| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
Tarek Raimo
Eleutherian Guard
Villore Accords
7
   |
Posted - 2014.12.18 15:57:21 -
[1] - Quote
I add my voice to the chorus of those who think the D-Scan invisibility goes too far. Making them visible only on shorter ranges (5AU for example) could be a compromise.
As for the rest, I like that the split weapon bonuses go away from the Lachesis and Huginn, and I very much like the range bonus on the Pilgrim. The main problem with that ship for me was always that it has two long-range bonuses for drones and tracking disruption but in the end you could not really exploit them fully because the neuts would force you to come close to the target anyway. |
Tarek Raimo
Eleutherian Guard
Villore Accords
7
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 17:45:44 -
[2] - Quote
To not just be a naysayer, allow me to offer an alternative to the intended change. CCP Rise states:
Quote:Give Combat Recons something to make them stand out as a unique and interesting set of ships
How about giving those ships a role bonus of CPU reduction for fitting probe launchers a combat probe scanning strength bonus. They are after all called Combat Recon ships, so why not give them a function that actually fits with their name? |
Tarek Raimo
Eleutherian Guard
Villore Accords
10
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 20:08:56 -
[3] - Quote
Many people have (correctly) pointed out the problematic implications of D-Scan immunity for WH Space and Lowsec solo/small gang pvp, but that is not all of it.
Imagine the following scenario in 0.0:
Local spikes with 100 enemies. Your spotters see that 50 of them are Ishtars/Tengus/Whatever FOTM + Logi, the other 50 are unaccounted for. Therefore, they could be any of four shiptypes with HAC tanks, dangerous EWAR and the damage potential of at least an AF. Even if you have a specialized combat prober in your fleet, you wont be able to determine what they are if they keep warping around in system.
Now take an educated guess what your FC will do.
My money would be on either fleeing or docking up since they can't estimate the risk of the upcoming engagement.
The net effect on nullsec fleet-fights will be negative, of that I am sure. |
Tarek Raimo
Eleutherian Guard
Villore Accords
10
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 20:29:44 -
[4] - Quote
Mr Floydy wrote:Tarek Raimo wrote:Your spotters see that 50 of them are Ishtars/Tengus/Whatever FOTM + Logi, the other 50 are unaccounted for. Therefore, they could be any of four shiptypes with HAC tanks, dangerous EWAR and the damage potential of at least an AF. Or it could be a fleet of 50 cloaky Proteus/Stratios each with over 500dps and a massive tank that have bridged in..... Oh wait that can happen now.
You could still spot those at the moment they bridge in and before they can activate their cloak.
Also, who seriously bridges 50 cloaky T3s to a covert cyno anyway, let alone that I would like to see a cloaky Proteus fit that does 500+dps. |
Tarek Raimo
Eleutherian Guard
Villore Accords
11
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 20:58:57 -
[5] - Quote
Mr Floydy wrote:Tarek Raimo wrote:
You could still spot those at the moment they bridge in and before they can activate their cloak.
Also, who seriously bridges 50 cloaky T3s to a covert cyno anyway, let alone that I would like to see a cloaky Proteus fit that does 500+dps.
Being pedantic..... If they cyno in outside of your dscan range..... But yeh, I'm being pedantic. As to 50+ covops bringing in. Can't see anyone doing it, but you really think someone's going to turn up with a fleet of just 50 Recons which is going to have **** poor dps compared to a load of dps ships?
Maybe not 50, but imagine if you scale that up. For example imagine a fuckyoufleet style setup where all the damping ships have the tanks of HACs, long range points, and much higher DPS than a Celestis and can't be seen on dscan before they are on grid. |
| |
|