|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
911
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 16:18:56 -
[1] - Quote
the no d-scanning bit is stupid, and this hybrid tracking bonuses on roden thing is stupid as well.
how about instead, you remove the covops cloaks from force recons, and make them immune to d-scanner instead.
why is the curse not getting a 5th lowslot? why is the lachesis not getting a 4th (and 5th) lowslot? these are supposed to be armour tanked ships, but they're really bad at it because they have no slots and no fitting. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
911
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 16:41:47 -
[2] - Quote
seriously you just give them the same stuff as hacs, but with ewar and silly tackle bonuses instead of guns. how is it possible to **** this up so much? |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
911
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 17:14:38 -
[3] - Quote
let's distinguish between ewar ships that are useful for straight up gang stuff (T1), and ewar ships that are good for blobbing soloers (EAFs, force recons, proposed combat recons).
I think we could do with more from the first category, and less from the second category. blobbing my solo frigate/cruiser is already insanely easy without 25km warp scramblers and 80km disruptors/webs, you don't need that stuff and cloaks and has d-scan immunity as well. I was hoping this would be a nerf or removal of the tackle range bonuses on force recons, and a tank/cap fix for combat recons.
and **** ecm, seriously. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
912
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 17:18:43 -
[4] - Quote
Zen Guerrilla wrote:Interesting changes and ideas.
While i like the idea of removing ships from dscan, this is a huge thing in FW. As in, you might have just killed (solo) medium plex pvp.
that's still technically dead, since links and covops ships and even normal cloaks already exist. this just makes it easier to be terrible, which yeah is a bad thing. I just think it's worth whining about the other stuff while we're at it. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
912
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 17:23:00 -
[5] - Quote
Lim Hiaret wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Zen Guerrilla wrote:Interesting changes and ideas.
While i like the idea of removing ships from dscan, this is a huge thing in FW. As in, you might have just killed (solo) medium plex pvp. that's still technically dead, since links and covops ships and even normal cloaks already exist. this just makes it easier to be terrible, which yeah is a bad thing. I just think it's worth whining about the other stuff while we're at it. You can't cloak inside a FW plex, right?
yes you can. get any ship, put a cloak on it, and get another ship and don't put a cloak on it. put them both inside a fw plex. congrats - you can now kill me. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
912
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 17:39:07 -
[6] - Quote
so I'm the only one who thinks curse and lach should have like 50% more lowslots than they have? |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
916
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 18:50:17 -
[7] - Quote
MukkBarovian wrote:This is ridiculous.
- "I warp in 2 fite 2 vexor and they also have 2 rook." Yes this will happen but with the current rules you could warp in to 2 vexors and have 2 falcons decloak on you. Nothing is stopping anybody from doing that.
this change is probably ok if you're ok with falcons and stuff, but lots of people aren't. doing this makes more things like that happen. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
917
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 19:07:57 -
[8] - Quote
Mr Floydy wrote:I'm really torn on the immune to dscan thing.... One one hand I think it sounds hilarious and great fun, but on the other hand it feels a bit OP as in a large amount of circumstances it might as well just be a full cloaky, but without the penalties that tends to come with (delayed locking, weaker tank, slower, less powerful bonuses) I'd certainly want to see them be dscanable whilst on grid. Need to think about whether I like it or not.... As an idea to throw out there, how about that they just show on dscan as "Unidentified Ship" - so they still gain some advantage but they're not invisible?
Not sure on the Pilgrim getting the range bonus either. Finally it gets some better cap and tank to tussle up close, then it loses the strength bonus? Think I'll have to fly it to make a call on that.
'hilarious and great fun' just means it's OP but you're flying it. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
918
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 19:28:15 -
[9] - Quote
Spugg Galdon wrote:Looking at the Rook...... it's still really a bit of a turd. It doesn't have any real "Combat" feel to it.
It needs a substantial powergrid buff and just moar something..... maybe some pppssshhhhhhh
plus the camera is centered like a mile below the model since they changed it. totally disgusting. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
922
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 21:05:31 -
[10] - Quote
Liz Aun wrote:I was hoping for a reason to fly my rapier more
Even though it at first sounds awesome not being visible on d-scan, I think this change is breaking a core mechanic of the game.
I also couldn't help dreaming (stupid, I know) for some better e-war thing than tp bonus. I know it has its uses but it feels so lame compared to the other e-war types that imo are much more useful. For both fleet and solo. TP bonuses for minmatar ships always left me feeling cheated for taking that route.
I also really dislike the switch to missiles, though it might make the tp thing make a little more sense. I think web and turrets is a better combo so I'll probably just keep my rapiers under the dust covers.
Rapiers has always been the ship I dreamed to fly but almost never did. No change there I think.
webs are pretty much the most powerful module in the game. you don't really have anything to complain about on that front. |
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
922
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 15:44:47 -
[11] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote: More low slots for Lachesis. Not sure yet on this one, will talk it over here and see what we can do.
why are you not sure? my celestis and arbitrator have 5. I would expect curse and lachesis to have 5 or 6. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
923
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 15:46:48 -
[12] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:That's more fights because people are risk averse.
actually it's more people getting trashed by risk-averse ecm users. basically this d-scan immunity thing is almost as bad as covops cloaks, and covops cloaks are really horrible **** that should've been changed years ago. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
923
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 15:54:35 -
[13] - Quote
Altirius Saldiaro wrote:Chances are that FW plexs will get a change so that Combat Recons can't enter those sites to satisfy all these crying, whining, bitching and moaning so called Militias. Damn you babies cry a lot.
I hope for all your crying that a curse awaits you in every plex to eat you alive. One of those will be me. \m/ ( >< ) \m/
stop crying bro |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
925
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 17:38:26 -
[14] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:sentinel neut power: - 108GJ every 6s *3 at 31.5km - equals 18GJ per second per neut - 54GJ/s total
new pilgrim: - 180GJ every 12s *3 at 37.8km - equals 15GJ per second per neut - 45GJ/s total
curse: - 360GJ every 6s *5 at 37.6km - equals 30GJ per second per neut -150GJ/s total
the pilgrim needs a little more love IMO. Maybe a 10% neut power bonus?
how about nerfing the sentinel instead? then pilgrim wouldn't look like it's out of line, and also it would fix the sentinel. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
925
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 18:04:21 -
[15] - Quote
Altirius Saldiaro wrote:Rhea Rankin Nolen wrote:Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:Rhea Rankin Nolen wrote:No ship in EvE had that trait yet..and for a reason. Except for every one that can fit a covert ops cloak. The SoE ships come to mind here. As do the cloaky recons and stealth bombers. Oh and T3's and to some extent Black OPs. Except that covert ops cloak has targeting delay after decloak. Doesn't prevent me from killing with my proteus.
actually you can only catch idiots in a covops that isn't a bomber. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
926
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 18:10:15 -
[16] - Quote
yes, thanks ccp. what we need is more ships with rlmls, because frigates are too relevant in actual fights. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
928
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 18:33:37 -
[17] - Quote
Ele Rebellion wrote:CCP Rise
Can I put a scenario in your head?
Faction Warfare. Medium Site. There are +3 or +4 people in local so you decide to try a medium site. D-Scan is clear. Land on gate. D-Scan is still clear. Take gate..
.. As you land you see Lachesis, Huggins, Rook at 30-100km. Lachesis is remote sebo'd. Triple scrams you as soon as you come out of warp. the huggins gets webs and target painters second later. Finally you are perma-jammed.
Scrammed, webbed, target painted, and jammed.
FW will change heavily when the D-Scan immunity goes into effect. People will avoid mediums like the plague, it will become a hunting ground of Force Recons. (might settle after first couple months, but will there be much left when the dust settles?)
True D-Scan immunity will be game breaking. Now if there was a mechanic of kinds where the ship becomes visible if within range of an object or using prop mod or something.
Most importantly they shouldn't be allowed to be "invisible" in a FW Plex. Didn't you just make it to where you can't cloak for this reason? The scenario is part of a doctrine I put together as soon as I heard about to D-Scan immunity, but as I've thought about it more I feel that it is OP, unfair, and game breaking.
apparently that counts as a fight, and apparently more fights is always better. also apparently it's forcing you to be less risk-averse because you're more at risk of getting blobbed by cloakers whenever you do anything (ignoring the fact that it's allowing risk-averse cloak scum to be more successful in pvp). no, I don't understand it either. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
928
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 19:16:21 -
[18] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Bienator II wrote:sentinel neut power: - 108GJ every 6s *3 at 31.5km - equals 18GJ per second per neut - 54GJ/s total
new pilgrim: - 180GJ every 12s *3 at 37.8km - equals 15GJ per second per neut - 45GJ/s total
curse: - 360GJ every 6s *5 at 37.6km - equals 30GJ per second per neut -150GJ/s total
the pilgrim needs a little more love IMO. Maybe a 10% neut power bonus? how about nerfing the sentinel instead? then pilgrim wouldn't look like it's out of line, and also it would fix the sentinel. would be a different topic. the question is if the new pilgrim is good enough to do the job in the current meta.
your suggestion is based on the sentinel not being overpowered |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
938
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 18:44:37 -
[19] - Quote
curse and lachesis still 3/4 lowslots instead of 5/6, d-scan immunity still only justified on the basis that covops cloaks are balanced, even though they aren't, and game-breaking tackle range bonuses still in.
this is actually more disappointing than +0.1 inertia. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
938
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 18:55:29 -
[20] - Quote
why are people talking about entire fleets of combat recons? are you guys ********? |
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
938
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 18:57:48 -
[21] - Quote
Caval Marten wrote:CCP Rise wrote: Dscan immunity is staying. We understand a lot of the concerns raised, but for most of them you guys are doing a great job making strong counter-arguments and I think it will be very interesting to see how this mechanic plays out on TQ. PLEASE someone be a hero and enjoy the free likes by going through the thread and actually putting numbers to the for-against debate. Not sure if it's confirmation bias on my side or Rise's, but to me it seems like the overwhelming amount of feedback is against the idea of dscan immunity.
it's a discussion, not a vote. that said, rise is still terrible. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
938
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 19:05:11 -
[22] - Quote
so people are saying to 'just use probes'.
how do I fit an expanded probe launcher to my thorax? |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
938
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 19:56:30 -
[23] - Quote
Mei Khlolov wrote:Just throwing out an idea for the pilgrim/curse.
Maybe a bandwidth of 60 or 70? This way, you can get a slight amount more dps by allowing a heavy drone or two to squeeze into a full flight, while still keeping it below the full 75 needed for 3 heavies/sentries. Would stick with the recent bandwidth experimentation with the guristas line.
Something like a Gecko + 2 infiltrators would be a typical flight with a 70 bandwidth, 447dps with 3 DDAs.
Or maybe just up them all the way to 75. Either way, for adding a bit of extra offense, this could work without crossing into gallente dedicated drone boat territory.
mixed drone waves are cancer, you should be asking for just a bigger drone damage bonus instead. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
938
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 20:07:25 -
[24] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:so people are saying to 'just use probes'.
how do I fit an expanded probe launcher to my thorax? I refuse to believe that Shadow Cartel of all people are unaware of what scouts are, and how to make good use of them.
ah. yet another case of 'give ccp more money or get ******'. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
938
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 20:12:49 -
[25] - Quote
Mei Khlolov wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:
mixed drone waves are cancer
How so
because they're easier to kill, you get fewer spares, and you're mixing up your tracking and speed loads, and you're making everyone pay loads of money for geckos. and it's just needlessly complicated. imagine if I suggested that the way to fix a low-damage frigate would be to let it replace one of its small guns with a medium gun. you'd hopefully see that that's really stupid. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
938
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 20:54:23 -
[26] - Quote
Joshua Milton Blahyi wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:so people are saying to 'just use probes'.
how do I fit an expanded probe launcher to my thorax? Have your links pilot put out probes. Or fly Legion with ELA sub. You lose a mid but get all the scans. Or have a fleet mate in a confessor. Or maybe small gang always should have included a scout, CCP just removed the option.
I want to fly a thorax, not a legion or confessor. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
942
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 16:32:41 -
[27] - Quote
iteration, guys. if they turn out to be overpowered, these ships will almost certainly be getting a 0.1 inertia nerf 6 months down the line. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
943
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 19:34:29 -
[28] - Quote
but pve people are already completely immune to pvp. massive nerfs to your immunity are a good thing. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
949
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 20:17:03 -
[29] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Monday update - I'm working on a revised proposal but it's a bit slow going with everyone but me out of the office to visit their families (boring). Hopefully some new stuff for you guys soon.
are you going to bring solo back? I'm looking forward to it. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
951
|
Posted - 2014.12.23 16:04:16 -
[30] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote: We are going to move one high slot on the Lachesis to a low slot, making armor slightly more viable while still preserving room in the mids for damps as well as long range warp disruption. The damage potential for the Lach is still on par with other combat recons even without the fifth high so we feel this fits better than giving up a mid.
when are you adding a 5th lowslot to the curse and lachesis? |
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
951
|
Posted - 2014.12.23 16:05:49 -
[31] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:We are disappointed too with having to pull back the resists for fleets. These ships just need that drawback to balance them at smaller scales where they are more likely to get used anyway.
We have T3 rebalance, black ops rebalance, and potential ewar module changes on the horizon to help address this as well.
when is the logi rebalance (nerf)? |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
951
|
Posted - 2014.12.23 16:17:36 -
[32] - Quote
S'No Flake wrote:Please Turn wrote: ... Anyway, Eve is not dying and all that. However, these changes don't provide any new meaningful game-play(they just buff the gank-bears), they promote (once again) the use of alts and send a message that is opposite with the recent CCP's claims(we would like more people in space doing things together). ...
You know, having somebody in your fleet with combat probes doesn't mean it needs to be an alt. Right?
I'm still trying to make this combat probing thorax, it's difficult. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
953
|
Posted - 2014.12.24 00:23:09 -
[33] - Quote
Casirio wrote:Oh don't worry CCP, we'll just keep using T3's and leaving the recons in the hanger.
Good job at removing T2 resists, you know, the one feature everyone in nullsec was excited about.
Literally ruined the viability of combat recons in large engagements.
and you ruined Christmas.
Thanks CCP
maybe when T3s get a -50% ehp nerf? |
|
|
|