Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 .. 80 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
879
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 14:39:51 -
[1531] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Squatdog wrote:Zappity wrote:Squatdog wrote:Zappity wrote: They are more detectable. Combat probes have much larger radius than d-scan.
How many PVP or PVE ships typically fit combat probes? Now or after Proteus? I imagine that probing will become more important for both activities. Which is fine. Being forced to gimp your fit to deal with an absurdly broken game mechanic is NOT fine. At least you CAN detect them, which is more than can be said for covops cloaked ships. If anything is absurdly broken it is that. D-scan immunity which can at least be defeated by actively looking for it seems fine in comparison.
Covops ships are gimpy, these ships are not. That's the difference you keep refusing to understand. The new combat recons will be 95% as un-detectable as a covops (and in some ways more stealthy-- at least cloaky ships need to appear on d-scan to take gates, interact with objects, sit afk in a POS, etc), while retaining the tank, dps, and slot layouts of a normal combat ship. |
Joshua Milton Blahyi
Therapists Inc
55
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 14:53:25 -
[1532] - Quote
Ehud Gera wrote:
Solo and small gang pilots find it daunting to not even be able to gather intel without gimping their fit with an expanded probe launcher. (Especially in lowsec!)
As a true solo low sec PvE toon, I can't wait for these changes.
I do my PvE in a T3, that can easily fit an expanded probe launcher to an actual combat fit. Sure it took some SP investment, and I am losing a mid slot to be able to run the probes full time, but it won't overly affect my site times, and as long as I keep my head about me, my risk level will not rise to an unacceptable level.
What will happen is that competition for the sites is going to go way down as people who are too afraid to step out of their Ishtar comfort zone no longer put their HAC's at risk because they are not able to run probes on their main screen.
The guy running an actual solo setup will only need to make some slight adjustments to be able to function in low sec with the new meta. The multi toon people are the ones who are actually affected more. They won't be able to be scanning down the next systems while their Ishtar afk's through the sites for them. They will have to keep their scanning alt in system to protect their mission runner, which will really hurt their ISK efficiency.
On the plus side to that of course is that if I see the local multi tooners running sites and they move their scanner out of system, I can always swap to a recon and contest the site.
So as a solo PvE player, I stand to make more money, face less competition, and potentially get some PvP kills if someone does not have the right focus. All it costs me is a mid slot, and a more active approach to site running. |
FistyMcBumBardier
TURN LEFT The Camel Empire
93
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 15:15:57 -
[1533] - 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.
Take your time and come up with something that will actually be game changing. I like the proposed changes, but there are MUCH better options for Combat Recons than the first pass.
An update on ECM would also be pretty dope.
Have a good Christmas. |
TheMercenaryKing
StarFleet Enterprises Almost Awesome.
331
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 15:28:53 -
[1534] - Quote
DScan immunity needs to stay.
Cloaks need a counter.
People need to STFU/HTFU. |
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
173
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 15:36:54 -
[1535] - Quote
TheMercenaryKing wrote:Cloaks need a counter. How d-scan immunity is counter to cloaking?
Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears.
I am the night. I'm Bantam.
More exploration in exploration
|
Mal Nina
The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
69
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 16:25:42 -
[1536] - Quote
Some of the issues I see with recons is simply from lack of a framework for ship and module design and how ships and modules interact. what I propose is building the framework and working from it. It would address many of the concerns that have been expressed thus far in this post and others.
Warning this goes out of the normal box and so can be controversial
A proposed framework for working ship design/module design that could be used from now into the future.
High slots - use these for projected effects. The modules that are used in high slots are all modules that project effects onto the environment. For the most part this is already what happens. However in the case of recons there are bonused effects that come from mid slots. While we are doing this revision lets change that once and for all.
Mid and low slots - use for ship enhancement and projected effect enhancement.
Examples. Guns and missiles are a damage projected effect that is all high slot with mid and low slot effect enhancements. The counter is remote repair which is also a high slot., Enhancement are mid and low. Those enhancements help in tracking, range, and damage. when one of these effects has no enhancement that is an opportunity to create a new module. As an example there are no enhancements to remote repair for distance or strength, perhaps there should be.
NOS and Nuet are high slots and so is their counter in the form of remote ET. modules could be designed to enhance the projected effects of these systems so that greater distance or Strength(damage in a sense) could be achieved from mid and low slot modules.
ECM and remote ECCM modules would become high slots in keeping with this framework as they are projected effects. Low and mid slots could then be used to enhance their effects for range and strength/"damage"
TP, web, points, and all other remote effects and their counters would again be relegated to high slots with modules that enhance their effects placed in mid and low slots.
Cloaks would move to mid or low since they are not a projected effect.
If the following framework was adopted recons would be specialist ships that project nonlethal force multipliers upon enemy fleets. It would be possible to enhance those effects through low and mid slots and have counters for each effect with modules that enhance individual ships.
With this framework the recon pilot would decide to place ECM in high highs, missiles, or some combination with enhancement for these systems in the mids and lows. more player choice with positives and negatives for each player decision. do I gimp my tank to enhance effects or not? similar to a HAC pilots decision making process of damage vs survivability. Under the current system the recon pilot is basically left with highs filled with damage projection and lows and mids with tank and projected effects with the exception of amarr due to nuets already being a high slot.
This could give rise to a whole new class of logistics ship that goes beyond repairing damage and instead mitigates projected effects with remote assistance.
A proper framework allows designers to see what is missing in the way of projected effects, enhancements for those effects and counters to the effects with enhancements for those counters. With the current ship and module terricide CCP has a chance to establish this framework and find the holes that exist, plug those holes and give players a greater choice in the roles and configurations of their ships with each ship having real differentiation in use. It ends the basically one way to fit a ship issue which many of the recons have had in the past. *+
|
Cmdr TwinTurrets
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 16:37:18 -
[1537] - Quote
I like most of the recon changes. Any chance all the recons could get some kind of bonus towards probe launcher fitting/usage? |
Ehud Gera
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
32
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 16:46:36 -
[1538] - Quote
Mal Nina wrote:Some of the issues I see with recons is simply from lack of a framework for ship and module design and how ships and modules interact. what I propose is building the framework and working from it. It would address many of the concerns that have been expressed thus far in this post and others.
Warning this goes out of the normal box and so can be controversial
A proposed framework for working ship design/module design that could be used from now into the future.
High slots - use these for projected effects. The modules that are used in high slots are all modules that project effects onto the environment. For the most part this is already what happens. However in the case of recons there are bonused effects that come from mid slots. While we are doing this revision lets change that once and for all.
Mid and low slots - use for ship enhancement and projected effect enhancement.
Examples. Guns and missiles are a damage projected effect that is all high slot with mid and low slot effect enhancements. The counter is remote repair which is also a high slot., Enhancement are mid and low. Those enhancements help in tracking, range, and damage. when one of these effects has no enhancement that is an opportunity to create a new module. As an example there are no enhancements to remote repair for distance or strength, perhaps there should be.
NOS and Nuet are high slots and so is their counter in the form of remote ET. modules could be designed to enhance the projected effects of these systems so that greater distance or Strength(damage in a sense) could be achieved from mid and low slot modules.
ECM and remote ECCM modules would become high slots in keeping with this framework as they are projected effects. Low and mid slots could then be used to enhance their effects for range and strength/"damage"
TP, web, points, and all other remote effects and their counters would again be relegated to high slots with modules that enhance their effects placed in mid and low slots.
Cloaks would move to mid or low since they are not a projected effect.
If the following framework was adopted recons would be specialist ships that project nonlethal force multipliers upon enemy fleets. It would be possible to enhance those effects through low and mid slots and have counters for each effect with modules that enhance individual ships.
With this framework the recon pilot would decide to place ECM in high highs, missiles, or some combination with enhancement for these systems in the mids and lows. more player choice with positives and negatives for each player decision. do I gimp my tank to enhance effects or not? similar to a HAC pilots decision making process of damage vs survivability. Under the current system the recon pilot is basically left with highs filled with damage projection and lows and mids with tank and projected effects with the exception of amarr due to nuets already being a high slot.
This could give rise to a whole new class of logistics ship that goes beyond repairing damage and instead mitigates projected effects with remote assistance.
A proper framework allows designers to see what is missing in the way of projected effects, enhancements for those effects and counters to the effects with enhancements for those counters. With the current ship and module terricide CCP has a chance to establish this framework and find the holes that exist, plug those holes and give players a greater choice in the roles and configurations of their ships with each ship having real differentiation in use. It ends the basically one way to fit a ship issue which many of the recons have had in the past. *+
This would be quite game altering and have a Lot of unintended effects. The entire meta of the game would have to be rebalanced and it would take years of changes. I applaud your effort in thinking but i don't think Eve is ready to be remade on this scale quite yet. |
Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
272
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 16:47:16 -
[1539] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote: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.
Perhaps they should change medium gates to accept only T1 cruisers. Mediums and these Combat Recons simply don't match. |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
3062
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 16:53:21 -
[1540] - 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.
"can't be at home, have to balance spaceships" is at least a half decent excuse
eve style bounties (done)
dust boarding parties
imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW
|
|
Moac Tor
Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation
25
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 16:54:21 -
[1541] - Quote
Cmdr TwinTurrets wrote:I like most of the recon changes. Any chance all the recons could get some kind of bonus towards probe launcher fitting/usage? That would make sense seeing as they are meant to be reconnaissance ships. |
Sitting Bull Lakota
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
3
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 16:59:14 -
[1542] - Quote
Giving the pilgrim a 100-125mb drone bandwidth along with the range bonus and neut strength bonus might make the pilgrim too strong and overshadow the other force recon options to too great a degree. Should the pilgrim be able to reach out to 37km with the effectiveness of 4-6 medium neuts (assuming 2 med neuts, probe launcher/covert cyno and cloak in highs), along with being able to field 5 bonused heavy drones, it would essentially be a cloaked armageddon with less staying power and neut strength.
I'd like to see a pilgrim with 100mb of drone bandwidth and neut strength and range bonuses at 20-25% per level. This would give effective neutralizing capability out to 20-27ish km with 4-6.75 medium neuts worth of strength depending on the high slot layout along with 4x Ogre II's. Assuming the medium slots are as follows: Cap booster AB/MWD TD Scram Web, the ship would be able to effectively cap out and eliminate just about any sub-cap, turret based ship assuming a long enough window between the initial de-cloak and the arrival of reinforcements. This would put it in roughly the same category for combat effectiveness as the Stratios, which should be the target for this particular hull. The Pilgrim, ideally (to me), should be able to deal comparable damage to the Stratios while sacrificing tank and scouting proclivity for ewar and combat utility. The result is a ship that must still carefully choose its targets (being significantly more reliant on its own ability than before) while still being a bit of a glass cannon and ill-suited to general fleet warfare or even small-gang warfare where the curse would easily be the better choice.
|
Marlona Sky
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
5816
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 17:01:47 -
[1543] - 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. Targeting an enemy player is 99% of combat in this game. ECM and to an extent, dampeners are not healthy at all. You have the opportunity to change that. The end result should not be where the affected ship is unable to target anything when the EW is applied.
ECM is a terrible mechanic for a couple reasons:
- Obviously not being able to lock a target means it functions as a 'Get out of jail free' card for the enemy of the person who is jammed resulting in less combat.
- Out of all the EW drones being built, almost all are ECM drones. This is not because the other ones are worthless. It is just because ECM is so powerful. I mean after all; why damp/paint/web/tracking disrupt when you can make the target unable to lock anything?
- Because ECM is so over the top powerful when it works, the fast dirty way of balancing it has been to reduce the chance it will work resulting in nothing happening when the module is activated. This is a terrible light switch mechanic. All or nothing.
- There is no counter play for those who are jammed. For 20 seconds plus the amount of time it takes to relock the targets - there is nothing you can do. Sure some will go on about using drones, smartbombs and F.O.F. missiles, but no one is ever able to provide results where these things caused them to win the fight. The ship ECMing the target is almost always aligned so even if they put drones on the them, they will just warp to a ping (which is even easier now with on grid bookmarks visible) and they will be rejammed as soon as it lands. Smartbombs only work if the enemy ships are in range and again, decides to stick around long enough to die to them. Even if you killed the ECM drones with the smartbombs, chances are that 20+ seconds was enough to tip the scale in the fight anyways. Obviously F.O.F. missiles are a joke, especially considering if the person being jammed is not in a missile boat, they don't get to use them.
ECM is just a bad game mechanic. Notice how almost all of the arguments against combat recons not being on directional scanner uses the Rook in the example. It's not necessarily the Rook they fear, it is ECM.
ECM does not need to be nerfed. It needs to be replaced!
We have tracking disruption, a missile disruption EW would be welcomed. Everyone is so sick of Drones Online, where is the drone disruption? Would be nice to target that Ishtar/Dominix, turn on my Balmer series drone disruption and those sentries become less effective at those extreme ranges. Even if you guys are not ready to release new EW, at least replace ECM with a couple existing EW in the game until then. Target painting makes sense.
With ECM out of the picture, you can get rid of ECCM resulting in far less off grid boosting ships as well. (sorry slippery Petes. you were a cowards ship anyways)
There is no point in leaving in such a terrible game mechanic when you guys can easily pull it right now and replace it with existing EW that actually has counter play.
The Paradox
|
Marlona Sky
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
5816
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 17:16:14 -
[1544] - Quote
Just don't forget the cancer that is ultra easy and effort free perfect intel. It results in far less fights. If not appearing on the directional scanner is not an option, then perhaps not appearing in local chat is. And don't worry about those nullbears, everyone has intel channels and of course the d-scan. If they are proactive in gathering intel for a change, then combat recons will not be the END OF DAYS as some are saying. Don't give in to the fear mongering!
The Paradox
|
Niskin
League of the Lost
173
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 17:35:05 -
[1545] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:afkalt wrote:Belinda HwaFang wrote:However, since Combat Recons don't need a cloak to hide from DSCAN they can appear on grid from out of nowhere and point the target without worry of any targeting delay because they were never cloaked in the first place To be fair, you're on grid a good while "decelerating" before locking is a possibility. We've all seen the reverse when a hostile warps in and you're mashing lock and getting nothing but "target is invulnerable" messages back until it's "out of warp". Something small would get out, something bigger and fit for PvP should be equipped to punch it in the face. Curse is probably the most dangerous in this scenario. People do seem fixated on the "victim" (the person warped to) though, as if there is no possibility of there being a curse or two waiting at the warp in point to give a would be pirate the good news. These will be glorious over/under/all around bait cynos 'target is invulnerable' is not the same as 'being in warp'. I know eve is a hard game but i wish people would realise how little they know sometimes. 'target is invulnerable' when a target actually lands can be canceled by the invulnerable party by performing an action. otherwise it lasts quite some time (dont know exactly, perhaps 10 seconds) before you can lock it. He can however, start locking you and go vunlerable as soon as he likes.
You just described how undocking works, and how titan bridging works, but that is NOT how warping works. When you warp you are invulnerable from the time your ship successfully activates the warp drive, until you have completely exited your warp at the other end. Your actions will be denied until you leave warp and you will be lockable as soon as you exit warp. There is no timed and/or breakable immunity on a warp tunnel exit. If you can lock them they can lock you.
It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog
Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship.
-MooMooDachshundCow
|
Amanda Orion
Open University of Celestial Hardship Art of War Alliance
33
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 17:39:41 -
[1546] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:ECM is a terrible mechanic for a couple reasons:
- Obviously not being able to lock a target means it functions as a 'Get out of jail free' card for the enemy of the person who is jammed resulting in less combat.
- Out of all the EW drones being built, almost all are ECM drones. This is not because the other ones are worthless. It is just because ECM is so powerful. I mean after all; why damp/paint/web/tracking disrupt when you can make the target unable to lock anything?
- Because ECM is so over the top powerful when it works, the fast dirty way of balancing it has been to reduce the chance it will work resulting in nothing happening when the module is activated. This is a terrible light switch mechanic. All or nothing.
- There is no counter play for those who are jammed. For 20 seconds plus the amount of time it takes to relock the targets - there is nothing you can do. Sure some will go on about using drones, smartbombs and F.O.F. missiles, but no one is ever able to provide results where these things caused them to win the fight. The ship ECMing the target is almost always aligned so even if they put drones on the them, they will just warp to a ping (which is even easier now with on grid bookmarks visible) and they will be rejammed as soon as it lands. Smartbombs only work if the enemy ships are in range and again, decides to stick around long enough to die to them. Even if you killed the ECM drones with the smartbombs, chances are that 20+ seconds was enough to tip the scale in the fight anyways. Obviously F.O.F. missiles are a joke, especially considering if the person being jammed is not in a missile boat, they don't get to use them.
ECM is just a bad game mechanic. Notice how almost all of the arguments against combat recons not being on directional scanner uses the Rook in the example. It's not necessarily the Rook they fear, it is ECM. ECM does not need to be nerfed. It needs to be replaced!We have tracking disruption, a missile disruption EW would be welcomed. Everyone is so sick of Drones Online, where is the drone disruption? Would be nice to target that Ishtar/Dominix, turn on my Balmer series drone disruption and those sentries become less effective at those extreme ranges. Even if you guys are not ready to release new EW, at least replace ECM with a couple existing EW in the game until then. Target painting makes sense. With ECM out of the picture, you can get rid of ECCM resulting in far less off grid boosting ships as well. ( sorry slippery Petes. you were a cowards ship anyways) There is no point in leaving in such a terrible game mechanic when you guys can easily pull it right now and replace it with existing EW that actually has counter play.
Anything that can create this many tears is Poetry in Motion. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2624
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 17:44:07 -
[1547] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:Just don't forget the cancer that is ultra easy and effort free perfect intel. It results in far less fights. If not appearing on the directional scanner is not an option, then perhaps not appearing in local chat is. And don't worry about those nullbears, everyone has intel channels and of course the d-scan. If they are proactive in gathering intel for a change, then combat recons will not be the END OF DAYS as some are saying. Don't give in to the fear mongering! TBH I would much rather them disappear from local than D-Scan.
D-Scan is a legitimate intelligence tool, local chat is abused into a resource tool.
Don't make ships ignore legit intel and perpetuate local intel. |
Alundil
Isogen 5
800
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 17:45:35 -
[1548] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:Just don't forget the cancer that is ultra easy and effort free perfect intel. It results in far less fights. If not appearing on the directional scanner is not an option, then perhaps not appearing in local chat is. And don't worry about those nullbears, everyone has intel channels and of course the d-scan. If they are proactive in gathering intel for a change, then combat recons will not be the END OF DAYS as some are saying. Don't give in to the fear mongering! I think the Combat Recon changes will be fine in the long run either way. It'll shake up the current meta a bit now and that's cool. However, I think that a far better change would have been to prevent pilots of combat recons appearing in local instead of blocking them from d-scan.
It leaves room for the attentive pilot to gain some intel. It still penalizes those who aren't paying attention. And local is a ****** free intel tool anyways and needs to diaf.
I'm right behind you
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1295
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 17:49:04 -
[1549] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:Just don't forget the cancer that is ultra easy and effort free perfect intel. It results in far less fights. If not appearing on the directional scanner is not an option, then perhaps not appearing in local chat is. And don't worry about those nullbears, everyone has intel channels and of course the d-scan. If they are proactive in gathering intel for a change, then combat recons will not be the END OF DAYS as some are saying. Don't give in to the fear mongering!
Id rather have perfect intel and relying on tricks, skill and my targets laziness than just being handed effortless kills.
Each to their own though i guess. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
589
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 17:49:10 -
[1550] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote: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. Out of all the EW drones being built, almost all are ECM drones. This is not because the other ones are worthless. It is just because ECM is so powerful. I mean after all; why damp/paint/web/tracking disrupt when you can make the target unable to lock anything?
Well, the other EWAR drones being literally terrible doesn't help much. Either castrated by stacking penalties or so ineffective as to be laughable (neut drones) or bugged (webs).
You could delete ECM tomorrow and the ewar drone landscape wouldn't change. It is never worth losing the damage potential for the pissant returns they give.
I suggested these were given the gecko treatment before but don't know that they cared for it. Gecko treatment being bulking up size and bandwidth to allow sidestepping stacking penalties and allowing buffed ewar effects. |
|
Niskin
League of the Lost
173
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 17:51:51 -
[1551] - Quote
As a true solo player, with one account only, I hear these solo player complaints but still disagree. It will be more risky unless you are willing to put in a little more effort. You will have to operate away from the entrance of a plex. You may need a Mobile Tractor Unit, placed away from the entrance also, if you want to collect loot more safely. You will have to watch the overview as diligently as the d-scan window.
When looking to warp into a plex you will have to do more work also. Fitting an Expanded Scan Probe launcher to your ship isn't going to be a reasonable option in most cases. I've operated solo for a long time, I use all three of my character slots. In low sec, if I was in FW again, I'd keep my alt nearby in a T1 scanning frigate with probes. It takes a few extra minutes but you can check the system with combat probes to see if any recons are operating in the area. That will at least get you a safer entry to the plex.
Being a solo player in EVE requires the most effort, the most risk, and you will likely be the one most affected by these kinds of changes. That's just how the game works, you have to be really good and knowledgeable about the game to hold your own against other soloers and groups. When something changes you should be the first one reading about it, planning contingencies and adapting.
Being solo in EVE may be workable for those with casual play styles, but it's not for those who are casual about understanding and exploiting game mechanics. I spend about half the time I could be playing the game reading and learning tricks, and it makes a difference. More playtime and less knowledge would just get me dead more often.
It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog
Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship.
-MooMooDachshundCow
|
Antillie Sa'Kan
Forging Industries Silent Infinity
844
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 18:21:55 -
[1552] - 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. The current proposal is fine tbh. If you drop the HAC resists then the recons will need some more DPS to be competitive in small gangs. Won't help them in fleets though, where they will remain trash. |
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
174
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 18:24:03 -
[1553] - Quote
Niskin wrote:As a true solo player, with one account only, Good start...
Niskin wrote: I've operated solo for a long time, I use all three of my character slots. In low sec, if I was in FW again, I'd keep my alt nearby in a T1 scanning frigate with probes. ...and you lost it. Game of alts again. Show me your b...s and try it with one char only, then we will speak. Everytime i have a problem with game mechanics all i hear is bring an alt...
Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears.
I am the night. I'm Bantam.
More exploration in exploration
|
Niskin
League of the Lost
173
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 18:35:28 -
[1554] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:Niskin wrote:As a true solo player, with one account only, Good start... Niskin wrote: I've operated solo for a long time, I use all three of my character slots. In low sec, if I was in FW again, I'd keep my alt nearby in a T1 scanning frigate with probes. ...and you lost it. Game of alts again. Show me your b...s and try it with one char only, then we will speak. Everytime i have a problem with game mechanics all i hear is bring an alt...
Ok, dock up and buy a T1 frigate and Expanded launcher whenever you need one... single character solution solved. Or you could use the alt and save yourself time and money, which is what I would do. Not to mention it's quicker to just switch characters and probe and switch back. I do stuff like this all the time when it would be useful to have a second account.
The issue with needing an alt revolves around paying for an additional account so you can have both characters online at the same time. I'm telling you how to avoid that. If you can't handle "Quit Game, Click Play on already authenticated launcher, Use Alt" then nobody can help you. Use the resources that are available to you, or don't, but that doesn't mean they aren't available.
It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog
Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship.
-MooMooDachshundCow
|
hellokittyonline
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
121
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 19:00:42 -
[1555] - Quote
Niskin wrote:Jeremiah Saken wrote:Niskin wrote:As a true solo player, with one account only, Good start... Niskin wrote: I've operated solo for a long time, I use all three of my character slots. In low sec, if I was in FW again, I'd keep my alt nearby in a T1 scanning frigate with probes. ...and you lost it. Game of alts again. Show me your b...s and try it with one char only, then we will speak. Everytime i have a problem with game mechanics all i hear is bring an alt... Ok, dock up and buy a T1 frigate and Expanded launcher whenever you need one... single character solution solved. Or you could use the alt and save yourself time and money, which is what I would do. Not to mention it's quicker to just switch characters and probe and switch back. I do stuff like this all the time when it would be useful to have a second account. The issue with needing an alt revolves around paying for an additional account so you can have both characters online at the same time. I'm telling you how to avoid that. If you can't handle "Quit Game, Click Play on already authenticated launcher, Use Alt" then nobody can help you. Use the resources that are available to you, or don't, but that doesn't mean they aren't available. Except when you're roaming around PvPing that means you need to log off/have an alt in every system.
The last thing this game needs is another reason to take on another sub. Furthermore, the last thing low-sec in particular needs is another completely broken mechanic for all the "pay to win" scrubs to exploit. |
Ehud Gera
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
34
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 19:00:59 -
[1556] - Quote
As Crosi put it, make Recon invisible on Local Chat
This^ Would be legit.
And really fits the "Recon" idea without taking on 90% of the role of the covert cloak with none of the drawbacks as immunity would. |
Helene Fidard
20
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 19:21:20 -
[1557] - Quote
Niskin wrote:Your actions will be denied until you leave warp and you will be lockable as soon as you exit warp. There is no timed and/or breakable immunity on a warp tunnel exit. If you can lock them they can lock you. You should test this out sometime. You might be surprised. |
Marlona Sky
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
5820
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 19:27:03 -
[1558] - Quote
One more thing. You can also restrict combat recons from fitting a cyno if you go with the no local route.
The Paradox
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1295
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 19:28:00 -
[1559] - Quote
Ehud Gera wrote:As Crosi put it, make Recon invisible on Local Chat
This^ Would be legit.
And really fits the "Recon" idea without taking on 90% of the role of the covert cloak with none of the drawbacks as immunity would.
I didnt put that. Nor would i endorse it. |
Ehud Gera
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
35
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 19:30:24 -
[1560] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Ehud Gera wrote:As Crosi put it, make Recon invisible on Local Chat
This^ Would be legit.
And really fits the "Recon" idea without taking on 90% of the role of the covert cloak with none of the drawbacks as immunity would. I didnt put that. Nor would i endorse it.
Sry Crosi, misquoted, I think it was someone else. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 .. 80 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |