships. The federation vessels are not more or less agile than the klingon or romulan ones and are not bigger either.
I was not thinking of the romulan warbird ofcourse more like the klingon "Bird Of Prey" (cant remember the original name was it Vortcha or something?)
Anyway I found out a tactic where 3-4 cloaked frigates can easyly take out a BS in 3-4secs. And sorry that I wont tell it u. But I can tell one thing: Speed is of the essence in the cloaking and think that CCP has balanced the device very good.
Intercepting since BETA |
ElCoCo
|
Posted - 2003.10.31 13:28:00 -
[89]
Quote:
Anyway I found out a tactic where 3-4 cloaked frigates can easyly take out a BS in 3-4secs. And sorry that I wont tell it u. But I can tell one thing: Speed is of the essence in the cloaking and think that CCP has balanced the device very good.
3-4 secs?...what will the frigs be firing? It`s hard enough for 4 BS`s to finish another1 in 10 secs with wrecking hits...and that`s if he`s afk or forgot to shield boost or whatever
|
Bad Harlequin
|
Posted - 2003.10.31 16:57:00 -
[90]
Quote:
Anyway I found out a tactic where 3-4 cloaked frigates can easyly take out a BS in 3-4secs. And sorry that I wont tell it u.
Then get off the test server and stop hunting for secret potential exploits?
You are in a maze of twisty little asteroids, all alike. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |