| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gierling
Gallente
Celestial Fleet
Ascendant Frontier
   |
Posted - 2006.08.29 23:02:00 -
[1]
It just consoles me greatly to know that CCP continues to nerf the things I HATE.
I wholeheartedly approve of the cloak nerf (Although I also think that they need to fix cloak supply and introduce a tech I covops cloak).
Covops are just gamebreaking, and offer a skewed risk reward paradigm. I'd have been happy with like a 50k smartbomb that only decloaks ships as a counter. However I will accept this as a good means of offering a counter to them.
Thank you CCP, please continue to nerf stuff I Hate (namely everything Tech II, or that requires a level 5 skill to use...).
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 23:05:00 -
[2]
I hope you are joking.
Covert ops... gamebreaking.... LOL
Go look up the word 'covert' in a dictionary.
|
Jenny Spitfire
Caldari
LoneStar Industries
Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 23:05:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 29/08/2006 23:05:51
o.O
Reverse psychology? If you are not kidding, I agree with you on the cov-ops and T1 cloak BPOs.
---------
In the blindness, a streak fiery thread violently cuts the horizon. Bleeding golden mists, engulfing the blindness from within. Burning the darkness. The touch of dawn. |
Major Stormer
Caldari
Demon Womb
Xelas Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 23:07:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Major Stormer on 29/08/2006 23:08:46
Covert ops... gamebreaking.... LOL]
just as sad is those that think the changes to covert ops is gamebreaking.
EDIT: and please leave this open for now...this is a happy thread, the patch thead is full of moaners and its all very depressing :(
--------------------------
0.01 ISK to the first mod that writes in my sig! :D
Pay cash value in cookies plskthx - Immy
Oh man thats gonna be a lot of cookies. |
Gierling
Gallente
Celestial Fleet
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 23:13:00 -
[5]
I'm serious, they completely throw out risk vs reward in all spheres from manufacturing, to scouting, to area denial, to tactical movement.
It lets you move BPO's without risk of being scanned in empire, It lets you automatically get a scout into a protected system (It should be difficult to get intel on an enemy stronghold that actively has gaurds on the gates), It automatically lets you deny a system to ratters (go afk in a cov ops in an enemies mining system), It automatically provides secure warpins far from tacklers and warpable objects. No single vessel is so critical to the success of a a combat action as the Covert ops... that is why they are unbalanced.
There needs to be some way to counter them specifically, and if the best CCP can do is make it so that you can keep them out of a system if you REALLY REALLY want to then I'll take it.
Although I would prefer a temporary decloak/smartbomb for destroyers, this will do in a pinch.
|
Michiyo Daishi
Royal Knights of Khanid
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 23:13:00 -
[6]
umm...
Covert Ops cloak is broken from the patch, they werent gamebreaking in the first place.
-
want a sig like mine? |
Major Stormer
Caldari
Demon Womb
Xelas Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 23:15:00 -
[7]
 Originally by: Gierling
I'm serious, they completely throw out risk vs reward in all spheres from manufacturing, to scouting, to area denial, to tactical movement.
It lets you move BPO's without risk of being scanned in empire, It lets you automatically get a scout into a protected system (It should be difficult to get intel on an enemy stronghold that actively has gaurds on the gates), It automatically lets you deny a system to ratters (go afk in a cov ops in an enemies mining system), It automatically provides secure warpins far from tacklers and warpable objects. No single vessel is so critical to the success of a a combat action as the Covert ops... that is why they are unbalanced.
There needs to be some way to counter them specifically, and if the best CCP can do is make it so that you can keep them out of a system if you REALLY REALLY want to then I'll take it.
Although I would prefer a temporary decloak/smartbomb for destroyers, this will do in a pinch.
very good points. thanking you using to to fuel a debate here :D
--------------------------
0.01 ISK to the first mod that writes in my sig! :D
Pay cash value in cookies plskthx - Immy
Oh man thats gonna be a lot of cookies. |
R0ze
Hounds of Basgerin
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 23:19:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Gierling
There needs to be some way to counter them specifically, and if the best CCP can do is make it so that you can keep them out of a system if you REALLY REALLY want to then I'll take it.
Sitting at gate and smartbombing like hell? :)
On the other hand if there was a way (besides the SB for example) wouldnt that also nerf the whole Covop thing?
Maybe increasing cap needs so you cant like run it for days :)
|
Tao Han
Caldari
Crucial Electronics
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 23:20:00 -
[9]
Actually... I kind of agree, altough its a sad day for the Stealthbomber crew
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 23:21:00 -
[10]
Right, because no-one loses covert ops already do they... so now there is a 'certain death' function being introduced... namely jumping into a gate where there is an interceptor with a 20km scram.
If you fit a cloak and probe launcher, you need lows for CPU upgrades, you can't fit nanos or WCS.
Bye bye covert.
You guys must be joking, or trolling... or both.
|
Onin Ra
Trail of Tears
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 23:24:00 -
[11]
Dont give a rats ass about cov-ops, we lived without em before, can live without em now. There is alot of "broken" ships anyway.
But insta "fix" and queue is da bomb.
---
First pvp expirience in eve is alot like having first sex, you have absolutely no idea what you are doing, but it is exciting and one way or another its over way too fast.
|
Gierling
Gallente
Celestial Fleet
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 23:25:00 -
[12]
All I want is a module which would send out a pulse that decloaks any cloaked ship within a 50k radius for one second. Then they autorecloak, but you have an inkling of thier position and can head over to manually decloak them.
So that its more of a game of cat and mouse, where a covops will need to possibly react to you tactically. Where covops can be deterred, discovered and possibly even hunted.
But in the absence of such a thing, I will accept this.
|
Miss Overlord
Gallente
Garoun Investment Bank
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 23:27:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Onin Ra
Dont give a rats ass about cov-ops, we lived without em before, can live without em now. There is alot of "broken" ships anyway.
But insta "fix" and queue is da bomb.
agree its a boost for us gate snipers down with the covert ops (the gate camping pirates here will be happy to) it just makes this game so easy ... thanks again CCP lova ya for it.
|
R0ze
Hounds of Basgerin
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 23:28:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Butter Dog
You guys must be joking, or trolling... or both.
Naah waiting in queue for next jump ;)
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 23:29:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Gierling
All I want is a module which would send out a pulse that decloaks any cloaked ship within a 50k radius for one second. Then they autorecloak, but you have an inkling of thier position and can head over to manually decloak them.
Quite an interesting suggestion, I wouldnt be against this.
But as covert ops are used for scouting, its rather insane to not allow them to warp away from a gate if there is an interceptor pilot there who is even half-decent. Which is the case at present.
Everyone I know has effectively stopped using them. And who can blame them? Certain death and a 60m ISK module lost... would you risk it?
|
Coran Ordus
Ominous Corp
Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 23:32:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Butter Dog
Right, because no-one loses covert ops already do they... so now there is a 'certain death' function being introduced... namely jumping into a gate where there is an interceptor with a 20km scram.
If you fit a cloak and probe launcher, you need lows for CPU upgrades, you can't fit nanos or WCS.
Bye bye covert.
You guys must be joking, or trolling... or both.
I actually agree with the OP, but you have a point that they're stupidly fragile. Suppose they had 1/2 - 2/3 inty speed, or better resists. Doesn't it seem a lot more reasonable now? |
Luc Boye
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 23:34:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Luc Boye on 29/08/2006 23:34:50
Originally by: Butter Dog
But as covert ops are used for scouting, its rather insane to not allow them to warp away from a gate if there is an interceptor pilot there who is even half-decent. Which is the case at present.
Actually most ppl use them for probing stuff up and setting up fleet combat/ganks. As it is now, you have to be pretty thick to lose a covops.
---
|
Jenny Spitfire
Caldari
LoneStar Industries
Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 23:34:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Butter Dog
Everyone I know has effectively stopped using them. And who can blame them? Certain death and a 60m ISK module lost... would you risk it?
If nobody wants to use it, the price will drop. Havent you learnt? Oh yea, I forgot that you like to spam trolling in every thread without thinking hard. Cloaks are IMHO the bastard modules in EvE. Battleships, haulers, cruisers are fitting one. They need redesign.
Cov ops cloak should be a module that is useful when you are somewhere in a system and start a game of cat and mouse. It shouldnt render the pilot invinsible after jumping into a camp.
---------
In the blindness, a streak fiery thread violently cuts the horizon. Bleeding golden mists, engulfing the blindness from within. Burning the darkness. The touch of dawn. |
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 23:37:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Originally by: Butter Dog
Everyone I know has effectively stopped using them. And who can blame them? Certain death and a 60m ISK module lost... would you risk it?
If nobody wants to use it, the price will drop. Havent you learnt? Oh yea, I forgot that you like to spam trolling in every thread without thinking hard. Cloaks are IMHO the bastard modules in EvE. Battleships, haulers, cruisers are fitting one. They need redesign.
Cov ops cloak should be a module that is useful when you are somewhere in a system and start a game of cat and mouse. It shouldnt render the pilot invinsible after jumping into a camp.
The price doesnt bother me, its their functionality which has been eroded.
I dont care how much covert ops cost personally, but lets face it, you may as well not bother and use a shuttle instead with the way things are right now.
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 23:38:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Luc Boye
Edited by: Luc Boye on 29/08/2006 23:34:50
Originally by: Butter Dog
But as covert ops are used for scouting, its rather insane to not allow them to warp away from a gate if there is an interceptor pilot there who is even half-decent. Which is the case at present.
Actually most ppl use them for probing stuff up and setting up fleet combat/ganks. As it is now, you have to be pretty thick to lose a covops.
Granted, but you still need to move then about to the target system. And they ARE generally used as scouts.
The 'certain death' interceptor + 20k scram scenario still applies with the way things work at the moment.
|
Luc Boye
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 23:39:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Butter Dog
Originally by: Luc Boye
Edited by: Luc Boye on 29/08/2006 23:34:50
Originally by: Butter Dog
But as covert ops are used for scouting, its rather insane to not allow them to warp away from a gate if there is an interceptor pilot there who is even half-decent. Which is the case at present.
Actually most ppl use them for probing stuff up and setting up fleet combat/ganks. As it is now, you have to be pretty thick to lose a covops.
Granted, but you still need to move then about to the target system. And they ARE generally used as scouts.
The 'certain death' interceptor + 20k scram scenario still applies with the way things work at the moment.
Dude, as it is now, you lose a covops only if you really mess up. It shouldn't be that easy.
---
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 23:43:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Butter Dog on 29/08/2006 23:43:27
Originally by: Luc Boye
Originally by: Butter Dog
Originally by: Luc Boye
Edited by: Luc Boye on 29/08/2006 23:34:50
Originally by: Butter Dog
But as covert ops are used for scouting, its rather insane to not allow them to warp away from a gate if there is an interceptor pilot there who is even half-decent. Which is the case at present.
Actually most ppl use them for probing stuff up and setting up fleet combat/ganks. As it is now, you have to be pretty thick to lose a covops.
Granted, but you still need to move then about to the target system. And they ARE generally used as scouts.
The 'certain death' interceptor + 20k scram scenario still applies with the way things work at the moment.
Dude, as it is now, you lose a covops only if you really mess up. It shouldn't be that easy.
Er, have you used a covert since Dragon?
If you jump into a system with a dictor camp, you are 100% assured of death if anything smaller than a Carrier starts locking you. Also if an Interceptor with a 20km scram sits on the gate, you are equally 100% assured of death (if they are awake). No ifs, no buts... you are dead.
|
Balklanac
Freezoner
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 00:15:00 -
[23]
With a dictor camp , a lot of ships are assured of death. They've made 0.0 life a lot more difficult.
---------
I would love to see a bounty pilot get some friend or an alt to pod them to collect the isk if that resulted in a two week delay before their 'personality' was uploaded to a new clone. |
Izo Azlion
Veto.
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 00:38:00 -
[24]
I typed up a comical version of the OP's post, but its not worth posting because of the potential wounds I might suffer from those higher than me.
I will say that I think the OP is a fruit and nut cake, and that he should go and spend his time with the one holding the Trident below us.
Izo Azlion.
---
Veto.
|
Kage Getsu
Lordless
Unbrella Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 00:45:00 -
[25]
Covert Ops were never gamebreaking because they were never harmful by themselves unless you are Uuve Savisaalo.
Own a piece of the biggest scammer in EVE history! |
Nesa
Antares Fleet Yards
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 00:48:00 -
[26]
All this will mean is more alt scouts.... woo.
This half fix is at least better than it showing you cloaked when you are not.
It was 'hard' to lose a cov ops before, however as you still decloaked after you jumped, and could be decloaked by anyone with an inkling of where you were. They were not invincible.
It is a problem when they can be decloaked without a lock though, I mean, how does that work, while 'attempting' a lock you're not supposed to be able to do anything to the 'potential' target.... You would be better off with some area of affect decloaking device. Or tactical environments like deadspace that don't allow cloaks to work etc.
|
Gierling
Gallente
Celestial Fleet
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 03:55:00 -
[27]
Fruit AND nut cake?
|
Buxaroo
Black Dwarf
Caldari Deep Space Industral
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 04:04:00 -
[28]
A covert ops ships is SUPPOSED to be untouchable. Just like a ninja or a spy, you are not supposed to know where they are etc. And the thing that people keep forgetting is that a covert ops frigate is used for SCOUTING and gathering intel, NOT for fighting. So covert ops are already handicapped. Now, if they made it where a BS could warp while cloaked then I can understand your complaints about this. And I have lost a covert ops or 2 from dictor camps so they are NOT invincible.
IMHO the bug is GAMEBREAKING because it means that a cloak is totaly ******* useless now until they fix this. And every alliance/corp has a covert ops pilot(s) that they use so its a completely level playing field.
|
Buxaroo
Black Dwarf
Caldari Deep Space Industral
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 04:17:00 -
[29]
Just found these patch notes for the patch coming up Thursday:
Patch Notes:
Dragon Code Branch Patch Notes
Fixes
* An issue with corp manufacturing processes has been resolved.
* The market in Tash-Murkon region now starts up correctly after DT.
* The Market will no longer reopen when you next undergo a session change (ie, dock, undock, jump) if you used the market button on the Neocom to toggle the market closed.
* An issue which prevented the packaging of ships manufactured in a ship assembly array also prevented the launch of ships from corporation hangars and assembly arrays. Both issues have been resolved.
* The missing warping sound effect has returned.
* Characters in NPC corps will no longer have a list of "Untitled 1, Untitled 2" etc. in their show info.
* Escrow will correctly display Blueprint copies as copies and blueprint originals as originals.
* A number of server side fixes to improve the startup and resolve the issues that occured after the Dragon update have been made via previous hotfixes.
* The default 'warp to' distance is once again configurable.
* If a ship that is being targeted, and cloaks, the lock will now guarantee the uncloak effect occurs.
Changes
* The jump queue for systems will only occur if the system in question is on a node using 95% or more CPU. This has previously been hotfixed on TQ.
* Bookmark copying is now limited to 5 bookmarks at a time. Attempting to copy more than 5 bookmarks will result in only 5 being copied.
* A number of agents have items they need transported and will be offering compensation for hauling these goods. (A number of courier missions will be returning).
I don't comprehend this: Does this mean that the ship will decloak? From what I read this looks to be the problem that is happening NOW. Or is this icelandic mis-interpretation?
|
Miss Overlord
Gallente
Garoun Investment Bank
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 04:31:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Buxaroo
Just found these patch notes for the patch coming up Thursday:
Patch Notes:
Dragon Code Branch Patch Notes
Fixes
* An issue with corp manufacturing processes has been resolved.
* The market in Tash-Murkon region now starts up correctly after DT.
* The Market will no longer reopen when you next undergo a session change (ie, dock, undock, jump) if you used the market button on the Neocom to toggle the market closed.
* An issue which prevented the packaging of ships manufactured in a ship assembly array also prevented the launch of ships from corporation hangars and assembly arrays. Both issues have been resolved.
* The missing warping sound effect has returned.
* Characters in NPC corps will no longer have a list of "Untitled 1, Untitled 2" etc. in their show info.
* Escrow will correctly display Blueprint copies as copies and blueprint originals as originals.
* A number of server side fixes to improve the startup and resolve the issues that occured after the Dragon update have been made via previous hotfixes.
* The default 'warp to' distance is once again configurable.
* If a ship that is being targeted, and cloaks, the lock will now guarantee the uncloak effect occurs.
Changes
* The jump queue for systems will only occur if the system in question is on a node using 95% or more CPU. This has previously been hotfixed on TQ.
* Bookmark copying is now limited to 5 bookmarks at a time. Attempting to copy more than 5 bookmarks will result in only 5 being copied.
* A number of agents have items they need transported and will be offering compensation for hauling these goods. (A number of courier missions will be returning).
I don't comprehend this: Does this mean that the ship will decloak? From what I read this looks to be the problem that is happening NOW. Or is this icelandic mis-interpretation?
if youre being locked u cloak u are 100% uncloaked thats it pretty much what we need is a 100% reduction in sig radius of the covert ops to make a longer lock time (unless they can fix it this is the only other option unless u just remove covert ops fully until they are fixed)
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |