|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
133
   |
Posted - 2014.12.18 15:38:29 -
[1] - Quote
The Dscan thingy completely breaks wormhole risk/reward. C1-C3 will be a wasteland |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
136
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 15:46:35 -
[2] - Quote
Nys Cron wrote:Ross Sylibus wrote:I don't see how this doesn't make WH space completely unlivable for most of EVE. This just makes wspace more awesome.
For those who would make their isk in closed-up holes, maybe.
You will see a huge drop in activity in C1-C3 space, can't really be a good thing ... |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
136
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 15:53:42 -
[3] - Quote
Pelea Ming wrote:I love all the bitching from the WH residents. Duh, they still have to probe your ass out, and your d-scan still picks the damned probes up! If your still on grid for the recon to find you by that point, your blown up even now, since you failed to get safe while they were probing you down!
Other then that, I do agree that overall, the Pilgrim still fails to shine.
That's not really how it works. Most PvE happens in anomalies that don't need to be probed down ...
it's also not just wormholers complaining. The landsscape of fw and general solo pvp would change too |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
164
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 18:59:12 -
[4] - Quote
So CCP will release this abomination with Proteus and then largely ignore the 10 GD whining threads per day for the next two months. Maybe CCP Falcon will leave a clever comment about how EvE is supposed to be hard yada yada when in fact d-scan immunity on recons does nothing but simplify ganks.
Eventually, d-scan immunity will be retracted and a feature that might have lead to actually interesting gameplay if implemented differently forever be borked (see walking in stations and Incarna).
Nice job |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
167
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 01:46:29 -
[5] - Quote
Ehud Gera wrote:CCP Rise wrote:[quote]
Yes, people are risk averse, they want to make good decisions when they're taking risks and that often leads being conservative. That's exactly why I like this kind of mechanic. People want to do the fun thing and take more engagements, but when they have enough information to know that they aren't the favorite they shy away from fighting. However, when some information is obscured they become optimistic and take more risks. I've seen players so willing to make decisions that are likely too risky simply because they lack perfect information. Jumping into gate camps where positional information isn't guaranteed, engaging on stations with people docked, fighting in systems with more in local than can be accounted for, etc. These mechanics that obscure information give people the excuses needed to take risks. Take the example given somewhere in this thread of a low sec camp with 2 Vexors and 2 Rooks. Before these changes, the gang considering fighting them never would because they know they can't deal with the Rooks. After, they won't see them and so they will probably engage. That's more fights because people are risk averse.
Are you talking about more fights, or more frustration? I don't want to see more fights just for the sake of more ships blown up on zkillboard, I want GOOD FIGHTS. Having DSCAN be unusable in the case of recons (ECM, and EWAR in general already being a cause of frustration to many solo and small gang pilots) is rash. If you want more fights give us more content that throws pilots after the same goals in a competitive nature. You're upping the Gankability factor, not the Gudfight factor. I see this as a negative. "Moar content" isn't the answer CCP Rise. More Good Content is. Please look for other opportunities to increase content besides arbitrary bonus changes on hulls. More complexity in combat pve that requires the attention of pilots off their dscan comes to mind. Try that first?
this
|
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
171
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 11:04:12 -
[6] - Quote
Adrie Atticus wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote:Adrie Atticus wrote:ITT: risk-averse FW farmers and WH carebears whining about being exposed to PvP. From a guy who one ever gets kills in fleets of 30-200 people. Point still stands, no matter how much you try to shoot the messenger.
If you had paid proper attention, you would have noticed that it's not the carebears complaining but people that do solo / small gang pvp. I would benefit from dscan immunity in wormholes, yet I don't want it. Why? I believe it's bad for the overall health of the lower class community ...
You have no point. |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
176
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 22:30:56 -
[7] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Sabrina Scatterbrain wrote:The end result of Dscan buggery will be that wormhole space is dead and current blob mechanics will shift to Recon blobs, good job CCP, good job. Please explain how anybody but carebear farmers would be hurt by this in wormholes. Especially seeing as how wormholers often fly ships that will reduce a solo recon to dust without much trouble, even after an EHP buff.
As someone who hunts for those carebear farmers I will be hurt by this because I expect there will be significantly less prey after only a couple of weeks of ReconOnline.
I will also be hurt as a solo pvp person who tends to fly ships that can be killed by recons quite easily (sabre ftw). I actually do use a scout with an extended probe launcher, however, dropping combat scanner probes is something that has certain consequences (like giving away that I have a scout with combat scanner probes, to name one) and I'd like to retain it as a tactical choice not to drop them. Having d-scan immune ships takes that choice away.
EDIT: Something like the above might seem silly to you. But it's such nuances in strategy that make a huge difference if you want to get kills. |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
177
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 00:07:46 -
[8] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Thanatos Marathon wrote:
rofl, its called clicking your mouse button.
Well, that's what you say, but it's a pretty big coincidence if you can be clicking d-scan literally constantly and spot the guy when he randomly pops in. I honestly doubt that you do that literally once a second, every second. If so I'd like to see your CTS surgery scars, lol. Now, I would easily believe that wormholers use d-scan bots, however. I've known that to be a thing for a long time, and I suspect having that taken away from them is a large portion of why some are so upset about this.
Yes I'm upset because my prey can no longer use dscan bots to prevent me from killing them. Eh?
|
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
181
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 01:24:18 -
[9] - Quote
Prince Amygdala wrote:Krystyn wrote:New Ratting/Plex plan: Immediately dock the second anyone enters local who isn't a blue.
New PVP plan fly unscannable fleets and gank people or fly lots of cheap suicide atrons.
Lame Love the tears. The crybaby is strong in this thread. The changes to Recon seem interesting, looking forward to trying them out. If the risk averse want to dock up and avoid playing the game because they can't be 100% safe in space anymore, good riddance. Go sit in captains quarters, lol. But please, don't stop your ragetear posts. The rest of us are entertained.
The criticism has few to do with risk aversion. The proposed changes support a gank culture (as opposed to "gud fight" culture) and make it harder yet for smaller groups and solo pvp pilots to use skill and knowledge to prevail against bigger groups.
This is just not something EVE needs right now, and I'm disappointed that CCP Rise blatantly ignores the concerns of what would seem to be a majority of players. |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
188
|
Posted - 2014.12.23 23:17:39 -
[10] - Quote
Giving combat recons full t2 resists and putting the dscan immunity on hold until there has been a comprehensive overhaul of the system would have been the sensible thing to do.
What you're doing Mr. CCP Rise is plain bullsmits pretend listening to players. Thanks so much.
|
|
|
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
197
|
Posted - 2015.01.07 14:46:02 -
[11] - Quote
Niskin wrote:King Fu Hostile wrote:Niskin wrote:I don't know what kind of stasis field you people are operating in but the time between aligning or initiating warp and clicking the cloaking device is less than one second. That means at most you are on scan for one to two seconds. The fastest you can click d-scan is every two seconds. The only time people actually show up uncloaked for any length of time is when they are dropping probes.
So yes, if you click scan every two seconds, always, you might notice a cloaky ship entering your wormhole. People are arguing in here like that's always the case, and it's not even close. Try clicking scan every two seconds for 10 minutes, if you can even keep up with it your wrist will be burning in no time. Now do that for an hour, or multiple hours, for days.
The truth is that you can catch people sneaking up on you with d-scan, but that doesn't mean you always will. You show up on scan long after you have clicked cloak on your client and disappear from grid. Your cloaky Proteus can be already in warp after cloaking, and still visible on dscan. That has not been my experience. There will be inherent delays due to long distance communication with the server, and the 1 second server ticks will propagate that a bit. But I've never seen a case where somebody cloaked and still showed on scan for any length of time, even for 1 second.
I find your lack of knowledge disturbing. It's Wormhole 101 that you'll show up on dscan for at least 4-5 seconds even if you immediately re-cloak. |
|
|
| |
|