EVE Search - Sticky:[Proteus - January] Recon ships

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Proteus - January] Recon ships

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

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)

CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 4666	Posted - 2014.12.18 14:57:04 - [1] - Quote Hello again o/ Finally, finally, Recons. I know you guys have been asking for a long time now so even though timing was pretty tight with vacations coming up I want to get this class in for January. We had a few big goals with Recons: Give Combat Recons something to make them stand out as a unique and interesting set of ships Close the gap somewhat between Recons and T3 Cruisers, though this will also be a goal during the T3 Cruiser rebalance Align Recons around ship developer trends established in other classes (Roden Lachesis should not use missiles for example) Address any other general balance issues or pain points (hello Pilgrim) Those goals lead us to the following major changes: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners All eight Recons will have their resist profiles brought up to Heavy Assault Cruiser level All eight Recons will have the capacitor cost of warping reduced by roughly half Where appropriate, bonuses will be adjusted to match ship developer trends All eight Recons are having their capacitor pool and capacitor regeneration buffed (roughly 20% increase in cap regen) The average maximum velocity across the class is going up by around 20m/s We hope in the end we have a more attractive class of ship overall and some exciting new ways to use Combat Recons. That said, there are still some issues we hoped to address before rebalancing this class, such as ECM, which simply weren't happening fast enough. We still feel good about making improvements to this class now and look forward to hearing what you guys have to say about it. Here's the gritty stuff: PILGRIM We decided that the Pilgrim really needed Nos/Neut range, rather than strength, to give it the engagement flexibility that other Recons enjoy. Role Bonus: 80% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator liquid ozone consumption 50% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator duration GÇó Can fit Covert Ops Cloaking Device and Covert Cynosural Field Generator GÇó Cloak reactivation delay reduced to 5 seconds Amarr Cruiser Bonuses: 7.5% bonus to strength of tracking disruptors 10% bonus to drone damage and hp Recon Ships Bonuses: 40% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer range (was 20% nos/neut strength) 20% reduction in Cloaking Devices CPU requirement Slot layout: 4H, 5M, 5L; 3 turrets, 0 launchers Fittings: 1000 PWG(+50), 370 CPU(+20) Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 850(+62) / 1800 / 1050(+178) Capacitor (amount / capacitor per second) : 1450(+190) / 4.39/s (+.75) Mobility (max velocity / agility / align time): 198(+34) / .61(-.1) / 9.61s(-1.57s) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50 / 150 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 104km / 237 / 8(+1) Sensor strength: 26(+2) Radar Signature radius: 155(-1) CURSE Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners Amarr Cruiser Bonuses: 7.5% bonus to Tracking Disruptor effectiveness 10% bonus to Drone hitpoints and damagere Recon Ships Bonuses: 40% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer range 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer amount Slot layout: 5H, 6M, 5L; 2 turrets, 4 launchers Fittings: 900 PWG, 380 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1650(-187) / 1650 / 1075(+203) Capacitor (amount / capacitor per second) : 1470(+220) / 4.46/s (+.83) Mobility (max velocity / agility / align time): 205(+30) / .61(-.04) / 9.99s(-.66s) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50 / 150 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 130km / 281 / 10 Sensor strength: 28 Radar Signature radius: 150 FALCON Role Bonus: 80% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator liquid ozone consumption 50% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator duration GÇó Can fit Covert Ops Cloaking Device and Covert Cynosural Field Generator GÇó Cloak reactivation delay reduced to 5 seconds Caldari Cruiser Bonuses: 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage 10% reduction in ECM Target Jammer activation cost Recon Ships Bonuses: 30% bonus to ECM Target Jammer strength 20% reduction in Cloaking Devices CPU requirement Slot layout: 4H, 7M, 3L; 3 turrets, 1 launchers Fittings: 700 PWG, 380 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1750(+147) / 940(-16) / 945(+204) Capacitor (amount / capacitor per second) : 1190(+96.25) / 3.7/s (+.52) Mobility (max velocity / agility / align time): 192(+23) / .64(+.09) / 10.85s(+1.67s) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 10 / 10 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 120km / 220 / 8(+1) Sensor strength: 28 Gravimetric Signature radius: 180 ROOK Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners Caldari Cruiser Bonuses: 5% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile Launcher rate of fire 10% reduction in ECM Target Jammer activation cost Recon Ships Bonuses: 30% bonus to ECM Target Jammer strength 10% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile max velocity Slot layout: 5H, 7M, 3L; 2 turrets, 5 launchers Fittings: 600 PWG, 600 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 2050(+262) / 965(+9) / 960(+359) Capacitor (amount / capacitor per second) : 1250(+187) / 3.93/s(+.83) Mobility (max velocity / agility / align time): 194(+24) / .61 / 10.76s(-.04s) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25 / 25 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 150km / 259 / 10 Sensor strength: 32 Gravimetric Signature radius: 175(+2) ARAZU Role Bonus: 80% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator liquid ozone consumption 50% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator duration GÇó Can fit Covert Ops Cloaking Device and Covert Cynosural Field Generator GÇó Cloak reactivation delay reduced to 5 seconds Gallente Cruiser Bonuses: 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage 7.5% bonus to Remote Sensor Dampener effectiveness Recon Ships Bonuses: 20% bonus to Warp Scrambler and Warp Disruptor optimal range 20% reduction in Cloaking Devices CPU requirement Slot layout: 4H, 6M, 64L; 3 turrets, 1 launchers Fittings: 750 PWG, 420 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1180(+55) / 1430(+136) / 1080(+208) Capacitor (amount / capac... @ccp_rise


CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 4666	Posted - 2014.12.18 14:57:43 - [2] - Quote Hopefully no typos or weirdnesses but its always possible so just let me know if something looks funny. @ccp_rise

Scheulagh Santorine The Math Department 20	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:00:05 - [3] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners ============================== I used to shoot things. Now I do math. S. Santorine Writings on some formal methods in EvE-Online: Ship Motion in EVE Online
HVAC Repairman GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 848	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:00:06 - [4] - Quote all these ship balances and HACs still haven't been renamed to HVACs Follow me on twitter
Faren Shalni Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 80	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:00:11 - [5] - Quote \o/ So Much Space
Amantus Snuff Box Snuffed Out 349	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:00:29 - [6] - Quote nice
SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 243	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:00:37 - [7] - Quote Looking good. Liking the invisible to d-scan thing.
Xtrah No Holes Barred 203	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:01:26 - [8] - Quote "Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners" WHAT @Xtrah_ - YouTube channel Latest vids: Fight against TDSIN and SSC (Triage) \| The Defence of Polaris
Marcel Devereux Aideron Robotics 394	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:01:39 - [9] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Hopefully no typos or weirdnesses but its always possible so just let me know if something looks funny. The Lach needs a 4th low slot! Move one of those meds so we can at least hope to armor fit it.
Boltorano Devious Chemicals 102	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:03:09 - [10] - Quote You've basically made scout alts mandatory for "solo" site runners. Thanks so much.

Asayanami Dei Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy 1072	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:04:21 - [11] - Quote Get ready to feel the wrath of my Curse (again)! I'm a leaf on the wind, watch how I--THE CAPACITOR IS EMPTY Youtube: /asayanami Twitter: @asayanami The Anthology
Marcel Devereux Aideron Robotics 394	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:05:13 - [12] - Quote How about doing a 5/5/5 slot layout for the Lach? That would give a ton of options for fitting the different tanks.
Canenald Rubella Solaris Test Alliance Please Ignore 19	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:06:10 - [13] - Quote Please also make Huginn a missile boat. It's a Bellicose hull after all. That or change the hull to Stabber or Rupture.
Marcel Devereux Aideron Robotics 396	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:06:34 - [14] - Quote And why does the rest of the combat recons get 15 slots while the curse gets 16? Aren't drone boats suppose to have one less slot?
Connall Tara Conquering Darkness 128	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:08:38 - [15] - Quote whoops Quote: Slot layout: 4H, 6M, 64L; 3 turrets, 1 launchers I think I might have stacking penalty problems before I use all those arazu lows :D Naomi Knight - "You must be CCP Rise alt , that would explain everything"
Airi Cho Dark-Rising Executive Outcomes 48	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:08:48 - [16] - Quote 10 curse please. thank you very much!
Longdrinks Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 147	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:10:22 - [17] - Quote pretty dumb changes with buffs to speed and cap across the board when this was one of the limiting factors holding very strong ships back. Also dscan changes and neutrange on pilgrims is a big middle finger to solo players. 10/10 changes, didnt expect anything else
Keras Authion Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 157	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:10:23 - [18] - Quote Curse has a bonus to drone damagere That d-scan invisibility seems rather powerful in some situations. This post was rated "C" for capsuleer.
Vulfen Snuff Box Snuffed Out 163	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:11:37 - [19] - Quote [quote=CCP Rise] 10% bonus to Drone hitpoints and damagere Just the 1 spelling mistake rise on the curse
Bronwolff LeCroix Motiveless Malignity Unknown Destination 1	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:11:52 - [20] - Quote Missing the sig radius on the Huginn

Chandaris Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel 629	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:13:17 - [21] - Quote 10/10 I love you.
Marcel Devereux Aideron Robotics 396	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:14:46 - [22] - Quote The Huginn also only has 14 slots. So this is what we have so far: Curse: 16 Rook: 15 Lac: 15 Huginn: 14 Seems you missed doing a slot adjusting this pass.
Diivil Magellanic Itg Goonswarm Federation 306	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:14:55 - [23] - Quote Combat recons should at least show up in dscan if you are on the same grid with them. Majority of Eve use dscan tools and it would be extremely frustrating to not be able to copy a certain ship type from dscan list when you can clearly see it in your own overview.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 396	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:16:54 - [24] - Quote RIP anything trying to close on a hyugen now. Making battleships worth the warp Tech 3 battleships. Moar battleships
Suzuma Makiriemi Industries 5	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:19:03 - [25] - Quote Was hoping the Arazu would be made a droneboat with at least 50mbit/100m3 dronebay and 4/7/4 slot layout Lachesis needs damage/tracking or damage/optimal bonuses, cos optimal/tracking is great for what...swatting frigates? Shouldn't one of the Amarr hulls should be lasers? Say damage/tracking or damage/cap use for starters :)
Mizhir Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 70297	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:19:26 - [26] - Quote Some pretty cool changes. Is it intentionally that the curse gained an extra lowslot for free (I hope it is)? One Man Crew - Collective Solo PVP - Video is out!
Asayanami Dei Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy 1073	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:19:40 - [27] - Quote Diivil wrote: Combat recons should at least show up in dscan if you are on the same grid with them. Majority of Eve use dscan tools and it would be extremely frustrating to not be able to copy a certain ship type from dscan list when you can clearly see it in your own overview. Good point. I'm a leaf on the wind, watch how I--THE CAPACITOR IS EMPTY Youtube: /asayanami Twitter: @asayanami The Anthology
Tiberius StarGazer Thrall Nation Brave Collective 446	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:19:55 - [28] - Quote Quite literally smashing this one out of the park. The HAC tank will actually make em usable as the frontline support ships they always should have been!
Psianh Auvyander Noir. Suddenly Spaceships. 115	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:20:19 - [29] - Quote I fear that the Dscan bit will be changed, but I truly hope not! CSM X Announcement Thread My Blog @wsethbrown
Needmore Longcat Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 217	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:20:29 - [30] - Quote I like most of the changes, especially since it will make the ships a little more useful, but not showing up on dscan is a bit silly. That's what cloaks are for.

lin Quay Motiveless Malignity Unknown Destination 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:20:39 - [31] - Quote Diivil wrote: Combat recons should at least show up in dscan if you are on the same grid with them. Majority of Eve use dscan tools and it would be extremely frustrating to not be able to copy a certain ship type from dscan list when you can clearly see it in your own overview. Very much this. Very happy to see the tank increase as well, it was needed. The capacitor is also very welcome. Always sucks to leave your huginn behind on a long warp! ECM still needs fixed.
Draciste Everyone vs Everything THE R0NIN 22	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:20:40 - [32] - Quote "Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners" bleh Everyone vs Everything [qEvEp] - https://qevep.zkillboard.com/corporation/98188033/ https://twitter.com/Draciste
ale rico Calamitous-Intent Feign Disorder 7	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:21:28 - [33] - Quote Give Combat Recons something to make them stand out as a unique and interesting set of ships Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Seems to me a stronger tank or significant damage bonuses would have had the desired effect without completely changing the game with recons. I hope you guys thought about all implications this will bring.
Innominate GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 606	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:21:56 - [34] - Quote Arbitrary immunities are dumb everywhere they exist.
Arkon Olacar Bearded BattleBears Brave Collective 459	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:22:36 - [35] - Quote Canenald wrote: Please also make Huginn a missile boat. It's a Bellicose hull after all. That or change the hull to Stabber or Rupture. Not emptyquoting. Warping to zero
Sentient Blade Crisis Atmosphere 1462	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:23:40 - [36] - Quote Can someone run the numbers on the EHP once they have the HAC resist profiles? Right now they are of course paper thin.
Arkon Olacar Bearded BattleBears Brave Collective 459	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:23:40 - [37] - Quote Also the arbitary DScan immunity is stupid, please no Warping to zero
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 72	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:24:39 - [38] - Quote Undetectable by Dscan?! Love. It. Huginn could be interesting. Though couple things i want you to consider. With long webs comes the need for a weapon system that has good range. Ac huginn is laughable at 20-40km. Arty huginn could be interesting, is there enough grid for 4 arty turrets? Please for the love of all that is EVE, reduce fitting on small/medium arty. Or maybe give huginn a smidge more PG so its viable at range instead of being forced to get close, unlike the rest of the CRS. Or Give it double missile bonus, since heavies MIGHT actually apply their damage with a 50% TP bonus with long webs. It would be the only ship being able use heavy missiles effectively. Maybe double missile RoF bonus like claymore? Otherwise, looks like some great changes.
Ross Sylibus SniggWaffe WAFFLES. 27	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:25:59 - [39] - Quote I don't see how this doesn't make WH space completely unlivable for most of EVE.
Morwen Lagann Tyrathlion Interstellar 1486	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:26:36 - [40] - Quote Pilgrim without its neut amount bonus? One word: Ugh. If you absolutely must put a range bonus on it, make it a small one and keep the amount one. Don't neuter the thing it was good at. With this change it's just a weak Curse with a cloak. Which isn't all that big a ~thing~ with the whole "invisible to d-scan" bonus that you want to give to combat recons. With these changes there'd be even fewer reasons to fly a Pilgrim than there are right now. Morwen Lagann CEO, Tyrathlion Interstellar Owner, The Golden Masque

Levina Windstar Mekalon Industry 45	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:27:15 - [41] - Quote I like the undetectable feature but I think this will be wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too OP in WH. CCP plz... think about WH too! :/
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1240	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:28:16 - [42] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: CURSE Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners Amarr Cruiser Bonuses: 7.5% bonus to Tracking Disruptor effectiveness 10% bonus to Drone hitpoints and damagere Recon Ships Bonuses: 40% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer range 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer amount Slot layout: 5H, 6M, 5L; 2 turrets, 4 launchers Fittings: 900 PWG, 380 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1650(-187) / 1650 / 1075(+203) Capacitor (amount / capacitor per second) : 1470(+220) / 4.46/s (+.83) Mobility (max velocity / agility / align time): 205(+30) / .61(-.04) / 9.99s(-.66s) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50 / 150 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 130km / 281 / 10 Sensor strength: 28 Radar Signature radius: 150 Is the Curse supposed to have that much in the way of raw shields? This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Marcel Devereux Aideron Robotics 396	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:28:54 - [43] - Quote Querns wrote: CCP Rise wrote: CURSE Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners Amarr Cruiser Bonuses: 7.5% bonus to Tracking Disruptor effectiveness 10% bonus to Drone hitpoints and damagere Recon Ships Bonuses: 40% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer range 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer amount Slot layout: 5H, 6M, 5L; 2 turrets, 4 launchers Fittings: 900 PWG, 380 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1650(-187) / 1650 / 1075(+203) Capacitor (amount / capacitor per second) : 1470(+220) / 4.46/s (+.83) Mobility (max velocity / agility / align time): 205(+30) / .61(-.04) / 9.99s(-.66s) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50 / 150 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 130km / 281 / 10 Sensor strength: 28 Radar Signature radius: 150 Is the Curse supposed to have that much in the way of raw shields? And don't forget to ask about the 2 EXTRA SLOTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Rosewalker Khumaak Flying Circus 90	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:29:07 - [44] - Quote Diivil wrote: Combat recons should at least show up in dscan if you are on the same grid with them. Majority of Eve use dscan tools and it would be extremely frustrating to not be able to copy a certain ship type from dscan list when you can clearly see it in your own overview. Why should CCP have to balance their game around third party applications? Making game design changes to combat botting, sure. But besides that, doesn't seem like such a good idea. The Nosy Gamer - Free Wollari!-á Buy your EVE time codes through Dotlan maps!
Adam C Hax. Northern Coalition. 2	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:29:40 - [45] - Quote ''Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners ' for trolly ideas i would of preferred combat recons dont appear in local but on dscan. is that even possible :D trollolololo :D going to be nuts in wh space after that change
colera deldios 263	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:30:29 - [46] - Quote Morwen Lagann wrote: Pilgrim without its neut amount bonus? One word: Ugh. If you absolutely must put a range bonus on it, make it a small one and keep the amount one. Don't neuter the thing it was good at. With this change it's just a weak Curse with a cloak. Which isn't all that big a ~thing~ with the whole "invisible to d-scan" bonus that you want to give to combat recons. With these changes there'd be even fewer reasons to fly a Pilgrim than there are right now. No it's a perfect change. Without the amount bonus Pilgrim will still drain most of it's prior target's in about the same time bit more now. Range bonus is much better than amount bonus.
RTSAvalanche The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos 40	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:30:43 - [47] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Those goals lead us to the following major changes: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Well that's just complete and utter bullsh!t... As if Solo pvp wasn't hard enough, we can not even rely on our D-Scan now?? somthing that we have relied on for the past 10 years.. You are basicaly breaking around some core mechanics here. Faction Warefare has been completely broken since Incarna, now you are telling me that recons with web, neut, damp & ECM bonuses will be able to hide in plain site in FW plexes and there is no conventional way to find them. Even if combats work to find them, we would have to do that for every plex... I smelt somthing bad in the air when the mobile scan inhib came into game, didn't realise things were going to be this bad. POWER CREEP is getting excessive..
Alexander Zuu Dolosa Cogitationes We All Hurt Alliance 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:31:02 - [48] - Quote Maybe make the combat recons appear on d-scan fom on grid to 1 au ?
Zepheros Naeonis TinklePee 15	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:31:04 - [49] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners Sweet baby jesus, I approve! Also: CCP Rise wrote: CURSE Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners Amarr Cruiser Bonuses: 7.5% bonus to Tracking Disruptor effectiveness 10% bonus to Drone hitpoints and damagere lol
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1240	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:32:03 - [50] - Quote RTSAvalanche wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Those goals lead us to the following major changes: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Well that's just complete and utter bullsh!t... As if Solo pvp wasn't hard enough, we can not even rely on our D-Scan now?? somthing that we have relied on for the past 10 years.. You are basicaly breaking around some core mechanics here. Faction Warefare has been completely broken since Incarna, now you are telling me that recons with web, neut, damp & ECM bonuses will be able to hide in plain site in FW plexes and there is no conventional way to find them. Even if combats work to find them, we would have to do that for every plex... I smelt somthing bad in the air when the mobile scan inhib came into game, didn't realise things were going to be this bad. POWER CREEP is getting excessive.. Do they not have combat probes where you live? This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Airi Cho Dark-Rising Executive Outcomes 48	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:33:14 - [51] - Quote Marcel Devereux wrote: Querns wrote: CCP Rise wrote: CURSE Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners Amarr Cruiser Bonuses: 7.5% bonus to Tracking Disruptor effectiveness 10% bonus to Drone hitpoints and damagere Recon Ships Bonuses: 40% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer range 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer amount Slot layout: 5H, 6M, 5L; 2 turrets, 4 launchers Fittings: 900 PWG, 380 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1650(-187) / 1650 / 1075(+203) Capacitor (amount / capacitor per second) : 1470(+220) / 4.46/s (+.83) Mobility (max velocity / agility / align time): 205(+30) / .61(-.04) / 9.99s(-.66s) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50 / 150 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 130km / 281 / 10 Sensor strength: 28 Radar Signature radius: 150 Is the Curse supposed to have that much in the way of raw shields? And don't forget to ask about the 2 EXTRA SLOTS!!!!!!!!!!!!! It had 4 before not 3. so it is just one extra low.
Faren Shalni Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 80	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:33:15 - [52] - Quote Querns wrote: RTSAvalanche wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Those goals lead us to the following major changes: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Well that's just complete and utter bullsh!t... As if Solo pvp wasn't hard enough, we can not even rely on our D-Scan now?? somthing that we have relied on for the past 10 years.. You are basicaly breaking around some core mechanics here. Faction Warefare has been completely broken since Incarna, now you are telling me that recons with web, neut, damp & ECM bonuses will be able to hide in plain site in FW plexes and there is no conventional way to find them. Even if combats work to find them, we would have to do that for every plex... I smelt somthing bad in the air when the mobile scan inhib came into game, didn't realise things were going to be this bad. POWER CREEP is getting excessive.. Do they not have combat probes where you live? you have combats on your PvP ship? So Much Space
Randolph Sykes Iris Covenant The Gorgon Empire 21	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:33:50 - [53] - Quote This should have been in the Happy Holidays dev blog, because this is by far the best holiday gift, CCP. Thanks.
colera deldios 263	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:34:24 - [54] - Quote Adam C wrote: ''Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners ' for trolly ideas i would of preferred combat recons dont appear in local but on dscan. is that even possible :D trollolololo :D going to be nuts in wh space after that change And you will have 50k 0.0 people go nuts with the local change xD Tho delayed or no local in 0.0 is generally a bad idea.
ale rico Calamitous-Intent Feign Disorder 7	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:35:10 - [55] - Quote Querns wrote: RTSAvalanche wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Those goals lead us to the following major changes: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Well that's just complete and utter bullsh!t... As if Solo pvp wasn't hard enough, we can not even rely on our D-Scan now?? somthing that we have relied on for the past 10 years.. You are basicaly breaking around some core mechanics here. Faction Warefare has been completely broken since Incarna, now you are telling me that recons with web, neut, damp & ECM bonuses will be able to hide in plain site in FW plexes and there is no conventional way to find them. Even if combats work to find them, we would have to do that for every plex... I smelt somthing bad in the air when the mobile scan inhib came into game, didn't realise things were going to be this bad. POWER CREEP is getting excessive.. Do they not have combat probes where you live? Combat probes to find a ship you can't see on D-Scan? That's a lot of probing
Skyler Hawk The Ironmongery 30	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:35:52 - [56] - Quote Quote: Please also make Huginn a missile boat. It's a Bellicose hull after all. That or change the hull to Stabber or Rupture.
Stacy Lone University of Caille Gallente Federation 19	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:36:05 - [57] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Have you considered the implications this will have for wspace? I mean it might work for 0.0 where you can see that something is there through local, but in wspace, this will be absolutely OP and hilarious. No local, not even DScan anymore, how are you supposed to even get any intel? The only way to detect such a ship is by having either eyes on all wholes (requires multitude of characters) and thus seeing it enter or by constant combat probing, which can be seen by the enemy. I fear that this will make this ship far out of line in wspace, where intel is already harder to get than in 0.0.
Reagalan Amok. Goonswarm Federation 7	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:36:16 - [58] - Quote Combat recons are already unique. They give long webs and long points, both of which are critical for fleets to be effective. They're already in extremely high demand and very heavily flown, and often die first in fleets precisely because they are that important. Considering these are "combat" ships, why not a combat bonus in lieu of this d-scan invisibility? EAFs get a signature radius bonus, combat recons could really use a tanking bonus. Unintended consequences are also something to consider here. Unkillable Crows obviously weren't intended, and many in Eve do use d-scan tools like Dashboard and consider them as vital and irreplaceable. On the actual ships themselves, an opportunity is being missed here: making viable armor tanked recons. Right now the Rapier and Arazu are the two armor tanked CRs; the Huginn and Lachesis the two shield ones. Both of them suck for tank but the Huginn and Lachesis at least can survive at smaller scales, while the Rapier and Arazu are stuck with a pitiful 4 low slots and die to a light breeze. The two shield ones can get by with just 1 web/point each, and while the two armor ones do give you like 5 points and webs, they don't need that many. Tech 3s, on the other hand, fit fewer tackling mods, but are capable of getting the tank needed to survive being primaried, and as such, are used way more often. Revising the slot layouts of the Rapier and Arazu would help very much with closing the gap between Recons and Tech 3s.
RTSAvalanche The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos 42	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:37:04 - [59] - Quote Querns wrote: RTSAvalanche wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Those goals lead us to the following major changes: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Well that's just complete and utter bullsh!t... As if Solo pvp wasn't hard enough, we can not even rely on our D-Scan now?? somthing that we have relied on for the past 10 years.. You are basicaly breaking around some core mechanics here. Faction Warefare has been completely broken since Incarna, now you are telling me that recons with web, neut, damp & ECM bonuses will be able to hide in plain site in FW plexes and there is no conventional way to find them. Even if combats work to find them, we would have to do that for every plex... I smelt somthing bad in the air when the mobile scan inhib came into game, didn't realise things were going to be this bad. POWER CREEP is getting excessive.. Do they not have combat probes where you live? The idea of a plex is small scal combat Let's break it down a different way... I'm in a medium plex, lets say im in an active tanked vagabond, a couple thoraxs come in, i take drugs and stay to fight them. Now as much as I check D-scan i have no way of know if they hae a ROOK sitting out side. Not being able to rely on DSCAN = eve broken
Vadeim Rizen Doughboys Snuffed Out 97	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:37:31 - [60] - Quote this is so hilariously OP. inb4 recon nerf. ratters now can't even just keep an eye on d-scan and warp out before someone comes in to tackle.... nobody will be able to detect a covert ops cyno at all unless randomly using combat probes... tbh all they needed was a hitpoint and cap buff. can't wait to sit in a medium plex with an insta-lock arty rapier and blap unsuspecting frigs.

Svana Shaishi Dropbears Anonymous Brave Collective 1	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:38:10 - [61] - Quote Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners This looks like a ton of fun for us to play with in WHs.
Ab'del Abu Atlantis Ascendant 133	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:38:29 - [62] - Quote The Dscan thingy completely breaks wormhole risk/reward. C1-C3 will be a wasteland
Lorac Gemini Dropbears Anonymous Brave Collective 4	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:38:40 - [63] - Quote Levina Windstar wrote: I like the undetectable feature but I think this will be wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too OP in WH. CCP plz... think about WH too! :/ As a wormholer, I think this is amazing. But I guess WH carebears would hate this.
RTSAvalanche The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos 42	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:40:06 - [64] - Quote Vadeim Rizen wrote: this is so hilariously OP. inb4 recon nerf. ratters now can't even just keep an eye on d-scan and warp out before someone comes in to tackle.... nobody will be able to detect a covert ops cyno at all unless randomly using combat probes... tbh all they needed was a hitpoint and cap buff. can't wait to sit in a medium plex with an insta-lock arty rapier and blap unsuspecting frigs. +1 I agree, sir.
Ix Method Shadows Legion High-Sec Tomfoolery 353	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:40:10 - [65] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners There's going to be some whining. There's going to be some tears. Please, hold fast, it'll be exactly as glorious as you imagined in your head. And yeah the slots are all over the place, what the ****? Travelling at the speed of love.
Lucas Quaan Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 79	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:40:38 - [66] - Quote Marcel Devereux wrote: The Huginn also only has 14 slots. Huginn has 6H right now, so the -1 in the op should presumably put it at 5H instead.
Ben Nickfen Drone Orphanage Ethical Carnage 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:40:42 - [67] - Quote Morwen Lagann wrote: Pilgrim without its neut amount bonus? One word: Ugh. If you absolutely must put a range bonus on it, make it a small one and keep the amount one. Don't neuter the thing it was good at. With this change it's just a weak Curse with a cloak. Which isn't all that big a ~thing~ with the whole "invisible to d-scan" bonus that you want to give to combat recons. With these changes there'd be even fewer reasons to fly a Pilgrim than there are right now. I have to agree with Morwen here I personal was thinking of getting a Pilgrim but now seeing there going to possibility of them losing the neut amount bonus i really can't see a reason to use it now
ale rico Calamitous-Intent Feign Disorder 8	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:40:50 - [68] - Quote Vadeim Rizen wrote: this is so hilariously OP. inb4 recon nerf. ratters now can't even just keep an eye on d-scan and warp out before someone comes in to tackle.... nobody will be able to detect a covert ops cyno at all unless randomly using combat probes... tbh all they needed was a hitpoint and cap buff. can't wait to sit in a medium plex with an insta-lock arty rapier and blap unsuspecting frigs. Since when do Combat Recons use covert cynos? Cloaky (force recons) are still d-scannable.
Malcoreh Vakarhn Dropbears Anonymous Brave Collective 16	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:41:27 - [69] - Quote As a wormholer, my god, I'm so hard....
Thomas Markov Dropbears Anonymous Brave Collective 12	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:41:58 - [70] - Quote I think every non-carebear wormholer can agree that this is the greatest thing since tech 3 cruisers.

Sobic Appetite 4 Destruction 26	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:42:00 - [71] - Quote The recons badly needed the cap changes, and some layout/bonus tweaks. But the D-scan immune is completely OP, and honestly will just reduce engagements as lower grade WH's will be completely abandoned. I was like "Cool idea", but then my brain started to actually function.
Grm Makentor Oruze Cruise 1	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:42:20 - [72] - Quote >dscan immune ships with covops cloaks in w-space jesus christ what were they thinking, so mandatory scouting alts on every hole now?
Faren Shalni Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 82	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:42:49 - [73] - Quote Vadeim Rizen wrote: this is so hilariously OP. inb4 recon nerf. ratters now can't even just keep an eye on d-scan and warp out before someone comes in to tackle.... nobody will be able to detect a covert ops cyno at all unless randomly using combat probes... tbh all they needed was a hitpoint and cap buff. can't wait to sit in a medium plex with an insta-lock arty rapier and blap unsuspecting frigs. the combat recons get the dscan bonus the force recons dont So Much Space
Sobic Appetite 4 Destruction 26	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:43:17 - [74] - Quote Ben Nickfen wrote: Morwen Lagann wrote: Pilgrim without its neut amount bonus? One word: Ugh. If you absolutely must put a range bonus on it, make it a small one and keep the amount one. Don't neuter the thing it was good at. With this change it's just a weak Curse with a cloak. Which isn't all that big a ~thing~ with the whole "invisible to d-scan" bonus that you want to give to combat recons. With these changes there'd be even fewer reasons to fly a Pilgrim than there are right now. I have to agree with Morwen here I personal was thinking of getting a Pilgrim but now seeing there going to possibility of them losing the neut amount bonus i really can't see a reason to use it now As a blops dropper. The range is a huge help when you can stay out of web/scram range.
Bienator II madmen of the skies 3037	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:43:45 - [75] - Quote searches assets for pilgrim -> happy face eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW
Nys Cron Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 47	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:43:48 - [76] - Quote 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.
Saede Riordan Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 6673	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:43:54 - [77] - Quote Out of all these changes, the only one I feel kind of =/ about is the switch from neut amount to neut range for the Pilgrim. If you're going to do that, can you please give it one more high slot so that you can fit 3x neuts, cloak, and probe launcher? Right now you can get away with 2x neuts, cloak, and probe launcher, but without that amount bonus, two medium neuts are going to be pretty wimpy. I'd also appreciate the Rook getting a 100 PWG increase so you can cram on a 1600 plate and still have the fitting for missiles. The directional scan changes...wow, as a wormholer, that is absolutely massive. I do agree with some people that it might be a bit too powerful, but I'd like to see it attempted, its a really interesting new feature to the class. However, I think that perhaps they should be detectable at under 1 AU range or some other such balance change. Fear and Loathing in Internet Spaceships
Marcel Devereux Aideron Robotics 397	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:44:04 - [78] - Quote Airi Cho wrote: Marcel Devereux wrote: Querns wrote: CCP Rise wrote: CURSE Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners Amarr Cruiser Bonuses: 7.5% bonus to Tracking Disruptor effectiveness 10% bonus to Drone hitpoints and damagere Recon Ships Bonuses: 40% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer range 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer amount Slot layout: 5H, 6M, 5L; 2 turrets, 4 launchers Fittings: 900 PWG, 380 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1650(-187) / 1650 / 1075(+203) Capacitor (amount / capacitor per second) : 1470(+220) / 4.46/s (+.83) Mobility (max velocity / agility / align time): 205(+30) / .61(-.04) / 9.99s(-.66s) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50 / 150 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 130km / 281 / 10 Sensor strength: 28 Radar Signature radius: 150 Is the Curse supposed to have that much in the way of raw shields? And don't forget to ask about the 2 EXTRA SLOTS!!!!!!!!!!!!! It had 4 before not 3. so it is just one extra low. Not it has 1 more than all the other combat recons. Drones boats are suppose to have 1 less. So that is 2 extra slots that it gets.
Levina Windstar Mekalon Industry 46	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:45:16 - [79] - Quote Lorac Gemini wrote: Levina Windstar wrote: I like the undetectable feature but I think this will be wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too OP in WH. CCP plz... think about WH too! :/ As a wormholer, I think this is amazing. But I guess WH carebears would hate this. I think it's an amazing idea too, but you have to understand that most corp in WH are small corp and it's another kick in the ass for them (for us). We are not carebear at all but if this **** happens, we will seriously think of leaving WH for good. I mean cmon... can't you see this is way too OP in WH space? I get it in K-Space but balance must be made in W-Space
Grm Makentor Oruze Cruise 1	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:45:29 - [80] - 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. if by awesome you mean completely devoid of pve and therefore pvp, then party on mate

Joni Hariere The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos 17	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:46:03 - [81] - Quote No no no no and no Destroys lowsec/fw/solo , as it's harder every day i dont think we soloist deserve **** this big slapped into face. Like RTSAvalanche said, d-scan is pretty much all we have..dont take it away.
Athonis Lazerhawks 2	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:46:20 - [82] - Quote As a wormholer, this is hilariously fun sounding, but as a former FW pilot all I have to say is RIP FW space. No one is going to combat probe every medium plex they come across so they dont have to worry about 3 rooks and a huginn dunking theirr bunghole in.
Rroff Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 875	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:46:22 - [83] - Quote Canenald wrote: Please also make Huginn a missile boat. It's a Bellicose hull after all. That or change the hull to Stabber or Rupture. Have to say seems like rapier and huginn are the wrong way around for weapons - rapier should be projectiles (with arty feasible) and huginn the missile boat. (Would have rather seen an extra low slot on the rapier as its typically armor tanked and extra mid on the huginn as its typically shield tanked). As for dscan invisibility with combat recons I'd like to see how this actually works out on a trial basis with the flexibility to revisit the decision at a later date (6 weeks for next patch) as I can see both positives and negatives.
Faren Shalni Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 84	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:46:35 - [84] - Quote Levina Windstar wrote: Lorac Gemini wrote: Levina Windstar wrote: I like the undetectable feature but I think this will be wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too OP in WH. CCP plz... think about WH too! :/ As a wormholer, I think this is amazing. But I guess WH carebears would hate this. I think it's an amazing idea too, but you have to understand that most corp in WH are small corp and it's another kick in the ass for them (for us). We are not carebear at all but if this **** happens, we will seriously think of leaving WH for good. I mean cmon... can't you see this is way too OP in WH space? I get it in K-Space but balance must be made in W-Space CCP doesn't care for w-space............... So Much Space
Ab'del Abu Atlantis Ascendant 136	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:46:35 - [85] - 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 ...
Sokor Loro Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 73	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:47:15 - [86] - Quote Diivil wrote: Combat recons should at least show up in dscan if you are on the same grid with them. Majority of Eve use dscan tools and it would be extremely frustrating to not be able to copy a certain ship type from dscan list when you can clearly see it in your own overview. "Hey guys here's the DSCAN link, also because i'm not a blind mongoloid and can count they have 10 huginns, cool."
Vadeim Rizen Doughboys Snuffed Out 99	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:47:36 - [87] - Quote Faren Shalni wrote: Vadeim Rizen wrote: this is so hilariously OP. inb4 recon nerf. ratters now can't even just keep an eye on d-scan and warp out before someone comes in to tackle.... nobody will be able to detect a covert ops cyno at all unless randomly using combat probes... tbh all they needed was a hitpoint and cap buff. can't wait to sit in a medium plex with an insta-lock arty rapier and blap unsuspecting frigs. the combat recons get the dscan bonus the force recons dont I didn't say anything about combat recons lighting cynos
Minaro Shina off course Hole Control 5	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:48:00 - [88] - Quote well .. we got 20 days of dual training... ... with which we can train our now mandatory combat-probing alt because dscan isn't reliable anymore.
Hardcore Nightmare The Scope Gallente Federation 3	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:48:05 - [89] - Quote New 100% imba. CURSE Back in business. Also the arazu will be obligatory in any roam.
Petrus Blackshell Scrap Metal Squadron 3229	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:48:33 - [90] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners While I appreciate the gumption it takes to propose such a change, it is completely out of whack with everything else in the game, and I believe will be seriously overpowered, especially combined with the now tankier and more combat-capable combat recons. Until now, the only non-dscannable threat was covert-ops ships. All of these (with some few exceptions like the Stratios) are mostly utility ships with poor combat ability. They are now being joined by combat recons, which were already dangerous enough before their combat ability buff. They can singlehandedly turn the tide of fights, which means that the best defense against them is forewarning and information -- a defense that is not available anymore. I fear that this change will cause combat recons to enter the "Because of Falcon" role of ship that is used as an "ace up your sleeve" to remove any chance of losing a fight. At least the Falcon contribute damage itself, and cannot tank very well. These new combat recons can do both of those. That ability will not be used for good fights. Being unscannable is a ship ability that is too powerful to be a passive "role bonus". If anything, it should be a cloak-like module that requires a serious trade-off to fit, which can serve as a counter-balance for the extra tactical ability it grants a ship -- in the same way that fitting a cloak gimps a fit. Giving it as a raw role bonus to ships that have extremely powerful ewar, and now good tank and damage, is just too much. The changes to Force Recons are good, though. I like them. Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com

Grookshank Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 40	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:48:45 - [91] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: FALCON [...] Fittings: 700 PWG, 380 CPU Seems to be a typo, since it currently has 500 CPU
Sobic Appetite 4 Destruction 29	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:48:51 - [92] - Quote Instead of arbitrary tweaks like making a certain ship type invisible to D-scan. You guys should be spending your time making a more robust scanner. Increase the overall range, but the results are mabe range based. So you don't get a ship type until they are very close. This can be related to sig ot ship class. But the D-scan still has to be able to do its job. Combat recons will be everywhere, and they wont be making the game anymore interesting. Just more rage inducing. Especially for Solo pilots. Off grid recons will be the norm now.
Nys Cron Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 47	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:48:56 - [93] - Quote Grm Makentor wrote: 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. if by awesome you mean completely devoid of pve and therefore pvp, then party on mate I personally don't care much about ganks. The usual pvp groups won't be driven out by it and it will make for fun surprises and makes actual scouts matter more.
Vadeim Rizen Doughboys Snuffed Out 99	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:49:00 - [94] - Quote ale rico wrote: Vadeim Rizen wrote: this is so hilariously OP. inb4 recon nerf. ratters now can't even just keep an eye on d-scan and warp out before someone comes in to tackle.... nobody will be able to detect a covert ops cyno at all unless randomly using combat probes... tbh all they needed was a hitpoint and cap buff. can't wait to sit in a medium plex with an insta-lock arty rapier and blap unsuspecting frigs. Since when do Combat Recons use covert cynos? Cloaky (force recons) are still d-scannable. i stand corrected. at work and read it too fast
Airi Cho Dark-Rising Executive Outcomes 48	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:49:13 - [95] - Quote Vadeim Rizen wrote: this is so hilariously OP. inb4 recon nerf. ratters now can't even just keep an eye on d-scan and warp out before someone comes in to tackle.... nobody will be able to detect a covert ops cyno at all unless randomly using combat probes... tbh all they needed was a hitpoint and cap buff. can't wait to sit in a medium plex with an insta-lock arty rapier and blap unsuspecting frigs. force recons are the ones with covert cyno. not the combat recons. minor difference.

CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 4678	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:49:20 - [96] - Quote Okay some bad typos there sorry. Slot layout on Curse and Huginn were both messed up, fixed that. Added sig radius to Huginn. Fixed typo in Curse damage bonus. @ccp_rise

Daegara Odenson Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels 6	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:49:26 - [97] - Quote This. is. *******. epic!
Hatshepsut IV Cascading Failure Un.Bound 326	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:49:37 - [98] - Quote Marcel Devereux wrote: Airi Cho wrote: Marcel Devereux wrote: Querns wrote: CCP Rise wrote: CURSE Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners Amarr Cruiser Bonuses: 7.5% bonus to Tracking Disruptor effectiveness 10% bonus to Drone hitpoints and damagere Recon Ships Bonuses: 40% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer range 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer amount Slot layout: 5H, 6M, 5L; 2 turrets, 4 launchers Fittings: 900 PWG, 380 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1650(-187) / 1650 / 1075(+203) Capacitor (amount / capacitor per second) : 1470(+220) / 4.46/s (+.83) Mobility (max velocity / agility / align time): 205(+30) / .61(-.04) / 9.99s(-.66s) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50 / 150 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 130km / 281 / 10 Sensor strength: 28 Radar Signature radius: 150 Is the Curse supposed to have that much in the way of raw shields? And don't forget to ask about the 2 EXTRA SLOTS!!!!!!!!!!!!! It had 4 before not 3. so it is just one extra low. Not it has 1 more than all the other combat recons. Drones boats are suppose to have 1 less. So that is 2 extra slots that it gets. Where has this been stated as a design rule by CCP? Ships have the amount of slots that CCP feels worth it for balance. You too can start failing today! Reddit-áad \| Cascading Failure Public Channel \| Aspiring Failure
Captn Hammer ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 6	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:50:27 - [99] - Quote I'd love to see one of the Gallente variants get a drone bonus/bigger bay instead of both having hybrid bonuses.
Pelea Ming Prostitutes Are Always Wlling 328	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:50:48 - [100] - Quote 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.

h4kun4 Heeresversuchsanstalt The Bastion 18	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:51:20 - [101] - Quote I am afraid of the T3 Rebalance...either other T3s are becoming as good as a Tengu or other way round....and both makes me very afraid But +10 for the recon changes
Thomas Markov Dropbears Anonymous Brave Collective 12	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:51:42 - [102] - Quote Grm Makentor wrote: 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. if by awesome you mean completely devoid of pve and therefore pvp, then party on mate That's exactly what we mean.
Rroff Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 875	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:52:03 - [103] - Quote Sobic wrote: Increase the overall range, but the results are mabe range based. So you don't get a ship type until they are very close. This can be related to sig ot ship class. Make a new post in features and ideas if that topic doesn't already exist as I think theres some great potential with that idea but this isn't really the thread for it.
Dwaigon Aumer The Bastards The Bastards. 12	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:52:40 - [104] - Quote Make Huginn missile boat to just like the belli and rapier. The Bastards. Technical / Security Director http://www.the-bastards.net Minmatar FTW!!
Airi Cho Dark-Rising Executive Outcomes 48	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:52:46 - [105] - Quote Marcel Devereux wrote: Not it has 1 more than all the other combat recons. Drones boats are suppose to have 1 less. So that is 2 extra slots that it gets. It is amarr ... it should be armor tanked... 5 makes it somewhat viable.
Faren Shalni Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 84	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:53:25 - [106] - 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. Actually a lot of ganks are without probes in anoms or ore sites So Much Space
Imiarr Timshae Funny Men In Funny Hats 266	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:53:40 - [107] - Quote Plex prices increase once again as CCP makes a scout alt (and second monitor?) mandatory for doing DED's in lowsec. "Let's make them more distinct by adding a ridiculous bonus." - Combat Recons "Lets make them more distinct by adding a ridiculous bonus." - The Rattlesnake "Let's make them more distinct by removing the only viable shield/drone cruiser." - The Gila Etc etc "development" marches onwards. Personal Standings Services - Free 3rd Party & Collateral Holding Service - 7+ Day Old Corps for Highsec POS Sales
Ab'del Abu Atlantis Ascendant 136	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:53:42 - [108] - 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
Hardcore Nightmare The Scope Gallente Federation 3	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:53:47 - [109] - Quote CCP you really better buff CovOps than remove dscan.
SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 243	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:55:24 - [110] - Quote Asayanami Dei wrote: Diivil wrote: Combat recons should at least show up in dscan if you are on the same grid with them. Majority of Eve use dscan tools and it would be extremely frustrating to not be able to copy a certain ship type from dscan list when you can clearly see it in your own overview. Good point. Good point indeed, but I completely like the idea. Eve needs more 'wild cards' that cannot be countered by lazy out-of-game tools. This seems to be a great balance pass. This class of ships is now much more survivable in fleet, as most not only received shield and armor buffs but will get the better resist profile also (poor curse). The advantage of packing large numbers of these in fleet will make it more difficult for any opposing force to counter correctly, unless they are depending on VISUAL confirmation and not lame copy/paste. +1 Now, get rid of SBU/IHUB/STATION timers. And then, drop bomb ehp to about 1/6th of current. You will literally become Jebus.

Grm Makentor Oruze Cruise 3	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:55:34 - [111] - 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. it takes less than 5 seconds to dscan a siterunner in a combat anom, no probes needed your point is entirely moot
Airi Cho Dark-Rising Executive Outcomes 48	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:55:35 - [112] - Quote Vadeim Rizen wrote: Faren Shalni wrote: Vadeim Rizen wrote: this is so hilariously OP. inb4 recon nerf. ratters now can't even just keep an eye on d-scan and warp out before someone comes in to tackle.... nobody will be able to detect a covert ops cyno at all unless randomly using combat probes... tbh all they needed was a hitpoint and cap buff. can't wait to sit in a medium plex with an insta-lock arty rapier and blap unsuspecting frigs. the combat recons get the dscan bonus the force recons dont I didn't say anything about combat recons lighting cynos but the force recon will be visible on dscan. :p
Faren Shalni Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 84	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:55:37 - [113] - Quote h4kun4 wrote: I am afraid of the T3 Rebalance...either other T3s are becoming as good as a Tengu or other way round....and both makes me very afraid But +10 for the recon changes They are more likely to go towards the loki level which is a good benchmark. This is assuming CCP rebalances with W-space in mind. If they balance for nullsec then goodbye t3's you gonna be nuked into oblivion So Much Space
Levina Windstar Mekalon Industry 47	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:56:04 - [114] - 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. Typical answer from a guy that doesn't have any clue how WH space is working. Let me enlight you : YOU DON'T NEED TO USE PROBES TO SCAN PPL IN WH IF YOUR GOOD AT USING D-SCAN. kthxbye
Janeway84 Def Squadron Pride Before Fall 121	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:56:59 - [115] - Quote Some good changes and 1 bad imo Awesome that you looking on recons but removing ship from dscan is way to OP. Also hugin and rapier should swap weapon bonuses And arazu should get drone damage bonus please
Tarek Raimo Eleutherian Guard Villore Accords 7	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:57:21 - [116] - 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.
Rroff Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 876	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:57:29 - [117] - Quote Pelea Ming wrote: Other then that, I do agree that overall, the Pilgrim still fails to shine. The extra resists will make mar fits better, I think it just needs a tiny touch more speed/agility and a tiny little more armor and it should work great with the neut range bonus.
RTSAvalanche The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos 48	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:58:20 - [118] - Quote ale rico wrote: Querns wrote: RTSAvalanche wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Those goals lead us to the following major changes: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Well that's just complete and utter bullsh!t... As if Solo pvp wasn't hard enough, we can not even rely on our D-Scan now?? somthing that we have relied on for the past 10 years.. You are basicaly breaking around some core mechanics here. Faction Warefare has been completely broken since Incarna, now you are telling me that recons with web, neut, damp & ECM bonuses will be able to hide in plain site in FW plexes and there is no conventional way to find them. Even if combats work to find them, we would have to do that for every plex... I smelt somthing bad in the air when the mobile scan inhib came into game, didn't realise things were going to be this bad. POWER CREEP is getting excessive.. Do they not have combat probes where you live? Combat probes to find a ship you can't see on D-Scan? That's a lot of probing Clearly you want some OP ships. But listen, Faction Warfare is very much Solo & Small gang. We are here for the past pace action. Not probing upto 15 sites in a system for a target that may or maynot be ther and able to warp out before we get a fix on that location - and able to return when it wants with out ever knowing!! TO MUCH POWER Atleast a Rapier for example has to decloak for a short time when it punches the gate & can NOT cloak with in 30km of the plex timer! Being a SOLO pvper - I feel the need to say somthing, solo pvp has been treated quite harshly for a long time. I get that this is a community game to support large fleets & for the most part all solo & small gang pvpers are totally cool with that. But D-scan is one of the most important things to learn when becomming a pvp pilot (not a F1 pilot...). For this to loose it's reliability is plain idiotic If a Modilbe Scan Inhib was put inside a plex... I would not know what is there. But atleast I know there would be somthign inside coz I can see the Scan-Inhib on Dscan. Apart of a good fight is checking DSCAN and knowing when to deagress because you notice somthing on DSCAN. I had a 20minute fight yesterday in my Confessor, nearing the end I briefly saw a Rapier on DSCAN and thought "oh my, I best get back to gate and deagro!". Sure enough around 30seconds later I saw a Rapier Decloak! Knowing he was likely on his way it bought me time to plan ahead. In the Future a Huginn would just suddenly appear... No warning at all... ::BROKEN::
Marcel Devereux Aideron Robotics 401	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:58:25 - [119] - Quote Hatshepsut IV wrote: Where has this been stated as a design rule by CCP? Ships have the amount of slots that CCP feels worth it for balance. In every other thread that involves a drone boat. And look at the other drone ships. They all have ONE less slot compared to the other ships in their class.
O'nira United System's Commonwealth 44	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:58:36 - [120] - Quote Am afraid of what this means for solo/small group stuff. Kinda feels like ccp doesn't give a crap about it. Not looking forward to getting ganked by a bunch of ewar ships that i cant see on scan

SpaceSaft Capts Deranged Cavaliers Gentlemen's.Club 131	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:58:49 - [121] - Quote I have no idea about what state these ships are in or what a good balance would look like so, disclaimer. The d scan thing looks like fun though. All against are like "but but... I have to be ready to pvp?". All for are looking forward to the new pvp possibiliities. I suspect it's going to be OP but a new scan system is necessary sometime in the future anyway. Wasn't there talk about CCP being reluctant to upgrade the d-scan UI because bigger changes were planned? The UI is still bad.
Aeril Malkyre Knights of the Ouroboros 380	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:59:46 - [122] - Quote Love the changes, might actually hop a Recon finally. But I have to agree with some of the others here: dscan immunity, while hilarious, is bound to be borked. Now not only must a pilot presume that every square meter of space around him is filled with cloaky campers, he must also assume that every cubic meter beyond his grid is filled with combat recons he can't see, nor will he see, until they jump him or he happens to land on top of them. Most other ships in game that ignore an effect or set of effects pay for it. Bastion module immune to ewar, you have to sit still. Triage makes you rep harder, can't receive reps. Interceptors, while way OP with bubble immunity, can't do much but tackle if they find you. They're not the thing that kills you, it's the people that follow them. Now a combat recon, with no trade-off I can see, gets dscan immunity. If you want to do this, make it a module. Make a literal d-scan cloak. It doesn't block light, just sensor sweeps. This way they can get into system, d-scan cloak, and have to trade something: locked in place is a pretty common solution.
Zomgnomnom Royal Black Watch Highlanders DARKNESS. 46	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:00:45 - [123] - Quote Can you take another look at the Pilgrim perhaps, I don't see the range being that effective to be honest. There is now pretty much no reason to ever use a pilgrim over a curse other than a blops bridge. Perhaps a bonus that more suits the Pilgrims role as a tackle and cyno? Also, the Falcon and ECM in general have needed an overhaul since forever. VERY under whelmed on the Falcon pass.
Michele Bachmann Collapsed Out Overload Everything 106	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:01:12 - [124] - Quote Vadeim Rizen wrote: this is so hilariously OP. inb4 recon nerf. ratters now can't even just keep an eye on d-scan and warp out before someone comes in to tackle.... nobody will be able to detect a covert ops cyno at all unless randomly using combat probes... tbh all they needed was a hitpoint and cap buff. can't wait to sit in a medium plex with an insta-lock arty rapier and blap unsuspecting frigs. reading is hard huh
Chessur Mining Industry Exile Foundation The Camel Empire 420	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:01:53 - [125] - Quote Cap was one of the few things holding these ships back. If its one thing I have noticed- its this: All ships that have gone through a balance pass no longer have any cap stability issues, or cap has been grossly increased. These ships are extremely strong force multipliers, and one of the few things keeping them in check was their very weak cap when running EWAR. The EAF's are already terrors, why do recons need cap buffs as well?
Minaro Shina off course Hole Control 5	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:02:04 - [126] - Quote Janeway84 wrote: Some good changes and 1 bad imo Awesome that you looking on recons but removing ship from dscan is way to OP. Also hugin and rapier should swap weapon bonuses And arazu should get drone damage bonus please Just look at the phobos and devoted. Gallente now gets optimal/tracking bonis (previously caldari) and Amarr gets the drones. I really don't know why ... but apparently a fall-off bonus would be to OP and ******* over the lore because of "balance" is Fozzies thing.
Gorgof Intake Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion 44	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:02:15 - [127] - Quote Asayanami Dei wrote: Diivil wrote: Combat recons should at least show up in dscan if you are on the same grid with them. Majority of Eve use dscan tools and it would be extremely frustrating to not be able to copy a certain ship type from dscan list when you can clearly see it in your own overview. Good point. Terrible Point. I for one applaud the fact that Intel tools are taking a subsequent nerf. One of the biggest factors that has degraded the content in Null Sec warfare in particular has been the advent and growth of these sorts of instant, perfect intelligence tools. Dont get me wrong, i'll use them in every fleet I run while I can but taking off my FC hat and putting on a game design/balance one, the fact that intelligence gathering has largely been relegated to clicking d-scan from cloaky eyes just off a hostile POS grid and all of a sudden an FC has perfect assessment of enemy fleet composition is a really bad game mechanic. Anything that adds uncertainty or requires player skill instead of a 'click here to win' approach to fleet combat is a good step in the right direction. As a CSM I would have expected you to have considered that.
Gremk Origin. Black Legion. 5	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:03:03 - [128] - Quote At first I loved the idea of not having combat recons now show up on d-scan... But then I thought about it a little more and it doesn't really seem like a good idea for a few reasons: 1. Basically invisible with no decloak delay 2. If you're running missions / ded sites then you have to have a dedicated char on the first gate (and can never see when they are warping in until they are there) 3. DScan tools for large fleets won't work properly to give intel in a fast manner 4. OP roaming ship, unable to keep up with them unless you physically see where they are going gate to gate... Basically at the end of the day it is like having a perma cloak without any of the negatives of the cloak. For WH'ers it sounds like a nightmare. My suggestions is to make it to where they can only be seen within a certain AU of you ie 3-5AU or remove it completely. OR you could just remove the cloaking delay and give them one that matches the stealth bomber. That way for DED/mission runners/WH you have to originally cloak / uncloak at activation gates.
Sokor Loro Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 73	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:03:33 - [129] - Quote I don't understand all the complaints like, "Now I have to have scouts on every hole!". Are covert recons/T3s/bombers not a thing that you already see right now and have to deal with? It's literally the exact same situation. Except with these you can still probe them out. I don't see how this "breaks" WH space as is because there are already loads of cases where you cannot rely on Dscan to get your information. Even with the upgraded combat capabilities, these are not going to be unstoppable killing machines. They will still require gang/fleet assistance to bring down targets. So now instead of literally everyone cloaking up a rapier/arazu in a site/whole/complex they might actually use a Huginn/Lachesis to do it.
Lorac Gemini Dropbears Anonymous Brave Collective 6	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:04:15 - [130] - Quote Levina Windstar wrote: Lorac Gemini wrote: Levina Windstar wrote: I like the undetectable feature but I think this will be wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too OP in WH. CCP plz... think about WH too! :/ As a wormholer, I think this is amazing. But I guess WH carebears would hate this. I think it's an amazing idea too, but you have to understand that most corp in WH are small corp and it's another kick in the ass for them (for us). We are not carebear at all but if this **** happens, we will seriously think of leaving WH for good. I mean cmon... can't you see this is way too OP in WH space? I get it in K-Space but balance must be made in W-Space You realise cloaks are a thing right? Recons off Dscan is too scary, but cloaky T3's, bombers, force recons, etc... If anything, this just makes W-space more varied. See, I'm honestly surprised to see WH tears here, because we should be used to non-information.

Seraph Essael eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred 1007	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:04:34 - [131] - Quote This is certainly going to spice things up in wormholes a little bit Quoted from Doc Fury: "Concerned citizens: Doc seldom plays EVE on the weekends during spring and summer, so you will always be on your own for a couple days a week. Doc spends that time collecting kittens for the on-going sacrifices, engaging in reckless outdoor activities, and speaking in the 3rd person."
raging star Circle Of Chaos 13	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:06:12 - [132] - Quote ale rico wrote: Give Combat Recons something to make them stand out as a unique and interesting set of ships Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Seems to me a stronger tank or significant damage bonuses would have had the desired effect without completely changing the game with recons. I hope you guys thought about all implications this will bring. Wormholes have become more scarier than ever. Sure you can use combat probes to find out of you sre alone or not but dscan is you primary eyes in a wormhole and if the attack recons can't be seen by it, it gives the attackers one hell of an advantage even ahead of cloakers.
Lorac Gemini Dropbears Anonymous Brave Collective 6	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:06:52 - [133] - Quote Surprised there's more WH tears than FW tears here. Figured FW farmers not being able to see a recon on dscan would make them like this change less.
Glyndi Doom Generation THE H0NEYBADGER 264	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:06:53 - [134] - Quote As a WHer I love these changes. Makes WHS even harder...as they should be. Would be nice though to have that 4th low on the Lachesis.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1240	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:08:28 - [135] - Quote The number of people in this thread that think that the Falcon, Rapier, Arazu, and Pilgrim are becoming immune to directional scan is depressingly high. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
RTSAvalanche The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos 49	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:08:37 - [136] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Okay some bad typos there sorry. Slot layout on Curse and Huginn were both messed up, fixed that. Added sig radius to Huginn. Fixed typo in Curse damage bonus. You forgot about the "Can not be seen on DSCAN" typo.. #evebroken
Gabriel Karade Noir. Suddenly Spaceships. 212	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:08:47 - [137] - Quote Please consider making the Lachesis a 5 mid/5 low slot platform. It really makes no sense giving it the Gallente HAC resistance profile (which favours armour), with more armour than shield, then knee-capping it with 3 low slots. 5/5 makes so much more sense - its Gallente, armour tank first, but still flexible enough to be fit otherwise. War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Tear Jar Emolgranlan Code Enforcement Branch 208	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:08:50 - [138] - Quote Stacy Lone wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Have you considered the implications this will have for wspace? I mean it might work for 0.0 where you can see that something is there through local, but in wspace, this will be absolutely OP and hilarious. No local, not even DScan anymore, how are you supposed to even get any intel? The only way to detect such a ship is by having either eyes on all wholes (requires multitude of characters) and thus seeing it enter or by constant combat probing, which can be seen by the enemy. I fear that this will make this ship far out of line in wspace, where intel is already harder to get than in 0.0. How is that any different than cov ops ships?
Adarnof Free Trade Monopoly You Are Being Monitored 48	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:10:08 - [139] - Quote Wormholer here. So how exactly did you envision this dscan invisibility playing out? Is CCP even aware of how critical this function is to our day-to-day lives? If you want a ship to be hidden, fine, cloak it. The penalty being it can't engage in combat while cloaked. This new ability is stupidly overpowered and is yet another swing of the nerfbat to small group viability. If we can't dscan the ship, the pilot should also be removed from local channel in kspace to make things "balanced".
Kynric Sky Fighters 222	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:10:54 - [140] - Quote Lorac Gemini wrote: Levina Windstar wrote: I like the undetectable feature but I think this will be wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too OP in WH. CCP plz... think about WH too! :/ As a wormholer, I think this is amazing. But I guess WH carebears would hate this. It goes both ways. Expect to see ratting or hacking rooks, gassing huggins and other silliness. I would prefer a chance to not show on dscan or a shortening of the range at which they will appear rather than an absolute as that makes for a more interesting cat and mouse. Either way new shennanigans should make for good times.

O'nira United System's Commonwealth 44	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:11:46 - [141] - Quote Gorgof Intake wrote: Asayanami Dei wrote: Diivil wrote: Combat recons should at least show up in dscan if you are on the same grid with them. Majority of Eve use dscan tools and it would be extremely frustrating to not be able to copy a certain ship type from dscan list when you can clearly see it in your own overview. Good point. Terrible Point. I for one applaud the fact that Intel tools are taking a subsequent nerf. One of the biggest factors that has degraded the content in Null Sec warfare in particular has been the advent and growth of these sorts of instant, perfect intelligence tools. Dont get me wrong, i'll use them in every fleet I run while I can but taking off my FC hat and putting on a game design/balance one, the fact that intelligence gathering has largely been relegated to clicking d-scan from cloaky eyes just off a hostile POS grid and all of a sudden an FC has perfect assessment of enemy fleet composition is a really bad game mechanic. Anything that adds uncertainty or requires player skill instead of a 'click here to win' approach to fleet combat is a good step in the right direction. As a CSM I would have expected you to have considered that. Because these type of ships are used so often in fleet warfare? its not surprising that you dont care about this change since you probably mostly do fleet combat, but what does this change add to the game exactly? all this change will do is promote ganks and discourage actual fights IMO.
Nishachara Stillwater Corporation That Escalated Quickly. 13	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:12:13 - [142] - Quote I think that fiddling with visibility of any ship on d-scan is a very very bad idea. You can lower its visibility, for example not saying insert combat recon of your choice here in the column..but just ship or something. Being a player who loves flying recon ships i think thats too much... There is not counter or advance warning to that type of ships if they become invisible to scanning. That will put a really big curse on much wh players and in other areas of space too, especially if playing solo without alts or corpmates online at a given moment.
Icarus Able Revenant Tactical 510	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:12:22 - [143] - Quote Keep the rapier as a turret boat and the huginn as a missile boat plllleasse.
Tear Jar Emolgranlan Code Enforcement Branch 208	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:12:59 - [144] - Quote Grm Makentor wrote: 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. if by awesome you mean completely devoid of pve and therefore pvp, then party on mate WH loot value is based on supply and demand. If everyone leaves then the isk/hr in WH space will skyrocket and bring in new players willing to take risks for amazing rewards, which is what WH space should be about.
Rroff Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 877	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:13:38 - [145] - Quote Tear Jar wrote: Stacy Lone wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Have you considered the implications this will have for wspace? I mean it might work for 0.0 where you can see that something is there through local, but in wspace, this will be absolutely OP and hilarious. No local, not even DScan anymore, how are you supposed to even get any intel? The only way to detect such a ship is by having either eyes on all wholes (requires multitude of characters) and thus seeing it enter or by constant combat probing, which can be seen by the enemy. I fear that this will make this ship far out of line in wspace, where intel is already harder to get than in 0.0. How is that any different than cov ops ships? Some exceptions aside covert ops ships tend to have a short delay after decloaking before they can target - a combat recon won't have that delay.
Ogopogo Mu O C C U P Y The 99 Percent 130	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:13:53 - [146] - Quote CCP Rise: Bringing Solo Back BACK OF THE PRIORITY LIST THAT IS HUE HUE HUE
Lim Hiaret Hiaret Family 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:15:33 - [147] - Quote Quote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Did I miss something? Where Combat Recons temporarily "undetectable by directional scanners" sofar? And don't waste your time on this one, instead remove dscan. Its hardly used anyways, confusing, especially for newer players and also reasons. Realy! It's not worth your high paid DEV hours. Fix it later when you have proper time to revisit this one and such...
Niskin League of the Lost 147	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:15:44 - [148] - Quote I'm scared and excited at the same time. But a Combat Recon not showing on d-scan is actually less of a threat than a cloaky T3. At least from the perspective of a person running anoms in a wormhole. The cloaky will get in and you will never see him. Then he will come out of cloak with a bump and ruin your day. The Combat Recon will land in the site at the entrance or whatever range they warp to, and you will see them. Placement inside the anom will matter now, being aligned will matter. The cloaky T3 will still get you, but you have a shot against the Curse/Lachesis/Huginn/Rook at least. The issue with people using these ships to run things while hiding will be interesting. I may look into that myself. It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow
Ponder Stuff Nocturnal Romance Cynosural Field Theory. 23	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:16:50 - [149] - Quote Great changes all accept the D scan part, that just makes solo and small - small gang worse.... Still waiting for a good patch since Incarna with just positive changes. You have broken links and now caps, lets not break Dscan too....
Grm Makentor Oruze Cruise 4	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:17:00 - [150] - Quote Tear Jar wrote: Grm Makentor wrote: 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. if by awesome you mean completely devoid of pve and therefore pvp, then party on mate WH loot value is based on supply and demand. If everyone leaves then the isk/hr in WH space will skyrocket and bring in new players willing to take risks for amazing rewards, which is what WH space should be about. Remember the higher the class, the bigger than chunk of the total loot value comes from blue loot which is sold to static npc buy orders once again, moot point i think

Tear Jar Emolgranlan Code Enforcement Branch 209	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:17:08 - [151] - Quote Rroff wrote: Tear Jar wrote: Stacy Lone wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Have you considered the implications this will have for wspace? I mean it might work for 0.0 where you can see that something is there through local, but in wspace, this will be absolutely OP and hilarious. No local, not even DScan anymore, how are you supposed to even get any intel? The only way to detect such a ship is by having either eyes on all wholes (requires multitude of characters) and thus seeing it enter or by constant combat probing, which can be seen by the enemy. I fear that this will make this ship far out of line in wspace, where intel is already harder to get than in 0.0. How is that any different than cov ops ships? Some exceptions aside covert ops ships tend to have a short delay after decloaking before they can target - a combat recon won't have that delay. That is a good point. Making the d-scan immunity an active affect with a short targeting delay when deactivated may be a better choice. Especially with all the other buffs recons are getting. Edit: Actually, the warpin time works as a perfect substitute for this. You will get at least 3-4 seconds while the Recon is in warp.
Levina Windstar Mekalon Industry 47	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:17:10 - [152] - Quote Lorac Gemini wrote: Levina Windstar wrote: Lorac Gemini wrote: Levina Windstar wrote: I like the undetectable feature but I think this will be wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too OP in WH. CCP plz... think about WH too! :/ As a wormholer, I think this is amazing. But I guess WH carebears would hate this. I think it's an amazing idea too, but you have to understand that most corp in WH are small corp and it's another kick in the ass for them (for us). We are not carebear at all but if this **** happens, we will seriously think of leaving WH for good. I mean cmon... can't you see this is way too OP in WH space? I get it in K-Space but balance must be made in W-Space You realise cloaks are a thing right? Recons off Dscan is too scary, but cloaky T3's, bombers, force recons, etc... If anything, this just makes W-space more varied. See, I'm honestly surprised to see WH tears here, because we should be used to non-information. Yeah but I had a chance to get them on D-Scan for 8-10 sec meaby. And yeah, cloaky T3 is a thing but a cloaky T3 lack DPS + they have targeting delay so at least there is a drawback here and again, I had the chance to get them on D-Scan. Think about a 10 man fleet that jump through a WH and land on you (cause THEY can use D-Scan to spot you). It's totally not fair for the defenders. If CCP want to make WH an alts fest scoutin every WH, fine. I'll just find something else to do in New Eden than being a wormholers.
Reagalan Amok. Goonswarm Federation 13	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:17:26 - [153] - Quote Gorgof Intake wrote: I for one applaud the fact that Intel tools are taking a subsequent nerf. One of the biggest factors that has degraded the content in Null Sec warfare in particular has been the advent and growth of these sorts of instant, perfect intelligence tools. I'd say Remote Reps, Bombers, and Supercapitals are a bigger problem. Anything that adds uncertainty or requires player skill instead of a 'click here to win' approach to fleet combat is a good step in the right direction. One of the biggest parts of the skill of being an FC is choosing your engagements wisely. Knowing how many recons a fleet has is an extremely important component of this, especially if you're using a sig tanking doctrine. If such a piece of information is unobtainable, or indeed if any of these pieces of information are unobtainable, then it devalues this skill immensely.
Sobic Appetite 4 Destruction 29	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:17:35 - [154] - Quote Tear Jar wrote: Stacy Lone wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Have you considered the implications this will have for wspace? I mean it might work for 0.0 where you can see that something is there through local, but in wspace, this will be absolutely OP and hilarious. No local, not even DScan anymore, how are you supposed to even get any intel? The only way to detect such a ship is by having either eyes on all wholes (requires multitude of characters) and thus seeing it enter or by constant combat probing, which can be seen by the enemy. I fear that this will make this ship far out of line in wspace, where intel is already harder to get than in 0.0. How is that any different than cov ops ships? A covert ops has to re-cloak when jumping into a system. has to Re-cloak when entering a plex, or docking at a station,etc. That's a lot of chances to make a hit on D-scan. Or the covert to make a mistake(Like Dbl tapping his cloak) It also causes a 6 sec delay to target when decloaking.(yes I know a combat recon warping in is effectively the same thing) Now you have a perma off grid cloak with increased combat capability across the board. Obviously you can drop combat probes to subvert this entire thing to some degree. But adding yet another chore for yet another alt just so you can have a chance to survive is poor eve design. We've been down this stupid street before CCP. (Cloaked ships decloaking cloaked ships anyone) instead how bout improving D-scan. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=392816&find=unread
Airi Cho Dark-Rising Executive Outcomes 48	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:18:53 - [155] - Quote Querns wrote: The number of people in this thread that think that the Falcon, Rapier, Arazu, and Pilgrim are becoming immune to directional scan is depressingly high. +1
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 911	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:18:56 - [156] - 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.
Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 239	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:19:27 - [157] - Quote Hatshepsut IV wrote: Where has this been stated as a design rule by CCP? Ships have the amount of slots that CCP feels worth it for balance. It's been given as the reason for gallente drone ships having less slots, but apparently it does not concern Amarr, the new drone master race. The D-scan change is nuts and breaks core mechanics of the game.
Sokor Loro Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 73	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:20:06 - [158] - Quote Ponder Stuff wrote: Still waiting for a good patch since Incarna with just positive changes. You have broken links and now caps, lets not break Dscan too.... Is this guy for real lmao
FearlessLittleToaster GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 21	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:20:08 - [159] - Quote I realize it looks cool on paper, but have you really considered the impact on risk/reward that will result from the D-Scan immunity? Before this change a player who was at the keyboard and paying attention could reliably escape an incoming red in local or see incoming hostiles in a wormhole; the stupid, lazy, or unlucky got caught. After this change a player will either have to dock up the instant a red his local or risk having a recon just appear at zero. Right now if a player wants a "sneaky point" they can use a bomber since it does not suffer from reactivation delay on decloak, but that is balanced by the fact that their bomber is paper thin, is going to need backup to kill more than a covops, and has a slow and difficult approach while cloaked if the target is outside basic point range. Alternately they can rely on an interceptor and hope the speed of their arrival lets them catch the unwary. Either way there are tradeoffs. With the changes a double sensor booster Lachesis will become better tackle than an interceptor and be effectively as sneaky as a bomber. In real terms, despite the greater speed of the interceptor or the ability to get really close (slowly) while cloaked in a bomber the decreased warning and increased point range of the Lachesis will give will make it far more likely to land a point. Of course it will also be far more expensive, but besides the above it will be able to rip ships up to and including some HACs in half by using a long-scram, damps, and dictating range (and I still haven't accounted for a mid-slot). In other words, if you leave it as is, I'm buying a dozen and blinging the bejezus out of them; blood for the blood god! Still probably not a good game design choice though. The Rook and Curse will be almost as brutal since they have universally effective E-War that will rapidly shut down the ability of nearly all targets to fight back, they will just have to get in a bit closer to hold the target down. As much as I hate to agree with people who seem to be whining about their PvE getting ruined I think that making a highly combat capable ship class not show up on D-scan is not a good idea. It will break the risk/reward ratio that currently stands in nullsec by making the red in local a far far greater threat. As things stand now the dispersed ratters of null and low populations of wormholes cannot usually concentrate the numbers needed to fight off a ship like this so all it will do is serve to make space more deserted as everyone becomes that much more dock-happy. Now, making themonly show up at close range could work; less warning is fun and serves to encourage paying attention, no warning is overpowered. Also, I say this as somebody who does exploration exclusively; I don't personally care if these things show up on D-Scan because unless I see combat probes IDGAF.
JetCord Abyssal Heavy Industries 51	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:20:08 - [160] - Quote 60% bonus to Stasis Webifier optimal range you mean per level?

rhiload Feron-drake TURN LEFT The Camel Empire 18	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:20:26 - [161] - Quote these are not good changes towards small-gang pvp, then again this is a rise post.
Airi Cho Dark-Rising Executive Outcomes 48	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:20:32 - [162] - Quote Adarnof wrote: Wormholer here. So how exactly did you envision this dscan invisibility playing out? Is CCP even aware of how critical this function is to our day-to-day lives? If you want a ship to be hidden, fine, cloak it. The penalty being it can't engage in combat while cloaked. This new ability is stupidly overpowered and is yet another swing of the nerfbat to small group viability. If we can't dscan the ship, the pilot should also be removed from local channel in kspace to make things "balanced". bombers have 0 calibration delay IIRC. that is no different. you see neither on dscan. and actually bombers are worse ... if you arent sitting on the warp in spot with the combat recon, you actually see him while he tries to approach you e.g.
Tear Jar Emolgranlan Code Enforcement Branch 209	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:20:34 - [163] - Quote Grm Makentor wrote: Tear Jar wrote: Grm Makentor wrote: 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. if by awesome you mean completely devoid of pve and therefore pvp, then party on mate WH loot value is based on supply and demand. If everyone leaves then the isk/hr in WH space will skyrocket and bring in new players willing to take risks for amazing rewards, which is what WH space should be about. Remember the higher the class, the bigger than chunk of the total loot value comes from blue loot which is sold to static npc buy orders once again, moot point i think And the higher the class the easier these changes are to deal with. A big group in a C6 wormhole should have no problem dealing with Combat recons, either by scouting their holes or having a few defenders on standby. Smaller groups have a harder time, but their loot is going to be based on supply and demand.
Petrus Blackshell Scrap Metal Squadron 3232	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:20:40 - [164] - Quote Tear Jar wrote: Stacy Lone wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Have you considered the implications this will have for wspace? I mean it might work for 0.0 where you can see that something is there through local, but in wspace, this will be absolutely OP and hilarious. No local, not even DScan anymore, how are you supposed to even get any intel? The only way to detect such a ship is by having either eyes on all wholes (requires multitude of characters) and thus seeing it enter or by constant combat probing, which can be seen by the enemy. I fear that this will make this ship far out of line in wspace, where intel is already harder to get than in 0.0. How is that any different than cov ops ships? Covops ships are, with a few exceptions, not very good at the whole "stand and fight" shtick. They also have a targeting delay after decloaking, and can actually be seen on d-scan when they're fighting something (or doing other stuff). Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com
Diana Kim State Protectorate Caldari State 1505	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:20:41 - [165] - Quote Scheulagh Santorine wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners Oh, yes, yes, YES, CCP, YEEES, YEEEES, So yes, YES yes SO YEESSSS.... Aaaaahhh. Yes. Thank you.
Rroff Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 877	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:21:01 - [166] - Quote Tear Jar wrote: That is a good point. Making the d-scan immunity an active affect with a short targeting delay when deactivated may be a better choice. Especially with all the other buffs recons are getting. its a point - personally I don't have a problem with it though and kind of interested to see how it works out.
Levina Windstar Mekalon Industry 47	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:21:06 - [167] - Quote Levina Windstar wrote: Lorac Gemini wrote: Levina Windstar wrote: Lorac Gemini wrote: Levina Windstar wrote: I like the undetectable feature but I think this will be wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too OP in WH. CCP plz... think about WH too! :/ As a wormholer, I think this is amazing. But I guess WH carebears would hate this. I think it's an amazing idea too, but you have to understand that most corp in WH are small corp and it's another kick in the ass for them (for us). We are not carebear at all but if this **** happens, we will seriously think of leaving WH for good. I mean cmon... can't you see this is way too OP in WH space? I get it in K-Space but balance must be made in W-Space You realise cloaks are a thing right? Recons off Dscan is too scary, but cloaky T3's, bombers, force recons, etc... If anything, this just makes W-space more varied. See, I'm honestly surprised to see WH tears here, because we should be used to non-information. Yeah but I had a chance to get them on D-Scan for 8-10 sec meaby. And yeah, cloaky T3 is a thing but a cloaky T3 lack DPS + they have targeting delay so at least there is a drawback here and again, I had the chance to get them on D-Scan. Think about a 10 man fleet that jump through a WH and land on you (cause THEY can use D-Scan to spot you). It's totally not fair for the defenders. If CCP want to make WH an alts fest scoutin every WH, fine. I'll just find something else to do in New Eden than being a wormholers.
Angrod Losshelin Oath of the Forsaken Half Massed 94	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:22:19 - [168] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: PILGRIM We decided that the Pilgrim really needed Nos/Neut range, rather than strength, to give it the engagement flexibility that other Recons enjoy. Well this kills the usefulness of the pilgrim in almost every way. Curse = Better neut power at range, legion beats it in EHP while cloaky and raw neuting power, and its tracking disrupt benefits are the same as either the curse or the frigate version (sentinel) which is significantly cheaper. This boat was significantly useful as a small gang tackle or sneak up an neut your **** off boat. Now its a....I should probably be in any other ship that has neut bonuses boat. Seriously give the neut amount back and kill the range or give it a different bonus to make it viable in the role you just moved it to. It needs more tracking disrupt or drone dps. You have just placed it in a skirmish/fleet role, please atleast make it viable in that role. Check out my Podcast! CSM X: Candidate - Wormholes, Multiboxing, and New Bro's!
Arla Sarain 184	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:22:19 - [169] - Quote D-SCAN immunity has no targetting delay. This will be fun... Not.
Bronson Hughes The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration 932	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:23:17 - [170] - Quote Thoughts: 1. I love the general durability and cap buff to make recons more combat capable. 2. The mobility buffs seem perfectly placed. They are recon cruisers, which means part of their job is doing reconnaissance. This involves lots of moving. 3. I love the removal of split weapon systems. Love. It. 4. I like the D-Scan Immunity idea. It gives Combat Recons some of the off-grid stealth ability of Force Recons, without giving it to them on-grid too. Lots of people will complain about #4, and I predict "Nerf AFK Combat Recons!" threads will start popping up soon. But with even Force Recons getting a general buff to their combat abilities, everything people will complain about would have been true already. CCP Falcon's thoughts on suicide ganking. Reading Comprehension: so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I want to create content, not become content.

Gremk Origin. Black Legion. 7	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:23:29 - [171] - Quote Airi Cho wrote: Adarnof wrote: Wormholer here. So how exactly did you envision this dscan invisibility playing out? Is CCP even aware of how critical this function is to our day-to-day lives? If you want a ship to be hidden, fine, cloak it. The penalty being it can't engage in combat while cloaked. This new ability is stupidly overpowered and is yet another swing of the nerfbat to small group viability. If we can't dscan the ship, the pilot should also be removed from local channel in kspace to make things "balanced". bombers have 0 calibration delay IIRC. that is no different. you see neither on dscan. and actually bombers are worse ... if you arent sitting on the warp in spot with the combat recon, you actually see him while he tries to approach you e.g. And bombers have a paper thin tank vs something that is going to have a T2 HAC class tank.
X ATM092 Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension 446	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:23:46 - [172] - Quote Warp into a fw plex. There is a curse. Game was good.
Nariya Kentaya Ministry of War Amarr Empire 1646	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:25:43 - [173] - Quote And thus continues the long held tradition of ***** lasers up the ass and making sure 50% plus amarr ships are ** drone whores, and the remaining 50% are kept so **** that people eventually ask them to be changed to drone ships just so theyre usable, because why bother balancing 4 weapon systems when you cut it down to 3, right?
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate 1074	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:25:59 - [174] - Quote Total Dscan immunity should not be a thing unless you are cloaked, use a specific module or a deployable. Make it so that they are only visible within close range Dscan, like 5AU or thereabout.
Sofia Evanglene Ridge Mineral Holdings 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:28:36 - [175] - Quote X ATM092 wrote: Warp into a fw plex. There is a curse. Game was good. warp into plex theres 10 sebo arty huginns ggwp great game
Dmitry Kuvora WAR TEAM Flex Point 2	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:28:38 - [176] - Quote interesting changes, but recons will be overpowered i hope someday you'll add scanning bonuses for force recons
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 429	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:29:21 - [177] - Quote While I feel generally quite enthusiastic about these changes I really wish more had been done about the rook. Change the ecm cap use bonus for a cycle rate bonus or SOMETHING more useful like missile damage (even if its kinetic vomit) and when you rebalance ECM in to something more reliable and useful then come back to the rook. Obviously the answer always was making ecm function like "mirror image" but it seems noone has the balls to make it that way. Join channel Aussies in space to chat with AU/NZ players
Sobic Appetite 4 Destruction 30	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:30:11 - [178] - Quote X ATM092 wrote: Warp into a fw plex. There is a curse. Game was good. lol so much this ^
Neckbeard Nolyfe Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 28	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:30:54 - [179] - Quote Could you make it so that players piloting recons dont show up in local? *~lvl 60 paladin~*
Mixu Paatelainen Eve Refinery 188	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:31:41 - [180] - Quote Glass half full: hahahaha this will be amazing piratical fun! Glass half empty: I'll be offlining that wormhole tower.

Jerry T Pepridge Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC. 228	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:32:44 - [181] - Quote Great changes, esp the cap issues. Memories of using a 2nd warp whenever i flew a lach -_-
Tibo Paralian Phoibe Enterprises 39	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:34:38 - [182] - Quote Putting the risk of losing the cost of ship aside, DSCAN immunity needs to have a big trade-off, as with everything in this game. Bombers have a paper thin tank, covert-ops have no dps. A ship with a tank profile close to those of a HAC + DSCAN immunity + a decent amount of DPS/utility needs to have some type of negative downside.
GREYBOBSASS Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 19	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:35:04 - [183] - Quote Combat recons should do combat, not some ***** ditching usable only in griefing tactics meanwhile breaking some areas of gamplay (FW) A pg buff to get those hi slot filled should be enough alongside with the tank and speed buff no to dscan imunity, this is just plain broken and makes solo even harder, FFS sake Rise you used to do solo roaming and stuff wtf is wrong with you? I wasnt happy about changes you guys were doing Fozzie/Rise but after you got hired i thought you getting better and better at gamplay design, this change proves i was wrong.
Sofia Evanglene Ridge Mineral Holdings 6	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:35:40 - [184] - Quote Innominate wrote: Arbitrary immunities are dumb everywhere they exist. They are lazy amateurish game design.
Aladar Dangerface Doughboys Snuffed Out 48	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:37:36 - [185] - 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. Duh, you clearly havent ever been in wh space, when running annomolies no one needs to probe you out; they are warpable from the probe scanner. I still like the idea of the undetectable recons addsa new dynamic, but it is pretty OP in wh space. Should maybe bump ribbon prices up though if no one runs C1-3 so im happy :p I don't need twitter. I'm already following you.
RTSAvalanche The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos 55	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:37:58 - [186] - Quote X ATM092 wrote: Warp into a fw plex. There is a curse. Game was good. Checks Dscan in Medium Plex..... 2 Vexors..... punches gate...... oh, 2 Vexors + 2 Rooks.... gg Checks Dscan.... Thrasher at small plex.... warps to small plex..... Thrasher is sebo fit, insta pointed & his Rook friend is sitting there.... gg Sitting in plex a SFI (stabber fleet).... Vexor appears on shart scan.... Vexor comes in... We start fighting... Suddenly ROOK appears.... gg #EVEBROKEN
Angrod Losshelin Oath of the Forsaken Half Massed 96	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:38:08 - [187] - Quote Lim Hiaret wrote: Quote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Did I miss something? Where Combat Recons temporarily "undetectable by directional scanners" sofar? And don't waste your time on this one, instead remove dscan. Its hardly used anyways, confusing, especially for newer players and also reasons. Realy! It's not worth your high paid DEV hours. Fix it later when you have proper time to revisit this one and such... WOW have you ever heard of combat? Anything related to shooting people or trying to find them to shoot them...I would say now. D-scan is huge in any combat situation. There is not a single PVP fleet that does not use it. There is not a single WH resident that doesn't use it. Check out my Podcast! CSM X: Candidate - Wormholes, Multiboxing, and New Bro's!
PIRJANIN Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 18	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:38:17 - [188] - Quote D-SCAN Immunity kills all kind of solo and small warfare. Strongly oppose that concept. If you wanna make recons something special give em warp speed, or just more speed. NOT THIS
Hakan MacTrew MUTED VOID Takahashi Alliance 877	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:39:20 - [189] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Give Combat Recons something to make them stand out as a unique and interesting set of ships Friends
Theon Severasse Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 99	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:39:30 - [190] - Quote Undetectable to DSCAN is an absolutely appalling change. This gives them all of the advantages that a the cloaky versions have with none of the drawbacks. All a gang needs to do is hide one of these offgrid and then warp it in once they have their target tackled. There's no locking delay that the cloaky recons have, AND they will be far tankier. Rooks hidden offgrid of every gatecamp. Lachs and Huginns hidden inside every combat site. Unable to accurately report on intel, even if ongrid with enemy fleet. Nobody has been thinking "Oh wouldn't it be great if my recon was undetectable", because that was already a thing. There is literally 0 counters to someone hiding one of these offgrid, short of having either an alt or friend who can do the facechecking for you, or to combat scan every system that you enter just to make sure that there isn't one hiding. For all of your claims (as in CCP in general) to making changes to make the game more "intuitive", this is something that directly goes against that. Not to mention the fact that there isn't a Falcon nerf in there.

Marcel Devereux Aideron Robotics 401	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:40:34 - [191] - Quote PIRJANIN wrote: D-SCAN Immunity kills all kind of solo and small warfare. Strongly oppose that concept. If you wanna make recons something special give em warp speed, or just more speed. NOT THIS Jump drives ?-)
Psianh Auvyander Noir. Suddenly Spaceships. 115	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:40:39 - [192] - Quote I am concerned with the Pilgrim after these changes. Its unique nature is gone now, and I'd really like to see this revisited. Instead of essentially copying the Curse, I sincerely urge you to consider finding new, interesting ways to implement the Pilgrim. Its heavy bonus to neutralizing strength is still part of its core, I believe, and while it certainly was struggling, this doesn't provide us with a great choice. Instead, choosing between the Pilgrim and Curse is going to boil down to: do I need a cyno? Perhaps let it focus more on the tracking disrupters, utilizing them for their survival more than they do now. Regardless, I do hope you'll revisit this hull and help it find a unique place. CSM X Announcement Thread My Blog @wsethbrown
Bob Shaftoes TURN LEFT The Camel Empire 27	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:40:46 - [193] - Quote Yeah , don't really like these changes very much I am afraid Recons are force multipliers , having them be insanely tanky and immune to d-scan is borderline broken because their inherent fragility was a balancing effect in of itself. The cloaky ones certainly should not have the resist bonus , but the combat ones having better resists is a bit more warranted due to their front-line role. I would still pre nerf the resists to stop them from being too powerful with logistics. The D-scan thing is just an awful awful idea. No ship should be exempt from d-scan , especially ships that have the potential to turn fights on their own due to powerful ewar bonuses. Lots of gatecampers are going to sit with combat recons off grid and warp them in when a fight starts. Unlike de-cloaking there is no lock delay or any downside for doing this The cap and speed changes are awesome. Those were two things that were really holding back the class Pilgrim getting a range bonus finally is great. I dunno what the deal is with the huggin and rapier weapon systems. Surely the huggin would be the missile boat as it started out with missiles while the rapier mostly used projectiles?
hell Epic Woah Industries Guardians of the Morrigan 1	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:40:48 - [194] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners What. the.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 911	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:41:47 - [195] - 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?
Soldarius Deadman W0nderland The 99 Percent 937	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:42:01 - [196] - Quote Combat Recons no longer show up on d-scan. My tear cup runneth over. Really don't understand why this makes so many people cry. Unless said pilot pops probes, its not like he can just warp on top of you. He will still have to warp to the beacon. So stay away from the beacon. Recon warps in... he's 120km away. gg, warp out. If he pops probes so that he can warp on top of you, you can see those. Pilgrim has been absolute trash forever. Now it is no longer trash. gj. I'm really looking forward to the new focus on hybrids for the Lachesis. 10% tracking and optimal on a ship with bonused scram range is gonna be sweet. I would like to see the Rook get a bonus to Rapid Light Missile Launchers since Heavies are such shite and bringing it into HAM range is generally not a good idea. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
bizz Antollare The Scope Gallente Federation 2	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:42:12 - [197] - Quote I'm sorry but no ship should be immune to dscan unless its cloaked. Yes I like how we could catch stuff REALLY easily with them... But its a dumb idea.
Fonac Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 104	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:43:28 - [198] - Quote The pilgrim, seems underpowered compared to athe Curse. The curse has a range bonus, and a neut amount bonus. The pilgrim, only has one of the things. I've always found it weird, that people have trouble getting into range, while being cloaked.
Sobic Appetite 4 Destruction 32	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:43:39 - [199] - Quote +1 To people asking for Huginn missile boat!
Airi Cho Dark-Rising Executive Outcomes 48	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:43:50 - [200] - Quote GREYBOBSASS wrote: Combat recons should do combat, not some ***** ditching usable only in griefing tactics meanwhile breaking some areas of gamplay (FW) A pg buff to get those hi slot filled should be enough alongside with the tank and speed buff no to dscan imunity, this is just plain broken and makes solo even harder, FFS sake Rise you used to do solo roaming and stuff wtf is wrong with you? I wasnt happy about changes you guys were doing Fozzie/Rise but after you got hired i thought you getting better and better at gamplay design, this change proves i was wrong. solo roam in a recon is a thing too :)

Sanctus Maleficus Lambent Enterprises 1	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:44:34 - [201] - Quote Instead of just a general immunity to d-scan, I'd rather see it allowing them to fit a module that then makes them immune to dscan. Might require rebalancing the stats further, but would be nice to see that tension of a more powerful ship versus scan immunity.
Adarnof Free Trade Monopoly You Are Being Monitored 49	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:45:31 - [202] - Quote Airi Cho wrote: bombers have 0 calibration delay IIRC. that is no different. you see neither on dscan. and actually bombers are worse ... if you arent sitting on the warp in spot with the combat recon, you actually see him while he tries to approach you e.g. Bombers were also balanced for this by having negligible defences, and even recently their agility dropped. And you do in fact see bombers on dscan if you're vigilant. Takes a few ticks to cloak after jumping a hole, you can easily catch this.
Danhiil Xadi Tri-empire Trading 12	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:45:33 - [203] - Quote Overall I like the changes, I look forward to being able to warp into a fight and actually have the cap to do stuff. However I am of the opinion that complete D-Scan imunity is too strong especially in lower class wormholes and FW space, as these are areas where a single recon can make a pretty massive difference due to the general fleet sizes and compositions. I dont know about the technical fesibility but I would suggest that having combat recons only appear on scans of 5AU or less would help quite a bit. My napkin maths seems to indicate that given the base warp speed/lock time of a recon 5AU gives somebody who is actively d-scanning roughly the same response time (around 4 seconds) as seeing a T3 uncloak or picking up an Inty on long scan. This also helps out solo players and small FW gangs as entering a plex is no longer has a chance of containing a load of invisible sebo'd arty Huginns alowing them to actually choose whether they want to engage that in advance.
Adrie Atticus Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion 693	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:47:27 - [204] - Quote JetCord wrote: 60% bonus to Stasis Webifier optimal range you mean per level? Recon ships skill is now only one level and you cannot train it into levle 2, 3, 4 or 5. What do you think?
Rollo Brinalle Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 6	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:47:54 - [205] - Quote The not detectable on d-scan has to be the stupidest decision ever to come out. Let's makes some really cool changes to the New Eden and then make a bunch of ships which are completely undetectable so you can't enjoy those new changes. Especially the WH changes I mean D-scan is your only eyes in wormholes. So someone just shows up on grid and you're suppose to do what? Hold on let me go get my 55 gallons drum of lube http://www.amazon.com/Passion-Natural-Water-Based-Lubricant-Gallon/dp/B005MR3IVO/ref=sr_1_1?s=hpc&ie=UTF8&qid=1418838127&sr=1-1&keywords=55+gallon+drum+of+lube&pebp=1418838127785 because that's what I'm going to need while doing WH stuff. Take this back to the drawing board because while it sounded good in the brainstorming room the implementation and how it will affect the game overall is not going to be good.
Theon Severasse Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 100	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:48:58 - [206] - Quote Sanctus Maleficus wrote: Instead of just a general immunity to d-scan, I'd rather see it allowing them to fit a module that then makes them immune to dscan. Might require rebalancing the stats further, but would be nice to see that tension of a more powerful ship versus scan immunity. This dscan immunity module should act like the glass cannon modules and remove all resists just by being fit. You want to sit a massive advantage offgrid? Fine, but it will die if the other person sneezes at it.
Bronson Hughes The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration 932	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:50:16 - [207] - Quote Rollo Brinalle wrote: The not detectable on d-scan has to be the stupidest decision ever to come out. Let's makes some really cool changes to the New Eden and then make a bunch of ships which are completely undetectable so you can't enjoy those new changes. Especially the WH changes I mean D-scan is your only eyes in wormholes. You realize that some of these new "really cool changes" to New Eden include 100 wormhole systems that combat recons can't enter, right? CCP Falcon's thoughts on suicide ganking. Reading Comprehension: so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I want to create content, not become content.
Arla Sarain 186	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:50:35 - [208] - Quote Unless combat scanners become negligible in fitting, D-SCAN invisibility is dumb.
Angrod Losshelin Oath of the Forsaken Half Massed 96	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:51:01 - [209] - Quote Airi Cho wrote: solo roam in a recon is a thing too :) In the pilgrim it was a thing.... Check out my Podcast! CSM X: Candidate - Wormholes, Multiboxing, and New Bro's!

CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 4690	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:51:18 - [210] - Quote Appreciate all the discussion. The work day is ending here so I'll let this continue tonight and talk over the feedback with my colleagues in the morning and then get back to you with responses to specific issues. Thanks @ccp_rise


Suitonia Corp 54 Curatores Veritatis Alliance 380	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:51:27 - [211] - Quote Hello Rise I'm not really sure what direction you're taking the Combat Recons in, the undetectable on directional scanner feels like a really situational bonus that will either incredibly powerful if you're in situation which allows you show up to a fight your opponent is unprepared for (like at a 5000km bookmark off a gate, or in wormholes). Or otherwise negliable, I don't think the Combat Recons offer anything for small-med gangs aside from people who are setting up traps. And when you're setting up a trap, why not use a Falcon instead of a 5000km bookmark Rook, or their varients, it doesn't offer much in addition to the Falcon. The main problem with Combat Recons is that they don't offer much different game play from the Covert variant, with exception of the Curse. Why take a Huginn in a fleet when a Rapier does the same job with more tank, with cynosural field and covert cloak. I would much rather see a heavier focus on damage bonuses on the Combat Recons, remove the directional scan immunity. Take them in a direction similar to the Heavy Interdictor changes that you rolled out in Oceanus. Which will make them more appealing to use in small gangs and solo, where people care more about DPS. Here are a few examples Huginn High: 4, Mid: 6. Low: 4 (3 Launchers) MC: 5% to Missile Launcher Rate of Fire, 10% to TP effectiveness RC: 60% to web optimal, 10% to Missile launcher velocity, 5% to missile launcher explosion velocity Role Bonus: 100% bonus to missile damage. Drone: 40m3 (8 Effective Launchers) I think this is much more interesting than a projectile focused Huginn, and also provides progession from Bellicose -> Huginn. Both Short and Long range missile launchers benefit from longer ranged webs and bonused target painters which has more synergy. The Rapier already has more of a focus on turrets anyway, and it provides it with something to differentiate itself from the standard web loki which uses projectiles. Rook: High: 4, Mid 7: low: 4 (3 Launchers) CC: 10% to Kinetic Missile damage, 10% to ECM capacitor cost RC: 30% to ECM Strength, 10% to launcher velocity, 5% to missile launcher explosion velocity Drone: 25m3 (10 effective launchers kinetic locked, 6 effective launchers non kinetic) The Rook needs to differentiate itself more from the Falcon, an extra low allows it to achieve better DPS output, better tank, or more EWAR power at the expense of not having the covert cloak. In contrast to the Huginn, the Rook has higher raw damage output than the Huginn but locked into kinetic, not having the synergetic web/TP bonuses that the Huginn has, and being slower, it comes close to the Cerberus/Othrus in terms of raw DPS output, but at the expense of being much less mobile, more vulnerable and with lower cap stability. Lachesis High: 4, Mid: 6, Low: 4 (3 turrets) GC: 5% to Medium hybrid damage, 7.5% to damp effectiveness RC: 20% to Warp Disruption range, 10% to Medium Hybrid Optimal range, 7.5% to medium hybrid tracking Drone: 50m3 (+10) Role Bonus: 100% bonus to Medium Hybrid damage (7.5 effective turrets) I like your redesign of the Lachesis a lot, but think it should be focused more towards higher damage, 5 effective turrets isn't enough imo. Curse. - Keep it the same, remove the directional scanner immunity, 3rd bonus added to recon ship skill, +5% to Drone MWD Speed and Tracking. Contributer to Eve is Easy:-á https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos Check out my PvP Rifter guide for new players; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YReUNRTGcXo
Sofia Evanglene Ridge Mineral Holdings 6	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:52:10 - [212] - Quote Bronson Hughes wrote: Rollo Brinalle wrote: The not detectable on d-scan has to be the stupidest decision ever to come out. Let's makes some really cool changes to the New Eden and then make a bunch of ships which are completely undetectable so you can't enjoy those new changes. Especially the WH changes I mean D-scan is your only eyes in wormholes. You realize that some of these new "really cool changes" to New Eden include 100 wormhole systems that combat recons can't enter, right? you mean 25 right
Anariasis Hard Knocks Inc. 48	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:52:54 - [213] - Quote I just hope the combat recons will appear on d-scan while they are on the same grid as you are - otherwise it's just stupid that you have stuff on your overview that your scanner can't see.
Heinrich Rotwang Caldari Provisions Caldari State 52	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:53:38 - [214] - Quote Im gonna comment once I know how likely the ECM changes are to make the Falcon and the Rook join the Drake and the Crow on the Scrapyard.
GREYBOBSASS Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 19	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:53:42 - [215] - Quote then again when it comes to ecm when we will see changes to them? scriptet ecm that work ONLY on the right sensor types is the way to go to prevent the fact that a falcon with 6 different jammers can jam you with the wrong ecm types, needs to be done then again it makes ECM boats nicer to fly, I would rather have a falcon with 1 or 2 scripted jammer and shield tank with ecm mods in lows than the current armor abomination
Makari Aeron The Shadow's Of Eve TSOE Consortium 153	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:53:44 - [216] - Quote Rook needs more ECM range. CCP RedDawn: Ugly people are just playing life on HARD mode. Personally, I'm playing on an INFERNO difficulty. CCP Goliath: I often believe that the best way to get something done is to shout at the person trying to help you. http://goo.gl/PKGDP
MeBiatch GRR GOONS 2026	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:54:42 - [217] - Quote bah... i am late to the party... lemme read and let the battle commence There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote: Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Shizuken Venerated Stars 332	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:55:41 - [218] - Quote Ross Sylibus wrote: I don't see how this doesn't make WH space completely unlivable for most of EVE. The Dscan change is so radical it almost seems like CCP is throwing grenades to watch people argue over it. They need to at least explain their reasoning for something like this. Otherwise we can rename the game to Combat Recon Online. "Ohh my, 100 pilots in local and no one on Dscan." And you can kiss wormholes goodbye. Who wants to risk assets with that kind of gank possibility out there.
Misaniovent Origin. Black Legion. 17	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:55:46 - [219] - Quote I would greatly prefer having pilots in recons not appear in local, but I imagine that would be harder to implement than simply not having recons appear on D-Scan.
Edward Olmops DUST Expeditionary Team 230	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:55:55 - [220] - Quote D-Scan immunity is a cool new trait. I do not think its overpowered in comparison to regular cloaking in PvP. Just more variance. But. People will use these things not to ambush people exclusively. This is like a "free ratting" card. You can be anywhere, doing anything WHILE being invisible on D-Scan. Regular cloaked ships can only sit around and produce a scary entry in local chat... Means people who want to ambush YOU will have to search the entire system - if you are in a Plex they will have to get into your room until they can see you. Which means in turn - at least in the environment as it is now - that you would be able to PvE completely unmolested. Are there concerns that Combat Recons might become OMGWTFBBQOP-PvE-Boats? Or is that no issue due to the mediocre PvE combat value of this class?

Altrue Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 1485	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:56:01 - [221] - Quote Ok, I like the general goal of these changes :) D-scan detection is definitely a good idea! Now for the specifics (I can fly all 8 recons and hope to be able to provide feedback based on experience): - Pilgrim : The nos range alone won't fix it, I agree that it lacks range, but at the cost of nos amount? Definitely not. Both would be nice! Don't destroy the niche of the pilgrim for solo pvp please... That kind of players don't need the range, and that's the only kind of player to actually use the ship. If anything, other recons should be inspired by the pilgrim gameplay! My suggestion : 30% bonus to range and amount of nos/neut per level. Or 40 + 20 for range + amount if you don't fear extended level bonuses descriptions. - Falcon : For real, it needs more drones. At least 25mb Signature Tanking - Best Tanking
Skyler Hawk The Ironmongery 32	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:57:17 - [222] - Quote Suitonia wrote: Hello Rise, I think the changes you've made to the covert recon line are great and all make perfect sense. I'm not really sure what direction you're taking the Combat Recons in, the undetectable on directional scanner feels like a really situational bonus that will either incredibly powerful if you're in situation which allows you show up to a fight your opponent is unprepared for (like at a 5000km bookmark off a gate, or in wormholes). Or otherwise negliable, I don't think the Combat Recons offer anything for small-med gangs aside from people who are setting up traps. And when you're setting up a trap, why not use a Falcon instead of a 5000km bookmark Rook, or their varients, it doesn't offer much in addition to the Falcon. The main problem with Combat Recons is that they don't offer much different game play from the Covert variant, with exception of the Curse. Why take a Huginn in a fleet when a Rapier does the same job with more tank, with cynosural field and covert cloak. I would much rather see a heavier focus on damage bonuses on the Combat Recons, remove the directional scan immunity. Take them in a direction similar to the Heavy Interdictor changes that you rolled out in Oceanus. Which will make them more appealing to use in small gangs and solo, where people care more about DPS. Here are a few examples Huginn High: 4, Mid: 6. Low: 4 (3 Launchers) MC: 5% to Missile Launcher Rate of Fire, 10% to TP effectiveness RC: 60% to web optimal, 10% to Missile launcher velocity, 5% to missile launcher explosion velocity Role Bonus: 100% bonus to missile damage. Drone: 40m3 (8 Effective Launchers) I think this is much more interesting than a projectile focused Huginn, and also provides progession from Bellicose -> Huginn. Both Short and Long range missile launchers benefit from longer ranged webs and bonused target painters which has more synergy. The Rapier already has more of a focus on turrets anyway, and it provides it with something to differentiate itself from the standard web loki which uses projectiles. Rook: High: 4, Mid 7: low: 4 (3 Launchers) CC: 10% to Kinetic Missile damage, 10% to ECM capacitor cost RC: 30% to ECM Strength, 10% to launcher velocity, 5% to missile launcher explosion velocity Drone: 25m3 Role Bonus: 100% bonus to missile damage (9 effective launchers kinetic locked, 6 effective launchers non kinetic) The Rook needs to differentiate itself more from the Falcon, an extra low allows it to achieve better DPS output, better tank, or more EWAR power at the expense of not having the covert cloak. In contrast to the Huginn, the Rook has higher raw damage output than the Huginn but locked into kinetic, not having the synergetic web/TP bonuses that the Huginn has, and being slower, it comes close to the Cerberus/Othrus in terms of raw DPS output, but at the expense of being much less mobile, more vulnerable and with lower cap stability. Lachesis High: 4, Mid: 6, Low: 4 (3 turrets) GC: 5% to Medium hybrid damage, 7.5% to damp effectiveness RC: 20% to Warp Disruption range, 10% to Medium Hybrid Optimal range, 7.5% to medium hybrid tracking Drone: 50m3 (+10) Role Bonus: 100% bonus to Medium Hybrid damage (7.5 effective turrets) I like your redesign of the Lachesis a lot, but think it should be focused more towards higher damage, 5 effective turrets isn't enough imo. Curse. - Keep it the same, remove the directional scanner immunity, 3rd bonus added to recon ship skill, +5% to Drone MWD Speed and Tracking. these are all good ideas imo
LakeEnd FinFleet Northern Coalition. 68	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:57:44 - [223] - Quote Nice one Rise. But could you make some of the recons viable for armor fleets so armor fleets wont be terrible once you nerf our tech3 tackle?
PinkKnife Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 512	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:57:51 - [224] - Quote Explain to me why anyone would ever fly a Pilgrim now that the curse is even more dominant over it? The only advantage it did have was that it could cloak and be stealthy. Now that the Curse is immune to dscan, there's no reason to ever fly the Pilgrim since the curse is basically better in every way. The bonus to cloaking CPU use is a ****** bonus. You need the cloak just to use the ship properlly, why get a bonus to a module that is inherently required on the ship? Give the pilgrim its neut strength back (even if reduced) otherwise there simply is no usage case for it over the curse, let alone the geddon or Shimmu.
Wulfy Johnson NorCorp Security 53	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:58:19 - [225] - Quote Rip lowsec. Dscan immunity is way out of balance.. Creative, but bad.
Legion40k Hard Knocks Inc. 87	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:58:48 - [226] - Quote Little rant about Pilgrim; - 2 to 3 neuts and now they're unbonused strength..so they cant cap out a cruiser+ quickly. Why? - range bonus completely useless, you cant kite with it being armour i spose you can always shield f-vomits
MonkeyBusiness Thiesant randomly named no tax corp v2 31	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:59:33 - [227] - Quote Pilgrim certainly needs a boost, and at first glance this seemed useful. However, it has 3 med neuts, 540 cap hit every 12 secs, with 3x range. That's interesting, but how useful is it in practice? Frigs will escape its range, and it's only enough cap pressure to affect targets over multiple cycles. Compare a cloaky neut legion, 6 bonused neuts, 1620 cap hit every 12 secs. Yes, doesn't have the range, but with the cloak you can dictate that in a lot of situations. It's also zero cap for most cruiser targets in one alpha. Thus, I'm still struggling to see a reason to use the Pilgrim - the Legion is still better at cloaky work, and the Curse (1440 neut alpha) has the same neut range as well as the dscan change. One thing I will use: the lolfit single heavy faction neut with 88km range :-)
biz Antollare Aperture Harmonics No Holes Barred 44	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:59:44 - [228] - Quote Recon fleets appearing out of nowhere through wormholes seems a bit overpowered. But again this is another idea not well thought out in regards to it in wh space.
Odithia Rondass 73	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:59:53 - [229] - Quote I'm afraid the d-scan immunity will make Force Recon much less desirable. Also good luck at running solo site in low sec and especialy WH when this patch hit.
RTSAvalanche The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos 56	Posted - 2014.12.18 16:59:55 - [230] - Quote Faren Shalni wrote: Querns wrote: RTSAvalanche wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Those goals lead us to the following major changes: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Well that's just complete and utter bullsh!t... As if Solo pvp wasn't hard enough, we can not even rely on our D-Scan now?? somthing that we have relied on for the past 10 years.. You are basicaly breaking around some core mechanics here. Faction Warefare has been completely broken since Incarna, now you are telling me that recons with web, neut, damp & ECM bonuses will be able to hide in plain site in FW plexes and there is no conventional way to find them. Even if combats work to find them, we would have to do that for every plex... I smelt somthing bad in the air when the mobile scan inhib came into game, didn't realise things were going to be this bad. POWER CREEP is getting excessive.. Do they not have combat probes where you live? you have combats on your PvP ship? Ofcause not. This isn't WH space, or null bear hunting... FW is bread & butter pvp with out all the rubbish & F1 warriros.

Sofia Evanglene Ridge Mineral Holdings 7	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:01:54 - [231] - Quote Edward Olmops wrote: D-Scan immunity is a cool new trait. I do not think its overpowered in comparison to regular cloaking in PvP. Just more variance. But. People will use these things not to ambush people exclusively. This is like a "free ratting" card. You can be anywhere, doing anything WHILE being invisible on D-Scan. Regular cloaked ships can only sit around and produce a scary entry in local chat... Means people who want to ambush YOU will have to search the entire system - if you are in a Plex they will have to get into your room until they can see you. Which means in turn - at least in the environment as it is now - that you would be able to PvE completely unmolested. Are there concerns that Combat Recons might become OMGWTFBBQOP-PvE-Boats? Or is that no issue due to the mediocre PvE combat value of this class? im going to huff wormhole gas in a rook and theres not a damned thing you can do about it this **** is just stupid
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1242	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:02:14 - [232] - Quote RTSAvalanche wrote: Ofcause not. This isn't WH space, or null bear hunting... FW is bread & butter pvp with out all the rubbish & F1 warriros. I dare say that your particular views towards PvP are not inviolate GÇö-áthe game can change. Maybe you need to start bringing a probing ship or using scouts! This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
maCH'EttE Mafia Redux 129	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:02:44 - [233] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Hopefully no typos or weirdnesses but its always possible so just let me know if something looks funny. 15:02 - I have to step out for a meeting. Back in an hour to start responding. 15:49 - fixed typos in Huginn and Curse slot layout =/ you have totally ruined this amazing game. Now every one will be flying falcons, jam everything, at 100+km and sit pretty while other people get raped.
sycore101 From Our Cold Dead Hands The Kadeshi 58	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:03:21 - [234] - Quote Roll out the ships being removed from dscan to cov-ops as well, to assume that they are using a covert operational ship, kinda makes sense to me.
Stefan Silviu Knowledge is Money - Money is Power 1	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:03:30 - [235] - Quote new models for gallente recons would make this change sooooo much sweet
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1242	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:03:55 - [236] - Quote maCH'EttE wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Hopefully no typos or weirdnesses but its always possible so just let me know if something looks funny. 15:02 - I have to step out for a meeting. Back in an hour to start responding. 15:49 - fixed typos in Huginn and Curse slot layout =/ you have totally ruined this amazing game. Now every one will be flying falcons, jam everything, at 100+km and sit pretty while other people get raped. oh not to mention that they will no longer be on the directional, you are the worst. Falcons aren't immune to directional scan. Rooks are. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Ripard Teg Stimulus Rote Kapelle 974	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:04:18 - [237] - Quote That enormous, world-shattering THUMP you just heard was the ball being dropped big-time on the Pilgrim rebalance. Why take away the one thing it was actually good at to give it something that it desperately doesn't need? Ashs and neut Legions already vastly, wildly overshadow Pilgrims in small-gang armor fleets. This range change isn't going to do a thing about that... while taking away its one solid weapon when used in ultra-small gang and solo ratter ganking. What good is a range bonus gonna do for a cloaky ship? I'm incredibly sad the Rook didn't get a RLML bonus to go with its HML/HAM bonus. This sounds OP but it really isn't: a RLML Rook isn't even close to a good option right now, giving only 130 DPS (and long reload time) versus 190 (and much better alpha) for the HML version. So add this bonus, please. That would make it a viable take-along on small-gang RLML Caracal/Cerb fleets. I'm also incredibly sad and confused that the Huginn/Rapier weapon bonuses have been flip-flopped. TP-bonused missiles were the only thing that made the Huginn interesting. This profile should have been improved, not eliminated. What was the justification for doing this, if you don't mind my asking? I'm torn on the invisible-to-dscan thing. It feels OP, particularly in w-space. It also makes me nervous because you guys don't have a good strategy around "What intelligence tools should there be in EVE?" So you probably shouldn't be screwing around with the intel tools we do have until you know what the strategy is going to be. aka Jester, who apparently was once entrusted to Wield The Banhammer to good effect.
WaTeR Ubersnol TURN LEFT The Camel Empire 2	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:05:14 - [238] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Hello again o/ Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Really ? To start off with , looking at the amount of typo's in your post really makes me wonder. Are these changes actually thought through ? I really cant think of any way this change is going to give "good fights" Especially in combination with the tank buff. As being mentioned by several . people should be able to trust on their d-scan. Of course with the exception of cloaky ships , then again , they all have trade offs for it. Making random stuff invisible on scan really makes for a lazy part of game design To go even further , it is potentially a deal breaker for small gang pvp. I could probably rant on for a hour giving you good arguments on how this change is bad. Wich i wont. Instead i will ask you this ; How do you really see this turn out on TQ ? Since you are giving so many options to abuse the crap out of it. Rebalance will be needed again right after you implemented these. Wich is kinda weird , since most recons werent in that bad of a place to start off with....
Joni Hariere The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos 19	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:05:47 - [239] - Quote Querns wrote: RTSAvalanche wrote: Ofcause not. This isn't WH space, or null bear hunting... FW is bread & butter pvp with out all the rubbish & F1 warriros. I dare say that your particular views towards PvP are not inviolate GÇö-áthe game can change. Maybe you need to start bringing a probing ship or using scouts! Thanks for following me where ever i go and scan for me, that way i can enjoy my pvp in this one character, without alts/links/scouts whatever.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5629	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:06:33 - [240] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Hopefully no typos or weirdnesses but its always possible so just let me know if something looks funny. There's still a typo on the Arazu. For some boneheaded reason it only reads 40/40 drone bandwidth/bay still, and there's no drone bonuses. Capital W Capital T Capital F Capital ! Hellooo... Gallente... drone folks... ship that fights far far away... drones fit here. I don't care if you have to make it a Creodrone ship or some other lore fluff, make it so! Good grief, I've waited years to see the Arazu get the fixing it needs and it just falls farther behind. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.

C'ernd Catastrophic Overview Failure Brave Collective 1	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:07:45 - [241] - Quote As an avid Pilgrim Pilot, I must say, the change to them is underwhelming. The only thing it had going for it as far as hunting pve'rs was it's neut drain ability. While the increase the range is nice in theory, removing cap at the same range as a Curse with no bonus to the strength of the neuts will make for a lot of escaping targets that are faster than a Pilgrim, which for the uninformed.......there are a lot of. Bad call on this one CCP.
Cynthia Aishai State War Academy Caldari State 9	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:07:47 - [242] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners How about NO!
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1244	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:08:31 - [243] - Quote Joni Hariere wrote: Querns wrote: RTSAvalanche wrote: Ofcause not. This isn't WH space, or null bear hunting... FW is bread & butter pvp with out all the rubbish & F1 warriros. I dare say that your particular views towards PvP are not inviolate GÇö-áthe game can change. Maybe you need to start bringing a probing ship or using scouts! Thanks for following me where ever i go and scan for me, that way i can enjoy my pvp in this one character, without alts/links/scouts whatever. You might need to make friends. :shrug: This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1244	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:09:58 - [244] - Quote It's actually pretty surprising to see the number of people who think that neut range is somehow worse than neut amount. Have any of you actually flown a pilgrim against, well, anything? Pilgrims needed the range very badly to avoid getting fridged by anything with even a remote ability to kite. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Reagalan Amok. Goonswarm Federation 15	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:11:02 - [245] - Quote The more I ponder this D-scan thing, the more I find it wreckless. There is, again, no reason to make combat recons any more "unique" as they already fill a vital role in fleets and small gangs, and enhancing this role through enhancing survivability would be more suitable. This D-scan thing is a solution looking for a problem. Many others have already pointed out how many problems it will cause, in wormholes, in faction warfare sites, and in nullsec fleets. I get it CCP, you want to be bold and take risks, but there is a big difference between being bold and being wreckless. Phoebe jump fatigue was bold. Applying fatigue to subcaps using jump bridges (and thereby crippling home defense gangs) was wreckless. Drones as a standalone weapon system was bold. Neglecting consideration for the consequences (Drone Assist, the current Ishtar imbalance) was wreckless. Something to make interceptors "unique" was bold. Giving interceptors bubble immunity when they are capable of insta-warping was wreckless. AoE Doomsdays were bold. Allowing them to fire through cynos was wreckless. You don't need to add to this list.
rsantos TEC-NOLOGY Sorry We're In Your Space Eh 23	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:11:13 - [246] - Quote Ouch! Never expected the recon balance to be soo unbalanced. So we get HAC Tank with EWAR bonus!!! The D-Scan thinggy is just silly. I will make sure to abuse it! Curse with double ewar nos/neut bonus... Really! Too afraid to give it a second drone bonus? Give some strength to minmatar recon webs too... pretty please! Pilgrim range bonus is pretty much the only right thing I see in this balance.
Teleil Zoomers Usque Ad Mortem TCC. 17	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:13:54 - [247] - Quote what in the actual ****? dscan immunity? ahaha for solo to small gangs welcome to combat recons online, where you and your buddies are the all powerful hunters and are invisible and cant be dscanned and your prey is also invisible and cant be dscanned so you must combat probe evry single system. pointless and op
Joni Hariere The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos 19	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:14:29 - [248] - Quote Querns wrote: Joni Hariere wrote: Querns wrote: RTSAvalanche wrote: Ofcause not. This isn't WH space, or null bear hunting... FW is bread & butter pvp with out all the rubbish & F1 warriros. I dare say that your particular views towards PvP are not inviolate GÇö-áthe game can change. Maybe you need to start bringing a probing ship or using scouts! Thanks for following me where ever i go and scan for me, that way i can enjoy my pvp in this one character, without alts/links/scouts whatever. You might need to make friends. :shrug: SOLO PILOT , ever heard of one.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 911	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:14:38 - [249] - 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.
Zen Guerrilla CTRL-Q Iron Oxide. 306	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:16:41 - [250] - Quote 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. pew pew

Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1244	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:16:42 - [251] - Quote Joni Hariere wrote: SOLO PILOT , ever heard of one. No, what's that? This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
GREYBOBSASS Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 20	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:17:31 - [252] - Quote Edward Olmops wrote: D-Scan immunity is a cool new trait. I do not think its overpowered in comparison to regular cloaking in PvP. Just more variance. But. People will use these things not to ambush people exclusively. This is like a "free ratting" card. You can be anywhere, doing anything WHILE being invisible on D-Scan. Regular cloaked ships can only sit around and produce a scary entry in local chat... Means people who want to ambush YOU will have to search the entire system - if you are in a Plex they will have to get into your room until they can see you. Which means in turn - at least in the environment as it is now - that you would be able to PvE completely unmolested. Are there concerns that Combat Recons might become OMGWTFBBQOP-PvE-Boats? Or is that no issue due to the mediocre PvE combat value of this class? screw pve you have a golem for that
Dirk Morbho Mindstar Technology Get Off My Lawn 19	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:17:52 - [253] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Hello again o/ RAPIER Slot layout: 4H, 6M, 4L; 1 turrets, 3 launchers(+2) WHAT?? Dude, seriously stop with the missile infestation. CCP has already screwed up the cyclone and bellicose. Minmatar ships are meant to have projectile weapons. Stop ruining my rusty ships! Purge the Caldari virus now. What next, all ships from all races need laser bonuses?
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 912	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:18:43 - [254] - 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.
Challus Mercer Sacred Temple The Gorgon Empire 10	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:19:07 - [255] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners I dont understand, first you say eve is about making decisions but now you take it from us by introducing such bonuses. Just think about solo or small scale pvpers. What decisions should they make for avoiding being permajammed by rook or tackled by huggin and lachesis? No recalibration time and invisibility for d-scan makes it impossible to counter. Now they gonna have even more EHP. Once you was a solo pvper yourself so why do you do it to us?
Sir Constantin Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 22	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:19:08 - [256] - Quote D-Scan immunity is way too imbalanced. Maybe would work as a percent, like 85% chance to remain hidden on every scan, so a player needs to hit dscan 5 times to see your ship? That would be slightly less overpowered.
Saede Riordan Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 6675	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:19:09 - [257] - Quote Can we get a separate thread for the discussion of the d-scan thing? I feel like all the other balance changes are getting lost behind that. Fear and Loathing in Internet Spaceships
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate 1076	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:20:02 - [258] - Quote Querns wrote: Joni Hariere wrote: Querns wrote: RTSAvalanche wrote: Ofcause not. This isn't WH space, or null bear hunting... FW is bread & butter pvp with out all the rubbish & F1 warriros. I dare say that your particular views towards PvP are not inviolate GÇö-áthe game can change. Maybe you need to start bringing a probing ship or using scouts! Thanks for following me where ever i go and scan for me, that way i can enjoy my pvp in this one character, without alts/links/scouts whatever. You might need to make friends. :shrug: The word "solo" does have a certain meaning to it.
Bronson Hughes The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration 932	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:20:24 - [259] - Quote Let me contribute this to the whole "D-Scan Immunity" rage-fest...er...discussion. What does granting D-Scan immunity grant Combat Recons allow them to do that other ships couldn't do already? Other ships could already warp cloaked to your anom or belt and tackle you without you seeing them. And with the Force Recon buff, some of them would actually kill you solo. Post-Proteus Combat Recons can land on-grid with you sure, but unless they've fit a combat scanner (which gimps their fit and relies on scan probes that do show up on D-Scan) they can't land right on top of you. With the possible exception of a long-point Lachesis, you should have plenty of time to warp off unless you're sitting right at the warp-in spot. What about acceleration gates? With those, even cloaky ships had to decloak briefly in order to use the gate giving you a chance to scan them. Post-Proteus Combat Recons will be undetectable until they land on grid. And there again is their weakness: the gate will always drop them, uncloaked, at the same spot. So unless they're sitting there waiting for you at the warp-in (which other cloaky ships could already do), you should have plenty of time to warp off as long as you don't sit on the warp-in. EDIT: What about gate camps, ratting, or anything else that a Combat Recon would do whilst uncloaked? Proper scouting has always involved getting eyes on-grid to actually see the enemy's disposition. D-Scan immunity just makes proper scouting more critical to see if they have Combat Recons hiding in plain sight. The sky isn't falling folks. We'll just have to pay a bit more attention to what we're doing. CCP Falcon's thoughts on suicide ganking. Reading Comprehension: so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I want to create content, not become content.
Lim Hiaret Hiaret Family 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:21:13 - [260] - Quote 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?

Rahmiro Discrete Astrographic Reconnaissance Technologies This Is How We Roll 67	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:22:21 - [261] - Quote In the spirit of change, I'm going yes on the dscan changes for combat recons. Combat probes for EVERYONE! Having just fit a pilgrim for close range neuting power, td's and a little tank, I no like more range. I never seen these people in my life. I don't recognize them Your Honor
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 912	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:23:00 - [262] - 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.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1244	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:23:11 - [263] - Quote Rivr Luzade wrote: The word "solo" does have a certain meaning to it. In Eve: Online? Not really. Hell, people using gang bonuses on their alt still consider themselves to be "solo." This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Marlona Sky Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 5721	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:23:48 - [264] - Quote There is a couple things here I am concerned about: ECM still offers no counter play. Effectively rendering a player unable to do anything for at least 20 seconds plus the time it takes them to relock anything. 99.99% fo all combat in this game involves locking a target. ECM drones turn any ship into a diet Blackbird. ECM needs to be revamped from the ground up and should not involve removing a players ability to play the game. Celestis being incredibly powerful from 100+km is silly. If it turns out combat recons not being on the directional scanner is an option, perhaps showing the ships as the T1 version of the ship instead would be a good compromise. i.e. the directional scanner shows an Arbitrator on scan when in fact it is really a Curse. Semi-related, but what are the odds of a new high slot module that can not be fit if there is any type of cyno fit as well, only allowed for recons and means they do not appear in local? Perhaps I am dreaming a bit too hard here. The Paradox
MeBiatch GRR GOONS 2026	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:24:40 - [265] - Quote Querns wrote: RTSAvalanche wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Those goals lead us to the following major changes: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Well that's just complete and utter bullsh!t... As if Solo pvp wasn't hard enough, we can not even rely on our D-Scan now?? somthing that we have relied on for the past 10 years.. You are basicaly breaking around some core mechanics here. Faction Warefare has been completely broken since Incarna, now you are telling me that recons with web, neut, damp & ECM bonuses will be able to hide in plain site in FW plexes and there is no conventional way to find them. Even if combats work to find them, we would have to do that for every plex... I smelt somthing bad in the air when the mobile scan inhib came into game, didn't realise things were going to be this bad. POWER CREEP is getting excessive.. Do they not have combat probes where you live? One more step to making the nestor a thing. There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote: Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Aliventi Hard Knocks Inc. 789	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:25:30 - [266] - Quote I really do like some of the things you did here. The cap additions and tank additions are spot on. Those are two areas recons really suffered. Props on recognizing and fixing those issues. I was hoping three additional things would happen. First, they would all be essentially the same ship. Second, all of them would receive Covert Cloaks. Third, that one of each race would be a shield tank and the other would be armor tanked. The reason for one to be armor tankable and the other to be shield tankable would be because if you want to fly a shield fleet you should be able to bring all 4 recons along. Same for an armor fleet. part of the reason that T3s are used so often in armor fleets to provide the recon services is that they tank WAY more. The reason for the covert cloak would be for Black Ops you could bring either a shield version or the armor version along. In BlOps fleets there are pros and cons to both. The reason for them to be essentially the same ship would be so that in either an armor or a shield fleet if you bring the one that is supposed to tank the same you would always have the same level of capability present. If you were to go with this I think that armor and shield tanks fleets win, BlOps wins, and you get your fancy "doesn't appear on D-scan" with the covert ops cloak.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1244	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:28:36 - [267] - Quote MeBiatch wrote: One more step to making the nestor a thing. If it had a CPU reduction for probe launchers, anyways. Really wish they had just given the Nestor the covert jump drive it so desperately needs. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
l0rd carlos Friends Of Harassment The Camel Empire 1111	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:28:37 - [268] - Quote Yeah, I don't like this. For roaming gangs there is almost no reason to take combat recons. It's still not really worth to put guns on them. Fit it for max Tank / Speed, gang will bring DPS. The dscan change will be only usable for niche cases and traps / ganks. Suitonia has some great ideas. He put in words what I was thinking. German blog about smallscale lowsec pvp: http://friendsofharassment.wordpress.com
Jazz Caden Convicts and Savages Shadow Cartel 29	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:29:21 - [269] - Quote While this seems kool from a fleet perspective, it is going to be really really frustrating for solo and small gang pilots. This is especially true for some newer FW pilots. When they go into a FW plex and immediately get tackled and killed it will be very disappointing and you really wont be able to do anything about it. And if your response is: "just combat probe before you go into the plex" then you need to go jump off of a high object b/c that is completely ridiculous. The great thing about FW space is being able to fly around quickly and engage multiple people in a small space of time. This DSCAN change will change that heavily, and not in a good way IMHO.
BKuCKy Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:30:00 - [270] - Quote Ahahah yep less pve-ers! More RMT!!!! PLEX for real money!!!

biz Antollare Aperture Harmonics No Holes Barred 46	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:30:08 - [271] - Quote This isn't CCP being "creative". Its just them doing what they always do. Take existing things in the game and just tweaking, buffing, or nerfing them in different ways. Lazy development. Make new ships = awesome Make new systems = great Make new modules = great Fixing problems with ships = great Making ships dscan immune on their own = dumb, broken, overpowered. CCP be more creative please and read feedback.
Lug Muad'Dib Wise Humans Sword 16	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:30:52 - [272] - Quote Dscan immunity is dumb idea, lol at dev.
ihavenotoneclue Rolled Out Black Legion. 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:31:43 - [273] - Quote Really a fan of the D-scan changes, and the pilgrim has needed the range boost forever. Overall I'm definitely a fan. I like that you're using new and interesting changes to alter mechanics instead of the old tired racial bonuses which often don't fit the role of the ship.
biz Antollare Aperture Harmonics No Holes Barred 46	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:33:55 - [274] - Quote ihavenotoneclue wrote: Really a fan of the D-scan changes, and the pilgrim has needed the range boost forever. Overall I'm definitely a fan. Appropriate character name.
Ripard Teg Stimulus Rote Kapelle 975	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:34:36 - [275] - Quote Ripard Teg wrote: I'm torn on the invisible-to-dscan thing. It feels OP, particularly in w-space. It also makes me nervous because you guys don't have a good strategy around "What intelligence tools should there be in EVE?" So you probably shouldn't be screwing around with the intel tools we do have until you know what the strategy is going to be. Given a few more minutes to think about invisible-to-dscan, I dislike it even more. It just doesn't seem to add any interesting game-play outside of w-space. And in w-space, as I mentioned, I think it's OP. Entertaining alternative: combat recon pilots don't appear in Local for 10-12 seconds. As it is, most ratters (and all bots) just watch Local: "14 blues... and oh look, a neut just showed up. Time to dock up!" Therefore, d-scan immunity isn't gonna do a thing for combat recons... whereas giving them 10-12 seconds of Local immunity will add some interesting game-play options without being OP. Ratters that watch d-scan will still be OK, while those that rely on Local... This would give you guys the opportunity to dip a toe into the delayed Local debate and try it out without committing yourselves. aka Jester, who apparently was once entrusted to Wield The Banhammer to good effect.
Jezza McWaffle No Vacancies 161	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:35:04 - [276] - Quote Massive fan of these changes although the Pilgrim still needs some buffing, same goes for the Rook as well me thinks. C6 Wormhole blog http://holelotofwaffle.wordpress.com/
Tiberian Deci Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 23	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:35:41 - [277] - Quote ale rico wrote: Give Combat Recons something to make them stand out as a unique and interesting set of ships Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Seems to me a stronger tank or significant damage bonuses would have had the desired effect without completely changing the game with recons. I hope you guys thought about all implications this will bring. Do you have some implications in mind or are you just fearmongering in hope that they remove that proposed change so you don't have to learn to deal with it? I welcome these changes. I bought a Rook on accident once and it's been gathering dust while waiting for an opportunity to shine.
ihavenotoneclue Rolled Out Black Legion. 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:36:41 - [278] - Quote biz Antollare wrote: ihavenotoneclue wrote: Really a fan of the D-scan changes, and the pilgrim has needed the range boost forever. Overall I'm definitely a fan. Appropriate character name. When logical discourse isn't an option, feel free to use anecdote.
Pom Agrant Evil Young Flesh 8	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:36:50 - [279] - Quote The d-scan immunity is a very very bad idea. WHs and cloaky camping will be completely broken. Seriously, don't break eve with this kind of stupid change. I have been a recon pilot for years and would luv to see them suck less, but this is ridonkulous.
biz Antollare Aperture Harmonics No Holes Barred 48	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:38:47 - [280] - Quote Next they will change another ship and make it completely immune to combat probes right out of the box and call it creative.

TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 912	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:39:07 - [281] - Quote so I'm the only one who thinks curse and lach should have like 50% more lowslots than they have?
Odins Raktor Negative Density Disavowed. 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:39:10 - [282] - Quote Making these ships more in line with T3's i like. D Scan immunity thing won't have the effects you're looking for I think. In places like 0.0 local still exists and won't really help you hunt any better. People will still warp away the second local goes up one. In WH space jumping in with one of these won't stop the WH fire sound, and that's really the indication pvebears hear with their alt to tell them to warp back to the safety of their safespot and posup/cloak. Sadly with the increased tank I think you're going to see these used more to PVE with almost completely safely, then you will to pvp with more effectively. Warping into a system and Dscanning down someone who's pve'ing is a skill taking that away means i now need to pull combats out which is yet more stuff that indicates I'm looking to kill you. I like the ship changes just drop the D scan stuff and you're golden.
Duchess Starbuckington Starbuckington Manor 305	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:39:22 - [283] - Quote This has probably been said already but - would it be too much to ask to give the Rook a rapid light bonus as well? Frankly given your determination for heavies and to a lesser extent HAMS to be completely and laughably ****, I see no reason to fly even the updated Rook over a Falcon. I take this back should you notice that heavies were over-nerfed into utter uselessness. Curse and Pilgrim I absolutely love though, and will be flying a lot. Curse was one of my favorite solo ships and this is the icing on the cake there.
Lonan O'Labhradha Lith 'n' Brannor Enterprises Absolution Alliance 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:39:45 - [284] - Quote Boltorano wrote: You've basically made scout alts mandatory for "solo" complex runners. Thanks so much. See below. If you look in the Role Bonus section, the D-Scan-proof recons cannot fit covert cyno, so you can't be unaware of a in incoming hot drop on your accelerator... Not showing up on D-Scan is already a property of any ship that can fit a Covert Cloak, like the T3 cruisers, which are already more dangerous than Recon ships and will continue to be so. If you're in a plex, you're already protected from close warp ins, so if you don't want to use a warp gate scout, just make sure you stay out of point range from the beacon and fight aligned. SOP? PILGRIM Role Bonus: 80% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator liquid ozone consumption 50% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator duration GÇó Can fit Covert Ops Cloaking Device and Covert Cynosural Field Generator GÇó Cloak reactivation delay reduced to 5 seconds CURSE Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners
Blodhgarm Dethahal Doughboys Snuffed Out 183	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:40:33 - [285] - Quote no no no no and no... The Pilgrim is FINE... its got a thing called a Cloak to get in close so it DOES NOT need a range bonus... an MWD fit is perfectly viable with cap and fitting buff that you are giving it (hell it worked fine before now it just fits easier)... with the speed buff you are giving them as well it can move around better already... What 'flexibility' are we gaining exactly? The ability to neut something 37km away is nice... sure... but if I wanted that I would use a Curse (which is also faster... neuts harder... immune to DScan... and if armor fit can fit up to 4 TDs after a prop mod and cap booster)... What advantage does the Pilgrim have over the Curse? it can Cloak... and... eh... that is it? At least with the neut bonus before it could take out a target's cap quickly while brawling with nice tank. Now its just a brick with three utility neuts. Since the Curse already has a perma cloak installed essentially I am going to use the Curse every single time now compared to the Pilgrim. Thanks for killing the Pilgrim more for small gang. -Bl+¦d http://bloodytravels.blogspot.com/ -á-- My travels through space.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries Chelonaphobia 711	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:40:44 - [286] - Quote How about instead of D-scan immunity you make it so they don't show up in local? If someone is actively punching D-scan it seems reasonable that they should be able to detect an uncloaked ship. Recons are supposed to be sneaky, so give them the ability to circumvent local scanners. They could actually perform their recon role w/ out being passively detected.
Niart Gunn TURN LEFT The Camel Empire 16	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:41:04 - [287] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Give Combat Recons something to make them stand out as a unique and interesting set of ships I don't get why this is needed nor how the dscan immunity is going to achieve that. Even more so, the d-scan ability actually makes them more similar to force recons, and will likely cause them to encroach on those instead, like e.g. Rooks warping in from an offgrid bookmark to gates being better at jamming quickly than decloaking Falcons. I can't imagine that's the intent of this change. I also can't see the Pilgrim being useful as long as the Curse has the dscan immunity, as the curse will neut a ton more, and the difference in their abilities to stealth around isn't all that big. Arguably, the Curse even has the better form of cloak. As Suitonia has put nicely, this seems a lot like a feature that is either op in the much mentioned cases of fw plexes, wormholes in general and setting up traps, while being useless in virtually any other situation. A decent scout will see it on grid anyways and relay the information, be it through intel channels or to a roaming gang. Note how the aforementioned cases are all situations where the Force Recons are supposed to excel at. I would much rather see the Combat Recons being good at actual combat instead of this gimmicky dscan immunity. They should get the HIC treatment in that they should get somewhat decent, although not HAC-level DPS and damage projection, which would also set them apart nicely from Force Recons. Their ewar bonuses are already unique enough. If there absolutely has to be a special role bonus to set Combat Recons apart, I think it should be something like a CPU reduction and maybe even probe strength for combat probes, to give them the ability to do mid-combat and on-grid scanning decently. I am also concerned about full T2 resists on all recons. First, I think Force Recons should remain slightly weaker in tank compared to their Combat Recon counterparts, to stress the fact that Combat Recons are supposed to be good at, you know, combat. Second, I think full T2 resists is going too far, making them too hard to kill through remote reps, which are already incredibly powerful anyways.
RTSAvalanche The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos 56	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:42:26 - [288] - Quote Querns wrote: RTSAvalanche wrote: Ofcause not. This isn't WH space, or null bear hunting... FW is bread & butter pvp with out all the rubbish & F1 warriros. I dare say that your particular views towards PvP are not inviolate GÇö-áthe game can change. Maybe you need to start bringing a probing ship or using scouts! Comming from an F1 warrior, no surpise.. You want this ability so badly you blindly push aside the harsh effects it will have on so many, simply saying adapt to the changes. Yet goons as a whole certainly have a big mouth when anything at all pops up that they are even iffy about.. I don't need to be told to adapt, I've been doing it for 8 years. CCP have done some daft things in that time, but this would have to be their biggest blunder! This is a power creep that's been happening every since they started rebalancing ships has gone too far. Given that a standard Warp Disrupter can reach 24km... How is it justfied that a Sentinal can neut past 30km.. Ships used to be pretty locked into armor or shield with the layout given, with the exception of Minmatar who was only ok-ish at either.. Not that long ago, the Deimos gained an extra mid, turning it into some sort of poor mans Adrestia, Strongly validating both Shield & Armor fits This has spread through eve, ships have been gaining more & more slots, ships are often able to multi-task roles to a degree (having a free slot for a TD etc) Then there's the newer ships like the Garmur & Confessor that can out class many Alliance Tourment ships with easy, so much so lately that the Mimir & Vangel each recieved a small buff (targeting & cargo) Which brings me to the Recons, Rooks, Huggins etc are simply the next step in this Power Creep. Any change how ever small it is, is always felt hardest in the solo & small gang warfare in lowsec (and faction warfare). This one will simply be exploited in such away where it will turn many pilots but noobs & vets alike off pvp. Gather intel is the biggest part of any fight, if a pilot can not obtain confirmed information then he/she is unlikely to engage. Being greeted with Damps, ECM, TD, Neuts, Webs is not a fight or even intended to be a fight, its simply put Denieing a fight and simply Griefing. And though this will fall on deaf ears, i'm compelled to say - CCP how about you make an update that helps low-sec for once. Null & WHs always get the red carpet, but low-sec the last place where you can still guninely do solo & small gang fights is never mentioned as if its the unwanted child. Quit ignoring low-sec we all pay like everyone else! #EVEBROKEN
Mazzara Gale Force Contractors 22	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:42:31 - [289] - Quote Combat recon doesn't show up on D-scan, this is a great idea! I don't know what some of my WH brothers are whining about, while it will be a pain to counter, that means its just as much of a pain for them. I'm so going to bring in a bunch of these ships. `No matter how much you scrub, how hot of water you use,-áyou can't wash shame!`
Komodo Askold No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 234	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:42:56 - [290] - Quote D-Scan invulnerability? Oh wow! Time to train for Combat Recons

scimichar Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 232	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:42:57 - [291] - Quote Ripard Teg wrote: [quote=Ripard Teg] Given a few more minutes to think about invisible-to-dscan, I dislike it even more. It just doesn't seem to add any interesting game-play outside of w-space. And in w-space, as I mentioned, I think it's OP. Entertaining alternative: combat recon pilots don't appear in Local for 10-12 seconds. As it is, most ratters (and all bots) just watch Local: "14 blues... and oh look, a neut just showed up. Time to dock up!" Therefore, d-scan immunity isn't gonna do a thing for combat recons... whereas giving them 10-12 seconds of Local immunity will add some interesting game-play options without being OP. Ratters that watch d-scan will still be OK, while those that rely on Local... This would give you guys the opportunity to dip a toe into the delayed Local debate and try it out without committing yourselves. Summary: Make changes that don't affect W space.
Blastcaps Madullier Royal Black Watch Highlanders DARKNESS. 159	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:43:02 - [292] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: ARAZU Role Bonus: 80% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator liquid ozone consumption 50% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator duration GÇó Can fit Covert Ops Cloaking Device and Covert Cynosural Field Generator GÇó Cloak reactivation delay reduced to 5 seconds Gallente Cruiser Bonuses: 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage 7.5% bonus to Remote Sensor Dampener effectiveness Recon Ships Bonuses: 20% bonus to Warp Scrambler and Warp Disruptor optimal range 20% reduction in Cloaking Devices CPU requirement Slot layout: 4H, 6M, 4L; 3 turrets, 1 launchers Fittings: 750 PWG, 420 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1180(+55) / 1430(+136) / 1080(+208) Capacitor (amount / capacitor per second) : 1290(+133) / 3.98/s(+.61) Mobility (max velocity / agility / align time): 207(+27) / .59(-.04) / 9.53s(-.74) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 40 / 40 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 112km / 231 / 8(+1) Sensor strength: 26 Magnetometric Signature radius: 160(-2) LACHESIS Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners Gallente Cruiser Bonuses: 10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret Tracking (was medium hybrid turret damage) 7.5% bonus to Remote Sensor Dampener effectiveness Recon Ships Bonuses: 20% bonus to Warp Scrambler and Warp Disruptor optimal range 10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret optimal range (was missile rate of fire) Slot layout: 5H, 7M, 3L; 5 turrets(+2), 1 launchers Fittings: 850(+50) PWG, 450 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1350(+225) / 1500(+94) / 1120(+248) Capacitor (amount / capacitor per second) : 1315(+190) / 4.07/s(+.79) Mobility (max velocity / agility / align time): 220(+29) / .56(-.04) / 9.37s(-.74) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50(+10) / 50(+10) Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 140km / 270 / 10 Sensor strength: 30 Magnetometric Signature radius: 155 and still the Celestis remains the best damp platform in the game. Rise the suggestion I'd have is relook at the bonuses on the arazu and lachesis and figure what to replace with the same bonus the celestis gets for opti and fall off of sensor damps For example: ARAZU Role Bonus: 80% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator liquid ozone consumption 50% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator duration GÇó Can fit Covert Ops Cloaking Device and Covert Cynosural Field Generator GÇó Cloak reactivation delay reduced to 5 seconds Gallente Cruiser Bonuses: 10% bonus to Remote Sensor Dampener optimal range and falloff 10% bonus to Remote Sensor Dampener effectiveness Recon Ships Bonuses: 20% bonus to Warp Scrambler and Warp Disruptor optimal range 20% reduction in Cloaking Devices CPU requirement Slot layout: 4H, 6M, 4L; 3 turrets, 1 launchers Fittings: 750 PWG, 420 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1180(+55) / 1430(+136) / 1080(+208) Capacitor (amount / capacitor per second) : 1290(+133) / 3.98/s(+.61) Mobility (max velocity / agility / align time): 207(+27) / .59(-.04) / 9.53s(-.74) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 40 / 40 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 112km / 231 / 8(+1) Sensor strength: 26 Magnetometric Signature radius: 160(-2) LACHESIS Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners Gallente Cruiser Bonuses: 10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret optimal range 12.5% bonus to Remote Sensor Dampener effectiveness Recon Ships Bonuses: 20% bonus to Warp Scrambler and Warp Disruptor optimal range 10.5% bonus to Remote Sensor Dampener optimal range and falloff (was missile rate of fire) Slot layout: 5H, 7M, 3L; 5 turrets(+2), 1 launchers Fittings: 850(+50) PWG, 450 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1350(+225) / 1500(+94) / 1120(+248) Capacitor (amount / capacitor per second) : 1315(+190) / 4.07/s(+.79) Mobility (max velocity / agility / align time): 220(+29) / .56(-.04) / 9.37s(-.74) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50(+10) / 50(+10) Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 140km / 270 / 10 Sensor strength: 30 Magnetometric Signature radius: 155
Odins Raktor Negative Density Disavowed. 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:43:34 - [293] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: How about instead of D-scan immunity you make it so they don't show up in local? If someone is actively punching D-scan it seems reasonable that they should be able to detect an uncloaked ship. Recons are supposed to be sneaky, so give them the ability to circumvent local scanners. They could actually perform their recon role w/ out being passively detected. I like this much better, It benefits the hunter not the hunted.
Marlona Sky Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 5724	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:43:43 - [294] - Quote And another thing. I think it is time we put the recon back into the recons. Allow the cloaky recons to lock while cloaked. Then give it a role bonus to optimal range of ship scanners and allow them to activate said ship scanner all the while remaining cloaked. The Paradox
Andreus Ixiris Duty. Circle-Of-Two 5183	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:44:43 - [295] - Quote I'm afraid I cannot in good faith agree with the idea of Combat Recons being immune to D-scan. This makes one of the only previously reliable active intel tools unreliable while still not really adding enough appeal to the Combat Recon class to justify choosing one over a Force Recon. The Force Recon's ability to fit a cloaking device still makes it functionally superior in almost all respects and provides the same functionality of keeping it off of D-scan while also allowing it to dodge gatecamps, avoid probing, appear on the battlefield unexpectedly, reposition discreetly and use covert jump portals, all of which the Combat Recon will still not be able to do. Giving Combat Recons D-scan immunity is just a nerf to D-scan, not a buff to Combat Recons. Andreus Ixiris > A Civire without a chin is barely a Civire at all. Pieter Tuulinen > He'd be Civirely disadvantaged, Andreus. Andreus Ixiris > ... Andreus Ixiris > This is why we're at war.
Tarek Raimo Eleutherian Guard Villore Accords 7	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:45:44 - [296] - 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?
Necharo Rackham The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 46	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:45:45 - [297] - Quote So - no warping into a medium/large FW plex in case of sebo-ed curse at zero. At least the cloaky version gets a decloak targetting delay.
Lonan O'Labhradha Lith 'n' Brannor Enterprises Absolution Alliance 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:46:16 - [298] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: How about instead of D-scan immunity you make it so they don't show up in local? If someone is actively punching D-scan it seems reasonable that they should be able to detect an uncloaked ship. Recons are supposed to be sneaky, so give them the ability to circumvent local scanners. They could actually perform their recon role w/ out being passively detected. Cloakiness is already pretty powerful. Camping a system becomes really easy when you don't show up in local and it brings some of the wormhole flavor into null, which I don't think I like. I would say that if you really wanted to open that can of worms, then you'd also need to come up with a type of probe that can counter super-cloakies allowing Level 5 scanners to detect cloaked vessels.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1244	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:46:19 - [299] - Quote RTSAvalanche wrote: Querns wrote: RTSAvalanche wrote: Ofcause not. This isn't WH space, or null bear hunting... FW is bread & butter pvp with out all the rubbish & F1 warriros. I dare say that your particular views towards PvP are not inviolate GÇö-áthe game can change. Maybe you need to start bringing a probing ship or using scouts! Comming from an F1 warrior, no surpise.. You want this ability so badly you blindly push aside the harsh effects it will have on so many, simply saying adapt to the changes. Yet goons as a whole certainly have a big mouth when anything at all pops up that they are even iffy about.. [citation needed] Also, who is an F1 warrior, exactly? I haven't been in a fleet in years. My contributions to the swarm are decidedly non-military. You sure think you know an awful lot about an organization of which you aren't a member. I do appreciate your ingratiating position of surrender, however. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Catherine Laartii Dominion Fleet Group Templis CALSF 438	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:46:29 - [300] - Quote Generally the balance concept for making combat recons invisible to dscan is going to be completely invaluable, especially for lowsec in fw complexes. I can see the curse ruining some peoples' day quite handily with that. That being said, here are my thoughts on the balance pass, as well as my concerns for the ones that STILL do need fixing: -The Pilgrim and Curse changes look great; they both benefit immensely from the cap buff due to their focus on neuts, and the dscan invisibility is going to be invaluable in FW for the curse. Neut range bonus on the pilgrim is going to be absurdly fun; kiting pilgrim will now be a thing, so hunting with one solo is going to be even more of an option. -The Falcon and Rook are great for jamming, but they generally suck for combat. The falcon is superb in its ability to ambush with ecm, but it has little in the way of offensive capability. Something that would help it out quite a bit I think would be giving it a full drone bay like the rook has, and swapping that 5% damage per level bonus into a RoF bonus. The rook in particular needs a serious buff to its powergrid; This is such a serious issue that I would be alright with passing over the falcon changes as long as the rook got at least 750 PG or more. -While the Arazu didn't get changed since the patch due to it being an alright place where it is, I would like to see either its hybrid bonus get switched to RoF like the falcon, or consider switching it over to a drone boat like the pilgrim. It would better, I think to see the gallente get a dedicated drone cloaky to offset the powerhouse that is the pilgrim. I will also reiterate concerns being voiced over the Lachesis' slot layout. it should get at least one slot from its mids moved down to a low slot, as it should have at least some viability with armor. -The changes to the Rapier and Huginn are exactly where they were needed; the rapier as a missile boat makes sense, and actually gives it decent attack power and revises its role to one as a potential solo/small gang ship since can actually threaten with its missiles now. The Huginn's dropping of the split slot layout is nice, but it doesn't go far enough. Go the whole 9 yards and give it a 5th turret slot; you did it on the lach you can do it on the Huginn. Overall, I think these changes are a step in the right direction. The extra capacitor was an excellent idea to port over from the HAC and electronic frigate rebalance, and in my mind complements their t2 roles quite nicely. It will remain to be seen whether the dscan invisibility will be useful and balanced, or OP as hell and abused to absurd levels (I know I wlll be using the pilgrim and curse a lot after the patch myself). CCP Rise, PLEASE consider the changes to the caldari and gallente recons. They need some serious help in the combat and fitting department, and with how stronk the other recons are getting the falcon could definitely get by with a small dps buff without breaking the game.

Komi Toran Paragon Trust The Bastion 462	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:46:53 - [301] - Quote Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote: What 'flexibility' are we gaining exactly? The ability to neut something 37km away is nice... Make that 80km away. And it can either do that without faction mods, or with a faction mod and still have room for non-PG-related modules. Sniper Curse just became Sniper Pilgrim.
BKuCKy Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 1	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:47:10 - [302] - Quote Asayanami Dei wrote: Diivil wrote: Combat recons should at least show up in dscan if you are on the same grid with them. Majority of Eve use dscan tools and it would be extremely frustrating to not be able to copy a certain ship type from dscan list when you can clearly see it in your own overview. Good point. Lol no-scan recons is a death to WH carebears. Less WH carebears -> more price on T3 ships -> more $ players spend for PLEX -> PROFIT for CCP!
RTSAvalanche The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos 58	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:48:20 - [303] - Quote Lonan O'Labhradha wrote: Boltorano wrote: You've basically made scout alts mandatory for "solo" complex runners. Thanks so much. See below. If you look in the Role Bonus section, the D-Scan-proof recons cannot fit covert cyno, so you can't be unaware of a in incoming hot drop on your accelerator... Not showing up on D-Scan is already a property of any ship that can fit a Covert Cloak, like the T3 cruisers, which are already more dangerous than Recon ships and will continue to be so. If you're in a plex, you're already protected from close warp ins, so if you don't want to use a warp gate scout, just make sure you stay out of point range from the beacon and fight aligned. SOP? PILGRIM Role Bonus: 80% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator liquid ozone consumption 50% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator duration GÇó Can fit Covert Ops Cloaking Device and Covert Cynosural Field Generator GÇó Cloak reactivation delay reduced to 5 seconds CURSE Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners These will be the new "falcon alts" That will appear with out warning mid fight. & Perhaps you see a ship on scan towards a small / medium / large plex - you warp there only to find that the ship you saw is sebo fit with a recon waiting there to denie the fight eg. a sebo thrasher on a small gate
Syrias Bizniz Krautfleet Warp to Cyno. 392	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:49:20 - [304] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Appreciate all the discussion. The work day is ending here so I'll let this continue tonight and talk over the feedback with my colleagues in the morning and then get back to you with responses to specific issues. Thanks Dear Rise, Have you considered shifting the midslots / lowslots on the Curse? It's pretty much the only ship in the whole Amarr Lineup that somehow oddly favors shield tanking. Since there is the need to fit medium neuts, which eat tons of PG, there is only few Powergrid left to make an armor tank work. The achievable EHP are quite similar on Shield and Armor, however this should, at least in my opinion, not be true for a ship which's race is exclusively focused on armortanking. I know that the power of a Curse on grid is immense, but somehow it just doesn't feel right to tank it on armor. The buffer is roughly the same, with significantly less chances of survival on an incoming damage spike while armor tanked, just for the reason of Armor Reppings landing on the end of the cycle. Which all in all translates into a Recon that is either flying in a shield gang - and sacrificing half it's ewar bonuses - or in an armor gang, severly impacting it's own chance of survival. I'm not asking for 'Ze Brick', but you really should consider switching the slot movement of Combat Recons to Force Recons where the 'cloaky', more gtfo'ing variants have actually more capability to tank on armor.
Syrias Bizniz Krautfleet Warp to Cyno. 392	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:50:20 - [305] - Quote RTSAvalanche wrote: These will be the new "falcon alts" That will appear with out warning mid fight. & Perhaps you see a ship on scan towards a small / medium / large plex - you warp there only to find that the ship you saw is sebo fit with a recon waiting there to denie the fight eg. a sebo thrasher on a small gate If you know the GateSlide, it doesn't matter how fast the recon can lock you. ;)
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1245	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:50:33 - [306] - Quote BKuCKy wrote: Asayanami Dei wrote: Diivil wrote: Combat recons should at least show up in dscan if you are on the same grid with them. Majority of Eve use dscan tools and it would be extremely frustrating to not be able to copy a certain ship type from dscan list when you can clearly see it in your own overview. Good point. Lol no-scan recons is a death to WH carebears. Less WH carebears -> more price on T3 ships -> more $ players spend for PLEX -> PROFIT for CCP! This is a pretty far-fetched chain of thought, here. There are several alternatives, not the least of which is "flying ships other than strategic cruisers." This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1055	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:52:23 - [307] - Quote oh so many things too address here. -sig radius on all these ships are horrendously high.. looks at the supposed shield tanking caldari ones.. -why add full T2 resists? wasn't the HAC's main point resilience? .. and what are you doing here?... -you state about developer trends yet the curse being khanid displays none of the normal characteristics associated with them. something like this would be more characteristic of khanid CURSE Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners Amarr Cruiser Bonuses: 7.5% bonus to Tracking Disruptor effectiveness 20% bonus to missile damage Recon Ships Bonuses: 40% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer range 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer amount Slot layout: 5H, 5M(-1), 5L(+1); 0 turrets, 3(-1) launchers Fittings: 900 PWG, 380 CPU appropriate increase for plates Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1650(-187) / 2000 / 1075(+203) Capacitor (amount / capacitor per second) : 1470(+220) / 4.46/s (+.83) Mobility (max velocity / agility / align time): 205(+30) / .61(-.04) / 9.99s(-.66s) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50 / 75 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 130km / 281 / 10 Sensor strength: 28 Radar Signature radius: 140 Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
Orinda Cinderheart Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:53:30 - [308] - Quote "We decided that the Pilgrim really needed Nos/Neut range, rather than strength, to give it the engagement flexibility that other Recons enjoy". while I appreciate the idea of flexibility, is this not just making the amarr recon choice : armour or shield? the pilgrim while in dire need of a fix works superbly well as a close range brawler that can pick its fights and get under the guns of an enemy, with no cap neutraliser bonus to amount it feels to me that this change is a step in the wrong direction, I'd be more inclined to give it a higher drone damage bonus to improve its solo viability. ofc I am biased, this was the first true pvp ship I trained for as a newbro so I have a soft spot for them.
Lonan O'Labhradha Lith 'n' Brannor Enterprises Absolution Alliance 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:56:07 - [309] - Quote RTSAvalanche wrote: Perhaps you see a ship on scan towards a small / medium / large plex - you warp there only to find that the ship you saw is sebo fit with a recon waiting there to denie the fight eg. a sebo thrasher on a small gate Aaah... I didn't think about that. T'would be a great way to bait someone into a plex.
Gaven Darklighter FinFleet Northern Coalition. 5	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:56:59 - [310] - Quote Hey Rise i think the changes are overall good and needed, would be nice to see the exact resists profiles. However the Combat recon idea is a bad one imo, you are punishing somehow active player who sue scanner instead of punishing lazy ones who just check local so i would do this instead: - Player in combat recons dont show in local but show in scanner as normally so people who are actually engaged with the game scanning arent punished

Lumpymayo Jebediah Kerman's Junkyard and Spaceship Parts Co. Brave Collective 97	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:57:41 - [311] - Quote I have been waiting for over a year and a half for the Rorqual rebalance.
Catherine Laartii Dominion Fleet Group Templis CALSF 438	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:57:49 - [312] - Quote Stacy Lone wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Have you considered the implications this will have for wspace? I mean it might work for 0.0 where you can see that something is there through local, but in wspace, this will be absolutely OP and hilarious. No local, not even DScan anymore, how are you supposed to even get any intel? The only way to detect such a ship is by having either eyes on all wholes (requires multitude of characters) and thus seeing it enter or by constant combat probing, which can be seen by the enemy. I fear that this will make this ship far out of line in wspace, where intel is already harder to get than in 0.0. inb4 spider-tanking curse roaming games for wh pve
Shiva Makoto Pyre Falcon Defence and Security 39	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:58:18 - [313] - Quote Nice to see something done with Recons. While I like the No-Dscan-Bonus on Combat Recons I can't see me using the Arazu/Rapier anymore to hunt mission/plex runners in low sec. With the Covert Ops Cloak people can see me activating the gate to the mission/plex for each gate I have to take and a lot of the time it's multiple gates so multiple chances for the target to see me on scan and react. It's weird that the non-cloaky Recons are now better at hunting than the cloaky ones but I don't mind switching to the Lach/Huginn.
BKuCKy Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 1	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:58:29 - [314] - Quote Querns wrote: [quote=BKuCKy][quote=Asayanami Dei][quote=Diivil]Combat recons should at least show up in dscan if you are on This is a pretty far-fetched chain of thought, here. There are several alternatives, not the least of which is "flying ships other than strategic cruisers." LOL and lose to fleets of RMT-ers? ahah yeah sure. Hello to goons CEO for rmt support ;) They have low price ;)
BKuCKy Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 1	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:00:21 - [315] - Quote Catherine Laartii wrote: I fear that this will make this ship far out of line in wspace, where intel is already harder to get than in 0.0. Lol no-scan recons is a death to WH carebears. Less WH carebears -> more price on T3 ships -> more $ players spend for PLEX -> PROFIT for CCP!
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1055	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:01:15 - [316] - Quote both caldari recons have cap bonuses for ecm .. this is a waste of a slot. the falcon needs better damage projection and output, along with more drones.. also most recons don't need so much cpu anymore with the cloak changes made over time.. the range bonuses on webs and points are still too high and need a nerf along with the warfare links .. getting webs over 100km shouldn't be possible and web strength needs a nerf in general its far too easy too kill a ships speed out of scram range and in general.. and also tends too make target painters look very bad. the issue of slots needs addressing is it ok for the force recons which according too role bonuses means half its highs are supposed too be used for non weapons and then have the -1 slot on top of that effectively 3 slots down on combats.. gallente are supposed too armour tank btw, .. they need more lows and grid as do the amarr ones.. huginn dps and projection is distinctly underwhelming, have you read the autocannon thread btw? oh also on amarr why isn't the pilgrim laser based? ... amarr without lasers just aren't very amarrian.. also points at the laser thread, lasers need more work. Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1246	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:04:18 - [317] - Quote BKuCKy wrote: Querns wrote: [quote=BKuCKy][quote=Asayanami Dei][quote=Diivil]Combat recons should at least show up in dscan if you are on This is a pretty far-fetched chain of thought, here. There are several alternatives, not the least of which is "flying ships other than strategic cruisers." LOL and lose to fleets of RMT-ers? ahah yeah sure. Hello to goons CEO for rmt support ;) They have low price ;) We stomp T3 fleets with Dominixes on the regular. Strategic cruisers aren't the end-all, be-all of Eve. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Eeio Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 15	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:06:40 - [318] - Quote At least the camouflage skins will make more sense now
Athamai Storms of Vengeance 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:06:49 - [319] - Quote colera deldios wrote: Morwen Lagann wrote: Pilgrim without its neut amount bonus? One word: Ugh. If you absolutely must put a range bonus on it, make it a small one and keep the amount one. Don't neuter the thing it was good at. With this change it's just a weak Curse with a cloak. Which isn't all that big a ~thing~ with the whole "invisible to d-scan" bonus that you want to give to combat recons. With these changes there'd be even fewer reasons to fly a Pilgrim than there are right now. No it's a perfect change. Without the amount bonus Pilgrim will still drain most of it's prior target's in about the same time bit more now. Range bonus is much better than amount bonus. Pilgrim change: Highly negative. It's a perfectly terrible change. How is -100% neut strength equal to "draining the target cap in about the same time"? The range bonus is crap, especially since you have to stay in point range anyway.
scarify ardonn The First Kiss 8	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:06:58 - [320] - Quote this is really big bullshit: Give Combat Recons something to make them stand out as a unique and interesting set of ships this is not even OP, this is stupid Better rezist, why not Reduce capacitor warping cost - hell yes pilgrim without strenght bonus, I dont know. This ship is strong. If not many people flying any ship, it doestn mean its not good ship. Pilgrim is just hard to fly for many people

Blodhgarm Dethahal Doughboys Snuffed Out 184	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:08:36 - [321] - Quote Querns wrote: It's actually pretty surprising to see the number of people who think that neut range is somehow worse than neut amount. Have any of you actually flown a pilgrim against, well, anything? Pilgrims needed the range very badly to avoid getting fridged by anything with even a remote ability to kite. You are assuming that as a recon ship is has no allies in the fight... which is hilarious as Recons almost always need back up... Who cares if it gets kited? I have friends to deal with that... -Bl+¦d http://bloodytravels.blogspot.com/ -á-- My travels through space.
l0rd carlos Friends Of Harassment The Camel Empire 1114	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:10:32 - [322] - Quote Lonan O'Labhradha wrote: Boltorano wrote: You've basically made scout alts mandatory for "solo" complex runners. Thanks so much. See below. If you look in the Role Bonus section, the D-Scan-proof recons cannot fit covert cyno, so you can't be unaware of a in incoming hot drop on your accelerator... Not showing up on D-Scan is already a property of any ship that can fit a Covert Cloak, like the T3 cruisers, which are already more dangerous than Recon ships and will continue to be so. If you're in a plex, you're already protected from close warp ins, so if you don't want to use a warp gate scout, just make sure you stay out of point range from the beacon and fight aligned. SOP? If you run DED sites, you can just check d-scan for incomming tackle. Right now you see the covert ops (recon / t3 / frigs) get decloacked on the gate. It's hard for them to suppries you. And if you are 1 - 2 pockets into the site, you have quite a good warning time to position yourself. With the recon now getting more tank, cap and unable to see on the d-scan, it will be very hard to do somthing about that. I mean I like pvp, I fly the DED exploration sites with PvP fitting, but what can I do when suddently two ships appear with no warning that can tackle and jam me from 93 km away? After they got point, the rest of the gang can come in. I really reallly like DED sites pvp, but this will make it SUPER easy to get hard countered by a larger group. It doesn't add any particularly interestuing game play apart from rather idiotic ganks. German blog about smallscale lowsec pvp: http://friendsofharassment.wordpress.com
BKuCKy Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 1	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:10:47 - [323] - Quote scarify ardonn wrote: this is really big bullshit: Give Combat Recons something to make them stand out as a unique and interesting set of ships this is not even OP, this is stupid Better rezist, why not Reduce capacitor warping cost - hell yes pilgrim without strenght bonus, I dont know. This ship is strong. If not many people flying any ship, it doestn mean its not good ship. Pilgrim is just hard to fly for many people You just don't understand Lol no-scan recons is a death to WH carebears. Less WH carebears -> more price on T3 ships -> more $ players spend for PLEX -> PROFIT for CCP! THAT"S ALL!
Orange Something Enchanting Wizards of Rhythm 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:11:16 - [324] - Quote Grm Makentor wrote: >dscan immune ships with covops cloaks in w-space jesus christ what were they thinking, so mandatory scouting alts on every hole now? Combat recons are getting the d-scan buff, and unless I misread something they still cant use covops cloaks.
Iain Cariaba 771	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:11:21 - [325] - Quote To everyone saying, 'how is dscan immunity different than covops cloak,' I will simply remind them that, if you're actively paying attention to dscan, there is always a brief period of time between losing jump cloak and activating cloak module. During this time, you are seen on dscan. With dscan immunity, you lose even this brief period of visibility. If you're in an anomaly, trying to make isk to buy PvP ships, you get zero warning before the recon ship lands on grid. Even the most rabid dscan spammer won't see this coming. EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
Catherine Laartii Dominion Fleet Group Templis CALSF 438	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:11:51 - [326] - Quote Lorac Gemini wrote: Surprised there's more WH tears than FW tears here. Figured FW farmers not being able to see a recon on dscan would make them like this change less. That's because we'll be using them more often; general equipment upgrades benefit BOTH sides of the war, so we rarely complain about power creep if the races we like get their ships upgraded. Even though the caldari recons could use a fitting buff, the cap regen bonus and the wonders that will be amarr recon will be excellent.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1249	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:12:32 - [327] - Quote Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote: Querns wrote: It's actually pretty surprising to see the number of people who think that neut range is somehow worse than neut amount. Have any of you actually flown a pilgrim against, well, anything? Pilgrims needed the range very badly to avoid getting fridged by anything with even a remote ability to kite. You are assuming that as a recon ship is has no allies in the fight... which is hilarious as Recons almost always need back up... Who cares if it gets kited? I have friends to deal with that... Back in the day, force recons were actually used as solo boats for their ability to dictate range. It was more about not getting caught than sheer destructive force. The pilgrim failed at this because it always had to engage in scram range in order to bring its bonuses to bear; something that its other force recon cousins could not do. The pilgrim, additionally, was too slow to, practically, get into neut range in the first place, and even if it did, it was difficult to keep anyone there. With neut range, it will be able to more effectively dictate range in an encounter, allowing it greater solo potential. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
BKuCKy Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 1	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:13:28 - [328] - Quote l0rd carlos wrote: If you run DED sites, you can just check d-scan for incomming tackle. Right now you see the covert ops (recon / t3 / frigs) get decloacked on the gate. It's hard for them to suppries you. And if you are 1 - 2 pockets into the site, you have quite a good warning time to position yourself. With the recon now getting more tank, cap and unable to see on the d-scan, it will be very hard to do somthing about that. I mean I like pvp, I fly the DED exploration sites with PvP fitting, but what can I do when suddently two ships appear with no warning that can tackle and jam me from 93 km away? After they got point, the rest of the gang can come in. I really reallly like DED sites pvp, but this will make it SUPER easy to get hard countered by a larger group. It doesn't add any particularly interestuing game play apart from rather idiotic ganks. lol CCP don't care about this. They just want you to buy PLEX for real money.
Blodhgarm Dethahal Doughboys Snuffed Out 184	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:13:35 - [329] - Quote Komi Toran wrote: Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote: What 'flexibility' are we gaining exactly? The ability to neut something 37km away is nice... Make that 80km away. And it can either do that without faction mods, or with a faction mod and still have room for non-PG-related modules. Sniper Curse just became Sniper Pilgrim. riiiiight... with one Heavy neut... it s a novelty fit and you know it... no practical purpose -Bl+¦d http://bloodytravels.blogspot.com/ -á-- My travels through space.
Hiasa Kite Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 75	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:14:13 - [330] - Quote No real wormhole experience here, but won't this make wormhole space even more dangerous unless you're ain a fleet? Not that more danger is a bad thing, it just strikes me as odd that there appears to be no way to see if these things are coming before they're on grid with you. People to vote for CSM X(in order): Sabriz Adoudel, Steve Ronuken, Manfred Sideous, Mike Azariah, Gorski Car

Evei Shard Shard Industries 394	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:15:14 - [331] - Quote The d-scan change is cute, but should have been tied to a module, just like cloaking is. We already have modules that are designed to fit specific ships, so that would not be new, and adding it would have given the pilots a choice to make. Immune to D-scan, but lose a slot, etc. Profit favors the prepared
BKuCKy Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 1	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:15:23 - [332] - Quote Iain Cariaba wrote: If you're in an anomaly, trying to make isk to buy PvP ships, you get zero warning before the recon ship lands on grid. Even the most rabid dscan spammer won't see this coming. And this is exelent! CCP just wnat you to buy PLEX for real money and then change it for ISK! Thats all!
Suzuma Makiriemi Industries 8	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:15:33 - [333] - Quote biz Antollare wrote: ihavenotoneclue wrote: Really a fan of the D-scan changes, and the pilgrim has needed the range boost forever. Overall I'm definitely a fan. Appropriate character name. A+ would read again haha
Elana Apgar DarkMatter-Industries Upholders 11	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:15:52 - [334] - Quote \0/ Love the changes!
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1249	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:15:56 - [335] - Quote BKuCKy wrote: l0rd carlos wrote: If you run DED sites, you can just check d-scan for incomming tackle. Right now you see the covert ops (recon / t3 / frigs) get decloacked on the gate. It's hard for them to suppries you. And if you are 1 - 2 pockets into the site, you have quite a good warning time to position yourself. With the recon now getting more tank, cap and unable to see on the d-scan, it will be very hard to do somthing about that. I mean I like pvp, I fly the DED exploration sites with PvP fitting, but what can I do when suddently two ships appear with no warning that can tackle and jam me from 93 km away? After they got point, the rest of the gang can come in. I really reallly like DED sites pvp, but this will make it SUPER easy to get hard countered by a larger group. It doesn't add any particularly interestuing game play apart from rather idiotic ganks. lol CCP don't care about this. They just want you to buy PLEX for real money. Your posting is equivalent to a small child banging the same key on a piano over, and over, and over, and over. We get it. You, at once, believe CCP's only motive is to force PLEX sales, as well as believe that buying PLEX is the only way to make money in a game where money is literally thrown at you from all possible angles in amounts greater than any one person can devise a way to consume. Your point is clearly made. We get it. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Blodhgarm Dethahal Doughboys Snuffed Out 184	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:16:01 - [336] - Quote Querns wrote: Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote: Querns wrote: It's actually pretty surprising to see the number of people who think that neut range is somehow worse than neut amount. Have any of you actually flown a pilgrim against, well, anything? Pilgrims needed the range very badly to avoid getting fridged by anything with even a remote ability to kite. You are assuming that as a recon ship is has no allies in the fight... which is hilarious as Recons almost always need back up... Who cares if it gets kited? I have friends to deal with that... Back in the day... Well we are not 'back in the day' so stop living in the past and focus on the present and the future. -Bl+¦d http://bloodytravels.blogspot.com/ -á-- My travels through space.
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 5	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:16:40 - [337] - Quote Quote: LACHESIS Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners Gallente Cruiser Bonuses: 10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret Tracking (was medium hybrid turret damage) 7.5% bonus to Remote Sensor Dampener effectiveness Recon Ships Bonuses: 20% bonus to Warp Scrambler and Warp Disruptor optimal range 10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret optimal range (was missile rate of fire) I am a little surprised to see a Combat Recon with no damage bonuses. Tracking and range are nice and all but couldn't you at least split the tracking with damage so: +5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret Tracking and Damage.
Lorac Gemini Dropbears Anonymous Brave Collective 7	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:17:34 - [338] - Quote Blastcaps Madullier wrote: and still the Celestis remains the best damp platform in the game. Rise the suggestion I'd have is relook at the bonuses on the arazu and lachesis and figure what to replace with the same bonus the celestis gets for opti and fall off of sensor damps For example: ARAZU Role Bonus: 80% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator liquid ozone consumption 50% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator duration GÇó Can fit Covert Ops Cloaking Device and Covert Cynosural Field Generator GÇó Cloak reactivation delay reduced to 5 seconds Gallente Cruiser Bonuses: 10% bonus to Remote Sensor Dampener optimal range and falloff 10% bonus to Remote Sensor Dampener effectiveness Recon Ships Bonuses: 20% bonus to Warp Scrambler and Warp Disruptor optimal range 20% reduction in Cloaking Devices CPU requirement -SNIP- LACHESIS Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners Gallente Cruiser Bonuses: 10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret optimal range 12.5% bonus to Remote Sensor Dampener effectiveness Recon Ships Bonuses: 20% bonus to Warp Scrambler and Warp Disruptor optimal range 10.5% bonus to Remote Sensor Dampener optimal range and falloff (was missile rate of fire) -SNIP- Also with all the Covert recons possibly consider giving them a role bonus giving reduced CPU and PG needs for probe launchers. This.
Catherine Laartii Dominion Fleet Group Templis CALSF 438	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:18:10 - [339] - Quote Diana Kim wrote: Scheulagh Santorine wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners Oh, yes, yes, YES, CCP, YEEES, YEEEES, So yes, YES yes SO YEESSSS.... Aaaaahhh. Yes. Thank you. I have a solo rook fit I wanna show you that I'll be flying after this...
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1249	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:20:46 - [340] - Quote Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote: Querns wrote: Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote: Querns wrote: It's actually pretty surprising to see the number of people who think that neut range is somehow worse than neut amount. Have any of you actually flown a pilgrim against, well, anything? Pilgrims needed the range very badly to avoid getting fridged by anything with even a remote ability to kite. You are assuming that as a recon ship is has no allies in the fight... which is hilarious as Recons almost always need back up... Who cares if it gets kited? I have friends to deal with that... Back in the day... Well we are not 'back in the day' so stop living in the past and focus on the present and the future. That's the thing GÇö-ánothing about my anecdote has changed. The issues with the pilgrim still exist, and are compensated nicely by swapping the neut amount for range. I know that everyone is comparing the pilgrim's neut amount to the legion's neut amount, but given the ominous portents by Dev posts within this thread and without, I suspect that the battleship-level tank strategic cruisers are not long for this world. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Siobhan MacLeary BRG Corp Ocularis Inferno 185	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:21:51 - [341] - Quote Quote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners I'd like to know more about the reason you chose this, of all things. You realize this is going to make them pretty overpowered in wormholes, right? You'll literally never see Combat Recons coming until they appear on grid. GÇ£Point out to me a person who has been harmed by an AFK cloaker and I will point out a person who has no business playing this game.GÇ¥ - CCP Soundwave
Catherine Laartii Dominion Fleet Group Templis CALSF 438	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:22:42 - [342] - Quote Psianh Auvyander wrote: I am concerned with the Pilgrim after these changes. Its unique nature is gone now, and I'd really like to see this revisited. Instead of essentially copying the Curse, I sincerely urge you to consider finding new, interesting ways to implement the Pilgrim. Its heavy bonus to neutralizing strength is still part of its core, I believe, and while it certainly was struggling, this doesn't provide us with a great choice. Instead, choosing between the Pilgrim and Curse is going to boil down to: do I need a cyno? Perhaps let it focus more on the tracking disrupters, utilizing them for their survival more than they do now. Regardless, I do hope you'll revisit this hull and help it find a unique place. Or just remove the TD bonus and swap it for a neut amount. Or keep the neut range and drop a mid for a high.
Panther X High Flyers The Kadeshi 27	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:25:22 - [343] - Quote lin Quay wrote: Diivil wrote: Combat recons should at least show up in dscan if you are on the same grid with them. Majority of Eve use dscan tools and it would be extremely frustrating to not be able to copy a certain ship type from dscan list when you can clearly see it in your own overview. Very much this. Very happy to see the tank increase as well, it was needed. The capacitor is also very welcome. Always sucks to leave your huginn behind on a long warp! ECM still needs fixed. ABSO-FREAKIN-SMURFLY I don't always fly Recons, but when I do... It would be nice if ECM WORKED. TD works great, Damps work great, Cap warfare works great. ECM has illicit and unlawful relations with donkeys. [b]Sick liaisons raised this monumental mark The sun sets forever over Blackwater Park[/b]
Alpheias Euphoria Released Triumvirate. 7809	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:25:35 - [344] - Quote As a devout worshiper of anything Recon, let me be the first to say that: CCP Rise wrote: Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners ...literally translates to ceiling cat watching you masterbate. Allow me to be frank. You will not like me. You will not like me now, and you will not like men++ a good deal less as we go on.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries Chelonaphobia 712	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:25:39 - [345] - Quote Hiasa Kite wrote: No real wormhole experience here, but won't this make wormhole space even more dangerous unless you're ain a fleet? Not that more danger is a bad thing, it just strikes me as odd that there appears to be no way to see if these things are coming before they're on grid with you. This only affects getting ganked in a wh mildly. The recon will gain 2 advantages in wh. 1. No flash on D-scan upon entering a wh (you still get the sound) 2. No uncloaking delay when they land on you (the can warped uncloaked due to d-scan immunity)
Grimpak Shifting Sands Trader Cartel Bleak Horizon Alliance. 2446	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:28:30 - [346] - Quote Alpheias wrote: As a devout worshiper of anything Recon, let me be the first to say that: CCP Rise wrote: Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners ...literally translates to ceiling cat watching you masterbate. M-F'KIN /thread [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img] [quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right
Panther X High Flyers The Kadeshi 27	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:28:44 - [347] - Quote Siobhan MacLeary wrote: Quote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners I'd like to know more about the reason you chose this, of all things. You realize this is going to make them pretty overpowered in wormholes, right? You'll literally never see Combat Recons coming until they appear on grid. I think that's kind of the point to them. You should be changing your underpants in a wh when a Curse or Falcon appears on grid...now that the Rook is actually usable, it actually has a purpose now, look out. But then again, they still won't be as powerful as a cloaky t3. just short of. BRAVO CCP. Now please please fix ECM. [b]Sick liaisons raised this monumental mark The sun sets forever over Blackwater Park[/b]
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5630	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:29:34 - [348] - Quote The overall boosts to Recons I like - capacitor and tank were lacking. But the individual attention each ship got (or didn't get) is universally meh IMO. I like the increased velocity, but the careless wording and typos in the post tends to indicate the care with which the whole balance appears to have been approached. "The average maximum velocity across the class is going up by around 20m/s " - CCP Rise PILGRIM 198(+34) CURSE 205(+30) FALCON 192(+23) ROOK 194(+24) ARAZU 207(+27) LACHESIS 220(+29) RAPIER 230(+38) HUGINN 240(+31) Real average: +29.5 - only off by 50% or so. Just my 2 +/- 1 cents I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
RTSAvalanche The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos 61	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:31:34 - [349] - Quote Querns wrote: RTSAvalanche wrote: Querns wrote: RTSAvalanche wrote: Ofcause not. This isn't WH space, or null bear hunting... FW is bread & butter pvp with out all the rubbish & F1 warriros. I dare say that your particular views towards PvP are not inviolate GÇö-áthe game can change. Maybe you need to start bringing a probing ship or using scouts! Comming from an F1 warrior, no surpise.. You want this ability so badly you blindly push aside the harsh effects it will have on so many, simply saying adapt to the changes. Yet goons as a whole certainly have a big mouth when anything at all pops up that they are even iffy about.. [citation needed] Also, who is an F1 warrior, exactly? I haven't been in a fleet in years. My contributions to the swarm are decidedly non-military. You sure think you know an awful lot about an organization of which you aren't a member. I do appreciate your ingratiating position of surrender, however. And yet, even though you edited out most of what I said, My point remains valid. You simply made it personal, rather adressing the issue at hand. Since you did not have a valid reply for those affected most in low-sec. Each reply you have made has simply been adapt & combats.. but you sure act like you know alot for some one that doesn't do combat in low-sec FW. #EVEBROKEN
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1055	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:31:36 - [350] - Quote i would suggest reducing their targeting range down a bit .. its also odd that combat recons have about 30kkm more than their force recon variant... its getting hard too see where the differences in HAC resilience and recon resilience is.. seems better on recons by a fair way here... Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.

GREYBOBSASS Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 21	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:31:47 - [351] - Quote then again, Dscan is a tool just like overview fitting window etc. what comes next overview invisibility? I wont say you cant, but you shouldnt mess with ingame tools like that at least not in a way that gives you a disadvantage if you DONT fly a cartain ship thats what makes that thing broken you should get REASONABLE advantage for flying the ship not a HUGE disadvantage to everyone else because you flying it. next thing is a counter to that theres absolutly none. The machanic is interesting but is already covered with cloaking and the deployable (who no one uses and it may perhaps hurt you guys so your giving it to propably worst choice of ships same was with bubble immunity for inties where giving it do interdictors would make far more sense)
Liuni Kalthis Scope Works Psychotic Tendencies. 154	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:32:17 - [352] - Quote Well that'll be interesting, now have to worry about a Curse or Arazu in every single medium FW complex.
Komodo Askold No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 234	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:32:41 - [353] - Quote I have to mark out that this doesn't mean Combat Recons can't be located with combat probes. Seems we'll have to get the habit of using them more often, especially on W-Space.
CheesusCrust HildCo Interplanetar Villore Accords 12	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:34:08 - [354] - Quote So, let me try and keep this constructive. CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners This has some serious implications, not just for me as an fw pilot. With disallowing any type of cloaking in fac war plexes, we got a change that mainly reduced farming. A big +1. But with this change I could sit and run medium plexes all day without anyone ever knowing I was there. You'd only have local and (out of game) killboard information so you'd either have to manually check every open medium plex or constantly use combat probes. This requires a permanent scout infront of every medium plex you run solo or in small groups. It would be more powerful than the no longer viable cov ops in plexes, because you can't even detect them going through the gate and they don't have the cloak targeting delay. Of course this also means that a scout would be mandatory for every mission and site that has a gate. You can usually protect yourself against cov ops by using the dscan frequently. Now you'll need a second account (either yours or a space friend) checking the front door. If alone, you'd have to expend a high slot and be constantly combat probing while running a site to have any kind of protection. Seems a bit overkill for me. Same goes for wormholes: An active dscaner can detect a cov ops pilot coming through a hole in scanrange. But wh space in generall is tricky, as it (rightfully so) is a dangerous place. Remember: without a gate that they have to pass through or local to rely on, cov ops can grab and kill you in any open space as it is right now. Using a combat recon to engage in open space would be less favourable to cov ops, as it lands visible on grid and cannot sneak up to a desired range. Increased point-range and no cloaking delay somewhat mitigate this though. Ewar bonuses and a good tank seem appropriate enough for the role of combat recon. And if you'd want to spice it up more, a dps range buff seems more logical in my opinion. (drone boats where appropriate, falloff/optimal, missile speed/flight time) o7
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1055	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:34:46 - [355] - Quote War Kitten wrote: The overall boosts to Recons I like - capacitor and tank were lacking. But the individual attention each ship got (or didn't get) is universally meh IMO. I like the increased velocity, but the careless wording and typos in the post tends to indicate the care with which the whole balance appears to have been approached. "The average maximum velocity across the class is going up by around 20m/s " - CCP Rise PILGRIM 198(+34) CURSE 205(+30) FALCON 192(+23) ROOK 194(+24) ARAZU 207(+27) LACHESIS 220(+29) RAPIER 230(+38) HUGINN 240(+31) Real average: +29.5 - only off by 50% or so. Just my 2 +/- 1 cents much more thoroughness is required .. something he has shown in all his threads sadly .. overbuffs and just neglect seems the theme of most threads.. Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1251	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:35:49 - [356] - Quote RTSAvalanche wrote: You simply made it personal, rather adressing the issue at hand. Since you did not have a valid reply for those affected most in low-sec. Each reply you have made has simply been adapt & combats.. but you sure act like you know alot for some one that doesn't do combat in low-sec FW. You're the one who made it personal by calling me an "F1 Warrior," impugning me on account of my alliance affiliation. I make it a point to never bring up the affiliation of a poster when I'm posting, but if others stoop to it, I'm happy to respond in kind. I didn't put the rest of your post into my reply, because I wasn't interested in it. It was mostly rambling about stuff, and it wasn't the part that I wanted to talk about. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Catherine Laartii Dominion Fleet Group Templis CALSF 438	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:36:08 - [357] - Quote Ripard Teg wrote: That enormous, world-shattering THUMP you just heard was the ball being dropped big-time on the Pilgrim rebalance. Why take away the one thing it was actually good at to give it something that it desperately doesn't need? Ashs and neut Legions already vastly, wildly overshadow Pilgrims in small-gang armor fleets. This range change isn't going to do a thing about that... while taking away its one solid weapon when used in ultra-small gang and solo ratter ganking. What good is a range bonus gonna do for a cloaky ship? I'm incredibly sad the Rook didn't get a RLML bonus to go with its HML/HAM bonus. This sounds OP but it really isn't: a RLML Rook isn't even close to a good option right now, giving only 130 DPS (and long reload time) versus 190 (and much better alpha) for the HML version. So add this bonus, please. That would make it a viable take-along on small-gang RLML Caracal/Cerb fleets. I'm also incredibly sad and confused that the Huginn/Rapier weapon bonuses have been flip-flopped. TP-bonused missiles were the only thing that made the Huginn interesting. This profile should have been improved, not eliminated. What was the justification for doing this, if you don't mind my asking? I'm torn on the invisible-to-dscan thing. It feels OP, particularly in w-space. It also makes me nervous because you guys don't have a good strategy around "What intelligence tools should there be in EVE?" So you probably shouldn't be screwing around with the intel tools we do have until you know what the strategy is going to be. -I agree with you on the pilgrim; it should either drop a mid for a high or lose the TP bonus for neut amount; it's being half-assed and nothing good will come of that. That being said, if we're forced to accept this, i can see it being useful for blops and disruptor-range kiting in pvp. -The rook not only needs a RLM bonus, but it also needs a helluva lot more PG; a base of 750 would be perfect, but more to the point, something needs to be done with the falcon. A RoF bonus for hybrids and a bigger drone bay would be excellent; it's just worrisome that the force recons got so little attention in this patch apart from the rapier. -I need to point this out since it keeps popping up in this thread like a demented gopher and needs to be put down: The Huginn should not get missiles. Core Complexion ships in this game have missiles as part of their identity with the new balance meta, so Boundless Creation ships shouldn't be getting it at all in any instance. You want a TP bonus on a t2 missile cruiser? Tough sh*t! Caldari are the ones who need the bloody TP bonuses to compliment their missiles; minmatar just needs something else like web strength or extra combat usability. Web range is a bonus as effective if not more so in pvp since it is the literal definition of range control. They should have fixed this a LONG time ago but it's never once been addressed.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries Chelonaphobia 712	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:36:22 - [358] - Quote I think CCP meant "Recons no longer show up in local" and just typed "immune to D-scan" by mistake.
Nikel Ivanovich 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:37:10 - [359] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Cannot be detected by directional scanners lol next step Rifter full immune to missiles and drones?
Naava Edios 404 File Not Found 18	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:38:55 - [360] - Quote No offense, If I didn't want to be detected I'd just fly the cloakie but still interesting. Rise, Still think you need to re-look the rook, Cause you don't make the worst recon useable by adding DScan immunity And can we trade a high slot on the falcon and give it a 25 Drone/Bandwidth? Someone who flies the hated Falcon I'd much rather have 5 drones than... 2 useless CAP EATING Guns with my already Cap eating ecm. Most of the others look good too, Nice the see the Huginn get a 4th lowslot, I think even the Lachesis was pleading "Rise Give me a forth low too!" I actually had hoped you were going to restrict the Falcon to having two High slots period :/

Ned Thomas Hellbound Turkeys Alliance of Abandoned Cybernetic Rejects 490	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:39:49 - [361] - Quote Well.....D3's being able to use combat probes makes a smidge more sense now. Goes to update skill queue Vote Sabriz!
Marcel Devereux Aideron Robotics 412	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:39:55 - [362] - Quote Harvey James wrote: War Kitten wrote: The overall boosts to Recons I like - capacitor and tank were lacking. But the individual attention each ship got (or didn't get) is universally meh IMO. I like the increased velocity, but the careless wording and typos in the post tends to indicate the care with which the whole balance appears to have been approached. "The average maximum velocity across the class is going up by around 20m/s " - CCP Rise PILGRIM 198(+34) CURSE 205(+30) FALCON 192(+23) ROOK 194(+24) ARAZU 207(+27) LACHESIS 220(+29) RAPIER 230(+38) HUGINN 240(+31) Real average: +29.5 - only off by 50% or so. Just my 2 +/- 1 cents much more thoroughness is required .. something he has shown in all his threads sadly .. overbuffs and just neglect seems the theme of most threads.. OH SNAP!
Aloe Cloveris The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple 153	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:44:08 - [363] - Quote Rook is still garbage just fyi
MukkBarovian Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion 26	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:44:16 - [364] - Quote 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. -"Wormholes are unlivable." What? Wormholes have all kinds of cloaky things in them all the time. Between the cloaky T3s, the Covops, the Recons and the Stratios its pretty dumb to just wander around without being cloaky. A bomber can target and point you instantly after decloak. A Huginn will have to land on grid decloaked and burn over to you uncloaked. (You're an idiot if you sit within point range of the warp in.) Sure the Huginn is tankier than a single bomber, but its not outright superior as a tackler. This is amazingly dumb. There are so many things that already don't show up in WH directional scan that I just don't get why combat recons are some kind of serious problem. Whats the difference between a cloaked Falcon and an uncloaked Rook? Does it really come down to those few seconds of targeting delay after decloak? How about the upside that you can at least find out about them with probes? -"Dscan tools are broken!" No they aren't. The cloaky falcon also didn't show up on the Dscan of the enemy fleet. -"10 arty Huginn..." Sure the hidden arty Huginn got a slight buff. But 9 arty Rapiers and an instalock bomber can currently create the same effect. You don't see them on scan. They can point you instantly. They blap anemically for the number of ships involved. Somehow I don't regularly worry about cloaky arty Rapier fleets right now.
Landis Delco Interstellar Nuclear Penguins Here Be Dragons 3	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:44:38 - [365] - Quote When running a blops fleet, you can throw in combat recons and there forced to use crappy prototype cloaking devices and cant warp and cloak. Now, they just don't show up on D scan will make them just like the rest of the roaming Blops fleet undetectable until they land on grid next to you! This is an amazing change! It's a waste of a high slot having to put a Cloak on a combat Recon.
Bevici Roden The Maythorn 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:46:56 - [366] - Quote I feel like this is quite a big power creep. But on the other hand, risky moves by ccp are good. Overall I enjoy the change. I wish there was some sort of detection counter that is not a dedicated combat probe scanner equipped ship.
Tau Cabalander Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs 4451	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:47:39 - [367] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Given they can't covert cloak, that's utterly brilliant My Rook, "Jam and Toast", thanks you!
Dracones Tarsis Inc 30	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:47:47 - [368] - Quote I think the d-scan mechanic itself could use an overhaul. Make it work off sig radius vs distance so larger ships can be d-scanned from anywhere but smaller ships need to be more up close. Add modules to improve/dampen d-scan or maybe use scan strength. I don't know. Recon would have a bonus to dampen d-scan results so it looks/acts more like a frig while other ships might have a bonus towards using their d-scan. But as it is now being an "all or nothing" mechanic is pretty uninteresting.
Vel'drinn Sol Research and Development Aurora Foundation 39	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:48:45 - [369] - Quote This is the only song playing in my head after reading this post. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFtb3EtjEic CCP gifts us the ultimate gank tool in wormholes! Dscan invisibility is gonna be so good lol.
Catherine Laartii Dominion Fleet Group Templis CALSF 438	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:50:10 - [370] - Quote BKuCKy wrote: Catherine Laartii wrote: I fear that this will make this ship far out of line in wspace, where intel is already harder to get than in 0.0. Lol no-scan recons is a death to WH carebears. Less WH carebears -> more price on T3 ships -> more $ players spend for PLEX -> PROFIT for CCP! While I agree with the quoted statement, I did actually say it. Please fix your quotes.

TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 916	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:50:17 - [371] - 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.
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION The Obsidian Front 575	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:53:27 - [372] - Quote I predict Ishtars: Online will become Combat Recons: Online.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1255	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:55:00 - [373] - Quote It's also pretty amusing that people still decry ECM as overpowered, when it's been consistently shat upon over the last four years. To put it into finer perspective GÇö-áGoonswarm Federation, an organization for whom the use of cheap, T1 disruption cruisers is signature, abandoned ECM entirely in favor of sensor dampening and tracking disruption. This ought to tell you how unreliable jamming is in the current meta. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Emma DiLivio DiLivio Biomedicals 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:55:20 - [374] - Quote Levina Windstar wrote: I like the undetectable feature but I think this will be wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too OP in WH. CCP plz... think about WH too! :/ Everyone has probes in WH. If anything it's the place the least affected.
Kassasis Dakkstromri Yumping Amok Circle-Of-Two 276	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:59:10 - [375] - Quote Pleased... But reserved as to what ECM changes will ultimately be? Other ships look pretty great! CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
Discomanco We pooped on your lawn Resonance. 71	Posted - 2014.12.18 18:59:10 - [376] - 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. -"Wormholes are unlivable." What? Wormholes have all kinds of cloaky things in them all the time. Between the cloaky T3s, the Covops, the Recons and the Stratios its pretty dumb to just wander around without being cloaky. A bomber can target and point you instantly after decloak. A Huginn will have to land on grid decloaked and burn over to you uncloaked. (You're an idiot if you sit within point range of the warp in.) Sure the Huginn is tankier than a single bomber, but its not outright superior as a tackler. This is amazingly dumb. There are so many things that already don't show up in WH directional scan that I just don't get why combat recons are some kind of serious problem. Whats the difference between a cloaked Falcon and an uncloaked Rook? Does it really come down to those few seconds of targeting delay after decloak? How about the upside that you can at least find out about them with probes? -"Dscan tools are broken!" No they aren't. The cloaky falcon also didn't show up on the Dscan of the enemy fleet. -"10 arty Huginn..." Sure the hidden arty Huginn got a slight buff. But 9 arty Rapiers and an instalock bomber can currently create the same effect. You don't see them on scan. They can point you instantly. They blap anemically for the number of ships involved. Somehow I don't regularly worry about cloaky arty Rapier fleets right now. Pretty much well said. I have never seen any concern about wormhole due to the huge amount of cloaked danger there's already out there, so people just whine to whine right now. I can understand the concern for FW though, but I guess you just have to prepare for the worst.
Spec 593357629 Balkan Mafia Circle-Of-Two 2	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:00:37 - [377] - Quote Why do we have to use guns, all the other Recons can fit anti frig weapons. You just declawed the lach, no one fits guns on recons anyways its a waist of time, you are meant to be shooting support ship not the primary. I will no longer be flying gallente recons they just suck now. I don't see why they cannot have missiles like they used to. The only weapon that should be used for recons is Rapid light launchers, that's it. Nothing else is much use. Please reconsider limiting our fitting options for these great ships. It would not be much to keep the launcher hard points so pilots have a few more fitting options for recons. Thank you.
Dersen Lowery Drinking in Station 1378	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:01:21 - [378] - Quote Interesting. BRB buying Lachesis, even if it doesn't have enough low slots. Can we get a gas-huffing version of the Prospect with this feature, instead of a cloak? D-scan is still a terrible mechanic, and ECM is still broken--not because it's OP, but because it's either no fun for the jammer or no fun for the jammed. I wonder if it would be an interesting variant to give them a HIC-like D-scan Inhibitor bubble centered on the ship. That way, you'd know something was there, and that something is probably a recon (it could just be the deployable) but you don't know what else is in the bubble. That's about the only way to get any nuance out of the current D-scan mechanic. But as it is, it will be interesting to see how it plays out. I will cheerfully give credit for taking a bold and unexpected step here. Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
Awkward Pi Duolus Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 20	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:04:08 - [379] - Quote DScan immunity is game-breaking. Like interceptor bubble immunity was. CCP Rise, do you even play Eve anymore?
Mr Floydy Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 254	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:04:42 - [380] - Quote 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.

ArmyOfMe PILGRIMS Advent of Fate 396	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:05:33 - [381] - Quote Love it.. QUOTE CCP Dolan and the EVE Online development team:-áThe battle was relatively even for some time with CFC and Russian forces holding moderate lead at first and only have a slight lead in Titan kills. Then came a turning point in the battle. Manfred Sideous, the initial Fleet Commander for PL/N3, handed over command to the CEO of Northern Coalition., Vince Draken
Dys Novus Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy 3	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:05:55 - [382] - Quote Tbh, I'm not seeing where it is a death sentence to w-space pve other than people fear mongering in hopes it is taken off the table so they don't have to deal with it. If you are in a sig, they still have to drop probes. See probes, run away. If they already have the sig, they warp to the default point uncloaked. See warp-in. Run away. If they have cloakie eyes on grid and get a perfect warpin, there's still the lock delay while your ship slows down and exits warp, which will be about on par with the cloakie dropping cloak, so the point is moot. Oh look, a combat recon exiting warp slooooooowly, run away. These suffer from more drawbacks than an actual cloak, while retaining better combat stats. Which is the point. Either way, a Stratios will ruin your day more efficiently than a combat recon warping into you. This could be an announcement that cloaks were being added to the game and you'd get the exact same whinging. "This is impossible to counter" "Everyone will fly one, welcome to cloaks online" "This is the death of wormholes, I'm offlining my towers" "They are literally invisible and can't be seen until its too late, this isn't what I signed up for" "What do you mean I have to pay attention?" Keep shaking things up and introducing new mechanics, CCP. People will either adapt or die, but the game will be more varied and interesting for the effort.
Novah Soul 100	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:06:36 - [383] - Quote I don't really fly Recons so take this with a pinch of salt, but does anyone else find it odd that an Amarr hull gets drone bonuses while a Gallente one does not?
Levina Windstar Mekalon Industry 49	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:06:43 - [384] - Quote Discomanco wrote: 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. -"Wormholes are unlivable." What? Wormholes have all kinds of cloaky things in them all the time. Between the cloaky T3s, the Covops, the Recons and the Stratios its pretty dumb to just wander around without being cloaky. A bomber can target and point you instantly after decloak. A Huginn will have to land on grid decloaked and burn over to you uncloaked. (You're an idiot if you sit within point range of the warp in.) Sure the Huginn is tankier than a single bomber, but its not outright superior as a tackler. This is amazingly dumb. There are so many things that already don't show up in WH directional scan that I just don't get why combat recons are some kind of serious problem. Whats the difference between a cloaked Falcon and an uncloaked Rook? Does it really come down to those few seconds of targeting delay after decloak? How about the upside that you can at least find out about them with probes? -"Dscan tools are broken!" No they aren't. The cloaky falcon also didn't show up on the Dscan of the enemy fleet. -"10 arty Huginn..." Sure the hidden arty Huginn got a slight buff. But 9 arty Rapiers and an instalock bomber can currently create the same effect. You don't see them on scan. They can point you instantly. They blap anemically for the number of ships involved. Somehow I don't regularly worry about cloaky arty Rapier fleets right now. Pretty much well said. I have never seen any concern about wormhole due to the huge amount of cloaked danger there's already out there, so people just whine to whine right now. I can understand the concern for FW though, but I guess you just have to prepare for the worst. It's nice to see so many comments regarding WH coming from ppl who actually doesn't live there and have no clue of what they are talking about . Anyway, it's your opinion so it's fine, and mine is I think a ship that is immune to D-Scane is too OP in WH. Hell, I'll be the first one to use it but I still think this is too OP and need at least some balance and/or huge drawback.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 917	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:07:57 - [385] - 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.
Kyle Yanowski Aideron Robotics 148	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:08:22 - [386] - Quote On Forced Recon changes: Limiting the feature of DSCAN immunity to a single class of ships is somewhat folly. I personally feel that that DSCAN immunity should be reserved for a module or rig. Thus giving capsuleers a choice on reducing DPS, or Tank, or Maneuverability in favor of anonymity. Force Recon implies that these ships should fill a reconnaissance role in fleets (or solo). My proposal is simple: Force Recon Role Bonus: 200% increase to DSCAN effective range instead of what is currently proposed. This will give the ships a significant role in fleet through the ability to quickly scan down systems as well as in solo. Host of the High Drag Eve Online Podcast ( http://highdrag.wordpress.com). Director of Aideron Robotics.
Carebear McPublord Department of Magical Law Enforcement 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:08:28 - [387] - Quote Ab'del Abu wrote: The Dscan thingy completely breaks wormhole risk/reward. C1-C3 will be a wasteland Combat Probes. Holy **** that was difficult.
Tira Janau Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:09:35 - [388] - Quote So all the things that actually balanced insane EWAR powered ships is getting thrown out the window, this is gonna suck.
Ripard Teg Stimulus Rote Kapelle 980	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:11:33 - [389] - Quote Catherine Laartii wrote: -I need to point this out since it keeps popping up in this thread like a demented gopher and needs to be put down: The Huginn should not get missiles. Core Complexion ships in this game have missiles as part of their identity with the new balance meta, so Boundless Creation ships shouldn't be getting it at all in any instance. You want a TP bonus on a t2 missile cruiser? Tough sh*t! Caldari are the ones who need the bloody TP bonuses to compliment their missiles; minmatar just needs something else like web strength or extra combat usability. Web range is a bonus as effective if not more so in pvp since it is the literal definition of range control. They should have fixed this a LONG time ago but it's never once been addressed. Hm. You raise a good point about the corporate tendencies. I p.much never think about that (frankly, because I think it adds very little to the game). This does pretty efficiently neuter the Huginn, though. Rapier or Lach will be better for anything that I can think of off the top of my head. Am I missing a use case, perhaps in FW? aka Jester, who apparently was once entrusted to Wield The Banhammer to good effect.
Motorbit HildCo Interplanetar Villore Accords 44	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:12:00 - [390] - Quote still to weak. need doomsdays, imo

Xqu Reasonable People Of Sound Mind 1	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:13:50 - [391] - Quote Why are all the DED runners complaining about this change? Sure you will lose a few early warnings without being able to see them while they use the gates, but it's not like he will magically appear next to you. You already know a neutral / hostile is in the system AND you know he can see wrecks just as well as you so hes likely looking for you. Even if he warps into your site and suddenly appears on your overview are you a) a smart person and always aligned out, or b) far away from the warp in point. If you aren't either of these two things would you have warped to a safe spot the moment you saw the guy appear in local. Also to the guys who thinks that they can magically disappear if they just find a way to make a ratting recon work then think again. People still know you're in local, they can see the wrecks on d-scan and they can see that more wrecks are spawning. It's not difficult to put 2 and 2 together once people get used to this new mechanic. There is no stupid questions, just stupid answers
Metal Icarus Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 711	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:14:06 - [392] - Quote Spugg Galdon wrote: I predict Ishtars: Online will become Combat Recons: Online. Still better than Ishtars Online.
Mr Floydy Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 254	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:18:44 - [393] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: 'hilarious and great fun' just means it's OP but you're flying it. You're right, that was exactly where I was coming from. However having just read Dys Novus's post further up this page I don't really see this as too game breaking, maybe just in need of some tweaking. As a few others have said, it doesn't really do much a cloaky Recon doesn't do already? Cloaky recons are getting a HUGE buff by getting HAC resists instead of their current ones and no-one seems overly bothered by that. Think that this new rebalanced Pilgrim is likely to be able to put of a 50k EHP tank without much issue, whilst being able to move into position and potentially bump tackle you so your aligned away from your warp out.... Yes a Curse will be able to sit decloaked waiting in a sig for you to warp to it unlike a Pilgrim, but it'll also be on dscan, it'll potentially be taking rat aggro.... I think it can work.
Andreus Ixiris Duty. Circle-Of-Two 5183	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:24:15 - [394] - Quote Metal Icarus wrote: Spugg Galdon wrote: I predict Ishtars: Online will become Combat Recons: Online. Still better than Ishtars Online. Flavour Of This Month Online being better than Flavour Of Last Month Online still means we're living in Flavour Of the Month Online, which is not neccessarily healthy. Andreus Ixiris > A Civire without a chin is barely a Civire at all. Pieter Tuulinen > He'd be Civirely disadvantaged, Andreus. Andreus Ixiris > ... Andreus Ixiris > This is why we're at war.
Gorski Car 455	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:24:19 - [395] - 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. -"Wormholes are unlivable." What? Wormholes have all kinds of cloaky things in them all the time. Between the cloaky T3s, the Covops, the Recons and the Stratios its pretty dumb to just wander around without being cloaky. A bomber can target and point you instantly after decloak. A Huginn will have to land on grid decloaked and burn over to you uncloaked. (You're an idiot if you sit within point range of the warp in.) Sure the Huginn is tankier than a single bomber, but its not outright superior as a tackler. This is amazingly dumb. There are so many things that already don't show up in WH directional scan that I just don't get why combat recons are some kind of serious problem. Whats the difference between a cloaked Falcon and an uncloaked Rook? Does it really come down to those few seconds of targeting delay after decloak? How about the upside that you can at least find out about them with probes? -"Dscan tools are broken!" No they aren't. The cloaky falcon also didn't show up on the Dscan of the enemy fleet. -"10 arty Huginn..." Sure the hidden arty Huginn got a slight buff. But 9 arty Rapiers and an instalock bomber can currently create the same effect. You don't see them on scan. They can point you instantly. They blap anemically for the number of ships involved. Somehow I don't regularly worry about cloaky arty Rapier fleets right now. I fully agree so many scrubs here fear mongering that this will end wh pve, fw pvp, solo pvp etc... Recons were weak compared to t3s, eafs and sometimes even t1 ewar ships. Collect this post
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION The Obsidian Front 576	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:26:23 - [396] - Quote Looking at the Rook...... it's still really a bit of a turd. It doesn't have any real "Combat" feel to it.
Clahim Ministry of War Amarr Empire 150	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:28:10 - [397] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners. wth Rise, you are clearly not Bringing Solo Back here... Very, very disapointed by that. Stupid Solo PvPer
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 918	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:28:15 - [398] - 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.
atanV Repo. 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:28:51 - [399] - Quote D-scan immunity seems hilariously OP. If you want to develop the Combat Recon role, how about increasing their d-scan range, and/or enabling them to detect the presence of cloaked ships (through the d-scan) instead?
Clahim Ministry of War Amarr Empire 150	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:28:57 - [400] - Quote Clahim wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners. wth Rise, you are clearly not Bringing Solo Back here... Very, very disapointed by that, Fw and low sec soloers will suffer from that a lot. Stupid Solo PvPer

Kyalla Ahashion Paladin Order Fidelas Constans 14	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:31:17 - [401] - Quote Vadeim Rizen wrote: this is so hilariously OP. inb4 recon nerf. ratters now can't even just keep an eye on d-scan and warp out before someone comes in to tackle.... nobody will be able to detect a covert ops cyno at all unless randomly using combat probes... tbh all they needed was a hitpoint and cap buff. can't wait to sit in a medium plex with an insta-lock arty rapier and blap unsuspecting frigs. It's the combat recons that are getting immunity to d-scan, the ones without covert cloaks and covertops cynos. Force recons could just stay cloaked to avoid dscan already. The dscan immunity that combat recons are getting will have some interesting uses (initial tackle? wormhole harassment?) but I don't see that it will change too much. I'd trade all the buffs for the ability to web and scram out to actual fleet battle engagement ranges of 140-150km with T2 web/scram though.
Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 240	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:31:57 - [402] - Quote MukkBarovian wrote: Whats the difference between a cloaked Falcon and an uncloaked Rook? Does it really come down to those few seconds of targeting delay after decloak? The difference is that you can see the Falcon on dscan when it enters the system, but you can't see the Rook. Previously no ship could enter a wormhole unnoticed.
MukkBarovian Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion 30	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:33:24 - [403] - Quote Spugg Galdon wrote: I predict Ishtars: Online will become Combat Recons: Online. Nope. The Ishtars will eat the recons alive any time the two of them fight unless we're talking solo.
TuCZnak Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:33:27 - [404] - Quote Is there still that monument in Jita? Because if the dscan thing goes live, we'll need something to shoot at.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1058	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:35:33 - [405] - 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 more like this please ROOK Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners Caldari Cruiser Bonuses: 5% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile Launcher rate of fire 5% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile Launcher damage Recon Ships Bonuses: 30% bonus to ECM Target Jammer strength 10% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile max velocity Slot layout: 5H, 7M, 3L; 0(-2) turrets, 5 launchers Fittings: 600 PWG, 600 CPU reduce cpu plenty spare Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 2050(+262) / 965(+9) / 960(+359) maybe buff armour and structure a bit more Capacitor (amount / capacitor per second) : 1250(+187) / 3.93/s(+.83) buff cap more too compensate for ecm cap bonus loss Mobility (max velocity / agility / align time): 194(+24) / .61 / 10.76s(-.04s) buff agility please Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25 / 25 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 100km( -50km) / 259 / 10 Sensor strength: 32 Gravimetric Signature radius: 155(-18) Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
MukkBarovian Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion 30	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:40:08 - [406] - Quote Actually I was wrong. Recons will be overpowered monsters capable of beating all comers. Sell your Ishtars and get arty Huginns. I promise you that will win all the fleet fights if you do this.
Mr Ignitious Aperture Harmonics No Holes Barred 46	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:40:27 - [407] - Quote Grm Makentor wrote: >dscan immune ships with covops cloaks in w-space jesus christ what were they thinking, so mandatory scouting alts on every hole now? ... Only combat recons are getting dscan immunity, they can't use cov ops cloaks. Curse has too many slots, Huginn appears to have too few, and the lachesis... needs more suitable weapon bonuses but I don't have suggestions for it other than for it to go full missiles. Dscan immunity is a good thing. Right now people rat with impunity. There is no "risk vs reward" except for log in traps. Interceptors go god speed now and still can't even catch CARRIERS because of local and dscan. Anyone ratting just has to be aligned (and they will be) and warp out. Maybe, finally, carebears in null will incur losses. Or, better yet, people will escalate ganks and defend the farmers. Then everyone will have more fun.
Aralieus The Inf1dels 233	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:42:58 - [408] - Quote Love the changes Curse is going to be w-space beast now! Oderint Dum Metuant
ArmyOfMe PILGRIMS Advent of Fate 396	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:46:17 - [409] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Appreciate all the discussion. The work day is ending here so I'll let this continue tonight and talk over the feedback with my colleagues in the morning and then get back to you with responses to specific issues. Thanks Do not give in, this is a awesome change for recons, and i cant wait to try them out as solo ships QUOTE CCP Dolan and the EVE Online development team:-áThe battle was relatively even for some time with CFC and Russian forces holding moderate lead at first and only have a slight lead in Titan kills. Then came a turning point in the battle. Manfred Sideous, the initial Fleet Commander for PL/N3, handed over command to the CEO of Northern Coalition., Vince Draken
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 75	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:47:30 - [410] - Quote Gorski Car wrote: 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. -"Wormholes are unlivable." What? Wormholes have all kinds of cloaky things in them all the time. Between the cloaky T3s, the Covops, the Recons and the Stratios its pretty dumb to just wander around without being cloaky. A bomber can target and point you instantly after decloak. A Huginn will have to land on grid decloaked and burn over to you uncloaked. (You're an idiot if you sit within point range of the warp in.) Sure the Huginn is tankier than a single bomber, but its not outright superior as a tackler. This is amazingly dumb. There are so many things that already don't show up in WH directional scan that I just don't get why combat recons are some kind of serious problem. Whats the difference between a cloaked Falcon and an uncloaked Rook? Does it really come down to those few seconds of targeting delay after decloak? How about the upside that you can at least find out about them with probes? -"Dscan tools are broken!" No they aren't. The cloaky falcon also didn't show up on the Dscan of the enemy fleet. -"10 arty Huginn..." Sure the hidden arty Huginn got a slight buff. But 9 arty Rapiers and an instalock bomber can currently create the same effect. You don't see them on scan. They can point you instantly. They blap anemically for the number of ships involved. Somehow I don't regularly worry about cloaky arty Rapier fleets right now. I fully agree so many scrubs here fear mongering that this will end wh pve, fw pvp, solo pvp etc... Recons were weak compared to t3s, eafs and sometimes even t1 ewar ships. True. I fly belli more than huginn just because its bonuses meshed well. The only huginn i had fun with had 500dps, but cost about what 5-6 fully fit bellis did, and was still pretty ****. im willing to try this, i dont think this will be as game breaking as people claim. And im in FW daily. Quite simple really, if i want to med plex, find a low pop system and plex away. For systems i regularly travel, im familiar with what space junk is on dscan. Add new ships on dscan compared to local, does total ship = local? Yes? All ships accounted for. No? Prob a recon floating around. You want to plex amamake or some other high population/pirate ridden system? Should probably be in a gang anyway. Low pop fw systems will be largely unaffected.

Edwin Wyatt In Utter Darkness 64	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:49:24 - [411] - Quote Again CCP strikes with another ill though out changes to recons. So my option is to fly a ship that can cloak and I can pick my targets, range and time to strike, or I can fly around in a so called combat recon ship that cannot be seen by directional scanners, 99% of high sec don't use d-scanner. This will only be useful for harassing players who enjoy faction warfare, running anoms or missions in populated lowsec systems and WH space. You fail to see how these ships are currently used and draw up this encourage others to use the combat recon ships. Increase DPS in combat recons to HAC levels, they are paper thin and use EW to tank a target. Why are all damps and tracking disrupters scripted but not warp disrupters or scramblers,Target painters and ECM? You need to focus on simpler changes, that only affect the change item directly and not make up arbitrary changes that have cascading effects on the entire universe, a great example is "Teams". Complicated solution to such a simple problem! Good luck CCP, I believe you will truly need it in the months to come.
Marcel Devereux Aideron Robotics 418	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:49:40 - [412] - Quote Ripard Teg wrote: Catherine Laartii wrote: -I need to point this out since it keeps popping up in this thread like a demented gopher and needs to be put down: The Huginn should not get missiles. Core Complexion ships in this game have missiles as part of their identity with the new balance meta, so Boundless Creation ships shouldn't be getting it at all in any instance. You want a TP bonus on a t2 missile cruiser? Tough sh*t! Caldari are the ones who need the bloody TP bonuses to compliment their missiles; minmatar just needs something else like web strength or extra combat usability. Web range is a bonus as effective if not more so in pvp since it is the literal definition of range control. They should have fixed this a LONG time ago but it's never once been addressed. Hm. You raise a good point about the corporate tendencies. I p.much never think about that (frankly, because I think it adds very little to the game). This does pretty efficiently neuter the Huginn, though. Rapier or Lach will be better for anything that I can think of off the top of my head. Am I missing a use case, perhaps in FW? pssh. The Lach will get great for those nano-shield gangs and nothing else.
Nitrah Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy 55	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:50:20 - [413] - Quote Aiyshimin wrote: MukkBarovian wrote: Whats the difference between a cloaked Falcon and an uncloaked Rook? Does it really come down to those few seconds of targeting delay after decloak? The difference is that you can see the Falcon on dscan when it enters the system, but you can't see the Rook. Previously no ship could enter a wormhole unnoticed. Unless you put a listening picket on the wormhole. Or have someone with combat probes out to see him instantly. this is absolutely no different than running a site in a wormhole which is larger than 14.3AU across where the wormhole is off of d-scan. Except this is safer for you because it takes one button push of the combat scanner to light up his presence like a Christmas tree. If he's going to warp in on you in an anomaly, it'll be at zero from the warpin. If you're not a dope, you won't be within 30km or so, and will be able to warp out. You are still at a much greater risk of an astero than you are of any combat recon bogeyman.
Trii Seo 693	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:50:39 - [414] - Quote The pilgrim could use some of its old neuting strength bonus, not just range - especially with Curse being dscan-proof. With Rapier and Arazu being your primary tackle&cyno ships due to, well, their bonused tackle (and the fact that they can fit the typical hunting setup of 2 cynos + probes + cloak without gimping themselves, since their job-slots are mids - unlike the Pilgrim which uses high slots primarily). Other than that, good changes all around. Is it Hotdrop O'Clock yet?
Azzie Stardust Unimpressed Collectors 1	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:54:13 - [415] - Quote > Combat Recons no longer show up on d-scan. This is rly big gamechanger. EVE will never be the same. Maybe you should send some industries team to re-check that.
Discomanco We pooped on your lawn Resonance. 71	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:54:14 - [416] - Quote Levina Windstar wrote: Discomanco wrote: 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. -"Wormholes are unlivable." What? Wormholes have all kinds of cloaky things in them all the time. Between the cloaky T3s, the Covops, the Recons and the Stratios its pretty dumb to just wander around without being cloaky. A bomber can target and point you instantly after decloak. A Huginn will have to land on grid decloaked and burn over to you uncloaked. (You're an idiot if you sit within point range of the warp in.) Sure the Huginn is tankier than a single bomber, but its not outright superior as a tackler. This is amazingly dumb. There are so many things that already don't show up in WH directional scan that I just don't get why combat recons are some kind of serious problem. Whats the difference between a cloaked Falcon and an uncloaked Rook? Does it really come down to those few seconds of targeting delay after decloak? How about the upside that you can at least find out about them with probes? -"Dscan tools are broken!" No they aren't. The cloaky falcon also didn't show up on the Dscan of the enemy fleet. -"10 arty Huginn..." Sure the hidden arty Huginn got a slight buff. But 9 arty Rapiers and an instalock bomber can currently create the same effect. You don't see them on scan. They can point you instantly. They blap anemically for the number of ships involved. Somehow I don't regularly worry about cloaky arty Rapier fleets right now. Pretty much well said. I have never seen any concern about wormhole due to the huge amount of cloaked danger there's already out there, so people just whine to whine right now. I can understand the concern for FW though, but I guess you just have to prepare for the worst. It's nice to see so many comments regarding WH coming from ppl who actually doesn't live there and have no clue of what they are talking about . Anyway, it's your opinion so it's fine, and mine is I think a ship that is immune to D-Scane is too OP in WH. Hell, I'll be the first one to use it but I still think this is too OP and need at least some balance and/or huge drawback. I have lived in WHs, granted it was not for long but I lived there. Everything I saw coming in to kill me was cloaky. Everything. What would the Combat Recons change? Those I can actually see landing on grid and have a chance to get out before I get tackled.
Xercodo Vector Galactic Did he say Jump 3919	Posted - 2014.12.18 19:57:53 - [417] - Quote Kyle Yanowski wrote: On Forced Recon changes: Limiting the feature of DSCAN immunity to a single class of ships is somewhat folly. I personally feel that that DSCAN immunity should be reserved for a module or rig. Thus giving capsuleers a choice on reducing DPS, or Tank, or Maneuverability in favor of anonymity. Force Recon implies that these ships should fill a reconnaissance role in fleets (or solo). My proposal is simple: Force Recon Role Bonus: 200% increase to DSCAN effective range instead of what is currently proposed. This will give the ships a significant role in fleet through the ability to quickly scan down systems as well as in solo. Good idea, however would require some potentially significant back end changes as dscan is limited by the range of values for a 32-bit integer right now and nothing else as far as I can tell. I don't know how hard it'd be for CCP to change the datatype underneath but they would also need to put in extra work to ensure that the current limit is maintained artificially instead of automatically being capped by data type limitations. The Drake is a Lie
Mr Floydy Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 254	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:00:42 - [418] - Quote I'd like to see Pilgrim get something in between it's current bonus and the proposed one.... Bit of a range bonus, but bit of an amount bonus. Considering it's already slower and less tanky than the Curse, plus pretty much stuck with an armour tank it could do with some extra neuting to counter the Curse imo.
Nova' Darkstar Dark Star Operations. 10	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:00:44 - [419] - Quote After the initial "Omg no combat recons on d-scan? that would be hilarious!" thoughts wore-off, and I actually realized what this would do, I am going to have to put my vote against making combat recons immune to d-scan. It is way too over powered, and this is coming from a pure cov-ops/recon pilot. Not only does this hurt small gang/solo PVP, and FW (Curse sitting in a medium plex? goodbye almost anything that warps in) but it will also make any bears that are piracy targets insanely risk averse since they will always be expecting a curse or something sitting somewhere in system waiting to land on them. It will actually make low-sec/wh even more dead due to bears just not going there at all because they will be expecting the worst. At least they go there now and have d-scan as a little cushion of security which makes them feel a little safer. If they know they won't feel safe at all, it isn't really "lol yeah bears! in your face! can't wait to gank you!" because they simply will just not be there to gank. Making such a drastic and over powered change might seem like a great buff, but when a change is so overpowered, people won't even try to fight it and thus you have less pew and no targets to even use your super awesome new buff on. I also am going to have to put a vote against swapping the Pilgrims neut/nos strength bonus with range. The Pilgrim is a great solo/small gang boat, and is known for being a very close range heavy tackle ship that takes a while to grind down it's opponent. Swapping the strength bonus for range bonus kind of takes away some of the reason to even fly a Pilgrim over the Curse at all in addition with the new d-scan changes. With the Curse, you need the range because you can be seen on grid when you land. With the Pilgrim, you need the strength because you are de-cloaking on-top of them anyway since you are most likely heavy tackle in a small gang, or solo. The other buffs to their tanks and bringing them in line with HAC tanks look great. tl:dr -No on the d-scan immunity for combat recons -No on the Pilgrim swapping it's neut/nos strength bonus for a range bonus because why not just fly a Curse then? Everything else looks good.
Kyle Yanowski Aideron Robotics 150	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:00:46 - [420] - Quote Edwin Wyatt wrote: Again CCP strikes with another ill though out changes to recons. Feller, you do know that this is a Features and Ideas forum? Soliciting the community for feedback on an idea... Host of the High Drag Eve Online Podcast ( http://highdrag.wordpress.com). Director of Aideron Robotics.

Edward Olmops DUST Expeditionary Team 230	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:03:04 - [421] - Quote Ripard Teg wrote: I'm torn on the invisible-to-dscan thing. It feels OP, particularly in w-space. It also makes me nervous because you guys don't have a good strategy around "What intelligence tools should there be in EVE?" So you probably shouldn't be screwing around with the intel tools we do have until you know what the strategy is going to be. Always appreciating your judgement... but this time... Why is this OP? Where is this better than a regular cloak? (aside of the invisible Gas Harvester) 1. Please notice that regular cloaks also make you PERMANENTLY INVISIBLE ON D-SCAN. Uh-oh. What if cloaked ships sit in wormholes? 2. If you are ambushing someone I very much doubt that warping in on someone and locking him is faster (and thus more OP) than decloaking right next to him + locking. A bomber is definitely faster and a T3 most likely. So that leaves which aspect of overpoweredness? [Note to self: post that concept on intel tools.]
vikari Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Nulli Secunda 86	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:05:46 - [422] - Quote CCP historically the rebalances to ships have simplified them, as well as updated their stats. All of these ships contain token weapon ships that will not be used, as well as in some cases, undefined tanks. Consider these changes for review please: Pilgrim: Change the layout to support armor tanking. Move a mid slot to a low slot. As it stands now 5 mids are unnecessary. This ship's damage is mostly in drones, and will need low slots to push that damage without crippling it's tank. Curse: Change the layout to support armor tanking. Move 2 mid slots to low slots. The 6 mid slots come largely as a waste to this ship. This ship's damage is mostly in drones, and will need low slots to push that damage without crippling it's tank. Falcon: Remove the launcher slot, keep it as an utility slot for the cloak. This boat will engage at mid to long range, and there for next mix it's guns with missiles. Rook: Remove the turret slots. Consider also having a missile bonus apply to rapid light and heavy assault, this ship has a change to be close range, as its mid slots support it. Arazu: Remove the launcher slot, keep it as an utility slot for the cloak. Decide if you want this boat to be armor or shield, the slot layout supports shield but the defense numbers support armor. Consider swapping one mid to a low, or removing some armor and adding shield to the defense. Lachesis: Remove the launcher slot, pilots are going to run 5 turrets in their 5 high slots. Decide if you want this boat to be armor or shield, the slot layout supports shield but the defense numbers support armor. Consider swapping 2 mid to 2 low, or removing some armor and adding shield to the defense. Rapier: Remove the turret slot and keep it as an utility slot for the cloak, or consider a 2 turret /2 launcher layout to force a mix of weapon types. Current configuration leave the turret unused. Huginn: Remove the launcher slot, or consider a 2 turret /2 launcher layout to force a mix of weapon types. Current configuration leave the launcher unused.
Levina Windstar Mekalon Industry 51	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:05:52 - [423] - Quote Discomanco wrote: Levina Windstar wrote: Discomanco wrote: 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. -"Wormholes are unlivable." What? Wormholes have all kinds of cloaky things in them all the time. Between the cloaky T3s, the Covops, the Recons and the Stratios its pretty dumb to just wander around without being cloaky. A bomber can target and point you instantly after decloak. A Huginn will have to land on grid decloaked and burn over to you uncloaked. (You're an idiot if you sit within point range of the warp in.) Sure the Huginn is tankier than a single bomber, but its not outright superior as a tackler. This is amazingly dumb. There are so many things that already don't show up in WH directional scan that I just don't get why combat recons are some kind of serious problem. Whats the difference between a cloaked Falcon and an uncloaked Rook? Does it really come down to those few seconds of targeting delay after decloak? How about the upside that you can at least find out about them with probes? -"Dscan tools are broken!" No they aren't. The cloaky falcon also didn't show up on the Dscan of the enemy fleet. -"10 arty Huginn..." Sure the hidden arty Huginn got a slight buff. But 9 arty Rapiers and an instalock bomber can currently create the same effect. You don't see them on scan. They can point you instantly. They blap anemically for the number of ships involved. Somehow I don't regularly worry about cloaky arty Rapier fleets right now. Pretty much well said. I have never seen any concern about wormhole due to the huge amount of cloaked danger there's already out there, so people just whine to whine right now. I can understand the concern for FW though, but I guess you just have to prepare for the worst. It's nice to see so many comments regarding WH coming from ppl who actually doesn't live there and have no clue of what they are talking about . Anyway, it's your opinion so it's fine, and mine is I think a ship that is immune to D-Scane is too OP in WH. Hell, I'll be the first one to use it but I still think this is too OP and need at least some balance and/or huge drawback. I have lived in WHs, granted it was not for long but I lived there. Everything I saw coming in to kill me was cloaky. Everything. What would the Combat Recons change? Those I can actually see landing on grid and have a chance to get out before I get tackled. They are cruiser type ship with insanely fast warp speed. Believe me when I'm telling you that when you see it comig on grid, you wont' have time to warp away unless your in a frig.
Tarek Raimo Eleutherian Guard Villore Accords 10	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:08:56 - [424] - 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.
Suzuma Makiriemi Industries 8	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:08:58 - [425] - Quote Lumpymayo wrote: I have been waiting for over a year and a half for the Rorqual rebalance. I've been waiting since they added it into the game
Terranid Meester Tactical Assault and Recon Unit 274	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:09:20 - [426] - Quote While I can fly a lachesis to full ability, how about making the undetectable on d-scan bonus a module that can only be fitted on combat recons like how marauders are used with bastion modules these days. Id be inclined to suggest that the interceptor immunity to bubbles be a module too.
Teleil Zoomers Usque Ad Mortem TCC. 19	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:09:50 - [427] - Quote heres the skinny of it imo. how much time do you spend combat probing systems/sites now? how much time would you be willing to spend combat probing systems/sites?
Mr Floydy Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 254	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:10:01 - [428] - Quote Nova' Darkstar wrote: It will actually make low-sec/wh even more dead due to bears just not going there at all because they will be expecting the worst. At least they go there now and have d-scan as a little cushion of security which makes them feel a little safer You mean just as dead as it is with people being able to sneak up on a bear with a cloak? Let's face it the majority of bears in Lowsec and Nullsec dock up as soon as you appear in local, whether you are dscan immune, cloaky or saying hello in local makes no difference. As for wormholes, I don't think it makes a whole lot of difference. Covert recons can land on grid and get into position before they have a 5 second decloak delay and lock/point you. Combat recons will show visible on grid then take a couple of seconds to slow down and lock you whilst not having the advantage of being able to get into a nice position before targetting.
Xan Luca Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:10:55 - [429] - Quote These are some nice changes. About time combat recons got some good bonus's. Pretty please can we get more low slots so we can armor tank our Lachesis's?
Mr Floydy Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 254	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:11:36 - [430] - Quote 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.

Zenmaster Aihaken Tsero Corporations Absolute Darkness 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:14:37 - [431] - Quote If I'm not able to use my skills to track down a ship in my system, and then just - out of the blue - start losing ships, I will stop playing EvE and start playing something else that makes more sense, like say Elite or whatever.
Mr Floydy Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 254	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:16:00 - [432] - Quote Zenmaster Aihaken wrote: If I'm not able to use my skills to track down a ship in my system, and then just - out of the blue - start losing ships, I will stop playing EvE and start playing something else that makes more sense, like say Elite or whatever. Erm, this patch doesn't change anything then, cloakies already have this ability. Combat recons can be scanned with probes. Go play hello kitty online.
Benito Arias Angry Mustellid The Periphery 61	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:17:18 - [433] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Give Combat Recons something to make them stand out as a unique and interesting set of ships Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Please don't. What it does is actually blending their role with that of Force Recons, because in the landscape of grids, deadspace and bubbles ambushing ability skyrockets. Tank and mobility is what Combat Recons need. You want to fix this, great. After that, the Role bonus might compliment the established, uh, role some more, with MWD bloom reduction, or warp mobility, or something, just not out of the blue immunity to X.
Marlona Sky Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 5731	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:17:25 - [434] - Quote Querns wrote: It's also pretty amusing that people still decry ECM as overpowered, when it's been consistently shat upon over the last four years. To put it into finer perspective GÇö-áGoonswarm Federation, an organization for whom the use of cheap, T1 disruption cruisers is signature, abandoned ECM entirely in favor of sensor dampening and tracking disruption. This ought to tell you how unreliable jamming is in the current meta. That's because ECM in a small gang/solo environment is extremely over powered, but is insignificant in large scale combat. Damps are the reverse. Do you understand now? The Paradox
MicroNova Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy 2	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:17:52 - [435] - Quote A point of clarification for some: Combat Recons are the Curse, Lachesis, Huginn, and Rook. They cannot cloak. The d-scan immunity would only apply to these ships. Force Recons are the Pilgrim, Arazu, Rapier, and Falcon. They can cloak. The d-scan immunity would NOT apply to these ships. The d-scan immunity for the Combat Recons gives them just the little bump that they need to make them really useful. As noted by others, you cannot d-scan cloaked ships anyway, so the advantage this change brings is that it lets you get on grid with a Force Recon before they know to run. You'll still have the lock delays due to signature resolution, grid loading, warp ending, fat fingers, etc... It's not the apocalyptic change that people fear. Really appreciate the defensive boosts to all the Recons. Would like to see the Force Recons get a scanning bonus. The Pilgrim changing to a cloaky Curse jr is kind of meh, preferred the old bonusii, it's always been a solo ship that wins or loses based on target selection and committing to the objective. Looking forward to Proteus.
Levina Windstar Mekalon Industry 51	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:17:55 - [436] - Quote Zenmaster Aihaken wrote: If I'm not able to use my skills to track down a ship in my system, and then just - out of the blue - start losing ships, I will stop playing EvE and start playing something else that makes more sense, like say Elite or whatever. Pretty much this
Pike Chargrim Carebear Empire 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:19:32 - [437] - Quote I don't like the d-scan immunity idea. Recons were already in a good place in terms of the meta (give or take a few ship tweaks here and there). What's the point of adding it here? I think this bonus would be great on a new T2 destroyer hull. Something with the hunting aspects of a SB, but a little bit more punch and tank. It gets permanent d-scan immunity, can use covert portals, but cannot fit a cloak. Or alternatively, this seems like a good fit for blops... This just doesn't seem right for a recon.
Nova' Darkstar Dark Star Operations. 11	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:20:14 - [438] - Quote Edward Olmops wrote: Why is this OP? Where is this better than a regular cloak? (aside of the invisible Gas Harvester) I assume by "regular cloak" you mean cov ops cloak? Here are some examples of when this d-scan immunity would be better: When you are in a cov-ops ship, someone checking d-scan can still see you and the type of ship you are in: -In any medium FW plex -when you undock, -when you drop gate cloak to activate regular cloak -when you uncloak to launch probes -when you uncloak to enter/exit wormholes -when you are uncloaked inside of a POS in WH space -when you uncloak to fight something not on grid of person checking d-scan (if this change goes into the game all they will see is your victims ship, then your victims wreck+pod on dscan) Those are just some I can think of off the top of my head.
Turanga L Interstellar H00kers 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:21:17 - [439] - Quote > Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Didn't read whole topic. But what about to change DScan more like combat probes: it shows names and only 'ship' / 'drone' / ... whatever for objects that not in grid and exact type only for ships in grid with your ship. Hardcore enought but not so overkill like complete immune to DScan. It's too much i would say...
Discomanco We pooped on your lawn Resonance. 72	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:22:11 - [440] - Quote Levina Windstar wrote: Discomanco wrote: Levina Windstar wrote: Discomanco wrote: 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. -"Wormholes are unlivable." What? Wormholes have all kinds of cloaky things in them all the time. Between the cloaky T3s, the Covops, the Recons and the Stratios its pretty dumb to just wander around without being cloaky. A bomber can target and point you instantly after decloak. A Huginn will have to land on grid decloaked and burn over to you uncloaked. (You're an idiot if you sit within point range of the warp in.) Sure the Huginn is tankier than a single bomber, but its not outright superior as a tackler. This is amazingly dumb. There are so many things that already don't show up in WH directional scan that I just don't get why combat recons are some kind of serious problem. Whats the difference between a cloaked Falcon and an uncloaked Rook? Does it really come down to those few seconds of targeting delay after decloak? How about the upside that you can at least find out about them with probes? -"Dscan tools are broken!" No they aren't. The cloaky falcon also didn't show up on the Dscan of the enemy fleet. -"10 arty Huginn..." Sure the hidden arty Huginn got a slight buff. But 9 arty Rapiers and an instalock bomber can currently create the same effect. You don't see them on scan. They can point you instantly. They blap anemically for the number of ships involved. Somehow I don't regularly worry about cloaky arty Rapier fleets right now. Pretty much well said. I have never seen any concern about wormhole due to the huge amount of cloaked danger there's already out there, so people just whine to whine right now. I can understand the concern for FW though, but I guess you just have to prepare for the worst. It's nice to see so many comments regarding WH coming from ppl who actually doesn't live there and have no clue of what they are talking about . Anyway, it's your opinion so it's fine, and mine is I think a ship that is immune to D-Scane is too OP in WH. Hell, I'll be the first one to use it but I still think this is too OP and need at least some balance and/or huge drawback. I have lived in WHs, granted it was not for long but I lived there. Everything I saw coming in to kill me was cloaky. Everything. What would the Combat Recons change? Those I can actually see landing on grid and have a chance to get out before I get tackled. They are cruiser type ship with insanely fast warp speed. Believe me when I'm telling you that when you see it comig on grid, you wont' have time to warp away unless your in a frig. Then I suppose we shouldn't sit within 30km from the warp in spot? While Cynabals (and a few others) are fast as hell, sure they can seen on DScan. Combat Recons are not fast, and you should have proper tile to warp out, unless you're in a battleship (you wouldn't have time to run from a cloaky anyways). I still see nothing changed in terms of wormholes

Zomgnomnom Royal Black Watch Highlanders DARKNESS. 49	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:23:22 - [441] - Quote Ripard Teg wrote: That enormous, world-shattering THUMP you just heard was the ball being dropped big-time on the Pilgrim rebalance. Why take away the one thing it was actually good at to give it something that it desperately doesn't need? Ashs and neut Legions already vastly, wildly overshadow Pilgrims in small-gang armor fleets. This range change isn't going to do a thing about that... while taking away its one solid weapon when used in ultra-small gang and solo ratter ganking. What good is a range bonus gonna do for a cloaky ship? I'm incredibly sad the Rook didn't get a RLML bonus to go with its HML/HAM bonus. This sounds OP but it really isn't: a RLML Rook isn't even close to a good option right now, giving only 130 DPS (and long reload time) versus 190 (and much better alpha) for the HML version. So add this bonus, please. That would make it a viable take-along on small-gang RLML Caracal/Cerb fleets. I'm also incredibly sad and confused that the Huginn/Rapier weapon bonuses have been flip-flopped. TP-bonused missiles were the only thing that made the Huginn interesting. This profile should have been improved, not eliminated. What was the justification for doing this, if you don't mind my asking? I'm torn on the invisible-to-dscan thing. It feels OP, particularly in w-space. It also makes me nervous because you guys don't have a good strategy around "What intelligence tools should there be in EVE?" So you probably shouldn't be screwing around with the intel tools we do have until you know what the strategy is going to be. So much all of these points, especially on the Pilgrim..... Complete swing and miss.
Oddsodz The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare. 116	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:24:22 - [442] - Quote Just where the hell are my drones on my Gallente ships? 4 lites drones is silly. Always has been. It's a Gallente ship. Give it a full flight for the love of cake.
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1653	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:24:43 - [443] - Quote D-scan immunity is an awesome idea! Please give it to my Stratios too. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Tarek Raimo Eleutherian Guard Villore Accords 10	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:29:44 - [444] - 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.
Arrendis GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 228	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:30:42 - [445] - Quote RTSAvalanche wrote: Faction Warefare has been completely broken since Incarna, now you are telling me that recons with web, neut, damp & ECM bonuses will be able to hide in plain site in FW plexes and there is no conventional way to find them. Even if combats work to find them, we would have to do that for every plex... Scanner probes != Your Directional Scanner. Combat Scanner Probes are very much a 'conventional' way to find bad guys - especially ones that can't warp cloaked, and get hit with the full cloak delay if they're trying to ambush you cloaked. Meaning they won't be cloaked. Gotta say, I really like the idea.
Kyle Yanowski Aideron Robotics 150	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:32:06 - [446] - Quote Tarek Raimo wrote: 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. Very feasible. Host of the High Drag Eve Online Podcast ( http://highdrag.wordpress.com). Director of Aideron Robotics.
Zenmaster Aihaken Tsero Corporations Absolute Darkness 2	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:32:47 - [447] - Quote Zenmaster Aihaken wrote: Mr Floydy wrote: Go play hello kitty online. Oh tell me more! Is it any good? You seem to know a lot about this game. ^^ Anyhow, your cloaky argument is rather moot. Firstly cloakies show up on d-scan eventually, and there are many tell-tale signs for them. Combat Recons OTOH have no signs except in the unlikely event that you happen to for some reason d-scan for no reason at all, because you - I dunno - are a mind reader or something, possibly because you already lost a few expencive ships. Most importantly, none of the cloakies are particularly OP. I don't really care what game it is. If CCP brings something so broken into the game, then I'm not gonna pay them anymore. Simple as that.
Shaleb Heworo Viziam Amarr Empire 36	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:33:29 - [448] - Quote Great changes except for the d-scan invisibility of combat recon. D-scan is th one life saving compass of solo pvpers which are fundamentally arsed by OGB already. If you put D-scan invisible, instalocking 40km neuting, pointing, double webbing recons ON TOP of that you will just make pvp even harder for the great many players who don't like to run around in herds all the time. C'mon CCP, leave us at least d-Scan!
Budrick3 POS Party Try Rerolling 67	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:37:45 - [449] - Quote I think lack of D scan is a poor idea. Though I live in a wormhole, I fear for people in FW attempting to run plexes just to be completely outclassed when they warp in their thorax on a pilgram. Just encourages more blobbing for protection and discourages the solo guy.
Tex Raynor Guardians of Asceticism 3	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:41:18 - [450] - Quote Wormhole player here - Awesome changes, especially the d-scan immunity. Remember folks, what they can use against you you can also use against them. As far as FW goes, good luck locking a frigate with 2-3 warp core stabs anyway using a combat recon. Combat probes should still be able to detect combat recons as far as I understand it, so there is at least that. Another thing people can do is fit up some sort of defensive mods on their PVE boats such as various drone damage types, neuts, mjds, ecm, omni tank... a warp disruptor is not the only difference between PVE and PVP ships!

Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 208	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:42:26 - [451] - Quote Cant wait till these changes hit. Wish we didnt show up in local with recons, covert ops and black ops too.
l0rd carlos Friends Of Harassment The Camel Empire 1117	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:47:30 - [452] - Quote Arrendis wrote: RTSAvalanche wrote: Faction Warefare has been completely broken since Incarna, now you are telling me that recons with web, neut, damp & ECM bonuses will be able to hide in plain site in FW plexes and there is no conventional way to find them. Even if combats work to find them, we would have to do that for every plex... Scanner probes != Your Directional Scanner. Combat Scanner Probes are very much a 'conventional' way to find bad guys - especially ones that can't warp cloaked, and get hit with the full cloak delay if they're trying to ambush you cloaked. Meaning they won't be cloaked. Gotta say, I really like the idea. For solo roaming, how do you expect people to fit an expaned probe launcher on their ships? German blog about smallscale lowsec pvp: http://friendsofharassment.wordpress.com
Sir Livingston Club Deadspace 305	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:48:01 - [453] - Quote WHAT!? The power of being undetectable on d-scan is absurd. EVE Online videos to inform and inspire http://www.youtube.com/JonnyPew
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1262	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:49:46 - [454] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: Querns wrote: It's also pretty amusing that people still decry ECM as overpowered, when it's been consistently shat upon over the last four years. To put it into finer perspective GÇö-áGoonswarm Federation, an organization for whom the use of cheap, T1 disruption cruisers is signature, abandoned ECM entirely in favor of sensor dampening and tracking disruption. This ought to tell you how unreliable jamming is in the current meta. That's because ECM in a small gang/solo environment is extremely over powered, but is insignificant in large scale combat. Damps are the reverse. Do you understand now? No, because damps are better in the small scale combat scenario too, because they are guaranteed to work. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Kirasten No Vacancies 125	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:49:58 - [455] - Quote First concern would be the ability for the Huginn to project damage out to ranges that meet it's web range without any projectile optimal or falloff range bonus. This may be a concern for other ships as well, but the Huginn is the one I personally would fly.
Mr Floydy Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 255	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:50:05 - [456] - Quote 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?
Jennifer Maxwell Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate 211	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:51:14 - [457] - Quote Sir Livingston wrote: WHAT!? The power of being undetectable on d-scan is absurdLY AWESOME!!! :D Fixed your post, hope you don't mind :)
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 515	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:51:50 - [458] - Quote Things to consider to making things equal, the electronic warfare stuff is somewhat out of whack at the moment. We currently have, - turret disruption - target painting - stasis webbifiers - capacitor neutralizers and draining for self - and sometimes ECM All of them but the last do not fail. People complaining about being jammed but do not consider that being dampened for sure is as if not even more powerful. Turning your long range guns to never hitting short range ones, slowing down your boat from 60km away or turning it of completely is even more screwd up then not targetting a boat is. Your options on your offline neuted boat are even worse then flying out of jamming optimal range is. Thing is you are pretty much able to to anything you want but lock that jamming boat. In the recent years jamming was nerfed, nerfed and even more nerfed. Now they is no tech 2 boat that can get jammed permanently or at all. The only thing a Falcon can jam are tech one frigates and a few tech one cruisers. Everything else is a maybe and that maybe is your soon to be lossmail. In order to make ECM as good as the rest of the electronic warfare the Falcon and the Rook should have at least a +60% if not +90% ECM strength bonus per level. And while we are doing the unexpected, can we get rid of missile tracking too? signature
Kynric Sky Fighters 223	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:53:53 - [459] - Quote I like the rapier as a missle boat. I wound like the huggin to have that as a realistic option as well. Over recent years a significant population of matari t1 missle boats have emerged (breacher, talwar, bellicose, scythe fleet, cyclone, typhoon and typhoon fleet), taking this formerly secondary weapon and utilizing as the primary weapon. Yet sadly this style has not been supported in the t2 line with the obvious exceptions of the hound, claymore and huggin. Which makes it more puzzling that the huggin is leaving this style as missles are underrepresented in the t2 lineup.. The combination of paint and webs has a nice synergy with missles, it seems odd that the naval architects would go out of their way to feature a weapon system which is not native to the bellicose hull.
l0rd carlos Friends Of Harassment The Camel Empire 1117	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:54:49 - [460] - Quote elitatwo wrote: And while we are doing the unexpected, can we get rid of missile tracking too? What missile tracking? German blog about smallscale lowsec pvp: http://friendsofharassment.wordpress.com

Miner Hottie Valar Morghulis. Goonswarm Federation 60	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:55:01 - [461] - Quote TuCZnak wrote: Is there still that monument in Jita? Because if the dscan thing goes live, we'll need something to shoot at. Unfortunately, it no longer appears on d-scan. It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
GREYBOBSASS Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 22	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:58:30 - [462] - Quote Asayanami Dei wrote: Get ready to feel the wrath of my Curse (again)! lack of imagination by the CSM is disturbing
Tarek Raimo Eleutherian Guard Villore Accords 11	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:58:57 - [463] - 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.
Daevaron Raianor Valar Morghulis. Goonswarm Federation 2	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:59:59 - [464] - Quote Please introduce a rig that grants D-scan immunity (for recon only) that gimps locking speed/cpu&pg. As a hull bonus it only adds to the 'misery' of being a small group/solo player due to the limited counterplay, while for blobs its neigh pointless.
Mr Floydy Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 255	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:02:21 - [465] - Quote When you scale up to massive numbers I don't think that brief period of warp in not knowing what you are going to fight is even slightly relevant to how the fight will go. If you're fighting in fleets of that size and haven't got scouts to see enemies coming you deserve anything you get!
Liz Aun Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 3	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:02:29 - [466] - Quote 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.
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 208	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:03:34 - [467] - Quote Daevaron Raianor wrote: Please introduce a rig that grants D-scan immunity (for recon only) that gimps locking speed/cpu&pg. As a hull bonus it only adds to the 'misery' of being a small group/solo player due to the limited counterplay, while for blobs its neigh pointless. Nah, you'll see them when they land on grid.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 922	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:05:31 - [468] - 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.
Budrick3 POS Party Try Rerolling 69	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:07:16 - [469] - Quote Tex Raynor wrote: Wormhole player here - Awesome changes, especially the d-scan immunity. Remember folks, what they can use against you you can also use against them. As far as FW goes, good luck locking a frigate with 2-3 warp core stabs anyway using a combat recon. Combat probes should still be able to detect combat recons as far as I understand it, so there is at least that. Another thing people can do is fit up some sort of defensive mods on their PVE boats such as various drone damage types, neuts, mjds, ecm, omni tank... a warp disruptor is not the only difference between PVE and PVP ships! What ? Not everyone lacks balls and only flies a frigate with warp core stabs while pursuing FW. I would like to think that one day FW will transition to more than just desi's, frigates, and mordus ships.
Daevaron Raianor Valar Morghulis. Goonswarm Federation 2	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:09:13 - [470] - Quote Altirius Saldiaro wrote: Daevaron Raianor wrote: Please introduce a rig that grants D-scan immunity (for recon only) that gimps locking speed/cpu&pg. As a hull bonus it only adds to the 'misery' of being a small group/solo player due to the limited counterplay, while for blobs its neigh pointless. Nah, you'll see them when they land on grid. Its more you landing on their grid that's the cause of my concern

Haelur Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 2	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:10:26 - [471] - Quote I have to agree with a lot of people on this. The implications of not being on D-scan are going to be taken way to far. Every other change I feel was warranted, but when Faction warefare pilots can sit in a plex in combat recons and not get scanned or mission/DED runners cannot even run their sites without having an alt to probe scan every time someone comes in local and be safe is a little ridiculous. Stick with the tank and capacitor buffs.
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 208	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:11:30 - [472] - Quote Daevaron Raianor wrote: Altirius Saldiaro wrote: Daevaron Raianor wrote: Please introduce a rig that grants D-scan immunity (for recon only) that gimps locking speed/cpu&pg. As a hull bonus it only adds to the 'misery' of being a small group/solo player due to the limited counterplay, while for blobs its neigh pointless. Nah, you'll see them when they land on grid. Its more you landing on their grid that's the cause of my concern They will be the Spiders of EVE. I cant wait.
Venix An Eye For An Eye AN EYE F0R AN EYE 3	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:15:34 - [473] - Quote Quote: Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners no
AshenShugar01 Convicts and Savages Shadow Cartel 13	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:16:14 - [474] - Quote Not being able to rely on D-Scan = EVE Broken. This is an act of complete stupidity and needs to be re-thought out. EVE players need tools they can rely on to interact with the environment and the community. Taking such a basic fundamental mechanic and making its reliability questionable is a big step in the wrong direction. Providing one ship class with this kind of immunity makes them completely OP straight away. In fact its game breaking with certain mechanics; if CCP progresses with this lunacy it puts another significant nail in the coffin of small gang/small scale PVP. Remember when the falcon was OP?? Well the rook will be the new problem.... in fact every combat recon will be a problem. This is such a bad idea, my respect for the rebalance team for even considering this stupidity has dropped a great deal. You were doing so well too........
Kmelx Matari Exodus 72	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:16:37 - [475] - Quote D-Scan immunity is just a terrible idea, at least with the cov ops recons there is a chance that you can leave before they can ruin the fight after they decloak, here, they can just sit on grid, still surprise you unless you alt scout with combats every single fight your going to take, but without any of the drawbacks of the cloak's detrimental effect upon locking speed. The bonus is far too powerful, without any compensating detrimental effect. It will have a seriously deleterious effect on FW and lowsec small gang PVP. It is not a balanced change.
Tex Raynor Guardians of Asceticism 3	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:18:22 - [476] - Quote Budrick3 wrote: Tex Raynor wrote: Wormhole player here - Awesome changes, especially the d-scan immunity. Remember folks, what they can use against you you can also use against them. As far as FW goes, good luck locking a frigate with 2-3 warp core stabs anyway using a combat recon. Combat probes should still be able to detect combat recons as far as I understand it, so there is at least that. Another thing people can do is fit up some sort of defensive mods on their PVE boats such as various drone damage types, neuts, mjds, ecm, omni tank... a warp disruptor is not the only difference between PVE and PVP ships! What ? Not everyone lacks balls and only flies a frigate with warp core stabs while pursuing FW. I would like to think that one day FW will transition to more than just desi's, frigates, and mordus ships. You are correct, but those that don't fit stabs should not really worry about 100% chance of a fight inside the plex.
Drew Li Space Exploitation Inc The Bastion 54	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:21:00 - [477] - Quote Combat Recons +30/15% to ewar optimal/falloff +100% damage small guns -50% cycle time small guns This makes ewar from recons effective against sniper platforms(tengus, sniper battleships, sentry drones, etc). It also makes them far more useful against smaller ship classes. Nobody is going to use a recon as a primary damage platform. This could allow them to be used as screening platforms for a fleet. Also consider adding high slot ewar modules restricted to certain ship classes(covert cynos for example). As it stands armor platforms are the best at ewar/tackle because all their mids are available without sacrificing tank. Consider a Curse with 5 small neut/nos, 5 tracking disruptors, prop mod, and nearly 200 dps in drones. You could also move all ewar to high slots and remove the mid slot fitting requirement. This would of course mean re-balancing every combat ship in the game without a lot of care. Curse and Pilgrim +20% neut/nos range per level (+100% range at Recon 5) -10% Neut/Nos cycle time per level (Double strength at Recons 5) -85% powergrid for Neut/NOS (Allow fitting larger neut/nos for range) This would give the amarr recons a lot of interesting fitting options for neuts. Falcon and Rook -50% ECM cycle time +50% ewar optimal/falloff This would make ECM more reliable and/or allow them to fit non-bonused ewar with significantly increased range. Target painting effectively from 150km for example. Something similar could be done with the scorpion as well.
Jennifer Maxwell Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate 211	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:24:17 - [478] - Quote People are freaking out about this non-D-scan feature. One set of ships. Four ships in all. That's it. You guys act like now, everywhere you turn, Recons are gonna be popping out of space like daisies. Why don't we just make cov ops cloaks detectable by Dscan but not visually? Because that's totally too much too. I mean, I warp into a medium and I don't know how many cloaky ships could be in there!!! That'll totally kill my solo ability. Why would I take any fight when they could be anywhere? Why wouldn't everybody have a cloaky alt sitting with all four races to protect their Thorax in a medium plex? As someone who actually flies solo combat recon, I love this. If this gets the axe because a lot of whiny "soloers" don't like the risk of taking a fight, then I'll be really really disappointed in the pansy ass attitude of some of the "pro pvpers" in this game. Look. Outside of FW, you can already warp cloaky ships to combat sites or planets or whatever and drop on people via that. Inside FW, this change only really effects medium plexes and, in a much more limited way, larges (since you can warp at range to a large and scout it first). This isn't going to be a game breaker, you guys are just being babies about it.
Moebbius Aideron Robotics 4	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:27:03 - [479] - Quote I think the undetectable by directional scanners is way to overpowered.
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie The Conference Elite CODE. 1248	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:28:42 - [480] - Quote So, who wants to buy me a curse? New player resources: Uni Wiki - General Info Eve Altruist - PvP Belligerent Undesirables - High Sec Pvp

Tex Raynor Guardians of Asceticism 4	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:30:25 - [481] - Quote Jennifer Maxwell wrote: People are freaking out about this non-D-scan feature. One set of ships. Four ships in all. That's it. You guys act like now, everywhere you turn, Recons are gonna be popping out of space like daisies. Why don't we just make cov ops cloaks detectable by Dscan but not visually? Because that's totally too much too. I mean, I warp into a medium and I don't know how many cloaky ships could be in there!!! That'll totally kill my solo ability. Why would I take any fight when they could be anywhere? Why wouldn't everybody have a cloaky alt sitting with all four races to protect their Thorax in a medium plex? As someone who actually flies solo combat recon, I love this. If this gets the axe because a lot of whiny "soloers" don't like the risk of taking a fight, then I'll be really really disappointed in the pansy ass attitude of some of the "pro pvpers" in this game. Look. Outside of FW, you can already warp cloaky ships to combat sites or planets or whatever and drop on people via that. Inside FW, this change only really effects medium plexes and, in a much more limited way, larges (since you can warp at range to a large and scout it first). This isn't going to be a game breaker, you guys are just being babies about it. In fact, like you said, immunity to d-scan as proposed just gives combat recons covert ops cloaks... you trade that short moment where covert cloakers appear on scan as they enter system before they cloak versus actually being combat probable unless fitting a regular cloak.
Suitonia Corp 54 Curatores Veritatis Alliance 387	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:30:27 - [482] - Quote Also worth pointing out that this invalidates many guerrilla warfare techniques that solo and smaller entitys use to engage larger groups. One technique is warping to a different celestial in a system and engaging there, hoping the enemy forces are split up, and you can guage by the directional scanner what is following you and their arrival time roughly, with these new combat recons that is thrown out of the window entirely, even if a cloaked recon follows you they have to suffer from 5 second decloak timer+lock time, and the fact that they tend to be more vulnerable and bring less DPS than the combat varients, which gives you more counterplay, and time to try and disengage or kill your target before it can influence the fight, I really dislike taking away this ability. Complex/Site/Mission runners will now need a mandatory alt watching the entrance of their plex, if you were vigilant with directional scanner you could detect covert ops invaders and the cloaking delay gives you time to try and escape or fight. FW will probably be hit hardest by this, you see a t1 cruiser in a medium plex on d-scan, great, you go in with your cruiser, then find a curse and 2 rooks on grid. Likewise, you could be in a t1 Cruiser, see another t1 cruiser come in so decide to stay and fight. then 2 rooks come in and it's gg and you couldn't possibly prevent it without having an alt watching the entrance. A combat recon could also capture plexes without anyone ever knowing about it unless there is someone watching the inside constantly, which invalidates a lot of FW sieging and defensive plexing. I only see this ability being used to gank people who can't possibly scout these ganks, unless they have meta knowledge, which is a lot like hotdrops (Which is one of the reasons why you nerfed long distance travel and jump bridge ranges to curtail this type of gameplay) This ability is not useful to solo/small gang players who roam to engage other players in nullsec, and possibly more organised lowsec, since they'll quickly be reported in intel and as soon as a combat recon is spotted they know you're in one when they see your character in local and just leave whatever they're doing assuming you're there. this ability is not useful to large fleets who are scouted anyway, and are large enough that they can't really hide their shiptypes, and would probably prefer their recon pilots had covert cloak + cynosural field bonus for escalation potential. I feel like this ability only punishes solo/small gang players Contributer to Eve is Easy:-á https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos Check out my PvP Rifter guide for new players; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YReUNRTGcXo
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 517	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:32:00 - [483] - Quote Kmelx wrote: D-Scan immunity is just a terrible idea, at least with the cov ops recons there is a chance that you can leave before they can ruin the fight after they decloak, here, they can just sit on grid, still surprise you unless you alt scout with combats every single fight your going to take, but without any of the drawbacks of the cloak's detrimental effect upon locking speed. The bonus is far too powerful, without any compensating detrimental effect. It will have a seriously deleterious effect on FW and lowsec small gang PVP. It is not a balanced change. It will not be the end of EVE - errm the world. The Rook, Pilgrim, Arazu stil need to gate-travel and will be seen there. They have no cloaky bonus. People in cloaky boat will see and report their presents. And remember they don't have the OMG-FTW-BBQ-SOLO-PWN-mobile capability that those tech 3 abominations ak+á proteus, tengu, legion and loki have. signature
Dracvlad Taishi Combine Second-Dawn 524	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:33:41 - [484] - Quote I was intending to spend more time in Stain, however once that D-scan change kicks in I don't think I will bother.for me the Lachesis becomes a game breaker as a solo operator, its not a whine on my part, but there was little reason for me to go back to NPC 0.0 as it is, but that ship will just be too OTT. I operate in systems with other people in them, cloaky ships are of course one issue, but often the time delay for getting a lock is the thing that gets me out, an interceptor I can blap, but the Lachesis does not need a close warp in and as soon as it arrives it starts locking. I want a chance to get out, I am not interested in certain death, sorry but that is a game breaker for me and the pity is that the changes you were making had enticed me back. What is your reasoning? Is it to aid the people who cannot deal with local, give them an instant I win ship against people who are able to operate because they are concentrating and using strategies that make them difficult to catch, like being away from the warp in in belts. Belt ratting is dead mostly after the nerf to re-processing, but for me that kills it for me, all someone has to do is jump in a Lachesis and I am toast. I play Eve to be hard to kill and I have fun in the game by operating in crap space and giving people the run around and pick them off if I can, this breaks the game for me, so I can't see it working for me, so will be de-subbing i that is applied, I am sorry and I have to say again its a pity as all the recent changes had brought me back. Ella's Snack bar
Bronson Hughes The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration 937	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:37:35 - [485] - Quote AshenShugar01 wrote: Not being able to rely on D-Scan = EVE Broken. So, EvE has been broken for as long as we've had cloaking devices? Good to know. AshenShugar01 wrote: EVE players need tools they can rely on to interact with the environment and the community. Taking such a basic fundamental mechanic and making its reliability questionable is a big step in the wrong direction. This change does not decrease the reliability of D-Scan, it simply removes it's utility against four hulls. Four. Given that there were already several times over that number that could be effectively immune to D-Scan with their CovOps cloak, I fail to see how this is such a huge deal. AshenShugar01 wrote: Providing one ship class with this kind of immunity makes them completely OP straight away. In fact its game breaking with certain mechanics; if CCP progresses with this lunacy it puts another significant nail in the coffin of small gang/small scale PVP. How exactly? D-Scan immunity doesn't magically grant Combat Recons the ability to land on grid with you at zero. They still have to find you, which means either using scan probes, or finding you on D-Scan and warping to a nearby celestial. With the former, you still get a warning on D-Scan (scan probes are still visible) and with the latter, unless you are literally sitting stationary at zero at the warp-in to wherever you are, you can just warp off because they will land uncloaked. (Lachesis may be a slightly different story...but we'll see.) So the easy solution is to add scan probes to your D-Scan settings (they should be there already) and to not fly like an idiot and sit where people can warp to you at zero. If you're worried about them laying in wait for you...well that's nothing new. Force Recons, bombers, CovOps, BlOps, etc. could already do that. And how exactly will this hurt small gangs? If anything, I see this boosting small gang warfare because two of the best force multipliers in the game (Force Recons and Combat Recons) will be getting buffed significantly. CCP Falcon's thoughts on suicide ganking. Reading Comprehension: so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I want to create content, not become content.
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 209	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:37:45 - [486] - Quote elitatwo wrote: Kmelx wrote: D-Scan immunity is just a terrible idea, at least with the cov ops recons there is a chance that you can leave before they can ruin the fight after they decloak, here, they can just sit on grid, still surprise you unless you alt scout with combats every single fight your going to take, but without any of the drawbacks of the cloak's detrimental effect upon locking speed. The bonus is far too powerful, without any compensating detrimental effect. It will have a seriously deleterious effect on FW and lowsec small gang PVP. It is not a balanced change. It will not be the end of EVE - errm the world. The Rook, Pilgrim, Arazu stil need to gate-travel and will be seen there. They have no cloaky bonus. People in cloaky boat will see and report their presents. And remember they don't have the OMG-FTW-BBQ-SOLO-PWN-mobile capability that those tech 3 abominations ak+á proteus, tengu, legion and loki have. Lol, pilgrim and arazu have cloaking bonuses. Lachesis and curse are what you mean. You shouldn't even be commenting on recons if you don't even know the difference between them.
Quesa Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 45	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:41:28 - [487] - Quote Honestly, these changes mean nothing without details on EWar/EWar Mod changes being discussed at the same time and I didn't see any discussion about those things.
Moac Tor Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation 15	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:43:16 - [488] - Quote Immunity to Dscan seems overkill to be honest, I'd still use the ships as you linked them without that feature. I am not sure how thorough CCPs analysis of the implications that this would have have been, but my instant reaction to reading the immunity to dscan is that it will probably be scrapped before the changes go live. That being said, as a recon user myself, I'm intrigued as to the amount of possibilities that this would throw open if it really does go ahead. And it would certainly set recons apart from T3s that is for sure. I'm not putting much faith though on the possibility that this will actually make it to tranquillity, will have to see it to believe it.
ISD Ezwal ISD Community Communications Liaisons 2973	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:43:43 - [489] - Quote I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay. I also removed some replies to edited out parts of the post(s) they replied to. Please people, keep it on topic and above all civil! The Rules: 4. Personal attacks are prohibited. Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated. 5. Trolling is prohibited. Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote. 13. Spamming is prohibited. Spam is defined as the repetitive posting of the same topic or nonsensical post that has no substance and is often designed to annoy other forum users. This can include the words GÇ£firstGÇ¥, GÇ£go back to (insert other game name)GÇ¥ and other such posts that contribute no value to forum discussion. Spamming also includes the posting of ASCII art within a forum post. ISD Ezwal Vice Admiral Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department
Mei Khlolov The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 4	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:44:12 - [490] - Quote Maybe a RLML bonus for the rook? Looking good overall

Jennifer Maxwell Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate 212	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:45:02 - [491] - Quote Suitonia wrote: Also worth pointing out that this invalidates many guerrilla warfare techniques that solo and smaller entitys use to engage larger groups. One technique is warping to a different celestial in a system and engaging there, hoping the enemy forces are split up, and you can guage by the directional scanner what is following you and their arrival time roughly, with these new combat recons that is thrown out of the window entirely, even if a cloaked recon follows you they have to suffer from 5 second decloak timer+lock time, and the fact that they tend to be more vulnerable and bring less DPS than the combat varients, which gives you more counterplay, and time to try and disengage or kill your target before it can influence the fight, I really dislike taking away this ability. Complex/Site/Mission runners will now need a mandatory alt watching the entrance of their plex, if you were vigilant with directional scanner you could detect covert ops invaders and the cloaking delay gives you time to try and escape or fight. FW will probably be hit hardest by this, you see a t1 cruiser in a medium plex on d-scan, great, you go in with your cruiser, then find a curse and 2 rooks on grid. Likewise, you could be in a t1 Cruiser, see another t1 cruiser come in so decide to stay and fight. then 2 rooks come in and it's gg and you couldn't possibly prevent it without having an alt watching the entrance. A combat recon could also capture plexes without anyone ever knowing about it unless there is someone watching the inside constantly, which invalidates a lot of FW sieging and defensive plexing. I only see this ability being used to gank people who can't possibly scout these ganks, unless they have meta knowledge, which is a lot like hotdrops (Which is one of the reasons why you nerfed long distance travel and jump bridge ranges to curtail this type of gameplay) This ability is not useful to solo/small gang players who roam to engage other players in nullsec, and possibly more organised lowsec, since they'll quickly be reported in intel and as soon as a combat recon is spotted they know you're in one when they see your character in local and just leave whatever they're doing assuming you're there. this ability is not useful to large fleets who are scouted anyway, and are large enough that they can't really hide their shiptypes, and would probably prefer their recon pilots had covert cloak + cynosural field bonus for escalation potential. I feel like this ability only punishes solo/small gang players You realize that bombers can get lock the second they decloak, right? They have no recalibration delay. I've caught stuff like that before. Is that OP? How about if I sig tank it so it takes you 5 seconds to lock while the rest of my allies land? Is that too OP for you? IF you're in a DED site, you're moving around. You're not sitting on the gate, even if you're armor tanked. You'll have time while the recon lands and starts locking you. It's the same as if a Garmur lands; you barely have any warning and it can point you from a hell of a long range. As a small gang player, I disagree with you completely.
Pretty Pony Princess Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 6	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:46:33 - [492] - Quote The changes sound interesting and seem to make Combat Recons a viable choice compared to Force Recons. CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners As others have already pointed out this seems a bit OP in some situations. It provides something close to a covert cloak without the drawbacks. Maybe it could be tied to a new Combat Recon specific module that provides this bonus when active at the cost of not being able to lock anything and requiring a sensor recalibration after deactivation.
MachineOfLovingGrace Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 1	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:49:44 - [493] - Quote Eve already has a lot of situations where you are screwed without doing anything stupid. I don't think it needs more (filthy solo casual here, for context). If this goes live, I can no longer... ... check if gates/stations are clear (can you fit smartbombs on these things - surely enough for pods? okay, I didn't want those implants anyway...) ... check if plexes are empty (or have the content (heh) that I expect) ... gtfo if anything too big closes in on me etc. Fitting combat probes to everything is just no solution. Being forced to use 2 Accounts to play the game is just really stupid. It's bad enough as it is. And yes, maybe this turns out to be a total paper tiger and nothing really changes, but it sounds eve would be getting a LOT more tedious and volatile and random for the small guy, and shift the advantage even more to bigger, richer groups. Yeah, QQ, I'll mind the door on the way out, but this is my perspective. If you positively want to make something like this happen... couple the detection range to the scanning angle, maybe? 360-¦ only detects them at, say, 100K Kilometers, but 5-¦ at full (half? quarter?) range. Everything inbetween scales linearly or logarithmically or so. This way, you can use them to sneak up on people from an odd angle (which still is crazy powerful, but requires a bit more work - people CAN scan in direction of gates), but the "lol, im already here, invisible!!1" - trap is gone.
Richard Justice THE BOARD OF EDUCATION 1	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:50:03 - [494] - Quote I got more than I wanted with these changes, thank you. Now I can stop nagging.
Zoneras eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred 18	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:50:21 - [495] - Quote I LOVE RECONS... that said... even I think being completely immune to d-scan is a bit overpowered for the combat recons, especially in wormholes, and will abuse this role bonus to the fullest extent. Perhaps something odd like a reduction to the range they will appear on d-scan, like to 2 or 4 AU?
Ersahi Kir Froosh INC. SpaceMonkey's Alliance 401	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:52:21 - [496] - Quote I would like to offer an alternative suggestion for the combat recon role bonus: Flex slots: Make it so that two of the slots in combat recons can be used for either low or mid power modules. That allows you to include all the racial ewar in fleets, instead of trying to wedge them in with Tech 3 ships. That means armor fit rooks/hugins could exist and shield fit curse/arazu can fly in fleets. That seems like a much more balanced way to fit these into fleets than trying to make another "something immune" blanket.
Shaleb Heworo Viziam Amarr Empire 37	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:52:41 - [497] - Quote What about cargo space? When you want recons to actually enhance the possibilities of mobile solo/small gang players recons need A LOT bigger trunks. Seriously CCP, this is very important. Since they somehow fit the same niche give them cargo space similar to the Stratios. And D-scan imunity really needs to go. Solo/small gang plexers will just not enter medium plexes anymore when somebody is in local. This is really bad!
Bentakhar Minmatar Death Squad 21	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:53:21 - [498] - Quote Very interesting news! Is the lachesis hull getting a redesign aswell?
Discomanco We pooped on your lawn Resonance. 72	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:53:29 - [499] - Quote Drew Li wrote: Combat Recons Curse and Pilgrim +20% neut/nos range per level (+100% range at Recon 5) -10% Neut/Nos cycle time per level (Double strength at Recons 5) -85% powergrid for Neut/NOS (Allow fitting larger neut/nos for range) This would give the amarr recons a lot of interesting fitting options for neuts. I like the thought, but they really need something to save the capacitor then, otherwise they'll go out of cap in absolutely no time. With Neuts time being cut in half, it's likely that NOS wont do much good, or not enough to save the capacitor from being dry in 30 seconds
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE 799	Posted - 2014.12.18 21:54:43 - [500] - Quote with the warp changes I almost feel like invisible on d-scan is more powerful than a cov-ops cloak. I think I'd rather spend a few seconds in warp than a few seconds of just sitting there waiting for the cloak deactivation to go away. Plus with bookmarks and/or gang member warp ins you can land in a wide array of places rather than be sat in one place cloaked. sure it doesn't really matter vs scan probes, but well, that involves having a prober around. interesting change to say the least I'll join the chorus asking CCP, don't take my fancy names away from me! In the name of the Limos, the Malkuth, and the Arbalest, so help me pod - Mara Rinn

Silvetica Dian Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 1104	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:00:46 - [501] - Quote Iain Cariaba wrote: To everyone saying, 'how is dscan immunity different than covops cloak,' I will simply remind them that, if you're actively paying attention to dscan, there is always a brief period of time between losing jump cloak and activating cloak module. During this time, you are seen on dscan. With dscan immunity, you lose even this brief period of visibility. If you're in an anomaly, trying to make isk to buy PvP ships, you get zero warning before the recon ship lands on grid. Even the most rabid dscan spammer won't see this coming. don't sit on the warp in........ hunting someone that sits on the warp in then use combat recon. hunting someone that moves off the warp in use a force recon. choices choices. Money at its root is a form of rationing. When the richest 85 people have as much wealth as the poorest 3.5 billion (50% of humanity) it is clear where the source of poverty is. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/20/trickle-down-economics-broken-promise-richest-85
Saraki Ishikela Deep Space Adventure Time 80	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:01:44 - [502] - Quote You've essentially made the ultimate solo hunter. Not being detectable on D Scan? Sure it sounds awesome from the side of the hunter but creating a mechanic in which the player has no defense to or can't protect himself from isn't any fun for the victim. You're creating a scenario in which players will have no recourse to protect themselves no matter how skilled, or what fit. The advantage is purely in the hunters had being invisible on both D Scan and cloaked physically they can choose any engagement they want and their victims upon reflecting on their death cannot logically say what they could have done differently to change the outcome of that engagement with the exception of docking up any time anyone comes into system with them. TLDR Game Mechanics should offer counterplay and reward players for smart choices and decision making. This ship stacks the deck in one side. One newbies quest to ExploreEVE: [u]Youtube[/u]: www.youtube.com/exploreeve - [u]Blogspot:[/u] http://exploreeve.blogspot.com [u]Twitter:[/u] www.twitter.com/exploreeve - [u]Facebook[/u]: www.facebook.com/exploreeve
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 209	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:02:16 - [503] - Quote What I really like about this change is it puts the Recon back into the non-cloaky recons. The whole point of reconnaissance is to gather intel without detection.
Shilalasar Dead Sky Inc. 137	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:02:20 - [504] - Quote For fleets a T3 is still way tankier and so better. But the recons are now faster than HACs who are designed for speed, that just sounds wrong. Most of them will actually beat a Muninn 1vs1 with ease. Pilgrims do not get used so little because people kite them outside of neutrange, they are flipping cloakies and engade at 0 anyways. But because there are very little viable soloships that stop shooting you when neuted out since someone turned Eve into Game of Drones. And after this change you will need even longer to neut someone out before you explode. D-scaninvis will hurt alot. FW plexes will be permacamped outside of the gate to farm easy kills, a Lach+Huginn will be easymode. Same goes for any other PvE behind a gate f.e. DEDs. Lach lands on grid and points you, no way to prevent this but to have a scout outside. People talking about them not being able to sneak up have to look at some stats: C1-3 Sleepers do not spawn outside of Lach pointrange and I can-¦t remember a DED where the gates are further than 60 off each other. It is covertcloak light without targetingdelay (same as if you uncloaked while in warp), the second a covertcloaker is visable between jumpcloak and recloaking. Also the ship itself is way scarier than a cloakyrecon. Also it really screws over intel for smallgangs. If you bring a cloakyrecon it can be seen when jumping into system or when taking a fleetwarp. With this change EVERY gang will look like 20% less people without forcemultiplier #1 before landing on grid. They will also be supersafe PvEboats since you cant hunt what you cannot see. I instead support the idea to make the a bit better in PvP (but not better than ships designed to shoot stuff) and give them bonuses to combatprobing.
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 517	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:02:37 - [505] - Quote Altirius Saldiaro wrote: ... You shouldn't even be commenting on recons if you don't even know the difference between them. And you are? signature
Budrick3 POS Party Try Rerolling 69	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:02:47 - [506] - Quote I also have to say that living in wormhole space will be very unpleasant with the absence of Dscan. At least you can spam dscan constantly and hope to see someone before they cloak while running sites. Now, you're just screwed no matter what you do.
DFA200 Hard vs Soft 10	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:03:15 - [507] - Quote Quote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners How is this good in terms of balance? Curse and Falcon are still OP. Neuts and ECM "counter" almost everything. Can it be fixed? Apparently not this time. These changes look more like power creep than actual balancing.
Necharo Rackham The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 47	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:05:51 - [508] - Quote Discomanco wrote: I like the thought, but they really need something to save the capacitor then, otherwise they'll go out of cap in absolutely no time. As a tangent, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with some ships having poor cap. At the moment every ship comes out of its balancing pass capstable.
sten mattson Virtus Crusade Curatores Veritatis Alliance 78	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:06:14 - [509] - Quote since i only fly the clearly superior amarr recons, im going to tell what i think was wrong with them before the rebalance: -bad capacitor -bad speed/agility -bad powergrid on both ships although more pronounced on the curse -curse only has 4 lows -pilgrim has no range bonus now most of those points have been cleared away with the current rbalance proposal, except for the following: -curse still has 4 lows -pilgrim got his range bonus, but lost its amount bonus, making its neuts less effective 4 lows on the curse is not enough to make a semi decent tank out of it, although with the added racial resists, it may lessen somewhat. I would love for the curse to either loose a high or a mid to get a lowslot. pilgrim loosing its amount bonus makes it even more underwhelming, considering that the curse could already outneut a pilgrim with 5 High slots vs 3 usable ones for the pilgrim (1 high slot for the cloak). Just by highslot amount alone, a pilgrim is about as half as effective than a curse. But now with the pilgrim loosing its neut amount bonus, the curse will now be 4 times more effective than a pilgrim!! With these changes it may look like people will be flying the pilgrim for its surprise Tracking disrupting and extra drone dps, but certainly not for its neuting ability! As for the curses Dscan immunity, i just cant see it not get too powerful. either in w-space, where dscan are actually our eyes and ears rather than local chat, or in Militia lowsec inside gated plexes, thinking you'll land on a lone moa in your omen, but land amongst 5 curses instead. Hiding from dscan with no impunity is just plain lazy, and you should need cloaks for that! IMMA FIRING MA LAZAR!!!
Shaleb Heworo Viziam Amarr Empire 38	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:06:30 - [510] - Quote Saraki Ishikela wrote: You've essentially made the ultimate solo hunter. Not being detectable on D Scan? Sure it sounds awesome from the side of the hunter but creating a mechanic in which the player has no defense to or can't protect himself from isn't any fun for the victim. You're creating a scenario in which players will have no recourse to protect themselves no matter how skilled, or what fit. The advantage is purely in the hunters had being invisible on both D Scan and cloaked physically they can choose any engagement they want and their victims upon reflecting on their death cannot logically say what they could have done differently to change the outcome of that engagement with the exception of docking up any time anyone comes into system with them. TLDR Game Mechanics should offer counterplay and reward players for smart choices and decision making. This ship stacks the deck in one side. Exactly! Since docking up really is the only defense you left them a lot of less fights will actually happen. While the other changes are really good d-scan immunity will turn out to be bad for pvp and bad for the game as a whole.

DFA200 Hard vs Soft 10	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:06:31 - [511] - Quote Shilalasar wrote: D-scaninvis will hurt alot. FW plexes will be permacamped outside of the gate to farm easy kills, a Lach+Huginn will be easymode. We need to gamble more. Gates are no longer enough.
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 209	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:08:07 - [512] - Quote I hope they remove local next
MuppetsSlayed Great White North Productions Northern Associates. 18	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:10:23 - [513] - Quote U can see the type of player who is in favour of the Not on DSCan changes. However for the other 95+% of us ... Currently if your in a plex with a gate even an afk cloaky on local cant sneak up on u if you spam directional like a boss. Cause when they activate the gate they show on dscan. This seems to be something that will make afk cloaking even more effective. I fear these changes will make even more apects of eve unuseable. I can see there being a need for solo players running plexes to run a trial account with eyes on plex gates.
DFA200 Hard vs Soft 10	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:10:40 - [514] - Quote Shaleb Heworo wrote: Saraki Ishikela wrote: You've essentially made the ultimate solo hunter. Not being detectable on D Scan? Sure it sounds awesome from the side of the hunter but creating a mechanic in which the player has no defense to or can't protect himself from isn't any fun for the victim. You're creating a scenario in which players will have no recourse to protect themselves no matter how skilled, or what fit. The advantage is purely in the hunters had being invisible on both D Scan and cloaked physically they can choose any engagement they want and their victims upon reflecting on their death cannot logically say what they could have done differently to change the outcome of that engagement with the exception of docking up any time anyone comes into system with them. TLDR Game Mechanics should offer counterplay and reward players for smart choices and decision making. This ship stacks the deck in one side. Exactly! Since docking up really is the only defense you left them a lot of less fights will actually happen. While the other changes are really good d-scan immunity will turn out to be bad for pvp and bad for the game as a whole. Agreed. Making things more one-sided in a game where people are generally risk averse, is not a good idea.
Ashlar Vellum 24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire 130	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:13:28 - [515] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners WTF! I need to sober up for this thread.
Irya Boone Never Surrender. 417	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:14:16 - [516] - Quote Can the arazu have some drone bonuses too please? because you know , gallente drones etc etc CCP it's time to remove Off Grid Boost and Put Them on Killmail too, add Logi on killmails .... Open that damn door !!
Aureus Ahishatsu Deadspace Knights 76	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:14:34 - [517] - Quote Levina Windstar wrote: I like the undetectable feature but I think this will be wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too OP in WH. CCP plz... think about WH too! :/ I completely agree with this. If this change goes through I see major recon gangs roaming wh's now. And why wouldn't they? You can have an entire fleet now with extended webs, scrams, neuts, and boosted jams and be invisible to anyone not on grid with ZERO cloak lock delay. I would be ok with this feature being implemented with the one exception being that combat recons are still visible while decloaked in wh's. Build it into the lore or something that wh's messed with the directional scan jammer signals or something you guys are creative.
Guth'Alak EVE University Ivy League 26	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:19:31 - [518] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Close the gap somewhat between Recons and T3 Cruisers, though this will also be a goal during the T3 Cruiser rebalance Thank Bob! its about time!
Tex Raynor Guardians of Asceticism 6	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:30:31 - [519] - Quote I'm curious though.. what ship(s) are people flying that a combat recon landing on grid means insta-death? Combat recons roaming wormholes? You are more likely to see a fleet of recons rage-rolling their static and thus new sig = stop, scan and assess the situation, like it already is.
Alexis Nightwish 62	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:32:05 - [520] - Quote I'm on the fence with these changes. I feel they might be overshadowing HACs a bit, and I'm definitely opposed to buffing the defense of force recons that much as they can fit cov ops cloaks. Perhaps bring the resistance profiles of the force recons up to what the combat recons are now, and up the combat recons up to HAC-level? Also, special attention needs to be given to the Rook as it must split its mids between tank and ECM, its lows between damage and ECM, and its rigs between ECM and all the other things that compete for rig slots. The result is either go for ECM and fly the Falcon, or go for damage and fly a Cerberus, Drake, (insert ship that does missiles better). Perhaps change the Falcon's bonus to ECM range instead of strength, and/or give a stronger missile/ECM bonus to the Rook? Power Projection: A Brighter Future

Marlona Sky Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 5734	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:33:03 - [521] - Quote BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote: So, who wants to buy me a curse? Afk miners don't watch d-scan anyways. The Paradox
Shaleb Heworo Viziam Amarr Empire 38	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:33:12 - [522] - Quote I really don't understand the stealth aspect with combat(!) recons. These should not hide but actively seek combat. The hiding aspect of reconnassance is covered with force recons! Combat recons should get a probing and/or scan resolution bonus since that just fits the aggressive aspect of reconnaissance. Wouldn't that be a solution? Maybe not the most spectacular one but a solid one!
Zanquis The Northerners Northern Coalition. 1	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:33:43 - [523] - Quote I like the direction they are going in the OP, however I'm not sure if enough thought has be placed on the real role it will play. I like the unique bonus, but how will this play out? I see the ROLE of this ship being an overt heavy ewar boat designed to withstand a small to medium engagement. I see them having a medium to close range focus with cruiser maneuverability, an above average tank, and slightly better damage then a T1 combat focused cruiser. This would place it at less damage then a hac, likely the same tank. The purpose of this ship would be to brawl and deliver the Ewar at ranges close enough to put it at risk. This would make it well placed in faster nano gangs that hit you hard and fast. It would also give the game a ship that is more capable of delivering Ewar in combat and surviving. Picture them as the Vanguard. IN all honesty in many cases the ships themselves are close to what they need to be. What is needed is a meaningful role bonus that will bring them into their own. The role bonus I suggest would help with the problem of having to fit the basics and ewar modules at the same time, especially for the Rook who also shares tank with mids. With these role bonuses the slot layout can be rejigged to allow for a greater ewar focus, with better fitting choices ROLE BONUS: 20% Shield or Armor resistance bonus 50% Bonus to Afterburner Speed
Qual Infinity Engine Sleeping Dragons 61	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:34:05 - [524] - Quote Levina Windstar wrote: I like the undetectable feature but I think this will be wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too OP in WH. CCP plz... think about WH too! :/ Come on! It is brilliant. Dont think about what THEY will do to you. Think about what YOU can do to them. Muahahahahaha! Live in a WH. Love the idea.
Marlona Sky Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 5734	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:36:19 - [525] - Quote I don't think I have ever been killed by just a recon before. Was there some massive boost in firepower I didn't see in the OP? The Paradox
Sable Blitzmann Aperture Harmonics No Holes Barred 152	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:36:54 - [526] - Quote Typo with the curse: Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1650(-187) / 1650 / 1075(+203) I'm showing current value for shields/armor/hp as 1238/1463/872, making the only modification to make sense the hull HP. Can you clarify
Fzhal Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:41:22 - [527] - Quote Okay, I really like the idea of removing Combat Recons from D-Scan, but as explained so far it is too OP. This would make at least one Combat Probe Launcher required for every solo or gang PvP. Combat Probes aren't easy to fit... This change would effectively/eventually cause D-Scan to be removed or replaced by the current probing mechanics. Current safety practices by security to keep in mind for the rest of this post: High - Carebear safety goggles on max polarization Low - D-Scan everything except gates and understand that unknowns in local could be allied and people can hurt PvP viability with cloaks Null - Unknown in local = Warp to safe/POS and maybe get combat ship WH - D-Scan done every few seconds (Why is there no hotkey for this? Because of macros isn't a great reason.) Places D-Scan immunity NOT OP: High Sec for the most part 0.0 - Face it, with Local, Cyno's, alliance/region chat, and all other intracacies/practices that happen in Null... this is a very small issue Places D-Scan immunity IS OP: *Caveats - Most of this can be done with less powerful Cov Ops Cloaking ship . Mission/Ship Balancing - This literally impacts the balance of all game content for those who PvE in unowned territory "No one is just out of D-Scan range or passing through system..." Combat probes or you're stupid Faction Warfare (Moderate) - This is meant to be a PvP gateway for newbies (FW signup should give a popup for optional D-Scan training regardless). Combat recon sits in FW medium+ plex for easy KB-padding/LOL-fest because Combat PL gimps frigates Anomalies/Plexing in non-alliance territory - Anything that doesn't need probing to find (I personally think that all Null/WH sigs should require probing, maybe Low Sec but it would complicate FW. It makes sense in High/low Sec because Concord does it.) Wormhole Corps (Moderate) - See Anomalies/Plexing/Balance above, but delayed local makes it worse. WH residents have benefit of switching ships so don't equip Combat PL. If Anomalies stay same, this requires them to have one Combat PL in system while doing Anomalies Wormhole Daytrippers (Moderate) - See Wormhole Corps above. This would decrease WH daytripping significantly Let's face it, with best practices in mind, FW has flooded low-sec and made it much more dangerous than anywhere else. So this mainly affects solo and small gangs because, for the most part, Combat Recons are much better in situations when DPS/Tank is favored over the cloak of Force Recons. So that means that the OP factor can be quantified as the difference in combat usefulness between Combat and Force Recon ships. Funny, this whole time I thought I would end up concluding that this is way OP, but it really isn't. That being said, I still think that it is a little overpowered in FW and Wormholes only. Suggested changes relating to D-Scan immunity: Warp disables D-Scan immunity (FW plex camping issues remain) A drawback, because solo and small gangs are limited on intel and in those cases D-Scan immunity has 90% of the Cov Ops Cloak's benefits. Something like longer lock time, but that is tricky because the Combat Recons have a good niche that should be augmented, not rebalanced. Something better would be something like a new module or T3 Destroyer toggle that causes locking delay for 4-10 seconds after turning it off. D-Scan immunity only works if 100Km from all objects - D-Scan works if they're within gate/WH range (Mostly fixes FW issues, but not sure about ECM range)
Marlona Sky Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 5734	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:42:39 - [528] - Quote In the end, as long as local remains a thing; nothing will change in regards to combat recons causing more PvP to happen. No one waits for the ship to appear on D-scan before warping to the safety of a POS/station/safe spot to cloak. The other issue is a PvE fit ship is no match for a PvP fit ship. Flying a PvP fit ship to do these PvE sites is crazy talk and sticking around to fight a PvP fit ship with a PvE setup is equally silly. CCP, you have to address this sooner that later. Only then will you have the freedom to be as creative as you want when it comes to balancing these ships. The Paradox
S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 45	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:43:43 - [529] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: There is a couple things here I am concerned about: ECM still offers no counter play. Effectively rendering a player unable to do anything for at least 20 seconds plus the time it takes them to relock anything. 99.99% fo all combat in this game involves locking a target. ECM drones turn any ship into a diet Blackbird. ECM needs to be revamped from the ground up and should not involve removing a players ability to play the game. Celestis being incredibly powerful from 100+km is silly. If it turns out combat recons not being on the directional scanner is an option, perhaps showing the ships as the T1 version of the ship instead would be a good compromise. i.e. the directional scanner shows an Arbitrator on scan when in fact it is really a Curse. Semi-related, but what are the odds of a new high slot module that can not be fit if there is any type of cyno fit as well, only allowed for recons and means they do not appear in local? Perhaps I am dreaming a bit too hard here. The counterplay to ECM it's the damp from Arazu/Lachesis/Celestis.. Hell, Keres does a great job at that too :)
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 211	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:48:05 - [530] - Quote I see a lot of FW carebears whining. CCP could just disallow Recons from your cribs, I mean plexs.

Dani Maulerant Order of the Valkyrie LOADED-DICE 7	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:50:03 - [531] - Quote Eh, dscan immunity is pretty way out there. If anything it makes the two versions of recons much closer to the same as force recons cloak to not appear on scans, while combat recons have a built in effective cloak just long as they're not on grid. Looking at the curse/pilgrim for instance, Curse seems miles better. Both a neut range and amount (very important), while being effectively cloaked when just simply not on grid. Pilgrim now getting a range bonus but the neuts work at base drain amount as if fitted to a T1 cruiser like they often are anyways, and with only a couple being able to be fit really exacerbates that issue. I really hoped Pilgrim would shine, as well as force recons in general, but it seems Curse will be the solid go-to one with its Dscan immunity (effectively a cloak), tank, neut amount on top of range. and more highs to fit more neuts that further multiply that capability. And while probing is 'possible', it's not a reasonable expectation to impose on everyone.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1262	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:53:20 - [532] - Quote Those of you decrying directional scanning as an "effective cloak" must not do a lot of gatecamping. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Suitonia Corp 54 Curatores Veritatis Alliance 392	Posted - 2014.12.18 22:53:55 - [533] - Quote Jennifer Maxwell wrote: Suitonia wrote: Also worth pointing out that this invalidates many guerrilla warfare techniques that solo and smaller entitys use to engage larger groups. One technique is warping to a different celestial in a system and engaging there, hoping the enemy forces are split up, and you can guage by the directional scanner what is following you and their arrival time roughly, with these new combat recons that is thrown out of the window entirely, even if a cloaked recon follows you they have to suffer from 5 second decloak timer+lock time, and the fact that they tend to be more vulnerable and bring less DPS than the combat varients, which gives you more counterplay, and time to try and disengage or kill your target before it can influence the fight, I really dislike taking away this ability. Complex/Site/Mission runners will now need a mandatory alt watching the entrance of their plex, if you were vigilant with directional scanner you could detect covert ops invaders and the cloaking delay gives you time to try and escape or fight. FW will probably be hit hardest by this, you see a t1 cruiser in a medium plex on d-scan, great, you go in with your cruiser, then find a curse and 2 rooks on grid. Likewise, you could be in a t1 Cruiser, see another t1 cruiser come in so decide to stay and fight. then 2 rooks come in and it's gg and you couldn't possibly prevent it without having an alt watching the entrance. A combat recon could also capture plexes without anyone ever knowing about it unless there is someone watching the inside constantly, which invalidates a lot of FW sieging and defensive plexing. I only see this ability being used to gank people who can't possibly scout these ganks, unless they have meta knowledge, which is a lot like hotdrops (Which is one of the reasons why you nerfed long distance travel and jump bridge ranges to curtail this type of gameplay) This ability is not useful to solo/small gang players who roam to engage other players in nullsec, and possibly more organised lowsec, since they'll quickly be reported in intel and as soon as a combat recon is spotted they know you're in one when they see your character in local and just leave whatever they're doing assuming you're there. this ability is not useful to large fleets who are scouted anyway, and are large enough that they can't really hide their shiptypes, and would probably prefer their recon pilots had covert cloak + cynosural field bonus for escalation potential. I feel like this ability only punishes solo/small gang players You realize that bombers can get lock the second they decloak, right? They have no recalibration delay. I've caught stuff like that before. Is that OP? How about if I sig tank it so it takes you 5 seconds to lock while the rest of my allies land? Is that too OP for you? IF you're in a DED site, you're moving around. You're not sitting on the gate, even if you're armor tanked. You'll have time while the recon lands and starts locking you. It's the same as if a Garmur lands; you barely have any warning and it can point you from a hell of a long range. As a small gang player, I disagree with you completely. Stealth Bombers are incredibly vulnerable, having just a few thousand effective hit-points even when buffer fit, especially if they operate in disruption range, cloaked bombers and recons have to 'sneak up' on you, so they are much harder to be used offensively than the new combat recons, since you not only have about 5-6x more time to sort yourself out, clear the scram/web rats, align out, get as much valuable loot as you can etc, as cloaked ships need to approach at base speed, while also avoiding obstacles in sites which can decloak them. if someone lands on you because you're already set up, that's perfectly fine. Remember that FW Plexes also have a 30km non-cloak radius around the button, so a cloaked bomber would still need to approach a small distance before getting the 'insta' heated disruptor on you, and you would not be scrammed by this, which is very important when it comes to being able to disengage. All the current recons aside from an officer scram Arazu which requires a complete glass-fit with expensive RCUs cannot turn off your MWD from outside the FW plex non-cloak range. Even if you're moving around in a DED site, it's not always possible to be perfectly aligned, and outside a potential 90km disruption from a Lachesis, while also having to apply your DPS meaningfully to the rats, and looting the containers/structures, while also dealing with scram/web rats. Garmur can be seen on directional scanner, it has the same warp speed as a frigate. I think it's perfectly fine. Contributer to Eve is Easy:-á https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos Check out my PvP Rifter guide for new players; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YReUNRTGcXo
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1928	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:01:58 - [534] - Quote Rise if I were you I woudl reverse rapier and huggin on missiles and guns. Rapier already has cloak. It doe snto nee d to have the strongest weapon system to add on that. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1928	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:06:01 - [535] - Quote Alexis Nightwish wrote: I'm on the fence with these changes. I feel they might be overshadowing HACs a bit, and I'm definitely opposed to buffing the defense of force recons that much as they can fit cov ops cloaks. Perhaps bring the resistance profiles of the force recons up to what the combat recons are now, and up the combat recons up to HAC-level? Also, special attention needs to be given to the Rook as it must split its mids between tank and ECM, its lows between damage and ECM, and its rigs between ECM and all the other things that compete for rig slots. The result is either go for ECM and fly the Falcon, or go for damage and fly a Cerberus, Drake, (insert ship that does missiles better). Perhaps change the Falcon's bonus to ECM range instead of strength, and/or give a stronger missile/ECM bonus to the Rook? The recons have far less DPS and do nto get signature reduction. They are not brute force comprable to HACS, but they can be as effective isf not mroe with usage fo the Ewar. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Midnight Hope Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 147	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:10:55 - [536] - Quote "Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners " Well, that makes the cloaks almost useless. This goes against the grain in so many levels and makes recons op. I'm all for making them "unique" but this is unique enough they now don't belong in EVE anymore. Totally against it.
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION The Obsidian Front 578	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:13:45 - [537] - Quote Tarek Raimo wrote: 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. [Proteus, Covert Gank] Damage Control II 1600mm Reinforced Steel Plates II Armor Explosive Hardener II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Medium Ancillary Armor Repairer, Nanite Repair Paste Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I Republic Fleet Warp Scrambler Stasis Webifier II Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M Covert Ops Cloaking Device II Medium Hybrid Burst Aerator I Medium Anti-EM Pump I Medium Auxiliary Nano Pump II Proteus Offensive - Covert Reconfiguration Proteus Defensive - Augmented Plating Proteus Electronics - Friction Extension Processor Proteus Engineering - Power Core Multiplier Proteus Propulsion - Localized Injectors Hobgoblin II x5 >550 dps with Void
MeBiatch GRR GOONS 2026	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:16:13 - [538] - Quote wrote: I don't think I have ever been killed by just a recon before. Was there some massive boost in firepower I didn't see in the OP? never been killed by a curse? i did see one kill back in o6 where it was a curse and a vegabond. There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote: Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1928	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:16:35 - [539] - Quote People are way overreacting to the scan immunity. Any cloakwarper already had that. Force recons, STRATIOS, T3, Bombers. VERY little change in the metagame. Most people already react to LOCAL and not dscan. Exaclty because other cloak warpers already made unsafe to rely on the d-scan as an warnign system. If you are aligned you can still warp when the combat recon get in gridd before he gets to full stop and is able to lock you. And if you were not aligned you were already going to die to a cloaked recon, Stratios or t3. The only place where they might tip things a bit too much is in WH space. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1929	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:17:24 - [540] - Quote MeBiatch wrote: wrote: I don't think I have ever been killed by just a recon before. Was there some massive boost in firepower I didn't see in the OP? never been killed by a curse? i did see one kill back in o6 where it was a curse and a vegabond. MAybe you shoudl re read his sentence. JUST A RECON.. that means a recon and nothign else. That curse and vagabond would appear very well on D-SCAN. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment

Hemmo Paskiainen 465	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:17:29 - [541] - Quote Hello, i might have a curse bpo that i might sell. Mssg me "Relativity equals time plus momentum: if it can be erased by a single click on a button, would it be worth spending it?"
Iyokus Patrouette No Vacancies 228	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:21:10 - [542] - Quote Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners Yeah, the guys in corp are excited about this because no local + no d scan in wormholes makes things very unbalanced on the hunter/prey game play that comes with wormholes. I am personally raising an eyebrow and moving all my solo PvE ships back to high sec as i will no longer be able to pve in my static wormhole unless i enlist an army of scout alts to watch all wormholes / POSes in a system and possibly buy a few more monitors so i can watch all those screens. Currently skeptical about this change. ---- Advocate for the initiation of purple coloured wormholes----
Marlona Sky Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 5734	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:22:11 - [543] - Quote S'No Flake wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: There is a couple things here I am concerned about: ECM still offers no counter play. Effectively rendering a player unable to do anything for at least 20 seconds plus the time it takes them to relock anything. 99.99% fo all combat in this game involves locking a target. ECM drones turn any ship into a diet Blackbird. ECM needs to be revamped from the ground up and should not involve removing a players ability to play the game. Celestis being incredibly powerful from 100+km is silly. If it turns out combat recons not being on the directional scanner is an option, perhaps showing the ships as the T1 version of the ship instead would be a good compromise. i.e. the directional scanner shows an Arbitrator on scan when in fact it is really a Curse. Semi-related, but what are the odds of a new high slot module that can not be fit if there is any type of cyno fit as well, only allowed for recons and means they do not appear in local? Perhaps I am dreaming a bit too hard here. The counterplay to ECM it's the damp from Arazu/Lachesis/Celestis.. Hell, Keres does a great job at that too :) How do you do that when you are jammed? The Paradox
Heleana Commodus Luyseyal Zvezdani seljoberi i pijandure Devil Divided By Zero 0	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:22:16 - [544] - Quote Pilgrim at that state will be useless. On slow moving, low agi, cloaky solo hunter (we dont have many of those) adding range instead of bonus neut amount in my opinion is useless, his medium and small neuts reach his operational range allrdy (5-6km) , and making him cloaky curse makes no sense. How about to squize "GÇó Energy Vampires fitted to this ship will drain targeted ship's capacitor regardless of your own capacitor level" ......somewhere in there, if you want to add diversity +1H slot On pilgrim? Amarr Cruiser Bonuses: 7.5% bonus to STRENGTH of tracking disruptors On curse? Amarr Cruiser Bonuses: 7.5% bonus to Tracking Disruptor EFFECTIVNESS What will be diffrence betwen Strength and/ on other side Effectivness of tracking disruptors?
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1929	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:23:10 - [545] - Quote James Baboli wrote: RIP anything trying to close on a hyugen now. Why? It is EXACTLY the same regarding that as it was before. No ship was able to caught up on a huggin before.. and will continue to be. Ifyou want to catch a huggin you need to warp in close or kill him from range (they are not that sturdy) "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1929	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:24:24 - [546] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: S'No Flake wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: There is a couple things here I am concerned about: ECM still offers no counter play. Effectively rendering a player unable to do anything for at least 20 seconds plus the time it takes them to relock anything. 99.99% fo all combat in this game involves locking a target. ECM drones turn any ship into a diet Blackbird. ECM needs to be revamped from the ground up and should not involve removing a players ability to play the game. Celestis being incredibly powerful from 100+km is silly. If it turns out combat recons not being on the directional scanner is an option, perhaps showing the ships as the T1 version of the ship instead would be a good compromise. i.e. the directional scanner shows an Arbitrator on scan when in fact it is really a Curse. Semi-related, but what are the odds of a new high slot module that can not be fit if there is any type of cyno fit as well, only allowed for recons and means they do not appear in local? Perhaps I am dreaming a bit too hard here. The counterplay to ECM it's the damp from Arazu/Lachesis/Celestis.. Hell, Keres does a great job at that too :) How do you do that when you are jammed? The arazu locks faster than the caldari one. So the caldai one will be dampened before. The advantage of the caldari one is beign able to neutralzie more than 1 ship. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
coik el tuerto Origin. Black Legion. 3	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:26:02 - [547] - Quote I always hoped for the huggin to become a rapid light boat just like the bellicose, but it seems you took the easy way out with projectiles =( but im still happy with buff.
Gully Alex Foyle Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop 2799	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:26:18 - [548] - Quote Regarding Fw plexes, I often fly solo and I honestly do not understand what all the fuss is about. Tomorrow: dscan-immunity games Today: visible frigate to grab point + cloaky whatever for surprise buttsex What's the difference? In both cases, if you're truly alone you're probably dead. Gf in local, add smartasses to watchlist. In both cases, if you want revenge just pretend you're solo then call your buddies in for surprise gangbang. Seriously, what's the whining about? New tools, new tricks, new counters. Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Sven Viko VIkolander Friends and Feminists 317	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:28:14 - [549] - Quote Suitonia wrote: Hello Rise, I think the changes you've made to the covert recon line are great and all make perfect sense. I'm not really sure what direction you're taking the Combat Recons in, the undetectable on directional scanner feels like a really situational bonus that will either incredibly powerful if you're in situation which allows you show up to a fight your opponent is unprepared for (like at a 5000km bookmark off a gate, or in wormholes). Or otherwise negliable, I don't think the Combat Recons offer anything for small-med gangs aside from people who are setting up traps. And when you're setting up a trap, why not use a Falcon instead of a 5000km bookmark Rook, or their varients, it doesn't offer much in addition to the Falcon. The main problem with Combat Recons is that they don't offer much different game play from the Covert variant, with exception of the Curse. Why take a Huginn in a fleet when a Rapier does the same job with more tank, with cynosural field and covert cloak. I would much rather see a heavier focus on damage bonuses on the Combat Recons, remove the directional scan immunity. Take them in a direction similar to the Heavy Interdictor changes that you rolled out in Oceanus. Which will make them more appealing to use in small gangs and solo, where people care more about DPS. Here are a few examples Huginn High: 4, Mid: 6. Low: 4 (3 Launchers) MC: 5% to Missile Launcher Rate of Fire, 10% to TP effectiveness RC: 60% to web optimal, 10% to Missile launcher velocity, 5% to missile launcher explosion velocity Role Bonus: 100% bonus to missile damage. Drone: 40m3 (8 Effective Launchers) I think this is much more interesting than a projectile focused Huginn, and also provides progession from Bellicose -> Huginn. Both Short and Long range missile launchers benefit from longer ranged webs and bonused target painters which has more synergy. The Rapier already has more of a focus on turrets anyway, and it provides it with something to differentiate itself from the standard web loki which uses projectiles. Rook: High: 4, Mid 7: low: 4 (3 Launchers) CC: 10% to Kinetic Missile damage, 10% to ECM capacitor cost RC: 30% to ECM Strength, 10% to launcher velocity, 5% to missile launcher explosion velocity Drone: 25m3 Role Bonus: 100% bonus to missile damage (9 effective launchers kinetic locked, 6 effective launchers non kinetic) The Rook needs to differentiate itself more from the Falcon, an extra low allows it to achieve better DPS output, better tank, or more EWAR power at the expense of not having the covert cloak. In contrast to the Huginn, the Rook has higher raw damage output than the Huginn but locked into kinetic, not having the synergetic web/TP bonuses that the Huginn has, and being slower, it comes close to the Cerberus/Othrus in terms of raw DPS output, but at the expense of being much less mobile, more vulnerable and with lower cap stability. Lachesis High: 4, Mid: 6, Low: 4 (3 turrets) GC: 5% to Medium hybrid damage, 7.5% to damp effectiveness RC: 20% to Warp Disruption range, 10% to Medium Hybrid Optimal range, 7.5% to medium hybrid tracking Drone: 50m3 (+10) Role Bonus: 100% bonus to Medium Hybrid damage (7.5 effective turrets) I like your redesign of the Lachesis a lot, but think it should be focused more towards higher damage, 5 effective turrets isn't enough imo. Curse. - Keep it the same, remove the directional scanner immunity, 3rd bonus added to recon ship skill, +5% to Drone MWD Speed and Tracking. Much better proposal on all accounts IMO.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 1787	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:34:51 - [550] - Quote Could recons please get a fitting bonus to allow them to fit Extended Probe Launchers. To allow them to..... Actually recon. This also provides counter play to the Dscan immunity as Dscan immunity is not combat probe immunity.

Komodo Askold No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 235	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:36:22 - [551] - Quote *To those worried about the D-Scan invulnerability, I highly recommend you to read this.* In my humble opinion, I don't think the whole D-Scan inmunity thing would be so OP and game-breaking as many say. The reasons people bring up is that they would not be able to know if there's an enemy incoming, even when checking D-Scan actively, and that they would get suddenly ganked. I think that isn't necessarily true, as long as these players use the other tools at their disposal and take measures to reduce the risk of being ganked. I've been living in W-Space for quite a long time; I've hunted, I've been hunted, I've been ganked by cloakies. And most of those loses were due to me taking too big risks instead of being prudent. Now I try not to repeat the same mistakes. First, even on W-Space, we have Combat Probes. They might require an Expanded Probe Launcher, a pinch of extra work (number of clicks) and might not inmediatly tell what ship is that, but they WILL work against these new Combat Recons. If your D-Scan says nobody's around, yet your probes see something, then you should expect a CR to be around. If you're not i W-Space, you also have Local Chat to check if you're really alone. And if you do are in W-Space, you should be always expecting to be watched by a cloaked someone (you're not always going to catch them in the few seconds they uncloak). As soon as you become confident, that cloaky will remind you about being prudent. Also, a full 8-probes load can cover a much bigger volume of space than your 14.3 AU D-Scan. You can essentially disperse them around and have them scan as frecuently as you can, in the same way you would use D-Scan. Not to mention the probes reveal the same targets than D-Scan does, excepting it can also detect Combat Recons. And, of course, you can use both tools simultaneously. Second, if you're running sites, be it alone or with friends, you should make sure you're NOT on the warp-in point for too long. Also applies for planets and other bookmarks. When you land somewhere, you should inmediatly make your ship move. Your best chance would be to have it aligned to a "safe" place, but having a random direction works too. That way, if the Combat Recon, cloaky-something or another kind of ship warps to your site/planet, you'll be far away enough not to be quickly pointed and shot at, and you should have time to warp away. This is important even if you're on a cloaky yourself, since if they land on you they'll uncloak you. Of course, you should also be aware of possible, sudden warp-ins and be prepared to GTFO. Third, cloaky ships already are inmune to D-Scan (as long as they are cloaked). Yet nobody complains about them. Nobody complains to suddenly have a T3 appear right at their optimal and have yourself suddenly pointed and melted. Without any kind of targeting delay. Or to briefly see a pack of Stealth Bombers while they unload a bomb run on you, or proceed to torpedo your everything. Or just be permanently watched by a Covops. And yes, that happens in W-Space too, and a lot. And no, you can't see those ships until they're right on top of you. And on top of that, all ships can fit a cloaking device; it might not be as pretty as the covops one, but will still give them "D-Scan invulnerability" and allow them to scout or wait for an ambush. With this change, Combat Recons will NOT get that tremendous capability. You might not see them on your D-Scan, but they will arrive to you uncloaked for everyone to see. If you remember the 2nd tip, you should not be near the warp-in point. Oh wait, they landed directly on you by using Combat Probes? Well, that could happen with any other ship they wanted to use, and you should have seen those Combat Probes, and warped away as soon as you saw them. That's not "they're not allowing me to run sites, I can't play"; that has been happening since Combat Probes appeared, nobody seems to hate them, and since they do show up on D-Scan, you should have acted accordingly. If you think the area is too hot with gankers, just move to a different place. And, don't forget these are just 4 ships. Four, in a total of... many more, of which many are better suited to land on you unexpectedly and/or watch you while invisible. At least with these changes, these 4 ships will be able to perform their Recon role with some "camouflage" themselves. They will still have to move frecuently though, since they're completely visible to anyone who's on grid with them. As a W-Space resident, I'm confident taking measures against these new Combat Recons will just be a matter of getting the habit of deploying Combat Probes more often. Everyone can do this, even the lonely solo site-runner (and yes, I've run exploration sites on my own, even in 0.0 and W-Space).
MeBiatch GRR GOONS 2026	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:36:39 - [552] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: MeBiatch wrote: wrote: I don't think I have ever been killed by just a recon before. Was there some massive boost in firepower I didn't see in the OP? never been killed by a curse? i did see one kill back in o6 where it was a curse and a vegabond. MAybe you shoudl re read his sentence. JUST A RECON.. that means a recon and nothign else. That curse and vagabond would appear very well on D-SCAN. NO I DID READ. I LIKE CAPS TOO. it was the closest i could find for his losses that was solo. though solo curse before the nos nerf was totally a thing back in the day. There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote: Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION The Obsidian Front 580	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:36:46 - [553] - Quote [Lachesis, Solo] Damage Control II 1600mm Reinforced Steel Plates II Armor Explosive Hardener II Warp Scrambler II Federation Navy Stasis Webifier Phased Muon Sensor Disruptor I, Targeting Range Dampening Script Phased Muon Sensor Disruptor I, Targeting Range Dampening Script Phased Muon Sensor Disruptor I, Targeting Range Dampening Script Phased Muon Sensor Disruptor I, Targeting Range Dampening Script Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I Dual 150mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Dual 150mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Dual 150mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Dual 150mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Dual 150mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Medium Inverted Signal Field Projector II Medium Anti-EM Pump II Hammerhead II x5 This look interesting. The ability to damp two ships down to very low targeting range, (I'm guessing here) >40k EHP and 350DPS at 18km with bonkers tracking on railguns and full tackle at that range all without links! or as a Shield HAC with long scram range... [Lachesis, HAC] Power Diagnostic System II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I Adaptive Invulnerability Field II EM Ward Field II Large F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Large F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Warp Scrambler II Federation Navy Stasis Webifier 200mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 200mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 200mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 200mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 200mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II Medium Anti-Explosive Screen Reinforcer II Hammerhead II x5 approx 42k EHP 450 DPS at >20km with superb tracking for rails. Lachesis is probably gonna be king.
MeBiatch GRR GOONS 2026	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:39:37 - [554] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: S'No Flake wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: There is a couple things here I am concerned about: ECM still offers no counter play. Effectively rendering a player unable to do anything for at least 20 seconds plus the time it takes them to relock anything. 99.99% fo all combat in this game involves locking a target. ECM drones turn any ship into a diet Blackbird. ECM needs to be revamped from the ground up and should not involve removing a players ability to play the game. Celestis being incredibly powerful from 100+km is silly. If it turns out combat recons not being on the directional scanner is an option, perhaps showing the ships as the T1 version of the ship instead would be a good compromise. i.e. the directional scanner shows an Arbitrator on scan when in fact it is really a Curse. Semi-related, but what are the odds of a new high slot module that can not be fit if there is any type of cyno fit as well, only allowed for recons and means they do not appear in local? Perhaps I am dreaming a bit too hard here. The counterplay to ECM it's the damp from Arazu/Lachesis/Celestis.. Hell, Keres does a great job at that too :) How do you do that when you are jammed? I think since day 1 rise has wanted to change ECM my fav ideas are to either make ECM affect missiles like TD's do for turrets. or to make ECM and Sensor strength affect how X is cacluated in the damage application formula... you have the chance to hit which is a number that is then compared to a random number which is X . X is used to determin if that is a barely scratch or a perfect hit. There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote: Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Dani Maulerant Order of the Valkyrie LOADED-DICE 7	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:40:11 - [555] - Quote As if FW needed any more incentive to stay at the frigate/destroyer meta level in novices and smalls.
Catherine Laartii Dominion Fleet Group Templis CALSF 440	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:41:03 - [556] - Quote Marcel Devereux wrote: Ripard Teg wrote: Catherine Laartii wrote: -I need to point this out since it keeps popping up in this thread like a demented gopher and needs to be put down: The Huginn should not get missiles. Core Complexion ships in this game have missiles as part of their identity with the new balance meta, so Boundless Creation ships shouldn't be getting it at all in any instance. You want a TP bonus on a t2 missile cruiser? Tough sh*t! Caldari are the ones who need the bloody TP bonuses to compliment their missiles; minmatar just needs something else like web strength or extra combat usability. Web range is a bonus as effective if not more so in pvp since it is the literal definition of range control. They should have fixed this a LONG time ago but it's never once been addressed. Hm. You raise a good point about the corporate tendencies. I p.much never think about that (frankly, because I think it adds very little to the game). This does pretty efficiently neuter the Huginn, though. Rapier or Lach will be better for anything that I can think of off the top of my head. Am I missing a use case, perhaps in FW? pssh. The Lach will get great for those nano-shield gangs and nothing else. Lach needs a 4th (or 5th) low and a bloody damage bonus. The balance pass on the caldari and gallente recons was substandard at best and absurdly lazy at worst.
MeBiatch GRR GOONS 2026	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:42:13 - [557] - Quote Dani Maulerant wrote: As if FW needed any more incentive to stay at the frigate/destroyer meta level in novices and smalls. We totally need Pirate Faction Faction warfare... There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote: Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Komi Toran Paragon Trust The Bastion 464	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:45:06 - [558] - Quote Komodo Askold wrote: Third, cloaky ships already are inmune to D-Scan (as long as they are cloaked). Yet nobody complains about them. Now posting in a stealth nerf AFK cloakers thread.
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1929	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:45:14 - [559] - Quote Sven Viko VIkolander wrote: Suitonia wrote: Hello Rise, I think the changes you've made to the covert recon line are great and all make perfect sense. I'm not really sure what direction you're taking the Combat Recons in, the undetectable on directional scanner feels like a really situational bonus that will either incredibly powerful if you're in situation which allows you show up to a fight your opponent is unprepared for (like at a 5000km bookmark off a gate, or in wormholes). Or otherwise negliable, I don't think the Combat Recons offer anything for small-med gangs aside from people who are setting up traps. And when you're setting up a trap, why not use a Falcon instead of a 5000km bookmark Rook, or their varients, it doesn't offer much in addition to the Falcon. The main problem with Combat Recons is that they don't offer much different game play from the Covert variant, with exception of the Curse. Why take a Huginn in a fleet when a Rapier does the same job with more tank, with cynosural field and covert cloak. I would much rather see a heavier focus on damage bonuses on the Combat Recons, remove the directional scan immunity. Take them in a direction similar to the Heavy Interdictor changes that you rolled out in Oceanus. Which will make them more appealing to use in small gangs and solo, where people care more about DPS. Here are a few examples Huginn High: 4, Mid: 6. Low: 4 (3 Launchers) MC: 5% to Missile Launcher Rate of Fire, 10% to TP effectiveness RC: 60% to web optimal, 10% to Missile launcher velocity, 5% to missile launcher explosion velocity Role Bonus: 100% bonus to missile damage. Drone: 40m3 (8 Effective Launchers) I think this is much more interesting than a projectile focused Huginn, and also provides progession from Bellicose -> Huginn. Both Short and Long range missile launchers benefit from longer ranged webs and bonused target painters which has more synergy. The Rapier already has more of a focus on turrets anyway, and it provides it with something to differentiate itself from the standard web loki which uses projectiles. Rook: High: 4, Mid 7: low: 4 (3 Launchers) CC: 10% to Kinetic Missile damage, 10% to ECM capacitor cost RC: 30% to ECM Strength, 10% to launcher velocity, 5% to missile launcher explosion velocity Drone: 25m3 Role Bonus: 100% bonus to missile damage (9 effective launchers kinetic locked, 6 effective launchers non kinetic) The Rook needs to differentiate itself more from the Falcon, an extra low allows it to achieve better DPS output, better tank, or more EWAR power at the expense of not having the covert cloak. In contrast to the Huginn, the Rook has higher raw damage output than the Huginn but locked into kinetic, not having the synergetic web/TP bonuses that the Huginn has, and being slower, it comes close to the Cerberus/Othrus in terms of raw DPS output, but at the expense of being much less mobile, more vulnerable and with lower cap stability. Lachesis High: 4, Mid: 6, Low: 4 (3 turrets) GC: 5% to Medium hybrid damage, 7.5% to damp effectiveness RC: 20% to Warp Disruption range, 10% to Medium Hybrid Optimal range, 7.5% to medium hybrid tracking Drone: 50m3 (+10) Role Bonus: 100% bonus to Medium Hybrid damage (7.5 effective turrets) I like your redesign of the Lachesis a lot, but think it should be focused more towards higher damage, 5 effective turrets isn't enough imo. Curse. - Keep it the same, remove the directional scanner immunity, 3rd bonus added to recon ship skill, +5% to Drone MWD Speed and Tracking. Much better proposal on all accounts IMO. The problem is that then they step over HAC territory. It woudl be logical if the HACS were not in the way. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Moac Tor Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation 15	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:48:27 - [560] - Quote Komodo Askold wrote: *To those worried about the D-Scan invulnerability, I highly recommend you to read this.* In my humble opinion, I don't think the whole D-Scan inmunity thing would be so OP and game-breaking as many say. The reasons people bring up is that they would not be able to know if there's an enemy incoming, even when checking D-Scan actively, and that they would get suddenly ganked. I think that isn't necessarily true, as long as these players use the other tools at their disposal and take measures to reduce the risk of being ganked. I've been living in W-Space for quite a long time; I've hunted, I've been hunted, I've been ganked by cloakies. And most of those loses were due to me taking too big risks instead of being prudent. Now I try not to repeat the same mistakes. First, even on W-Space, we have Combat Probes. They might require an Expanded Probe Launcher, a pinch of extra work (number of clicks) and might not inmediatly tell what ship is that, but they WILL work against these new Combat Recons. If your D-Scan says nobody's around, yet your probes see something, then you should expect a CR to be around. If you're not i W-Space, you also have Local Chat to check if you're really alone. And if you do are in W-Space, you should be always expecting to be watched by a cloaked someone (you're not always going to catch them in the few seconds they uncloak). As soon as you become confident, that cloaky will remind you about being prudent. Also, a full 8-probes load can cover a much bigger volume of space than your 14.3 AU D-Scan. You can essentially disperse them around and have them scan as frecuently as you can, in the same way you would use D-Scan. Not to mention the probes reveal the same targets than D-Scan does, excepting it can also detect Combat Recons. And, of course, you can use both tools simultaneously. Second, if you're running sites, be it alone or with friends, you should make sure you're NOT on the warp-in point for too long. Also applies for planets and other bookmarks. When you land somewhere, you should inmediatly make your ship move. Your best chance would be to have it aligned to a "safe" place, but having a random direction works too. That way, if the Combat Recon, cloaky-something or another kind of ship warps to your site/planet, you'll be far away enough not to be quickly pointed and shot at, and you should have time to warp away. This is important even if you're on a cloaky yourself, since if they land on you they'll uncloak you. Of course, you should also be aware of possible, sudden warp-ins and be prepared to GTFO. Third, cloaky ships already are inmune to D-Scan (as long as they are cloaked). Yet nobody complains about them. Nobody complains to suddenly have a T3 appear right at their optimal and have yourself suddenly pointed and melted. Without any kind of targeting delay. Or to briefly see a pack of Stealth Bombers while they unload a bomb run on you, or proceed to torpedo your everything. Or just be permanently watched by a Covops. And yes, that happens in W-Space too, and a lot. And no, you can't see those ships until they're right on top of you. And on top of that, all ships can fit a cloaking device; it might not be as pretty as the covops one, but will still give them "D-Scan invulnerability" and allow them to scout or wait for an ambush. With this change, Combat Recons will NOT get that tremendous capability. You might not see them on your D-Scan, but they will arrive to you uncloaked for everyone to see. If you remember the 2nd tip, you should not be near the warp-in point. Oh wait, they landed directly on you by using Combat Probes? Well, that could happen with any other ship they wanted to use, and you should have seen those Combat Probes, and warped away as soon as you saw them. That's not "they're not allowing me to run sites, I can't play"; that has been happening since Combat Probes appeared, nobody seems to hate them, and since they do show up on D-Scan, you should have acted accordingly. If you think the area is too hot with gankers, just move to a different place. And, don't forget these are just 4 ships. Four, in a total of... many more, of which many are better suited to land on you unexpectedly and/or watch you while invisible. At least with these changes, these 4 ships will be able to perform their Recon role with some "camouflage" themselves. They will still have to move frecuently though, since they're completely visible to anyone who's on grid with them. As a W-Space resident, I'm confident taking measures against these new Combat Recons will just be a matter of getting the habit of deploying Combat Probes more often. Everyone can do this, even the lonely solo site-runner (and yes, I've run exploration sites on my own, even in 0.0 and W-Space). Good post, I was thinking along these lines myself and you pretty much summed up my thoughts. Would be also quite easy to put in a clause that the beacon in a FW plex interferes with the dscan immunity, although I would wait to see if it really is game breaking or not before implementing that as FWers could just use combat probes also.

Moac Tor Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation 15	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:58:41 - [561] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: Rise if I were you I woudl reverse rapier and huggin on missiles and guns. Rapier already has cloak. It doe snto nee d to have the strongest weapon system to add on that. The dps on the rapier is anaemic with projectiles, I'm very happy to see the switch to missiles. Projectile turrets on a combat recon should be much better due to the extra turret point and damage bonus. That being said making them both missile ships would be the optimal situation, but if you have to have one as the projectile ship then it is better to make that the huginn in my opinion.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries Chelonaphobia 715	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:59:20 - [562] - Quote I'm sad CCP missed the opportunity to take 1 ship class out of local and opted for D-scan immunity. If you really want them to fulfill the recon role, taking them out of local would go a lot further than D-scan immunity. The D-scan immunity just opens up a whole lot of ganking options in PVE sites. As much as I love and participate in the whole gank thing - I'll say eve would be better off w/ more pvp options and fewer gank the bear options. I think CCP just recently put out that 'getting ganked' was a major reason newbros leave the game. Now you hand this out?? I know this won't be used to gank empire missioners, but it's going to be a serious kick in the junk to fw plex runners. Low sec is going to be polluted w/ recons sitting on plex gates.... until folks get tired of being ganked every time they warp to them. If I've learned anything in my time in eve - putting these things in play doesn't generate content - it just causes folks to stop playing in a way they can get ganked. I can see a lot of folks saying 'goodby FW - hellow incursions' It really is time to take a ship class out of local to help null bears re-learn how to live with risk. It really isn't the time to make it easy to gank someone in PVE that is actively (using D-scan) trying to take reasonable precautions. This blinding a player who is actively trying to do the right thing is (my opinion) a step in the wrong direction.
Komodo Askold No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 237	Posted - 2014.12.18 23:59:23 - [563] - Quote Komi Toran wrote: Komodo Askold wrote: Third, cloaky ships already are inmune to D-Scan (as long as they are cloaked). Yet nobody complains about them. Now posting in a stealth nerf AFK cloakers thread. Not my intention. I don't think cloaking devices are OP. And I find the "nerf AFK cloakers" as ridiculous as most people (AFK means not playing...). What I mean with that sentence is that there is a lot of rage for the proposed change to Combat Recons, while cloaked ships have been doing that for a very long time, and they haven't broken the game either. Serendipity Lost wrote: I'm sad CCP missed the opportunity to take 1 ship class out of local and opted for D-scan immunity. If you really want them to fulfill the recon role, taking them out of local would go a lot further than D-scan immunity. The D-scan immunity just opens up a whole lot of ganking options in PVE sites. As much as I love and participate in the whole gank thing - I'll say eve would be better off w/ more pvp options and fewer gank the bear options. I think CCP just recently put out that 'getting ganked' was a major reason newbros leave the game. Now you hand this out?? I know this won't be used to gank empire missioners, but it's going to be a serious kick in the junk to fw plex runners. Low sec is going to be polluted w/ recons sitting on plex gates.... until folks get tired of being ganked every time they warp to them. If I've learned anything in my time in eve - putting these things in play doesn't generate content - it just causes folks to stop playing in a way they can get ganked. I can see a lot of folks saying 'goodby FW - hellow incursions' It really is time to take a ship class out of local to help null bears re-learn how to live with risk. It really isn't the time to make it easy to gank someone in PVE that is actively (using D-scan) trying to take reasonable precautions. This blinding a player who is actively trying to do the right thing is (my opinion) a step in the wrong direction. Taking Combat Recons out of Local would be completely useless for them in W-Space; there they would just be T2 combat cruisers. I suggest you to read my (long) post a few posts above yours. There's no more "player blinding" as there has been, without breaking the game, for quite some time.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries Chelonaphobia 715	Posted - 2014.12.19 00:02:00 - [564] - Quote komodo wall-of-text cloaked ships are immune to D-scan, but they also have a declaoking delay before they can lock something. A sensor boosted arazu/lachesis can warp in and insta lock a guy who has no chance to do anything. So it isn't the same. I don't complain about them because you have a chance when they uncloak to get away while they wait out thier uncloaking delay and activate modules. W/ D-scan immunity they would land w/ sensor boosers already online and no claoking delay.
Komodo Askold No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 237	Posted - 2014.12.19 00:09:49 - [565] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: komodo wall-of-text cloaked ships are immune to D-scan, but they also have a declaoking delay before they can lock something. A sensor boosted arazu/lachesis can warp in and insta lock a guy who has no chance to do anything. So it isn't the same. I don't complain about them because you have a chance when they uncloak to get away while they wait out thier uncloaking delay and activate modules. W/ D-scan immunity they would land w/ sensor boosers already online and no claoking delay. Fair point; I recognise the mistake about cloakies' locking delay. However any non-cloaky, non-recon ship with sensor boosters can insta-lock everything, even pods. Also, since ships that are warping-in can be seen a few seconds before they stop completely (that is, before they can lock anything), their targets can do something in the meanwhile, such as try to warp away. And again, that happens with every non-cloaky ship, even the new Combar Recons.
God's Apples Pod Liberation Authority HYDRA RELOADED 513	Posted - 2014.12.19 00:14:17 - [566] - Quote Who gives a damn about the d-scan change. Now all the weaknesses recons had before (being slow, having awful cap, less tanky) are just completely removed. Perma-MWDing recons going 3km/s with 70k ehp will be really fun to deal with. Thanks CCP for breaking the game. "Hydra Reloaded are just jealous / butthurt on me / us because we can get tons of PVP action in empire while they aren't good enough to get that." - NightmareX
Krops Vont Aces of Space Teralition 25	Posted - 2014.12.19 00:17:46 - [567] - Quote Oh the glorious tears. So many people whining yet... so much joy. These things are going to be a blast. I'm surprised this didn't happen sooner. It makes sense, they are RECON ships, should be master of hiding themselves. Maybe make only recons detectable by other recons? (not too broken) As with any human, we must map out everything for the sake of living. So what happens when you put the same aspect in a game with random events? They go nuts trying to figure out how to predict and map out everything.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries Chelonaphobia 716	Posted - 2014.12.19 00:23:16 - [568] - Quote Komodo Askold wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: komodo wall-of-text cloaked ships are immune to D-scan, but they also have a declaoking delay before they can lock something. A sensor boosted arazu/lachesis can warp in and insta lock a guy who has no chance to do anything. So it isn't the same. I don't complain about them because you have a chance when they uncloak to get away while they wait out thier uncloaking delay and activate modules. W/ D-scan immunity they would land w/ sensor boosers already online and no claoking delay. Fair point; I recognise the mistake about cloakies' locking delay. However any non-cloaky, non-recon ship with sensor boosters can insta-lock everything, even pods. Also, since ships that are warping-in can be seen a few seconds before they stop completely (that is, before they can lock anything), their targets can do something in the meanwhile, such as try to warp away. And again, that happens with every non-cloaky ship, even the new Combar Recons. Currently you can either see them coming on D-scan OR they have a delay on uncloaking. If this change goes through, then recons will have neither. I'm telling you flat out what I'm going to do with this. Refit a lachesis to max sensor boosts and the guys will have zero change of getting away. I'm a ganker, not a gankee and I'm telling you - this is going to be busted from the second it's implemented. Folks only get ganked w/ no chance to evade so many times before they pull the incursion D-ring and go make tons of nice safe empire isk. Just like my obvious move is to sensor boost the crap out of a recon, the obvious move for the guys getting ganked is to go somewhere (empire incursions) where they can make isk w/out that happening. You think guys are risk averse in null and dock up immediately upon a neutral entering their system? After this change it will be the only option for survival. Remember - all I have to do is tackle the guy in a sensor boosted recon and light my blops cyno. It will be fun while it lasts.
Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 243	Posted - 2014.12.19 00:23:38 - [569] - Quote I guess the D-scan change is interesting after all. And since it benefits my two Recon V all EWAR maxed toons, I'm just going to ride it this time. My favourite ships get to shine for a while before they are nerfed for being absurdly OP.
Ines Tegator Towels R Us 522	Posted - 2014.12.19 00:25:06 - [570] - Quote When I first heard of the dscan immunity, I though it was cool. After thinking about, it is not. Very, very, very not. What this change means is that Local Chat becomes even more broken. This is not the improvement you are looking for. What this change does in make Dscan less reliable. To compensate, people will rely more heavily on Local and safe up far earlier. This is the opposite of improvement. What we need is more Dscan tools; for Dscan to be expanded and made more reliable, turning it into a true recon tool, thus paving the way for Local to removed from nullsec. All that this change will do is make the existing problems worse. Please, pull this change before it goes live. It's a bad idea among bad ideas. It might be a good idea for the long run, but the state of the game (Dscan mechanics) right now mean this will backfire terribly. The world is not yet ready for this. Work on Local/Dscan first, then we'll talk. - Mission Overhaul - Bridging the PVP / PVE Gap - If the game stops teaching people to fear lowsec, maybe people will start going there?

Rain6637 GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 27468	Posted - 2014.12.19 00:28:39 - [571] - Quote Oh wow, win. My 50 mil SP Falcon Rains thank you. Dat Pilgrim too. I have a heavy neut troll fit that just got way more interesting, easier, and better. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub \| Twitter \|-ámk.III \| Imgur \| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined \|
Richard Justice THE BOARD OF EDUCATION 2	Posted - 2014.12.19 00:30:54 - [572] - Quote CCP Rise, can we have the neut amount bonus for the Pilgrim back instead or range please? Pilgrim operates in web range typically and so range is not really that much of a factor where as the amount of energy neuted is more so of an issue. -D. Justice
Mixu Paatelainen Eve Refinery 189	Posted - 2014.12.19 00:35:02 - [573] - Quote What about only being invisible from d-scan if mods are inactive? That'd go some way to addressing concerns about FW camping, using them as invisible pve boats etc. Guys who forget to online damage controls in their excitement when they land would be easier to kill off etc. Still. I sorta feel like I'm thinking up safeguards against rampant abuse, which suggests it's not a very good idea in the first place.
Rain6637 GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 27468	Posted - 2014.12.19 00:35:56 - [574] - Quote Canenald wrote: Please also make Huginn a missile boat. It's a Bellicose hull after all. That or change the hull to Stabber or Rupture. I kinda like the look of the rifle on a bipod President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub \| Twitter \|-ámk.III \| Imgur \| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined \|
Komi Toran Paragon Trust The Bastion 465	Posted - 2014.12.19 00:37:33 - [575] - Quote Komodo Askold wrote: Komi Toran wrote: Komodo Askold wrote: Third, cloaky ships already are inmune to D-Scan (as long as they are cloaked). Yet nobody complains about them. Now posting in a stealth nerf AFK cloakers thread. Not my intention. I don't think cloaking devices are OP. And I find the "nerf AFK cloakers" as ridiculous as most people (AFK means not playing...). What I mean with that sentence is that there is a lot of rage for the proposed change to Combat Recons, while cloaked ships have been doing that for a very long time, and they haven't broken the game either. Oh, I know it's not your intention. I was just pointing out that yes, people do complain about cloaks. Quite a bit. The afk cloak is just the most obvious example.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries Chelonaphobia 716	Posted - 2014.12.19 00:41:15 - [576] - Quote God's Apples wrote: Who gives a damn about the d-scan change. Now all the weaknesses recons had before (being slow, having awful cap, less tanky) are just completely removed. Perma-MWDing recons going 3km/s with 70k ehp will be really fun to deal with. Thanks CCP for breaking the game. You forgot the part where i'm neuting you dry from 40km. So ends the age of the ishtar and begins the reign of the curse.
Kriorth Deadspace Knights 1	Posted - 2014.12.19 00:44:00 - [577] - Quote I don't understand the need for such drastic changes in the combat recon like adding the immunity to d-scan. Recon ships don't need to "stand out" they already have decent powers (web/newt/scram/etc). One is sneaky and one has some teeth (thought not that sharp). now you are making the beefy one also sneaky??. This completely breaks the game. I know eve is meant to be played in groups, but this basically trashes a lot of solo work, trashes small wormhole groups and basically gives an insane edge to attackers. A large group of recon ships right now isn't all that scary, but now a large group can sneak up on ANY smaller group it wants and still pack the punch to trash them. There is less and less advantage to small/medium groups as changes have been made over the years, but this is over the top. If you want to get people out of womrholes, there are easier ways.
God's Apples Pod Liberation Authority HYDRA RELOADED 514	Posted - 2014.12.19 00:48:38 - [578] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: God's Apples wrote: Who gives a damn about the d-scan change. Now all the weaknesses recons had before (being slow, having awful cap, less tanky) are just completely removed. Perma-MWDing recons going 3km/s with 70k ehp will be really fun to deal with. Thanks CCP for breaking the game. You forgot the part where i'm neuting you dry from 40km. So ends the age of the ishtar and begins the reign of the curse. Well of course they're doing all the stuff I mentioned while still being... recons. "Hydra Reloaded are just jealous / butthurt on me / us because we can get tons of PVP action in empire while they aren't good enough to get that." - NightmareX
RavenNyx The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League 18	Posted - 2014.12.19 00:50:38 - [579] - Quote Wow... TL;DR: don't like the "no d-scan" thing... Longer version: FW takes a hit... "oh, but the farmers...." ... will just move down to small plex' and you solved nothing. That'll also be no more "I wanna' have some fun for 30 minutes and none of my 4 corpmates are online" PvP, in anything larger than a faction frig or dessy. My guess is that will drive some casual players away. Griefer-wars in high-sec? It's got potential to become more nasty to low SP players than it already is. I know nothing about WHs, so not gonna' go there, and I haven't been living in null for some time, so I don't really know how anoms are handled or how much a problem AFK cloakers are. I do however see low-sec small-gang taking a turn for the worse, and blobs really take over. Gatecamps will now be something you'd avoid messing with, even if you're about of even strength on paper; target system has 8 in local, 4 on gate - 2 lachesis and 2 huginns sitting perched, or are those 4 docked, or in one of those velators on scan? Don't know, and can't spare a guy to probe to see if I should be worried. The result would be that I would avoid camps, not taking the fight because of the unknown variables - I'd be forced to use more time on each system with a neut in it, where I'd potentially fight - time that I A.) don't get, because the enemy's already forming a blob, or B.) time that I don't have because I'm an old fart with a family and don't want to waste my precious hours gaming probing for stuff that may, or may not be there instead of just shooting people. Getting even (== interesting) fights is pretty rare these days as it is - you want to make it harder and you even wanna' give the blobs more tools? I really hope that someone with a bit love for small-gang and low-sec puts their foot down before this becomes reality.
Grath Telkin Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 2670	Posted - 2014.12.19 00:52:23 - [580] - Quote I LOVE EVERY INCH OF ALL OF IT. TBH I was a bit skeptical about the bonus change on the pilgrim considering good pilgrim pilots could neut out just about any ship in game in about 70 seconds or less (neuts overheat for 90 so no big deal) however I think taken as a whole the pilgrim will get a little better (and easier to fit). The Rapier will finally be scary again. The new Lach will be....a pain in the ass to deal with but hey, those are words literally never uttered in EVE so who cares, its not like its got a ton of tank fit when you finally run it down. The Dscan role bonus is what sells this whole thing. Theres no way I'm reading through all these pages of angry wormhole/FW dudes bitching about how living somewhere that was supposed to be hard to live in suddenly got not super easy to live in, the change is great. It gives this group of ships a unique bonus that you hadn't slapped on other ships like the MWD and or Bubble immune bonus, its unique, and its new, and its kind of baller as long as they're the only ships to ever get it. I've been waiting for this set since you started the tiericide, I'm not at all let down. Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

Flyinghotpocket Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica 471	Posted - 2014.12.19 00:56:36 - [581] - Quote why the literal **** isnt the curse getting a 5th low? do you still want shield tanking curses? i mean thats totaly un amarr. Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
Tira Janau Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 00:59:46 - [582] - Quote Laying out my argument AGAINST this direction as simply as I can. All Ewar by itself (even ecm, especially on a small scale) is very powerful even when it is not on a bonused hull. Ewar on bonused hulls is ridiculously powerful, and please don't say bring friends when a single EAF can shut down 2-3 ships (mostly ecm, damps and TDs) Also range bonused webs are freakishly powerful, but they can be fought usually since rapiers and huginns generally have the tank of a mid-heavy t1 cruiser) Ewar bonused cruiser hulls with full t2 resists (and probably full tank considering that the ones who will abuse this VERY powerful EWAR are the ones that dont need that Recon to do any dps) are going to be stupidly strong. The icing on the cake is going to be combat recons not showing up on dscan, an ability that force recons possess with covert cloaks and that come with appropriate penalties. Combat recons do not require this ability to "seperate themselves with a unique ability," they already possess an ability in having bonused EWAR, this in itself is very powerful. A more measured balancing of combats and force are to give force recons less dps and tank (perhaps even t1 or slightly better resists) and making combat recons simply beefier options with more direct combat ability. All in all, EWAR is VERY powerful on its own merits, you do not have to give them an ability that makes them almost undetectable until it's too late. This is a very poor method of balancing in addition to giving them HAC level tanks.
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 75	Posted - 2014.12.19 01:00:37 - [583] - Quote coik el tuerto wrote: I always hoped for the huggin to become a rapid light boat just like the bellicose, but it seems you took the easy way out with projectiles =( but im still happy with buff. Its looking like the rapier will be the new belli. I think the 10% missile dmg suits RLML way better than a RoF bonus. Means more possible damage per clip, and equal or higher alpha than standard bellicose. Plus web or tp bonus with more mids and resist profile.. the rapier has some potential. Though, dps will prob be about the same as the belli.
Lelden Praxis Waves of Aegir 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 01:00:50 - [584] - Quote Welp, time to train my missile skills for my Rapier. It's going to be useless to me until then... Just got to figure out what of all the 250 days of skills I wanted to train before then I can kick back. Seriously annoyed, but I guess having good gunnery skills, but only okay missile skills and liking minmatar ships meant I'd get screwed over at some changes.
Iyokus Patrouette No Vacancies 228	Posted - 2014.12.19 01:02:52 - [585] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: I LOVE EVERY INCH OF ALL OF IT. TBH I was a bit skeptical about the bonus change on the pilgrim considering good pilgrim pilots could neut out just about any ship in game in about 70 seconds or less (neuts overheat for 90 so no big deal) however I think taken as a whole the pilgrim will get a little better (and easier to fit). The Rapier will finally be scary again. The new Lach will be....a pain in the ass to deal with but hey, those are words literally never uttered in EVE so who cares, its not like its got a ton of tank fit when you finally run it down. The Dscan role bonus is what sells this whole thing. Theres no way I'm reading through all these pages of angry wormhole/FW dudes bitching about how living somewhere that was supposed to be hard to live in suddenly got not super easy to live in, the change is great. It gives this group of ships a unique bonus that you hadn't slapped on other ships like the MWD and or Bubble immune bonus, its unique, and its new, and its kind of baller as long as they're the only ships to ever get it. I've been waiting for this set since you started the tiericide, I'm not at all let down. 100% not bitching about it, just wondering out loud at the potential lack of people running anoms in wormholes with no way to protect themselves anymore. The hunter side of me is doing back flips at being able to jump into a wormhole and not be spotted until i have point on something. At the end of the day, the Directional Scanner is a very valid intel tool. How about we change the new role bonus to "makes this character not appear in local chat" how many Null sec tears would we see then? :p ---- Advocate for the initiation of purple coloured wormholes----
Coltain Tellan Third Herd 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 01:06:18 - [586] - Quote Quote: Well that's just complete and utter bullsh!t... As if Solo pvp wasn't hard enough, we can not even rely on our D-Scan now?? somthing that we have relied on for the past 10 years.. You are basicaly breaking around some core mechanics here. Faction Warefare has been completely broken since Incarna, now you are telling me that recons with web, neut, damp & ECM bonuses will be able to hide in plain site in FW plexes and there is no conventional way to find them. Even if combats work to find them, we would have to do that for every plex... I smelt somthing bad in the air when the mobile scan inhib came into game, didn't realise things were going to be this bad. POWER CREEP is getting excessive.. You understand that cloaked ships don't appear on d scan also right? You also understand Tech 3 cruisers can already do all of the above?
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 75	Posted - 2014.12.19 01:06:41 - [587] - Quote Flyinghotpocket wrote: why the literal **** isnt the curse getting a 5th low? do you still want shield tanking curses? i mean thats totaly un amarr. I know right! Thats like minmatar having to armor tank a muninn... oh? That exists.. probably deal with it like minny pilots do. You at least have wtfpwn neuts going for you. Well look on the brightside, at least your kin and explo resists will be really high.
Grath Telkin Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 2670	Posted - 2014.12.19 01:10:36 - [588] - Quote Iyokus Patrouette wrote: Grath Telkin wrote: I LOVE EVERY INCH OF ALL OF IT. TBH I was a bit skeptical about the bonus change on the pilgrim considering good pilgrim pilots could neut out just about any ship in game in about 70 seconds or less (neuts overheat for 90 so no big deal) however I think taken as a whole the pilgrim will get a little better (and easier to fit). The Rapier will finally be scary again. The new Lach will be....a pain in the ass to deal with but hey, those are words literally never uttered in EVE so who cares, its not like its got a ton of tank fit when you finally run it down. The Dscan role bonus is what sells this whole thing. Theres no way I'm reading through all these pages of angry wormhole/FW dudes bitching about how living somewhere that was supposed to be hard to live in suddenly got not super easy to live in, the change is great. It gives this group of ships a unique bonus that you hadn't slapped on other ships like the MWD and or Bubble immune bonus, its unique, and its new, and its kind of baller as long as they're the only ships to ever get it. I've been waiting for this set since you started the tiericide, I'm not at all let down. 100% not bitching about it, just wondering out loud at the potential lack of people running anoms in wormholes with no way to protect themselves anymore. If only they made a probe that could detect ships in space that weren't cloaked. Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1059	Posted - 2014.12.19 01:14:31 - [589] - Quote maybe both minnies should be missile based, but maybe rapier could be armour tanked instead give it a 5th lowslot and more armour than shields Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
MaxPower 519 Damage Distribution Incorporated 2	Posted - 2014.12.19 01:17:46 - [590] - Quote Morwen Lagann wrote: Pilgrim without its neut amount bonus? One word: Ugh. If you absolutely must put a range bonus on it, make it a small one and keep the amount one. Don't neuter the thing it was good at. With this change it's just a weak Curse with a cloak. Which isn't all that big a ~thing~ with the whole "invisible to d-scan" bonus that you want to give to combat recons. With these changes there'd be even fewer reasons to fly a Pilgrim than there are right now. As a Pilgrim pilot I would agree with this.

Deych Far East Inc The Gorgon Empire 14	Posted - 2014.12.19 01:20:03 - [591] - Quote CCP Rise, please! Can we have one more low-slot for Huginn and Lachesis? Armor gangs really need some love.
Grath Telkin Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 2670	Posted - 2014.12.19 01:22:29 - [592] - Quote MaxPower 519 wrote: Morwen Lagann wrote: Pilgrim without its neut amount bonus? One word: Ugh. If you absolutely must put a range bonus on it, make it a small one and keep the amount one. Don't neuter the thing it was good at. With this change it's just a weak Curse with a cloak. Which isn't all that big a ~thing~ with the whole "invisible to d-scan" bonus that you want to give to combat recons. With these changes there'd be even fewer reasons to fly a Pilgrim than there are right now. As a Pilgrim pilot I would agree with this. As a guy who's been flying pilgrims for years you're both wrong, the thing you want the pilgrim to do it can't do anymore and hasn't been able to do since Anoms were introduced and people started ratting together in systems. I know, its literally my favorite ship in EVE, only EVE changed, and that thing it does isn't really a thing anymore. Your DPS is so lackluster that theres zero chance of you killing a ratter now without help arriving for him. So, the pilgrim needed to be redesigned around the current environment of Blops gangs where the pilgrim (you know, the one that can use the blops bridge, not the Dscan immune one that still has to take gates or titan bridges with tell tale cynos) was the only ship left that had to go danger close to a target to be effective at all. Now a pilgrim will effectively be able to support its blops fleet with TD's and neuts from range, without having to go into scram and web range. Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Dr Jihad Alhariri Dr Jihad's Brigade of Interstellar Mujahideen Corrosive. 15	Posted - 2014.12.19 01:33:16 - [593] - Quote So far, there has been a lot of negative feedback regarding the proposed dscan immunity for the combat recons. Specifically, people are stating it is going to be OP. Some predict it will ruin PvE entirely in C1, C2, and C3 wormholes. Here are my thoughts... We already have frigates that can warp around cloaked and launch bombs that decimate huge fleets of battleships (and other ships too!). Before they launch their bombs, these frigates cannot be detected on dscan. We already have combat cruisers that can warp around cloaked with over 100k EHP and deliver a satisfactory 500 DPS within scram range. Before they decloak and attack, they cannot be detected on dscan. We already have a subset of recon ships, force recons, that can warp around cloaked and cripple enemies with their enhanced Ewar capabilities. Before they decloak and attack, they cannot be detected on dscan. These recons will retain their ability to be undetectable on dscan after the upcoming patch with their covert ops cloaks. Now, the other subset of recon ships, combat recons, is proposed to be given the ability to be undetectable on dscan in the upcoming patch. They still cannot fit a covert ops cloak and warp around cloaked, though. And combat probes will still be able to sniff them out! So I am not seeing how the proposed dscan immunity will be OP. We already have a plethora of ships in the game that are effectively undetectable on dscan before they launch their attacks, including other recons that have Ewar capabilities that are identical or very similar to that of combat recons. Yet wormhole PvE still persists. Am I missing an important detail regarding combat recons that would make them severly OP when given the proposed ability to be immune from dscan?
Alty McAltypants Eretz Israel 3	Posted - 2014.12.19 01:37:44 - [594] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Hello again o/ Hi. You guys and ladies have been on fire recently, but I think you are possibly overheating with these changes. Comments: a) a role bonus making a ship undetectable to D-Scan is a terrible idea. As stated already, arbitrary immunities are lazy game design and feel horrible. All other changes in this thread seem palatable, but this really tastes acidic. b) by making a ship immune to D-scan, you affect WH groups and highlight local as a source of intel. Please consider fixing the local chat channel, how players use local and D-Scan before introducing a ship that is immume to one (i.e. D-Scan) in k-space and immume to both in WH space. c) if you are trying to close the gap between combat recons and T3 ships, why not nerf the T3 ships back instead of buffing the T2's? If you thought about this already, please share your thoughts. Let me remind you that the T3 ships have some of the same bonuses as the recons line, why not try removing these from the T3 lines/modules or rebalancing T3? Of course, T3's overlap with logistics (shield/armour transfer) as well and arguably interceptors (i.e. interdiction nullifiers), but who said they had to make sense. d) In null sec, neut enters local = run to pos/station/safe. In low sec (at the moment), hostile enters low sec = mash and tune D-Scan, the hostile will decloak at a complex's entrance at least. Only if you are in one of the few non-gated mission (level 5 and very few Level 4s), higher tier FW sites and some expo sites might you be caught with you pants down but you could mitigate this by dropping a can at the warp in, moving away from the entrance, aligning out and mashing warp in the 4-5s window you have if a recon decloaked within scram/disruptor range. This proposed change, in essence, makes low sec activities more risky, sure I can bring an alt and park them on the warp gate cloaked but is that honestly the anticipated counter? In other words, my feeling is that this will affect low sec game play the most. e) Increasing resists to HAC levels, uping the speed, etc. Great but why. See point c). f) Pilgrim change to range is a but meh, give it another low (plus a sprinkling of grid/cpu) and leave the neuted amount bonus. g) Merry Xmas lachesis pilots which gets an extra 2 turrets and more drones. Couple this with D-Scan immunity and trollolollolol. peace
Ben Ishikela Medico - Health Provisions 10	Posted - 2014.12.19 01:48:32 - [595] - Quote uh oh to all pve i had some issues with recon ships. they are as vital as dangerous in fleet engagements. people get punished already on the nooblevel for flying ewar and get primary at beginning of fights. ewar does not need guns! imho they need tank! they are support. they have a great strength in small-gangs. they are the second most social friendship after logi. So i suggest: 1st drop some highslots to have a minimum of 2 for cloak and a nos or scanner. add some med or lowslots to be able to add more tank. similar to the amarrian recons lesser medslots and more low or make recons able to use neuts in a midslot (i dont know if this switch of slots for one item is doable at all) 2nd: divert damage boni to tank boni like resistance or repair. a overall signature reduction might also help. also make sure, they can all be shield or armor tanked. 3rd: rename to "electronic support" or "electronic defense cruiser" thats for the combat one. the cloaky can use some agility and mwd speed. again, damage not needed imho. they should be best at killing enemy scouts and providing intel. maybe add an ability that they can see all cloaked ships on grid when they are cloaked themself. and instead of damagebonus give it a bonus to ecmburst range. on the dscan part: plexing mediums at FW in a combat recon would be so easy ................... and dangerous because of other combatrecons. Funny Suggestion: make them appear on dscan as a random shiptype. a huginn could appear as ragnarok or reaper. Suggestion: do the above proposed changes to "electronic support" and you wont need the dscan change anymore to make combat recons used in fleets.
Aralieus The Inf1dels 233	Posted - 2014.12.19 01:48:59 - [596] - Quote Wow! Did they make combat probes not show up on scan as well? This doesn't give recons the ability to warp wherever you are instantaneously as soon as they jump into system. If a new recon warps in on you then any ship could have cause you weren't watching for the old as time tell tale ~combat probes~ on d-scan and probably deserve that recon in your anom. Oderint Dum Metuant
Xindi Kraid Priano Trans-Stellar State Services Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive 883	Posted - 2014.12.19 01:58:13 - [597] - Quote I don't really get what is wrong with Roden ships being missile ships. Amarr have Khanid missile ships (though for symetry maybe Caldari and Minmatar should ahve gotten some T2 drone boats. All you REALLY needed to do is make the Enyo a Duvolle ship and the Nemesis a Roden ship. === As for the ships themselves, I do like the sentiment behind a range bonus for the Pilgrim to let it control the field better, but I don't think I like it losing the strength bonus for it. As for the D-scanner change: O_o
Moac Tor Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation 16	Posted - 2014.12.19 02:11:02 - [598] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: MaxPower 519 wrote: Morwen Lagann wrote: Pilgrim without its neut amount bonus? One word: Ugh. If you absolutely must put a range bonus on it, make it a small one and keep the amount one. Don't neuter the thing it was good at. With this change it's just a weak Curse with a cloak. Which isn't all that big a ~thing~ with the whole "invisible to d-scan" bonus that you want to give to combat recons. With these changes there'd be even fewer reasons to fly a Pilgrim than there are right now. As a Pilgrim pilot I would agree with this. As a guy who's been flying pilgrims for years you're both wrong, the thing you want the pilgrim to do it can't do anymore and hasn't been able to do since Anoms were introduced and people started ratting together in systems. Hmmm, I am on the fence with this one. When I first saw the amount bonus replaced with range, well, that completely screws how I was using them beforehand. They were the best close range covert cyno ship, as could fit a fairly decent tank, and the web/scram needed to pin the enemy synergised well with the nuet/nos amount bonus. On the other hand, it makes them operate much better in fleets as they can tracking disrupt, drone damage, and now also nuet from range. They were the only recon ship which didn't synergise well with the others in terms of its primary ewar bonus.
Neckbeard Nolyfe Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 29	Posted - 2014.12.19 02:14:22 - [599] - Quote Dr Jihad Alhariri wrote: So far, there has been a lot of negative feedback regarding the proposed dscan immunity for the combat recons. Specifically, people are stating it is going to be OP. Some predict it will ruin PvE entirely in C1, C2, and C3 wormholes. Here are my thoughts... We already have frigates that can warp around cloaked and launch bombs that decimate huge fleets of battleships (and other ships too!). Before they launch their bombs, these frigates cannot be detected on dscan. We already have combat cruisers that can warp around cloaked with over 100k EHP and deliver a satisfactory 500 DPS within scram range. Before they decloak and attack, they cannot be detected on dscan. We already have a subset of recon ships, force recons, that can warp around cloaked and cripple enemies with their enhanced EWar capabilities. Before they decloak and attack, they cannot be detected on dscan. These recons will retain their ability to be undetectable on dscan after the upcoming patch with their covert ops cloaks. Now, the other subset of recon ships, combat recons, is proposed to be given the ability to be undetectable on dscan in the upcoming patch. They still cannot fit a covert ops cloak and warp around cloaked, though. And combat probes will still be able to sniff them out! So I am not seeing how the proposed dscan immunity will be OP. We already have a plethora of ships in the game that are effectively undetectable on dscan before they launch their attacks, including other recons that have EWar capabilities that are identical or very similar to that of combat recons. Yet wormhole PvE still persists. Am I missing an important detail regarding combat recons that would make them severely OP when given the proposed ability to be immune from dscan? You still see those ships on dscan before/when they are cloaking. Eve is hard. *~lvl 60 paladin~*
Kontraband Venning Mecha Enterprises Fleet 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 02:20:56 - [600] - Quote I don't normally post or get too involved in the rage over changes but as a FW small gang pilot I just couldnt stay quiet. This change will be terrible in the fw zone. Small gang/solo rules for fw space after this change. Never fly anything larger then what fits in a small. Otherwise you will be jumped. Never warp into a medium with others in system. Never sit in a medium. Never sit outside of a plex. Move out.

Moac Tor Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation 16	Posted - 2014.12.19 02:23:15 - [601] - Quote Kontraband Venning wrote: I don't normally post or get too involved in the rage over changes but as a FW small gang pilot I just couldnt stay quiet. This change will be terrible in the fw zone. Small gang/solo rules for fw space after this change. Never fly anything larger then what fits in a small. Otherwise you will be jumped. Never warp into a medium with others in system. Never sit in a medium. Never sit outside of a plex. Move out. Or bring combat probes.
Primary This Rifter 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 352	Posted - 2014.12.19 02:23:39 - [602] - Quote I'm very glad you're returned to ship tiericide. After several expansions without I was getting worried that you'd abandoned the project. Alt of [redacted on advice from a reputable internet spaceships lawyer]
Syzygium Friends Of Harassment The Camel Empire 47	Posted - 2014.12.19 02:24:47 - [603] - Quote The Dscan Immunity is a horrible Idea. While it makes little to no difference for larger fleets where Recons only act in a minor support role, it is deadly for solo or smallscale engagements. Solo and Smallscale Fights are often started spontaneously and the decision to engage or not is done in a few seconds or the chance is gone. You check Dscan, they have this, we have that, lets try or lets move on. There is not a lot of probing with alts or checking the Grid with CovOps. Its going in, give or get a bloddy nose and moving on. And should there be a few cloaked Recons, well then you can try to kill the tackle, get in range of them or extract before they sensor delay is done. With the Dscan Invisibility there will be plenty of Situations where a soloplayer or 2-3 man gang warps on Grid because they thought the other gang is engageble and simply is instantly dead. These Recons will not be used as "support" ships but as main fighting force that is able to lockdown smaller groups completely via EWar while the other ships are just uesed as bait and source of DPS. While dying to a trap is not the main problem, the inability to avoid being trapped is. You force everyone to either move as Blob where Recons are no danger or to have a Probing Alt all the time which is simpy annoying and fun-killing. This change is bad because it heavily favors ganks and put smaller groups at a significant disadvantage.
Syzygium Friends Of Harassment The Camel Empire 47	Posted - 2014.12.19 02:27:16 - [604] - Quote doublepost delete plz
Promiscuous Female GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 536	Posted - 2014.12.19 02:31:12 - [605] - Quote lmbo at all the nerds who refuse to do things in space without perfect intel about everything around them
Thedaius Repercussus Goonswarm Federation 36	Posted - 2014.12.19 02:31:40 - [606] - Quote Can the rook (a cruiser) get rapid light bonuses? I think this would make it a much more viable ECM boat! HAM's make no sense for a recon since it's suppose to be far off ham's make absolutely 0 sense for a rook to be bonus'd too!
Dani Maulerant Order of the Valkyrie LOADED-DICE 8	Posted - 2014.12.19 02:38:18 - [607] - Quote Promiscuous Female wrote: lmbo at all the nerds who refuse to do things in space without perfect intel about everything around them lol spoken by one with numerous intel channels about what's all around them for 10 jumps in any direction.
Kyle Meshuggah Dark Fusion Industries Limitless Redux 10	Posted - 2014.12.19 02:38:46 - [608] - Quote As a player who DAILY PVEs and PVPs in C1-C3 systems, I LOVE these chagnes! Eff yeah 1000x over! Me and my corpmates have been rejoicing over this dev blog since we first read it this morning. CCP Rise, u da man! Pilgrim changes: super mega dope now! Curse changes: maybe even more dope! Arazu: buying my first one now! Lachesis: never even considered this ship until now! Every Recon pilot in my fleet when i linked the dev blog started screaming with joy. Every non-Recon pilot in my fleet changed their training queue. Op success, CCP. Also, to those who are complaining about dangers in wspace and this breaking low class systems and PVE....wspace should be seriously effing dangerous and operating here ought to be extremely difficult and deadly. Players who do not take the necessary defensive steps to secure their hole or their operations SHOULD be punished by those who do take the necessary offensive steps. So basically, be smart- take the steps to secure your system before you run sites, put alts on your doors, scout your neighbors or roll/crit your exits. Happy hunting my friends. :) http://i.imgur.com/8tmu8E2.jpg
Grath Telkin Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 2674	Posted - 2014.12.19 02:42:07 - [609] - Quote Syzygium wrote: or to have a Probing Alt all the time which is simpy annoying and fun-killing.. Stop being so anti social, even jerks like us have managed to find people that like scanning, you dont need an alt, you need a new friend, one who likes to probe. Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Grath Telkin Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 2674	Posted - 2014.12.19 02:44:15 - [610] - Quote Dani Maulerant wrote: Promiscuous Female wrote: lmbo at all the nerds who refuse to do things in space without perfect intel about everything around them lol spoken by one with numerous intel channels about what's all around them for 10 jumps in any direction. I dont have those channels and I think you're a risk averse ***** too Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

Bullet Therapist Caldari Provisions Caldari State 221	Posted - 2014.12.19 02:47:19 - [611] - Quote Gotta say I'm pretty happy to see that they're getting t2 resists, though I think I'd rather see a role bonus directed to tank than dscan immunity for combat recons given how quickly they get primaried. Also, it would be nice to see some attention for armor gangs, particularly with the lachesis. The huginn might be able to fit a passable armor tank now, and make use of both of it's ewar bonuses.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries Chelonaphobia 716	Posted - 2014.12.19 02:48:54 - [612] - Quote Dr Jihad Alhariri wrote: So far, there has been a lot of negative feedback regarding the proposed dscan immunity for the combat recons. Specifically, people are stating it is going to be OP. Some predict it will ruin PvE entirely in C1, C2, and C3 wormholes. Here are my thoughts... We already have frigates that can warp around cloaked and launch bombs that decimate huge fleets of battleships (and other ships too!). Before they launch their bombs, these frigates cannot be detected on dscan. We already have combat cruisers that can warp around cloaked with over 100k EHP and deliver a satisfactory 500 DPS within scram range. Before they decloak and attack, they cannot be detected on dscan. We already have a subset of recon ships, force recons, that can warp around cloaked and cripple enemies with their enhanced EWar capabilities. Before they decloak and attack, they cannot be detected on dscan. These recons will retain their ability to be undetectable on dscan after the upcoming patch with their covert ops cloaks. Now, the other subset of recon ships, combat recons, is proposed to be given the ability to be undetectable on dscan in the upcoming patch. They still cannot fit a covert ops cloak and warp around cloaked, though. And combat probes will still be able to sniff them out! So I am not seeing how the proposed dscan immunity will be OP. We already have a plethora of ships in the game that are effectively undetectable on dscan before they launch their attacks, including other recons that have EWar capabilities that are identical or very similar to that of combat recons. Yet wormhole PvE still persists. Am I missing an important detail regarding combat recons that would make them severely OP when given the proposed ability to be immune from dscan? yeah you are. Here it is. Anything that is cloaked has a delay when the uncloak before they can lock something. So true you can't detect them, but when they uncloak they have to wait 5sec or more before they can start locking you. So when they show up on grid a guy still has a several second window where he has the possibility of escape. now i'll be landing on grid uncloaked w/ sensor boosters running and insta lock you at range w/ a lachesis. my buddies will land on you w/ proper combat ships and pop you. My insta locking lachesis at range ensures you have zero time to gtfo once i'm on grid. So currently a guy has a slim chance and after d-scan immunity the guy has zero chance. What guys don't like is zero chance. This change will give them zero chance. It won't affect null so much, those risk averse pubbies are on orders to dock anytime a neutral enters local. D-scan is irrelelvant in null. They run like rabbits from anything. FW - plexes will be camped by recons. If the plex gate allows a cruiser in, then a recon can jump the gate and sit uncloaked and sensor boosted on the warp in spot. Not just one guy, it could be a small gang sitting there. Again, the guy trying to plex has no way to detect them in the site and they don't have an uncloaking delay, so if you jump the gate you have zero chance of getting away. WH - (where I'm from) won't be that different. You still get a chance to see the guy flash on dscan as he enters the system and the wh makes a sound upon entering, so if you're cautious and have a guy on the wh - you'll have warning. If you miss that you're toast. So if you're in a corp and do group things... you're probably not going to notice much. If you're a solo day tripper - then you are toast. If the recons are already in the system in a safe spot - then you're toast. The flip side is you can run sites in a buffed recon and not be d-scanned in a site. Which is in my opinion totall BS. You jump into a heavily farmed null there will be a zillion wrecks all over the system and a ton of anoms and no ship on d-scan. So the change really buffs risk averse null bears (the PL guy is all giddy and stuff). You have local to gtfo if a neutral comes into system and you can get lost in the clutter of wrecks and sited in an upgraded system. It's another handout to null farmers and a kick in the nuts to fw and wh guys (the guys that try to make a living doing small gang pvp) add to that whatever the new recon doctrines which my gut tells me will be OP and you have in my opinion a pretty crappy chang. Will it end eve? Nah. Would it be better to give recons a 'no local' super power in lieu of the 'no D-scan' super power? I say hell yeah!!
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 75	Posted - 2014.12.19 02:50:58 - [613] - Quote i just realized.. this is the ultimate counter to garmur's. Stealth garmur nerf. FW can be reclaimed from garmur menace. Already have a fit ready for new rapier. To everyone wanting huginn as t2 belli, the rapier is what you're looking for. Its 50 paper dps less than bellicose, but with 10% damage bonus, you get `150 more volley damage, giving your magazine an extra `3k volley. This is important when frig hunting with RLML, extra damage per magazine is best.
Syzygium Friends Of Harassment The Camel Empire 48	Posted - 2014.12.19 02:53:46 - [614] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Syzygium wrote: or to have a Probing Alt all the time which is simpy annoying and fun-killing.. Stop being so anti social, even jerks like us have managed to find people that like scanning, you dont need an alt, you need a new friend, one who likes to probe. So what you say it that SoloPvP is bullshit at all and should be ignored or at least forced to dualbox all the time and all other forms of PvP should simply bring MORE PEOPLE (what is the final solution to all problems in EvE, just bring MORE...)? Yeah that sounds great. Also a great idea to bring someone who "likes to scan". Yeah. We roam 50 jumps and the guy needs 50times to drop Combat Probes to make sure we don't run into a faggotrytrap with our 3 cruisers. That makes so much sense. I think this "friend" will quit EvE on the third day.
Suitonia Corp 54 Curatores Veritatis Alliance 403	Posted - 2014.12.19 03:01:33 - [615] - Quote OGBs are fine too, just get a friend who likes sitting in a safespot! Contributer to Eve is Easy:-á https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos Check out my PvP Rifter guide for new players; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YReUNRTGcXo
Dr Jihad Alhariri Dr Jihad's Brigade of Interstellar Mujahideen Corrosive. 15	Posted - 2014.12.19 03:03:47 - [616] - Quote Neckbeard Nolyfe wrote: Dr Jihad Alhariri wrote: So far, there has been a lot of negative feedback regarding the proposed dscan immunity for the combat recons. Specifically, people are stating it is going to be OP. Some predict it will ruin PvE entirely in C1, C2, and C3 wormholes. Here are my thoughts... We already have frigates that can warp around cloaked and launch bombs that decimate huge fleets of battleships (and other ships too!). Before they launch their bombs, these frigates cannot be detected on dscan. We already have combat cruisers that can warp around cloaked with over 100k EHP and deliver a satisfactory 500 DPS within scram range. Before they decloak and attack, they cannot be detected on dscan. We already have a subset of recon ships, force recons, that can warp around cloaked and cripple enemies with their enhanced EWar capabilities. Before they decloak and attack, they cannot be detected on dscan. These recons will retain their ability to be undetectable on dscan after the upcoming patch with their covert ops cloaks. Now, the other subset of recon ships, combat recons, is proposed to be given the ability to be undetectable on dscan in the upcoming patch. They still cannot fit a covert ops cloak and warp around cloaked, though. And combat probes will still be able to sniff them out! So I am not seeing how the proposed dscan immunity will be OP. We already have a plethora of ships in the game that are effectively undetectable on dscan before they launch their attacks, including other recons that have EWar capabilities that are identical or very similar to that of combat recons. Yet wormhole PvE still persists. Am I missing an important detail regarding combat recons that would make them severely OP when given the proposed ability to be immune from dscan? You still see those ships on dscan before/when they are cloaking. You will never see combat recons on dscan post proteus. Eve is very hard game. True, but that point is moot if they are turning on their cloaks outside of dscan range. In my experience, wormholes often lie outside of a PvE player's dscan range. And yes, Eve is very hard game. I think we can all be big boys and girls and deal with that.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries Chelonaphobia 716	Posted - 2014.12.19 03:04:01 - [617] - Quote Suitonia wrote: OGBs are fine too, just get a friend who likes sitting in a safespot! Hi sweety
Promiscuous Female GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 536	Posted - 2014.12.19 03:09:24 - [618] - Quote Dani Maulerant wrote: Promiscuous Female wrote: lmbo at all the nerds who refuse to do things in space without perfect intel about everything around them lol spoken by one with numerous intel channels about what's all around them for 10 jumps in any direction. i like "intel channel" japes because people have it in their heads that they are a nullsec-only feature anyone can start an intel channel, genius, just enumerate your enemies and report them in the channel, it's not hard if you're not doing it then you only have yourself to blame for not using the tools the game provides you
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries Chelonaphobia 716	Posted - 2014.12.19 03:11:43 - [619] - Quote Promiscuous Female wrote: Dani Maulerant wrote: Promiscuous Female wrote: lmbo at all the nerds who refuse to do things in space without perfect intel about everything around them lol spoken by one with numerous intel channels about what's all around them for 10 jumps in any direction. i like "intel channel" japes because people have it in their heads that they are a nullsec-only feature anyone can start an intel channel, genius, just enumerate your enemies and report them in the channel, it's not hard if you're not doing it then you only have yourself to blame for not using the tools the game provides you Such as D-scan? Is that one of the tools provided?
Promiscuous Female GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 536	Posted - 2014.12.19 03:13:43 - [620] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: Promiscuous Female wrote: Dani Maulerant wrote: Promiscuous Female wrote: lmbo at all the nerds who refuse to do things in space without perfect intel about everything around them lol spoken by one with numerous intel channels about what's all around them for 10 jumps in any direction. i like "intel channel" japes because people have it in their heads that they are a nullsec-only feature anyone can start an intel channel, genius, just enumerate your enemies and report them in the channel, it's not hard if you're not doing it then you only have yourself to blame for not using the tools the game provides you Such as D-scan? Is that one of the tools provided? sure, and now it isn't perfect just like how wormholes short circuit intel channels by providing random points of entry into a region it's all part of the game, chauncey

Serendipity Lost Repo Industries Chelonaphobia 716	Posted - 2014.12.19 03:21:20 - [621] - Quote Let's go w/ no local as their super power. How would that suit you chauncy?
Promiscuous Female GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 536	Posted - 2014.12.19 03:29:16 - [622] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: Let's go w/ no local as their super power. How would that suit you chauncy? ah yes, we've resorted to "attack the conceived entitlements of nullsec" play i see
Ghaustyl Kathix Rising Thunder 46	Posted - 2014.12.19 03:36:46 - [623] - Quote SpaceSaft wrote: All against are like "but but... I have to be ready to pvp?" Not so much "I have to be ready to PvP," but "I have to kill this brick-tanked heavy tackle before all of his friends land on me?" I notice most who really like this change are part of some of the more massive and notable alliances (No Holes Barred, Pandemic Legion, Brave Collective). Lorac Gemini wrote: Surprised there's more WH tears than FW tears here. Figured FW farmers not being able to see a recon on dscan would make them like this change less. T2 cruisers aren't allowed in medium complexes and lower, so this change shouldn't affect FW much.
KIller Wabbit The Scope Gallente Federation 815	Posted - 2014.12.19 03:46:33 - [624] - Quote RIP FW CCP .. always first with the wrong stuff CSM .. CCP Shills with a vacation plan
Grath Telkin Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 2674	Posted - 2014.12.19 03:58:16 - [625] - Quote Syzygium wrote: Grath Telkin wrote: Syzygium wrote: or to have a Probing Alt all the time which is simpy annoying and fun-killing.. Stop being so anti social, even jerks like us have managed to find people that like scanning, you dont need an alt, you need a new friend, one who likes to probe. So what you say it that SoloPvP is bullshit at all and should be ignored or at least forced to dualbox all the time and all other forms of PvP should simply bring MORE PEOPLE (what is the final solution to all problems in EvE, just bring MORE...)? Yeah that sounds great. Also a great idea to bring someone who "likes to scan". Yeah. We roam 50 jumps and the guy needs 50times to drop Combat Probes to make sure we don't run into a faggotrytrap with our 3 cruisers. That makes so much sense. I think this "friend" will quit EvE on the third day. Thats not what I said at all, but good job winding yourself up like a gigantic baby over it. Solo PVP without a proper or alts right now is already full of traps and ambushes, for the average solo pvp guy, literally nothing will change, his day seeing a lachesis drop on grid will literally be no different than when an arazu decloaks near him. He will have literally the exact same amount of time to react, because in situation A, you can't see the pilgrim until he commits, and decloaks, he's got a 4-5 second delay in his actions, the Lachesis, you can't see until he commits, and he'll have about 4-5 seconds of warp deceleration PLUS targeting time that delay his actions. So lets not drag the solo PVP guy on this, post change his day isn't any worse than it was before. If anything he's probably rolling around in a RLML Rapier owning Garmurs. Second, if you were just running 3 cruisers with no alts theres a pretty good chance you were going to run into a 'faggotytrap'. Second if you're really roaming in 3 guys and you can see 10 dudes in local but dont show ships on scan your spidey sense should already be going off, and if not, one of your traps is probably waiting to kill you. Sorry, all the crap you're getting spun up about is something entirely made up in your own head Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Grath Telkin Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 2674	Posted - 2014.12.19 04:00:29 - [626] - Quote Ghaustyl Kathix wrote: [Not so much "I have to be ready to PvP," but "I have to kill this brick-tanked heavy tackle before all of his friends land on me?" Theres no such thing as a brick tanked recon. They literally dont exist, they're all thin as hell. Ghaustyl Kathix wrote: I notice most who really like this change are part of some of the more massive and notable alliances (No Holes Barred, Pandemic Legion, Brave Collective). You just grouped two of the smaller alliances in eve with one of the largest. Get Out. Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Aralieus The Inf1dels 233	Posted - 2014.12.19 04:09:58 - [627] - Quote I truly hope CCP can sift thru all the whines, straw men and fear mongering and stand fast on a seemingly unique and fantastic approach to balancing recons with the rest of the ships in Eve. Once again great changes Rise and don't put to much stock into those who have painfully biased and obvious oopinions. They fear change and always will no matter which way you march so once again remain brave and see this through for these changes while absolutely a game shaker completely justified and sorely needed. Thank you Rise, keep up the great work! Oderint Dum Metuant
Gallowmere Rorschach Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation 884	Posted - 2014.12.19 04:15:56 - [628] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Theres no such thing as a brick tanked recon. They literally dont exist, they're all thin as hell. Well, to be fair, they are about to get a tad more beefy. I still wouldn't call any of them brick tanked, by any stretch of the imagination, unless you're trying to kill one with a frigate.
Suitonia Corp 54 Curatores Veritatis Alliance 403	Posted - 2014.12.19 04:25:55 - [629] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Syzygium wrote: Grath Telkin wrote: Syzygium wrote: or to have a Probing Alt all the time which is simpy annoying and fun-killing.. Stop being so anti social, even jerks like us have managed to find people that like scanning, you dont need an alt, you need a new friend, one who likes to probe. So what you say it that SoloPvP is bullshit at all and should be ignored or at least forced to dualbox all the time and all other forms of PvP should simply bring MORE PEOPLE (what is the final solution to all problems in EvE, just bring MORE...)? Yeah that sounds great. Also a great idea to bring someone who "likes to scan". Yeah. We roam 50 jumps and the guy needs 50times to drop Combat Probes to make sure we don't run into a faggotrytrap with our 3 cruisers. That makes so much sense. I think this "friend" will quit EvE on the third day. Thats not what I said at all, but good job winding yourself up like a gigantic baby over it. Solo PVP without a prober or alts right now is already full of traps and ambushes, for the average solo pvp guy, literally nothing will change, his day seeing a lachesis drop on grid will literally be no different than when an arazu decloaks near him. He will have literally the exact same amount of time to react, because in situation A, you can't see the pilgrim until he commits, and decloaks, he's got a 4-5 second delay in his actions, the Lachesis, you can't see until he commits, and he'll have about 4-5 seconds of warp deceleration PLUS targeting time that delay his actions. So lets not drag the solo PVP guy on this, post change his day isn't any worse than it was before. If anything he's probably rolling around in a RLML Rapier owning Garmurs. Second, if you were just running 3 cruisers with no alts theres a pretty good chance you were going to run into a 'faggotytrap'. Second if you're really roaming in 3 guys and you can see 10 dudes in local but dont show ships on scan your spidey sense should already be going off, and if not, one of your traps is probably waiting to kill you. Sorry, all the crap you're getting spun up about is something entirely made up in your own head This is horrible for solo PvPers Grath. Splitting up targets using celestials+directional scanner will be much harder. Contributer to Eve is Easy:-á https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos Check out my PvP Rifter guide for new players; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YReUNRTGcXo
Flyinghotpocket Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica 471	Posted - 2014.12.19 04:29:19 - [630] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: Flyinghotpocket wrote: why the literal ** isnt the curse getting a 5th low? do you still want shield tanking curses? i mean thats totaly un amarr. I know right! Thats like minmatar having to armor tank a muninn... oh? That exists.. probably deal with it like minny pilots do. You at least have wtfpwn neuts going for you. Well look on the brightside, at least your kin and explo resists will be really high. deal with what? how minni pilots can change tanks on a whim and amarr cant? ok no thanks i dont want a shield curse i want a god dam armor curse. 4 lows on a punisher is one thing but on a ***** CRUISER designed to be armor tanked is another. especially when your always forced to have a stupid reactor control on it. Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro

Samuel Wess Torin Industries Happy Cartel 77	Posted - 2014.12.19 04:33:13 - [631] - Quote Will we ever have some stable ship design ? It's confusing to change slots/bonuses every 3 months. Walk into the club like "What up? I got a big cockpit!"
Ciba Lexlulu Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 51	Posted - 2014.12.19 04:45:29 - [632] - Quote Unusual changes. Will force many people to adapt (or quit).. Dscan has been too powerful imho. This will add a level of unpredictability to the game play. To counter some of the issues raise and to balance combat recon unique immunity, may be their scan res can be nerfed abit. Which effectively allow a fast cruiser to align and warp out if combat recon drop on top of them. Edit. Forgot to mention, overall i like the changes to Recon.. GJ Rise!
Syzygium Friends Of Harassment The Camel Empire 49	Posted - 2014.12.19 04:46:45 - [633] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Syzygium wrote: Grath Telkin wrote: Syzygium wrote: or to have a Probing Alt all the time which is simpy annoying and fun-killing.. Stop being so anti social, even jerks like us have managed to find people that like scanning, you dont need an alt, you need a new friend, one who likes to probe. So what you say it that SoloPvP is bullshit at all and should be ignored or at least forced to dualbox all the time and all other forms of PvP should simply bring MORE PEOPLE (what is the final solution to all problems in EvE, just bring MORE...)? Yeah that sounds great. Also a great idea to bring someone who "likes to scan". Yeah. We roam 50 jumps and the guy needs 50times to drop Combat Probes to make sure we don't run into a faggotrytrap with our 3 cruisers. That makes so much sense. I think this "friend" will quit EvE on the third day. Thats not what I said at all, but good job winding yourself up like a gigantic baby over it. Solo PVP without a proper or alts right now is already full of traps and ambushes, for the average solo pvp guy, literally nothing will change, his day seeing a lachesis drop on grid will literally be no different than when an arazu decloaks near him. He will have literally the exact same amount of time to react, because in situation A, you can't see the pilgrim until he commits, and decloaks, he's got a 4-5 second delay in his actions, the Lachesis, you can't see until he commits, and he'll have about 4-5 seconds of warp deceleration PLUS targeting time that delay his actions. So lets not drag the solo PVP guy on this, post change his day isn't any worse than it was before. If anything he's probably rolling around in a RLML Rapier owning Garmurs. Second, if you were just running 3 cruisers with no alts theres a pretty good chance you were going to run into a 'faggotytrap'. Second if you're really roaming in 3 guys and you can see 10 dudes in local but dont show ships on scan your spidey sense should already be going off, and if not, one of your traps is probably waiting to kill you. Sorry, all the crap you're getting spun up about is something entirely made up in your own head Sorry but you obviously have no idea about living and roaming in lowsec. You simply navigate fast and your decisions to warp to or stay in a location, be it an FW plex, belt or the star entirely depend on what Dscan tells you. People in local give little to no hints who is in space because lowsec is full of stations where half of the people idle all the time. You have plenty of PI Chars, Cloakhaulers or Soloplexers that are in no way a target or a threat. No one goes docking in 5 stations to check who is docked before accepting a fight or not. Also if you do not recognize the difference between a few recons decloaking next to you which gives you around 10 seconds to either warp out or maximize range and speed before they have a successful lock and landing on a grid with some already waiting recons (sensorbooster/remotesensorbooster anyone?) that have locked you 1 second after you have landed on grid, then you might want to watch a few great solo PvP videos and look how you can deal with decloaking recons in a fast ship. What you cannot do when you land and the sensorboosted recon is already waiting for you.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 14260	Posted - 2014.12.19 04:47:00 - [634] - Quote Time to buy rooks! Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Cale Agittain Calamitous-Intent Feign Disorder 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 04:56:39 - [635] - Quote I think this d-scan immunity nonsense is a mistake. According to the OP, the reasoning behind this change is to: "Give Combat Recons something to make them stand out as a unique and interesting set of ships" Rather than dscan immunity, let's discuss some other ways to make combat recons unique. Say, a cpu reduction bonus for expanded probe launchers?
Syzygium Friends Of Harassment The Camel Empire 49	Posted - 2014.12.19 05:12:44 - [636] - Quote Well, they could simply give Recons an improved DScan Range themselves, maybe +20% per Level. So these Recons an spot enemies earlier or watch over locations while outside scanning range from these locations (unless for other Recons). They would be great for scouting or warning purposes along with their powerful EWar Support role without making them the ideal traptool for farming soloplayers.
Tira Janau Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 05:13:03 - [637] - Quote Cale Agittain wrote: I think this d-scan immunity nonsense is a mistake. According to the OP, the reasoning behind this change is to: "Give Combat Recons something to make them stand out as a unique and interesting set of ships" Rather than dscan immunity, let's discuss some other ways to make combat recons unique. Say, a cpu reduction bonus for expanded probe launchers? Ridiculous EWAR power and sizeable tank/dps I think is unique enough. Syzygium wrote: Well, they could simply give Recons an improved DScan Range themselves, maybe +20% per Level. So these Recons an spot enemies earlier or watch over locations while outside scanning range from these locations (unless for other Recons). They would be great for scouting or warning purposes along with their powerful EWar Support role without making them the ideal traptool for farming soloplayers. I think the dscan thing is a hardware/software limit thing (i've heard that explanation given, so I cant verify it), but if doable would be a very nice thing.
Kontraband Venning Mecha Enterprises Fleet 1	Posted - 2014.12.19 05:15:05 - [638] - Quote Moac Tor wrote: Kontraband Venning wrote: I don't normally post or get too involved in the rage over changes but as a FW small gang pilot I just couldnt stay quiet. This change will be terrible in the fw zone. Small gang/solo rules for fw space after this change. Never fly anything larger then what fits in a small. Otherwise you will be jumped. Never warp into a medium with others in system. Never sit in a medium. Never sit outside of a plex. Move out. Or bring combat probes. Its FW. They dont need probes to find your plex and warp in on you. So you have zero warning. Lots of FW is Small ships. Gimping your fit to fit probes just so you can check every location to make sure your not going to get blapped. You would literally spend 90% of your play time using probes.
Justin Zaine The Scope Gallente Federation 106	Posted - 2014.12.19 05:16:55 - [639] - Quote If this is how they rebalance Recons...I can't wait to see what they think up for T3's. That must be some good stuff being passed around the office. Fucks Given --Perception/Willpower-- Skill at social interaction. 20% decrease per level to the number of fucks given in any particular situation.
Ghaustyl Kathix Rising Thunder 46	Posted - 2014.12.19 05:36:25 - [640] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Theres no such thing as a brick tanked recon. They literally dont exist, they're all thin as hell. They're getting buffed. The resist profile should give a Curse, for example, an extra 20k EHP with fleet boosts. If you're solo or in a small gang, you probably don't have enough time to pop it before his friends join in. Quote: You just grouped two of the smaller alliances in eve with one of the largest. I said massive and notable. I probably should've said "or" instead of "and" (it's late). But my point is everybody who loves this change are all in the beefiest alliances who don't have any trouble bringing more people to a fight. Yeah, you do need scan probes to get to combat signatures, for example. But you can scan them, bookmark them, then wait for someone to start running the site before you go in. And as was brought up before, at least the cloaky versions have to decloak when they go through an acceleration gate, and have a period of time after decloaking where they can't lock on to anything. If this change gets in, I'm probably going to be one of those people hunting site-runners with a Curse or a Huginn, but I think it's way too powerful for what it is.

Grath Telkin Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 2675	Posted - 2014.12.19 05:51:39 - [641] - Quote Syzygium wrote: \ Also if you do not recognize the difference between a few recons decloaking next to you which gives you around 10 seconds to either warp out or maximize range and speed before they have a successful lock and landing on a grid with some already waiting recons (sensorbooster/remotesensorbooster anyone?) that have locked you 1 second after you have landed on grid, then you might want to watch a few great solo PvP videos and look how you can deal with decloaking recons in a fast ship. What you cannot do when you land and the sensorboosted recon is already waiting for you. . So you're saying as a good solo PVP guy you'd see six or seven people in local but pick nothing up on Dscan and you'd still warp to the out gate? Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Grath Telkin Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 2675	Posted - 2014.12.19 05:53:15 - [642] - Quote Ghaustyl Kathix wrote: , and have a period of time after decloaking where they can't lock on to anything.. Its 5 seconds. If you were guessing man, what number would you lay on the amount of time it takes a cruiser to decelerate from warp and then lock a target? Would you say its more or less than 5 seconds? Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 1842	Posted - 2014.12.19 05:54:04 - [643] - Quote instead of the dcsan bonus (not saying i dont like it) but could be give the combat recons a bonus to cpu use on expanded probe launchers similar to the confessor? No scanning bonuses but the ability to fit it without gimping the tank.
Bienator II madmen of the skies 3040	Posted - 2014.12.19 05:57:10 - [644] - Quote what if recon ships could see other recon ships on dscan eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW
Suzuma Makiriemi Industries 8	Posted - 2014.12.19 05:57:38 - [645] - Quote Richard Justice wrote: CCP Rise, can we have the neut amount bonus for the Pilgrim back instead or range please? Pilgrim operates in web range typically and so range is not really that much of a factor where as the amount of energy neuted is more so of an issue. -D. Justice have you considered the possibility that its time for the Pilgrim to change its brawling role? maybe? just maybe? (hint: buffs to base speed, align time, capacitor)
Marlona Sky Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 5737	Posted - 2014.12.19 05:59:22 - [646] - Quote Samuel Wess wrote: Will we ever have some stable ship design ? It's confusing to change slots/bonuses every 3 months. Somebody hold me back. The Paradox
Karl Hobb Imperial Margarine 2168	Posted - 2014.12.19 06:11:03 - [647] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Geeeeez... I'm by no means an authority, but this seems like an overly powerful ability. A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.
Syzygium Friends Of Harassment The Camel Empire 50	Posted - 2014.12.19 06:12:05 - [648] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: So you're saying as a good solo PVP guy you'd see six or seven people in local but pick nothing up on Dscan and you'd still warp to the out gate? lol. You obviously have never lived in LowSec. Six or Seven People in Local means nothing here, thats the usual case in like 95% of the factionwar systems and is in now way an indicator for a waiting gang. And to your question: where to warp is completely dependent on system size, sec/corpstatus of the other locals and ship flown. Usually you warp to some celestials or bookmark to check activity via Dscan and then decide to look for an engagement or to leave. These cloaky-Recons are in most cases no danger, because you are long in warp or miles and miles away from them when they decloak and try to lock you. Unfortunately with Dscan Immune ships, that brings nothing any more because the information that there is a Vexor in the Belt is useless if you cant know if that is a Vexor or a Vexor and a Huginn and a Rook and a Lachesis before you are actually there. And no, even "warp to 100" or such stuff does not safe you when they have simply put remotesensorboosted Lach+Huginn at 50. You are immobile 2 seconds after you land and thats "game over".
Ransu Asanari Powder and Ball Alchemists Union Mordus Angels 192	Posted - 2014.12.19 06:13:47 - [649] - Quote I think that the discussion of changing our in-game and out of game intel tools should be a completely separate discussion, and giving Combat Recons invisibility to DSCAN should wait until we've had that discussion and there's a solid plan and policy around what intel we want to reliably be provided from Dscan, Local, Combat Probing, etc. When you look at DSCAN/Local parsing tools and Killboards, a lot of the intel generated is very automated and fast. Fixing ECM should be another discussion as there are lot of options on how it could be changed to be more balanced with the other EWAR choices. That said, looking at the Falcon and Rook as it stands out now, there are two main problems. The Rook seriously needs more Powergrid to be able to mix enough tank in the midslots to survive, as well as have a few jammers. Bringing it up to 750PG and reducing CPU by a bit in trade would make fitting it properly a lot easier. This is something has has been lamented for years. In addition, I really feel the Falcon and Rook are missing a secondary role for fleet fights. A corp mate came up with this progression for how things work now for the Electronic Warfare line of Frigates and Cruisers: Quote: Minmatar gets: T1 ships get Target Painting T2 ships get Webs on top of it Amarr gets: T1 ships get Tracking Disruption T2 ships get Capacitor Warfare on top of it Gallente gets: T1 ships get Sensor Dampening T2 ships get Warp Disruption on top of it Caldari get: T1 ships get ECM T2 ships get ** all You frequently see Huginns and Lachesis in large fleet fights acting as long range points and webs. You frequently see Curse helping neut out targets of interest or capitals. But there is no secondary role for the Rook except for Jamming. The bonuses CCP Rise has suggested for the Rook are: CCP Rise wrote:** Caldari Cruiser Bonuses: 5% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile Launcher rate of fire 10% reduction in ECM Target Jammer activation cost Recon Ships Bonuses: 30% bonus to ECM Target Jammer strength 10% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile max velocity So ECM has two of the role bonuses for Strength and Cap usage. Is this really necessary? Part of the fix will come when ECM is rebalanced, but as it stands, without a second role it really puts the Rook in a one dimensional place for fleet fights, which is why you don't see it a lot. It'll still work fine in solo and small gang fleets, but the Falcon is almost always preferable in those cases. I honestly don't have a good answer for what the Rook's secondary role would be besides Jamming. Potentially something to help counter Drones, Missiles, or Bombs. That would probably fit more under a replacement/change for ECM. Giving it a bonus to Rapid Light Missile Launchers so it can help screen light tackle, and have the tank and resists to stay on field isn't a bad idea, but this role is easily covered by newer players in cheaper ships. The fact that it has bonuses to Heavy Missile rate of fire and velocity means it should be able to do decent DPS. The new Rapier is going to be a lot better at applying missile damage since it gets bonuses to both Web range and Target Painters - both factor favorably into the missile damage formula. The Orthrus already gets an interesting bonus to apply missile damage better - I don't think it would make sense to introduce it here. Thoughts? Discussion? Powder and Ball Alchemists Union - "Turning Lead into Gold since 2008"
Grath Telkin Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 2675	Posted - 2014.12.19 06:18:05 - [650] - Quote Syzygium wrote: Grath Telkin wrote: So you're saying as a good solo PVP guy you'd see six or seven people in local but pick nothing up on Dscan and you'd still warp to the out gate? lol. You obviously have never lived in LowSec. Six or Seven People in Local means nothing here, thats the usual case in like 95% of the factionwar systems and is in no way an indicator for a waiting gang. And to your question: where to warp is completely dependent on system size, sec/corpstatus of the other locals and ship flown. Usually you warp to some celestials or bookmark to check activity via Dscan and then decide to look for an engagement or to leave. These cloaky-Recons are in most cases no danger, because you are long in warp or miles and miles away from them when they decloak and try to lock you. Unfortunately with Dscan Immune ships, that brings nothing any more because the information that there is a Vexor in the Belt is useless if you cant know if that is a Vexor or a Vexor and a Huginn and a Rook and a Lachesis before you are actually there. And no, even "warp to 100" or such stuff does not safe you when they have simply put remotesensorboosted Lach+Huginn at 50. You are immobile 2 seconds after you land and thats "game over". Whats remote sensorboosting the lach and huggin? Shouldn't you have picked that up on Dscan? Are they remote sensorboosting each other because that seems like they might have gimped their tank a bit. Why aren't you just killing them? Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 244	Posted - 2014.12.19 06:35:01 - [651] - Quote Btw this change will end all solo PVP in this game. Literally and completely, all the activity that FW brought to lowsec will die.
Cartridgexxxx BALKAN EXPRESS Shadow Cartel 5	Posted - 2014.12.19 06:36:11 - [652] - Quote d-scan immunity is a bit too much. if there must be an immunity to scan, it should only be there during the ship's CovOps cloak reactivation delay imo
Lisa Sophie d'Elancourt Empusa. 10	Posted - 2014.12.19 06:39:49 - [653] - Quote I don't like pilgrim nos/neut new bonus - this ship really doesn't need such a change. Rook unfortunately seems still to be a useless crap. Rest is interesting.
Syzygium Friends Of Harassment The Camel Empire 54	Posted - 2014.12.19 06:42:43 - [654] - Quote I have the feeling you have little to no PvP experience at all? Lets say there is a Firetail in a Small FW Plex. Dscan is clear otherwise. You are in a Jaguar and decide to be ultracareful and "warp to 100" to the Plex. Unfortunately you land and notice the Firetail is actually outside the Plex at 50 remotesensorboosting a Huginn and a Lachesis which are also remotesensorboosting each other. You fall out of warp and around 2 seconds later you are pointed, (at least) doublewebbed and damped to 10km lockrange which leaves you with 600m/s at fully overheated MWD while all other three ships are a lot faster. You simply go nowhere, you cannot come into fighting range and simply die. You can repeat this with mutliple sizes of trapgangs and baitships, all leaving to the point that you simply cannot warp anywhere anymore without risking to run into a no-way-out-camp in the middle of space. It really matters not if you fly a Frig, a Cruiser or a Battlecruiser, because you can neither leave nor dictate the fighting range. They just pin you down and chew slowly through your tank with longrange weaponry or drones. And thats something that cloaked recons could never do, because once they decloak you have plenty of time to warp out or at least get at fullspeed overheated (which means 3000m/s + in the usual lowsec ship) and have enough momentum to get outside of their tacklerange before they have locked you and accelerated themselves.
Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 244	Posted - 2014.12.19 06:43:18 - [655] - Quote Aralieus wrote: Wow! Did they make combat probes not show up on scan as well? This doesn't give recons the ability to warp wherever you are instantaneously as soon as they jump into system. If a new recon warps in on you then any ship could have cause you weren't watching for the old as time tell tale ~combat probes~ on d-scan and probably deserve that recon in your anom. Wow You don't need combat probes to find targets in anomalies. But after this change, you will need combat probes on every ship to see attackers, unless you are in nullsec. Dscan becomes worthless, and local even more important.
Catherine Laartii Dominion Fleet Group Templis CALSF 440	Posted - 2014.12.19 06:46:43 - [656] - Quote MaxPower 519 wrote: Morwen Lagann wrote: Pilgrim without its neut amount bonus? One word: Ugh. If you absolutely must put a range bonus on it, make it a small one and keep the amount one. Don't neuter the thing it was good at. With this change it's just a weak Curse with a cloak. Which isn't all that big a ~thing~ with the whole "invisible to d-scan" bonus that you want to give to combat recons. With these changes there'd be even fewer reasons to fly a Pilgrim than there are right now. As a Pilgrim pilot I would agree with this. I would like it if they just dropped the TD bonus and went for neut range and amount. Probably won't happen since TD's are the 'primary' ewar system for amarr.
Kyalla Ahashion Paladin Order Fidelas Constans 14	Posted - 2014.12.19 06:51:23 - [657] - Quote ale rico wrote: [quote=Vadeim Rizen]this is so hilariously OP. inb4 recon nerf. Since when do Combat Recons use covert cynos? Cloaky (force recons) are still d-scannable. Force Recons are dscannable.... for the few seconds in which they decloak before they point you and cyno in friends..... This just gives combat recons some parity with force recons. without also giving them a covert cloak. It's not a completely new mechanic, just half of an existing mechanic being applied.
Catherine Laartii Dominion Fleet Group Templis CALSF 440	Posted - 2014.12.19 06:54:16 - [658] - Quote Moac Tor wrote: Kontraband Venning wrote: I don't normally post or get too involved in the rage over changes but as a FW small gang pilot I just couldnt stay quiet. This change will be terrible in the fw zone. Small gang/solo rules for fw space after this change. Never fly anything larger then what fits in a small. Otherwise you will be jumped. Never warp into a medium with others in system. Never sit in a medium. Never sit outside of a plex. Move out. Or bring combat probes. Or, you know...friends? Aside from the curse, there's really not much that can stand up to a small, disciplined frig gang.
Petrified Old and Petrified Syndication TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance 195	Posted - 2014.12.19 06:58:05 - [659] - Quote Scheulagh Santorine wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners It is like a Second Christmas... This is going to be the gift that keeps on giving.
Lelira Cirim EVE University Ivy League 179	Posted - 2014.12.19 06:58:53 - [660] - Quote Cartridgexxxx wrote: d-scan immunity is a bit too much. if there must be an immunity to scan, it should only be there during the ship's CovOps cloak reactivation delay imo You seem confused? Covops recons do not receive the immunity role bonus. They're already cloaked all the time. _Do not actively tank my patience. \|\| -á_Events Team -á\|\| -áUniWiki Team

Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 246	Posted - 2014.12.19 07:13:33 - [661] - Quote Lelira Cirim wrote: Cartridgexxxx wrote: d-scan immunity is a bit too much. if there must be an immunity to scan, it should only be there during the ship's CovOps cloak reactivation delay imo You seem confused? Covops recons do not receive the immunity role bonus. They're already cloaked all the time. You seem clueless of the basic game mechanics, which is no surprise since you are still in kindergarten, learning this game. Covert ops ships aren't cloaked or hidden from dscan all the time, they will show up on dscan whenever they use wormhole, stargate or acceleration gate.
Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 247	Posted - 2014.12.19 07:29:22 - [662] - Quote P.S. Combat recons have been unique and interesting ships so far, there's absolutely zero need for the dscan gimmic that breaks the whole game. The stats buffs are good and plenty enough to ensure combat recons have a place in solo, small gangs and fleets. Well, except armor fleets that is.
Syzygium Friends Of Harassment The Camel Empire 60	Posted - 2014.12.19 07:35:30 - [663] - Quote Aiyshimin wrote: Covert ops ships aren't cloaked or hidden from dscan all the time, they will show up on dscan whenever they use wormhole, stargate or acceleration gate. ... or while fighting or waiting uncloaked to fast-tackle someone with the help of (remote-)sensorboosters (avoiding sensor delay).
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 93	Posted - 2014.12.19 07:51:04 - [664] - Quote wont show up on dscan? that needs to NOT be added. I solo pvp in low sec and guarantee its going to break the ever-living-**** out of solo roaming. With offgrid boosting, skynet, and a plethora of other pay to win opportunities the last thing lowsec in particular needs is another way for all the "coolbros" to get easy kills.
Suzuma Makiriemi Industries 8	Posted - 2014.12.19 07:57:05 - [665] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Time to buy rooks! the time to buy rooks was 2012 when they were 85mil 2 slow
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION The Obsidian Front 583	Posted - 2014.12.19 07:57:31 - [666] - Quote I'm sitting on the fence with the ComRec changes to D-Scan immunity. To me, I thought that the ships would be given more focus to a "role" rather than becoming the same through indirect means. The Force Recons (ForRec's) are the sneaky beaky type ones. They should have strong E-WAR and decent mobility but poor tanks and poor offensive capability. They are CovOps after all. The ComRecs should have been the true "Fleet E-WAR" platforms. Essentially HAC's but instead of offensive capability the use E-WAR.
Suzuma Makiriemi Industries 8	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:00:00 - [667] - Quote Bienator II wrote: what if recon ships could see other recon ships on dscan Rise you need to listen to this guy :)
Skyler Hawk The Ironmongery 34	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:00:14 - [668] - Quote Promiscuous Female wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: Such as D-scan? Is that one of the tools provided? sure, and now it isn't perfect Please provide a definition of 'perfect' that could reasonably be applied to the current implementation of d-scan or the intel it provides. TYIA.
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 93	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:02:59 - [669] - Quote Also if you want ships to fall in line with t3s just make isk actually matter, the only reason t3s are op is because scrubs can get a pimped out one for 15 bucks or a few hours of incursions. T3s becoming overused is a perfect example of how isk faucets like incursions affect the meta. If its too easy to get e-rich (or too cheap to get e-rich with real life money) anything with even the slightest advantage will be abused no matter the cost because the risk has been made negligible due to inflation.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 14262	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:05:47 - [670] - Quote Aiyshimin wrote: Btw this change will end all solo PVP in this game. Literally and completely, all the activity that FW brought to lowsec will die. You say this while I excitedly get ready to use solo rooks. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship

tiberiusric Comply Or Die Retribution. 193	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:05:58 - [671] - Quote So curse and latch become overpowered and the pilgrim gets nerfed (again). at least the recon bits for combats actually means something now
Lelob ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 196	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:12:48 - [672] - Quote Well this is just dissapointing. A curse is STILL worthless. The only good tank a curse could hope to get was from shields, and you are now removing shields and adding to hull wtf. Having a crappy tank, mediocre dps and kinda meh bonuses makes this crap. TD's cannot be reliably fit unless you armour tank, which is beyond ******** on a 4 lowslot tank. Removing shield mods for td's makes a curse worthless for fleet engagements because they always get primaried and will just get instapopped with the crappy tank. Neuts are not nearly as useful as something like ecm, first because they have a HARD range of 37.8km and second because medium neuts off a curse don't really neut enogh to be a threat unless they are neuting you over an extended time period, which never happens because they always get primaried because they have terrible tanks. Assuming t2 resists will resemble the zealot, then this is just bs, because amarr t2 has terribad shield em/therm resists. The drone bonus is far less useful then you might think though because anyone with 1/2 a brain against just a curse will immediately kill your drones and laugh as you fail to kill them. Because you only really can have 2 flights of mediums (you need small drones to kill off frigs) this is a big deal. More to the point, this is in no way better then an ishtar. An ishtar has a better tank with the mwd sig reduction, can fit 3 medium neuts and run 2 of them fairly long, is still probably fastter and does wayyyy more dps. If you want to try a solo curse you are better 99% of the time with just buying an ishtar. If you are wanting to do fleet things, you are better off in flying a rook, which can actually have a shield tank and jam things (as opposed to td's), or a huggin/lach which can do range control far, far, far better then a curse ever could. tldr: Curse still sucks at solo and gang engagements.
Aralyn Cormallen Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 623	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:18:35 - [673] - Quote I knew Recon 5 was a sound investnment
Lelob ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 196	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:21:11 - [674] - Quote Catherine Laartii wrote: Moac Tor wrote: Kontraband Venning wrote: I don't normally post or get too involved in the rage over changes but as a FW small gang pilot I just couldnt stay quiet. This change will be terrible in the fw zone. Small gang/solo rules for fw space after this change. Never fly anything larger then what fits in a small. Otherwise you will be jumped. Never warp into a medium with others in system. Never sit in a medium. Never sit outside of a plex. Move out. Or bring combat probes. Or, you know...friends? Aside from the curse, there's really not much that can stand up to a small, disciplined frig gang. Wut. A "disciplined" frig gang will just kill the curse's drones and lol into the sun about the curse kill they just got. Alternatively, if they see that someone is being td'd, someone is being pointed, the curse had an mwd, and nobody is being nos'd (very high chance of a cap booster) then they will know that the curse has AT best a 2-3 slot tank and will get roasted by just killing it and ignoring the drones. Considering most af's get a wonderful sig bonus nowadays and a big tank, I'd happily fight a curse stupid enough to engage me in a frig gang of 3+ people.
Lachesiss nomnomnom MOAR BABIES The Pursuit of Happiness 20	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:23:17 - [675] - Quote Somewhere in a Wh "OK guys nothing on scan only 2 sleepers left" "yeah awesome day making isk" "Still nothing on scan" "yep looks all clear and WWOOOAAAaaaaaaa" "holy ****, where did those 10 curse come from" "ah crap there goes my 5 bill ship" Im sooooo gonna love this
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 14262	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:24:25 - [676] - Quote Love these threads, we have one guy moan about how the curse is now overpowered instantly followed by someone else flailing around decrying the the curse is near useless. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Lelob ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 196	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:24:54 - [677] - Quote Ransu Asanari wrote: You frequently see Huginns and Lachesis in large fleet fights acting as long range points and webs. You frequently see Curse helping neut out targets of interest or capitals. But there is no secondary role for the Rook except for Jamming. Anyone dumb enough to use a curse probably has no idea what they're doing. If people want to neut stuff out nowadays, they use bhalgorns or legions (Rich WH people) or geddons, domis or ishtars (not rich wh people). All of the above neut out more cap then a curse does with the exception of the ishtar, but the ishtar makes up for it by packing insanely imbalanced dps and having a stupidly good tank with a sig reduced mwd.
knobber Jobbler Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 493	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:28:09 - [678] - Quote Every fleet right now is made up of Ishtars, so they do a balance pass on recons. GG CCP. Here's an obligatory do you even play this game comment.
Lelob ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 196	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:28:35 - [679] - Quote Flyinghotpocket wrote: Stitch Kaneland wrote: Flyinghotpocket wrote: why the literal ** isnt the curse getting a 5th low? do you still want shield tanking curses? i mean thats totaly un amarr. I know right! Thats like minmatar having to armor tank a muninn... oh? That exists.. probably deal with it like minny pilots do. You at least have wtfpwn neuts going for you. Well look on the brightside, at least your kin and explo resists will be really high. deal with what? how minni pilots can change tanks on a whim and amarr cant? ok no thanks i dont want a shield curse i want a god dam armor curse. 4 lows on a punisher is one thing but on a ***** CRUISER designed to be armor tanked is another. especially when your always forced to have a stupid reactor control on it. Here's a good solution. Make the curse, AS AN AMARR SHIP, capable of armour tanking. Man wouldn't that be novel.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 14262	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:30:16 - [680] - Quote knobber Jobbler wrote: Every fleet right now is made up of Ishtars, so they do a balance pass on recons. GG CCP. Here's an obligatory do you even play this game comment. Its not the ishtars that need nerfing its the drone they use. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship

Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1931	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:37:21 - [681] - Quote Lelob wrote: Well this is just dissapointing. A curse is STILL worthless. The only good tank a curse could hope to get was from shields, and you are now removing shields and adding to hull wtf. Having a crappy tank, mediocre dps and kinda meh bonuses makes this crap. TD's cannot be reliably fit unless you armour tank, which is beyond ******** on a 4 lowslot tank. Removing shield mods for td's makes a curse worthless for fleet engagements because they always get primaried and will just get instapopped with the crappy tank. Neuts are not nearly as useful as something like ecm, first because they have a HARD range of 37.8km and second because medium neuts off a curse don't really neut enogh to be a threat unless they are neuting you over an extended time period, which never happens because they always get primaried because they have terrible tanks. Assuming t2 resists will resemble the zealot, then this is just bs, because amarr t2 has terribad shield em/therm resists. The drone bonus is far less useful then you might think though because anyone with 1/2 a brain against just a curse will immediately kill your drones and laugh as you fail to kill them. Because you only really can have 2 flights of mediums (you need small drones to kill off frigs) this is a big deal. More to the point, this is in no way better then an ishtar. An ishtar has a better tank with the mwd sig reduction, can fit 3 medium neuts and run 2 of them fairly long, is still probably fastter and does wayyyy more dps. If you want to try a solo curse you are better 99% of the time with just buying an ishtar. If you are wanting to do fleet things, you are better off in flying a rook, which can actually have a shield tank and jam things (as opposed to td's), or a huggin/lach which can do range control far, far, far better then a curse ever could. tldr: Curse still sucks at solo and gang engagements. WHAAAT? The curse worthless? It can defeat basically any turreted subcapital ship in this game. I am not sure if serious or trolling. Comapring a RECON witht he ishtar.. the most OP of the HACs (that are already supposed to be more pwoerful in direct combat) "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1931	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:38:09 - [682] - Quote baltec1 wrote: knobber Jobbler wrote: Every fleet right now is made up of Ishtars, so they do a balance pass on recons. GG CCP. Here's an obligatory do you even play this game comment. Its not the ishtars that need nerfing its the drone they use. Although if they coudl field only 4 of them each time that would work as well... (although would push things to Domi online only) "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1931	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:39:04 - [683] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Love these threads, we have one guy moan about how the curse is now overpowered instantly followed by someone else flailing around decrying the the curse is near useless. That means it is very likely well balanced.... as long as the complains on both sides are balanced. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Tikktokk Tokkzikk The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos 190	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:42:22 - [684] - Quote The D-scan immunity makes combat recons just as strong as force recons (unlike everyone else, I think they're balanced), so they should have equal e-war capabilities (looking at you, Pilgrim's neut amount).
Herzog Wolfhammer Sigma Special Tactics Group 5846	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:43:58 - [685] - Quote Recons immune to D-Scan. This might have worked back when one had to actually scan down every site. Back when you can "stealth" with ECCMs in the mids and force them to put the combat probes in closer. Now it's suicide. Why even leave highsec? Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1931	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:46:12 - [686] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: yeah you are. Here it is. Anything that is cloaked has a delay when the uncloak before they can lock something. So true you can't detect them, but when they uncloak they have to wait 5sec or more before they can start locking you. So when they show up on grid a guy still has a several second window where he has the possibility of escape. ! Smart players already avoid that. You cannot lock or do anything for about 3 seconds after you enter grid and are finishign your stop in a cruiser nowadays. Smart people just turn their cloak of a few thousand KM before the end of the warp. And VOIL+ü!! They can already do the EXACT same thing as the combat recons will be able to do! The combat recons will have ZERO advantage onthat scenario over the force recons. The uncloak -> lock delay only mattered for when you were already hidden on grid and approaching slowly.. somethign that the combat recons cannot even envision to do "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 94	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:49:49 - [687] - Quote I'm wondering why people see the need to compare the combat v force recons on the same platform, they serve different roles. Might as well just remove one of them and just have 1 recon cruiser per race. Also I feel the need to repeat that the DSCAN immunity is going to be ******* broken
Lelob ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 196	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:52:13 - [688] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: Lelob wrote: Well this is just dissapointing. A curse is STILL worthless. The only good tank a curse could hope to get was from shields, and you are now removing shields and adding to hull wtf. Having a crappy tank, mediocre dps and kinda meh bonuses makes this crap. TD's cannot be reliably fit unless you armour tank, which is beyond ****** on a 4 lowslot tank. Removing shield mods for td's makes a curse worthless for fleet engagements because they always get primaried and will just get instapopped with the crappy tank. Neuts are not nearly as useful as something like ecm, first because they have a HARD range of 37.8km and second because medium neuts off a curse don't really neut enogh to be a threat unless they are neuting you over an extended time period, which never happens because they always get primaried because they have terrible tanks. Assuming t2 resists will resemble the zealot, then this is just bs, because amarr t2 has terribad shield em/therm resists. The drone bonus is far less useful then you might think though because anyone with 1/2 a brain against just a curse will immediately kill your drones and laugh as you fail to kill them. Because you only really can have 2 flights of mediums (you need small drones to kill off frigs) this is a big deal. More to the point, this is in no way better then an ishtar. An ishtar has a better tank with the mwd sig reduction, can fit 3 medium neuts and run 2 of them fairly long, is still probably fastter and does wayyyy more dps. If you want to try a solo curse you are better 99% of the time with just buying an ishtar. If you are wanting to do fleet things, you are better off in flying a rook, which can actually have a shield tank and jam things (as opposed to td's), or a huggin/lach which can do range control far, far, far better then a curse ever could. tldr: Curse still sucks at solo and gang engagements. WHAAAT? The curse worthless? It can defeat basically any turreted subcapital ship in this game. I am not sure if serious or trolling. Comapring a RECON witht he ishtar.. the most OP of the HACs (that are already supposed to be more pwoerful in direct combat) Assuming this is solo/very small gang, where the td is really only capable of being fitted onto a curse due to the tank loss, anyone with a brain would just bumrush the curse, scram it and own face or disengage. I'll give some examples of other common turret ships that might be fielded: Vagabond: Can tank the curse for an extremely long time, while killing drones. That assumes he screwed up and didn't try to scram the curse, seens how it's now the big meta to have a asb scram vaga. Deimos: Either he's rail fit and tries to snipe you and when he fails because of td he runs away OR he's blaster fit, which gurantees a scram and blamo he scrams the curse, nukes him with his sick dps and keeps his own stuff on with a nos. The curse might be able to win this if he makes the deimos chase after him like a dummie and neut him out, but that also assumes buffer fit without a cap booster. One of the big metas nowadays is a cap booster with a medium ancil armor repper. So if he gets neuted and nos'd he, simply cap boosts away to freedom or kills the curse. Either way the deimos wins. Nomen? They all have cap boosters nowadays and so he probably disengages. He's fast enough that no curse can catch him. Vigilant: New meta is rails, when the vigi get's td'd he disengages. He has vastly better speed/agility then a curse so he would have to be beyond stupid to get neuted out by a curse. Cynabal: charge curse, own him with autocannons at short range, ezy pzy. If you have a long point instead of scram you run away SFI: Cap boosted so he either runs away or gets a scram and laughs into the sun THAT SAID, most solo pvpers now are in either ishtars or cerbs, both of which ** out curses for breakfast. Most ratters are also in either ishtars or gilas or carriers too, so again nbd. If you fitted td's on a curse in a gang situation, you're already dead because either: 1. You tried fitting a 4 slot armour tank and got instapopped. 2. You tried fitting a td to a shield tank and got instapopped.
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1932	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:53:47 - [689] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: I'm wondering why people see the need to compare the combat v force recons on the same platform, they serve different roles. Might as well just remove one of them and just have 1 recon cruiser per race. Also I feel the need to repeat that the DSCAN immunity is going to be ******* broken Will only be meaningful on WH and maybe FW sites. Every other activity already relies in local 10 times more than in DSCAN. Unfortunately the sensors mechanics in this game are too simplistic. The directional scanner should never be absolute. It should always have a chance of detecting something, and each ship would be a different chance, based on their signature againdt he scanning sensor strenght. Then would be easier and more balanced to just give a BONUS to the combat recons on that. This also would create a good reason to keep a fleet small, because less hips woudl mean less likely to be detected. But we are stuck with a primitive and oversimplistic mechanic. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1653	Posted - 2014.12.19 08:57:57 - [690] - Quote Adam C wrote: for trolly ideas i would of preferred combat recons dont appear in local but on dscan. is that even possible :D Oh yes, PLEASE do that but for the Force Recons! No local would make them perfect solo and scout ships. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.

VonBeerpuszken HUSARIA Curatores Veritatis Alliance 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:06:06 - [691] - Quote Great change, but it would be better for Pilgrim: Recon Ships Bonuses: 25% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer range 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer amoun
Fu Qjoo Pangalactic Frontline Supply Agency 27	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:09:50 - [692] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners This is the best idea you ever had - which is an achievement by its own. A combat recon or 2 in every FW medium complex will contribute a lot to the new player experience,
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 95	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:12:01 - [693] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: I'm wondering why people see the need to compare the combat v force recons on the same platform, they serve different roles. Might as well just remove one of them and just have 1 recon cruiser per race. Also I feel the need to repeat that the DSCAN immunity is going to be ***** broken Will only be meaningful on WH and maybe FW sites. Every other activity already relies in local 10 times more than in DSCAN. Unfortunately the sensors mechanics in this game are too simplistic. The directional scanner should never be absolute. It should always have a chance of detecting something, and each ship would be a different chance, based on their signature againdt he scanning sensor strenght. Then would be easier and more balanced to just give a BONUS to the combat recons on that. This also would create a good reason to keep a fleet small, because less hips woudl mean less likely to be detected. But we are stuck with a primitive and oversimplistic mechanic. Why shouldn't it be absolute? Because you wanna roleplay startrek? I dont care. It's already bubble space and this isn't a simulator, it'd be nice to see changes based on the overall balance of the GAME not just on a ship by ship basis and honestly you cant even compare ships across classes as the whole point is they serve different roles. And if dscan is too absolute then change dscan, but do not make it absolute for everything EXCEPT that one shipclass that all the coolbros will be inevitably using. Really I'm just looking for changes that reinforce or encourage good fights in low sec so I don't have perspective on anything else. With that being said, this is going to ** on good fights for solo pvpers in low sec (example: look a slasher at the medium.. land at medium, oh a curse im dead).
HoruSeth Republic University Minmatar Republic 1	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:13:04 - [694] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: Will only be meaningful on WH and maybe FW sites. Every other activity already relies in local 10 times more than in DSCAN. No, it will not. It won't change WH a lot as they have no local, so whenever you press scan in DS you see nothing, but there can be a fleet of CovOps T3 out there already. Nothing will Change really. And most WHrs already have Scouts on their wormholes, you see recons early enough. And using Recons as Scout, who can not cloak is probably a bad idea due to jump mass range issue. Only difference: You just have to add 1x Combat Probes Scanning when you start until you have whole control. That's it. stupid, simple technique. But this will heavily influence FW and lowsec PvP and PvE, especially solo, small gang work. Totally agree on that Point. And from my current Point of view that influence is too much! Buff the Recons? Yes! Make CR DS-immune? Don't do it. It will unbalance things in bad way as there is literelly not much how you can counter that in lowsec. This has been described by others already in this topic!
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1653	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:15:27 - [695] - Quote I don't understand all the complaints about the d-scan thing. How is this different in principle to the covert ops cloak? It 'breaks' just as many things as d-scan immunity does. But then I've always thought that there should be a specific probe to detect (if not necessarily resolve) cloaked ships. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 95	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:18:33 - [696] - Quote Zappity wrote: I don't understand all the complaints about the d-scan thing. How is this different in principle to the covert ops cloak? It 'breaks' just as many things as d-scan immunity does. But then I've always thought that there should be a specific probe to detect (if not necessarily resolve) cloaked ships. because if someone is cloaked in a medium with their t1 frig bait, they have a locking delay to wait out while you leave, furthermore you cant cloak within 30km of the plex so they have to burn in (if only slightly it still matters ALLOT) to get a point on you.
HoruSeth Republic University Minmatar Republic 3	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:21:41 - [697] - Quote Zappity wrote: I don't understand all the complaints about the d-scan thing. How is this different in principle to the covert ops cloak? It 'breaks' just as many things as d-scan immunity does. But then I've always thought that there should be a specific probe to detect (if not necessarily resolve) cloaked ships. E.g. because CovertOps have targeting delay (except Bomber, which are very fragile). And CovertOps Show up on DS at least for 1-3 seconds after Jump or can not Operation within 0m range to objects, etc, etc. This can make huge difference. If I would be a low-sec-plexer and see People in local, but can not assign ships on DS to them I would assume now they have CovertOps, which gives me some space to react. If they later sit in Combat Recons behind the first gate or at the first gate of my combat plex I have literally no Chance, except with a second alt, scouting for me before I am going in and Scouting the entrance when I am doing my Job. This feature again heavily disturbs parts of solo/smallgang gameplay in Eve.
Suzuma Makiriemi Industries 8	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:22:12 - [698] - Quote Lelob wrote: Kagura Nikon wrote: Lelob wrote: Well this is just dissapointing. A curse is STILL worthless. The only good tank a curse could hope to get was from shields, and you are now removing shields and adding to hull wtf. Having a crappy tank, mediocre dps and kinda meh bonuses makes this crap. TD's cannot be reliably fit unless you armour tank, which is beyond ****** on a 4 lowslot tank. Removing shield mods for td's makes a curse worthless for fleet engagements because they always get primaried and will just get instapopped with the crappy tank. Neuts are not nearly as useful as something like ecm, first because they have a HARD range of 37.8km and second because medium neuts off a curse don't really neut enogh to be a threat unless they are neuting you over an extended time period, which never happens because they always get primaried because they have terrible tanks. Assuming t2 resists will resemble the zealot, then this is just bs, because amarr t2 has terribad shield em/therm resists. The drone bonus is far less useful then you might think though because anyone with 1/2 a brain against just a curse will immediately kill your drones and laugh as you fail to kill them. Because you only really can have 2 flights of mediums (you need small drones to kill off frigs) this is a big deal. More to the point, this is in no way better then an ishtar. An ishtar has a better tank with the mwd sig reduction, can fit 3 medium neuts and run 2 of them fairly long, is still probably fastter and does wayyyy more dps. If you want to try a solo curse you are better 99% of the time with just buying an ishtar. If you are wanting to do fleet things, you are better off in flying a rook, which can actually have a shield tank and jam things (as opposed to td's), or a huggin/lach which can do range control far, far, far better then a curse ever could. tldr: Curse still sucks at solo and gang engagements. WHAAAT? The curse worthless? It can defeat basically any turreted subcapital ship in this game. I am not sure if serious or trolling. Comapring a RECON witht he ishtar.. the most OP of the HACs (that are already supposed to be more pwoerful in direct combat) Assuming this is solo/very small gang, where the td is really only capable of being fitted onto a curse due to the tank loss, anyone with a brain would just bumrush the curse, scram it and own face or disengage. I'll give some examples of other common turret ships that might be fielded: Vagabond: Can tank the curse for an extremely long time, while killing drones. That assumes he screwed up and didn't try to scram the curse, seens how it's now the big meta to have a asb scram vaga. Deimos: Either he's rail fit and tries to snipe you and when he fails because of td he runs away OR he's blaster fit, which gurantees a scram and blamo he scrams the curse, nukes him with his sick dps and keeps his own stuff on with a nos. The curse might be able to win this if he makes the deimos chase after him like a dummie and neut him out, but that also assumes buffer fit without a cap booster. One of the big metas nowadays is a cap booster with a medium ancil armor repper. So if he gets neuted and nos'd he, simply cap boosts away to freedom or kills the curse. Either way the deimos wins. Nomen? They all have cap boosters nowadays and so he probably disengages. He's fast enough that no curse can catch him. Vigilant: New meta is rails, when the vigi get's td'd he disengages. He has vastly better speed/agility then a curse so he would have to be beyond stupid to get neuted out by a curse. Cynabal: charge curse, own him with autocannons at short range, ezy pzy. If you have a long point instead of scram you run away SFI: Cap boosted so he either runs away or gets a scram and laughs into the sun THAT SAID, most solo pvpers now are in either ishtars or cerbs, both of which ** out curses for breakfast. Most ratters are also in either ishtars or gilas or carriers too, so again nbd. If you fitted td's on a curse in a gang situation, you're already dead because either: 1. You tried fitting a 4 slot armour tank and got instapopped. 2. You tried fitting a td to a shield tank and got instapopped. nice essay deimos has no utility high btw
Karl Hobb Imperial Margarine 2169	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:22:15 - [699] - Quote Zappity wrote: I don't understand all the complaints about the d-scan thing. How is this different in principle to the covert ops cloak? It 'breaks' just as many things as d-scan immunity does. But then I've always thought that there should be a specific probe to detect (if not necessarily resolve) cloaked ships. My biggest misgiving about it is that Force Recons have to use a module whereas Combats get it for free. Granted, there is the whole combat probe disadvantage to the d-scan immunity over a Cov Ops Cloak, but I don't feel that's a good balancing point considering the benefits. A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.
Barrogh Habalu Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 815	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:23:29 - [700] - Quote Pilgrim: Somehow I feel torn. On one hand, neut range is a big deal, and cloaky platform makes no exception. On the other hand, it won't be able to punch above its weight anymore (terms and conditions apply). The problem with the ship was that its usage was very niche though, so I don't know if that's really a big loss. Curse seems to be all around better choice now that it trades cloaking ability for semi-cloak and all around better performance. The only thing I see going for Pilgrim now is that you can have it decently armor tanked to go with armor logi gang while being capable to make use of bonused TD. Something tells me that some players would happily trade cloak for Curse neut bonuses though D-scan immunity and WHs: Well, if I were to ninja PvE in a wormhole, I'd be more concerned about cloaky Proteus or Loki, ones that were around like forever. Granted, more people would do cloaky ganks now that force/combat recons are sturdier/sneakier since they are cheaper than T3s. Oh well. Probably not that much of a difference now that I think about it. I think that as far as ganking concerned, in practice combat recons changes will impact k-space more, depending on what regions we are talking about. I think this should be tried. Reserving the idea of making them visible at short ranges (under 1 AU) may be good, unless they are specifically designed to be flown offensively and pounce-tackling flat-footed pilots. Nishachara wrote: You can lower its visibility, for example not saying insert combat recon of your choice here in the column..but just ship or something. Yeah, having to guess between 4 types of EWAR cruisers will surely lower their visibility... Cyno synergy: How do you feel about slightly buffing time reduction, maybe at least to -62,5%; -85% ? I always felt there's so little reason to use recons to actually cyno due to risks and costs. It doesn't do much in return for that tbh. Nice for those who don't have spare character for dedicated CovOps ofc, but I'd rather see more reason to go this route over just lacking whelp toon (I use the term loosely here) hellokittyonline wrote: Also if you want ships to fall in line with t3s just make isk actually matter, the only reason t3s are op is because scrubs can get a pimped out one for 15 bucks or a few hours of incursions. T3s becoming overused is a perfect example of how isk faucets like incursions affect the meta. If its too easy to get e-rich (or too cheap to get e-rich with real life money) anything with even the slightest advantage will be abused no matter the cost because the risk has been made negligible due to inflation. And how exactly inflation and ISK faucets affect availability of long-present things that are built with materials? Please. baltec1 wrote: Love these threads, we have one guy moan about how the curse is now overpowered instantly followed by someone else flailing around decrying the the curse is near useless. With most of such posters pointing out different ways to fit and use those ships. So, working as intended, I guess? Herzog Wolfhammer wrote: Recons immune to D-Scan. This might have worked back when one had to actually scan down every site. Back when you can "stealth" with ECCMs in the mids and force them to put the combat probes in closer. Now it's suicide. Why even leave highsec? What was changed though? Anoms were always warpable, sites still have to be scanned down, ECCM "stealthing" could always be sidestepped by using core probes unless we're talking about missions (where ECCM works). I feel I'm missing something. Maybe you mean grav sigs -> ore anoms change... Also, about Curse tank, is it indeed so bad if you really need to fit armor and TDs, considering that we are getting full T2 resistance profile? I think we're looking at 55k+ ehp fairly easily - I mean, shield tanked one we have today is less tanky than that IIRC. But it's nice to have an option.

Viceran Phaedra Instar Heavy Industries 61	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:27:59 - [701] - Quote I like the D-scan immunity idea; we should at least try implementing it for awhile and see where it goes. You can always remove it if it doesn't work out. Otherwise, solid changes. Well done, Rise! Please make sure the missile bonus covers RLM launchers for the Rook as well! Chief Executive Officer Instar Heavy Industries
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 95	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:29:46 - [702] - Quote Barrogh Habalu wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: Also if you want ships to fall in line with t3s just make isk actually matter, the only reason t3s are op is because scrubs can get a pimped out one for 15 bucks or a few hours of incursions. T3s becoming overused is a perfect example of how isk faucets like incursions affect the meta. If its too easy to get e-rich (or too cheap to get e-rich with real life money) anything with even the slightest advantage will be abused no matter the cost because the risk has been made negligible due to inflation. And how exactly inflation and ISK faucets affect availability of long-present things that are built with materials? Please. You clearly have the IQ of a squirrel because I said nothing about the availability and was obviously talking about the frequency of use. Notice I said "T3s becoming overused" and not "T3s becoming more available". But to answer your question, when a pimped t3 suddenly costs $15 instead of $30 you better believe you're going to see more of them.
Big Lynx Chaotic Tranquility Warp to Cyno. 816	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:31:26 - [703] - Quote @hellokitty face bookmarked
Fu Qjoo Pangalactic Frontline Supply Agency 29	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:32:06 - [704] - Quote Zappity wrote: I don't understand all the complaints about the d-scan thing. How is this different in principle to the covert ops cloak? It 'breaks' just as many things as d-scan immunity does. But then I've always thought that there should be a specific probe to detect (if not necessarily resolve) cloaked ships. Much <3, but you know how plexing mechanisms work in FW, right?
Nami Kumamato School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 369	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:34:06 - [705] - Quote Stacy Lone wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Have you considered the implications this will have for wspace? I mean it might work for 0.0 where you can see that something is there through local, but in wspace, this will be absolutely OP and hilarious. No local, not even DScan anymore, how are you supposed to even get any intel? The only way to detect such a ship is by having either eyes on all wholes (requires multitude of characters) and thus seeing it enter or by constant combat probing, which can be seen by the enemy. I fear that this will make this ship far out of line in wspace, where intel is already harder to get than in 0.0. CCP - increasing the levels of paranoia and jump-scares daily! :D Well gues now I'll get 200 more bps when tiptoeing through wormholes [i]"And now my ship is oh so cloaked and fit It never felt so good, I never felt so hid"[/i] - Ramona McCandless, Untitled
Onslaughtor Occult National Security Affirmative. 102	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:34:28 - [706] - Quote A few things. Rook needs another low. either for another powergrid mod or more armor tank. take a high slot and move it to a low. Also I feel that the rook needs a ecm range bonus to remain competitive. a 20% strength and 10% range bonus would fit really nicely if you dont want it to be to powerful. Pilgrim was actually really good with the amount bonus, but range is also needed, so maybe a 10% amount and 30% range?. The real issue with the ship, (and the curse) is that tracking disruption only work on 3 of eve's weapon systems. So I would look into actually having them affect missiles and drones in some way. This would go a long way to making all TD bonused ships be better and actually useful. Would likely have to nerf TD a bit and buff the specialist ships like you did ecm and damps tho, but I think we would all be ok with this. Finally the big pink flame engulfed elephant in the room. This D-scan immunity thing..... Its a really bad idea as presented. The main problem I find with it is how it basically destroys all trust in d-scan as a intel inference tool, with no real way to counter it. Combat probes while they do work require either a gimpfit or a specialist ship to fit them. Also there is no choices in the matter, no draw backs in it. The only other thing we have that is dscan immune is the sensor inhibitor, which is so costly and has so many draw backs that its a very useful but also extremely niche tool. In your proposed state implementing it would be bad for the over all health of the game and would add unenjoyable complexity to the system.
Daros Shi School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 2	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:37:42 - [707] - Quote Changes look interesting the only stuff i'm not that happy with are the changes to the pilgrim. As it is now you can pick from the long range super neuter curse, but no cloak or get in point blank range and hard neut with the cloaky Pilgrim. After the changes the pilgrim will just be a weaker, cloakier version of the curse, and with the dscan immunity there will be few reasons to pick it over the Curse. A cloaky WH pilgrim will have 2 of the 4 highs occupied with cloak and probe launcher leaving only 2 neuts. It is fine now with the bonus to neut amount but not without it. At least give it another high for a extra neut (and change grid to fit) OR lower the bonus range by a lot and keep the neut amount bonus. Or just leave the neuts/nos bonuses as they are.
Skyler Hawk The Ironmongery 34	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:38:01 - [708] - Quote The Huginn could really use a buff to its PG - fitting a rack of 720s with nothing else will leave it with only ~40 grid to spare, so you're going to need multiple RCUs/ACRs to fit a tank and prop mod on an arty setup.
Infrequent Vanilla. 63	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:40:32 - [709] - Quote Boltorano wrote: You've basically made scout alts mandatory for "solo" complex runners. Thanks so much. No they haven't, recons are invis to dscan, not probes.
Axloth Okiah Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 537	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:42:42 - [710] - Quote Isnt it weird that all the amarr recons are drone dps (no lasers) and all the gallente recons are hybrids (no drones)? I would expect to have at least one laser recon in game and gallente to have at least one drone-based recon... W-Space Realtor

hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 95	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:45:24 - [711] - Quote Zappity wrote: :shrug: Don't sit at zero on the beacon. You will see them as soon as they land on grid. Perfect intel is bad, just like perfect stealth is bad. You clearly have no idea what we're talking about so let me explain. First of all you seem to be under the assumption that lowsec pvp consists of sitting in a plex and waiting for someone to warp in on you but fail to realize that SOMEONE HAS TO WARP IN ON YOU. So lets assume you're on the other end and you're the one doing the warping (which already puts you at a disadvantage). You dscan a plex and find a ship that would be a good fight, you warp in on said ship, take the gate only to find him sebo'd out the ass to insta point you and a recon that is immune to dscan sitting there ready to rip your face off, not fun.
Torgeir Hekard I MYSELF AND ME 105	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:45:25 - [712] - Quote Infrequent wrote: No they haven't, recons are invis to dscan, not probes. A common tactic to hunt plex runners is fishing. You scan a plex beforehand and wait for an unsuspecting target to run it. This way there are no probes.
Vulfen Snuff Box Snuffed Out 163	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:48:58 - [713] - Quote @CCP Rise, why is it that the celestis is still more effective with damps than the recon counterparts, it gets a 10%bonus to effectiveness the T2 only get 7.5%, i think these need to be balanced so with both are 7.5% or both 10%
Davader Space Cleaners The Gorgon Empire 56	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:49:23 - [714] - Quote Morwen Lagann wrote: Pilgrim without its neut amount bonus? One word: Ugh. ... Please, don't break the pilgrim! It is very nice close ranged anti-carebear killing machine, you are taking his most valuable bonus off! Why? Leave the range bonus for Curses, but please don't make a Pilgrim to be some weaker kind of a Curse. The pilgirm will be used even lesser than now if you change its main bonus!
Dracvlad Taishi Combine Second-Dawn 524	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:53:32 - [715] - Quote Zappity wrote: I don't understand all the complaints about the d-scan thing. How is this different in principle to the covert ops cloak? It 'breaks' just as many things as d-scan immunity does. But then I've always thought that there should be a specific probe to detect (if not necessarily resolve) cloaked ships. A number of people have replied to you on this, its all about reaction time, covert cloaked ships have a delay before they can lock, which means if you are on the ball you can react to it. Bombers are too squishy so will die, the same goes for interceptors, for example I belt rat in Stain using two Phantasms fitted for PVP, I take great care to be away from the warp in area, working out on the non-bonused range of an Arazu. A bomber decloaks I kill it, an interceptor comes in on me I kill it. An Arazu decloaks has a delay, I can try to get out or I can set myself to deal with it and what comes in, the trick here is that how close are they to you and what they bring in, but the targeting delay is key. Also system selection is key, the system I use allows me to mainly keep an eye on the stations in terms of D-scan, so if someone undocks in an cloaky I will know that, so can get prepared, also if they warp in cloaked they generally come in at a distance and then have to get close to you so they risk decloaking. A Force Recon ship and the one that worries me the most is the Lachesis with its long point will undock and I will not see it, it will warp to a belt and I will see it when it arrives on grid, it will have no cloak delay, so its locking will be fast, they will brick tank it and fit it for fast locking. That means that I have less time to get ready, less time to GTFO and of course then in comes the blob, the people who camp Stain currently park an AFK claoky in system and hope you think they are afk, my method is to wait a bit then go next door, normally an hour later they arrive in the system and you just rinse and repeat. All that will happen is that these people will park up Combat Recons in multiple systems and just lock you out of any PvE, the only good things is that they cannot drop BLOPS, however the people who try to lock down Stain do have Titans, so it just becomes impossible. My fun was operating in there regardless of these people trying to lock it down, I will even operate with people in system once I have an idea what they are in, because you fly to their weakness and your own strengths, but the Lachesis is just too damn OTT, so imagine a Lachesis and a Curse coming in on me, I have zero chance, so instead of being in space and playing I end up saying the risk is too great, so either stay docked up in station when anyone is in system or forget about NPC 0.0 entirely, which means that I have no reason to continue because hisec bores me to death... Ella's Snack bar
Erehwon Rorschach Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop 113	Posted - 2014.12.19 09:54:51 - [716] - Quote As much as the idea of being able to hide my alts from D-scan and sit inside a FW plex is appealing, the overall implications this will have is huge. I like the other changes, but the d-scan immunity is one I am not in support of. Please don't implement it in this state. Because your mum just couldn't say no.
Broker Jack Kimotoro corp 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:04:52 - [717] - Quote I think its a good time to boost faction energy destabilizers and vampires range that give a good role for curse in big fleets.
Syzygium Friends Of Harassment The Camel Empire 61	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:10:56 - [718] - Quote @Pilgrim: Instead of 40% Rangebonus for Neuts, they should give her 20% Range and 20% Amountbonus. This way you had ~30km Neutrange which is not as good as the Curse but a lot more flexible than then crappy brawlingrange now, while still have a good neutcapacity.
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 96	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:12:08 - [719] - Quote I think recons already have well balanced rolls, maybe tweak the stats a bit, but even that's going to be a moot point unless you're adjusting fitting/# of slots/bonuses. This honestly just feels like more completely random ccp tweaking implemented only for the ability to say "we're doing stuff" so that people don't complain about the real problems that they cant fix because of the endless strings of backend code that they still know little to nothing about (such as off-grid boosting)
Barrogh Habalu Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 816	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:13:41 - [720] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: You clearly have the IQ of a squirrel because I said nothing about the availability and was obviously talking about the frequency of use. Notice I said "T3s becoming overused" and not "T3s becoming more available". But to answer your question, when a pimped t3 suddenly costs $15 instead of $30 you better believe you're going to see more of them. By availability I mean scarcity or abundance, which directly affects price. If you want them to be rarely used due to price, you must change something in material / effort cost to make them. Tweaking ISK printing volumes will not affect that in the slightest in the long run. Prices will just adjust accordingly if you do, both ISK/PLEX and ISK/T3 ones, if you're so concerned about real money equivalents. In short, the reason you see a lot of T3s is because a lot of T3s are built. Without production factor you can have all ISK in the world and still be unable to buy them to the extent that you "overuse them". If they aren't as much more expensive than T2s and other K-space produced ships as you think they should be, then it's because it doesn't take that much more effort to build them relatively to T2s and Co, at least not enough for their price to be sky-high. Again, all is relative because T3s aren't exactly cheap and easy to build. Nami Kumamato wrote: CCP - increasing the levels of paranoia and jump-scares daily! :D I've never noticed how fitting term "jump-scare" is to describe something that happen to people in EVE on daily basis, especially if you lack intel. Anyways, can someone make breakdown on justification behind Pilgrim bonus changes? More practical arguments pro/against partial Curse bonus (some range + some amount)? I really feel that Pilgrim just loses its niche, stepping on Curse's toes and probably getting wrecked by it in the process...

Komodo Askold No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 241	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:16:02 - [721] - Quote Combat Probes, people. Yes, you CAN see those Combat Recons entering system, waiting for you on a site, or escorting a friend who's running the site. Drop those probes and you'll see: if it appears on the probes and not on D-Scan, then it's a Combat Recon. That's it. And remember you can place probes all over the system, much further away than your D-Scan range, effectively covering by yourself a much bigger volume. You can even place 1 or more probes at each gate, wormhole or even some sites. And, that will warn you of any kind of ship that is not cloaked, even if you have no Local. And the insta-lock due to not being cloaked: every non-cloaked ship can do that. Even cloaky ships, if they pursposelly drop their cloak a few thousand kilometers before landing. So, stay away from those warp--in points and you'll have time to see it arrive and mash that Warp button. Especially when the incoming ship can't warp cloaked, such as... Combat Recons. And if it lands directly on you due to Combat Probes... you should have seen them in D-Scan and have acted accordingly. You have tools to know about incoming ships; use them and you'll avoid not only Combat Recons, but many other ships too. Now about the ship stats, I wonder if the Rook could get RLML's bonused too, or if that would be too much for it to have.
Kyang Tia Matari Exodus 45	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:17:31 - [722] - Quote I, too, am not convinced that this dscan immunity is a good idea. It mainly hurts PvP'ers who don't have scout alts. Rise, I hope you can symapthize with this group of people. Life is hard enough as a solo or small gang PvP person, do you really want to make it worse? Besides, what goal are you trying to achieve with this? People are using both kinds of Recons for good reasons at the moment, and that's fine. Like Suitonia said, if there is any reason that the non-cloaky ones aren't being used, it's that they are too similar to the cloaky variant, not that they aren't stealthy enough.
Gregor Parud 789	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:21:37 - [723] - Quote Things that worry me: - I'm not so sure the Rook will be on par with the others especially because ECM tends to require more slots to work - that Rapier will need some looking at, sounds fairly OP to me
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1932	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:22:30 - [724] - Quote Skyler Hawk wrote: The Huginn could really use a buff to its PG - fitting a rack of 720s with nothing else will leave it with only ~40 grid to spare, so you're going to need multiple RCUs/ACRs to fit a tank and prop mod on an arty setup. Good point. The ships is clearly made for arties ( AC without falloff bonus on a ship with web range bonus woudl be nonsense) A ship should always be able to fit the weapons it is intended to use and the basic rest of the fits without need of a PG module. PG module should be used when you want to extend a bit over the basics. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1932	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:23:21 - [725] - Quote Kyang Tia wrote: I, too, am not convinced that this dscan immunity is a good idea. It mainly hurts PvP'ers who don't have scout alts. Rise, I hope you can symapthize with this group of people. Life is hard enough as a solo or small gang PvP person, do you really want to make it worse? Besides, what goal are you trying to achieve with this? People are using both kinds of Recons for good reasons at the moment, and that's fine. Like Suitonia said, if there is any reason that the non-cloaky ones aren't being used, it's that they are too similar to the cloaky variant, not that they aren't stealthy enough. What? what youare smoking? No one uses laechis, huggin and rook . They are more invisible than their cloaky brothers. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 247	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:26:39 - [726] - Quote Komodo Askold wrote: Combat Probes, people. Yes, you CAN see those Combat Recons entering system, waiting for you on a site, or escorting a friend who's running the site. Drop those probes and you'll see: if it appears on the probes and not on D-Scan, then it's a Combat Recon. That's it. And remember you can place probes all over the system, much further away than your D-Scan range, effectively covering by yourself a much bigger volume. You can even place 1 or more probes at each gate, wormhole or even some sites. And, that will warn you of any kind of ship that is not cloaked, even if you have no Local. And the insta-lock due to not being cloaked: every non-cloaked ship can do that. Even cloaky ships, if they pursposelly drop their cloak a few thousand kilometers before landing. So, stay away from those warp--in points and you'll have time to see it arrive and mash that Warp button. Especially when the incoming ship can't warp cloaked, such as... Combat Recons. And if it lands directly on you due to Combat Probes... you should have seen them in D-Scan and have acted accordingly. You have tools to know about incoming ships; use them and you'll avoid not only Combat Recons, but many other ships too. Now about the ship stats, I wonder if the Rook could get RLML's bonused too, or if that would be too much for it to have. Sisters Expanded Probe Launcher requires 210 CPU
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1932	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:27:40 - [727] - Quote HoruSeth wrote: Kagura Nikon wrote: Will only be meaningful on WH and maybe FW sites. Every other activity already relies in local 10 times more than in DSCAN. No, it will not. It won't change WH a lot as they have no local, so whenever you press scan in DS you see nothing, but there can be a fleet of CovOps T3 out there already. Nothing will Change really. And most WHrs already have Scouts on their wormholes, you see recons early enough. And using Recons as Scout, who can not cloak is probably a bad idea due to jump mass range issue. Only difference: You just have to add 1x Combat Probes Scanning when you start until you have whole control. That's it. stupid, simple technique. But this will heavily influence FW and lowsec PvP and PvE, especially solo, small gang work. Totally agree on that Point. And from my current Point of view that influence is too much! Buff the Recons? Yes! Make CR DS-immune? Don't do it. It will unbalance things in bad way as there is literelly not much how you can counter that in lowsec. This has been described by others already in this topic! PS: CCP, why do you nerf Pilgrim again? Eliminate the neut strength bonus is not worth the extra range! Keep the strength bonus and only increase the range a little bit (maybe just 10%). With regard to Neuting role the Pilgrim was fine as it is! No improvement is done by giving it more range, but limiting the Neuting Power. How in hell you can say that it will change othign in WH but willb eOP in low sec? Dude you lost all the chance of anyone paying attention on what you post with that... "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Jori McKie TURN LEFT The Camel Empire 180	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:28:11 - [728] - Quote Combat Recons being invisible on D-Scan will hurt PvP on every scale, solo, small, fleet, WH and FW. EVE PvP is risk assessment, most EVE players are risk averse like hell including most FCs. That means if the odds are bad against the enemy fleet = avoid fight and in it's extrem form "fight only if we don't lose any ship" = gank/blob or massive amount of logis. With Combat Recons being invisible on D-Scan that attitude will highten = less fights overall because then it will be a counting and confirming game. Means if numbers are suspicious any FC will wait for visual/probe confirmation "how many and which Recons", result is combat pace will slow down and will be avoided even more. The worst will be, everybody will hide his friends in Recons, so if 2 at first visible glance more or less equal gangs meet nobody will engage because not knowing how many Recons the others have hidden is not an option, especially if lcoal numbers don't add up with visible gang numbers. This mindset will harden into everybody and will lead to ** this just blob the ** out of them. In WHs, lol PvP ..... nobody will engage in PvP without probing first anymore. Thera for example will be bait+recons only after 1 week. In lowsec and FW, lol PvP..... nobody will ever warp into a medium gated pocket without probing anymore. Nobody will engage without probing the whole system first. That will be the consequences of invisible Recons for PvP. For PvE in null, wh, lowesec it will be even worse. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." --áAbrazzar
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 96	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:28:35 - [729] - Quote Barrogh Habalu wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: You clearly have the IQ of a squirrel because I said nothing about the availability and was obviously talking about the frequency of use. Notice I said "T3s becoming overused" and not "T3s becoming more available". But to answer your question, when a pimped t3 suddenly costs $15 instead of $30 you better believe you're going to see more of them. By availability I mean scarcity or abundance, which directly affects price. If you want them to be rarely used due to price, you must change something in material / effort cost to make them. Tweaking ISK printing volumes will not affect that in the slightest in the long run. Prices will just adjust accordingly if you do, both ISK/PLEX and ISK/T3 ones, if you're so concerned about real money equivalents. In short, the reason you see a lot of T3s is because a lot of T3s are built. Without production factor you can have all ISK in the world and still be unable to buy them to the extent that you "overuse them". If they aren't as much more expensive than T2s and other K-space produced ships as you think they should be, then it's because it doesn't take that much more effort to build them relatively to T2s and Co, at least not enough for their price to be sky-high. Again, all is relative because T3s aren't exactly cheap and easy to build. Yes you are right in a sense but we're not talking about the long run, we're talking about right now and right now t3s are overused because they cost effectively half of what they did a year or two ago because people have twice the income or are getting twice the isk for their plex. Now assuming it is correcting itself already, the prices aren't going up, meaning t3s are actually being used less meaning rebalancing everything around them is completely pointless.
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1932	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:33:38 - [730] - Quote Jori McKie wrote: Combat Recons being invisible on D-Scan will hurt PvP on every scale, solo, small, fleet, WH and FW. EVE PvP is risk assessment, most EVE players are risk averse like hell including most FCs. That means if the odds are bad against the enemy fleet = avoid fight and in it's extrem form "fight only if we don't lose any ship" = gank/blob or massive amount of logis. With Combat Recons being invisible on D-Scan that attitude will highten = less fights overall because then it will be a counting and confirming game. Means if numbers are suspicious any FC will wait for visual/probe confirmation "how many and which Recons", result is combat pace will slow down and will be avoided even more. The worst will be, everybody will hide his friends in Recons, so if 2 at first visible glance more or less equal gangs meet nobody will engage because not knowing how many Recons the others have hidden is not an option, especially if lcoal numbers don't add up with visible gang numbers. This mindset will harden into everybody and will lead to ** this just blob the ** out of them. In WHs, lol PvP ..... nobody will engage in PvP without probing first anymore. Thera for example will be bait+recons only after 1 week. In lowsec and FW, lol PvP..... nobody will ever warp into a medium gated pocket without probing anymore. Nobody will engage without probing the whole system first. That will be the consequences of invisible Recons for PvP. For PvE in null, wh, lowesec it will be even worse. That will ahppen for a pair of weeks then people will stop flying only recons and everything get back to normal. If being D-Scan immune was THAT decisive you would see ONLY stratios running around... "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment

Kyang Tia Matari Exodus 45	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:35:13 - [731] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: What? what youare smoking? No one uses laechis, huggin and rook . They are more invisible than their cloaky brothers. My corp has used the Lach and the Huggin recently, and with decent success. We also saw other people doing the same. The only reason we use Arazus and Rapiers more often is that we generally tank armor more often than shield.
Jori McKie TURN LEFT The Camel Empire 180	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:38:02 - [732] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: That will ahppen for a pair of weeks then people will stop flying only recons and everything get back to normal. If being D-Scan immune was THAT decisive you would see ONLY stratios running around... Comparing Stratios with Combat Recons is silly. Combat Recons are force multipliers, Stratios are not. One Huggin+Lachesis can change the outcome of a 10 vs 30 fight, 2 more Stratios on one side doesn't matter that much. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." --áAbrazzar
Gully Alex Foyle Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop 2801	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:38:31 - [733] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: Zappity wrote: :shrug: Don't sit at zero on the beacon. You will see them as soon as they land on grid. Perfect intel is bad, just like perfect stealth is bad. You clearly have no idea what we're talking about so let me explain. First of all you seem to be under the assumption that lowsec pvp consists of sitting in a plex and waiting for someone to warp in on you but fail to realize that SOMEONE HAS TO WARP IN ON YOU. So lets assume you're on the other end and you're the one doing the warping (which already puts you at a disadvantage). You dscan a plex and find a ship that would be a good fight, you warp in on said ship, take the gate only to find him sebo'd out the ass to insta point you and a recon that is immune to dscan sitting there ready to rip your face off, not fun. What happens today when you dscan a plex, find a ship that 'would be a good fight', warp in, get scrammed and webbed, then his buddy uncloaks in [insert powerful ship here]? Or a bunch of his buddies enter system and warp to you? What's the difference? The small chance you have today of getting away in that situation while the nasty people have targeting delay or are warping to you? But then again, this will only apply to medium fw plexes. Recons are too fat for novices and smalls, and you can easily check out larges by warping in @100. So quit whining and just be more careful in medium plexes. Please note that it's ALWAYS about the PLAYERS, not about the ships: you'll NEVER get a 'good fight' anyway out of the kind of player that would sit in a d-scan invisible recon in a medium plex just to blap unsuspecting T1 frigs... Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1932	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:38:35 - [734] - Quote Kyang Tia wrote: Kagura Nikon wrote: What? what youare smoking? No one uses laechis, huggin and rook . They are more invisible than their cloaky brothers. My corp has used the Lach and the Huginn recently, and with decent success. We also saw other people doing the same. The only reason we use Arazus and Rapiers more often is that we generally tank armor more often than shield. Anedoctal evidence. They are generally cosnidered inferior because the minimal DPS increase they have is insignificant comapred to the warp cloaked capability. If you really need more raw power you bring a loki instead of the huggin for example. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Heinrich Rotwang Caldari Provisions Caldari State 53	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:39:40 - [735] - Quote Jori McKie wrote: Combat Recons being invisible on D-Scan will hurt PvP on every scale, solo, small, fleet, WH and FW. How is A) a combat recon, thats just not visible on dscan, worse than B) T3, force recon, bombers, Astero and Stratios not being visible on dscan, not probeable with combat probes and not even visible when you sit next to it. How does pvp work with B) but will cease to happen with A)?
Claud Tiberius Fidelas Constans 81	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:43:22 - [736] - Quote Awesome changes. Those who are complaining about Dscan immunity just don't like to accept risks - or handle them. Once upon a time the Golem had a Raven hull and it looked good. Then it transformed into a plataduck. The end.
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1653	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:44:36 - [737] - Quote Dracvlad wrote: A Force Recon ship and the one that worries me the most is the Lachesis with its long point will undock and I will not see it, it will warp to a belt and I will see it when it arrives on grid, it will have no cloak delay, so its locking will be fast, they will brick tank it and fit it for fast locking. Lachesis is Combat, not Force, but I do agree with your premise. Lachesis will probably be a problem with the ultra long point. Not much risk there. I wonder if CCP could slow down the speed with which these exit warp? You can still see them on the overview so having a battleship-type warp exit would give a few extra seconds before they can start locking while still being visible on grid. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 248	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:47:33 - [738] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: Kyang Tia wrote: Kagura Nikon wrote: What? what youare smoking? No one uses laechis, huggin and rook . They are more invisible than their cloaky brothers. My corp has used the Lach and the Huginn recently, and with decent success. We also saw other people doing the same. The only reason we use Arazus and Rapiers more often is that we generally tank armor more often than shield. Anedoctal evidence. They are generally cosnidered inferior because the minimal DPS increase they have is insignificant comapred to the warp cloaked capability. If you really need more raw power you bring a loki instead of the huggin for example. Huginn and Lachesis are integral to shield fleets, because shield web Lokis and shield Proteuses are bullshit. Some facts for you, according to Zkillboard: Recon Ships TOP 8 Killers 1. Rapier 1,454,295 2. Falcon 937,331 3. Huginn 841,639 4. Arazu 659,607 5. Lachesis 626,537 6. Curse 533,506 7. Pilgrim 274,889 8. Rook 204,756 Note that this will change to favour combat recons regardless of whether the Dscan stupidity gets through or not.
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 96	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:47:57 - [739] - Quote Gully Alex Foyle wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: Zappity wrote: :shrug: Don't sit at zero on the beacon. You will see them as soon as they land on grid. Perfect intel is bad, just like perfect stealth is bad. You clearly have no idea what we're talking about so let me explain. First of all you seem to be under the assumption that lowsec pvp consists of sitting in a plex and waiting for someone to warp in on you but fail to realize that SOMEONE HAS TO WARP IN ON YOU. So lets assume you're on the other end and you're the one doing the warping (which already puts you at a disadvantage). You dscan a plex and find a ship that would be a good fight, you warp in on said ship, take the gate only to find him sebo'd out the ass to insta point you and a recon that is immune to dscan sitting there ready to rip your face off, not fun. What happens today when you dscan a plex, find a ship that 'would be a good fight', warp in, get scrammed and webbed, then his buddy uncloaks in [insert powerful ship here]? Or a bunch of his buddies enter system and warp to you? What's the difference? The small chance you have today of getting away in that situation while the nasty people have targeting delay or are warping to you? But then again, this will only apply to medium fw plexes. Recons are too fat for novices and smalls, and you can easily check out larges by warping in @100. So quit whining and just be more careful in medium plexes. Please note that it's ALWAYS about the PLAYERS, not about the ships: you'll NEVER get a 'good fight' anyway out of the kind of player that would sit in a d-scan invisible recon in a medium plex just to blap unsuspecting T1 frigs... First of all because you can break range on the ship that points you (the bait needs a web, which means no sebo, which means you can likely warp away before the bait locks you anyways) and possibly get away during that targeting delay, second because they do not have to fit a module for the bonus, and third because it makes having two types of recons almost 100% pointless. I think the absence of a countermeasure, downside, or balancing point (that doesn't involve your opponent having friends or multiple accounts) is the obvious problem.
Cartridgexxxx BALKAN EXPRESS Shadow Cartel 5	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:48:54 - [740] - Quote edit: this might just become the start of a long chain of ''improving game experience by adding new changes in pvp'' aka attempting get more subs by screwing up everything. I hope it won't happen with this game

Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1932	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:50:36 - [741] - Quote Zappity wrote: Dracvlad wrote: A Force Recon ship and the one that worries me the most is the Lachesis with its long point will undock and I will not see it, it will warp to a belt and I will see it when it arrives on grid, it will have no cloak delay, so its locking will be fast, they will brick tank it and fit it for fast locking. Lachesis is Combat, not Force, but I do agree with your premise. Lachesis will probably be a problem with the ultra long point. Not much risk there. I wonder if CCP could slow down the speed with which these exit warp? You can still see them on the overview so having a battleship-type warp exit would give a few extra seconds before they can start locking while still being visible on grid. If you are aligned.. you can already warp away because all ships take 2-3 seconds to be able to lock. If you were not aligned.. then the cloaky recons were already able to get you... The change is very small in reality. If I am landing with an arazu to get someone that I wave a warpin to I will turn the cloak off some 3 seconds before get on grid already. So smart players already can do the exact same thing combat recons will be able to do. The only real game changing scenario is FW sites were people can wait inside.. but even that has a drawback..because what comes trough the game might be 2 other recons... "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1932	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:52:41 - [742] - Quote Aiyshimin wrote: Kagura Nikon wrote: Kyang Tia wrote: Kagura Nikon wrote: What? what youare smoking? No one uses laechis, huggin and rook . They are more invisible than their cloaky brothers. My corp has used the Lach and the Huginn recently, and with decent success. We also saw other people doing the same. The only reason we use Arazus and Rapiers more often is that we generally tank armor more often than shield. Anedoctal evidence. They are generally cosnidered inferior because the minimal DPS increase they have is insignificant comapred to the warp cloaked capability. If you really need more raw power you bring a loki instead of the huggin for example. Huginn and Lachesis are integral to shield fleets, because shield web Lokis and shield Proteuses are bullshit. Some facts for you, according to Zkillboard: Recon Ships TOP 8 Killers 1. Rapier 1,454,295 2. Falcon 937,331 3. Huginn 841,639 4. Arazu 659,607 5. Lachesis 626,537 6. Curse 533,506 7. Pilgrim 274,889 8. Rook 204,756 Note that this will change to favour combat recons regardless of whether the Dscan stupidity gets through or not. Why in hell anyone use a huggin instead of a rapier? Besides being an idiot? And these laechis numbers at not big at all. Check the dampener bonus on the recons agasint the other dampenign ships and you will see why BOTH are not much used. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Jori McKie TURN LEFT The Camel Empire 180	Posted - 2014.12.19 10:54:37 - [743] - Quote Heinrich Rotwang wrote: Jori McKie wrote: Combat Recons being invisible on D-Scan will hurt PvP on every scale, solo, small, fleet, WH and FW. How is A) a combat recon, thats just not visible on dscan, worse than B) T3, force recon, bombers, Astero and Stratios not being visible on dscan, not probeable with combat probes and not even visible when you sit next to it. How does pvp work with B) but will cease to happen with A)? Have you seen a cloak T3 fit, like you use in Blops? It is gimped and rightly so, T3 Recons are at least 2.5 times more expansive than Recons (yes T3 have better tank) and you risk to lose a skill. Bombers will be in line and balanced after multiple broadcast with ISboxer isn't allowed anymore in January. Astero+Stratios are no force multipliers, they can't change the outcome of a fight in small numbers, Recons can. Force Recons with cloak are gimped and rightly so compared to full tank and full utility Combat Recon. It is simple why should i use a gimped cloak Recon when i can use a Recon with better tank and same utility including being cloaked until probes. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." --áAbrazzar
Gully Alex Foyle Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop 2801	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:00:11 - [744] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: First of all because you can break range on the ship that points you (the bait needs a web, which means no sebo, which means you can likely warp away before the bait locks you anyways) Except the bait doesn't need a sebo, you warped in to fight it, remember? Until his surprise buttsex buddy appears you're not even trying to break range or warp out... And then it's too late (assuming the bait is decently fitted to hold you for a few seconds... anything with 2 webs and a bit of buffer tank can do it easily). I agree suprise buttsex games will be slightly easier to pull off, but who cares? It'll be that much more fun and challenging to devise counters. And the guys like me (and I assume you) that prefer more challenging fights will still be here. It's not that everyone will just fly combat recons next month so we can all laugh at each other instead of proper fighting. Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Dullmeyr Prodomo Gnartz 38	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:00:53 - [745] - Quote Introducing D-Scan invisibility to a ship class appears ill thought through to me. It promotes risk averse game play, not adding anything "interesting" to the game.
Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 249	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:00:58 - [746] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: Why in hell anyone use a huggin instead of a rapier? Besides being an idiot? And these laechis numbers at not big at all. Check the dampener bonus on the recons agasint the other dampenign ships and you will see why BOTH are not much used. Because the Huginn is faster and tanks better
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1933	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:03:29 - [747] - Quote HoruSeth wrote: Kagura Nikon wrote: How in hell you can say that it will change othign in WH but willb eOP in low sec? Dude you lost all the chance of anyone paying attention on what you post with that... My post has likes (not an alt!), yours don't, so from general point of view I would assume my Posts got more Attention. ;) Besides that I did not say it change "nother" in wh. I said it will not Change a lot, so only Little. And finally: Improve your reading and comprehension skills please. Explainations why for lowsec and wh have been provided many times, not only by me. just LOOOL.... count the number of likes in the whoel thread of my posts if that is important for you. And beign popular never was a good measure of wisdom... otherwise democracies would never have elected some "special presidents". "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1933	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:04:15 - [748] - Quote Aiyshimin wrote: Kagura Nikon wrote: Why in hell anyone use a huggin instead of a rapier? Besides being an idiot? And these laechis numbers at not big at all. Check the dampener bonus on the recons agasint the other dampenign ships and you will see why BOTH are not much used. Because the Huginn is faster and tanks better Has the same MID layout and the amount of HP difference is NEGLIGIBLE . And it is NOT faster because the rapier can put an extra speed module at the low slot. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Gully Alex Foyle Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop 2801	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:06:20 - [749] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: The only real game changing scenario is FW sites were people can wait inside.. but even that has a drawback..because what comes trough the game might be 2 other recons... LOL yes, this too. It's always about the meta, guys. New tools/toys are at everybody's disposal, it's the players themselves that keep other players in check. I'm way too noob to say that d-scan immunity is 100% good for gameplay (or 100% bad), but it's an interesting new tool for the sandbox. Let's play with it before jumping to conclusions. Take for example d-scan inhibitor deployables. Everybody was saying 'oooh they'll be used in every single fw plex'. Yeah right, never seen one in an year. Not. a. single. one. Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
HoruSeth Republic University Minmatar Republic 4	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:09:33 - [750] - Quote Gully Alex Foyle wrote: Take for example d-scan inhibitor deployables. Everybody was saying 'oooh they'll be used in every single fw plex'. Yeah right, never seen one in an year. Not. a. single. one. Because they are visible on DS?

colera deldios 266	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:12:19 - [751] - Quote WH space was designed to be the harshest place to live in. For people willing to go to extreme RISK for the promise of MASSIVE reward and that's how it is. WH residents have massive amounts of benefits to them. They get best quality PVP, they get super easy ganks on 0.0 residents, they get best SOLO & GROUP income I'm looking at your solo Relic/Data sites & now that is was revealed that with a nighthawk you can tank/mine entire gas cloud even after NPC spawns ( 575m ) for what was 40min of work for me (non-wh resident raiding a C5) seems pretty decent. If you are running WH anomalies/escalations have active eyes on connections to your space this way and recon can be spotten when jumping in if you are doing scan down sites that it does not matter if you cannot see the ship because you will see the probes. Also what will one recon really do against a WH fleet ? It lands and it's dead within seconds same as now with cloacky t3/stratios etc. They still need to bring the fleet in and you will see those at best the combat recon will be able to point one unlucky thing on the field. In any case this makes no difference to WH residents only diference it makes is to FW and there it's not really a big deal if system has no station and you see neut in local you can already assume they are cloacked in FW plex. Only place this dscan will have some harsh effect is 0.0
Gully Alex Foyle Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop 2801	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:13:13 - [752] - Quote HoruSeth wrote: Gully Alex Foyle wrote: Take for example d-scan inhibitor deployables. Everybody was saying 'oooh they'll be used in every single fw plex'. Yeah right, never seen one in an year. Not. a. single. one. Because they are visible on DS? Probably, plus they're expensive, plus most people in lowsec are here to fight (else they'd gank freighters in highsec). But that didn't prevent lots of people 'predicting' that they would've been everywhere... Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!

CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 4725	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:15:14 - [753] - Quote Just finished reading everything that was posted over night. Here's what I can update with at the moment: Biggest concern at the moment is the added EHP. Making recons a more realistic fleet option next to T3 cruisers is good, making them too tanky in smaller situations where their ewar already gives them a lot of damage evasion may be too much. Not sure if change is needed but will keep looking at this and update again asap. 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. The Pilgrim. Opinions seem mixed, gaining neut range is obviously nice but many of you still feel that giving up neut strength is too harsh, or that some other added power is needed (more damage for instance). Will get back to you on this as soon as possible but it's possible that we will make adjustments. RLML for Rook. Sure. Consider it done. More low slots for Lachesis. Not sure yet on this one, will talk it over here and see what we can do. Hope that answers some questions. I'm sure many of you would rather have more explanation for the dscan immunity change so I'll try to get that post together as soon as I can. Thanks for all the feedback. @ccp_rise

Adrie Atticus Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion 697	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:18:31 - [754] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: RLML for Rook. Sure. Consider it done. Yay!
The Bazzalisk Snuff Box Snuffed Out 56	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:20:40 - [755] - Quote I feel it would be better for the cloaky, stealthy, squishy recons to gain the d-scan immunity so they can be permanently invisible and unaffected by object collision interfering with their covops cloak, and the the combat recons to get their slot/stat/resist buffs. But giving the combat recons the stats buffs AND the d-scan immunity seems to me to be a bit over the top.
Shilalasar Dead Sky Inc. 137	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:27:07 - [756] - Quote A nice place for combatrecons would be the same PvP capabilities as a T1 cruiser with a T2 resistprofile and their ewarbonuses. Then you add the possibility to get them to 50k ehp without links if they do not fit weapons and you have useful fleetships. Cherry on top would be bonus to combatprobing so they can do recon. Instead there is a jesusfeature that will break the game in many cases and will hurt the people who are already in the shittiest places: Lowend-WH-people without a large group, smallscale-PvPers and FW-nonfarmers. This is not about whining, d-scaninvis will perfectly fill a role I have been struggeling to find an answer for for a long time and I will abuse the **** out of it. But it is still a bad design. And people talking about 500dps cloakies already existing, that is only a blasterproty which will do it-¦s dps at 4km. A cloaky railproty will deal less dps than the new lach.
Jori McKie TURN LEFT The Camel Empire 183	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:27:54 - [757] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Just finished reading everything that was posted over night. Here's what I can update with at the moment: 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. Thanks for all the feedback. I can tell you what will happen most likely: - Less fights because people are risk averse - A 2nd account with a Prober at all times will be must, not an option. In more detail quoting myself: Quote: Combat Recons being invisible on D-Scan will hurt PvP on every scale, solo, small, fleet, WH and FW. EVE PvP is risk assessment, most EVE players are risk averse like hell including most FCs. That means if the odds are bad against the enemy fleet = avoid fight and in it's extrem form "fight only if we don't lose any ship" = gank/blob or massive amount of logis. With Combat Recons being invisible on D-Scan that attitude will highten = less fights overall because then it will be a counting and confirming game. Means if numbers are suspicious any FC will wait for visual/probe confirmation "how many and which Recons", result is combat pace will slow down and will be avoided even more. The worst will be, everybody will hide his friends in Recons, so if 2 at first visible glance more or less equal gangs meet nobody will engage because not knowing how many Recons the others have hidden is not an option, especially if lcoal numbers don't add up with visible gang numbers. This mindset will harden into everybody and will lead to ** this just blob the ** out of them. In WHs, lol PvP ..... nobody will engage in PvP without probing first anymore. Thera for example will be bait+recons only after 1 week. In lowsec and FW, lol PvP..... nobody will ever warp into a medium gated pocket without probing anymore. Nobody will engage without probing the whole system first. That will be the consequences of invisible Recons for PvP or in simple words you will need a 2nd Account with a Prober at all times. For PvE in null, wh, lowesec it will be even worse. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." --áAbrazzar
Daneel Trevize Faster Path Than of Light Exiles 521	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:29:35 - [758] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Dscan immunity is staying. So you scout ahead in your link ship, your combat ones waiting to warp down to the low-low gate. The links jump and see the camp, it looks viable to fight, and the links warp off to a boost spot. Typically it'd be off of dscan of the camp, but perhaps you'd use a close-by spot to be quick about it, and to dscan the camp while making the final call about jumping the combat ships in. The camp of course has seen you coming and has eyes on your starting side, and huginns on their main side (off-grid to start with). When they see you commit the combat ships to the gate at 0km, knowing your links have likely moved off and you're about to jump, their huginns come on grid. You have scouted the camp, even maintained a dscan of it, seen no impossible tackle & jump your nano ships in to an uneven-but-still-possible fight... and just spawned with web range of huginns. GG you die. WTF are you supposed to do? Never have a scout leave the grid you plan to jump to incase a combat recon has warped in? So you now need 2 scouts to check a system: one to actually try find things (excluding combat recons); and one to just hang about on gate grid to ensure you're not jumping into otherwise-unscoutable death? At least with the current recons & T3s, you can dscan the gate, and if you call it clear right before you jump but there was hidden stuff, you'll have the decloak delay to make a move to burn out of tackle range, warp, or crash gate. These combat recons will just be insta-locking setup (RSBing t1 logi is a cancerous thing already), giving you no chance.
Syzygium Friends Of Harassment The Camel Empire 62	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:30:13 - [759] - Quote HoruSeth wrote: Gully Alex Foyle wrote: Take for example d-scan inhibitor deployables. Everybody was saying 'oooh they'll be used in every single fw plex'. Yeah right, never seen one in an year. Not. a. single. one. Because they are visible on DS? + they are single-use structures that cost about 15m each. They are just not very useful, neither for (moving) gangs that cannot rescoop it, nor for missionrunners or plexers who would ruin their income by dropping one of them per mission/plex they do.
TuCZnak Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 1	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:32:12 - [760] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Dscan immunity is staying. Thanks for all the feedback. I don't think you value feedback that much, because most of this thread is a really big backlash against this "improvement". Anyway, if the immunity is staying, my subscriptions in your game are not staying, you can be sure about that.

per Terpene Conglomerate 35	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:36:55 - [761] - Quote are those recons scanable with probes if you cannot see them on combat scanner? how about making module(with some crazy pg/cpu needs) that will hide your ship from combat scanner instead and give recons a bonus for using it? while you are at it how about hiding siphons from combat scanners? or were the engineers stoned while developing it?
Omnathious Deninard Novis Initiis 2608	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:37:10 - [762] - Quote TuCZnak wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Dscan immunity is staying. Thanks for all the feedback. I don't think you value feedback that much, because most of this thread is a really big backlash against this "improvement". Anyway, if the immunity is staying, my subscriptions in your game are not staying, you can be sure about that. Can I have your stuff?
Syzygium Friends Of Harassment The Camel Empire 65	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:37:34 - [763] - Quote 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. Sorry, but that "great job" is done by people who obviously have no idea about how solo and smallscale PvP especially in Lowsec works. I have not seen any "strong arguments" that have not been proven totally wrong by simple examples, if you have found some, please name them!
Tethys Luxor Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 3	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:37:41 - [764] - Quote Basicly, the whole dscan feature is outdated. All ships have the same equipment - same dscan range -100% chances to work (except 0% chance on cloak / minute) - same visibility on dscan of others -ability to see the ship name like a beacon :) It would be good to include scanner strength and range, and partial results. Using target' signature radius would make sense. Advanced dscan ability could include ability to reminder given ship's signature and links with combat probe scanner. I guess CCP Rise answer pointed in a dscan change direction

CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 4727	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:37:52 - [765] - Quote Quote: I can tell you what will happen most likely: - Less fights because people are risk averse - A 2nd account with a Prober at all times will be must, not an option. I think this is a complex debate and I'm sure that none of us understand player behavior completely, but my experience is actually the opposite of what you're saying. 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. The negative side for me is your other bullet point. Because people don't want to take unnecessary risk they will work very hard, sometimes doing something very boring or difficult, just to get at those last pieces of information. And they should. But we would want to avoid mechanics that obligate people to this kind of behavior too heavily without enough positive side to make the mechanic worthwhile. I would be more worried with this mechanic that people have to spend a lot of time running probe scans when they really don't want to be than that they are avoiding engagements because of the possibility of Recons. I don't think this will be a problem but we'll have to wait and see. @ccp_rise

TuCZnak Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 3	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:39:24 - [766] - Quote Omnathious Deninard wrote: TuCZnak wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Dscan immunity is staying. Thanks for all the feedback. I don't think you value feedback that much, because most of this thread is a really big backlash against this "improvement". Anyway, if the immunity is staying, my subscriptions in your game are not staying, you can be sure about that. Can I have your stuff? No you can't, I'm gonna keep it for my resub 6 months later after this nonsense gets rollbacked.
Gully Alex Foyle Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop 2802	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:40:24 - [767] - Quote Daneel Trevize wrote: WTF are you supposed to do? Never have a scout leave the grid you plan to jump to incase a combat recon has warped in? So you now need 2 scouts to check a system: one to actually try find things (excluding combat recons); and one to just hang about on gate grid to ensure you're not jumping into otherwise-unscoutable death? First of all, having 2 (or more) scouts is extremely common. Typical guys that cannot fly (SP) or do not have the ships the fc asks for. Second, 1 decent scout is good enough: jump it in, check gate, warp around to check the rest of the system, warp back to gate @100 (or at an on-grid tactical if you're particularly serious about your scouting prowess) just before the order to jump in is confirmed. How hard is that??? Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Kmelx Matari Exodus 76	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:43:23 - [768] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Dscan immunity is staying. Asking for player feedback and then ignoring that feedback for the win. I seriously wonder why you even bother...
Gully Alex Foyle Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop 2802	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:48:57 - [769] - Quote Syzygium 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. Sorry, but that "great job" is done by people who obviously have no idea about how solo and smallscale PvP especially in Lowsec works. I have not seen any "strong arguments" that have not been proven totally wrong by simple examples, if you have found some, please name them! For lowsec, three very simple arguments: 1) They're still visible in local 2) They're visible on-grid 3) Both fighting parties are free to use them What more do you need? You just have to be creative in using those 3 points better than your opponent(s). Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Daneel Trevize Faster Path Than of Light Exiles 523	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:49:39 - [770] - Quote Gully Alex Foyle wrote: Daneel Trevize wrote: WTF are you supposed to do? Never have a scout leave the grid you plan to jump to incase a combat recon has warped in? So you now need 2 scouts to check a system: one to actually try find things (excluding combat recons); and one to just hang about on gate grid to ensure you're not jumping into otherwise-unscoutable death? First of all, having 2 (or more) scouts is extremely common. Typical guys that cannot fly (SP) or do not have the ships the fc asks for. Second, 1 decent scout is good enough: jump it in, check gate, warp around to check the rest of the system, warp back to gate @100 (or at an on-grid tactical if you're particularly serious about your scouting prowess) just before the order to jump in is confirmed. How hard is that??? I'm trying to talk about scenarios where players are playing at a high skill & SP level, while not just falling back on the Eve crutch of 'bring an alt to do that'. So given that covops link T3s are ubiquitous & a practical choice of rolling a cloaky scout & survivable link ship into one char (keeps sub costs down too), that's what people will use. We don't have people in ships that we don't call for (we're not large enough scale to have 'an FC', it's small gang pvp we're talking about hre), we don't have SP concerns. But we don't want to have to have someone multibox a covops frig just to keep eyes on a grid to ever give a nano gang a chance ever again. Hell, suddenly recon webs is also enough to ruin RR gameplay. Jumping a gate and having to all get into the best dynamic central position to be able to start repping each other would be hugely harder if we could just suddenly find we're webbed when starting apart. This would hugely increase the buffer required on all ships, as well as probably limit the viable ones to those that can dual-prop to have both speed and a strong tanking option in a brawl environment. So something boring like 0-dps-mod Ishtars. RIP other HACs, RIP BSs. Didn't want that acclaim-winning, inspiring, motivating gameplay footage anyway. Better just all roll plain buffer+dps fitted ships (of course no blasters now that they can never mvoe to targets fast enough) + only regular logi for RR.

Kendarr Zebra Corp The Bastion 40	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:51:28 - [771] - Quote I think these changes are fantastic. It really shakes things up and that is what New Eden needs. In 10 years no ship has ever been d-scan immune all the time. +1 for the devs out of box thinking on this give yourselfs a pat on the back. The only thing I kind of disagree with is the pligrim. This may be down to my own experiences flying one. IGÇÖm so used to decloaking in peopleGÇÖs faces and engaging. Now I will come in at 50KM and decloak and engage much like the falcon. Thinking about this it is better for the pilgrim to have the range bonus and not the neut/nos bonus. I have felt that the pilgrim is an EW support ship not a direct bawler but i do believe it needs more DPS. Zebra-Corp
Komodo Askold No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 241	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:53:03 - [772] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: Currently you can either see them coming on D-scan OR they have a delay on uncloaking. If this change goes through, then recons will have neither. I'm telling you flat out what I'm going to do with this. Refit a lachesis to max sensor boosts and the guys will have zero change of getting away. I'm a ganker, not a gankee and I'm telling you - this is going to be busted from the second it's implemented. Folks only get ganked w/ no chance to evade so many times before they pull the incursion D-ring and go make tons of nice safe empire isk. Just like my obvious move is to sensor boost the crap out of a recon, the obvious move for the guys getting ganked is to go somewhere (empire incursions) where they can make isk w/out that happening. You think guys are risk averse in null and dock up immediately upon a neutral entering their system? After this change it will be the only option for survival. Remember - all I have to do is tackle the guy in a sensor boosted recon and light my blops cyno. It will be fun while it lasts. (I cut off our previous posts for avoiding a wall of quotes) Even if you fit your Lachesis that way, that doesn't instantly mean he's pointed and dead. Even when the Lachesis bonused point range (I think it might need to be looked at), if your target did his homework he won't be sitting at the warp-in for you to land on him; he will be several kilometers away, so you'll have to use your MWD for a few seconds to catch him. Since you're warping in uncloaked, if he's aware (as he should), he will see you while decelerating from your warp: enough for him to try to warp away, especially if he's already aligned (as he should try to be). Most site-running ships can do that (the larger ones, such as battleships, should already be taking in account their own slowness and plan accordingly), and mining ships can be aligned already with less impact on their activities (and can fit warp stabilizers easily). If you manage to land directly on him when he's not on the warp-in, that's because you used Combat Probes, that he should have seen on D-Scan. The thing is, this applies to every non-cloaky ship. Those that can fit the covops cloak will not appear on D-Scan, neither on Combat Probes, neither on your Overview, until they're in top of you (or when they drop probes/ move from a stargate or WH, in which case they will only be visible for a few seconds or even much less time). That said, it doesn't seem that cloaky ships are OP or game-breaking...
Varrakk Burning Napalm 3	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:54:53 - [773] - Quote Pilgrim: Range and Strength will be too powerful. Would take away what is unique with the Curse. +1 Mid or Low slot, and the CPU(PG) to make use of it would be a sufficient boost to the Pilgrim. DScan immunity for Combat Recons, very cool approach!
Gully Alex Foyle Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop 2802	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:55:38 - [774] - Quote Daneel Trevize wrote: Gully Alex Foyle wrote: Daneel Trevize wrote: WTF are you supposed to do? Never have a scout leave the grid you plan to jump to incase a combat recon has warped in? So you now need 2 scouts to check a system: one to actually try find things (excluding combat recons); and one to just hang about on gate grid to ensure you're not jumping into otherwise-unscoutable death? First of all, having 2 (or more) scouts is extremely common. Typical guys that cannot fly (SP) or do not have the ships the fc asks for. Second, 1 decent scout is good enough: jump it in, check gate, warp around to check the rest of the system, warp back to gate @100 (or at an on-grid tactical if you're particularly serious about your scouting prowess) just before the order to jump in is confirmed. How hard is that??? I'm trying to talk about scenarios where players are playing at a high skill & SP level, while not just falling back on the Eve crutch of 'bring an alt to do that'. So given that covops link T3s are ubiquitous & a practical choice of rolling a cloaky scout & survivable link ship into one char (keeps sub costs down too), that's what people will use. We don't have people in ships that we don't call for, we don't have SP concerns. But we don't want to have to have someone multibox a covops frig just to keep eyes on a grid to ever give a nano gang a chance ever again. Hell, suddenly recon webs is also enough to ruin RR gameplay. Jumping a gate and having to all get into the best dynamic central position to be able to start repping each other would be hugely harder if we could just suddenly find we're webbed when starting apart. This would hugely increase the buffer required on all ships, as well as probably limit the viable ones to those that can dual-prop to have both speed and a strong tanking option in a brawl environment. I hear you, but you're describing a very specific case of gang size/fit/composition and tactics. What I'm saying is, if you're succesful at fighting outnumbered in the current meta, leveraging on better ships/SP/tactics/combat discipline, I'm sure you boys will find a way to be just as succesful in a meta including d-scan immune recons - maybe bringing some of your own! Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Kyang Tia Matari Exodus 46	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:57:03 - [775] - Quote 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. If you were talking about any other ship type, I'd think that this is a pretty good argument. A ship that you didn't see coming could in many cases change an engagement and it not being seen right away can definitely make the difference between going in and shying away from the engagement. But Recons have a way larger impact on such things than most ships, therefore making this unpredicability more likely to have a negative effect rather than a positive one. An example: If you're solo in a NOmen and you engage some people with some T1 cruisers and some tackle on a gate. Since the cruisers are slower than you and you can kill the tackle, that should be a possible engagement. Now, almost no matter what kind of additional ships show up once you engage, you will still have a chance. A HAC/BC/BS? More damage projection against you. Not a problem as long as you can move. Anything Frig-sized? Just shoot it. If you are good enough at piloting, you might be okay. A Logi? Huge problem, but still leaves the possibilty to disengage sometimes. The only thing that will make it almost completely impossible to do anything would be a Recon. See the problem?
Major Trant Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 1276	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:57:54 - [776] - Quote Combat Recons not seen on DScan: I see this as a buff to low end Wormhole PvE myself. Sure you can't see a combat recon coming but it cuts both ways, you can't see a combat recon running a site either. People don't generally jump into WH and drop Combat probes. They jump in and do a DScan first. If they see someone, then they do a narrow DScan to the various anomalies and celestials. Only after that might they drop combat probes. There is no local in WHs so if you don't see someone on DScan you don't go probing for them.
Jori McKie TURN LEFT The Camel Empire 185	Posted - 2014.12.19 11:57:59 - [777] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Quote: I can tell you what will happen most likely: - Less fights because people are risk averse - A 2nd account with a Prober at all times will be must, not an option. I think this is a complex debate and I'm sure that none of us understand player behavior completely, but my experience is actually the opposite of what you're saying. 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. Yes, obscuring information to a degree is a good idea but a ship with an inbuild no penalties, cloak until probed is bad. Force Recons with cloak have drawbacks, they are usually harder to fit, less tank, lock time penalty. Combat Recons as you suggest have no drawback at all. I still cringe but what might work is giving the Combat Recons a similiar modul to cloak like "D-Scan obscurer" with drawbacks and penalties similiar to using a cloak on a Force Recon. So players have a choice get the full might of Combat Recon but be visible or obscure the D-Scan but be gimped. CCP Rise wrote: [quote] The negative side for me is your other bullet point. Because people don't want to take unnecessary risk they will work very hard, sometimes doing something very boring or difficult, just to get at those last pieces of information. And they should. But we would want to avoid mechanics that obligate people to this kind of behavior too heavily without enough positive side to make the mechanic worthwhile. I would be more worried with this mechanic that people have to spend a lot of time running probe scans when they really don't want to be than that they are avoiding engagements because of the possibility of Recons. I don't think this will be a problem but we'll have to wait and see. I think you should be worried about people exactly doing that, they will probe before engage, especially in WHs and Lowsec and a 2nd Prober account will be a necessity not an option. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." --áAbrazzar
Daneel Trevize Faster Path Than of Light Exiles 523	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:01:36 - [778] - Quote Gully Alex Foyle wrote: I hear you, but you're describing a very specific case of gang size/fit/composition and tactics. What I'm saying is, if you're succesful at fighting outnumbered in the current meta, leveraging on better ships/SP/tactics/combat discipline, I'm sure you boys will find a way to be just as succesful in a meta including d-scan immune recons - maybe bringing some of your own! **** ECM. We already use damps, as does everyone. But what does it matter if you'd like to continue to punish people for their mispositioning if you can never again achieve viable synchronised actions yourselves to make a comp actually tank any dps and thus play the long game of planning to survive rather than suicide? Why bother have some damps, some neuts, and hope to continue presenting the hostiles with interesting choices of being damped out of range, or forced into tackle & neuts range, if it means you could never do it without being forced to use high-resist fits and hugely range-bonused RR? How do you nano with the possiblity of huginns anywhere you don't leave cloaked eyes? Other that in weak, disposable t1 insured crap?
HoruSeth Republic University Minmatar Republic 4	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:01:39 - [779] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Quote: I can tell you what will happen most likely: - Less fights because people are risk averse - A 2nd account with a Prober at all times will be must, not an option. I think this is a complex debate and I'm sure that none of us understand player behavior completely, but my experience is actually the opposite of what you're saying. That can not be your honest reply? Instead of requiring a 2nd account with probes you say it's the opposite? Meaning with the incoming DS-Invisibility you can even better work without probes / scouting alts? And a lot of "fights" in lowsec are caused by very good scouting and because pve-people feel risk/reward balanced. As explained before severalt times it will change, because I will not jump my T3 / Stratios into combat plexes anymore when there are people in local. And as soon as a neutral jumps in I will stay aligned. This Overall will reduce my income as I can not fight so much time as I can do now, where I can be sure, that at least hitting a DS gives me some security (it will not protect me 100%!). But with this patch I have. Risk/Reward becomes unbalanced. Less PvE in lowsec, less Targets, less Engagements. I think that is quite simple. And this is just one example. FW has been explained as well. Don't count the sample inside the plex, Take into consideration the examples outside the FW plex. And even inside the FW plex this fight would have happened before! Before no gang would have waited in Vexors and rooks inside a plex. That's just senseless to take this as a serious counter argument. But a fleet of 4 Vexors (Exchange 2 rooks for reasonable vexors) would have been engaged. Without an Scouting-alt on a 2nd account and best on a second Monitor you will sooner or later die to Recons where you could have saved your ass by paying attention. Etc. etc. For the probe scans: How do you think shall one Person do that? Please check Fitting Requirements of Expanded Probe Launchers! Very hard to fit! Of course you can use mobile Depots, but again, that is weaking my other Jobs (like pve in lowsec) and just increases time and effort. And between refitting a recon can jump in the system or a guy in local changes ship at a Station and I am ****** without any Chance of escape!
TheButcherPete Radio New Vegas 530	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:01:58 - [780] - Quote Something to balance this suggested Recon change would be to only have the immunity active when traveling at sublight speeds, and when in warp the ship diverts too much to the warp core to keep the immunity field up. also if Recon capacitors end up needing a slight nerf, this would be a neat lore idea. [b]THE KING OF EVE RADIO If EVE is real, does that mean all of us are RMTrs?[/b]

Syzygium Friends Of Harassment The Camel Empire 68	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:02:30 - [781] - Quote Gully Alex Foyle wrote: Syzygium 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. Sorry, but that "great job" is done by people who obviously have no idea about how solo and smallscale PvP especially in Lowsec works. I have not seen any "strong arguments" that have not been proven totally wrong by simple examples, if you have found some, please name them! For lowsec, three very simple arguments: 1) They're still visible in local 2) They're visible on-grid 3) Both fighting parties are free to use them What more do you need? You just have to be creative in using those 3 points better than your opponent(s). As already said: 1. Local counts little in Lowsec because you have a LOT more Residents, Haulers, Shipspinners, PI Guys, POS Guys and whatnot in Local. You can almost never use Localcount to determine if there is a gang waiting or not. There can be 10 People an Local and no ship in Space. Daily Business in Lowsec. 2. To see them on-Grid is useless when that grid is a simple trap for anyone who warps there. When you see them you can count your ship as lost because you are already dead. You drop out of warp and are almost instantly pointed, webbed, damped and whatnot because they planned their trap for exat that scenario. The only way to prevent that is sending a scout or prober before you do any warp, which makes Solo- and Smallcale PvP just horrible annoying. 3. The larger force always have the advantage to hide a major part of their force in such recons and still use a few guys in juicy targets as bait. The smaller force will simply run into an unwinnable fight without chance to avoid it. It makes engaging larger numbers almost suicidal. @ CCP Rise: What kind of logic is it, to say "more fights will happen if people do not know what awaits them and so chose to fight where they normally would have ran away!" - think about what you just said there: You force frustration because you deny people to make the right decisions based on their scouting and experience. That is what people makes quit and saying "what a damn waste of time!" after they ran into a complete unwinnable fight just because the other side had "invisible units". Jesus...
royal killer Tailor Company Company Company 1	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:02:32 - [782] - Quote I noticed that neither of the Caldari recons have duration reduction on the ECMs. Would that be too much ?
HoruSeth Republic University Minmatar Republic 4	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:02:48 - [783] - Quote Major Trant wrote: Combat Recons not seen on DScan: I see this as a buff to low end Wormhole PvE myself. Sure you can't see a combat recon coming but it cuts both ways, you can't see a combat recon running a site either. People don't generally jump into WH and drop Combat probes. They jump in and do a DScan first. If they see someone, then they do a narrow DScan to the various anomalies and celestials. Only after that might they drop combat probes. There is no local in WHs so if you don't see someone on DScan you don't go probing for them. All I have to say about this: WRECKS! Easy to find them and by this the ano. No Advantage to PvE!!!
TheButcherPete Radio New Vegas 530	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:03:32 - [784] - Quote royal killer wrote: I noticed that neither of the Caldari recons have duration reduction on the ECMs. Would that be too much ? Yes you'll have to wait a few seconds longer to completely remove the targeted ship from the fight. [b]THE KING OF EVE RADIO If EVE is real, does that mean all of us are RMTrs?[/b]
TuCZnak Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 3	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:04:14 - [785] - Quote Gully Alex Foyle wrote: 3) Both fighting parties are free to use them Why nerf Ishtars, both parties are free to use them, right?
Komodo Askold No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 241	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:04:58 - [786] - Quote Aiyshimin wrote: Komodo Askold wrote: Combat Probes, people. Yes, you CAN see those Combat Recons entering system, waiting for you on a site, or escorting a friend who's running the site. Drop those probes and you'll see: if it appears on the probes and not on D-Scan, then it's a Combat Recon. That's it. And remember you can place probes all over the system, much further away than your D-Scan range, effectively covering by yourself a much bigger volume. You can even place 1 or more probes at each gate, wormhole or even some sites. And, that will warn you of any kind of ship that is not cloaked, even if you have no Local. And the insta-lock due to not being cloaked: every non-cloaked ship can do that. Even cloaky ships, if they pursposelly drop their cloak a few thousand kilometers before landing. So, stay away from those warp--in points and you'll have time to see it arrive and mash that Warp button. Especially when the incoming ship can't warp cloaked, such as... Combat Recons. And if it lands directly on you due to Combat Probes... you should have seen them in D-Scan and have acted accordingly. You have tools to know about incoming ships; use them and you'll avoid not only Combat Recons, but many other ships too. Now about the ship stats, I wonder if the Rook could get RLML's bonused too, or if that would be too much for it to have. Sisters Expanded Probe Launcher requires 210 CPU Fair point. Most of the ships used to run sites can fit it (and it will serve them not only for Combat Probes, but also Core Probes, and have much more of them loaded in the launcher, ths less reloads), but I also think their CPU usage is pretty high, especially now that more people would like to fit them in ships that are not D3's (Confessor and upcoming bros). I would vote for a CPU cost reduction for Expanded Probe Launchers. Make them still tight, but not that much. What about 180 CPU, for example?
Ransu Asanari Powder and Ball Alchemists Union Mordus Angels 196	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:06:30 - [787] - Quote Caldari Recons need some kind of secondary combat characteristic. Right now both of the bonuses are to ECM, where every other Recon gets two. See this post for details. CCP Rise wrote: RLML for Rook. Sure. Consider it done Thank you!! At least with RLML I can do a decent fit with T2 launchers without fitting mods. Please look closer at the fitting for the Rook though - it needs more Powergrid. I shouldn't need a lowslot PG mod AND a T2 Anciliary Current Router just to be able to fit a half decent tank and Meta HAMs. Powder and Ball Alchemists Union - "Turning Lead into Gold since 2008"
l0rd carlos Friends Of Harassment The Camel Empire 1122	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:09:00 - [788] - Quote Komodo Askold wrote: Even if you fit your Lachesis that way, that doesn't instantly mean he's pointed and dead. Even when the Lachesis bonused point range (I think it might need to be looked at), if your target did his homework he won't be sitting at the warp-in for you to land on him; he will be several kilometers away, so you'll have to use your MWD for a few seconds to catch him. Since you're warping in uncloaked, if he's aware (as he should), he will see you while decelerating from your warp: enough for him to try to warp away, especially if he's already aligned (as he should try to be). Most site-running ships can do that (the larger ones, such as battleships, should already be taking in account their own slowness and plan accordingly), Point and web range is 93km. You want to be in damage range to kill rats. Lets take an angel 5/10 lowsec DED site example. In the last pocket you need to kill a structure while doging a bunch of npcs. It's will not be possible to kill that from 100km away. I have run a bunch of sites in lowsec with PvP ships, right now you see recons declack while using the accerlation gate. With multiple pockets you have anough time to position yourself or run away. "It's an Arazu and rapier? I might be able to kill that before the main flet gets here. Oh they got an Oneiros to help them == armor tank == damps == better run!" Now you have 10 seconds between notice and before you get pointed, webbed and damped. That means I will try to run == less pvp for both parties. Oh, unless you use an 0 SP alt to watch the first gate! WHAT A THRILLING GAME MECHANIC! It just forces you to use more alts .. that do nothing but watch overview. Yay. German blog about smallscale lowsec pvp: http://friendsofharassment.wordpress.com
Gully Alex Foyle Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop 2803	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:14:26 - [789] - Quote Syzygium wrote: Gully Alex Foyle wrote: Syzygium 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. Sorry, but that "great job" is done by people who obviously have no idea about how solo and smallscale PvP especially in Lowsec works. I have not seen any "strong arguments" that have not been proven totally wrong by simple examples, if you have found some, please name them! For lowsec, three very simple arguments: 1) They're still visible in local 2) They're visible on-grid 3) Both fighting parties are free to use them What more do you need? You just have to be creative in using those 3 points better than your opponent(s). As already said: 1. Local counts little in Lowsec because you have a LOT more Residents, Haulers, Shipspinners, PI Guys, POS Guys and whatnot in Local. You can almost never use Localcount to determine if there is a gang waiting or not. There can be 10 People an Local and no ship in Space. Daily Business in Lowsec. DScan is your tool to make decisions, fight or move. If you cannot rely on that tool any more, you will stop fighting or get ganked a lot. 2. To see them on-Grid is useless when that grid is a simple trap for anyone who warps there. When you see them you can count your ship as lost because you are already dead. You drop out of warp and are almost instantly pointed, webbed, damped and whatnot because they planned their trap for exat that scenario. The only way to prevent that is sending a scout or prober before you do any warp, which makes Solo- and Smallcale PvP just horrible annoying. 3. The larger force always have the advantage to hide a major part of their force in such recons and still use a few guys in juicy targets as bait. The smaller force will simply run into an unwinnable fight without chance to avoid it. It makes engaging larger numbers almost suicidal. @ CCP Rise: What kind of logic is it, to say "more fights will happen if people do not know what awaits them and so chose to fight where they normally would have ran away!" - think about what you just said there: You force frustration because you deny people to make the right decisions based on their scouting and experience. That is what people makes quit and saying "what a damn waste of time!" after they ran into a complete unwinnable fight just because the other side had "invisible units". Jesus... Just for the sake of discussion: 1. Try Pirate's Little Helper. Awesome intel on carebears vs. pvpers (based on zkill stats), corp/alliance and affiliation, common EWAR/cap ship/cyno bait pilots, etc. It's super easy to use (just ctrl-a ctrl-c local). And come on, even on weekends there's rarely more than 20-30 or so in lowsec local... 2. This only applies to medium FW plexes and PVE acceleration gates. Just go fight somewhere else, space is big. 3. Not much difference from having the calvary cloaked or >14 AU away Not saying that you're flat wrong, but thankfully EVE PVP is complex enough that players will always find solutions to other players' tactics. That's part of the fun. Just saying you honestly can't be 100% (or even 90%) sure that this d-scan thing will be bad, instead of fun for all. Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Kyang Tia Matari Exodus 46	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:15:03 - [790] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: 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. Actually, your own example is way better than the one I just made up. Think about it: If you are in 2 cruisers, you see the Vexors on this gate and you don't see the Rooks. Yes, you engage. But is this really a success or a nice game mechanic? What kind of "fight" did it just generate? A fight where one side will just be jammed out without the chance to ever do anything. The people who were slaughtered might think twice before warping to something the next time, which is precisely what many of the people here are afraid of. For nano stuff, it's even worse, because Recons take not only your attack capabilities but also your defence away.

Mixu Paatelainen Eve Refinery 190	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:16:56 - [791] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: 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. No, that's 1 more fight then never pvping with those characters in system again. This is no different to the first time you fight someone in FW and figure out they have a boost alt, identify that character then move on every time you see them in a plex. Except now those same dudes will have a recon alt in the plex with them.
Gully Alex Foyle Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop 2803	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:16:59 - [792] - Quote TuCZnak wrote: Gully Alex Foyle wrote: 3) Both fighting parties are free to use them Why nerf Ishtars, both parties are free to use them, right? Balancing is about giving people options and not making bunches of ships entirely useless. Ishtars are currently pretty strong compared to all other hacs, but do you seriously think that if this change is confirmed everybody will fly just combat recons? Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Daneel Trevize Faster Path Than of Light Exiles 524	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:21:22 - [793] - Quote Seriously Rise (where's Fozzie in all of this?), talk us through this gameplay from a skillful player's perspective: You're solo in lowsec. That's it, that's all there is to the scenario. P.S. There could be a linked lachesis + huginn on every grid. That you can't dscan. What do you do, anywhere? How do you solo in this world? When do you not die on landing on any & every grid, on jumping every gate, without any way to get ingame intel on what awaits? Only fly frigs that can warp in a couple of seconds tops?
Daneel Trevize Faster Path Than of Light Exiles 524	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:23:00 - [794] - Quote Gully Alex Foyle wrote: TuCZnak wrote: Gully Alex Foyle wrote: 3) Both fighting parties are free to use them Why nerf Ishtars, both parties are free to use them, right? Balancing is about giving people options and not making bunches of ships entirely useless. Ishtars are currently pretty strong compared to all other hacs, but do you seriously think that if this change is confirmed everybody will fly just combat recons? Well everyone uses ishtars and have done for ~18months now. And everyone uses rail tengus. And slowcats. And before that blap titans, etc. Evidently people will train for OP **** and abuse it. Crossing race isn't a limit, SP or isk cost don't work for balancing things!
Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 51	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:23:44 - [795] - Quote I confess to being somewhat concerned about DScan immunity, but I don't think it quite deserves the vitriol it's getting. Is it really that different, now, to a Covert Recon with their cloaks? Ok, you won't get the brief window to DScan one coming through a wormhole / taking an acceleration gate or whatever, but that's offset by the early warning you'll get where EvE gives a massive boom and you see the ship decelerating from warp. Either way, you have the oppurtunity to leave if you're aligned. If you're not, your loss is your fault. In PvP, they're less effective than cloaks, surely. All you have to do is get your scout to warp to the grid and you find out whether there's combat recons there. That's much more secure intel than if they were the now quite tanky and invisible covert recons. This change ain't worth the vitriol it's getting. Cloaky force multipliers in the form of T3s and covert recons have not broken the game, this won't either.
Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 51	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:24:42 - [796] - Quote Daneel Trevize wrote: Seriously Rise (where's Fozzie in all of this?), talk us through this gameplay from a skillful player's perspective: You're solo in lowsec. That's it, that's all there is to the scenario. P.S. There could be a linked lachesis + huginn on every grid. That you can't dscan. What do you do, anywhere? How do you solo in this world? When do you not die on landing on any & every grid, on jumping every gate, without any way to get ingame intel on what awaits? Only fly frigs that can warp in a couple of seconds tops? The same way you solo currently, trusting that not everyone has thought to bring a cloaky T3 or Rapier or Arazu. It's no different, surely?
Jori McKie TURN LEFT The Camel Empire 187	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:26:37 - [797] - Quote Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron wrote: I confess to being somewhat concerned about DScan immunity, but I don't think it quite deserves the vitriol it's getting. Is it really that different, now, to a Covert Recon with their cloaks? Ok, you won't get the brief window to DScan one coming through a wormhole / taking an acceleration gate or whatever, but that's offset by the early warning you'll get where EvE gives a massive boom and you see the ship decelerating from warp. Either way, you have the oppurtunity to leave if you're aligned. If you're not, your loss is your fault. In PvP, they're less effective than cloaks, surely. All you have to do is get your scout to warp to the grid and you find out whether there's combat recons there. That's much more secure intel than if they were the now quite tanky and invisible covert recons. This change ain't worth the vitriol it's getting. Cloaky force multipliers in the form of T3s and covert recons have not broken the game, this won't either. Have you seen a cloak T3 fit, like you use in Blops? It is gimped and rightly so, T3 Recons are at least 2.5 times more expansive than Recons (yes T3 have better tank) and you risk to lose a skill. Force Recons with cloak are gimped and rightly so compared to full tank and full utility Combat Recon. It is simple why should i use a gimped cloak Recon when i can use a Recon with better tank and same utility including being cloaked until probes. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." --áAbrazzar
Wille Sanara Zakarum Industries Exiliar Syndicate 12	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:26:58 - [798] - Quote Giving them immunity to D-SCAN is just stupid. It makes them overpowered, a lot. You wont see anything else but recons in WHs after the changes.
Daneel Trevize Faster Path Than of Light Exiles 524	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:27:43 - [799] - Quote Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron wrote: Daneel Trevize wrote: Seriously Rise (where's Fozzie in all of this?), talk us through this gameplay from a skillful player's perspective: You're solo in lowsec. That's it, that's all there is to the scenario. P.S. There could be a linked lachesis + huginn on every grid. That you can't dscan. What do you do, anywhere? How do you solo in this world? When do you not die on landing on any & every grid, on jumping every gate, without any way to get ingame intel on what awaits? Only fly frigs that can warp in a couple of seconds tops? The same way you solo currently, trusting that not everyone has thought to bring a cloaky T3 or Rapier or Arazu. It's no different, surely? No I don't gamble upon the statisically bad chance that they don't have recons with them, in lowsec. And those odds will of course hugely change if this OP change is available to people. You would dscan and either see the cloaky recon being not cloaked; or you warp in and have 6+ seconds to reposition/warp away again. In this proposed world the recons will be dscanning you coming close and ready to tackle you as soon as you land/break landing invulnerability. You will not get to overheated-mwd away, or warp off if fitted for ~5sec agility. Warping anywhere not at 0km to a gate/station would be a total gamble. How then do you solo in anything not mostly covered by plat insurance? In a manner that is skill-based rather than a pure crapshoot dice roll every single jump and/or warp, that is.
SyntheticSins An Eye For An Eye AN EYE F0R AN EYE 59	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:31:08 - [800] - Quote 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that.. This may come off as a bit harsh, but CCP Rise, I hope you know that the majority of the solo community you left behind in Eve hate you. This is not coming just from me, I'm simply delivering the message here. I have spent the last three hours this morning listening to people cuss you out (again). That being said. Here's my actual constructive argument. In most fights, large, small, and solo, recons play a huge role even in their current unbuffed state. (As everything in eve has been buffed). The fact of having long-range tackle, heavy neuting power, ECM to demolish opposing forces or to render damage ships useless, or stationary enough to hit. These are huge buffs to the recons. I do admit - the current recons lack in two area's - damage and TANK. But even with that, they are still capable of doing these major role-changing things: Locking down targets. Cyno'ing, Covert Cyno'ing. That is their advantage. We already have little awareness if recons are in use. the slight split second if we manage to hit d-scan if he is decloaked to drop probes, or hits a gate. In most situations they are a nasty surprise that could mean our end. But in other situations they are the split-second reason we save ourselves from entering a death-trap. On the PvE side of things, obviously carebearing in null/wormholes will be that much harder. I think it's a f**king stupid argument to make; "You just have your alt to watch the gate." To assume that all players in eve have a dedicated alt with which to use freely. I admit, I do, and I still think that is why this game is broken, considering I cannot maintain safety or mobility without having a second character to devote to the untidy (often nasty) tasks of scouting/moving/ gathering resources. I get that recons are mostly scouted when jumping gates, and I would have rather seen the ability being used as; "remains cloaked during gate transit" or something akin to that rather than a simple middle finger to directional scan. That seems to me a lazy way of going about things. Recons are already a problem. I feel that taking away the slightest hint that they are even there will cripple a lot of players/fleets/carebears/nullbears. Yes this change sounds awesome from those that like to fly recon ships (me included.) But I also enjoy flying other things, and 90% of my losses already account to rapiers/falcons. No, I won't quit eve. I will exploit this game change in every way possible like the next guy. In fact, it may become my new doctrine. I think it's an unnecessary change and will do more to harm than good. I am an atheist yet I'll pray for those lonely 1 account players trying to mission run in plexes I've already scanned around constillation. :(

Kmelx Matari Exodus 79	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:33:25 - [801] - Quote For someone who was allegedly a solo pvper Rise, you seem to be doing everything you can to destroy solo pvp outside of disposable frigate and destroyer class hulls and your ruining small gang pvp as an encore whilst your at it. T1 Logi - can't break it outside of a solo command ship or BS. It sits at the stupid ranges you gave the damn things and can rep the damage most solo cruisers and BCs can put out. It's utterly disposable and cheap so all the bads have lots of T1 logi alts. Geddons - Massive tanks and stupidly long range neuts along with drone dps, they just destroy the tanks on the majority of those aforementioned solo command ships and BS. And if you want to try to kite one you need max links and a faction point. Your supposed to be in charge of balance. What on earth made you think this was a balanced change in the first place? Now you want to introduce a change where a ship that gives a massive force multiplier in all forms of small gang warfare and would guarantee a solo pvpers death if it was flown with even a modicum of skill or sense, is undetectable except to combat probes. You do realiise that we play this game to have fun right? You do also realize that fighting recons in solo or small gang is not fun right? Your aware that they ruin fights and convey a massive combat advantage to the side that possess them right? You do realize that dropping probes in every system before taking a fight is not fun right? Your aware probing is a time consuming and crap mechanic right? Your aware that if I'm faced with a choice between taking a fight with a gang which might have a recon that I can't detect and which will kill me, and combating their gang, or just docking up or avoiding the fight will lead me to take the last choice right? Is it your aim to just force solo and small gang pvpers to just join goons or some other crap group and F1 monkey their way to the pinnacle of badness.
Heleana Commodus Luyseyal Zvezdani seljoberi i pijandure Devil Divided By Zero 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:34:19 - [802] - Quote The Pilgrim. Opinions seem mixed, gaining neut range is obviously nice but many of you still feel that giving up neut strength is too harsh, or that some other added power is needed (more damage for instance). Will get back to you on this as soon as possible but it's possible that we will make adjustments. If damage buff, 125mb drone bandwith, otherwise Pilgrim will be stratios w/o scan strength bonus. Actually 125mb drone bandwith would make pilgrim interesting, unique and versitile ship to fly, PvE and PvP wise, also would make some sense with that neut range bonus.
Syzygium Friends Of Harassment The Camel Empire 73	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:34:28 - [803] - Quote Gully Alex Foyle wrote: 2. This only applies to medium FW plexes and PVE acceleration gates. Just go fight somewhere else, space is big. 3. Not much difference from having the calvary cloaked or >14 AU away And here is why you are soooo wrong. I am not limited to medium FW plexes, I an set up this trap at ANY celestial where people can warp to 0-100. If there is an acceleration gate that wont let me go in, I simply wait BEFORE that gate at 50km. Same goes for Planets, Belts, Moons, Star. Whoever is warping there will land more or less 50km within my ganksquads range and is simply dead. And if other Recons are incoming, my Squad is in Warp before they have a lock. So yes, it is a HUGE difference in reaction time window for the incoming pilots between invisible recons and "cavalry 14 AU out". A HUGE one.
Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 52	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:34:32 - [804] - Quote Jori McKie wrote: Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron wrote: I confess to being somewhat concerned about DScan immunity, but I don't think it quite deserves the vitriol it's getting. Is it really that different, now, to a Covert Recon with their cloaks? Ok, you won't get the brief window to DScan one coming through a wormhole / taking an acceleration gate or whatever, but that's offset by the early warning you'll get where EvE gives a massive boom and you see the ship decelerating from warp. Either way, you have the oppurtunity to leave if you're aligned. If you're not, your loss is your fault. In PvP, they're less effective than cloaks, surely. All you have to do is get your scout to warp to the grid and you find out whether there's combat recons there. That's much more secure intel than if they were the now quite tanky and invisible covert recons. This change ain't worth the vitriol it's getting. Cloaky force multipliers in the form of T3s and covert recons have not broken the game, this won't either. Have you seen a cloak T3 fit, like you use in Blops? It is gimped and rightly so, T3 Recons are at least 2.5 times more expansive than Recons (yes T3 have better tank) and you risk to lose a skill. Force Recons with cloak are gimped and rightly so compared to full tank and full utility Combat Recon. It is simple why should i use a gimped cloak Recon when i can use a Recon with better tank and same utility including being cloaked until probes. Cloaky T3s are gimped compared to normal T3s, but they are still powerful ships. Force Recons with a cloak are not that badly gimped, especially with their new tanking levels. And the cloak, obviously, adds the extra advantage of invisibility on grid as well, which seems worth the lower performance otherwise. Daneel Trevize wrote: No I don't gamble upon the statisically bad chance that they don't have recons with them, in lowsec. And those odds will of course hugely change if this OP change is available to people. You would dscan and either see the cloaky recon being not cloaked; or you warp in and have 6+ seconds to reposition/warp away again. In this proposed world the recons will be dscanning you coming close and ready to tackle you as soon as you land/break landing invulnerability. You will not get to overheated-mwd away, or warp off if fitted for ~5sec agility. Warping anywhere not at 0km to a gate/station would be a total gamble. How then do you solo in anything not mostly covered by plat insurance? In a manner that is skill-based rather than a pure crapshoot dice roll every single jump and/or warp, that is. Why will it change though? If people don't bring stealthy recons now, why are they suddenly going to bring stealthy recons once this change goes through. Obviously if you warp a combat ship to a grid that's got a recon on it, you're quite likely to be tackled. That same principle applies for the cloaky recons too though; so what's the difference? If you see someone on local, but not on DScan, you are ALWAYS taking a risk that they are cloaked up somewhere you want to be. That applies right now, it is not going to be a new thing when this DScan immunity comes in.
Komodo Askold No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 242	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:34:57 - [805] - Quote l0rd carlos wrote: Komodo Askold wrote: Even if you fit your Lachesis that way, that doesn't instantly mean he's pointed and dead. Even when the Lachesis bonused point range (I think it might need to be looked at), if your target did his homework he won't be sitting at the warp-in for you to land on him; he will be several kilometers away, so you'll have to use your MWD for a few seconds to catch him. Since you're warping in uncloaked, if he's aware (as he should), he will see you while decelerating from your warp: enough for him to try to warp away, especially if he's already aligned (as he should try to be). Most site-running ships can do that (the larger ones, such as battleships, should already be taking in account their own slowness and plan accordingly), Point and web range is 93km. You want to be in damage range to kill rats. Lets take an angel 5/10 lowsec DED site example. In the last pocket you need to kill a structure while doging a bunch of npcs. It's will not be possible to kill that from 100km away. I have run a bunch of sites in lowsec with PvP ships, right now you see recons declack while using the accerlation gate. With multiple pockets you have anough time to position yourself or run away. "It's an Arazu and rapier? I might be able to kill that before the main flet gets here. Oh they got an Oneiros to help them == armor tank == damps == better run!" Now you have 10 seconds between notice and before you get pointed, webbed and damped. That means I will try to run == less pvp for both parties. Oh, unless you use an 0 SP alt to watch the first gate! WHAT A THRILLING GAME MECHANIC! It just forces you to use more alts .. that do nothing but watch overview. Yay. Fair point with the Lachesis' point/web range; it does is scary. You could always try to get in the opposite side of the site, but that's not exactly easy when rats are shooting. On the other hand, Mordu's Legion ships can point you from comparable ranges too, and they're not cloaky either, but can be found with D-Scan. Honestly, I think the problem there would not be the D-Scan inmunity of Combat Recons, but rather the Lachesis' own attributes and bonuses. Being webbed from 93 km away is not that bad if all you want to do is warp away (in fact it helps aligning), but being pointed is another matter. The Mordu's Legion ships can do that but are not D-Scan inmune. Perhaps the Lachesis should get its point range bonus reduced to compensate?
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 79	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:35:23 - [806] - Quote Flyinghotpocket wrote: Stitch Kaneland wrote: Flyinghotpocket wrote: why the literal ** isnt the curse getting a 5th low? do you still want shield tanking curses? i mean thats totaly un amarr. I know right! Thats like minmatar having to armor tank a muninn... oh? That exists.. probably deal with it like minny pilots do. You at least have wtfpwn neuts going for you. Well look on the brightside, at least your kin and explo resists will be really high. deal with what? how minni pilots can change tanks on a whim and amarr cant? ok no thanks i dont want a shield curse i want a god dam armor curse. 4 lows on a punisher is one thing but on a *** CRUISER designed to be armor tanked is another. especially when your always forced to have a stupid reactor control on it. Um.. what? Did you even look at muninn slot layout? The only way to shield tank it is without a point. Its shoehorned into the same bad slot layout as most amarr ships. Except it has glaring kinetic/explo holes. So your curse will be the same, just for shield. You'll have glaring EM and thermal holes, but your kin and explo resists will be baller. So again, deal with it. Ghaustyl Kathix wrote: T2 cruisers aren't allowed in medium complexes and lower, so this change shouldn't affect FW much. Yes. Yes they are allowed into a medium plex. I bring my muninn and vagabond into them all the time. I don't see recon's being any different. Not that i'm really worried about this change, just a matter of comparing local to d-scan. Lelob wrote:** Here's a good solution. Make the curse, AS AN AMARR SHIP, capable of armour tanking. Man wouldn't that be novel. I'm sure they'll get right on that, as soon as they make the muninn a shield ship. Minmatar are in the same position, and we've managed just fine. Course, theres a lot more wrong with the muninn than the curse.
Daneel Trevize Faster Path Than of Light Exiles 526	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:40:05 - [807] - Quote Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron wrote: Daneel Trevize wrote: No I don't gamble upon the statisically bad chance that they don't have recons with them, in lowsec. And those odds will of course hugely change if this OP change is available to people. You would dscan and either see the cloaky recon being not cloaked; or you warp in and have 6+ seconds to reposition/warp away again. In this proposed world the recons will be dscanning you coming close and ready to tackle you as soon as you land/break landing invulnerability. You will not get to overheated-mwd away, or warp off if fitted for ~5sec agility. Warping anywhere not at 0km to a gate/station would be a total gamble. How then do you solo in anything not mostly covered by plat insurance? In a manner that is skill-based rather than a pure crapshoot dice roll every single jump and/or warp, that is. Why will it change though? If people don't bring stealthy recons now, why are they suddenly going to bring stealthy recons once this change goes through. Obviously if you warp a combat ship to a grid that's got a recon on it, you're quite likely to be tackled. That same principle applies for the cloaky recons too though; so what's the difference? If you see someone on local, but not on DScan, you are ALWAYS taking a risk that they are cloaked up somewhere you want to be. That applies right now, it is not going to be a new thing when this DScan immunity comes in. You seem to be deliberately ignoring the very answers I've already stated. Do you not see the difference between being able to escape if you land at ~70km but can warp your ship in <6 seconds, and being tackled in ~2 seconds as soon as you try? Do you not see that this utterly huge increase in non-cloaky recon potency would increase the number of people flying these ships?? And that it ruins any attempt at skillful timing of a longer-running solo fight, where you're trying to not only handle what's on grid but also assess what you see coming in ~14AU?
Niart Gunn TURN LEFT The Camel Empire 21	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:40:42 - [808] - Quote I'm still wondering about this: Dscan immunity makes Combat Recons encroach on the role of Force Recons. If the purpose of this treat is to make them stand out as a unique ship class, how is giving them half a Covert Ops cloak for free working towards achieving this goal? Just because that line of text has never been used doesn't make the effect actually unique. Fact is, it is very similar to Covert Ops cloaking, and actually better in some cases, like the fact that there are no windows in which you're visible or no locking delay when setting up a trap. Especially for a ship like the Pilgrim there will be very little reason to use it, as long as the Curse does the job so much better while being almost as hidden. There is a case for this for all other races' recons too, the ability is so similar to Covert Ops cloaking that unless you absolutely need to be invisible on grid, there is very little reason to use the Force Recons (except maybe the Arazu for lowslots alone), as they are not only short one slot on their Combat counterpart, but also have to fit a cloak and thereby sacrifice a high, whereas Combat Recons get dscan immunity for free. Also, the situations this treat caters to are mostly blobbing and ganking, while hurting the small guy the most. I know, there has been a long tradition in eve for this anyways, but does it really need to be continued? Regardless of similar things already being possible with cloaks (that have their drawbacks and actually use up a slot), is it really necessary to introduce yet another mechanic that reinforces camping of different places of interest, and make it even more important to have alts while being largely useless to a roaming gang? At the end of the day I think this just doesn't add any valuable gameplay over what we already have, while making things more tedious for people who can spare less numbers for scouts. If you want to obscure information from players, it would be much better to either introduce sort of a Mobile Scan Inhibitor in ship form that remains on scan itself, or better yet, start reworking the entire intel gathering in eve towards a system that is more dependent on ship signatures and sensor strengths, where information becomes more detailed the closer something is, or the more narrow your scan angle becomes. A thorough overhaul in this kind of fashion would be much better than an arbitrary gimmick like dscan immunity for 4 ships in the game. CCP Rise wrote: 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. Nice logic. So that would mean the removal of local would result in more fights, since the lack of local means the gang considering engaging something never knows that they can't deal with what they can't see, like it's the case in wormholes, right? Because people do not want to take extra risks is exactly why they will work very hard to get all the information possible, now involving getting on-grid eyes or combat probes as well, both of which might scare your potential target away too. Imagine the gang considering engaging the two Vexors seeing that there are 4 members of the corp they want to fight in local, not only will this slow everything down, because that gang now has to get a scout on grid with or probing the Vexors, but also will likely no fight happen because either there are the two Rooks or the Vexors will run because they get scouted.
Gully Alex Foyle Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop 2803	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:43:09 - [809] - Quote Syzygium wrote: Gully Alex Foyle wrote: 2. This only applies to medium FW plexes and PVE acceleration gates. Just go fight somewhere else, space is big. 3. Not much difference from having the calvary cloaked or >14 AU away And here is why you are soooo wrong. I am not limited to medium FW plexes, I an set up this trap at ANY celestial where people can warp to 0-100. If there is an acceleration gate that wont let me go in, I simply wait BEFORE that gate at 50km. Same goes for Planets, Belts, Moons, Star. Whoever is warping there will land more or less 50km within my ganksquads range and is simply dead. And if other Recons are incoming, my Squad is in Warp before they have a lock. So yes, it is a HUGE difference in reaction time window for the incoming pilots between invisible recons and "cavalry 14 AU out". A HUGE one. If you warp @10 to an accel gate, you can slide in while remaining invulnerable to anything on-grid. If they can't follow you in, you're fine. Just spam 'activate' the gate while exiting warp. Space is 3d, if you warp @100 to a celestial from an 'odd' angle you're very likely to land well over 50km away from anything on-grid, potentially up to 200km away. Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 79	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:44:37 - [810] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Just finished reading everything that was posted over night. Here's what I can update with at the moment: Biggest concern at the moment is the added EHP. Making recons a more realistic fleet option next to T3 cruisers is good, making them too tanky in smaller situations where their ewar already gives them a lot of damage evasion may be too much. Not sure if change is needed but will keep looking at this and update again asap. 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. The Pilgrim. Opinions seem mixed, gaining neut range is obviously nice but many of you still feel that giving up neut strength is too harsh, or that some other added power is needed (more damage for instance). Will get back to you on this as soon as possible but it's possible that we will make adjustments. RLML for Rook. Sure. Consider it done. More low slots for Lachesis. Not sure yet on this one, will talk it over here and see what we can do. Hope that answers some questions. I'm sure many of you would rather have more explanation for the dscan immunity change so I'll try to get that post together as soon as I can. Thanks for all the feedback. I think keeping t2 resists is good. Could be alil strong, but i'm willing to try it. Can always be changed later. Also, for D-scan immunity, glad you're sticking with it. Could you please consider huginn PG, it looks to be meant for arty, but you can't fit the arty that has good range on it. Leaving you with 650's and anemic dps, and still probably needing PG rig or RCU. Or, maybe reducing artillery PG requirements to make them viable for minny long range? Since a/c's are not going to reach 20-40km web ranges. And.. why would i want to brawl with a huginn with long webs?

Dracvlad Taishi Combine Second-Dawn 524	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:46:01 - [811] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Just finished reading everything that was posted over night. Here's what I can update with at the moment: 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. What strong counter arguments, they are all chaff type HTFU cheer-leading or weak arguments, I was enticed back by the jump changes and the slight tilt towards role playing, but the D-scan immunity makes it certain death. I am not sure I will wait for your explanation before hitting the de-sub button, in fact damn it I am de-subbing now and I will put this as my reason. Its ill thought out and makes it even easier for the easy gank crowd, WTF are you doing! Ella's Snack bar
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries Chelonaphobia 721	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:46:49 - [812] - Quote CCP Rise - the one explanation I would like from you is why D-scan immunity for recons is better than LOCAL IMMUNITY for recons.
Daneel Trevize Faster Path Than of Light Exiles 529	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:47:06 - [813] - Quote Gully Alex Foyle wrote: Space is 3d, if you warp @100 to a celestial from an 'odd' angle you're very likely to land well over 50km away from anything on-grid, potentially up to 200km away. Almost all Eve systems are limited to being designed on a 2D plane. Statisically most warp angles will come from the centre of the system, almost none offer you even 90degrees deviation, almost certainly not for the outer half of the celestials count. So now you want to start bouncing moons to generate odd angles. Yet another pressure to fly something that can align fast and deal with frigs, because you're going to have to deal with POS and tacklers following you as you spend more time lumbering about at locations with no 'out' choice.
Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 53	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:47:33 - [814] - Quote Daneel Trevize wrote: You seem to be deliberately ignoring the very answers I've already stated. Do you not see the difference between being able to escape if you land at ~70km but can warp your ship in <6 seconds, and being tackled in ~2 seconds as soon as you try? Do you not see that this utterly huge increase in non-cloaky recon potency would increase the number of people flying these ships?? And that it ruins any attempt at skillful timing of a longer-running solo fight, where you're trying to not only handle what's on grid but also assess what you see coming in ~14AU? Obviously I'm not deliberately ignoring anything. It just doesn't make sense to me. In regards to your point; I see the difference there, but I don't follow how you're arriving at the conclusion that that scenario will happen. How is the situation different between landing on grid with a dscan immune Lachesis and a cloaky Arazu? I really don't see it at all. In both case, the ship can see you coming in warp, and you can't see it before you land. They both point the same distance, and in basically the same time. So why is it better to have this new Lachesis than it is to currently have a cloaky Arazu? Your second point, again, is completely the same as the current situation. You can't see cloaky ships currently coming in either, so why is it different that you can't see the new dscan immune ships coming in when they perform basically the same function.
Jhaelee de'Auvrie Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica 17	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:48:58 - [815] - Quote Over all the stat adjustment on the Recons seems like a good idea. Giving the non-cloaking ones more durability should hopefully see increased usage in comparison to how it is now. The major thing that got my attention was the idea of Recons not showing up on D-Scan. That seems crazy. The directional scanner is one of the fundamental mechanics in the game. It is probably the single most useful tool in EVE when it comes to in-space decision making. Messing with core decision making dynamics will have drastic effects. Even if it is just a single class of ships, damaging players trust in that will lead to more avoidance of conflict than it will enjoyable content. Considering the advantage (and thus reason for taking a high slot/fittings) of a cloaking device is to avoid detection. Be it from the overview, probes, or the directional scanner. Giving that advantage to Recons for free negates the importance of having normal detection avoidance fitted on ships. Suddenly you have stealth ships with no downside (no slot loss, no scan res loss, nothing). Looking at the Mobile Scan Inhibitor as an example, if this kind of change is going to go forward, at how things should be done without providing no possible chance of detection. Instead of just not having the Recon ship show up at all, have it show up as a non-informative GÇ£Recon CruiserGÇ¥ (instead of Curse/Falcon/Rapier/whatever). This would still provide that all important information that there are Recon ships there, just not specifically which ones. This would also be in line with the Mobile Scan Inhibitor, which itself shows up on scan telling the detector that something might be there.
Dullmeyr Prodomo Gnartz 38	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:50:22 - [816] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Dscan immunity is staying. I bet you did not had to read all the posts in this thread to make this "decision". :p o/
Daneel Trevize Faster Path Than of Light Exiles 529	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:51:00 - [817] - Quote Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron wrote: How is the situation different between landing on grid with a dscan immune Lachesis and a cloaky Arazu? I really don't see it at all. In both case, the ship can see you coming in warp, and you can't see it before you land. They both point the same distance, and in basically the same time. So why is it better to have this new Lachesis than it is to currently have a cloaky Arazu? Your second point, again, is completely the same as the current situation. You can't see cloaky ships currently coming in either, so why is it different that you can't see the new dscan immune ships coming in when they perform basically the same function. Because the lach won't have to be on the ball and make the player action of decloaking sufficiently in time to have cleared their decloak delay. The lazy lach ****** can just see you land and go 'oh, something to tackle' and ruin your day. They won't be caught out trigging their decloak just to find you'd warped to a nearby offgrid tactical exactly to provoke that response in order to test for awake recon pilots! It's promoting brain-dead gameplay from those that already have the numbers advantage because they're risk-averse blobbers.
Altayr555 Enter Ice La Division Bleue 4	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:56:38 - [818] - Quote -1 for a big enormous error^^
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1656	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:58:29 - [819] - Quote Gully Alex Foyle wrote: Just for the sake of discussion: 1. Try Pirate's Little Helper. Awesome intel on carebears vs. pvpers (based on zkill stats), corp/alliance and affiliation, common EWAR/cap ship/cyno bait pilots, etc. It's super easy to use (just ctrl-a ctrl-c local). And come on, even on weekends there's rarely more than 20-30 or so in lowsec local... 2. This only applies to medium FW plexes and PVE acceleration gates. Just go fight somewhere else, space is big. 3. Not much difference from having the calvary cloaked or >14 AU away Not saying that you're flat wrong, but thankfully EVE PVP is complex enough that players will always find solutions to other players' tactics. That's part of the fun. Just saying you honestly can't be 100% (or even 90%) sure that this d-scan thing will be bad, instead of fun for all. Excellent post which pretty much sums it up for me. A typical solo system would see 5-10 in local. Copy into PLH will quickly identify the PvP toons and a quick rollover will show any with recent Combat Recon kills. You already do this when you enter system. If you identify a probable pilot, go to the Small or Novice, or go to the next system, or drop probes, or YOLO. Or hop in a Combat Recon and go hunting! Seriously, yes this will shake things up a bit. But it isn't the dire crisis some are predicting. I would LOVE to see a solid solo hunter ship get local immunity. Maybe the Stratios... Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Challus Mercer Sacred Temple The Gorgon Empire 11	Posted - 2014.12.19 12:58:42 - [820] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Dscan immunity is staying. Ok, if there is no sense to discuss about cancelling this feature, i would propose another approach to milder the negative effect of this on solo and small scale pvp. Nerf the scan res of combat recons so that their locking time would be equal to force recon with recalibration delay after decloaking. It wont have big impact on fleet fights but it will help smaller ships to escape this recon madness. I think it will help a lot with balancing this OP ability. Like this post if you agree!

Kane Fenris NWP 156	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:00:12 - [821] - Quote i feel like the target painter boni on the minmatar hulls are still pretty useles (esp on the huginn) caue i feel like you always want the web and dont want to use up your mids fitting both... and if i think youd fit 2x webs...
gabrial13 Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 7	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:02:07 - [822] - Quote Undetectable on directional scan, that is just stupid . Come on ccp , I know recons have lost popularity due to the t3's but this will make hunter killer recons unstoppable and way overpowered, the solution is to wait for the t3 rebalance and of course try and find some use for the pilgrim. This will just cause more problems than solutions, just my view of it
Daneel Trevize Faster Path Than of Light Exiles 530	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:02:50 - [823] - Quote Challus Mercer wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Dscan immunity is staying. Ok, if there is no sense to discuss about cancelling this feature, i would propose another approach to milder the negative effect of this on solo and small scale pvp. Nerf the scan res of combat recons so that their locking time would be equal to force recon with recalibration delay after decloaking. It wont have big impact on fleet fights but it will help smaller ships to escape this recon madness. I think it will help a lot with balancing this OP ability. Like this post if you agree! Only if they're also made immune to RSBs. And it still ruins the solo or small gang players that have committed to a fight and want to react to dscan to time their leaving/repositioning.
Gully Alex Foyle Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop 2805	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:03:54 - [824] - Quote Daneel Trevize wrote: Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron wrote: How is the situation different between landing on grid with a dscan immune Lachesis and a cloaky Arazu? I really don't see it at all. In both case, the ship can see you coming in warp, and you can't see it before you land. They both point the same distance, and in basically the same time. So why is it better to have this new Lachesis than it is to currently have a cloaky Arazu? Your second point, again, is completely the same as the current situation. You can't see cloaky ships currently coming in either, so why is it different that you can't see the new dscan immune ships coming in when they perform basically the same function. Because the lach won't have to be on the ball and make the player action of decloaking sufficiently in time to have cleared their decloak delay. The lazy lach ****** can just see you land and go 'oh, something to tackle' and ruin your day. They won't be caught out trigging their decloak from their dscan assessment just to find you'd warped to a nearby offgrid tactical exactly to provoke that response in order to test for awake recon pilots! It's promoting brain-dead gameplay from those that already have the numbers advantage because they're risk-averse blobbers. In a game supposedly with a huge basis in risk:reward. Meh, I've never been a fan of the risk:reward crap for PVP. I've always thought it was more of a PVE thing, because in PVP risk:reward is largely controlled by the players themselves. I'm more of a fan of the 'you're better than the others --> you win' thing, and I don't see how this dscan immunity thing would advantage 'bad' players in any way. What I see is, lots of wannabe gankers flying around in combat recons, thinking 'lololol my dscan immunity is an easy win button', and being obliterated by better players that will put some effort in it (such as yourself, probably). Stop thinking of (plausible) ways that the brain-dead dudes could kill you, and start thinking of the ways that will allow you to kill them, as they deserve!!! Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Bentakhar Minmatar Death Squad 21	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:04:14 - [825] - Quote To all the people freaking out about the Dscan thing, Remember how you all freaked out about the interdiction nullifier susbsystem on T3 cruisers... And keep in mind the recons are cloaky anyway and can still be scanned down with combat probes. So relax
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 14281	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:05:59 - [826] - Quote Bentakhar wrote: To all the people freaking out about the Dscan thing, Remember how you all freaked out about the interdiction nullifier susbsystem on T3 cruisers... And keep in mind the recons are cloaky anyway and can still be scanned down with combat probes. So relax But but my FW plexing! Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
HoruSeth Republic University Minmatar Republic 6	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:06:25 - [827] - Quote Zappity wrote: Gully Alex Foyle wrote: ... Excellent post which pretty much sums it incorrectly up for me. You missed to type one word. I corrected for you. Why he is wrong was explained before your post.
Komodo Askold No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 243	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:06:29 - [828] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: CCP Rise - the one explanation I would like from you is why D-scan immunity for recons is better than LOCAL IMMUNITY for recons. Because that would be useless in W-Space.
Gully Alex Foyle Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop 2805	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:06:29 - [829] - Quote Zappity wrote: or YOLO I admit this is usually my go-to option, so maybe I'm biased. Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Bentakhar Minmatar Death Squad 21	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:06:45 - [830] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Bentakhar wrote: To all the people freaking out about the Dscan thing, Remember how you all freaked out about the interdiction nullifier susbsystem on T3 cruisers... And keep in mind the recons are cloaky anyway and can still be scanned down with combat probes. So relax But but my FW plexing! FW kinda sucks

Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 57	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:06:59 - [831] - Quote Daneel Trevize wrote: Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron wrote: How is the situation different between landing on grid with a dscan immune Lachesis and a cloaky Arazu? I really don't see it at all. In both case, the ship can see you coming in warp, and you can't see it before you land. They both point the same distance, and in basically the same time. So why is it better to have this new Lachesis than it is to currently have a cloaky Arazu? Your second point, again, is completely the same as the current situation. You can't see cloaky ships currently coming in either, so why is it different that you can't see the new dscan immune ships coming in when they perform basically the same function. Because the lach won't have to be on the ball and make the player action of decloaking sufficiently in time to have cleared their decloak delay. The lazy lach ****** can just see you land and go 'oh, something to tackle' and ruin your day. They won't be caught out trigging their decloak from their dscan assessment just to find you'd warped to a nearby offgrid tactical exactly to provoke that response in order to test for awake recon pilots! It's promoting brain-dead gameplay from those that already have the numbers advantage because they're risk-averse blobbers. In a game supposedly with a huge basis in risk:reward. Ah. OK, I see your point now, thanks for the explanation. I'm afraid I don't agree that this is a problem particularly though. I think that the number of pilots whom currently warp to nearby celestials in an attempt to persuade possible cloaked recons on grid to shed their cloak and get rid of the targetting delay is extremely small, and that the ability to avoid giving the game away to those few clever pilots will not be considered worth giving up the ability of cloaked ships to remain undetected by far more numerous interceptor and covops scouts. So I don't think this change will result in people picking the combat recons over cloaky recons any more commonly than they do now, and when they do choose to take the combat recon I don't think they'll be particularly more successful at tackling people who warp to them unsuspecting.
Luscius Uta 121	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:07:59 - [832] - Quote Dscan immunity is a terrible idea. However, if there's no chance of it going away at least counter it with a big nerf to scan resolution - or even introduce some kind of a siege module that can only be fitted on combat recons, and they would be immune to dscan only when it's active. Having this module active would also give 75% penalty to scan resolution (and resebos wouldn't work) and it would prevent warping but not moving. No fuel use, cycle time 60 seconds. The recon siege module is not a well thought idea, but that's why I'm posting it on a public forum, to see if there's someone willing to improve it. I'm not fat, I'm just over-tanked!
Daneel Trevize Faster Path Than of Light Exiles 530	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:12:44 - [833] - Quote Gully Alex Foyle wrote: Stop thinking of (plausible) ways that the brain-dead dudes could kill you, and start thinking of the ways that will allow you to kill them, as they deserve!!! But I still have to plan to get through ubiquitous linked t1 logi, so I must bring significant damage projection, rather than a recon. Oh and I can't practically bring BCs or BSs for on-paper dps as they're pathetic in general, common situations, over bringing a HAC or pirate/faction cruiser. Long ranged tackle won't kill people you don't outnumber, or have a minumum relative speed advange of your fleet vs theirs, which huginns would remove without warning. Damps also require a minimum number of dps ships & damps to be effective and even then can be piloted against so as to be negated. And again **** ECM. So how do I use these recons against overwhelming numbers? Force multipliers need a force to multiple. When both sides have them, the larger force is still stronger.
Jori McKie TURN LEFT The Camel Empire 187	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:14:13 - [834] - Quote Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron wrote: Daneel Trevize wrote: Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron wrote: How is the situation different between landing on grid with a dscan immune Lachesis and a cloaky Arazu? I really don't see it at all. In both case, the ship can see you coming in warp, and you can't see it before you land. They both point the same distance, and in basically the same time. So why is it better to have this new Lachesis than it is to currently have a cloaky Arazu? Your second point, again, is completely the same as the current situation. You can't see cloaky ships currently coming in either, so why is it different that you can't see the new dscan immune ships coming in when they perform basically the same function. Because the lach won't have to be on the ball and make the player action of decloaking sufficiently in time to have cleared their decloak delay. The lazy lach ****** can just see you land and go 'oh, something to tackle' and ruin your day. They won't be caught out trigging their decloak from their dscan assessment just to find you'd warped to a nearby offgrid tactical exactly to provoke that response in order to test for awake recon pilots! It's promoting brain-dead gameplay from those that already have the numbers advantage because they're risk-averse blobbers. In a game supposedly with a huge basis in risk:reward. Ah. OK, I see your point now, thanks for the explanation. I'm afraid I don't agree that this is a problem particularly though. I think that the number of pilots whom currently warp to nearby celestials in an attempt to persuade possible cloaked recons on grid to shed their cloak and get rid of the targetting delay is extremely small, and that the ability to avoid giving the game away to those few clever pilots will not be considered worth giving up the ability of cloaked ships to remain undetected by far more numerous interceptor and covops scouts. So I don't think this change will result in people picking the combat recons over cloaky recons any more commonly than they do now, and when they do choose to take the combat recon I don't think they'll be particularly more successful at tackling people who warp to them unsuspecting. Nope, almost every passable good PvP lowsec Pilot does it. I do this all the time when i see a gate camp, warp in my ship at 0 and the bad ones on the other site just decloak their Rapier, Falcon whatever to get rid of the cloak delay. I know then what i have to deal with. I mark every Falcon, Rapier pilot i encounter in game, everyone. If i see a marked one in local i won't blind warp into any medium plex at all, just warp to a nearby celestial and see if something decloaks. "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." --áAbrazzar
Fatal pewpew SniggWaffe WAFFLES. 2	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:14:31 - [835] - Quote well i know what i'm about to start flying.
Draciste Everyone vs Everything THE R0NIN 27	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:14:38 - [836] - Quote well, because Ceptors & Drones only age is still not enough, here is the third one - Recons age. Everyone vs Everything [qEvEp] - https://qevep.zkillboard.com/corporation/98188033/ https://twitter.com/Draciste
Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 57	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:15:00 - [837] - Quote Daneel Trevize wrote: [. So how do I use these recons against overwhelming numbers? Force multipliers need a force to multiple. When both sides have them, the larger force is still stronger. Well duh. When 2 equal forces are multiplied by two equal force multipliers, they're still equal forces. If one side is stronger to begin with obviously they'll still be stronger if they have the same recons. Force multipliers help bring a weaker force in line with a stronger force that has no multipliers.
Grookshank Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 40	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:15:15 - [838] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Just finished reading everything that was posted over night. Here's what I can update with at the moment: Biggest concern at the moment is the added EHP. Making recons a more realistic fleet option next to T3 cruisers is good, making them too tanky in smaller situations where their ewar already gives them a lot of damage evasion may be too much. Not sure if change is needed but will keep looking at this and update again asap. If you reverse this, they will hardly be a viable option for fleet fights, but stay a big "hit me" sign in space :(
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1656	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:19:31 - [839] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Bentakhar wrote: To all the people freaking out about the Dscan thing, Remember how you all freaked out about the interdiction nullifier susbsystem on T3 cruisers... And keep in mind the recons are cloaky anyway and can still be scanned down with combat probes. So relax But but my FW plexing! Oh my goodness, I am going to catch SO MANY of those miserable stabbed plexers with my Lachesis. There will be rivers in local. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
big miker Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 246	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:23:27 - [840] - Quote Oh CCP Rise. This time you are proposing something that is too much. I love doing one thing in EVE, which is flying nano Battleships against the odds. My latest 2 video's have been nano Battleships only. You know that, and you loved my latest video. Not to mention you liked my fight the most in the one man crew competition. And then I see this showing up. Combat recons imune to d-scan. What on earth are you thinking with this change? This will not only ruin the thing I love doing which is nano Battleships, but this pretty much ruins solo pvp in general except for frigate pvp. Do I seriously need anather few alts to place on gates in order to see if there are combat recons around? Not to mention, checking out POS's in systems to see if there's recons waiting inside? The situation you described earlier, 2 vexors and 2 rooks camping a gate. If you know what's on that gate you don't engage. Sure, that's logic! After the changes you do not see them on the gate so you warp in anyways. What happens? You die. Was it a fun engagement? HELL NO! Getting killed pointlessly. So in order to properly fight something now you need: - Scout alt - Combat probes. WTB additional highslot + 220 cpu increase on all ships. - Friends in scout ships Allright, you now have friends in scout ships warping around cloaked. Enemy gang sees you + corp m8's in local and see nothing but you on scan. What on earth will they think? Combat recons everywhere! exactly, they will either flee or not engage you at all becuase they are expecting the very same thing. This is just a rediculous example of what will become of solo / small gang pvp. Claoky recons do exactly what the proposed combat recons do right now. And then there's the risk vs reward factor. Cloaky recons can be seen / d-scanned when they jump in a gate and try to cloak again. Risk of using a cloaking device. When cloaky recons deloak they have a 5 / 6 second lock delay. Which is a risk. You are given a small time/frame to REACT on something that can get you killed., which basically is player skill. The reward is being able to warp cloaked in a VERY STRONG SUPPORT SHIP. Recons allready are very strong support ships. The DPS increase, cap increase and hitpoint increase makes them alot stronger than they are curruntly. Makes them desirable for larger fleets becuase they won't get instablapped as easily anymore. I understand you want do give ships a new kind of role, something that makes them stand out of the regular ships. D-scan imunity however is not something you are looking for. Cloaks do that with the proper risk vs reward they have right now. Not to mention wormhole space will be Recons online, combined with a t3 OP fleet that follows it. And please balance t3's asap. 150+k EHP Battleship DPS Cruisers with ewar bonus's is just stupid. Especially if you want to combine these things with d-scan imune Recons.... - A very mad Miker Latest video: Ferocious 4.0 Official Release

Daneel Trevize Faster Path Than of Light Exiles 530	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:24:18 - [841] - Quote Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron wrote: Daneel Trevize wrote: [. So how do I use these recons against overwhelming numbers? Force multipliers need a force to multiple. When both sides have them, the larger force is still stronger. Well duh. When 2 equal forces are multiplied by two equal force multipliers, they're still equal forces. If one side is stronger to begin with obviously they'll still be stronger if they have the same recons. Force multipliers help bring a weaker force in line with a stronger force that has no multipliers. You deliberately removed the context there, which was that I must first bring sufficient force/dps in a small gang situation, and so can't go off and plan to use the proposed OP recons, as they have the opportunity cost of not doing enough to overcome linked t1 logi as reliably as projected damage.
Levina Windstar Mekalon Industry 58	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:27:22 - [842] - Quote Meaby I missed the info but if the recon is immune to D-Scan, will we be able to scan it with combat probe? So the only way to be "immune" to combat probe is to be cloaked? EDIT : Typo
Borachon GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 24	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:28:38 - [843] - Quote As someone who flies recons a lot, I like these overall. The speed, cap, and EHP bonuses are all great and essential for these ships, particularly the combat recons; good job. Not sure about the d-scan immunity. It's an interesting idea, and I'm happy to wait and see how it plays out. I expect it'll be a bigger deal in lowsec and w-space than nullsec The pilgrim desperately needed the range bonus However, the force recons feel a little thin or disjointed. The covert cloak is powerful, but they already pay in high slots for it - the all have one fewer high slot and have to burn a high slot on the cloak as well. My suggestion: Move covert cloak CPU bonus for force recons to be a 100% reduction as a role bonus, just like on covops ships. Give all of the force recons the same second bonus for recon skills as the corresponding combat recon. ALl of these bonuses are tied to high slots, which the force recons have effectively two fewer of, so they're actually much weaker bonuses for the force recons than the combat recons. I'm not sure it makes sense to have the falcon and rook have different weapon systems; as a result, there are there are no covert missile recons. I'd probably switch the falcon to get a missile bonuses from the rook instead of a hybrid bonus.
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1656	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:31:04 - [844] - Quote Levina Windstar wrote: Meaby I missed the info but if the recon is immune to D-Scan, will we be able to scan it with combat probe? So the only way to be "immune" to combat probe is to be cloaked? EDIT : Typo You will still be able to combat probe a Combat Recon unless it is cloaked. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Daneel Trevize Faster Path Than of Light Exiles 530	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:31:12 - [845] - Quote Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron wrote: Daneel Trevize wrote: Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron wrote: How is the situation different between landing on grid with a dscan immune Lachesis and a cloaky Arazu? I really don't see it at all. In both case, the ship can see you coming in warp, and you can't see it before you land. They both point the same distance, and in basically the same time. So why is it better to have this new Lachesis than it is to currently have a cloaky Arazu? Your second point, again, is completely the same as the current situation. You can't see cloaky ships currently coming in either, so why is it different that you can't see the new dscan immune ships coming in when they perform basically the same function. Because the lach won't have to be on the ball and make the player action of decloaking sufficiently in time to have cleared their decloak delay. The lazy lach **** can just see you land and go 'oh, something to tackle' and ruin your day. They won't be caught out trigging their decloak from their dscan assessment just to find you'd warped to a nearby offgrid tactical exactly to provoke that response in order to test for awake recon pilots! It's promoting brain-dead gameplay from those that already have the numbers advantage because they're risk-averse blobbers. In a game supposedly with a huge basis in risk:reward. Ah. OK, I see your point now, thanks for the explanation. I'm afraid I don't agree that this is a problem particularly though. I think that the number of pilots whom currently warp to nearby celestials in an attempt to persuade possible cloaked recons on grid to shed their cloak and get rid of the targetting delay is extremely small, and that the ability to avoid giving the game away to those few clever pilots will not be considered worth giving up the ability of cloaked ships to remain undetected by far more numerous interceptor and covops scouts. So I don't think this change will result in people picking the combat recons over cloaky recons any more commonly than they do now, and when they do choose to take the combat recon I don't think they'll be particularly more successful at tackling people who warp to them unsuspecting. Basically: Holy ** you need to stop consider these future changes won't cause changes in people's behaviour! It's not like people are stuck in their chosen ships & are just getting a random chance at a buff or nerf on each balance change. People mostly train things that are effective (rather than pure looks, especially outside of PvE or super-casual play), and they'll cross-traing to keep in ships that are effective. Where effective can either be what's FOTM OP, or what counters it if it's the regular thing to encounter in space. We don't pick a starting race, begin with T2 cruisers, and get stuck in that bubble world. Why wouldn't people choose the objectively better combat recons over cloaky ones? Why wouldn't people short-warp if cloaky recons were more common & disadvantaged by the decloak timer mechanic? How would this change not negate this balance mechanic and negate the extra game knowledge & effort a skillful player would wish to use if only short-warping would continue to be of value? Also: in lowsec there are no numerous interceptors and covops scouts. Because of no bubbles and because of sentry guns. By design. (In theory to give roaming BCs and BSs some viability too, back before superfast cruisers). And the fact is that the decloak timer mechanic exists, it is there as an option for a skillful player to take advantage of. Removing any reason to fly a recon that suffers it removes an option to approach the scenario beyond just comparing dps & ehp/rep numbers on paper. There needs to be a space in the game mechanics for piloting to make a difference! For a player to become the pivotal piece and craft their story. Not for it to be written before they undock/come out of warp.
Zedah Zoid Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy 21	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:31:47 - [846] - Quote CCP, just put in the d-scan immunity and watch what happens. You'll know soon enough if it's completely OP since you're now actually paying attention to your game and trying things and removing things that don't work. Good job, keep it up. I think this is potentially a fun change and I'm all for it. Give us something new to figure out how to use and counter. That's why we play, right?
Heleana Commodus Luyseyal Zvezdani seljoberi i pijandure Devil Divided By Zero 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:42:22 - [847] - Quote Local invis for force recons
S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 45	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:43:48 - [848] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: S'No Flake wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: There is a couple things here I am concerned about: ECM still offers no counter play. Effectively rendering a player unable to do anything for at least 20 seconds plus the time it takes them to relock anything. 99.99% fo all combat in this game involves locking a target. ECM drones turn any ship into a diet Blackbird. ECM needs to be revamped from the ground up and should not involve removing a players ability to play the game. Celestis being incredibly powerful from 100+km is silly. If it turns out combat recons not being on the directional scanner is an option, perhaps showing the ships as the T1 version of the ship instead would be a good compromise. i.e. the directional scanner shows an Arbitrator on scan when in fact it is really a Curse. Semi-related, but what are the odds of a new high slot module that can not be fit if there is any type of cyno fit as well, only allowed for recons and means they do not appear in local? Perhaps I am dreaming a bit too hard here. The counterplay to ECM it's the damp from Arazu/Lachesis/Celestis.. Hell, Keres does a great job at that too :) How do you do that when you are jammed? You lock before the recon? You know, a sebo helps. All ECM ships are using a full rack of ECM mods. I rarely see Falcons with a sebo. So, use a sebo. Or a Keres which has a better lock time :)
Devil Seven Objectless Hatred. Legion Galactic Council 1	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:50:14 - [849] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Just finished reading everything that was posted over night. Here's what I can update with at the moment: Biggest concern at the moment is the added EHP. Making recons a more realistic fleet option next to T3 cruisers is good, making them too tanky in smaller situations where their ewar already gives them a lot of damage evasion may be too much. Not sure if change is needed but will keep looking at this and update again asap. 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. The Pilgrim. Opinions seem mixed, gaining neut range is obviously nice but many of you still feel that giving up neut strength is too harsh, or that some other added power is needed (more damage for instance). Will get back to you on this as soon as possible but it's possible that we will make adjustments. RLML for Rook. Sure. Consider it done. More low slots for Lachesis. Not sure yet on this one, will talk it over here and see what we can do. Hope that answers some questions. I'm sure many of you would rather have more explanation for the dscan immunity change so I'll try to get that post together as soon as I can. Thanks for all the feedback. Yeah the lachesis is in real need of love 4 lows or a lot of base armor (15k to 20k) I can make do with 3 lows that way or it has little use to me
flaming phantom T.R.I.A.D Ushra'Khan 58	Posted - 2014.12.19 13:54:41 - [850] - Quote Wow, interesting. Definitely makes me never want to solo in medium plexes again, but otherwise quite interesting All great men have mustaches

Flyinghotpocket Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica 473	Posted - 2014.12.19 14:04:29 - [851] - Quote Lelob wrote: Flyinghotpocket wrote: Stitch Kaneland wrote: Flyinghotpocket wrote: why the literal ** isnt the curse getting a 5th low? do you still want shield tanking curses? i mean thats totaly un amarr. I know right! Thats like minmatar having to armor tank a muninn... oh? That exists.. probably deal with it like minny pilots do. You at least have wtfpwn neuts going for you. Well look on the brightside, at least your kin and explo resists will be really high. deal with what? how minni pilots can change tanks on a whim and amarr cant? ok no thanks i dont want a shield curse i want a god dam armor curse. 4 lows on a punisher is one thing but on a *** CRUISER designed to be armor tanked is another. especially when your always forced to have a stupid reactor control on it. Here's a good solution. Make the curse, AS AN AMARR SHIP, capable of armour tanking. Man wouldn't that be novel. no ** dumbass. that is exactly what im saying, give the curse a 5th low so it CAN armor tank. Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
Xsaggie Caldari Provisions Caldari State 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 14:05:34 - [852] - Quote Changes look good, of course the rook and falcon are completely useless as ECM is still very broken. Plus why not give the falcon launchers, the dps out of that thing is totally pointless with Hybrids, plus it needs the cap for its useless ecm mods.
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1944	Posted - 2014.12.19 14:10:08 - [853] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Just finished reading everything that was posted over night. Here's what I can update with at the moment: Biggest concern at the moment is the added EHP. Making recons a more realistic fleet option next to T3 cruisers is good, making them too tanky in smaller situations where their ewar already gives them a lot of damage evasion may be too much. Not sure if change is needed but will keep looking at this and update again asap. 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. The Pilgrim. Opinions seem mixed, gaining neut range is obviously nice but many of you still feel that giving up neut strength is too harsh, or that some other added power is needed (more damage for instance). Will get back to you on this as soon as possible but it's possible that we will make adjustments. RLML for Rook. Sure. Consider it done. More low slots for Lachesis. Not sure yet on this one, will talk it over here and see what we can do. Hope that answers some questions. I'm sure many of you would rather have more explanation for the dscan immunity change so I'll try to get that post together as soon as I can. Thanks for all the feedback. The increased EHP is not THAT much. People already tried to engage those ships when possible out of their resit profile. Because these recons already use a lot of their tank slots ( most are shield) to ewar, so they cannot realistically get a very strong tank. Effectively. How many recons fit more than 2 tank modules? That is VERY rare. Even on small scale these ships already need to be very very careful to stay out of real guns, because they are very fragile. The last recon I lost died in like 10 seconds to an orthrus that got a good warp in. Even webbing him (and I was not webbed, I coudl not pull out range before a SINGLE orthrus killed it (with minor contribution of an interceptor keeping a point on me). I do nto think the extra resist will be too much. If the stronger resist is too much, then revert the resists and increase a bit the base HP of the defense layers. AND DO NOT SKIP THIS: Check for huggin PG. It is clearly an arti ship but will be too hard to fit with this PG. REALLY too hard. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1944	Posted - 2014.12.19 14:12:31 - [854] - Quote Xsaggie wrote: Changes look good, of course the rook and falcon are completely useless as ECM is still very broken. Plus why not give the falcon launchers, the dps out of that thing is totally pointless with Hybrids, plus it needs the cap for its useless ecm mods. the guns are there just to ***** on KM. And the falcon is not useless at all. On small scale warfare is one of the most annoying ships a small gang can bring. It just does nto scale well in larger fights. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Haege Azizora Callide Vulpis Curatores Veritatis Alliance 4	Posted - 2014.12.19 14:13:54 - [855] - Quote I hope you can overhaul Dscan before giving that bonus to Combat Recon. A simple idea: Bigger ship has bigger scan range, pod has very limited range. Give Combat Recon more dscan range than other ship same class, and you cant see them on dscan unless they are within 1-2 AU. Even F-22 cant complete steath against Russian's radar
S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 46	Posted - 2014.12.19 14:14:08 - [856] - Quote Tethys Luxor wrote: Basicly, the whole dscan feature is outdated. All ships have the same equipment - same dscan range -100% chances to work (except 0% chance on cloak / minute) - same visibility on dscan of others -ability to see the ship name like a beacon :) It would be good to include scanner strength and range, and partial results. Using target' signature radius would make sense. Advanced dscan ability could include ability to reminder given ship's signature and links with combat probe scanner. I guess CCP Rise answer pointed in a dscan change direction Hell yes. This will be so nice to have. Sig radius and ECCM mods to determine when you show on dscan will be pretty cool. Even better if the same rules will apply to local channel :P
Kendarr Zebra Corp The Bastion 40	Posted - 2014.12.19 14:15:32 - [857] - Quote TheButcherPete wrote: Something to balance this suggested Recon change would be to only have the immunity active when traveling at sublight speeds, and when in warp the ship diverts too much to the warp core to keep the immunity field up. also if Recon capacitors end up needing a slight nerf, this would be a neat lore idea. pretty pointless. its seen or not seen at all. Zebra-Corp
Epigene Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude 52	Posted - 2014.12.19 14:21:42 - [858] - Quote Giving the Combat Recons a unique bonus seems like an excellent idea. I always wanted a Rook but for my purposes, a Blackbird did the same job for a fraction of the price. And since I pretty much lose every ECM boat I am engaging with, price is an issue. As wormhole resident, I like this a lot. www.splatus.wordpress.com-á
maCH'EttE Mafia Redux 129	Posted - 2014.12.19 14:26:06 - [859] - Quote S'No Flake wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: S'No Flake wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: There is a couple things here I am concerned about: ECM still offers no counter play. Effectively rendering a player unable to do anything for at least 20 seconds plus the time it takes them to relock anything. 99.99% fo all combat in this game involves locking a target. ECM drones turn any ship into a diet Blackbird. ECM needs to be revamped from the ground up and should not involve removing a players ability to play the game. Celestis being incredibly powerful from 100+km is silly. If it turns out combat recons not being on the directional scanner is an option, perhaps showing the ships as the T1 version of the ship instead would be a good compromise. i.e. the directional scanner shows an Arbitrator on scan when in fact it is really a Curse. Semi-related, but what are the odds of a new high slot module that can not be fit if there is any type of cyno fit as well, only allowed for recons and means they do not appear in local? Perhaps I am dreaming a bit too hard here. The counterplay to ECM it's the damp from Arazu/Lachesis/Celestis.. Hell, Keres does a great job at that too :) How do you do that when you are jammed? You lock before the recon? You know, a sebo helps. All ECM ships are using a full rack of ECM mods. I rarely see Falcons with a sebo. So, use a sebo. Or a Keres which has a better lock time :) You are asuming that he/she has a alt that is flying around with him. How about the solo player or even a small pvp group that has no cele or any other ship to "counter" ecm. You are absurd and so is your logic. You are thinking everyone flies in a fleet of 20+ where there is logi, ecm or even ecm counter, and links. This is OP, its not bad enough that a falcon has a lock range of 120km, and they do jam over 80+km. Now the rook will not be on d-scan. WTF. RUIN pvp more why dont you. Yeah yeah, add mods to counter ecm, only if eccm worked. ECM SHOULD BE TAKEN OUT OF THE GAME FOR GOOD. RISE AND FONZIE HAVE F'ED UP THIS GAME, ESPECIALLY SOLO/SMALL GANG PVP.
maCH'EttE Mafia Redux 129	Posted - 2014.12.19 14:36:09 - [860] - Quote Niart Gunn wrote: I'm still wondering about this: Dscan immunity makes Combat Recons encroach on the role of Force Recons. If the purpose of this treat is to make them stand out as a unique ship class, how is giving them half a Covert Ops cloak for free working towards achieving this goal? Just because that line of text has never been used doesn't make the effect actually unique. Fact is, it is very similar to Covert Ops cloaking, and actually better in some cases, like the fact that there are no windows in which you're visible or no locking delay when setting up a trap. Especially for a ship like the Pilgrim there will be very little reason to use it, as long as the Curse does the job so much better while being almost as hidden. There is a case for this for all other races' recons too, the ability is so similar to Covert Ops cloaking that unless you absolutely need to be invisible on grid, there is very little reason to use the Force Recons (except maybe the Arazu for lowslots alone), as they are not only short one slot on their Combat counterpart, but also have to fit a cloak and thereby sacrifice a high, whereas Combat Recons get dscan immunity for free. Also, the situations this treat caters to are mostly blobbing and ganking, while hurting the small guy the most. I know, there has been a long tradition in eve for this anyways, but does it really need to be continued? Regardless of similar things already being possible with cloaks (that have their drawbacks and actually use up a slot), is it really necessary to introduce yet another mechanic that reinforces camping of different places of interest, and make it even more important to have alts while being largely useless to a roaming gang? At the end of the day I think this just doesn't add any valuable gameplay over what we already have, while making things more tedious for people who can spare less numbers for scouts. If you want to obscure information from players, it would be much better to either introduce sort of a Mobile Scan Inhibitor in ship form that remains on scan itself, or better yet, start reworking the entire intel gathering in eve towards a system that is more dependent on ship signatures and sensor strengths, where information becomes more detailed the closer something is, or the more narrow your scan angle becomes. A thorough overhaul in this kind of fashion would be much better than an arbitrary gimmick like dscan immunity for 4 ships in the game. CCP Rise wrote: 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. Nice logic. So that would mean the removal of local would result in more fights, since the lack of local means the gang considering engaging something never knows that they can't deal with what they can't see, like it's the case in wormholes, right? Because people do not want to take extra risks is exactly why they will work very hard to get all the information possible, now involving getting on-grid eyes or combat probes as well, both of which might scare your potential target away too. Imagine the gang considering engaging the two Vexors seeing that there are 4 members of the corp they want to fight in local, not only will this slow everything down, because that gang now has to get a scout on grid with or probing the Vexors, but also will likely no fight happen because either there are the two Rooks or the Vexors will run because they get scouted. VERY GOOD POINTS MY FRIEND. AND RISE, LOL MY GOD YOU HAVE LOST TOUCH WITH THIS GAME. Your logic is so retarted. First they dont see the rooks so they dont fight, Now they are not on scan, they fight, they get raped, ECM OP. They never fight again!! How is your logic logical lol.

Xsaggie Caldari Provisions Caldari State 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 14:39:54 - [861] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: Xsaggie wrote: Changes look good, of course the rook and falcon are completely useless as ECM is still very broken. Plus why not give the falcon launchers, the dps out of that thing is totally pointless with Hybrids, plus it needs the cap for its useless ecm mods. the guns are there just to ***** on KM. And the falcon is not useless at all. On small scale warfare is one of the most annoying ships a small gang can bring. It just does nto scale well in larger fights. I know what your saying, but every other force recon can put out at least some dps, the rapier for example can get around 300 ish, which is pretty much what you want for its role as anti frig, the falcon at a push might get to 150? Doesnt seem balanced at all to me, though with the changes to missiles for the rapier, maybe that is going to be impossible to reach now too. ECM is VERY ineffective compared to other recon modules, neuts - very effective / webs - very effective, ecm with great skills and modules still only hover around 30-40% effective, and that is with racials, multispecs those numbers drop by almost 50%. On a separate note I also dont see how these ships close the gap to t3's at all, they all sport extremely hard tanks and decent dps, none of these ships are able to bring that to the table, as someone else pointed out, most are shield fit, and most need most of their mid slots for their respective roles, perhaps the answer is to buff midslots up ALOT?
ArmyOfMe PILGRIMS Advent of Fate 399	Posted - 2014.12.19 14:40:51 - [862] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Just finished reading everything that was posted over night. Here's what I can update with at the moment: Biggest concern at the moment is the added EHP. Making recons a more realistic fleet option next to T3 cruisers is good, making them too tanky in smaller situations where their ewar already gives them a lot of damage evasion may be too much. Not sure if change is needed but will keep looking at this and update again asap. 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. The Pilgrim. Opinions seem mixed, gaining neut range is obviously nice but many of you still feel that giving up neut strength is too harsh, or that some other added power is needed (more damage for instance). Will get back to you on this as soon as possible but it's possible that we will make adjustments. RLML for Rook. Sure. Consider it done. More low slots for Lachesis. Not sure yet on this one, will talk it over here and see what we can do. Hope that answers some questions. I'm sure many of you would rather have more explanation for the dscan immunity change so I'll try to get that post together as soon as I can. Thanks for all the feedback. <3 QUOTE CCP Dolan and the EVE Online development team:-áThe battle was relatively even for some time with CFC and Russian forces holding moderate lead at first and only have a slight lead in Titan kills. Then came a turning point in the battle. Manfred Sideous, the initial Fleet Commander for PL/N3, handed over command to the CEO of Northern Coalition., Vince Draken
Lugh Crow-Slave 283	Posted - 2014.12.19 14:44:20 - [863] - Quote Can we please get ore sites moved back to signatures rather than anomalies at least in WH space its bad enough we have cloaked ships to worry about but at least you had a slim chance to catch them when they decloaked b4 recloaking when entering system now we have no warning against some thing like Lachesis
Blobskillz McBlub Manson Family Advent of Fate 20	Posted - 2014.12.19 14:44:31 - [864] - Quote logic never worked on Rize the example he gave works maybe one time after that people will be even more risk averse
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9145	Posted - 2014.12.19 14:52:18 - [865] - Quote Boltorano wrote: You've basically made scout alts mandatory for "solo" complex runners. Thanks so much. This is not true. You can still see probes on scan.
l0rd carlos Friends Of Harassment The Camel Empire 1123	Posted - 2014.12.19 14:52:42 - [866] - Quote The bunny hopping of CS:S? German blog about smallscale lowsec pvp: http://friendsofharassment.wordpress.com
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1944	Posted - 2014.12.19 14:53:12 - [867] - Quote Blobskillz McBlub wrote: logic never worked on Rize the example he gave works maybe one time after that people will be even more risk averse Psycology is nto simple.. even the psycology of eve players. Players that react as your view are the ones that likely are already too coward to provide enough content in the game. So Rise point of view seems to be, invest on the players that already have gut enough to be useful content generators and if the ones that already do not generate much generate even less.. whatever... He might be wrong.. but he has a line of tought that can be understood. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 80	Posted - 2014.12.19 14:53:22 - [868] - Quote Xsaggie wrote: Kagura Nikon wrote: Xsaggie wrote: Changes look good, of course the rook and falcon are completely useless as ECM is still very broken. Plus why not give the falcon launchers, the dps out of that thing is totally pointless with Hybrids, plus it needs the cap for its useless ecm mods. the guns are there just to ***** on KM. And the falcon is not useless at all. On small scale warfare is one of the most annoying ships a small gang can bring. It just does nto scale well in larger fights. I know what your saying, but every other force recon can put out at least some dps, the rapier for example can get around 300 ish, which is pretty much what you want for its role as anti frig, the falcon at a push might get to 150? Doesnt seem balanced at all to me, though with the changes to missiles for the rapier, maybe that is going to be impossible to reach now too. ECM is VERY ineffective compared to other recon modules, neuts - very effective / webs - very effective, ecm with great skills and modules still only hover around 30-40% effective, and that is with racials, multispecs those numbers drop by almost The fit i made for the rapier should be right at 300dps using RLML. Close to what belli does. So rapier should still be ok. RLML falcon would make sense, then again, idk if we need something that can permajam and nuke frigs.
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9145	Posted - 2014.12.19 14:59:20 - [869] - Quote Varrakk wrote: Pilgrim: Range and Strength will be too powerful. Would take away what is unique with the Curse. +1 Mid or Low slot, and the CPU(PG) to make use of it would be a sufficient boost to the Pilgrim. DScan immunity for Combat Recons, very cool approach! +1 I've always said that Combat Recons need some kind of special ability. D-scan immunity is many times less powerful than being able to warp cloaked while giving Combat Recons something special Well done CCP. Side note, ima find a way to rat in null sec with Curses and Rooks now.
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9145	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:01:31 - [870] - Quote Blobskillz McBlub wrote: logic never worked on Rize the example he gave works maybe one time after that people will be even more risk averse Getting all snarky and butthurt at the guy making a change is a surefire and foolproof way to get him to change his mind! Well done.

Desert Ice78 Gryphons of the Western Wind 438	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:04:29 - [871] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Dscan immunity is staying. Seems a tad over powered considering certain environments where there is currently no other viable situation intel tool. How about giving said combat recons an ability (small chance) of uncloaking a cloaked ship? I am a pod pilot: http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/DesertIce/POD.jpg CCP Zulu: Came expecting a discussion about computer monitors, left confused.
Xsaggie Caldari Provisions Caldari State 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:07:15 - [872] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: Xsaggie wrote: Kagura Nikon wrote: Xsaggie wrote: Changes look good, of course the rook and falcon are completely useless as ECM is still very broken. Plus why not give the falcon launchers, the dps out of that thing is totally pointless with Hybrids, plus it needs the cap for its useless ecm mods. the guns are there just to ***** on KM. And the falcon is not useless at all. On small scale warfare is one of the most annoying ships a small gang can bring. It just does nto scale well in larger fights. I know what your saying, but every other force recon can put out at least some dps, the rapier for example can get around 300 ish, which is pretty much what you want for its role as anti frig, the falcon at a push might get to 150? Doesnt seem balanced at all to me, though with the changes to missiles for the rapier, maybe that is going to be impossible to reach now too. ECM is VERY ineffective compared to other recon modules, neuts - very effective / webs - very effective, ecm with great skills and modules still only hover around 30-40% effective, and that is with racials, multispecs those numbers drop by almost The fit i made for the rapier should be right at 300dps using RLML. Close to what belli does. So rapier should still be ok. RLML falcon would make sense, then again, idk if we need something that can permajam and nuke frigs. Im not saying do a 180 on ecm, im just saying make them more effective than they are currently, because at the moment they are pretty pointless, may as well just load up the rook with a full midslot tank instead haha Missiles would make more sense on the falcon too agreed.
egham Entity. The Camel Empire 2	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:16:42 - [873] - Quote Not a good change.
DFA200 Hard vs Soft 11	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:18:49 - [874] - Quote 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. Seems reasonable to make the arguments for something available before you decide on it, if there is actually a discussion at all. I dont see how this will not destroy FW and probably a lot of other things. The main question is how much people will abuse it.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 719	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:21:20 - [875] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Quote: I can tell you what will happen most likely: - Less fights because people are risk averse - A 2nd account with a Prober at all times will be must, not an option. I think this is a complex debate and I'm sure that none of us understand player behavior completely, but my experience is actually the opposite of what you're saying. 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. The negative side for me is your other bullet point. Because people don't want to take unnecessary risk they will work very hard, sometimes doing something very boring or difficult, just to get at those last pieces of information. And they should. But we would want to avoid mechanics that obligate people to this kind of behavior too heavily without enough positive side to make the mechanic worthwhile. I would be more worried with this mechanic that people have to spend a lot of time running probe scans when they really don't want to be than that they are avoiding engagements because of the possibility of Recons. I don't think this will be a problem but we'll have to wait and see. Eve already gives you so much information that this is not an issue in K-space. If I see a dashboard scan currently and notice ten hostiles in local and only nine accounted for, I assume the tenth is a Falcon. Now it could be a Rook instead. Whoop-dee-doo... Still a priority to kill or drive off early in the fight. Or I look up the hostile pilots' killboard, which tells me they always roll with Falcons or Rooks. The variable comes in inside of W-space, where this will be another uncertainty in an uncertain environment. The concern I have is in small scale fights where ECM is disproportionately powerful. It is now much harder to drive away that Falcon or Rook game changer. All in all, very glad I have Recon V on all my older characters. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Nyjil Lizaru Aideron Robotics 34	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:22:14 - [876] - Quote The D-scan immunity sounds interesting, and the debate is educational. But I do not like my in-game tools lying to me. Nyjil's corollary to Malcanis' Law: -á "Any attempt by CCP to smooth the learning curve of EVE Online will be carried out via the addition of extra factors and 'features' such that there is a net increase in complexity."
rsantos TEC-NOLOGY Sorry We're In Your Space Eh 25	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:25:34 - [877] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Varrakk wrote: Pilgrim: Range and Strength will be too powerful. Would take away what is unique with the Curse. +1 Mid or Low slot, and the CPU(PG) to make use of it would be a sufficient boost to the Pilgrim. DScan immunity for Combat Recons, very cool approach! +1 I've always said that Combat Recons need some kind of special ability. D-scan immunity is many times less powerful than being able to warp cloaked while giving Combat Recons something special Well done CCP. Side note, ima find a way to rat in null sec with Curses and Rooks now. The wrecks you produce still appear on d-scan!
Daneel Trevize Faster Path Than of Light Exiles 531	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:29:19 - [878] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: Eve already gives you so much information that this is not an issue in K-space. If I see a dashboard scan currently and notice ten hostiles in local and only nine accounted for, I assume the tenth is a Falcon. Now it could be a Rook instead. Whoop-dee-doo... Still a priority to kill or drive off early in the fight. Or I look up the hostile pilots' killboard, which tells me they always roll with Falcons or Rooks. The variable comes in inside of W-space, where this will be another uncertainty in an uncertain environment. The concern I have is in small scale fights where ECM is disproportionately powerful. It is now much harder to drive away that Falcon or Rook game changer. All in all, very glad I have Recon V on all my older characters. Rooks aren't the problem. Falcons don't tackle people, or apply webs to stop you moving to a better position, and make you take more damage from every weapon system. Tackle recons that have no need to be alert in order to pre-emptively drop a decloak delay are the problem. How would you like to land in tackle range (which is a ******* big sphere) of a huginn + lachesis everywhere you go?
X Gallentius Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop 2690	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:29:34 - [879] - Quote My ship just died as he warped into a medium plex to a combat recon.
Liet Ormand Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 3	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:31:56 - [880] - Quote Folks - To all those upset with this change, I'd like to point something out that's been referenced elsewhere in this thread by a few, and also in a few other threads/posts here and on reddit/r/eve. I will withhold my opinion on the DS immunity until the end of my post, but I my major reason for writing this is to point out that CCPs hands are, in a sense, tied. The problem is that the DS scanner - which is a fundamental game mechanic for Eve - is too simple a system. It is an all or nothing workaround to let capsuleers have some way to find things, sorta, in situations where overview isn't showing them anything. I haven't played Eve long enough to know, but it resembles in design something created early on because there wasn't time to build a better system before release, or something that was stuck in as a work around that required little coding. Given the way DScan works at the moment, in order to achieve certain gameplay goals it has to be possible for certain ships to be unseen in certain circumstances. DS is all or nothing. Therefore, immunity to DS is the only option available. Long term I think everyone who considers the options will agree that the whole mechanic of DS needs to be re-worked to be integrated into the electronic warfare system, and include things like: Variable range Variable signal strength Jammers, cloaks, chaff Beam steering and focusing False readings and interference from the environment ...and so on. It'll be fantastic of CCP can work all that into a new mechanic. Right now though, choices are limited, and the choice seems to be between a ship class with a lot of effort put into it not working as designed and a subset of the player population having to re-work and re-consider their play style. I know which way I'd go. As to my opinion on the immunity to DS change, let me say the only thing I do currently in game is PvE wormholes solo in a Tech 1 ship. This will change things. I was upset at first. But thinking about it, it'll actually make my life a bit easier. You see, if it's riskier to PvE wormholes, fewer people will do it. Fewer explorers means fewer targets for gankers, and the ones still exploring will be smarter. That means fewer people hunting in wormholes, even with the change to DS. Which makes things easier for me, since I can cope with not seeing recons on DS. ...as long as the reward matches the risk. Last night I scanned through three systems of wormholes, total of maybe 55 signatures, and found one site I could hack, total loot 5m. Seeing the Talocan static gates was kinda cool, but not worth the time I spent...

Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1243	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:32:40 - [881] - Quote Kmelx wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Dscan immunity is staying. Asking for player feedback and then ignoring that feedback for the win. I seriously wonder why you even bother... You all went about this wrong. CCP always looks at the player feedback then ignores it, this is their development model and has been for a long time. Recons dont get used at the moment because you have to fit them expensive for them to be good, and they are paper thin which encourages gimp fits where you might as well use a t3. The extra survivability is all they needed to secure a place is gang fights. The d-scan thing is just a tool for the people who already engage in the least risky forms of pvp. Well, one good thing is it might get the station campers off the undcok and into plexes for equally one sided pvp.. Bad idea.
Sine Wave Hidden Anomaly 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:35:56 - [882] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Varrakk wrote: Pilgrim: Range and Strength will be too powerful. Would take away what is unique with the Curse. +1 Mid or Low slot, and the CPU(PG) to make use of it would be a sufficient boost to the Pilgrim. DScan immunity for Combat Recons, very cool approach! +1 I've always said that Combat Recons need some kind of special ability. D-scan immunity is many times less powerful than being able to warp cloaked while giving Combat Recons something special Well done CCP. Side note, ima find a way to rat in null sec with Curses and Rooks now. curse should do it 4 lows for dmange and 6 mids for tank should work fine
DFA200 Hard vs Soft 13	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:40:49 - [883] - Quote X Gallentius wrote: My ship just died as he warped into a medium plex to a combat recon. I guess you just have to improve!
rsantos TEC-NOLOGY Sorry We're In Your Space Eh 25	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:40:50 - [884] - Quote Major Trant wrote: Combat Recons not seen on DScan: I see this as a buff to low end Wormhole PvE myself. Sure you can't see a combat recon coming but it cuts both ways, you can't see a combat recon running a site either. People don't generally jump into WH and drop Combat probes. They jump in and do a DScan first. If they see someone, then they do a narrow DScan to the various anomalies and celestials. Only after that might they drop combat probes. There is no local in WHs so if you don't see someone on DScan you don't go probing for them. After the change they will ...no?
Nova' Darkstar Dark Star Operations. 11	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:41:50 - [885] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Dscan immunity is staying. Thanks for all the feedback. Lol, why even post in features & ideas discussion, then?
X Gallentius Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop 2691	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:42:43 - [886] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Recons dont get used at the moment because... their resist profile sucks. If they keep this feature thenI hope they decrease make "insta-targeting" combat recons nonviable by decreasing their scan resolution. Whoops, my Thorax just got nueted out again by that damn Curse. Should have never warped into that "undefended" medium plex alone with another person in local. My bad. Time to start blobbing everywhere. Goodbye "solo".
Midnight Hope Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 148	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:43:13 - [887] - Quote DFA200 wrote: I dont see how this will not destroy FW and probably a lot of other things. The main question is how much people will abuse it. You haven't played EVE much I see. Everyone will abuse it. This is EVE.
S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 46	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:43:17 - [888] - Quote maCH'EttE wrote: S'No Flake wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: S'No Flake wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: There is a couple things here I am concerned about: ECM still offers no counter play. Effectively rendering a player unable to do anything for at least 20 seconds plus the time it takes them to relock anything. 99.99% fo all combat in this game involves locking a target. ECM drones turn any ship into a diet Blackbird. ECM needs to be revamped from the ground up and should not involve removing a players ability to play the game. Celestis being incredibly powerful from 100+km is silly. If it turns out combat recons not being on the directional scanner is an option, perhaps showing the ships as the T1 version of the ship instead would be a good compromise. i.e. the directional scanner shows an Arbitrator on scan when in fact it is really a Curse. Semi-related, but what are the odds of a new high slot module that can not be fit if there is any type of cyno fit as well, only allowed for recons and means they do not appear in local? Perhaps I am dreaming a bit too hard here. The counterplay to ECM it's the damp from Arazu/Lachesis/Celestis.. Hell, Keres does a great job at that too :) How do you do that when you are jammed? You lock before the recon? You know, a sebo helps. All ECM ships are using a full rack of ECM mods. I rarely see Falcons with a sebo. So, use a sebo. Or a Keres which has a better lock time :) You are asuming that he/she has a alt that is flying around with him. How about the solo player or even a small pvp group that has no cele or any other ship to "counter" ecm. You are absurd and so is your logic. You are thinking everyone flies in a fleet of 20+ where there is logi, ecm or even ecm counter, and links. This is OP, its not bad enough that a falcon has a lock range of 120km, and they do jam over 80+km. Now the rook will not be on d-scan. WTF. RUIN pvp more why dont you. Yeah yeah, add mods to counter ecm, only if eccm worked. ECM SHOULD BE TAKEN OUT OF THE GAME FOR GOOD. RISE AND FONZIE HAVE F'ED UP THIS GAME, ESPECIALLY SOLO/SMALL GANG PVP. You seem too be mad. Just because you can't field the same stuff as the other gang it doesn't mean the game it's broken. By the way, you can't see that Arazu on dscan either and it will make your life more miserable than a Falcon pilot because he won't miss jam cycles. His point and his damps will hit and make you suffer 100% of the time compared with ECM which might not work at all because the RNG says no and all the jams will fail. Try flying those ships and you will see how many times you have to warp off field because the Keres and Arazu will damp you before you can even lock them not to mention getting a cycle on them.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 922	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:44:47 - [889] - 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 - [890] - 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.

S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 47	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:49:16 - [891] - Quote Nyjil Lizaru wrote: The D-scan immunity sounds interesting, and the debate is educational. But I do not like my in-game tools lying to me. They don't :) Today: X people in local, Y on dscan => the rest are cloaky ships. After Proteus: X people in local, Y on dscan => the rest are either combat recons or cloaky ships. Plan accordingly ...
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 214	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:53:05 - [892] - Quote 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/
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 923	Posted - 2014.12.19 15:54:35 - [893] - 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
Kmelx Matari Exodus 86	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:04:02 - [894] - Quote Nova' Darkstar wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Dscan immunity is staying. Thanks for all the feedback. Lol, why even post in features & ideas discussion, then? It's so they can say they "consulted" the player base before they made the change. Which is exactly what they have done, they consulted the player base, granted he's then gone on to ignore the views of the eve players, their paying customers, but what the hell our opinion's clearly unimportant, after all, we only have to play the game once they've made the PVP experience into an ever worse abortion than it already is. As a guesstimate, I'd say 75-80-% of the people posting in here dislike the d-scan change, but like I said why should the majority view of the players of the game matter to it's developers? They've already made the decision to foist a change we don't want on us, they're not consulting with us they're simply informing us of their decision, and we can either like it or lump it.
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 517	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:04:03 - [895] - Quote Instead of D-Scan immunity, why not give combat recons EWAR immunity?
Petrus Blackshell Scrap Metal Squadron 3239	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:04:18 - [896] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: 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. Sure, that's the case in the short term. In the long term, if this gets abused as much as everyone seems to think it will get abused, "engageable"-looking fights will be less likely to be engaged. Why? Suppose my friends and I fly in a group of 3-4 Thoraxes. We run into 2 Vexors, and die to them because they were accompanied by 2 Rooks. The next day, with new Thoraxes, we run into 2 Ruptures, and die because we can't fire our guns since there's 2 Curses there. The day after that, we die to 2 Stabbers because a Lachesis and Huginn are scramming/webbing us from 30 km and we can't close range. The final outcome? One of the following: We stop roaming entirely. We get our own recons. Remember how fun (hint: not at all) this solution turned out for off-grid boosts, Falcon alts, and supercaps? We stop engaging anything when there are unaccounted-for neutrals in local, or stop fighting anything that isn't a single T1 frigate in our cruisers. It could be that I and the others on the forum are wrong, recons won't be abused in this way, and won't lead to a chilling of the PvP atmosphere by fear-of-recon. I cannot predict the actions of others. I can however predict my own actions, and as someone with Recon V trained, I will abuse this mechanic silly, and keep going until I stop getting easy-mode kills. I may even switch the training on one my alts to do the same thing. So, as someone who would abuse this in order to make PvP unfun, I ask you: please do not let me make PvP unfun. Because I will. And I'm sure so will almost everyone else. Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com
Ripard Teg Stimulus Rote Kapelle 985	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:11:35 - [897] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: RLML for Rook. Sure. Consider it done. Excellent! One other small request: take away some of its CPU and give it a little more grid in exchange. I'm not asking for double LSE, but it should be able to fit MWD/single LSE/HMLs at L5 skills without a fitting mod and right now it can't. This means the current incarnation effectively has only two low slots, which p.much only gives you one good option for fitting those lows. I understand where you're coming from on dscan immunity, but I think you're going to come to regret it. It just has too many nasty implications in FW and w-space, and the smaller your gang, the more likely you are to be punched in the face by those implications. EVE didn't need another iteration on the n+1 problem. I can't help thinking of gate camps backed up by more or less invisible combat recons with hyperspatial velocity accelerators (which they can now use 'cause they'll be so much tougher). It's gonna get ugly out there. aka Jester, who apparently was once entrusted to Wield The Banhammer to good effect.
Levina Windstar Mekalon Industry 59	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:12:14 - [898] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: Instead of D-Scan immunity, why not give combat recons EWAR immunity? Not a bad idea actually
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1945	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:12:53 - [899] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: Instead of D-Scan immunity, why not give combat recons EWAR immunity? BECAUSE THAT is 1 trillion times more powerful. Think before you post please. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Penny Ibramovic Wormhole Engineers Greater Realms 178	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:14:33 - [900] - Quote If the scanner overlay was added to remove the necessity for fleets to continually spam probes to look for new wormholes spawning, is it not against that philosophy to add a ship class that requires fleets to continually spam probes to look for that ship class?

Plukovnik Black Aces Against ALL Authorities 9	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:15:18 - [901] - Quote Keras Authion wrote: Curse has a bonus to drone damagere That d-scan invisibility seems rather powerful in some situations. D-Scan Invisibility is powerful tool intended to protect ratting ships from solo/small gang hunters. Like if ratters would not have enough edvantages on their side already.
dR PaNouKLa Perkone Caldari State 5	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:17:22 - [902] - Quote Finally, finally Recons... but again and again illogical bonuses. All the balancing etc. in terms of bonus twist and capacitor changes are welcomed and will be tested in game (not that pilgrim will be still played anyway). However, under what game mechanics do you introduce the role "Cannot be detected by directional scanners" ? Where does this bonus relies on as per the general "rules" that the game is based? In many of the later patches you introduce a SPECIAL bonus that is not in line with all the rest of the general mechanics and there is always a SPECIAL ship that brakes the rules (bubble immunity ceptors, micro jump drives which apart from the ridiculous 100km warp they are immune to warp disruptors, ships that have old school nosferatus which drains cap continiously and now... ships that they are immune to scanner! without a cloaking device..). And all these ridiculous bonuses, just because you cannot balance ships properly and you have invent every time something new to make it stand out from the crowd. Is it only us, the players, realizing that this makes the game UNbalanced and leaning towards a WoW in space?
Soldarius Deadman W0nderland The 99 Percent 945	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:18:43 - [903] - Quote Drew Li wrote: Falcon and Rook -50% ECM cycle time +50% ewar optimal/falloff This would make ECM more reliable and/or allow them to fit non-bonused ewar with significantly increased range. Target painting effectively from 150km for example. Something similar could be done with the scorpion as well. Quoting someone that clearly has no idea how ECM works. This would be the singularly most OP buff to ECM ever short of a simple switch that says "Activate this module to permajam 1 ship." 3 years ago, I trained up recons and all my EWAR skills to 5 so that I could be the best I could be in a recon, despite the fact that recons are the number 1 targeting priority in any fight. Then recons got nerfed, stealth nerfed (HACs with insane targeting stats, caps, T3s, T1 tiericide/rebalance, etc) and nerfed yet again. They have been nerfed so many times that virtually no one flies them anymore. I have not seen a combat recon in space in years. Currently, there are very few situations in which a T2 recon is preferable to its T1 or T3 version. Combat recons and the Pilgrim have been utter shite for years. The only reason you see Pilgrims is because it has a covert cloak. Their applications are very narrow and incredibly niche. Everything any combat recon can do, something else can do better. For non-cloaky work, T3s, T1s, and even pirate factions simply do it better. The proposed changes are vital and necessary. But imo they barely scratch the surface of what is wrong with recons. The fact that so many solo bears are crying about how OP the d-scan immunity will be just goes to show how out of touch they are with the rest of eve. If you want risk-free solo PvE, run missions in hisec or rent space in the drone lands. But don't roam around in losec, w-space, or a conflict-ridden pirate-infested nul region and then demand that everyone you meet should have to play the game in accordance with your narrow and self-entitled mind-set. When an area in a game devolves into a singular ship archetype or doctrine, and entire methods of gameplay or classes of ships are meta'd out, there is a balance problem that needs to be addressed. I have been asking for recon rebalance changes for years and cannot express how glad I am to finally have them put before the community for a public review. My only regret is that testing D-scan immunity on sisi will be completely pointless. With caps everywhere at known locations, AT prize ships regularly fielded, and no pve of any kind, Sisi is simply not an effective test-bed for that kind of change. I predict it will go live on TQ with little testing. The other changes should see substantial testing and evaluation. Bring it on, CCP RIse! My body is ready! http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1945	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:19:50 - [904] - Quote Xsaggie wrote: [ Im not saying do a 180 on ecm, im just saying make them more effective than they are currently, because at the moment they are pretty pointless, may as well just load up the rook with a full midslot tank instead haha Missiles would make more sense on the falcon too agreed. On my view. ECM right now is very powerful neutralizing small scale combat. and useless in large scale. And that is VERY bad for the gameplay. We can reverse that. change ECM effect from unable to lock for 15 seconds to: Swap randomly your locked targets by other ships that you could be locking (from ALL the ships in grid, be friendly or enemy) Why? Think on the result. in very small scale warfare it will have minimal results. But against a fleet it will ahve drastic results. Suddenly the enemy fleet will have a hard time to focus fire, their logistics will have a hard time repairing correct people, and even friendly fire will happen if people are not paying attention. They will work EXACLTY as an ECM should.. SCRAMBLING. It is exactly what this game needs, a tool that is stronger against large groups than against solo or very small gangs. And the thing will not be so frustrating. BEcause the one udner effect can still lock thigns and can still do something. They can still fire ato some enemy, probably just not the one the gang is focus firing, its is MUCH more fun, and still very powerful against large fleets. THe STrenght of the module woudl need to increase a bit to compensate for the bit weaker effect although. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Jeann Valjean Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop 54	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:20:07 - [905] - Quote Just wanted to add my two cents to the threadnaught. I support the proposed changes.
Antillie Sa'Kan Forging Industries Silent Infinity 825	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:21:43 - [906] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Just finished reading everything that was posted over night. Here's what I can update with at the moment: Biggest concern at the moment is the added EHP. Making recons a more realistic fleet option next to T3 cruisers is good, making them too tanky in smaller situations where their ewar already gives them a lot of damage evasion may be too much. Not sure if change is needed but will keep looking at this and update again asap. 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. The Pilgrim. Opinions seem mixed, gaining neut range is obviously nice but many of you still feel that giving up neut strength is too harsh, or that some other added power is needed (more damage for instance). Will get back to you on this as soon as possible but it's possible that we will make adjustments. RLML for Rook. Sure. Consider it done. More low slots for Lachesis. Not sure yet on this one, will talk it over here and see what we can do. Hope that answers some questions. I'm sure many of you would rather have more explanation for the dscan immunity change so I'll try to get that post together as soon as I can. Thanks for all the feedback. Kudos for sticking to your guns and not caving to the whiners. Recons may have nasty EWAR but they need the extra EHP from full T2 resists to be practical fleet tools (just adding more raw HP wouldn't really cut it due to fleet logistics). None of them do all that much damage really, and this really limits their power in solo and small gang situations. The Curse and Pilgrim are the only ones that get "full sized" cruiser DPS but non-sentry drones have other factors that keep them in check. I suppose you could cut the size of the drone bay a bit if you are worried about it.
Midnight Hope Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 148	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:30:03 - [907] - Quote Ripard Teg wrote: [...]and the smaller your gang, the more likely you are to be punched in the face by those implications. When Rice says that lack on information or intel makes people take chances is right...up to a point. After getting punched one too many times (as Ripard says) you start NOT taking chances and not engaging.
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 518	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:31:32 - [908] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: Estella Osoka wrote: Instead of D-Scan immunity, why not give combat recons EWAR immunity? BECAUSE THAT is 1 trillion times more powerful. Think before you post please. About as bad as what has been proposed. There is no huge difference between the cloak and d-scan immunity, except targeting delay. More tank on the combat recons or a dps bonus. Hell, if they are going to go through with this, at least bring back the old option to leave a set of probes in space.
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1945	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:32:19 - [909] - Quote Midnight Hope wrote: Ripard Teg wrote: [...]and the smaller your gang, the more likely you are to be punched in the face by those implications. When Rice says that lack on information or intel makes people take chances is right...up to a point. After getting punched one too many times (as Ripard says) you start NOT taking chances and not engaging. That type of people already quits eve pvp after 2 months anyway. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 214	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:32:31 - [910] - Quote Gryla and her Yule Lads are coming to eat all the FW kids.

Nova' Darkstar Dark Star Operations. 12	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:35:00 - [911] - Quote Kmelx wrote: Nova' Darkstar wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Dscan immunity is staying. Thanks for all the feedback. Lol, why even post in features & ideas discussion, then? It's so they can say they "consulted" the player base before they made the change. Which is exactly what they have done, they consulted the player base, granted he's then gone on to ignore the views of the eve players, their paying customers, but what the hell our opinion's clearly unimportant, after all, we only have to play the game once they've made the PVP experience into an even worse abortion than it already is. As a guesstimate, I'd say 75-80-% of the people posting in here dislike the d-scan change, but like I said why should the majority view of the players of the game matter to it's developers? They've already made the decision to foist a change we don't want on us, they're not consulting with us they're simply informing us of their decision, and we can either like it or lump it. Just seems like a lot more time would have been saved if they just threw these changes into a devblog as upcoming features instead of pretending to do the whole "we want feedback" run around.
Liet Ormand Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 3	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:36:53 - [912] - Quote dR PaNouKLa wrote: In many of the later patches you introduce a SPECIAL bonus that is not in line with all the rest of the general mechanics and there is always a SPECIAL ship that brakes the rules (bubble immunity ceptors, micro jump drives which apart from the ridiculous 100km warp they are immune to warp disruptors, ships that have old school nosferatus which drains cap continiously and now... ships that they are immune to scanner! without a cloaking device..). It's growing pains. As you add features to any program (including MMO games) there comes a point where you've done all the clever things you can to utilize the existing code's feature set. The stuff you add in is more complex and works differently than the original code envisioned, so you start having to do one offs and special conditions to add this feature or that one. It's like writing a spreadsheet, then adding on a scripting feature. People start scripting XML calls to a web site to get live data, which works ok so you add some more features like a console for debugging the XML. Pretty soon people want to dump the data to a local database too. That's when you realize there's no way you can tack that on to the existing spreadsheet code and have it be in any way maintainable or bug-free. You didn't write the spreadsheet with database connectivity in mind. You have to start over and re-work stuff that already works. CCP aren't lazy. They're trying to keep an existing user base happy by maintaining a steady development pace and releasing new features. Putting special case and add-on features out regularly makes people significantly more happy than taking several months or the better part of a year re-coding fundamental things that already work just so you have the ability to add more features in an elegant way later on. If the community on the forums is responding the way this thread indicates to a single change, imagine how unhappy they'd be if CCP didn't release anything for a year while coding furiously, then put out a new version, complete with possibly game breaking bugs, but with few or no new features? That's what re-coding the fundamentals would look like. It also plays havoc with development schedules. If you only release a new version 4 times a year and certain new features are dependent on re-work of the existing code base for release, then you have dependencies which means you have to schedule work on the new features so it comes after the code base re-work. If the code base work is delayed for emergency bug fixes, then the new features are delayed, which is a problem if you've already promised/discussed those new features with the community... it goes on and on. CCP seems to understand the issues here, I'm interested to see what rationale they post for these changes, and also what they plan for D-scan long term. Those of you fighting against this change like it's the end of the world need to realize that the game changes over time. Even if this change isn't made, long term something else will change, and you'll have to change with it. That's life.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1250	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:37:34 - [913] - Quote Antillie Sa'Kan wrote: As for DSCAN immunity, the whiners can suck it. People need to learn to be less risk averse. . As for this argument, people need to learn to be literate. What you call risk aversion, in this scenario is actually better termed 'risk ignorance'. People who want their targets to be ignorant of what risk they are about to face should learn how to hide and split their fleet and get good at the game without leaning on an arbitrary mechanic shoehorned in randomly to make up for how bad they are.
X Gallentius Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop 2695	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:39:41 - [914] - Quote S'No Flake wrote: Nyjil Lizaru wrote: The D-scan immunity sounds interesting, and the debate is educational. But I do not like my in-game tools lying to me. They don't :) Today: X people in local, Y on dscan => the rest are cloaky ships. After Proteus: X people in local, Y on dscan => the rest are either combat recons or cloaky ships. Plan accordingly ... Correction - Today: X people in local, Y on dscan => The rest are in cloaky ships, docked up, or outside of dscan range. This is very important since many fights are taken because you think they can potentially be over before the people not on D-scan can warp to you. The combat recons will be able to warp to you from a pounce AND be really effective combat ships. I think giving the Combat Recons the dscan immunity AND increased combat ability is over the top. Leave them as they were or decrease their power a little bit if you're going to give them dscan immunity.
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1946	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:41:32 - [915] - Quote CCp shoudl think on mid term on an overhaul on all DETECTION and early warnign mechanics in game. On general its all horrible. Local is horrible, too perfect. D-Scan is horrible - too perfect and binary (cloaked or fully visible) and too click intensive Probing is horrible ( too easy to probe on grid and gone the age where you needed human skill to probe) All these need to be remade, then the D-SCAN immunity coudl be convereted in a better bonus regardign that. Something like being harder to detect in D-SCAN ( be that range of detection or chance based). "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1946	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:42:57 - [916] - Quote X Gallentius wrote: S'No Flake wrote: Nyjil Lizaru wrote: The D-scan immunity sounds interesting, and the debate is educational. But I do not like my in-game tools lying to me. They don't :) Today: X people in local, Y on dscan => the rest are cloaky ships. After Proteus: X people in local, Y on dscan => the rest are either combat recons or cloaky ships. Plan accordingly ... Correction - Today: X people in local, Y on dscan => The rest are in cloaky ships, docked up, or outside of dscan range. This is very important since many fights are taken because you think they can potentially be over before the people not on D-scan can warp to you. The combat recons will be able to warp to you from a pounce AND be really effective combat ships. I think giving the Combat Recons the dscan immunity AND increased combat ability is over the top. Leave them as they were or decrease their power a little bit if you're going to give them dscan immunity. as several peopel pointed. Stratios can already do that.. and is barely used to do that. So this will happen, but not as much as some people believe. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Alekseyev Karrde Noir. Suddenly Spaceships. 1696	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:43:41 - [917] - Quote Tethys Luxor wrote: Basicly, the whole dscan feature is outdated. All ships have the same equipment - same dscan range -100% chances to work (except 0% chance on cloak / minute) - same visibility on dscan of others -ability to see the ship name like a beacon :) It would be good to include scanner strength and range, and partial results. Using target' signature radius would make sense. Advanced dscan ability could include ability to reminder given ship's signature and links with combat probe scanner. I guess CCP Rise answer pointed in a dscan change direction Yeah changes to tools like dcan and local have been talked about for a long time but as this thread demonstrates people freak out when you blind them a little. And nearly any change would be to move away from perfect information and into a more immersive sensor/intel/countermeasure/evasion ecosystem. I think the dscan immunity is a cool effect, one at least worth trying out. Might it be too OP? Sure. But since recons haven't been OP for like 5 years i think we can risk 1-2 months of them actually being too good on the chance of making them balanced. "Alekseyev Karrde: mercenary of my heart." -Arydanika, Voices from the Void Hero of the CSM Noir./Noir. Academy Recruiting: www.noirmercs.com
Ramona McCandless The McCandless Clan 7133	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:43:49 - [918] - Quote This is the greatest news ever "Many have joined the battle, many have survived the tests and trials, but countless have fallen because they weren't the sharpest, the fastest thinking, the most devious, the most ruthless or most intelligent. -áLog in and Compete!"-á_- _CCP Falcon
S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 47	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:46:29 - [919] - Quote X Gallentius wrote: S'No Flake wrote: Nyjil Lizaru wrote: The D-scan immunity sounds interesting, and the debate is educational. But I do not like my in-game tools lying to me. They don't :) Today: X people in local, Y on dscan => the rest are cloaky ships. After Proteus: X people in local, Y on dscan => the rest are either combat recons or cloaky ships. Plan accordingly ... Correction - Today: X people in local, Y on dscan => The rest are in cloaky ships, docked up, or outside of dscan range. This is very important since many fights are taken because you think they can potentially be over before the people not on D-scan can warp to you. The combat recons will be able to warp to you from a pounce AND be really effective combat ships. I think giving the Combat Recons the dscan immunity AND increased combat ability is over the top. Leave them as they were or decrease their power a little bit if you're going to give them dscan immunity. You should assume the worse: They are in cloaky ships :) In WH you are stalking that guy mining / sucking gas or PI at planet X. You finally decide to uncloak and pound his a... err, ship only to find out a Proteus was stalking the same guy and now he gets two kills instead of one and you only get the chance to buy a new bomber in Jita :D I guess some people are too scared to have fun these days. Anyway, a T3 still does it better and it can nave a nullified drive too. CCP should give recons the same drive as interceptors ... then you will see the hell break loose in forums =))
Rhea Rankin Nolen Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 49	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:47:32 - [920] - Quote Altirius Saldiaro wrote: Gryla and her Yule Lads are coming to eat all the FW kids. Oookay..all of the lowsec pvp-ers are FW guys. How about NOT! The immunity to directional scanner is a total kick in the groin. I roam alot on my main, doing 20-30 jumps around lowsec looking for fights. Usually fly assault frigs or cruisers. I enter the system warp to a celestial and then d-scan the nearby planets and belts for potential targets. Now since recons won't show on scan, every celestial is a potential trap! And whoopty friggin doo..imagine crazy me, I don't use combat probe launcher on my Wolf. This is a clear message to all the newbros too: "Don't go to low/null for pvp, you'll either get camped, killed if you don't know how to use a d-scanner, and actually no point in learning how to use one, cause you'll still be ****** by a recon anyway!" Bravo. No ship in EvE had that trait yet..and for a reason. D-scan immunity - please rethink!

Speedkermit Damo Demonic Retribution 369	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:48:07 - [921] - Quote Dwaigon Aumer wrote: Make Huginn missile boat to just like the belli and rapier. No, Don't Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.
Marlona Sky Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 5746	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:55:37 - [922] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: 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. The negative side for me is your other bullet point. Because people don't want to take unnecessary risk they will work very hard, sometimes doing something very boring or difficult, just to get at those last pieces of information. And they should. But we would want to avoid mechanics that obligate people to this kind of behavior too heavily without enough positive side to make the mechanic worthwhile. I would be more worried with this mechanic that people have to spend a lot of time running probe scans when they really don't want to be than that they are avoiding engagements because of the possibility of Recons. I don't think this will be a problem but we'll have to wait and see. Literally what I have been saying for years. So happy to know you guys realize this too. The Paradox
Antillie Sa'Kan Forging Industries Silent Infinity 826	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:56:20 - [923] - Quote 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.
Blobskillz McBlub Manson Family Advent of Fate 20	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:58:27 - [924] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Blobskillz McBlub wrote: logic never worked on Rize the example he gave works maybe one time after that people will be even more risk averse Getting all snarky and butthurt at the guy making a change is a surefire and foolproof way to get him to change his mind! Well done. when did he ever change his opinion about anything important? Kagura Nikon wrote: Blobskillz McBlub wrote: logic never worked on Rize the example he gave works maybe one time after that people will be even more risk averse Psycology is nto simple.. even the psycology of eve players. Players that react as your view are the ones that likely are already too coward to provide enough content in the game. So Rise point of view seems to be, invest on the players that already have gut enough to be useful content generators and if the ones that already do not generate much generate even less.. whatever... He might be wrong.. but he has a line of tought that can be understood. dont get me wrong I understand his reasoning, I just think that he did not think it through
Director Blackflame Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 23	Posted - 2014.12.19 16:58:52 - [925] - Quote Never thought so many people would be terrified of Schrodinger's recon. I mean his proteus has been or not been lurking for quite some time. As for the changes looks super interesting to try out though I had hoped with the recon rebalance we would see an overhaul of ECM both as a user and receiver ECM is just annoying long stretches of uselessness for either the ship who got jammed or the one who missed a jamming cycle. Edit: and for all the people saying the devs arent taking feedback the Rook likely would not have RLML bonuses if not for feedback here just because they arent changing a particular feature you want them to doesnt mean theyre ignoring feedback wholesale.
Ripard Teg Stimulus Rote Kapelle 987	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:00:16 - [926] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: CCP Rise wrote: 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. Literally what I have been saying for years. So happy to know you guys realize this too. Uh huh. And that logic will work fine the first two times a given FC encounters a situation. After that and forever after, he'll take imperfect information to mean there's more ships on grid than he sees and he won't engage because "yeah, I know we're only seeing three Thoraxes, but they've probably got three Rooks and a Lach just off grid and we don't have probes to check." aka Jester, who apparently was once entrusted to Wield The Banhammer to good effect.
X Gallentius Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop 2695	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:00:44 - [927] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: as several peopel pointed. Stratios can already do that.. and is barely used to do that. So this will happen, but not as much as some people believe. Stratios cannot warp into a plex undetected. Stratios has decloaking penalty to locking. Stratios is just a regular combat hull after it decloaks. It does not have "game breaking" combat abilities the Combat Recons have. CCP also placed cloak immunity in FW plexes. Anyways, combat recon pilots will get easy kills and then be put on lists - and then get blueballed. Not a problem - I guess. Then again, maybe it'll help out solo guys - who have an extra utility slot laying around - learn how to use scan probes. Great for Comet pilots like me. Not so great for hookbill, merlin, incursus, etc... pilots.
Antillie Sa'Kan Forging Industries Silent Infinity 826	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:01:08 - [928] - Quote Director Blackflame wrote: Never thought so many people would be terrified of Schrodinger's recon. I mean his proteus has been or not been lurking for quite some time. Yeah, especially when Schrodinger's Falcon has been or has not been lurking around for ages.
Ripard Teg Stimulus Rote Kapelle 987	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:04:09 - [929] - Quote Antillie Sa'Kan wrote: Director Blackflame wrote: Never thought so many people would be terrified of Schrodinger's recon. I mean his proteus has been or not been lurking for quite some time. Yeah, especially when Schrodinger's Falcon has been or has not been lurking around for ages. You guys say that like that situation doesn't prevent fights. I assure you it does. I have heard the phrase "These guys always have Falcon alts" prevent a fight quite a lot. aka Jester, who apparently was once entrusted to Wield The Banhammer to good effect.
Lug Muad'Dib Wise Humans Sword 17	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:04:40 - [930] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: literrature Only dumb FC will take more risk with D-SCAN immunity. Medium plex -> scout with insta warp frig or go away. More people in local, visual scout or go away. Want to plex in med ? cloacky alt on gate, no alt account, lol at you, solo cruiser is not more for you. People will be more paranoid and it's mean less fight. Literrature will not make this "feature" an improvement.

ep0c x Ekchuah's Shrine Comporium 5	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:04:57 - [931] - Quote I absolutely love the idea of flying one of these in WHs, however I think this might be a bit short-sighted. I suspect it wouldn't take long before the 'invisible to dscan' feature thats so awesome would turn many WHs into a waste land. In WHs this feature is arguably better than a cloak due to no targeting delay or showing up on dscan after jumping and before cloaking.
Blobskillz McBlub Manson Family Advent of Fate 20	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:07:37 - [932] - Quote Ripard Teg wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: CCP Rise wrote: 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. Literally what I have been saying for years. So happy to know you guys realize this too. Uh huh. And that logic will work fine the first two times a given FC encounters a situation. After that and forever after, he'll take imperfect information to mean there's more ships on grid than he sees and he won't engage because "yeah, I know we're only seeing three Thoraxes, but they've probably got three Rooks and a Lach just off grid and we don't have probes to check." if Rise wants to go this route of limited information availability before a fight then he has to go all the way. Meaning as long as possibilities aside from dscan exist which give near perfect approximations of the enemy strength ( aka combat probes ) then those available options have to be nerfed too. Otherwise any serious FC will take a combat prober with him. So far "only" cloaked and with this change combat recons will be able to avoid dscan detection, but if he wants to stick with his design philosophy then he has to go the logical steps towards making this philosophy work properly and dont leave us with something half baked. That does not encourage the faster taking of fights, but instead encourages even more slow and methodical gameplay from the FCs
Antarre Tuure Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:07:43 - [933] - Quote Quote: PILGRIM We decided that the Pilgrim really needed Nos/Neut range, rather than strength, to give it the engagement flexibility that other Recons enjoy. Recon Ships Bonuses: 40% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer range (was 20% nos/neut strength) 20% reduction in Cloaking Devices CPU requirement NOOO! you've just pushed the Curse into an effectively more cloaky ship with the no dcan combat recon than the Pilgrim and then gimped the one thing the Pilgrim was good at (neut amount). You have basically destroyed the Pilgrim as a decent solo ship making it really nothing more than an Arbitrator able to fit a cloak and have a little more range for its neuts (oh and 14x more expensive)
Speedkermit Damo Demonic Retribution 369	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:07:51 - [934] - Quote Sofia Evanglene wrote: X ATM092 wrote: Warp into a fw plex. There is a curse. Game was good. warp into plex theres 10 sebo arty huginns ggwp great game Ishtarceptors online is over. Combat Recons online is about to begin. Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.
Karl Hobb Imperial Margarine 2178	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:08:41 - [935] - Quote 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. And they use a module for it and (generally) have lock time penalties (circumvented in certain cases). Non-covert cloaks are balanced in that you cannot warp with them on. The big problem with the proposed combat recons is that they sacrifice nothing for what is effectively a cloak; maybe it's not equivalent to a cov ops but it is certainly comparable to a normal cloaking device. Don't get me wrong, I'll probably buy a Curse or two post Proteus, but I still feel like this change is a bit much. A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.
Tex Raynor Guardians of Asceticism 7	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:08:48 - [936] - Quote Wille Sanara wrote: Giving them immunity to D-SCAN is just stupid. It makes them overpowered, a lot. You wont see anything else but recons in WHs after the changes. Yeah dude, capital escalations in combat recons! You decided to use a carrier? Here let me bring my 10 combat recons that are somehow immune to fighter DPS and also, sleepers don't aggress. I also heard combat recons will not generate a sound or spawn a new sig when going through wormholes. Next patch: combat recons get doomsdays! ... Wait a sec... a covert Proteus that can land on grid, approach within scram range, uncloak, point and dish out MORE dps? Nerf the Proteus!!
Skyler Hawk The Ironmongery 35	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:08:58 - [937] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: as several peopel pointed. Stratios can already do that.. and is barely used to do that. A stratios doesn't suck your cap dry from 37 km or point/web you at 100 km, though.
Tex Raynor Guardians of Asceticism 7	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:10:51 - [938] - Quote ep0c x wrote: I absolutely love the idea of flying one of these in WHs, however I think this might be a bit short-sighted. I suspect it wouldn't take long before the 'invisible to dscan' feature thats so awesome would turn many WHs into a waste land. In WHs this feature is arguably better than a cloak due to no targeting delay or showing up on dscan after jumping and before cloaking. Yet still combat scannable...
Tex Raynor Guardians of Asceticism 7	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:12:34 - [939] - Quote Skyler Hawk wrote: Kagura Nikon wrote: as several peopel pointed. Stratios can already do that.. and is barely used to do that. A stratios doesn't suck your cap dry from 37 km or point/web you at 100 km, though. Fit warp core stabs or a MJD. In fact, don't leave highsec and they can't even touch you bro :)
Antillie Sa'Kan Forging Industries Silent Infinity 827	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:14:37 - [940] - Quote Ripard Teg wrote: [quote=Antillie Sa'Kan]You guys say that like that situation doesn't prevent fights. I assure you it does. I have heard the phrase "These guys always have Falcon alts" prevent a fight quite a lot. The point isn't that it won't prevent fights, because it will. The point is that it won't be any different from how things are now. Falcon or Rook won't make any real difference. Same for Arazu vs Lachesis or Rapier vs Huginn. Pilgrim vs Curse might be a little different, but I don't think it will be an issue.

Marlona Sky Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 5746	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:15:12 - [941] - Quote Ripard Teg wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: CCP Rise wrote: 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. Literally what I have been saying for years. So happy to know you guys realize this too. Uh huh. And that logic will work fine the first two times a given FC encounters a situation. After that and forever after, he'll take imperfect information to mean there's more ships on grid than he sees and he won't engage because "yeah, I know we're only seeing three Thoraxes, but they've probably got three Rooks and a Lach just off grid and we don't have probes to check." And that Thorax gang doesn't see the three Huggins and Curse the other gang has. I wonder if they will bail or stay? And because no one really know, people will take the engagement because that is why they logged in. If they have the prefect intel they do the napkin math and realize they will most likely lose. So they don't engage or call for more numbers. Then that other side sees these 'more numbers' due to perfect intel and realize they will lose. So they don't engage or call in for even MORE numbers. This goes on and on when the reality is if neither side had that perfect intel - they would have engaged each other from the start. Sure some FCs will not be able to handle dealing with these kinds of changes, because they were using perfect intel as a crutch the entire time to stand. The Paradox
Kesthely Fleet of the Damned Ace of Spades. 172	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:17:44 - [942] - Quote This thread amuses me, everyone complaining about a feature that is in respect a WEAKER version of a cloak Immunity vs D-Scan vs Cloak D-Scan: can be probed out can be seen on grid no targeting delay Cloak: Can't be proped out Cant be seen on grid needs special cloak / shp for no targeting delay Now if they would have changed the bonus to " does not show up on d-scan AND local " it would be justified, now its just a weaker cloak version that adds some intresting tactics for 4 of the 200+ existing ships
Major Margret McMurphy Hellios Prime Industrial Collective The Void Collective 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:19:36 - [943] - Quote This non-detectable recon ships on dscan is nothing more than catering to the pvp player and is pure crap and should not be allowed. This change will make WH mining impossible and expensive.
Marlona Sky Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 5747	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:20:01 - [944] - Quote Ripard Teg wrote: Antillie Sa'Kan wrote: Director Blackflame wrote: Never thought so many people would be terrified of Schrodinger's recon. I mean his proteus has been or not been lurking for quite some time. Yeah, especially when Schrodinger's Falcon has been or has not been lurking around for ages. You guys say that like that situation doesn't prevent fights. I assure you it does. I have heard the phrase "These guys always have Falcon alts" prevent a fight quite a lot. That's because ECM has no counter play. How come no one ever decides not to fight due to "These guys always have Arazu/Pilgrim/Rapier alts" ??? Because all other types of EW has some degree of counter play. ECM is a broken light switch mechanic that needs to be banished from the game completely and replaced with something else. Something that does 'something' as often as the other EW but leaves room for counter play. The Paradox
Marlona Sky Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 5747	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:21:24 - [945] - Quote Major Margret McMurphy wrote: This non-detectable recon ships on dscan is nothing more than catering to the pvp player and is pure crap and should not be allowed. This change will make WH mining impossible and expensive. Your alliance doesn't allow you to fly combat recons? The Paradox
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1062	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:22:08 - [946] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Just finished reading everything that was posted over night. Here's what I can update with at the moment: Biggest concern at the moment is the added EHP. Making recons a more realistic fleet option next to T3 cruisers is good, making them too tanky in smaller situations where their ewar already gives them a lot of damage evasion may be too much. Not sure if change is needed but will keep looking at this and update again asap. 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. The Pilgrim. Opinions seem mixed, gaining neut range is obviously nice but many of you still feel that giving up neut strength is too harsh, or that some other added power is needed (more damage for instance). Will get back to you on this as soon as possible but it's possible that we will make adjustments. RLML for Rook. Sure. Consider it done. More low slots for Lachesis. Not sure yet on this one, will talk it over here and see what we can do. Hope that answers some questions. I'm sure many of you would rather have more explanation for the dscan immunity change so I'll try to get that post together as soon as I can. Thanks for all the feedback. EHP - more HP is fine, its the full T2 resists thats too much same as T3 in that respect it makes them too reppable and competes with HAC's too much as a result.. not every T2 needs T2 resists partial or full .. slot layouts are a big issue here , force recons being done a slot and effectively 3 after a cloak and cyno as role bonuses are for those .. please consider giving 1 extra highslot too all force recons so some semblance of dps is possible please. gallente are armour tankers same as amarr they must have 5 lowslots no exceptions.. Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
Tex Raynor Guardians of Asceticism 7	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:22:11 - [947] - Quote Major Margret McMurphy wrote: This non-detectable recon ships on dscan is nothing more than catering to the pvp player and is pure crap and should not be allowed. This change will make WH mining impossible and expensive. Right, let's just keep using my covert proteus which does more DPS
Lugh Crow-Slave 283	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:22:23 - [948] - Quote Major Margret McMurphy wrote: This non-detectable recon ships on dscan is nothing more than catering to the pvp player and is pure crap and should not be allowed. This change will make WH mining impossible and expensive. they still show up on combat probs.. use them. the problem with WH mining is covert op cloaked ships can warp to the belts with 0 warning and yes this should be fixed but these will not change WH mining
S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 47	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:23:57 - [949] - Quote Skyler Hawk wrote: Kagura Nikon wrote: as several peopel pointed. Stratios can already do that.. and is barely used to do that. A stratios doesn't suck your cap dry from 37 km or point/web you at 100 km, though. But does a lot more DPS than any covert cloaky ships. Cloaky proteus can reach 500 DPS but a Stratios can put out more than that... much more.
Lugh Crow-Slave 283	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:24:37 - [950] - Quote Harvey James wrote: [ EHP - more HP is fine, its the full T2 resists thats too much same as T3 in that respect it makes them too reppable and competes with HAC's too much as a result.. not every T2 needs T2 resists partial or full .. gallente are armour tankers same as amarr they must have 5 lowslots no exceptions.. [/quote] please re-read what you just posted you understand that not all T2s need T2 resists however you feel that all of the armor tankers need at least 5 lows

Antillie Sa'Kan Forging Industries Silent Infinity 827	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:24:45 - [951] - Quote Karl Hobb wrote: And they use a module for it and (generally) have lock time penalties (circumvented in certain cases). Non-covert cloaks are balanced in that you cannot warp with them on. The big problem with the proposed combat recons is that they sacrifice nothing for what is effectively a cloak; maybe it's not equivalent to a cov ops but it is certainly comparable to a normal cloaking device. Don't get me wrong, I'll probably buy a Curse or two post Proteus, but I still feel like this change is a bit much. All covert ops cloak ships have utility high for the cloak so they don't really sacrifice fitting something else. They also usually have either a cloak CPU usage bonus or lots of CPU to start with so they don't sacrifice any fitting either.They do sacrifice targeting time though. Recons do sacrifice something, DPS. All recons do terrible DPS. They are great force multipliers though. Which is the point. I feel this change will bring an interesting amount of unpredictability to EVE.
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 215	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:24:46 - [952] - Quote Mighty, Mighty Recon Second to none.
Nou Mene 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 1	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:25:38 - [953] - Quote dscan invul... OP ON while on sub-warp speed OFF during warp ?
Antillie Sa'Kan Forging Industries Silent Infinity 827	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:27:29 - [954] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: That's because ECM has no counter play. How come no one ever decides not to fight due to "These guys always have Arazu/Pilgrim/Rapier alts" ??? Because all other types of EW has some degree of counter play. ECM is a broken light switch mechanic that needs to be banished from the game completely and replaced with something else. Something that does 'something' as often as the other EW but leaves room for counter play. This indicates an issue with ECM, not DSCAN immunity.
Aliventi Hard Knocks Inc. 791	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:28:32 - [955] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Quote: I can tell you what will happen most likely: - Less fights because people are risk averse - A 2nd account with a Prober at all times will be must, not an option. I think this is a complex debate and I'm sure that none of us understand player behavior completely, but my experience is actually the opposite of what you're saying. 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. The negative side for me is your other bullet point. Because people don't want to take unnecessary risk they will work very hard, sometimes doing something very boring or difficult, just to get at those last pieces of information. And they should. But we would want to avoid mechanics that obligate people to this kind of behavior too heavily without enough positive side to make the mechanic worthwhile. I would be more worried with this mechanic that people have to spend a lot of time running probe scans when they really don't want to be than that they are avoiding engagements because of the possibility of Recons. I don't think this will be a problem but we'll have to wait and see. So... we should have no local in nullsec and either no local/delayed local in lowsec? If less perfect intel brings fights then I hope you take a good long look at the effortless, free, perfect intel source that is local chat.
Bienator II madmen of the skies 3043	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:28:50 - [956] - Quote 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? eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW
S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 47	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:29:03 - [957] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: Ripard Teg wrote: Antillie Sa'Kan wrote: Director Blackflame wrote: Never thought so many people would be terrified of Schrodinger's recon. I mean his proteus has been or not been lurking for quite some time. Yeah, especially when Schrodinger's Falcon has been or has not been lurking around for ages. You guys say that like that situation doesn't prevent fights. I assure you it does. I have heard the phrase "These guys always have Falcon alts" prevent a fight quite a lot. That's because ECM has no counter play. How come no one ever decides not to fight due to "These guys always have Arazu/Pilgrim/Rapier alts" ??? Because all other types of EW has some degree of counter play. ECM is a broken light switch mechanic that needs to be banished from the game completely and replaced with something else. Something that does 'something' as often as the other EW but leaves room for counter play. You again with ECM has no counter? I told you once. Keres can lock faster and damp the damn Falcon to send him out of the grid. Even Arazu can lock faster than Falcon because of the scan res. Because ECM will miss cycles, Falcon pilots fill a full rack of ECM mods and no sebo which means even a T1 Celestits will make the Falcon to leave the grid. Geezzzz fly the damn thing for a week or two and see how much time you spend on grid compared with bouncing from planets or BMs.
Kharnakh Acheron Imperial Ascendancy Acheron Imperial Dominion 26	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:30:02 - [958] - Quote The one role the pilgrim was good at was that of a covert hunter-killer, sneaking up on other ships, locking them down from a range under their guns and neuting them dead. The the neut power bonus was extremely useful in this role, and because you uncloaked at 2.5km (or a little further if you wanted to get a run up after activating a prop mod for a bump) to maximise the effect of the tracking disruptor bonus and cloak, a neut range bonus is completely unnecessary. To remove the neut power bonus is just a further nerf to an already niche ship.
Gurny Atreides Hounds of War. Hashashin Cartel 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:33:03 - [959] - Quote Excited to try these out. Expect they'll be about the same as current cloaky recons. If they're off grid their 'targeting delay' is you seeing them exiting warp on grid, except they're not going to be able to bump tackle you like cloakies to get around this, or able to be a warp-in for rest of fleet right on top of you Ability to use them in actual fleets will be a nice change, they're still going to be primaried, maybe not instantly popped. 8 corp members in space, d-scan shows fleet of 5, maybe something's up. Character has out of corp character(s) in recon on lots of kills, not going to engage. Really not much of a change except people might actually fly combat recons. Wormholes, youll see them probe your sites, youll see them land on grid. Assume every lone ship is initial tackle for a fleet, so what's the change Fw plexes need a shakeup, there's a predominating mentality of ' I'm in x so i'm only going to engage y' Honestly wouldn't mind if all fw plexes acted as dscan inhibitors, or simply showed number of pilots in a plex on the entrance gate
Lvzbel Ixtab 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 37	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:33:03 - [960] - Quote I really dont like a total d-scan immunity it should at least be detectable withing 1 AU because it does not have any downsides. For example Cloaky ships are usually weaker and that is a trade off The argument that combat probes can be use who has the time to be using combat probes at every place you want to scan? specially with small gang Being detectable at 1 AU still gives great opportunity for surprises all they have to do is sit outside a LS plex and when you land u will into a big surprise. This will just encourage more cheesy tactics and lest desire to engage what looks like an engage able gang

DFA200 Hard vs Soft 13	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:37:16 - [961] - Quote Major Margret McMurphy wrote: This non-detectable recon ships on dscan is nothing more than catering to the pvp player and is pure crap and should not be allowed. This change will make WH mining impossible and expensive. Yes, and they also bring two of the most uncounterable, frustrating and cheap mechanics in the game - neuts and ECM.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 925	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:38:26 - [962] - 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.
Lvzbel Ixtab 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 37	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:40:40 - [963] - Quote DFA200 wrote: Major Margret McMurphy wrote: This non-detectable recon ships on dscan is nothing more than catering to the pvp player and is pure crap and should not be allowed. This change will make WH mining impossible and expensive. Yes, and they also bring two of the most uncounterable, frustrating and cheap mechanics in the game - neuts and ECM. It will affect pvpers by not knowing what are we against specially in small gang pvp where having a combat prober is not viable
Manssell OmiHyperMultiNationalDrunksConglomerate Together We Solo 226	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:43:17 - [964] - Quote Petrus Blackshell wrote: CCP Rise wrote: 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. Sure, that's the case in the short term. In the long term, if this gets abused as much as everyone seems to think it will get abused, "engageable"-looking fights will be less likely to be engaged. Why? Suppose my friends and I fly in a group of 3-4 Thoraxes. We run into 2 Vexors, and die to them because they were accompanied by 2 Rooks. The next day, with new Thoraxes, we run into 2 Ruptures, and die because we can't fire our guns since there's 2 Curses there. The day after that, we die to 2 Stabbers because a Lachesis and Huginn are scramming/webbing us from 30 km and we can't close range. The final outcome? One of the following: We stop roaming entirely. We get our own recons. Remember how fun (hint: not at all) this solution turned out for off-grid boosts, Falcon alts, and supercaps? We stop engaging anything when there are unaccounted-for neutrals in local, or stop fighting anything that isn't a single T1 frigate in our cruisers. Ed: I should acknowledge combat probing, but it is not great counter-play for dscan-immunity. It is hard to fit, completely compromises the fit of the ship involved (or requires a dedicated ship), and adds little value to the other operations of the gang. If you were to reduce the fitting costs of Expanded Probe Launchers so they could be reasonably fit in a utility high slot of a ship, that might be OK balance as far as the new recons are involved. It would completely break other balance, though, so we're at an impasse. It could be that I and the others on the forum are wrong, recons won't be abused in this way, and won't lead to a chilling of the PvP atmosphere by fear-of-recon. I cannot predict the actions of others. I can however predict my own actions, and as someone with Recon V trained, I will abuse this mechanic silly, and keep going until I stop getting easy-mode kills. I may even switch the training on one my alts to do the same thing. So, as someone who would abuse this in order to make PvP unfun, I ask you: please do not let me make PvP unfun. Because I will. And I'm sure so will almost everyone else. Spot on! This is the important bit people keep talking around. The problem isnGÇÖt so much of the individual fight scenarios that people are coming up with (although they do all seem to end in a GÇ£gankGÇ¥ rather than a GÇ£gud fightGÇ¥) itGÇÖs what happens the next time that small gang of thoraxs seeGÇÖs something they think they can take on a gate? How many GÇ£because of ReconsGÇ¥ does it take to disincentivize being the aggressor without having a scan alt? How many GÇ£just bring more friends to counterGÇ¥ cycles does the argument go through until itGÇÖs not a small gang anymore? Right now not many small gangs like loosing the fights that end with GÇ£because of FalconGÇ¥ but will put up with it because itGÇÖs not too common. This change just ads a whole mess more of GÇ£because falconGÇ¥ type fights to the mix and incentivezes them to be more common (hell IGÇÖm going to do this). If they become anything but the occasional edge case fights the overall effect I think will be to prevent frig gangs from engaging anywhere in system other than in a small-novice plex and small cruiser gangs (or frig gang with cruiser support) from engaging at all without first probing the system and checking the stations. Right now small gang and solo fighting in lowsec is actually making a pretty good rebound from the barren wasteland it was a few years ago. IGÇÖd hate to see a mechanic that could (and in my opinion will) mess that all up, thrown in just for the sake of mixing stuff up.
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 80	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:48:11 - [965] - Quote Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: DFA200 wrote: Major Margret McMurphy wrote: This non-detectable recon ships on dscan is nothing more than catering to the pvp player and is pure crap and should not be allowed. This change will make WH mining impossible and expensive. Yes, and they also bring two of the most uncounterable, frustrating and cheap mechanics in the game - neuts and ECM. It will affect pvpers by not knowing what are we against specially in small gang pvp where having a combat prober is not viable You know theres more options than warp to 0 and approach right? bounce a celestial, warp at random distance (70-100), have a cloaky with you... OR bring your own recons. Door swings both ways. And if someone else creates a strawman about combat recons at random celestials in random systems at random times.. seriously grow a pair. That scenario will be so remote at happening, its more luck than the spooky dscan immunity everyone is crying about. And i fly solo 99.9% of the time. I am not worried whatsoever.
Karl Hobb Imperial Margarine 2179	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:50:50 - [966] - Quote Antillie Sa'Kan wrote: All covert ops cloak ships have utility high for the cloak so they don't really sacrifice fitting something else. I don't buy that. Combat recons have an extra slot over force recons. Antillie Sa'Kan wrote: Recons do sacrifice something, DPS. All recons do terrible DPS. They are great force multipliers though. Which is the point. I feel this change will bring an interesting amount of unpredictability to EVE. Again, my only real gripe here is that they get it for free. I've already adjusted my exploration Cov Ops to handle an expanded probe launcher (probably something I should have done earlier anyway, tbh) and I realize that recons face the same limitations that everything else does when it comes to deciding whether to engage, especially when flying solo. It's not like this is a huge game changer in the grand game of Falcons, but it certainly does feel a bit overpowered. A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.
Dante Mystwerk Red Phoenix Rising Absolution Alliance 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:55:13 - [967] - Quote Kmelx wrote: Nova' Darkstar wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Dscan immunity is staying. Thanks for all the feedback. Lol, why even post in features & ideas discussion, then? It's so they can say they "consulted" the player base before they made the change. Which is exactly what they have done, they consulted the player base, granted he's then gone on to ignore the views of the eve players, their paying customers, but what the hell our opinion's clearly unimportant, after all, we only have to play the game once they've made the PVP experience into an even worse abortion than it already is. As a guesstimate, I'd say 75-80-% of the people posting in here dislike the d-scan change, but like I said why should the majority view of the players of the game matter to it's developers? They've already made the decision to foist a change we don't want on us, they're not consulting with us they're simply informing us of their decision, and we can either like it or lump it. People with negative feedback always respond more; this is true in everything. Just because x percent of people respond that they don't like something doesn't mean that percent is representative of the entire playerbase. And not changing something after getting negative feedback doesn't mean that feedback was ignored, it just means despite your concerns, for one reason or another, the change is going through still. If you don't know how feedback works, don't post in a feedback thread.
Rhea Rankin Nolen Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 52	Posted - 2014.12.19 17:57:42 - [968] - Quote 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.
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 215	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:02:36 - [969] - Quote 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.
Nalha Saldana Shattered Void Spaceship Samurai 869	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:02:57 - [970] - Quote Can you please please please turn amarr, gallente and 1 of the minmatar recons into proper armor tankers with more low slots? The current slots make no sense for the races and forces armor fleets to use t3s for webs and other ewar..

TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 925	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:04:21 - [971] - 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.
Komodo Askold No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 245	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:06:54 - [972] - Quote Director Blackflame wrote: Edit: and for all the people saying the devs arent taking feedback the Rook likely would not have RLML bonuses if not for feedback here just because they arent changing a particular feature you want them to doesnt mean theyre ignoring feedback wholesale. Not empty quoting. It's amazing how many people can literally stop reading an official post by a dev as soon as they read the thing they don't like is staying. If they did read the whole post, they would see the D-Scan inmunity is staying BECAUSE of player feedback. The reasons why it's not the horrible idea they think it is have been posted over and over again across the whole topic, yet they don't seem to be willing to read them. In my opinion, refusing to hear a reasoning, or just read it (which is even easier), means that it's not really that important for them, because if it was, they would be reading the hell out of the whole topic and all its pages, in order to debate properly. Instead, they seem to prefer resorting to anger, ignoring the already posted reasonings, and insulting the devs. Imagine how would it be to be a videogame developer, having to read all that whining. I feel sorry for our devs in that regard. Keep up the good work, CCP.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 926	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:10:15 - [973] - Quote yes, thanks ccp. what we need is more ships with rlmls, because frigates are too relevant in actual fights.
Antillie Sa'Kan Forging Industries Silent Infinity 829	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:11:48 - [974] - Quote Karl Hobb wrote: I don't buy that. Combat recons have an extra slot over force recons. You should. Force recons don't have enough weapon hard points to put another bonused weapons in their extra slot. The high slots are designed so that force recons will always have less DPS than combat recons while always having a spare slot for a cloak. Karl Hobb wrote: Again, my only real gripe here is that they get it for free. I've already adjusted my exploration Cov Ops to handle an expanded probe launcher (probably something I should have done earlier anyway, tbh) and I realize that recons face the same limitations that everything else does when it comes to deciding whether to engage, especially when flying solo. It's not like this is a huge game changer in the grand game of Falcons, but it certainly does feel a bit overpowered. I suppose we will have to see what happens when this hits TQ.
Antillie Sa'Kan Forging Industries Silent Infinity 829	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:12:48 - [975] - Quote Rhea Rankin Nolen wrote: Except that covert ops cloak has targeting delay after decloak. Unless you are talking about a stealth bomber.
Marcel Devereux Aideron Robotics 427	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:17:17 - [976] - Quote What about extending the trend for the dual weapon systems to the Amarr and Gallente lines. Make all the cloaky recons be turret based (Pilgrim, Falcon, Arazu, and Rapier) and make the combat recons the other racial weapon system: Curse: Drones Rook: Missiles Lachesis: Drones Huginn: Missiles I know there are issues with the manufacturers of the ships, but can't we over look that for some cool game play rather than it being a game design restriction? Also since space objects can't you easily switch the skins/models to accommodate this? EDIT: In fact wouldn't this give them a weakness to counter their disruption? Drones can be destroyed. Missiles can be smartbombed.
Helene Fidard 13	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:20:18 - [977] - Quote Oh I've been dying for a Recon buff, let's see what we've got CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners The average maximum velocity across the class is going up by around 20m/s PILGRIM We decided that the Pilgrim really needed Nos/Neut range, rather than strength, to give it the engagement flexibility that other Recons enjoy. godammit Rise
Captain Semper The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx 57	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:21:48 - [978] - Quote Quote: Close the gap somewhat between Recons and T3 Cruisers, though this will also be a goal during the T3 Cruiser rebalance And where armor tank tackler? Arazu with insane 4 armor slots? Why fleet that basic have less spead coz of tank type still have short range tackler and cant normaly reach enemy fleet? Where balance between proteus and arazu/lache? Make arazu armor tanked. BTW amar have no choise in armor fleet too but not like gallent with 4 low arazu.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1062	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:22:32 - [979] - Quote also curse needs to be armour and missile based its khanid Rise!!!!! please reduce the crazy high sig radius please Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
Hamish McRothimay Norse Complex Inc 2	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:24:01 - [980] - Quote Jori McKie wrote: [quote=Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron][quote=Daneel Trevize][quote=Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron ]SNIP.... I mark every Falcon, Rapier pilot i encounter in game, everyone. If i see a marked one in local i won't blind warp into any medium plex at all, just warp to a nearby celestial and see if something decloaks. That's another thing that needs looking at - The free intel available from being able to put anyone you want on a watch list. The D-Scan invisibility is really a minor buff with the largest effect being seen in WH space - and unlike the ability to add some unknowing player to a watch list, its is available to all players who can fly the Recon.

Lucius Regall CTRL-Q Iron Oxide. 42	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:24:44 - [981] - Quote Instead of Combat Recons not appearing on D-Scan at all, how about something slightly less game breaking? Combat Recons appear on D-Scan at 4AU or closer. Combat Recons appear as [Combat Recon] not as the usual ship type. Combat Recons can be adjusted to appear as some other type of ship.
Ele Rebellion Dead Star Syndicate I'd Rather Be Roaming 31	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:31:26 - [982] - Quote 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.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 928	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:33:37 - [983] - 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.
Ele Rebellion Dead Star Syndicate I'd Rather Be Roaming 31	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:35:34 - [984] - Quote Also Just like Mobile D-Scan Inhibitors.. They should be incredibly easy to combat probe.
Onslaughtor Occult National Security Affirmative. 102	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:36:57 - [985] - Quote D SCAN IMMUNITY Since you seem set on d scan immunity, lets at least add a fun and more interesting way to get intel other than d scan. Core scout probes. Basically combat probes that fit inside core launchers, doesn't allow you to get a warp but lets you see what is hiding out there. Depending on balance it would make a fun addition, large range scout probes could be used to check far out gates quickly, and gather fundamental intel. Also being used in a team with combat probes would let you get very percise locations on enemy ships with out nessisarily giving away you are looking for them. Some kind of lower level counter is needed if this change is to go forward. ROOK Also give the rook another low and more pwg. And some more armor, just accept the fact that its ecm so you will need to armor tank it. Lore wise we can just say that the state has accepted the fact that capsullers want there ecm ships to actually survive. Slot layout: 4H(-1), 7M, 4L(+1); 2 turrets, 4 launchers (-1) Fittings: 700 PWG (+100), 600 CPU I still think the ship would be more interesting and better served with a 20% strength and a 10% range bonus to ECM
Ele Rebellion Dead Star Syndicate I'd Rather Be Roaming 31	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:37:15 - [986] - 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. But with cloakers, they have to break cloak to take the gate.
Kynric Sky Fighters 227	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:43:25 - [987] - Quote Please give the Huginn its launchers back. The missile based fit was one of the things I enjoyed about the ship. AC can't project far enough to compliment the webs and arty fits have significant fitting challenges.
Lvzbel Ixtab 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 38	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:45:00 - [988] - 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. Good stuff and is not only a scenario because it will totally happen just like sebo gate camping frigs with fighters happen, and not only mediums i would say a lot of the plexes because they can just sit outside the play and be the same problem
Sakura Blake Quafe Commandos The Obsidian Front 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:54:45 - [989] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: The Pilgrim. Opinions seem mixed, gaining neut range is obviously nice but many of you still feel that giving up neut strength is too harsh, or that some other added power is needed (more damage for instance). Will get back to you on this as soon as possible but it's possible that we will make adjustments. Personally I would prioritise the range over the strength. That being said I would prefer; Range based off cruiser skill Strength based off recon skill Or something similar
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 80	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:58:14 - [990] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: yes, thanks ccp. what we need is more ships with rlmls, because frigates are too relevant in actual fights. So in your corner of EVE, roaming gangs of intys, garmurs, worms arent a thing? See it all the time, and its the best counter against them. Nuke a couple frigs and GTFO, biggest middle finger to these types of gangs. Especially since they're all over FW. How bout people start bringing cruisers to support their frigs, RLML dont have the damage potential to kill a cruiser in one magazine.

Ab'del Abu Atlantis Ascendant 164	Posted - 2014.12.19 18:59:12 - [991] - 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
Iebi Vyethar 24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 19:00:21 - [992] - Quote From what I understood, FW is paying the price with this so called rebalance. Must be a punishment to even out with qq-ing ISBoxing miners in nullsec. I blame the CSM
Thanatos Marathon Phoibe Enterprises 370	Posted - 2014.12.19 19:07:38 - [993] - Quote To my former Bro's in Gal Mil: Get all your peeps training for combat recons. To CCP & the CSM: Shaking up the game is good, but what are you looking to do with this change besides nerf solo/small gang risk takers? Oh well, time to change my skill queue I guess and get ready to stop running DED sites (cuz screw spamming probes while trying to run a 5/10 or higher with people moving through local).
Bienator II madmen of the skies 3044	Posted - 2014.12.19 19:08:01 - [994] - Quote 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. eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW
Viceran Phaedra Instar Heavy Industries 64	Posted - 2014.12.19 19:09:17 - [995] - Quote The EVE Community wrote: We are all precious little snowflakes that are threatened by change! I'm unsubbing because of [upcoming feature]! The environment is changing, and that's good. EVE players are some of the sharpest gamers out there. Adapt. Use your smarts to figure out how to deal with this new D-Scan immunity mechanic instead of clogging up the forums with your useless vitriol. If it doesn't work, try something else, or find another avenue for fun and/or ISK, temporarily or for good. At least have the decency to make an informed community decision by actually trying the feature before you complain. Look what happened with Industry Teams - they were implemented, we had a go at EVE with them, they didn't work; they're getting removed for now. Sure, you might not like the sound of D-Scan immunity for Recons, but for goodness sake; be constructive and patient and have a go so you can make an informed decision instead of acting like petulant children. Fix your attitude. Chief Executive Officer Instar Heavy Industries
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 928	Posted - 2014.12.19 19:16:21 - [996] - 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
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 81	Posted - 2014.12.19 19:16:44 - [997] - Quote Lvzbel Ixtab 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. Good stuff and is not only a scenario because it will totally happen just like sebo gate camping frigs with fighters happen, and not only mediums i would say a lot of the plexes because they can just sit outside the play and be the same problem I like how the scenario has you barge into a medium plex when there are 4 in local and you see no one on dscan. That MIGHT be a clue to assume the worst. Warp to the plex @ 100km and scout for anything on gate. If clear, warp around the system, checking for ANYBODY on scan. Use a random celestial for positioning. Dont warp straight from the gate to the plex. Cant find anybody? That means one of 3 things: -They are docked -They are cloaked -They are in recons So now you decide its best to barge into a questionable plex? Think you need to re-evaluate your tactics. If ONLY there was a tool available to look up pilots and their kills/losses to see what they regularly fly. Solo tools are available, learn to use them. MMJD are a thing for large plexes. Rook at 100km? MMJD on him and nuke em. Or relatively cheap MG sensor strength implants to counter ecm. If all else fails, and youre still suspicious of 4 rooks in a medium plex, go to another system or bring more people. Seriously..i could keep going on ways to avoid this scenario. Use your brain and adapt, or quit, which means... your stuff, can i have it?
Nyjil Lizaru Aideron Robotics 34	Posted - 2014.12.19 19:18:26 - [998] - Quote Viceran Phaedra wrote: The EVE Community wrote: We are all precious little snowflakes that are threatened by change! I'm unsubbing because of [upcoming feature]! The environment is changing, and that's good. EVE players are some of the sharpest gamers out there. Adapt. Use your smarts to figure out how to deal with this new D-Scan immunity mechanic instead of clogging up the forums with your useless vitriol. If it doesn't work, try something else, or find another avenue for fun and/or ISK, temporarily or for good. At least have the decency to make an informed community decision by actually trying the feature before you complain. Look what happened with Industry Teams - they were implemented, we had a go at EVE with them, they didn't work; they're getting removed for now. Sure, you might not like the sound of D-Scan immunity for Recons, but for goodness sake; be constructive and patient and have a go so you can make an informed decision instead of acting like petulant children. Fix your attitude. Oh, I guess we thought it was a feedback thread, our mistake, so sorry! (I also missed the part where anyone threatened to unsub, but then I only read about half of this) I'm now wondering where the trade-off is. SBs are paper thin, T3's are risking lots more ISK + skillpoint loss, recons aren't THAT expensive and with the combat buffs they will be THE go-to ship for anyone that can fly them (including me). Anytime that there is only one right answer, something has gone wrong. Nyjil's corollary to Malcanis' Law: -á "Any attempt by CCP to smooth the learning curve of EVE Online will be carried out via the addition of extra factors and 'features' such that there is a net increase in complexity."
Jakob Anedalle Aideron Robotics 78	Posted - 2014.12.19 19:21:33 - [999] - Quote Tangent so main body posted to another thread, but since relevant: TL;DR: Have a scan strength and a stealth rating, and allow them to interact to tell you what you can d-scan, from how far away, and with what level of information returned. Thus allows both the Force Recon Proteus change and for players to develop tactics and counters. Trying out all the things to do here in Eve - it's quite a checklist. So I made a blog Jakob's Eve Checklist
Invisusira The Rising Stars Tactical Narcotics Team 282	Posted - 2014.12.19 19:22:22 - [1000] - Quote brushes cobwebs off Curse EVE Music

Lvzbel Ixtab 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 40	Posted - 2014.12.19 19:24:17 - [1001] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: Lvzbel Ixtab 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. Good stuff and is not only a scenario because it will totally happen just like sebo gate camping frigs with fighters happen, and not only mediums i would say a lot of the plexes because they can just sit outside the play and be the same problem I like how the scenario has you barge into a medium plex when there are 4 in local and you see no one on dscan. That MIGHT be a clue to assume the worst. Warp to the plex @ 100km and scout for anything on gate. If clear, warp around the system, checking for ANYBODY on scan. Use a random celestial for positioning. Dont warp straight from the gate to the plex. Cant find anybody? That means one of 3 things: -They are docked -They are cloaked -They are in recons So now you decide its best to barge into a questionable plex? Think you need to re-evaluate your tactics. If ONLY there was a tool available to look up pilots and their kills/losses to see what they regularly fly. Solo tools are available, learn to use them. MMJD are a thing for large plexes. Rook at 100km? MMJD on him and nuke em. Or relatively cheap MG sensor strength implants to counter ecm. If all else fails, and youre still suspicious of 4 rooks in a medium plex, go to another system or bring more people. Seriously..i could keep going on ways to avoid this scenario. Use your brain and adapt, or quit, which means... your stuff, can i have it? Is not about adapting because there is nothing to adapt to, Im not trying to run away from this people I need to know exact intel in order to decided if i can engage them or not. What i do in this scenarios -They are docked- I move on -They are cloaked- I know they have at least a decloaking delay -They are recons - ? there is nothing i can do I can look at each people that is in local and check their killboards but do i really want to waist all this time looking at people killboards at EVERY SYSTEM? not really it will make engagement happens much more slowly or not happen at all? Sure i can also dock up at everything station and take note of who is dock and not, but is not realistic for a ls pvp environment where is suppose to be fast pace.
w1ndstrike White Talon Holdings 9	Posted - 2014.12.19 19:28:57 - [1002] - Quote I get the no dscan change for k-space, but this change will definitely cause problems for those of us that do exploration and solo sites in wormholes, where dscan is all we have for Intel and 99% of viable fits for doing so cannot fit combat probes. Something has to give in this scenario, and this change is likely enough to make solo wormhole runs no longer worth the risk.
Moac Tor Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation 20	Posted - 2014.12.19 19:33:54 - [1003] - Quote Komodo Askold wrote: Aiyshimin wrote: Komodo Askold wrote: Combat Probes, people. Yes, you CAN see those Combat Recons entering system, waiting for you on a site, or escorting a friend who's running the site. Drop those probes and you'll see: if it appears on the probes and not on D-Scan, then it's a Combat Recon. That's it. And remember you can place probes all over the system, much further away than your D-Scan range, effectively covering by yourself a much bigger volume. You can even place 1 or more probes at each gate, wormhole or even some sites. And, that will warn you of any kind of ship that is not cloaked, even if you have no Local. And the insta-lock due to not being cloaked: every non-cloaked ship can do that. Even cloaky ships, if they pursposelly drop their cloak a few thousand kilometers before landing. So, stay away from those warp--in points and you'll have time to see it arrive and mash that Warp button. Especially when the incoming ship can't warp cloaked, such as... Combat Recons. And if it lands directly on you due to Combat Probes... you should have seen them in D-Scan and have acted accordingly. You have tools to know about incoming ships; use them and you'll avoid not only Combat Recons, but many other ships too. Now about the ship stats, I wonder if the Rook could get RLML's bonused too, or if that would be too much for it to have. Sisters Expanded Probe Launcher requires 210 CPU Fair point. Most of the ships used to run sites can fit it (and it will serve them not only for Combat Probes, but also Core Probes, and have much more of them loaded in the launcher, ths less reloads), but I also think their CPU usage is pretty high, especially now that more people would like to fit them in ships that are not D3's (Confessor and upcoming bros). I would vote for a CPU cost reduction for Expanded Probe Launchers. Make them still tight, but not that much. What about 180 CPU, for example? If you are that bothered about perfect intel then you will get a ship with a probe launcher cpu reduction such as a T3 with Emergent Locus Analyser; or you can get a dedicated combat scanner in your fleet, after all they are great to have for locating targets off grid, finding combat boosters, and also with the side benefit of giving the newer players an incredibly useful job which doesn't have too much of a hefty skill requirement. The more I think about it the more I am not concerned about the dscan immunity, and it gives a great reason to use combat recons in fleets. Good to see CCP shaking the game up.
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 81	Posted - 2014.12.19 19:39:00 - [1004] - Quote Quote: Is not about adapting because there is nothing to adapt to, Im not trying to run away from this people I need to know exact intel in order to decided if i can engage them or not. What i do in this scenarios -They are docked- I move on -They are cloaked- I know they have at least a decloaking delay -They are recons - ? there is nothing i can do I can look at each people that is in local and check their killboards but do i really want to waist all this time looking at people killboards at EVERY SYSTEM? not really it will make engagement happens much more slowly or not happen at all? Sure i can also dock up at everything station and take note of who is dock and not, but is not realistic for a ls pvp environment where is suppose to be fast pace. You think that maybe nerfing "fast" intel is the point of these changes? Also, the "nothing i can do" comment after suspecting recons in plex. Sure there is! Bring your own recons. They arent available to only a small group of people, but to everyone. Or combat probes. Confessor was JUST released with probe bonuses..HMMMMMM.. wonder why? Maybe a t3 dessie with probes is a good addition to small gangs. Also, not every system, every celestial, every sun and every plex is going to have recons in them. Stop creating strawman arguements.
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 215	Posted - 2014.12.19 19:39:55 - [1005] - Quote Combat Recons = Heisenberg's Theory of Uncertainty
Lvzbel Ixtab 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 41	Posted - 2014.12.19 19:43:26 - [1006] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: Quote: Is not about adapting because there is nothing to adapt to, Im not trying to run away from this people I need to know exact intel in order to decided if i can engage them or not. What i do in this scenarios -They are docked- I move on -They are cloaked- I know they have at least a decloaking delay -They are recons - ? there is nothing i can do I can look at each people that is in local and check their killboards but do i really want to waist all this time looking at people killboards at EVERY SYSTEM? not really it will make engagement happens much more slowly or not happen at all? Sure i can also dock up at everything station and take note of who is dock and not, but is not realistic for a ls pvp environment where is suppose to be fast pace. You think that maybe nerfing "fast" intel is the point of these changes? Also, the "nothing i can do" comment after suspecting recons in plex. Sure there is! Bring your own recons. They arent available to only a small group of people, but to everyone. Or combat probes. Confessor was JUST released with probe bonuses..HMMMMMM.. wonder why? Maybe a t3 dessie with probes is a good addition to small gangs. Also, not every system, every celestial, every sun and every plex is going to have recons in them. Stop creating strawman arguements. Sure that is the optimal thing but not in an environment where most people fly T1 frigs and T2 frigs and a few cruisers every now and them, your pushing everyone to bring their own recons what about all the low skill players that roam in FW LS space. Also making slower pvp is the last thing that Eve needs that is ground for that in 0.0 but not FW space
skeeter doodles Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 19:43:59 - [1007] - Quote My favorite part of all this is how it will slow down the pace of PVP in LS. Cause if eve needs anything, its definitely slower paced PVP setup. Stitch Kaneland wrote: ... or bring more people. ^^ also this, cause if there's another thing eve needs its more ships on field during fights. cause more ppl == GFs amirite?
Kevin Emoto No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 36	Posted - 2014.12.19 19:46:22 - [1008] - Quote Looking forward to abusing the hell out of this new 'feature' of combat recons. I see a few solid weeks of LS action until the PVE FW crowd gives up, but to hell with those farmers! This will definitely be another blow in the coffins of WH macro miners, AFK miners, hell, even paranoid, mega aware miners. \o/ Though I wish that CCP would stop turning great minmatar pvp ships into pve missile boats. Ah well, a once great PvP race continues it's, now two year, on going march to become the 'little caldari' of new eden.
Lvzbel Ixtab 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 41	Posted - 2014.12.19 19:49:56 - [1009] - Quote skeeter doodles wrote: My favorite part of all this is how it will slow down the pace of PVP in LS. Cause if eve needs anything, its definitely slower paced PVP setup. Stitch Kaneland wrote: ... or bring more people. ^^ also this, cause if there's another thing eve needs its more ships on field during fights. cause more ppl == GFs amirite? exactly you get the point, they can do all the intel, spying and all that slow intel in SOV 0.0 but is not a good thing for FW space and WH space
Marlona Sky Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 5748	Posted - 2014.12.19 19:51:14 - [1010] - Quote S'No Flake wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: Ripard Teg wrote: Antillie Sa'Kan wrote: Director Blackflame wrote: Never thought so many people would be terrified of Schrodinger's recon. I mean his proteus has been or not been lurking for quite some time. Yeah, especially when Schrodinger's Falcon has been or has not been lurking around for ages. You guys say that like that situation doesn't prevent fights. I assure you it does. I have heard the phrase "These guys always have Falcon alts" prevent a fight quite a lot. That's because ECM has no counter play. How come no one ever decides not to fight due to "These guys always have Arazu/Pilgrim/Rapier alts" ??? Because all other types of EW has some degree of counter play. ECM is a broken light switch mechanic that needs to be banished from the game completely and replaced with something else. Something that does 'something' as often as the other EW but leaves room for counter play. You again with ECM has no counter? I told you once. Keres can lock faster and damp the damn Falcon to send him out of the grid. Even Arazu can lock faster than Falcon because of the scan res. Because ECM will miss cycles, Falcon pilots fill a full rack of ECM mods and no sebo which means even a T1 Celestits will make the Falcon to leave the grid. Geezzzz fly the damn thing for a week or two and see how much time you spend on grid compared with bouncing from planets or BMs. You are missing my point completely. I have flow ECM platforms many times. The Paradox

Liet Ormand Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 8	Posted - 2014.12.19 19:51:17 - [1011] - Quote Kevin Emoto wrote: Looking forward to abusing the hell out of this new 'feature' of combat recons. I see a few solid weeks of LS action until the PVE FW crowd gives up, but to hell with those farmers! This will definitely be another blow in the coffins of WH macro miners, AFK miners, hell, even paranoid, mega aware miners. \o/ Though I wish that CCP would stop turning great minmatar pvp ships into pve missile boats. Ah well, a once great PvP race continues it's, now two year, on going march to become the 'little caldari' of new eden. Just curious... have you thought about secondary effects if, hypothetically, this does have the effect you describe? I mean specifically what the reduced amount of minerals coming in to the economic system will be and do if the "farmers" you describe no longer farm.
Arden Elenduil Unlimited Ripoff Works 240	Posted - 2014.12.19 19:53:41 - [1012] - Quote My only bloody gripe is with the people that are continuously asking for the curse to be armour tanked.... Why on earth would you want to do that??????? Other than that, good changes overall and especially the dscanner immunity. Love it.
Shilalasar Dead Sky Inc. 138	Posted - 2014.12.19 19:57:14 - [1013] - Quote Ripard Teg wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: CCP Rise wrote: 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. Literally what I have been saying for years. So happy to know you guys realize this too. Uh huh. And that logic will work fine the first two times a given FC encounters a situation. After that and forever after, he'll take imperfect information to mean there's more ships on grid than he sees and he won't engage because "yeah, I know we're only seeing three Thoraxes, but they've probably got three Rooks and a Lach just off grid and we don't have probes to check." Since you are back at goodposting will you give us a christmasgift and make a blogpost again?
Kevin Emoto No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 36	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:00:25 - [1014] - Quote Liet Ormand wrote: Kevin Emoto wrote: Looking forward to abusing the hell out of this new 'feature' of combat recons. I see a few solid weeks of LS action until the PVE FW crowd gives up, but to hell with those farmers! This will definitely be another blow in the coffins of WH macro miners, AFK miners, hell, even paranoid, mega aware miners. \o/ Though I wish that CCP would stop turning great minmatar pvp ships into pve missile boats. Ah well, a once great PvP race continues it's, now two year, on going march to become the 'little caldari' of new eden. Just curious... have you thought about secondary effects if, hypothetically, this does have the effect you describe? I mean specifically what the reduced amount of minerals coming in to the economic system will be and do if the "farmers" you describe no longer farm. Hey, I think this is perhaps one of the worst design decisions to come out of CCP in these dark last two years, but I'm a pirate who likes to hunt in LS and WH space and I know that this will be a mind numbingly effective tool while it lasts! And honestly, I love the tears of FW farmers when they lose a ship! Their sense of entitlement just makes me want to hunt them more and more. Now medium and large sites will invariably be avoided in short order, as well as LS and NS DED sites, now that I think about it. Now you can camp sites anywhere, and bubbles in NS and WH space with large fleets of tanky, invisible to DScan, instalocking combat recons. If you don't think that doesn't tickle the hearts of every pirate in LS, NS and WH space, you're kidding yourself. But don't worry, people who play eve to harvest and do industry are greedy, really really greedy, they'll find a way to get their 'easy money'. We'll continue the be able to kill the dumb ones for quite a while yet.
Mandrozolizus Hauptutus Pancerne Poziomki YARRR and CO 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:01:14 - [1015] - Quote The impact on the WH environment, FW, etc. was widely discussed so I guess there is not much to add. ButGÇª (and it mostly applies to LS enviroment): Although in some areas dscan immunity opens new dimensions for tactical solutions it obviously will be MOSTLY used by those who are afraid of direct confrontation and are engaging only when huge power advantage is on their side. I mean all sorts of gankers, campers and clocky killers who hunt in herds (herds, not fleets) for preferably much weaker casualties (casualties, not targets) . It is sad that CCP adds another tool to support this without proper concern of avilable counter (should I fly with probe scanner on Slicer or dualbox with a scout for dessie fights?, come on, ridiculous...). I started this game in 04/2014. The initial period was a nightmare cause it was not easy to understand mechanics, learn stuff etc. But somehow I survived and a IGÇÖm still wormGÇª I still remember that after I was killed for the 1st time in LS the assassin said GÇ£Watch d scan frequently.GÇ¥ Thanks to his advice IGÇÖm still playing cause this was a CRUTIAL lesson of survival in EVE for a newbee (and for any pilot indeed). Efficient d scanning gave the ability to avoid the most of the traps (including the stated above) if the pilot was careful enough . UNLIMITED (always and everywhere) d scan immunity cancels this basic rule. So although the idea is very, very tempting in my opinion and has lots of pros, should we perhaps consider some, tiny, local, littleGÇª limitations ?GÇª dear devs.
Liet Ormand Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 8	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:07:43 - [1016] - Quote Kevin Emoto wrote: Hey, I think this is perhaps one of the worst design decisions to come out of CCP in these dark last two years, but I'm a pirate who likes to hunt in LS and WH space and I know that this will be a mind numbingly effective tool while it lasts! And honestly, I love the tears of FW farmers when they lose a ship! Their sense of entitlement just makes me want to hunt them more and more. Now medium and large sites will invariably be avoided in short order, as well as LS and NS DED sites, now that I think about it. Now you can camp sites anywhere, and bubbles in NS and WH space with large fleets of tanky, invisible to DScan, instalocking combat recons. If you don't think that doesn't tickle the hearts of every pirate in LS, NS and WH space, you're kidding yourself. But don't worry, people who play eve to harvest and do industry are greedy, really really greedy, they'll find a way to get their 'easy money'. We'll continue the be able to kill the dumb ones for quite a while yet. You're kind of missing my point, though, I'm not talking about combat or how it affects the people involved. I'll re-state. If all the minerals currently being brought into the economy from WH farmers are cut off (as you expect they will be) then what will happen to the prices of everything made with them? For example, a rook is built with both Megacyte and Morphite. Do you think it's acceptable to pay considerably more for both as they become scarce?
Malcolm Faust Soldiers of Cthulhu 11	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:07:47 - [1017] - Quote This will make low/null/wh exploration obsolete. I can understand the need for something that can't be seen for FW, but I bet more than half of the use will be to hunt explorers. The only way around it is to use one for exploration, except they are severely hindered as an exploration ship. Should have given this bonus to T3 ships as a subsystem.
DFA200 Hard vs Soft 13	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:11:42 - [1018] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: Quote: Is not about adapting because there is nothing to adapt to, Im not trying to run away from this people I need to know exact intel in order to decided if i can engage them or not. What i do in this scenarios -They are docked- I move on -They are cloaked- I know they have at least a decloaking delay -They are recons - ? there is nothing i can do I can look at each people that is in local and check their killboards but do i really want to waist all this time looking at people killboards at EVERY SYSTEM? not really it will make engagement happens much more slowly or not happen at all? Sure i can also dock up at everything station and take note of who is dock and not, but is not realistic for a ls pvp environment where is suppose to be fast pace. You think that maybe nerfing "fast" intel is the point of these changes? Also, the "nothing i can do" comment after suspecting recons in plex. Sure there is! Bring your own recons. They arent available to only a small group of people, but to everyone. Or combat probes. Confessor was JUST released with probe bonuses..HMMMMMM.. wonder why? Maybe a t3 dessie with probes is a good addition to small gangs. Also, not every system, every celestial, every sun and every plex is going to have recons in them. Stop creating strawman arguements. The solution to everything cannot be escalation and raising the barrier to entry.
Kevin Emoto No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 36	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:16:09 - [1019] - Quote Liet Ormand wrote: Kevin Emoto wrote: Hey, I think this is perhaps one of the worst design decisions to come out of CCP in these dark last two years, but I'm a pirate who likes to hunt in LS and WH space and I know that this will be a mind numbingly effective tool while it lasts! And honestly, I love the tears of FW farmers when they lose a ship! Their sense of entitlement just makes me want to hunt them more and more. Now medium and large sites will invariably be avoided in short order, as well as LS and NS DED sites, now that I think about it. Now you can camp sites anywhere, and bubbles in NS and WH space with large fleets of tanky, invisible to DScan, instalocking combat recons. If you don't think that doesn't tickle the hearts of every pirate in LS, NS and WH space, you're kidding yourself. But don't worry, people who play eve to harvest and do industry are greedy, really really greedy, they'll find a way to get their 'easy money'. We'll continue the be able to kill the dumb ones for quite a while yet. You're kind of missing my point, though, I'm not talking about combat or how it affects the people involved. I'll re-state. If all the minerals currently being brought into the economy from WH farmers are cut off (as you expect they will be) then what will happen to the prices of everything made with them? For example, a rook is built with both Megacyte and Morphite. Do you think it's acceptable to pay considerably more for both as they become scarce? Oh, I get your point, but I don't care. I am sure that when cruisers cost 600M, that Rise will come back and we'll see that Megacyte and Morphite will become available in HS. Besides Rise has said that the feature is absolutely not going away...when someone puts their pride on the line like that they're not going to back down. Fear not industrialist, they'll put Megacyte and Morphite in HS (or some such other brilliant balance 'design' change) if that really becomes an issue. Your easy money is secure! Respect the 'Meta!" Respect it!
X Gallentius Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop 2703	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:19:03 - [1020] - Quote In summary: learn how to use probes. Fair enough.

Shelom Severasse AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing 45	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:20:46 - [1021] - Quote This immunity to dscan for combat recons feels really op. Also, the changes to the pilgrim seems to have a lot of overlap with the curse. Imo the whole point of the pilgrim having no neut range bonus was because it could GET INTO range without being seen via cov ops cloak. Now that the curse can only be seen by combat probes or if its already on grid, that role of the "cloaky" neut boat seems to have been tossed out with the bathwater. -1 for amarr recon redesign As a side note, with this new curse, who would ever bother with say a neut legion in w space? Its more costly, not as effective, and must have the covert reconfig sub. Id rather not turn the curse into the end all be all neut ship. I mean, the thing was borderline op anyway without these changes. The cap bonuses and speed bonuses across the board feel like a good idea though. Maybe not giving the cap bonuses to the amarr recons though and no speed bonuses to the minmatar. And maybe nerfing lock ranges for the caldari and gallente but give them both the speed and cap buffs. Idk. Those were my two cents
Thanatos Marathon Phoibe Enterprises 370	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:21:18 - [1022] - Quote X Gallentius wrote: In summary: learn how to use probes. Fair enough. Unfortunately it's more complicated than that because of all the trash in most systems.
Kevin Emoto No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 36	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:23:15 - [1023] - Quote Come on you PvE and Industry folk! You've been loving the Easy Button mentality of CCP since December of 2012. Why you bitching when PvP pilots get an Easy Button that increases the chance of you dying by at least a magnitude. The Easy Button giveth, the Easy Button taketh away.... Rise and Fozzie have been trying to eradicate the "Learning Curve" graph since the end 2012, and this is another 'design' decision... Their campaign was inevitably going to kick PvE in the balls too, deal with it.
Liet Ormand Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 8	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:23:17 - [1024] - Quote Kevin Emoto wrote: Oh, I get your point, but I don't care. I am sure that when cruisers cost 600M, that Rise will come back and we'll see that Megacyte and Morphite will become available in HS. Besides Rise has said that the feature is absolutely not going away...when someone puts their pride on the line like that they're not going to back down. Fear not industrialist, they'll put Megacyte and Morphite in HS (or some such other brilliant balance 'design' change) if that really becomes an issue. Your easy money is secure! I'll be interested to see if people applauding this change "care" when things become more expensive (if, in fact they do). By the way... I do not mine anything in WH space. Or anywhere else to make ISK, actually. It's interesting that you assumed I did, because it tells me something interesting about the mindset of everyone posting here.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 719	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:23:22 - [1025] - Quote I'm really looking forward to testing the viability of the ratting Rook. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Celthric Kanerian Ascendance Of New Eden Workers Trade Federation 158	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:24:40 - [1026] - Quote Invisible to d-scan? Goodbye wormhole and nullsec exploration, it was nice knowing you as long as it lasted.
maCH'EttE Mafia Redux 131	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:25:06 - [1027] - Quote Moac Tor wrote: Komodo Askold wrote: Aiyshimin wrote: Komodo Askold wrote: Combat Probes, people. Yes, you CAN see those Combat Recons entering system, waiting for you on a site, or escorting a friend who's running the site. Drop those probes and you'll see: if it appears on the probes and not on D-Scan, then it's a Combat Recon. That's it. And remember you can place probes all over the system, much further away than your D-Scan range, effectively covering by yourself a much bigger volume. You can even place 1 or more probes at each gate, wormhole or even some sites. And, that will warn you of any kind of ship that is not cloaked, even if you have no Local. And the insta-lock due to not being cloaked: every non-cloaked ship can do that. Even cloaky ships, if they pursposelly drop their cloak a few thousand kilometers before landing. So, stay away from those warp--in points and you'll have time to see it arrive and mash that Warp button. Especially when the incoming ship can't warp cloaked, such as... Combat Recons. And if it lands directly on you due to Combat Probes... you should have seen them in D-Scan and have acted accordingly. You have tools to know about incoming ships; use them and you'll avoid not only Combat Recons, but many other ships too. Now about the ship stats, I wonder if the Rook could get RLML's bonused too, or if that would be too much for it to have. Sisters Expanded Probe Launcher requires 210 CPU Fair point. Most of the ships used to run sites can fit it (and it will serve them not only for Combat Probes, but also Core Probes, and have much more of them loaded in the launcher, ths less reloads), but I also think their CPU usage is pretty high, especially now that more people would like to fit them in ships that are not D3's (Confessor and upcoming bros). I would vote for a CPU cost reduction for Expanded Probe Launchers. Make them still tight, but not that much. What about 180 CPU, for example? If you are that bothered about perfect intel then you will get a ship with a probe launcher cpu reduction such as a T3 with Emergent Locus Analyser; or you can get a dedicated combat scanner in your fleet, after all they are great to have for locating targets off grid, finding combat boosters, and also with the side benefit of giving the newer players an incredibly useful job which doesn't have too much of a hefty skill requirement. The more I think about it the more I am not concerned about the dscan immunity, and it gives a great reason to use combat recons in fleets. Good to see CCP shaking the game up. " or you can get a dedicated combat scanner in your fleet" haha, that is the funniest doodoo i have heard. Probes dont work dude, who are you kidding. SERIOUSLY. As soon as you probes, you cloak or warp and than do the same thing. By the time the probes are out and scanned to a 1au, the target is long gone, laughing at your dumb ass. What if they have a scout for your prober scout. CCP is out of their minds, Rise, is the worst ccp employee and so is fonzie. They have done nothing to improve this game but make it harder and stupid. A somone who comes from solo/small gang pvp should not so easyly poop on his roots.
Thanatos Marathon Phoibe Enterprises 370	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:27:37 - [1028] - Quote Kevin Emoto wrote: Come on you PvE and Industry folk! You've been loving the Easy Button mentality of CCP since December of 2012. Why you bitching when PvP pilots get an Easy Button that increases the chance of you dying by at least a magnitude. The Easy Button giveth, the Easy Button taketh away.... Rise and Fozzie have been trying to eradicate the "Learning Curve" graph since the end 2012, and this is another 'design' decision... Their campaign was inevitably going to kick PvE in the balls too, deal with it. Not sure which PVE and Indi folks you are talking to but most of the posts I have seen both for and against seem to be from people who engage in spaceship violence at least on a semi-regular basis. On my side I'm more disappointed in the likely hit to solo/small gang fights. Ganks will probably continue to happen at the rate they currently do, if not slightly higher, especially directly after the change is implemented.
maCH'EttE Mafia Redux 132	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:28:06 - [1029] - Quote Kevin Emoto wrote: Come on you PvE and Industry folk! You've been loving the Easy Button mentality of CCP since December of 2012. Why you bitching when PvP pilots get an Easy Button that increases the chance of you dying by at least a magnitude. The Easy Button giveth, the Easy Button taketh away.... Rise and Fozzie have been trying to eradicate the "Learning Curve" graph since the end 2012, and this is another 'design' decision... Their campaign was inevitably going to kick PvE in the balls too, deal with it. If you cared anything about pvp, you would sit and consider the implications of these changes and how it will effect you. It really is not hard to catch ratting carrier or any other ship these days.
Moac Tor Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation 20	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:30:39 - [1030] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: The Pilgrim. Opinions seem mixed, gaining neut range is obviously nice but many of you still feel that giving up neut strength is too harsh, or that some other added power is needed (more damage for instance). Will get back to you on this as soon as possible but it's possible that we will make adjustments. 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? Antarre Tuure wrote:* you've just pushed the Curse into an effectively more cloaky ship with the no dcan combat recon than the Pilgrim and then gimped the one thing the Pilgrim was good at (neut amount) I find myself agreeing with a lot of the points raised above. After some time to reflect, I think removing the Nos/Neut amount bonus is going to needlessly kill a lot of the current applications of the pilgrim and replace it with a completely different role which is dubious as to whether it will actually improve usage. For me the nuet/nos amount should be fundamental, and range a secondary consideration. At 20% extra range per level you could keep the current 20% amount bonus and still offer the pilgrim a little extra room to play with if you want to keep yourself out of scram and web range whilst still applying all your ewar; not sure if you are able to cram that many bonuses into a single hull though as I can't see any of the other bonuses being dropped.

Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE 802	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:32:44 - [1031] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: 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. but that is a fight that no one really wants to get into, and can more or less already be done with falcons. Rooks can more or less do damage too. Domination by Ewar usually makes for very unfun fights. will be interesting to see what happens, and with the quicker cycles hopefully an eye will be kept on this. I'll join the chorus asking CCP, don't take my fancy names away from me! In the name of the Limos, the Malkuth, and the Arbalest, so help me pod - Mara Rinn
Kevin Emoto No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 36	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:34:30 - [1032] - Quote maCH'EttE wrote: Kevin Emoto wrote: Come on you PvE and Industry folk! You've been loving the Easy Button mentality of CCP since December of 2012. Why you bitching when PvP pilots get an Easy Button that increases the chance of you dying by at least a magnitude. The Easy Button giveth, the Easy Button taketh away.... Rise and Fozzie have been trying to eradicate the "Learning Curve" graph since the end 2012, and this is another 'design' decision... Their campaign was inevitably going to kick PvE in the balls too, deal with it. If you cared anything about pvp, you would sit and consider the implications of these changes and how it will effect you. It really is not hard to catch ratting carrier or any other ship these days. chuckles like I said earlier in this thread, this is perhaps one of the worst 'design' decisions to come out of the Fozzie Rise experiment... that being said, I don't decide the game, I just decide month over month to keep paying for it. Regardless of the wisdom or lack thereof in this 'design' decision, this one benefits me in the short term. I'm capable of flying these ships, I have friends who are as well and damn if I don't decide to capitalize on it while the people I hunt scramble and try to find some way to counter. Farmers will buy second accounts and set up covert ops to watch and scout for them, NS and LS people will be more careful about setting up ping spots around gates, and easy money people will go back to highsec to be ganked by CODE. This game has survived the past two years.... I'm sure it's can survive a couple more years of the Fozzie Rise experiment.
rhiload Feron-drake TURN LEFT The Camel Empire 24	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:35:32 - [1033] - Quote Seeing all this small-gang pvp players who mostly never post on forums are actually posting on a balance thread. this is a sign that these changes will be DEVASTATING towards the small gang pvpers. also rip medium plexing in fw. going to have fun warping into 2 curses in my vexor. dont let these changes go through, there is a reason why people are actually taking time to post on this forum and you act like you blatantly ignore what these people are actually saying.
Malcolm Faust Soldiers of Cthulhu 12	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:39:21 - [1034] - Quote This will break exploration. "Use combat probes?" Q. Can you probe and hack a container simultaneously? A. No "Use a scout?" I've never heard of an exploration fleet, not once. Not ever.
Moac Tor Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation 21	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:39:58 - [1035] - Quote maCH'EttE wrote: Probes dont work dude, who are you kidding. SERIOUSLY. As soon as you probes, you cloak or warp and than do the same thing. By the time the probes are out and scanned to a 1au, the target is long gone, laughing at your dumb ass. What if they have a scout for your prober scout. chuckles" combat probes do work my friend, if you are good your probes should not be appearing on your opponents dscan range for more than than one cycle. "What if they have a scout for your prober scout". Looks at maCH'EttE quizzically"
Niskin League of the Lost 167	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:44:51 - [1036] - Quote Malcolm Faust wrote: "Use combat probes?" Q. Can you probe and hack a container simultaneously? A. No Actually you can. You only need to be looking at the solar system map to move the probes. If you set them up around yourself in a defensive layout you can click scan while hacking and still see the results. It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow
McChicken Combo HalfMayo The Happy Meal 126	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:45:32 - [1037] - Quote I think it's a missed opportunity to not have removed the targeting delay after decloaking. I'd also have enjoyed the Pilgrim in the same role as before (same bonuses), just tankier with those T2 resists I do understand the motivation for the change though. Right now it's stuck in largely the same fit. 1600 plate and AB. With the range bonus you'd want an MWD, and Cap Booster instead of the web, which means dropping to an 800mm plate. It could work out, but I did like that the Amarr recons were an in-your-face option for the Recon class. Nice changes overall, I probably would not think so as a ratter though ~ Bookmarks in overview ~ Fleet improvements
Kevin Emoto No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 36	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:45:34 - [1038] - Quote Marcel Devereux wrote: What about extending the trend for the dual weapon systems to the Amarr and Gallente lines. Make all the cloaky recons be turret based (Pilgrim, Falcon, Arazu, and Rapier) and make the combat recons the other racial weapon system: Curse: Drones Rook: Missiles Lachesis: Drones Huginn: Missiles I know there are issues with the manufacturers of the ships, but can't we over look that for some cool game play rather than it being a game design restriction? Also since space objects can't you easily switch the skins/models to accommodate this? EDIT: In fact wouldn't this give them a weakness to counter their disruption? Drones can be destroyed. Missiles can be smartbombed. this ^ Also, to Fozzie Rise, what do you guys have against projectile weapon ships? I realize that you're trying to reduce the distinctiveness between the races, but us minmatar pilots love our PvP weapons...you know Projectile weapons.... if we wanted to fly PvE boats, we'd have picked to fly caldari missle boats years ago.
Kevin Emoto No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 36	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:46:22 - [1039] - Quote Niskin wrote: Malcolm Faust wrote: "Use combat probes?" Q. Can you probe and hack a container simultaneously? A. No Actually you can. You only need to be looking at the solar system map to move the probes. If you set them up around yourself in a defensive layout you can click scan while hacking and still see the results. "watch as his fingers never leave his hands! it's maaaagic!"
Tyrant v012 Catastrophic Operations Black Legion. 2	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:46:49 - [1040] - Quote Never posted on this forum before. Just came to say.... Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners Is BS.

Ms Michigan Aviation Professionals for EVE Rim Worlds Protectorate 56	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:49:19 - [1041] - Quote Petrus Blackshell wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners While I appreciate the gumption it takes to propose such a change, it is completely out of whack with everything else in the game, and I believe will be seriously overpowered, especially combined with the now tankier and more combat-capable combat recons. Until now, the only non-dscannable threat was covert-ops ships. All of these (with some few exceptions like the Stratios) are mostly utility ships with poor combat ability. They are now being joined by combat recons, which were already dangerous enough before their combat ability buff. They can singlehandedly turn the tide of fights, which means that the best defense against them is forewarning and information -- a defense that is not available anymore. I fear that this change will cause combat recons to enter the "Because of Falcon" role of ship that is used as an "ace up your sleeve" to remove any chance of losing a fight. At least the Falcon doesn't contribute damage itself, and cannot tank very well. These new combat recons can do both of those. That ability will not be used for good fights. Being unscannable is a ship ability that is too powerful to be a passive "role bonus". If anything, it should be a cloak-like module that requires a serious trade-off to fit, which can serve as a counter-balance for the extra tactical ability it grants a ship -- in the same way that fitting a cloak gimps a fit. Giving it as a raw role bonus to ships that have extremely powerful ewar, and now good tank and damage, is just too much. The changes to Force Recons are good, though. I like them. I have to log-in and comment on this change. I agree 110% with the above poster. My initial reaction was WTF....non-Dscanable? I am sorry CCP but this is OP even when not combined with the changes. This will make Recons the MUST have ship to which there is no viable counter.... EVE is about RISK Vs. REWARD. There is no risk on recon's now. SORRY - you are wrong. (No! Combat probing is not a viable check/balance for this because the ships can harass and warp around to safes all day and basically one guy can shut down a system, FW complex, WH, etc etc) Total BULL$H!T CCP - Maybe I could see this bonus if it was a module (like the above poster said) that only recon's could fit...This would trade off with not having a cloak but the element of surprise ON GRID. Otherwise - F#@$@ this. Give the Recon a module that allows it to not show up on D-Scan but then make it to where it can tackle (with tank) but not much else. Then I could see a balance maybe but to do all three is OP. I have been very happy with the changes as of late, but this sounds like a stupid CCP RISE crack-brained idea and I am seriously considering unsubscribing if you at least don't comment on this one.
Tonto Auri Vhero' Multipurpose Corp 247	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:54:18 - [1042] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Was it weed or pills? The two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity. ---áHarlan Ellison
Kevin Emoto No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 36	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:56:03 - [1043] - Quote Tonto Auri wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Was it weed or pills? *whispers "dude, the answer is blowing in your sig!"
Niskin League of the Lost 167	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:58:32 - [1044] - Quote 52 pages in and it all boils down to this: Combat Recons with D-scan immunity are still less of a threat than cloaky T3's in all but FW plexes specifically because of the block on cloaking in them. Everywhere else, in every area of space, the cloaky T3 is more dangerous to the solo player. So yes, for FW players this will hurt a bit, mostly the solo guys. For everybody else there is still a greater risk than what is being introduced in Proteus. As a solo player myself, I empathize, but you have to understand that game balance can't be focused on solo play. Especially in FacWar, where you are specifically trying to achieve a goal alongside other players, whether you choose to coordinate with them or not. Maybe they will play with the ship limitations in sites because of this, who knows. If you are solo then I'd recommend finding a Combat Recon that serves your purposes and plex in that. Fit creatively and watch your overview and you likely will never get caught, even by Lachesis's. Yes, I'm saying to fit Warp Core Stabs on your recon, that Lachesis isn't going to have unlimited points, and if they fit scrams their range is even shorter. At that point just be happy that cloaking isn't allowed in FW plexes, because when that T3 decloaks he's gonna hit you with a bump and he's gonna have the DPS and tank to ruin your day without ruining his own. TL;DR: Plexes are still safer than everywhere else, cloaky bumping T3's hurt. It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow
Hamish McRothimay Norse Complex Inc 2	Posted - 2014.12.19 20:59:48 - [1045] - Quote Malcolm Faust wrote: This will break exploration. "Use combat probes?" Q. Can you probe and hack a container simultaneously? A. No "Use a scout?" I've never heard of an exploration fleet, not once. Not ever. I use a Buzzard it has Covert Cloak, Combat Probes, Relic & Data analyzers and a scan range finding array - The main problem now being the m3 of hull section drops
Zenmaster Aihaken Tsero Corporations Absolute Darkness 4	Posted - 2014.12.19 21:01:06 - [1046] - Quote Solution: Every time you get killed and a Combat Recon is involved, like say in FW, WH or solo, submit a bug ticket to CCP about key game-play being completely broken and in need of a fix. Refusing to pay for a broken game is also an option. To those arguing that Cov-Ops isn't visible on D-Scan either: Cov-Ops ships can be seen on D-Scan if you just bother to pay attention. Reason: They have to uncloak and recloak at certain times, and even if you fail to catch them when they enter or leave a system, they will still have other tell-tale signs, like, say: "Hm, who does those probes belong to, anyone?" "Well, son, it's probably that cloaky who safe-logs off in our hole." This makes it possible to know whether a cloaky is in your system, regardless of if you spotted him on D-Scan the first time. Additionally cloaked ships suffer certain drawbacks, and if they're really unlucky they may be decloaked by other ships, or by venturing to close to things floating about in space. Not so with a non-D-scannable Combat Recon. In fact, mastering D-Scan is a real-life skill (as opposed to a numbered level in an in-game skillbook). However having to put out combat probes at regular intervals, or absolutely needing to multi-box a dedicated alt just for that one thing; it's just bad game design, man. Popping combat probes does not require real life skill unless you're trying to stay hidden. Absolutely having to do it just to survive in certain areas just adds tedium to the game, and not mastery like D-Scan does. Of course I'd love to fly one of these recon ships. Hell, if it's truly put in, I guess I'm just going to have to do it. Will I enjoy killing in it? Certainly. I've always wanted to play God, so I guess this is my chance. (Might want to make a quick buck trading them too, cuz these sucker will only go up in price now.) Will it be a completely OP and unfair advantage? Most decidedly! Will it be worth anybodys money? Certainly not. If it truly is as bad as it sounds, it completely breaks the game. Here's a tac I'd use to hunt hackers and small plex runners: 1. You'll need a minimum of two guys. A dude in a Cloaky. A dude in a Combat Recon. 2. The Cloaky will slow boat close to the target. 3. Then the Combat Recon will warp in. 4. Profit! There's no way to notice it when it warps in, so it'll be like swatting a blind fly. Three ways out of this (or make it a more livable feature): Give the Combat Recon a significant nerf when using this ability, make it into a special module that nerf other abilities just like the Cov-Ops Cloak does, or just get rid of this completely OP and game breaking ability all together.
Maekchu Black Rebel Rifter Club The Devil's Tattoo 97	Posted - 2014.12.19 21:01:29 - [1047] - Quote The dscan change is great. At last, some tools are given to the aggressor. Instead of always having all the odds stacked in favor of the defender. Position on grid will now matter. You cannot just mindlessly sit on a beacon and expect to be safe. But if you move yourself in such a way, that they need to burn to you to get a point, and your prealigned, you are pretty safe against this. People say, this is a nerf for solo PvP. I say it is a huge buff. Now, we will finally be able to jump someone without having to use cloaky ships. It might have some issues with FW, but who cares about that anyways. It's just a huge farm-fest these days.
Ms Michigan Aviation Professionals for EVE Rim Worlds Protectorate 56	Posted - 2014.12.19 21:07:55 - [1048] - Quote Bob Shaftoes wrote: Yeah , don't really like these changes very much I am afraid Recons are force multipliers , having them be insanely tanky and immune to d-scan is borderline broken because their inherent fragility was a balancing effect in of itself. The cloaky ones certainly should not have the resist bonus , but the combat ones having better resists is a bit more warranted due to their front-line role. I would still pre nerf the resists to stop them from being too powerful with logistics. The D-scan thing is just an awful awful idea. No ship should be exempt from d-scan , especially ships that have the potential to turn fights on their own due to powerful ewar bonuses. Lots of gatecampers are going to sit with combat recons off grid and warp them in when a fight starts. Unlike de-cloaking there is no lock delay or any downside for doing this The cap and speed changes are awesome. Those were two things that were really holding back the class Pilgrim getting a range bonus finally is great. I dunno what the deal is with the huggin and rapier weapon systems. Surely the huggin would be the missile boat as it started out with missiles while the rapier mostly used projectiles? Edit : Now that I have had a chance to think about it , I think a better "flavour" role bonus for combat recon ships should be a combat probe fitting reduction bonus , similar to what is on the confessor. This will allow them to utilize their utility highs to fit expanded probe launchers and would provide a useful fleet role. I like this post. Good ideas by someone that knows their stuff too.
Ines Tegator Towels R Us 525	Posted - 2014.12.19 21:10:34 - [1049] - Quote Maekchu wrote: The dscan change is great. At last, some tools are given to the aggressor. Instead of always having all the odds stacked in favor of the defender. Except it won't. As I pointed out earlier, it's just going to make more people focus on Local as their primary Intel tool. Expect your targets to safe up as soon as you enter system instead of waiting for you to approach their plex/anom/whatever. Even more then they already did that is. WH's a different story ofc. - Mission Overhaul - Bridging the PVP / PVE Gap - If the game stops teaching people to fear lowsec, maybe people will start going there?
Sturm Gewehr Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 55	Posted - 2014.12.19 21:12:49 - [1050] - Quote 2/10 Small gang and solo roaming is about to get a lot more tedious and risk averse. Facwar (and everywhere really) is going to be full of noobship/inty/covops alts warping to check every plex and every gate or celestial to check for recons and warping into every medium before anybody considers entering with actual PvP ships. The game already favors taking OGB and alt accounts just to set up fights to create content with a small gang. Players who can't be asked to accommodate these changes and bring alt accounts currently make do by using DSCAN and common sense are going to be forced out. These players also represent a large portion of content generators and will be missed. This change is going to be detrimental to any newer pilots (experience or time in game) trying to get their feet wet into small scale pvp. It is going to set the bar of entry to pvp even higher. The only counterplay is having extra sets of eyes everywhere. Being vigilant with DSCAN doesn't count for anything in regards to these new ships. Fix DSCAN and address the issues with these hulls players are actually concerned about (there are some good quality of life changes this time but far too much broken and unnecessary changes as well) before taking the lazy/sloppy route making big gamebreaking changes to make it look like something is being done. There will be hordes of unscannable gank fleets with little counterplay ready to end player gaming sessions with them being neuted, damped, jammed, webbed, painted, scrammed and tracking disrupted. This is going to be like the inty blobs after the added interdiction nullified bonus but with actual combat ships that you can't see coming unless you have eyes on grid with EHP better than HACs. At least with cloaky recons there is a delay which balances out the fact that force multiplying ships can suddenly appear out of thin air. They already fill the role of ganking/camping/stalking. Keep the covop recons in that role and make the other recons viable for larger scale conflict like people are asking for. It still sucks for small gang because of how strong recons already are (a lot of us intentionally don't comp them in gang because they scare away fights and remove content for us) but a lot of gameplay styles would benefit from that change. Recons already get HAC EHP because they have more slots to dedicate to tank (for shield shield). I like reducing cap for warp but increasing the cap is a bit much and removes too much counterplay from already really strong ships. They are already hard to jam/damp (unlike T3 recons) and have the ability to force multiply from great range. This power creep really needs to be checked. I know a lot of people are already planning to abuse this not in celebration but in protest and to display how gamebreaking it is. Things were on a good track for a while in regards to getting a lot of interest back in the game from a lot of former and current small gang types but these changes validate their leaving and are discouraging them from playing.

Maekchu Black Rebel Rifter Club The Devil's Tattoo 97	Posted - 2014.12.19 21:14:25 - [1051] - Quote Ines Tegator wrote: Maekchu wrote: The dscan change is great. At last, some tools are given to the aggressor. Instead of always having all the odds stacked in favor of the defender. Except it won't. As I pointed out earlier, it's just going to make more people focus on Local as their primary Intel tool. Expect your targets to safe up as soon as you enter system instead of waiting for you to approach their plex/anom/whatever. Even more then they already did that is. WH's a different story ofc. Depends what space you fly in. As a lowseccer, you can't always wait till a system is completely empty to do stuff, since many of the systems often have atleast a few characters in them. So this will give the opportunity to jump ratters etc. For nullsec, I hope they just remove the local completely. The space is too empty most of the times, that people will just dock up when someone enters. So yeah, here I see your point.
Kevin Emoto No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 37	Posted - 2014.12.19 21:27:41 - [1052] - Quote Sturm Gewehr wrote: 2/10 Small gang and solo roaming is about to get a lot more tedious and risk averse. Facwar (and everywhere really) is going to be full of noobship/inty/covops alts warping to check every plex and every gate or celestial to check for recons and warping into every medium before anybody considers entering with actual PvP ships. The game already favors taking OGB and alt accounts just to set up fights to create content with a small gang. Players who can't be asked to accommodate these changes and bring alt accounts currently make do by using DSCAN and common sense are going to be forced out. These players also represent a large portion of content generators and will be missed. This change is going to be detrimental to any newer pilots (experience or time in game) trying to get their feet wet into small scale pvp. It is going to set the bar of entry to pvp even higher. The only counterplay is having extra sets of eyes everywhere. Being vigilant with DSCAN doesn't count for anything in regards to these new ships. Fix DSCAN and address the issues with these hulls players are actually concerned about (there are some good quality of life changes this time but far too much broken and unnecessary changes as well) before taking the lazy/sloppy route making big gamebreaking changes to make it look like something is being done. There will be hordes of unscannable gank fleets with little counterplay ready to end player gaming sessions with them being neuted, damped, jammed, webbed, painted, scrammed and tracking disrupted. This is going to be like the inty blobs after the added interdiction nullified bonus but with actual combat ships that you can't see coming unless you have eyes on grid with EHP better than HACs. At least with cloaky recons there is a delay which balances out the fact that force multiplying ships can suddenly appear out of thin air. They already fill the role of ganking/camping/stalking. Keep the covop recons in that role and make the other recons viable for larger scale conflict like people are asking for. It still sucks for small gang because of how strong recons already are (a lot of us intentionally don't comp them in gang because they scare away fights and remove content for us) but a lot of gameplay styles would benefit from that change. Recons already get HAC EHP because they have more slots to dedicate to tank (for shield shield). I like reducing cap for warp but increasing the cap is a bit much and removes too much counterplay from already really strong ships. They are already hard to jam/damp (unlike T3 recons) and have the ability to force multiply from great range. This power creep really needs to be checked. I know a lot of people are already planning to abuse this not in celebration but in protest and to display how gamebreaking it is. Things were on a good track for a while in regards to getting a lot of interest back in the game from a lot of former and current small gang types but these changes validate their leaving and are discouraging them from playing. There's NOTHING wrong with things being hard for new players, and challenging for the rest of us. Honestly, of all the repercussions from this change that I anticipate, increased challenge is greatly welcomed. The power creep comment is however a good point, it really seems that when Fozzie Rise uses the term "balancing" they really tend to err on the side of OP. I know that WoW developers do the same thing, and promise to aggressively use the nerf bat over the next several cycles...which they fail at..miserably. However the realization that EVE devs appear to try to be keeping up with the WoW devs fills me with a bit of dread. What's next, a new fifth race? Pandari warriors with their faction Monastic Battlecruisers? If the past is an indicator, this will initially benefit large fleet corps like Hard Knocks who have very aggressive fleet theory crafters... then progressive lowsec pirates like Missy Loreli who will inevitably find remarkable ways to turn this into a mind numbingly effective spiderweb tool, then eventually work its way to Null Sec alliances who'll decide it's too much effort and just continue dieing horribly at the end of pipebombs. The beauty of these short cycle releases is that in 4-6 weeks this will all be forgotten in the emo rage storm over the next product of the Fozzie Rise experiment. Don't forget, these forum wars also fit into the 'interaction' category that the current developers crave from us! Yay, we're all winning.... just remember, in EvE you can be Elite, and you can be Dangerous, but to be both, you have to go somewhere else!
Nyjil Lizaru Aideron Robotics 34	Posted - 2014.12.19 21:29:43 - [1053] - Quote Niskin wrote: 52 pages in and it all boils down to this: Combat Recons with D-scan immunity are still less of a threat than cloaky T3's in all but FW plexes specifically because of the block on cloaking in them. Everywhere else, in every area of space, the cloaky T3 is more dangerous to the solo player. So yes, for FW players this will hurt a bit, mostly the solo guys. For everybody else there is still a greater risk than what is being introduced in Proteus. As a solo player myself, I empathize, but you have to understand that game balance can't be focused on solo play. Especially in FacWar, where you are specifically trying to achieve a goal alongside other players, whether you choose to coordinate with them or not. Maybe they will play with the ship limitations in sites because of this, who knows. If you are solo then I'd recommend finding a Combat Recon that serves your purposes and plex in that. Fit creatively and watch your overview and you likely will never get caught, even by Lachesis's. Yes, I'm saying to fit Warp Core Stabs on your recon, that Lachesis isn't going to have unlimited points, and if they fit scrams their range is even shorter. At that point just be happy that cloaking isn't allowed in FW plexes, because when that T3 decloaks he's gonna hit you with a bump and he's gonna have the DPS and tank to ruin your day without ruining his own. TL;DR: Plexes are still safer than everywhere else, cloaky bumping T3's hurt. And cloaky bumping T3's cost a LOT more than a recon. If someone risks a T3, they are 'earning' an advantage by risking a larger pile of ISK as well as skillpoints. But to give close to the same level of reward/power for a sub-200M ISK hull? Risk-v-reward-v-effort is out of whack, IMO. I'll fly the recons in FW, but it will be because I feel that I have no choice - that's not a good design. Nyjil's corollary to Malcanis' Law: -á "Any attempt by CCP to smooth the learning curve of EVE Online will be carried out via the addition of extra factors and 'features' such that there is a net increase in complexity."
IcyMidnight Valkyries of Night Of Sound Mind 8	Posted - 2014.12.19 21:30:46 - [1054] - Quote Recons should also never appear in local.
Please Turn The Tuskers The Tuskers Co. 31	Posted - 2014.12.19 21:31:10 - [1055] - Quote On the D-Scan immunity As one of my corp mates said: "this seems like a weird idea; it seems CCP run out of ideas and they said - let's try a weird one this time". I couldn't agree more with what he said. I'm pretty sure the people that enjoy "ganking" as a game-play style love this change(I'm just not sure that another tool for this activity was really needed). I just can't see the solo and the small gang PvP lovers(the ones that love the "gud gites" and not ganks) liking this change. It breaks the more powerful tool they have/had: D-Scan(I guess the only good news is the fact that you can get a sisters combat probes on a confessor, lol). I'm so "excited" to see how this change will affect the Eve PvP streams, which are for the most part centered around PvP action at FW plexes. On Balancing things(in general and on recons in particular): It's really sad to see that the balancing process is unidirectional: let's buff everything and keep doing it over and over again. I feel recons were already unique and in a good place when looked at them in zoom-in mode. The zoom-out was/is the problem, mainly the fact that T3-Cruisers are preferred over everything(especially in small/medium gang context) because for some reason CCP decided to make them good at ***** everything. So, as long as you have little risk of dying they are the preferred ship for almost every activity. To make justice for recons a T3-Cruisers nerf(as in don't let them overlap with recons unique abilities) is/was more apropiate. On people pretending to be solo PvP'ers:** Get the hell out. When 90% of your kills are the result of gate-camping just shut up, please ...
Kevin Emoto No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 37	Posted - 2014.12.19 21:33:10 - [1056] - Quote Maekchu wrote: For nullsec, I hope they just remove the local completely. The space is too empty most of the times, that people will just dock up when someone enters. So yeah, here I see your point. For nullsec and for lowsec.... death to local list, to be honest, it provides no real game value anywhere other than showing off our cool avatar....head.
Lvzbel Ixtab 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 41	Posted - 2014.12.19 21:38:15 - [1057] - Quote At least it should be consider to have a D-scan immunity up to a certain distance for example 3 AU or at the maximum 1AU that will force scouts to actually get closer to gather intel, but complete D-scan immunity is just crazy
Verdis deMosays Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 76	Posted - 2014.12.19 21:38:28 - [1058] - Quote As a wormhole resident, I approve this change of Combat Recons! 5 Rooks, please... ambush artist signing off
Theronth Valarax V0LTA Triumvirate. 83	Posted - 2014.12.19 21:39:43 - [1059] - Quote EHP and stat buffs are enough if not too much already. Additional dscan bonus is irrelevant in mid to big scale engagements, where its ridiculously screwing over small scale and solo PVP. I guess that ISB ban has to be compensated with alt eyes everywhere. Check out my Youtube channel
Loan--Wolf Utter-Chaos 18	Posted - 2014.12.19 21:39:47 - [1060] - Quote About half of eve that read this just jizzed there self the other half **** i love it they been in need of some love for a long time now just wondering and have been for a good while how come on T2 ships it has a bonus per skill level for that class ship like 5 % per frig level lets say when you have to have level 5 to even fly the ship how come not just 25 % ?

Dani Maulerant Order of the Valkyrie LOADED-DICE 9	Posted - 2014.12.19 21:41:56 - [1061] - Quote If this is going forward, then you should also take away a combat recon's ability to Dscan around themselves. Just like the scan inhibitor deployable. Same effect, being invisible to dscan, but at a balancing cost that already has precedent.
CheesusCrust HildCo Interplanetar Villore Accords 15	Posted - 2014.12.19 21:42:09 - [1062] - Quote Some more thoughts from a solo/smallscale fw perspective: I see a lot of "You are just crying because all you fw folks want to do is farm. This will counter that". Contrary to what people have been saying here I am not too worried about potentialy getting ganked in medium plexes. I am more afraid that this could actually increase farming. I would be completely fine with something like this: I see a potential target in a medium plex. I take the fight and you have a recon there. I probably get exploded. Similarly, I take a fight and you warp in your recon. Granted, I lose the short opportunity to dscan it using the gate. But in such a baiting situation I'm probably under full tackle and committed anyway. After that, I'll give you a gf and move on. Just like with a Falcon alt sitting cloaked off the 30km decloak range inside the plex or coming in mid-fight, I now have a lossmail with a lot of intel I can use for future engagements at the cost of my ship. I can then share this intel with my corp/alliance/militia and then people can adapt to this information. There's not much difference between cov ops and combat recon alts in that regard. If you are running solo, fitting for combat scanner probes is not viable for most fits and hulls. You could bring one in your cargo and refit at a friendly station or mobile depot but that's all time I would not take of my roam for a "could be maybe" scenario. For me personally, I'd rather take a few punches, gather that intel about you and keep the pace up. Also some things to consider: If you are roaming without a scout you are much more likely to run into a stray gatecamp than getting Recon'd in a random plex. As large plexes can be warped to directly and thus essentialy have a 200km diameter warp in region I see no problem here. You could just as well be ganked by cloaked support. The main source for a gank opportunity, the medium plex, must be opened for someone to be inside. That fact plus local should give you some idea about potential danger. But what I am actually a little worried about is that you could then actively farm these plexes undetected, a symptom that was addressed through the 30km decloak. Before the cloak changes, the amount of farming was insane. If you give people an easy way to make money like that they will do it anyway they can. Maybe even if that means using a stabbed combat recon. For the sake of argument, let's also say that the combat recon pilot running tons of plexes is not stabbed. Having the benefit of stealth and combat ability alone is not a problem, but adding to that the capability of earning heaps of ISK is a bit much. In my oppinion, if you are sitting in a plex running the timer and making a butt-load of cash farming these sites, you should be a visible target. Even before, when you could cloak inside the timer range, that meant it would stop running it. A counter to this thought would be the limitation to mediums and larges, which is good. Also, training a farming alt just for a stabbed combat recon is skill intensive. Especially compared to a cloaky t1 frig you could farm in before. So, from an fw point of view, I'd say let these changes roll in and keep an open eye for changing metas. o7
Caldari 5 D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F. S.A.S 370	Posted - 2014.12.19 21:43:55 - [1063] - Quote Wow I hadn't looked at F&ID in a couple of days and all of a sudden massive thread on Recons. Haven't read the thread yet, but have read the blue posts. CCP Rise any chance of adding the PvE bonus for Virus Strength to the Covert Recons? I had mentioned this to you in person at Eve Down Under.
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 217	Posted - 2014.12.19 21:44:58 - [1064] - Quote Malcolm Faust wrote: This will break exploration. "Use combat probes?" Q. Can you probe and hack a container simultaneously? A. No "Use a scout?" I've never heard of an exploration fleet, not once. Not ever. CCP wants players to interact with other players. Fleet up with friends. We do it all the time in wormholes. We work together to accomplish our goals. If you go solo, then you're on your own. There's a fleet function in EVE for a reason. Plus, did no one pay attention to the exploration trailer? Think it was the Rubicon one. Those explorers were in a fleet. They worked together. People always bitching about that EVE is a MMO, it should be played with friends etc etc, then they ***** because they might need a scout with them when they go exploring. Learn to adapt.
Kevin Emoto No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 38	Posted - 2014.12.19 21:46:07 - [1065] - Quote Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: At least it should be consider to have a D-scan immunity up to a certain distance for example 3 AU or at the maximum 1AU that will force scouts to actually get closer to gather intel, but complete D-scan immunity is just crazy This actually makes more sense....actually, make it combat recons cannot be descanned beyond 1.5 au, or 0.5 au..... the concept of dscan immunity is novel, and as a person who's always loved the recon class, kind of exciting to fly one with this kind of ability... but to have a ship class like recons to be dscan immune at all ranges is truly OP. and as an earlier poster hinted at... Leave the rapier as a projectile turret ship and the huginn as a missle boat, changing that around to just change it around is kinda silly. In each and every release the Fozzie Rise nuttiness brings me one step closer to being able to warp cloaked in a Sin!
Nivek Steyer Unknown Crusade 35	Posted - 2014.12.19 21:48:21 - [1066] - Quote I must agree with the above comments. All of the development on not seeing the targets on the scanner in sounds so much like WH space except for the local chat part. CCP get it over with remove local from null and low sec like you have been saying for years. I find it amazing that your trying so hard to go around the issue just remove the local and eve will be a better place for PvP. It really seems like CCP is trying to push for small scale PvP that happens in WH space so just do it already!
Ines Tegator Towels R Us 525	Posted - 2014.12.19 22:01:32 - [1067] - Quote Maekchu wrote: Ines Tegator wrote: Maekchu wrote: The dscan change is great. At last, some tools are given to the aggressor. Instead of always having all the odds stacked in favor of the defender. Except it won't. As I pointed out earlier, it's just going to make more people focus on Local as their primary Intel tool. Expect your targets to safe up as soon as you enter system instead of waiting for you to approach their plex/anom/whatever. Even more then they already did that is. WH's a different story ofc. Depends what space you fly in. As a lowseccer, you can't always wait till a system is completely empty to do stuff, since many of the systems often have atleast a few characters in them. So this will give the opportunity to jump ratters etc. For nullsec, I hope they just remove the local completely. The space is too empty most of the times, that people will just dock up when someone enters. So yeah, here I see your point. Agreed about nullsec. The problem is that Dscan is only so-so as an intel tool, and the vast majority of Nullsec fleet doctrine depends on Local as an intel tool. Can you imagine a roaming gang when you don't even know if targets are in system or not? An entire class of small corp gameplay will evaporate. CCP even acknowledged this (back newar when I joined, when people started asking for WH style local in nullsec) and said they won't remove/change local until they have replaced it with better intel tools. The problem with the recon change is it makes Dscan even less reliable; Local will end up picking up the balance. This makes the issues with too-good intel worse. As for lowsec, I don't play there, the space isn't valuable enough to be worth the risk. I'll accept your judgements about how it's affected. My concern is directed toward Null. I should note that the change won't affect me personally. At all. I tend to do my PVE in areas that can't be reached without probes, and seeing probes on Dscan is already my first warning anyway. My complaint with the Recon change is how it ties in to the larger game design, and the answer is badly. I guess it's time to start pushing hard for a dscan overhaul, and then for Local to be removed from nullsec. CCP has been talking about it for years, now they are forcing their own hand. - Mission Overhaul - Bridging the PVP / PVE Gap - If the game stops teaching people to fear lowsec, maybe people will start going there?
Lvzbel Ixtab 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 41	Posted - 2014.12.19 22:02:29 - [1068] - Quote Kevin Emoto wrote: Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: At least it should be consider to have a D-scan immunity up to a certain distance for example 3 AU or at the maximum 1AU that will force scouts to actually get closer to gather intel, but complete D-scan immunity is just crazy This actually makes more sense....actually, make it combat recons cannot be descanned beyond 1.5 au, or 0.5 au..... the concept of dscan immunity is novel, and as a person who's always loved the recon class, kind of exciting to fly one with this kind of ability... but to have a ship class like recons to be dscan immune at all ranges is truly OP. In each and every release the Fozzie Rise nuttiness brings me one step closer to being able to warp cloaked in a Sin! Ya ill be happy with something closer to 1AU it will punish fleets that get lazy and dont take the extra step to get within 1AU to scan and will reward with intel with the people that do
Yahrr The Tuskers The Tuskers Co. 18	Posted - 2014.12.19 22:32:51 - [1069] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Quote: I can tell you what will happen most likely: - Less fights because people are risk averse - A 2nd account with a Prober at all times will be must, not an option. 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. Isn't that what the Force Recons are for? Invisible Rooks will be the return of the old Falcon. Do you even remember the the 'because of Falcon'-Falcon? If so, you know that this isn't a good thing. Then there will be 'suddenly point' and 'suddenly neuts', all realistically unprobeable, heavily tanked and without sensor recalibration delay.
Lars Erlkonig Discrete Solutions Ltd. 15	Posted - 2014.12.19 22:35:07 - [1070] - Quote Because most guns take more grid to fit than missile launchers, will the huginn be getting more power grid to accommodate the change in weapon systems?

Cale Agittain Calamitous-Intent Feign Disorder 1	Posted - 2014.12.19 22:35:37 - [1071] - Quote So CCP sees nothing wrong with the scenarios created by combining these combat recons together? You warp onto a grid and are in the space of a few seconds pointed, webbed, damped and jammed, stuck outside of your own engagement range and unable to respond... Oh wait, you think this counts as a fight, and thus as content! You are not stimulating unknown fights with this, you are stacking the odds even further against people who don't want their gang to be 60% force multipliers. What makes you think the majority of gangs won't now be comprised of invisible HAC-tanked super-ewar boats? What is the downside of this change? What are combat recons trading for this? Is the answer nothing? You guys know this is broken and you're releasing it anyway and that's what's pissing us off. Where is the incentive to keep subbing to this game if you're just going to keep inventing ways to make fights miserable?
Grumpy Grandpa Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 22:36:48 - [1072] - Quote I actually am looking forward to this as it will be fun in faction warfare
Arla Sarain 196	Posted - 2014.12.19 22:36:54 - [1073] - Quote Ok, if you keep the D-SCAN, bloat their sig and reduce their sensors. If someone even accidentally swipes them with combat probes they light up like the caroline star. hopefully it won't take 14 days to blap it. Wouldn't be such an issue if Combat Probes were common but they're not - fights take around celestials and you typically don't need combat probes for that. If the cost for expanded launchers goes down and Combat Wincons are easier to scan the D-Scan immunity would be deserved.
Catherine Laartii Dominion Fleet Group Templis CALSF 440	Posted - 2014.12.19 22:54:19 - [1074] - Quote Gully Alex Foyle wrote: TuCZnak wrote: Gully Alex Foyle wrote: 3) Both fighting parties are free to use them Why nerf Ishtars, both parties are free to use them, right? Balancing is about giving people options and not making bunches of ships entirely useless. Ishtars are currently pretty strong compared to all other hacs, but do you seriously think that if this change is confirmed everybody will fly just combat recons? Ishtars by themselves are not OP. Ishtars with sentries are since it's sentry drones on the ishtar that is the problem, not the ship per se.
Azusa Asara Asara Corporation 10	Posted - 2014.12.19 22:57:59 - [1075] - Quote It seems the only way you will be able to counter a Combat Recon now is to fly a combat recon yourself. Industrialists will make easy isk off this change as everyone will want to fly a one! Start Construction!
Ehud Gera Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 15	Posted - 2014.12.19 22:59:19 - [1076] - Quote For everyone who says "This will be awesome for Wormholes" You are the PVP WH'er who wants to gank (and dont get me wrong, i'm a pvp nut as well) but here's your problem: Your targets are going to disappear. Any kind of solo or small gang operation just became so risky that its not even worth trying to do anoms in WH's. The only sites that will be done in WH's will be Signatures because then at least pilots can dscan for probes. CCP if you're going to make these ships not D-Scannable then please replace all WH Anoms with Signatures so that pilots can at least rely on DSCAN to see probes if not the actual combat recons. Otherwise RIP WH anom farming for all except the larger(est) groups
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 1799	Posted - 2014.12.19 23:14:01 - [1077] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: The negative side for me is your other bullet point. Because people don't want to take unnecessary risk they will work very hard, sometimes doing something very boring or difficult, just to get at those last pieces of information. And they should. But we would want to avoid mechanics that obligate people to this kind of behavior too heavily without enough positive side to make the mechanic worthwhile. I would be more worried with this mechanic that people have to spend a lot of time running probe scans when they really don't want to be than that they are avoiding engagements because of the possibility of Recons. I don't think this will be a problem but we'll have to wait and see. Going back to a post I made earlier, if Recons got a bonus to fitting probe launchers, this would provide some counter play that doesn't force alts. Obviously more T2 ships like Cov Ops & Black Ops BS should also be getting this bonus, but currently Combat Probes are T3 only if you want to be using the ship for anything else, which isn't good game play.
Leon Mantis Limul Tribal 4	Posted - 2014.12.19 23:21:24 - [1078] - Quote Hmmm, Rapier becomes missile ship. Huggin becomes projectile ship... Thats nice... I think. Don't get the utility high slot on the huggin tho...
Omnathious Deninard Novis Initiis 2614	Posted - 2014.12.19 23:24:41 - [1079] - Quote Caldari 5 wrote: Wow I hadn't looked at F&ID in a couple of days and all of a sudden massive thread on Recons. Haven't read the thread yet, but have read the blue posts. CCP Rise any chance of adding the PvE bonus for Virus Strength to the Covert Recons? I had mentioned this to you in person at Eve Down Under. I don't see why it has to be only covert recons? I agree that it would be nice to see them get a +10 virus strength for hacking
Xe'Cara'eos A Big Enough Lever 224	Posted - 2014.12.19 23:25:18 - [1080] - Quote CCP - have you REALLY considered how this is going to affect WH play? I know this is an alt-heavy environment (or teamwork-heavy), but I worry this will make combat recons the new HAC, as they have pretty good 'damage evasion' and you're buffing their resists to HAC levels...... just a concern also - what is the point to using a force recon now? since the main bonus of the cloak is nullified by the combat recon's role bonus? For posting an idea into F&I: come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it..... If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.

Caoni Mar Minmatar Brotherhood Ushra'Khan 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 23:26:02 - [1081] - Quote RTSAvalanche wrote: Well that's just complete and utter bullsh!t... As if Solo pvp wasn't hard enough, we can not even rely on our D-Scan now?? somthing that we have relied on for the past 10 years.. You are basicaly breaking around some core mechanics here. Faction Warefare has been completely broken since Incarna, now you are telling me that recons with web, neut, damp & ECM bonuses will be able to hide in plain site in FW plexes and there is no conventional way to find them. Even if combats work to find them, we would have to do that for every plex... I smelt somthing bad in the air when the mobile scan inhib came into game, didn't realise things were going to be this bad. POWER CREEP is getting excessive.. You didn't think it through. Here is why your assertions are hyperbolic nonsense. 1) The mechanic you speak of hasn't been around for 10 years. No such feature existed back then. 2) You would be safe in novice and small plexes. The recons can only enter mediums and large plexes. And large already have no gate on them so if you are in them and scanning, they would already be in warp to you so you might not notice anyway.
Caoni Mar Minmatar Brotherhood Ushra'Khan 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 23:27:01 - [1082] - Quote I'm fairly happy with the changes except for the huginn getting a turret bonus and not a missile bonus. However, it is understandable considering its painting and web bonus and combined with the fact that it is getting the resist increase as well might make it too strong. The Lachesis and Azaru would probably benefit more from a small optimal range increase. I'd probably start somewhere around 4 or 5% and play with the numbers to see how it works. I am just glad that the Huginn and Lachesis are losing the split weapon systems.
Commentus Nolen School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 17	Posted - 2014.12.19 23:31:31 - [1083] - Quote Now yes I am a new player but I just don't see why Recon ships should be used for anything other then reconnaissance. "Reconnaissance is the activity of obtaining military information about a place by sending soldiers or planes there, or by the use of satellites. " "Reconnaissance is the military term for exploring beyond the area occupied by friendly forces to gain vital information about enemy forces or features of the environment for later analysis and/or dissemination." Recon ships should not be viable combat ships. They should be fitted for speed, stealth, defensive ECM and scanning or probing. They should also be able to be cloaked while moving and scanning (while using a lot of fuel or cap) to allow them to get the intel and then get out or be a point for a fleet to warp to. You may even allow them to not show up in local but they should only be allowed to have short range defensive weapons and be easy to kill if they engage or are caught. Right now this just sounds like they will be way overpowered. Just what is the counter to this weapon system. But having gangs of these ships used for ship against ship pvp just seems wrong.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 1852	Posted - 2014.12.19 23:32:40 - [1084] - Quote Caoni Mar wrote: I am just glad that the Huginn and Lachesis are losing the split weapon systems. Hear hear
Niskin League of the Lost 168	Posted - 2014.12.19 23:34:04 - [1085] - Quote Ehud Gera wrote: For everyone who says "This will be awesome for Wormholes" You are the PVP WH'er who wants to gank (and dont get me wrong, i'm a pvp nut as well) but here's your problem: Your targets are going to disappear. Any kind of solo or small gang operation just became so risky that its not even worth trying to do anoms in WH's. The only sites that will be done in WH's will be Signatures because then at least pilots can dscan for probes. CCP if you're going to make these ships not D-Scannable then please replace all WH Anoms with Signatures so that pilots can at least rely on DSCAN to see probes if not the actual combat recons. Otherwise RIP WH anom farming for all except the larger(est) groups I'll still be running sites, and possibly doing PvP solo in one of the new recons, Combat or Force. I think they all will be good post-revamp. Better than trying to do solo wormhole pvp with anything other than a T3 at the moment. I am cool with anoms being switched to signatures though, at least some of them anyway. It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow
Bienator II madmen of the skies 3052	Posted - 2014.12.19 23:36:37 - [1086] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: 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 i used it for comparison since i know the sentinel very well and it doesn't matter if its overpowered or not if we talk about a pilgrim. All i said it should have at least the neut power of the current sentinel. Doesn't matter if it gets nerfed or not which is entirely offtopic. eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW
Aeron Kinkade Twenty Questions RAZOR Alliance 0	Posted - 2014.12.19 23:39:05 - [1087] - Quote Oh FFS CCP! Did you drink an extra dose of bong water when you thought about this? Recons having dscan immunity AND getting stat buffs! Absolutely obsurd! There is already a major issue with AFK cloakers that just sit and camp a system; now you want to just add to that???? So let's see here so far CCP In the last patch you screwed jump bridges, cyno's, etc, and any other kind of travel other than gate to gate. And now you want to go and make it that much easier for someone to afk camp.... how nice.... What else you got for 2015? Do you just plan on destroying NULL and Low Sec all together by the end of 2015. If so, please let me know so I can find something else to invest my time and money in. Good day CCP
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 220	Posted - 2014.12.19 23:44:25 - [1088] - Quote Xe'Cara'eos wrote: CCP - have you REALLY considered how this is going to affect WH play? I know this is an alt-heavy environment (or teamwork-heavy), but I worry this will make combat recons the new HAC, as they have pretty good 'damage evasion' and you're buffing their resists to HAC levels...... just a concern also - what is the point to using a force recon now? since the main bonus of the cloak is nullified by the combat recon's role bonus? Purpose of Force Recon is the same as Marine Force Recon. Reconnaissance of the enemy while being as close to the enemy and remaining hidden. In EVE, that means arriving on grid, and being on grid undetected. Combat Recon means staying undected while off grid and ready to move on grid when needed. Which is why, Force Recon ships have the covert ops cloaking bonus and now Combat Recon will have the bonus toward being offgrid undetected. I think people forget what Recon even means. Whether or not people use them for that purpose, as people prefer to use covert ops for scouting, but Recon is meant to do the same and have the survivability to defend itself and/or engage a threat.
Loan--Wolf Utter-Chaos 19	Posted - 2014.12.19 23:44:35 - [1089] - Quote i love all the tears this is causing this change is not as bad as some of you are trying to make it sound like. so you have to run a combat scanner instead of d you should be doing that any way in a wh larger than a c1 . and if your in null running sights and some one new shows up you should be running any way
Ehud Gera Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 18	Posted - 2014.12.19 23:47:31 - [1090] - Quote 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?

Cartheron Crust Matari Exodus 156	Posted - 2014.12.19 23:49:36 - [1091] - Quote All changes good. Great even. Especially the capacitor changes. How you are supposed to "recon" if you can't even do full system warps I don't know. Except the not appearing on d-scan. Is bad idea imo.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1063	Posted - 2014.12.19 23:53:38 - [1092] - Quote rise please consider nerfing the web range down on minnie recons, maybe 50% and reduce the point ranges on gal recons maybe 15% Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
Lvzbel Ixtab 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 42	Posted - 2014.12.20 00:02:31 - [1093] - Quote Loan--Wolf wrote: i love all the tears this is causing this change is not as bad as some of you are trying to make it sound like. so you have to run a combat scanner instead of d you should be doing that any way in a wh larger than a c1 . and if your in null running sights and some one new shows up you should be running any way Perfect example of someone who is not helping and doesn't understand the difference between D-scan and Combat Probes and that doesn't understand the impact this will have in other places other than WH space and 0.0
Loan--Wolf Utter-Chaos 19	Posted - 2014.12.20 00:27:57 - [1094] - Quote Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: Loan--Wolf wrote: i love all the tears this is causing this change is not as bad as some of you are trying to make it sound like. so you have to run a combat scanner instead of d you should be doing that any way in a wh larger than a c1 . and if your in null running sights and some one new shows up you should be running any way Perfect example of someone who is not helping and doesn't understand the difference between D-scan and Combat Probes and that doesn't understand the impact this will have in other places other than WH space and 0.0 i understand dscan i use it daily in whs and null and low i just am not crying because its a inconvenient
Desert Ice78 Gryphons of the Western Wind 438	Posted - 2014.12.20 00:47:56 - [1095] - Quote CCP Rise, I would love a straight answer - the guys living in WH's that of course live by D-scan; what exactly do you expect them to do now (besides die in a ball of fire?) I am a pod pilot: http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/DesertIce/POD.jpg CCP Zulu: Came expecting a discussion about computer monitors, left confused.
Dani Maulerant Order of the Valkyrie LOADED-DICE 10	Posted - 2014.12.20 00:58:24 - [1096] - Quote This really won't cause more fights, just more ganks, but then the actual good fights will be fewer and farther between as having to always combat probe (which alone is an issue on several levels from solo needing yet more alts, to who's-going-to-have-probing-duty-in-fleet?) each FW plex, sig, anomaly, etc will really slow pace down more than anything. And then using third party information like checking all KB's of all pilots in a lowsec system, each new jump, is just not reasonable, which as someone said, in lowsec, neutrals and such are just daily life to us, unlike null where one non-blue in system and word spreads through the cluster.
Primary This Rifter 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 368	Posted - 2014.12.20 01:01:54 - [1097] - Quote Dscan immunity is exciting and I don't think it's too strong. Alt of [redacted on advice from a reputable internet spaceships lawyer]
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 81	Posted - 2014.12.20 01:24:06 - [1098] - Quote Caoni Mar wrote: I'm fairly happy with the changes except for the huginn getting a turret bonus and not a missile bonus. However, it is understandable considering its painting and web bonus and combined with the fact that it is getting the resist increase as well might make it too strong. I am just glad that the Huginn and Lachesis are losing the split weapon systems. Rapier has 10% missile damage. Even with only 3 launchers, it does comparable dps as bellicose with RLML. So not only will it provide gang web support, it'll obliterate frigs. Huginn REALLY needs a PG grid buff to make arty viable, i think 4 720s will use 90% of its grid, if not over 100%. Thats before tank, mwd. So..yea, prob means 720s will be impossible without 2-3 fitting mods. 650s may work okish.. but youll probably only do high 200s for dps. Which sucks compared to my split weapon huginn (500dps with arty and rlml).
Ab'del Abu Atlantis Ascendant 167	Posted - 2014.12.20 01:46:29 - [1099] - 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
Sobic Appetite 4 Destruction 46	Posted - 2014.12.20 01:46:34 - [1100] - Quote Daneel Trevize wrote: Seriously Rise (where's Fozzie in all of this?), talk us through this gameplay from a skillful player's perspective: You're solo in lowsec. That's it, that's all there is to the scenario. P.S. There could be a linked lachesis + huginn on every grid. That you can't dscan. What do you do, anywhere? How do you solo in this world? When do you not die on landing on any & every grid, on jumping every gate, without any way to get ingame intel on what awaits? Only fly frigs that can warp in a couple of seconds tops? Its questions like these that I don't see RISE actually answering. Because the answer won't support his idea. You can expand it to gangs entering say... BRAVE space. Our gang of 20 is almost always outnumbered. So we have to use Dscan a lot to have a damn chance against the blob. So now I'll just pass on roaming period as they'll have an unknown number of combat recons ready to pounce at any given moment. You do realize that a SINGLE combat recon can turn a fight?!?!? I foresee ENTIRE FLEETS of just combat recons. This isn't hard to foresee that you're making the game a frustrating mess just so you can have your latest gimmick passive that makes you feel like your actually earning your dev paycheck. PS, I don't FW or WH or run anoms. People who keep accusing detractors as only being whiny carebears are short sited.

Shivanthar 150	Posted - 2014.12.20 01:47:59 - [1101] - Quote I like these changes. Sounds like solo missioners also have to adapt some stuff. It now requires wise watching and even a probing wingman in order to do missions in low/null. For all-solo players (single char-wants to be alone toons) it is now a no-go to low level5's with marauders. Other than that, really cool pvp stuff, I might dip my toe in sometime ^.^ _Half _the lies they tell about me aren't true.
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 81	Posted - 2014.12.20 01:49:52 - [1102] - Quote The more i think about it, the more i believe that the rapier made out better than the huginn. Double web with rlml using furies will be good for 320-385dps. Should be able to faceroll most kiters. Has cloak OR optional high (its got HAC lvl tank) for neut/nos. The huginn though...Once again, a minny ship that would be good with artillery, cant fit the damned things. Rise, please consider giving huginn more PG, or reduce fitting for medium arty. Does ac huginn sound like a good idea? Should i go get into brawling range with my 40km web to actually do damage? Yea.. its a recon i know. But it does say combat, so i would hope it would be semi competent in that department. Course with new hac resists..maybe huginn will be long awaited t2 minny brawler? Guess we will have to see. Will test on SiSi.
Esmanpir Revenent Defence Corperation Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive 7	Posted - 2014.12.20 01:54:06 - [1103] - Quote Syzygium 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. Sorry, but that "great job" is done by people who obviously have no idea about how solo and smallscale PvP especially in Lowsec works. I have not seen any "strong arguments" that have not been proven totally wrong by simple examples, if you have found some, please name them! +1
Boomrider SiIhouette Shadow Cartel 2	Posted - 2014.12.20 02:22:53 - [1104] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: 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. The negative side for me is your other bullet point. Because people don't want to take unnecessary risk they will work very hard, sometimes doing something very boring or difficult, just to get at those last pieces of information. And they should. But we would want to avoid mechanics that obligate people to this kind of behavior too heavily without enough positive side to make the mechanic worthwhile. I would be more worried with this mechanic that people have to spend a lot of time running probe scans when they really don't want to be than that they are avoiding engagements because of the possibility of Recons. I don't think this will be a problem but we'll have to wait and see. There have been a lot of responses to your tirade, so I won't bother with dissecting the fallacity of your assumptions and go straight for the bottom line: 1) Judging by how fiercely you're defending the dscan immunity, was it your idea in the 1st place ? 2) Have you bothered asking the actual players how they feel about the upcoming changes, rather than just smugly announcing it ? 3) Who do you think pays your salary ? Hint - it's us the players, the ones with the active subscription. We're the paying customers and our opinion matters. Why am I so aggressive about it ? Because it seems that for every single positive change there are at least 2 ridiculously negative ones. Example - more k-k WHs was probably the greatest thing CCP introduced in years, but it just had to be offset with the WH spawn range change and the rabidly spawning frig-sized WHs. These badly thought-out changes do not promote conflict, they just induce more headache when dealnig with trivial things. Maybe it's time to start actually listening to what the players (the ones who are paying your salary, remember ?) are saying, instead of stubbornly defending your ideas, no matter how bad they are.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1257	Posted - 2014.12.20 02:22:56 - [1105] - Quote i think im gonna take a break in the new year. Eve may not be dying, but it certainly is about to have brain damage.
Captain Davison Malachi Keep Detachments 10	Posted - 2014.12.20 02:27:24 - [1106] - Quote If there MUST be D-scan immunity, it should be a toggleable mode, like the Tac Destroyers. Turn it on, but take a serious tradeoff, like passive targeting only (massively reducing lock times/tracking) and a massive drop in power levels across the board as your ship diverts power into emissions control to keep from showing up on scans. Certainly, allow the pilot to keep some fire control and activities compared to a cloaked ship, but as everyone else says, it's too much to have D-Scan Immunity AND full combat capability. Idea: For D-Scan immunity, you have to kill outgoing emissions. Alright, so to trade off for that mode, you lose shields (bright flaming power source! What is that!), active targeting (you have to rely on your target targeting you to track their sensor emissions) or extremely limited targeting (single target), and something like a massively reduced capacitor regen as to keep your powerplant signature low you're running far below rated combat specs. And, you have to power back up in sequence. Maybe you'll get your sensors back up first, then your shields start regenerating alongside your capacitor regen rate increasing. Make it useful, but tricky to pull off successfully, with timing that requires precise piloting, a bit of luck, and skill in knowing exactly when to fire up again for the coming battle.
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1662	Posted - 2014.12.20 02:55:30 - [1107] - Quote Onslaughtor wrote: Since you seem set on d scan immunity, lets at least add a fun and more interesting way to get intel other than d scan. Core scout probes. Basically combat probes that fit inside core launchers, doesn't allow you to get a warp but lets you see what is hiding out there. Depending on balance it would make a fun addition, large range scout probes could be used to check far out gates quickly, and gather fundamental intel. Also being used in a team with combat probes would let you get very percise locations on enemy ships with out nessisarily giving away you are looking for them. Interesting. I think there needs to be a broader discussion about intel. I would very much like to see more ways to mess with the current perfect intel (local, d-scan, watchlists) and perfect counters to intel (cloaking). Probes which only provide partial intel would be a reasonable counter to anti-intel tools like d-scan immunity. I think this should also extend to cover loaking because that is extremely powerful. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Greygal Redemption Road Affirmative. 294	Posted - 2014.12.20 02:58:00 - [1108] - Quote Blanket-stating dscan immunity is staying without change negates the purpose of asking us for our opinions, and there have been a LOT of good arguments on both sides. I hope your stating that dscan immunity is staying is not meant to mean that you are not considering ways to better BALANCE this immunity, to address the very real concerns being brought up here. Because the concerns raised about how out of balance dscan immunity is on these ships are very real and valid. Please do not ignore all that has been stated already. For me, the issue with dscan immunity is that there is NO drawback to it, no "interesting choices" created by choosing to fit for the bonus or not (because you don't have to fit for it, it's already there). It gives way too much intel and power to the recon pilot without any counterbalance to it. The recon pilot will always know you are there, will always know when you are probing them, and can quickly adapt without ANY drawbacks or penalty's or RISK at all. At least a cloaked pilot can't instantly land on you and lock you up - there is always a slight delay - and a cloaked pilot has to be careful about when and where they chose to decloak. There are These are interesting choices and piloting decisions. Right now, any ship can be dscan immune by simply fitting a cloak. There are, of course, drawbacks to cloaks, but the CHOICE of using a cloak creates interesting gameplay decisions. There is a much simpler way to make the recons more interesting: Give them ALL the ability to fit covert cloaks. You achieve the goal of making the recons much more interesting, yet still provide some choices, drawbacks, advantages, and more. Or at least make dscan immunity a module that can only be fit on these specific recons. At least that way there is a fitting decision for it. We already have Ishtars Online, do we really want Eve to be Ishtars and Recons Online? What you do for yourself dies with you, what you do for others is immortal. Free weekly public roams & monthly NewBro new player roams! Visit Redemption Road or join mailing list REDEMPTION ROAMS for information
Gwydion Voleur Anarchic Exploration 16	Posted - 2014.12.20 02:58:08 - [1109] - Quote Morwen Lagann wrote: Pilgrim without its neut amount bonus? One word: Ugh. If you absolutely must put a range bonus on it, make it a small one and keep the amount one. Don't neuter the thing it was good at. With this change it's just a weak Curse with a cloak. Which isn't all that big a ~thing~ with the whole "invisible to d-scan" bonus that you want to give to combat recons. With these changes there'd be even fewer reasons to fly a Pilgrim than there are right now. This. One of the few great things about the Pilgrim was the neut amount bonus. With a probe launcher and a cloak there are only 2 highs left for neuts already. Having that equal 4 neuts was what made having a Pilgrim uncloak on you in scram range one of those "oh crap" moments in EvE when you knew you were in big trouble. With only regular neuting strength this is completely lost and many more ships will have enough cap to get away or fight their way out. Please reconsider this. Maybe give it the old Nos effect instead like was done with the Ashimmu if you think it needs a tweak. At least then we could free up a mid for Ewar as the mandatory cap booster could be eliminated.. Also, I share the concerns about the directional scan changes for Combat Recons in terms of the effect on wormhole pilots. As someone else said, this is why we have covert cloaks.
Caldari 5 D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F. S.A.S 370	Posted - 2014.12.20 03:39:50 - [1110] - Quote Omnathious Deninard wrote: Caldari 5 wrote: Wow I hadn't looked at F&ID in a couple of days and all of a sudden massive thread on Recons. Haven't read the thread yet, but have read the blue posts. CCP Rise any chance of adding the PvE bonus for Virus Strength to the Covert Recons? I had mentioned this to you in person at Eve Down Under. I don't see why it has to be only covert recons? I agree that it would be nice to see them get a +10 virus strength for hacking I'd actually like to see the Virus Strength Bonus applied to the entire line of Covert Ships, it's already on the Covert Ops Frigs, and the SoE Faction Ships, adding it to the Covert Recons and Black Ops just makes sense, as being something that is on a line of ships and natural progression :) I suppose it could be added to the combat recons, however it doesn't make quite as much sense.

Squatdog State Protectorate Caldari State 151	Posted - 2014.12.20 03:41:27 - [1111] - Quote As someone who has been flying Recons of all types in PVP over the last five years, I have to say that making Combat Recons undetectable approaches 'Loot-Spew' in terms of stupid ideas that will probably be rescinded. Combat Recons will be ridiculously imbalanced in FW plexes and WH space. Want to be undetectable on D-Scan? Fly a cloaky recon instead.
Greymist Power Absolute Absolute Damage Inc. 7	Posted - 2014.12.20 03:58:04 - [1112] - Quote A lot of Crying about not being able to see a ship on D-scan. I love the idea from a PVP perspective. From a PVE perspective, it adds a bit more challenge to the game. easily overcome by working as a team and watching the incoming and static WHs in the system. Can't wait to go hunting :) Good job CCP... Not going to make everyone happy but they will do as they always do... GET OVER IT!!! Happy hunting everyone
Cardinal T Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 1	Posted - 2014.12.20 04:03:42 - [1113] - Quote Hi CCP Old player here returning as you had improved a lot of stuff so I decided to try it out, and I was enjoying exploration. So, I would just like to say that the D scan immunity pretty much means that you are stark raving mad. Quote: 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. Yes "promoting PVP" by suckering people into fights they can't possibly win and probably wont even get a shot off by having the game actively lie to them. Sounds as "fun" as a knee to the groin and reminds me of the thrill and excitement of Logon traps. Other than that fair changes to Recons, but the Pilgrim needs a boost to Nuet power.
Squatdog State Protectorate Caldari State 152	Posted - 2014.12.20 04:11:56 - [1114] - Quote Greymist wrote: A lot of Crying about not being able to see a ship on D-scan. I love the idea from a PVP perspective. From a PVE perspective, it adds a bit more challenge to the game. easily overcome by working as a team and watching the incoming and static WHs in the system. Can't wait to go hunting :) Good job CCP... Not going to make everyone happy but they will do as they always do... GET OVER IT!!! Happy hunting everyone If there's one thing I trust on matters related to PVP , it's the opinion of someone with a 180-121 kill/loss record.
Ford Crendaven Stryker Industries 0	Posted - 2014.12.20 04:13:56 - [1115] - Quote Hi CCP Rise, Would you at least consider that the immunity to DSCAN be effective after a delay on entering a system or wormhole. Why isn't it a module? Then pilots decide the trade off from immunity to more slots available? There would be an activation delay. Everything in the game is supposed to be balanced and the balance on DSCAN is? You have created a new super heavy tackler that can basically jump in a wormhole, warp to anom, point and wait for backup. Large wormhole corps are going to be flying these in great numbers in the future. Cheers, Ford CCP Rise wrote: Quote: I can tell you what will happen most likely: - Less fights because people are risk averse - A 2nd account with a Prober at all times will be must, not an option. I think this is a complex debate and I'm sure that none of us understand player behavior completely, but my experience is actually the opposite of what you're saying. 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. The negative side for me is your other bullet point. Because people don't want to take unnecessary risk they will work very hard, sometimes doing something very boring or difficult, just to get at those last pieces of information. And they should. But we would want to avoid mechanics that obligate people to this kind of behavior too heavily without enough positive side to make the mechanic worthwhile. I would be more worried with this mechanic that people have to spend a lot of time running probe scans when they really don't want to be than that they are avoiding engagements because of the possibility of Recons. I don't think this will be a problem but we'll have to wait and see.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 1853	Posted - 2014.12.20 04:15:49 - [1116] - Quote So does anyone have the numbers on the updated tank for some of the combat recons?
Verdis deMosays Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 76	Posted - 2014.12.20 04:16:18 - [1117] - Quote Captain Davison wrote: If there MUST be D-scan immunity, it should be a toggleable mode, like the Tac Destroyers. Turn it on, but take a serious tradeoff, like passive targeting only (massively reducing lock times/tracking) and a massive drop in power levels across the board as your ship diverts power into emissions control to keep from showing up on scans. Certainly, allow the pilot to keep some fire control and activities compared to a cloaked ship, but as everyone else says, it's too much to have D-Scan Immunity AND full combat capability. Idea: For D-Scan immunity, you have to kill outgoing emissions. Alright, so to trade off for that mode, you lose shields (bright flaming power source! What is that!), active targeting (you have to rely on your target targeting you to track their sensor emissions) or extremely limited targeting (single target), and something like a massively reduced capacitor regen as to keep your powerplant signature low you're running far below rated combat specs. And, you have to power back up in sequence. Maybe you'll get your sensors back up first, then your shields start regenerating alongside your capacitor regen rate increasing. Make it useful, but tricky to pull off successfully, with timing that requires precise piloting, a bit of luck, and skill in knowing exactly when to fire up again for the coming battle. I think you're on the right track, but in the wrong area. Make this change apply to mobility instead. Role bonus: undetectable by D-scan, except while warp drive is active. That way, someone can still fly a combat recon invisibly, but the person being jumped still has 5 seconds warning. For a solo marauder, they're humped, for the venture out huffing a C6, there's still a chance to bail while the recon is aligning and getting into warp. Just a thought.
Greymist Power Absolute Absolute Damage Inc. 7	Posted - 2014.12.20 04:20:29 - [1118] - Quote Verdis deMosays wrote: Role bonus: undetectable by D-scan, except while warp drive is active. That way, someone can still fly a combat recon invisibly, but the person being jumped still has 5 seconds warning. For a solo marauder, they're humped, for the venture out huffing a C6, there's still a chance to bail while the recon is aligning and getting into warp. Just a thought. That actually makes a lot of sense..
Greymist Power Absolute Absolute Damage Inc. 7	Posted - 2014.12.20 04:23:46 - [1119] - Quote Squatdog wrote: If there's one thing I trust on matters related to PVP , it's the opinion of someone with a 180-121 kill/loss record. Never said I was great at it But don't see me crying...
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 720	Posted - 2014.12.20 04:30:45 - [1120] - Quote I've read all 50-odd pages of this messGÇª People are getting caught up on this D-Scan issue and it is frankly a silly waste of time. It makes no difference at all in any realistic 0.0 or WH situation, with a couple of twists. The D-Scan immunity is essentially just a special cloak that doesn't require a high slot and doesn't work if someone puts any real effort into finding you. That's all. The Recon still cannot hurt you unless it is on grid with you. In the current Eve universe, I enter a system. Per SOP, I immediately check local and then D-scan. I see one pilot in local. I see no ships on D-Scan. That tells me no one is uncloaked within 14.3 AU. That's all. I look at how big the system is, it is more than 14.3 AU. I warp to the other celestials and D-scan, still nothing. The pilot is either in a deep safe or cloaked. If there is a station, there is the possibility he is docked. I check my map tools and see that as of 30 minutes ago, no one was docked. Okay, he is either in a deep safe or cloaked. In the future, I just add the assumption that he could be in a Combat Recon ship. It doesn't change the analysis one bit - it is the same as if he is cloaked. Worst case scenario currently - he is cloaked in a T3. If I am not careful, he will fly up close to me, bump me, lock me, and call in a gang to kill me, whether because they are waiting next door or via cyno. Worst case scenario in the future? I warp to a signature and he is waiting for me and we fight. He could do the same thing now! All he has to do is wait until I am on short-range d-scan and decloak a couple of seconds before I land. By the time I have landed, his five seconds have worn off, he points me, and we fight. I look him up on zkillboard or eve-kill and see that he has 43 solo kills in a Rook. I wonder what ship he is flying? I drop my combat probes, because I don't leave home without them. I scan him down. Then I call for my friends, warp to him, bait him, and kill him with my gang. Or his gang comes in too and we have a brawl. Yay! Or, I look him up on zkillboard or eve-kill and see that he routinely has 14 other pilots on killmails with him and all are blackops jump bridge capable, and he is always in an Arazu. I wonder what ship he is flying? I bait him again and we have a fight. Yay! His ship still cannot kill me unless I let him get on grid with me and within range. Which I can avoid by active piloting and paying attention to my surroundings. Or, I can drop combat probes, find him, and either kill him or make him leave. So, where is the issue? The much more important part of this change will ultimately be the T2 resists. They will determine whether I can keep that Rook alive in a small gang fight, or whether my Lachesis gets volleyed off the field right away in my fleet. All these changes to Recon ships as a whole are awesome - CCP has finally removed the pre-nerf that came with them when they were first introduced and given warpy-cloaky ability. They finally have decent capacitors, speed, etc. They can be a really viable component to all scales of combat. There may even be some interesting changes for PVE from thisGÇª Depending on how much DPS and tank I can squeeze out of a pimped Rook, there may be a shakeup to the current PVE meta. Normally, when a roaming gang comes into system, the interceptors D-Scan and look at ranges to anomalies, then call "short" or "long" for the rest of the gang. "Short" if there is anything PVE looking on d-scan and "long" if there is not. The gang shotguns to the appropriate anomalies at ranges. Now, if the Rook can viably run anomalies, I can PVE in that and not be instantly obvious to that initial scout - giving me more time to get safe, get into a PVP fit ship, and fight the risk-averse pussies who come looking for ratters to bank. As for changes to individual ships - the Pilgrim should get a smaller range bonus than the Curse and a smaller amount bonus, but it should get both. That is the price it pays for covert jump bridge capability and warpy-cloaky. I would like to see all Recons get the option to viably go shield or armor based on slot layout. Obviously armor fits will have more utility than shield, but this class should be versatile. I'd like to see the Huginn and Rook get enough CPU/PG to fit appropriate weapons, reasonable tank, and prop mod comfortably. I'd prefer to see the Rapier be the Projectile Ship and the Huginn be the missile ship. Still, all in all, good changes. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 721	Posted - 2014.12.20 04:40:43 - [1121] - Quote Aeron Kinkade wrote: Oh FFS CCP! Did you drink an extra dose of bong water when you thought about this? Recons having dscan immunity AND getting stat buffs! Absolutely obsurd! There is already a major issue with AFK cloakers that just sit and camp a system; now you want to just add to that???? So let's see here so far CCP In the last patch you screwed jump bridges, cyno's, etc, and any other kind of travel other than gate to gate. And now you want to go and make it that much easier for someone to afk camp.... how nice.... What else you got for 2015? Do you just plan on destroying NULL and Low Sec all together by the end of 2015. If so, please let me know so I can find something else to invest my time and money in. Good day CCP You can use probes to scan down these Combat Recon "AFK cloakers." If they are actually AFK, that is an easy kill. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 724	Posted - 2014.12.20 04:59:00 - [1122] - Quote Malcolm Faust wrote: This will make low/null/wh exploration obsolete. I can understand the need for something that can't be seen for FW, but I bet more than half of the use will be to hunt explorers. The only way around it is to use one for exploration, except they are severely hindered as an exploration ship. Should have given this bonus to T3 ships as a subsystem. Please, stop exploring. If this is your attitude, and everyone else is this risk averse, I will make so much more ISK if all the competition stops. I already assume that if there is a character in local with me, he has scanned down the site, gotten inside and cloaked (it's all possible if you know what you are doing). So, I plan accordingly. If there is no local, I already assume there is someone cloaked in the site and plan accordingly. This situation is absolutely no different than if the dude is cloaked inside the complex or site, except that at least I can immediately see him on grid with me when I warp in the first ship - and I know that he is currently tanking all the rats in the site. Good luck fitting all these insta-locking tackle Lachesis OMGWTF solo pnwmobiles of doom and tanking a plex at the same time. Or, after I scan it down, I drop some combat probes really quickly and check for recon ships. Oh my God! How hard was that? I didn't even have to change ships to find him! Or, I warp at ten, cloaked, in my covert ops to the relic site, and see the Combat Recon sitting there. Then I call in my own friends, they warp to me, and we fry him like Grandma's yard bird. The only area this potentially affects is it injects some uncertainty for truly "solo" PvPers looking for honorable fights inside of FW medium complexes. I can already tell from looking at a killboard that the asshat in local with me is the kind of dude who rolls with a Falcon or Rook alt. Most of the people crying are concerned about the new risk to their FW income. If I cannot be bothered to know the pilots in my area, or do basic intel on them, I deserve to get killed by pirate-implanted, drug-boosted "Elite PvPer 1337 WTFpwnzor" and his Falcon/Rook/OGB alts. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 726	Posted - 2014.12.20 05:10:18 - [1123] - Quote Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: DFA200 wrote: Major Margret McMurphy wrote: This non-detectable recon ships on dscan is nothing more than catering to the pvp player and is pure crap and should not be allowed. This change will make WH mining impossible and expensive. Yes, and they also bring two of the most uncounterable, frustrating and cheap mechanics in the game - neuts and ECM. It will affect pvpers by not knowing what are we against specially in small gang pvp where having a combat prober is not viable Every small gang should have a combat prober with them. If you don't, you are simply unprepared. It is the number one weakness for most roaming gangs. Every home defense gang should have them readily available. I cannot count the number of times I have watched every other ratter in my system dock up or POS up when the first hostile comes into local, while I happily run even the crappiest complex, knowing that unless they scanned it down hours beforehand, when I wasn't around, they cannot find me unless they drop probes. Or, assume I am the sort of person who likes to have off-grid links (I am). You can take that huge bonus away from me by dropping combat probes. But most people won't. And that character will happily boost me and all my friends without any fear whatsoever. Because when you formed your gang, you decided that one more DPS ship or one more tackler was more important than a decent combat prober. The choice is yoursGÇª be effective, or suck. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Cade Windstalker Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra 307	Posted - 2014.12.20 05:25:33 - [1124] - Quote Just wanted to say I'm loving the look of these changes and I'm super excited to see this class getting some much needed love. Generally the most common place to find Recons has been in high-sec griefer wars hunting T1 frigates and Cruisers. Will be nice to see them get some real use in combat with these changes. ;)
Fairfax Narmolaya EVIL ONES New Frontiers Federation 0	Posted - 2014.12.20 05:37:35 - [1125] - Quote Wormhole guy here. Wonderfull changes. Im looking forward to finally fly Recons as I love to scout and hunt and mainly support. Perhaps carebears and small corps will leave WH as they will find hard to live in that harsh environment. Good. If they are still looking for a place to live and own - Null Sec still looks pretty empty in some parts. Enough space for everyone. Wormhole is about teamwork, so organised corporations will adapt to changes very easly with no tears, but happy face. Sorry for FW, but again, find new tactics and solutions. Perhaps group together, form a gang and face the enemy. Simple as that. Fly safe, recons are out there... ;)
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 517	Posted - 2014.12.20 05:39:59 - [1126] - Quote May I suggest a few slot changes for some Recons to assist their racial profile: - Curse gets changed to a 5 / 5 / 5 slot layout -> armor tank - Rook gets +150 powergrid -> hams + shields possible now - Arazu gets changed to a 4 / 5 / 5 slot layout and +100 powergrid -> armor tank - Lachesis gets changed to a 5 / 5 / 5 slot layout -> another armor tank ................ Here I am not sure, so no silly comments, yes? You can however help me making changes you would like to see - Rapier gets changed to a 4 / 7 / 3 slot layout for shields (?) - Huginn gets changed to a 4 / 7 / 4 slot layout and +100 powergrid for the arty-folks (?) signature
asmi84 Keepers of the New World 0	Posted - 2014.12.20 05:40:42 - [1127] - Quote Being a low-class wormholer myself, this dscan immunity is a dream came true to me. Every time I run an anomaly I wish there would be some way to hide what I'm doing, and this is it! HAC-class tank should allow running low-class WH anomalies a breeze. Because no hunter ever going through anoms just to see if there's someone there - they all use dscan. THIS is why dscan immunity is grossly OP. It allows pilot to _do things_ while being offgrid-cloaked.
Burl en Daire M.O.M.S. Corp 93	Posted - 2014.12.20 05:45:10 - [1128] - Quote They way to fix the d-scan thing is to lower the scan resolution of the recon ship. It gives it an inherent disadvantage for the permanent pseudo-cloak. The pilot can be on grid locking the target but it will just take longer to lock. If the recon pilot wants to speed up lock times then they sacrifice something to do so. The way I see it is that it has a good and bad side and so it equals out. In FW you may not be able to see what is on the other side of the gate coming in but they can't either. Gankers may be able to warp an anom or belt but that doesn't stop the gankie from having a recon sitting there with them as anit-gank. As it is, if there is a name in local but nothing on d-scan the ship is docked or cloaked; soon it will be docked, cloaked or a recon. Yesterday's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why. Hunter S. Thompson
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 727	Posted - 2014.12.20 05:48:20 - [1129] - Quote Ripard Teg wrote: You guys say that like that situation doesn't prevent fights. I assure you it does. I have heard the phrase "These guys always have Falcon alts" prevent a fight quite a lot. Working as intended. If he wanted to fight you without his Falcon alts, he would. If you really wanted to kill him, you'd bring the right counter. Sun Tzu says you should know your enemy. So we see a hostile and look up his killboard stats. Then people know when they see FT Diomedes in local, that he probably isn't much of a threat unless you are a POS or sovereignty structure. They know that he lost a Scimitar the other day, but hasn't been seen in a sub capital ship since then. They know that several months ago he lost a nicely-fit ratting Ishtar to a roaming gang. They see that he is normally active in USTZ and prefers to fly with certain other pilots. They plan accordingly. The really savvy ones will examine his corp history, forum posting history, and see what else they can learn before they even engage. If you are afraid of the other guy's Falcon or Scimitar or OGB and he is afraid to fight without it, the only way either of you will get a fight is non-consensually. Last time I checked, Eve was all about non-consensual PVP. Outside of tournaments and pre-arranged duels the only consensual PVP in Eve is when the other side doesn't recognize "It's a trap!" until it is too late. We have to use operational maneuver and misdirection to gain surprise. What a horrible thought! First rule of combat is: don't let the enemy dictate the terms of the fight. The fair fight is the one you walk away from. If you refuse to bring the counter to my fleet composition, that is your problem, not mine. If you don't want to fight my fleet composition, then I have to find a way to trick you into it, or make you do it against your will. That is the essence of combat as I understand it - finding a way to impose your will on your adversary. Not everyone will have that attitude. And that's fine too, in this lovely game called Eve. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Jenshae Chiroptera The Volition Cult 622	Posted - 2014.12.20 06:07:56 - [1130] - Quote https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5325934#post5325934 Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Frigate holes and now Recons. Never going to live in a worm hole ever again. They should be introducing an auto D-scan (slower frequency) and have the manual one (as quick as it is now) The reason that Recons are going to be so bad? Scan out holes Take a break New in hole appears They scan your system Return from break Go ratting or mining, etc D-scan, D-scan, D-scan No blip appears before they cloak. ARGH red right next to me! Align! Alig.... More reds arrive Dead. D-scan is your life in w-space. We need a new meme, "Do you even lift, bro?" and replace it with "Do you even play?" then give feedback with that linked to things like this recon change. Serving up more easy kills for invaders. CSM Ten movement for change. EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims. Status: Rabid carebear Blog

Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 83	Posted - 2014.12.20 06:24:08 - [1131] - Quote elitatwo wrote: May I suggest a few slot changes for some Recons to assist their racial profile: - Curse gets changed to a 5 / 5 / 5 slot layout -> armor tank - Rook gets +150 powergrid -> hams + shields possible now - Arazu gets changed to a 4 / 5 / 5 slot layout and +100 powergrid -> armor tank - Lachesis gets changed to a 5 / 5 / 5 slot layout -> another armor tank ................ Here I am not sure, so no silly comments, yes? You can however help me making changes you would like to see - Rapier gets changed to a 4 / 7 / 3 slot layout for shields (?) - Huginn gets changed to a 4 / 7 / 4 slot layout and +100 powergrid for the arty-folks (?) So thoughtful <3 I always thought rook needed more PG too, think it can only fit a single LSE (though it can fit 1 invuln/em w/ single LSE). I think curse should stay shield tanked, or gimped armor tank. Its got a very strong ewar bonus, tank should be at a disadvantage. think i'm ok with rapier slot layout currently 4/6/4. Debating on your proposed change on huginn.. would have more tank, but would it have the grid for it, even with the PG addition. Sad thing is, even with an extra 100 PG, 4 720's would still use up all the grid for the most part. 4 720's = 892 PG, even with +100 grid, you'd only have 40ish PG left over for MWD/tank/EWAR with max skills. So.. guess its another minny ship with 650's or 3 PG mods for arty to fit...
Nimrias Royal Order of Security Specialists Late Night Alliance 0	Posted - 2014.12.20 06:30:03 - [1132] - Quote I'm all for interesting changes. Instead of giving 1 type of ship dscan invisibility, why not give all the ships the ability to precisely locate and warp to other uncloaked ships within a certain range without the need of losing a highslot to a probe launcher? (I mean, come on, what century are we flying around in? Are we using SONAR in space or something?) That sounds like a much better idea. Then folks that want to shoot each other can find each other. On the other hand, I am looking forward to recon fleets being a thing again!
Galphii Caldari Provisions Caldari State 296	Posted - 2014.12.20 06:45:07 - [1133] - Quote I still don't get why the Curse has 6 mids and 4 lows. It's Amarr and Khanid, it should have the same 5 mid/5 low arrangement as the pilgrim, because you know, armour. "Wow, that internet argument completely changed my fundamental belief system," said no one, ever.
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 518	Posted - 2014.12.20 06:51:14 - [1134] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: ...So thoughtful <3 I always thought rook needed more PG too, think it can only fit a single LSE (though it can fit 1 invuln/em w/ single LSE). I think curse should stay shield tanked, or gimped armor tank. Its got a very strong ewar bonus, tank should be at a disadvantage. think i'm ok with rapier slot layout currently 4/6/4. Debating on your proposed change on huginn.. would have more tank, but would it have the grid for it, even with the PG addition. Sad thing is, even with an extra 100 PG, 4 720's would still use up all the grid for the most part. 4 720's = 892 PG, even with +100 grid, you'd only have 40ish PG left over for MWD/tank/EWAR with max skills. So.. guess its another minny ship with 650's or 3 PG mods for arty to fit... That is why I was proposing this. I may not agree with everything but that doesn't mean I don't listen to you The huginn change was with 650's arties in mind. Should be enough 'volley' power but I am unclear on this. What I am sure about is that I would like to armor tank the Curse. It is possible now but shield + Amarr ?? Oh and yes, I did carefully consider the OP in my proposal so it wouldn't sound 'off'. We may or not disagree on a few points and preferences but I wanted to keep it in bay so it might be considered. signature
The Hamilton Outer Ring Sleeper Collective Illusion of Solitude 94	Posted - 2014.12.20 07:10:43 - [1135] - Quote Wormhole dweller. These changes are glorious!
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1263	Posted - 2014.12.20 08:00:57 - [1136] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: You have a bunch of people with 15 kills in their lifetime or at maxumym 15 kills per month saying this change is awesome, First supporter of d-scan immunity for recons after i posted the above (and every other one ive checked is pretty much the same level of 'i basically dont ever pvp but will when im gonna be at zero risk' Greymist wrote: https://zkillboard.com/character/1400771967/stats/
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1961	Posted - 2014.12.20 08:07:49 - [1137] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: i think im gonna take a break in the new year. Eve may not be dying, but it certainly is about to have brain damage. You have a bunch of people with 15 kills in their lifetime or at maxumym 15 kills per month saying this change is awesome, and lots of people who i recognise that fight day in-day out who correctly say d-scan invisibility is idiotic. All the while the word of these guys who went into low sec once to pvp is considered equal to the hardcore pvp guys who create content day in day out. Absolutely stupid. I wonder if this is why greyscale quit. Irrelevant. You do not need 1 billion kills to your your brian and make a logical annalisis . As was poitned several times. With exception of FW plexes this exact behavior can be mimmicked by thigns like Stratios and a pilto with brains to disengage the cloak some 100 thousand KM before landing. And the d-scan immunity is still FAR less powerful than a cloak ship well piloted. And yet the huge issues people predict do not happen. To emualte the same thing in FW the stratios /rapier/arazu etc pilot would have to keep its dscan at a range shorter than the range to the accell gate by a tiny bit... then uncloak as soon as someone starts to cross. That is something that will be made easier with eh new d-scan immunity. But GOOOD pilots, really good pilots capable of using their brain, not peopel that think they are good pilots because they spend 10 hours per day playing, already can achieve basically the same effect with any cloak warper. YET.. the number of stratios and alike ruining small scale pvp is what? Almost non existent. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1961	Posted - 2014.12.20 08:09:46 - [1138] - Quote Galphii wrote: I still don't get why the Curse has 6 mids and 4 lows. It's Amarr and Khanid, it should have the same 5 mid/5 low arrangement as the pilgrim, because you know, armour. In ages long past al lkhanid ships were shield tankers. When CCP rebalanced and re rolled all khanid ships they forgot 1... the curse. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1264	Posted - 2014.12.20 08:12:50 - [1139] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: i think im gonna take a break in the new year. Eve may not be dying, but it certainly is about to have brain damage. You have a bunch of people with 15 kills in their lifetime or at maxumym 15 kills per month saying this change is awesome, and lots of people who i recognise that fight day in-day out who correctly say d-scan invisibility is idiotic. All the while the word of these guys who went into low sec once to pvp is considered equal to the hardcore pvp guys who create content day in day out. Absolutely stupid. I wonder if this is why greyscale quit. Irrelevant. You do not need 1 billion kills to your your brian and make a logical annalisis . As was poitned several times. With exception of FW plexes this exact behavior can be mimmicked by thigns like Stratios and a pilto with brains to disengage the cloak some 100 thousand KM before landing. And the d-scan immunity is still FAR less powerful than a cloak ship well piloted. And yet the huge issues people predict do not happen. To emualte the same thing in FW the stratios /rapier/arazu etc pilot would have to keep its dscan at a range shorter than the range to the accell gate by a tiny bit... then uncloak as soon as someone starts to cross. That is something that will be made easier with eh new d-scan immunity. But GOOOD pilots, really good pilots capable of using their brain, not peopel that think they are good pilots because they spend 10 hours per day playing, already can achieve basically the same effect with any cloak warper. YET.. the number of stratios and alike ruining small scale pvp is what? Almost non existent. As a high sec ganker you clearly dont understand the issues here. I dont recal anyone that is complaining about these changes complaining about the strateos. In fact i dont remember anyone at all that i know complaining about it at any point. So bad strawman is bad.
Solaris Vex Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 0	Posted - 2014.12.20 08:30:47 - [1140] - Quote The Rook desperately needs an ECM optimal range bonus to be useful in a fleet fight. Right now its far more expensive then a blackbird and must get suicidally close to an enemy fleet to apply jams. The Lachesis has a similar problem. The Remote Sensor Dampener effectiveness is basically useless, no one will fit damps on a Lachesis when the Celestis does the job better at a fraction of the cost. The same goes for the Amarr recons tracking disrupter bonus and to a lesser degree the Minmatars target painting. The combat recons are supposed to be force multipliers for their fleet but most simply do not have the range to apply their ewar.

Helene Fidard 13	Posted - 2014.12.20 08:46:02 - [1141] - Quote I personally would be more supportive of this idea of it weren't only combat recons getting this UI sorcery. Having a single class of ship which follows different rules from every other ship in the game seems like poor design (I thought everything was supposed to be intuitive now?), but if dscan immunity was more generally a thing, I guess I couldn't really argue with that.
Komodo Askold No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 248	Posted - 2014.12.20 08:56:59 - [1142] - Quote If the D-Scan inmunity thing turns out to be having more negative effects than expected, they can always take it out on the next release. Or even better, consider one of the alternatives presented here. Some people have suggested reasonable alternatives, such as said inmunity being off when warping, or it being toogleable at the expense of something else. I think those could be interesting if the current iteration of inmunity does not turn out well (although I'm confident it won't be that bad, as happened with the many previous changes to the game that spawned so much heated up discussion and at the end weren't that bad).
Solaris Vex Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 1	Posted - 2014.12.20 08:59:01 - [1143] - Quote Furthermore the split turret/launcher hardpoints adds extra buttons and micromanagement, this is not the kind of complexity that a busy recon pilot needs. Removing the neut strength from the curse is effectively a nerf to its role as a hunter for blops fleet. A hunters role involve sneaking up on a ratter, usually a battleship or t3, decloaking at point blank range, then scramming the target and lighting a covert cyno. In this situation a range bonus is nearly useless and the strength bonus is important for increasing the change the victim will be capped out in one cycle. So removing the neut strength is really a huge nerf to the curse. Whoever wrote the changes in the op doesn't seem to understand why most recons are broken.
Adrie Atticus Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion 717	Posted - 2014.12.20 10:07:11 - [1144] - Quote ITT: risk-averse FW farmers and WH carebears whining about being exposed to PvP.
TuCZnak Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 12	Posted - 2014.12.20 10:13:19 - [1145] - Quote Adrie Atticus wrote: ITT: risk-averse FW farmers and WH carebears whining about being exposed to PvP. ITT: nullbears that were never in lowsec calling others whiners
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1264	Posted - 2014.12.20 10:14:56 - [1146] - Quote 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.
Ciba Lexlulu Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 52	Posted - 2014.12.20 10:31:21 - [1147] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: You have a bunch of people with 15 kills in their lifetime or at maxumym 15 kills per month saying this change is awesome, First supporter of d-scan immunity for recons after i posted the above (and every other one ive checked is pretty much the same level of 'i basically dont ever pvp but will when im gonna be at zero risk' Greymist wrote: ]A lot of Crying about not being able to see a ship on D-scan. I love the idea from a PVP perspective. From a PVE perspective, it adds a bit more challenge to the game. easily overcome by working as a team and watching the incoming and static WHs in the system. Can't wait to go hunting :) Good job CCP... Not going to make everyone happy but they will do as they always do... GET OVER IT!!! Happy hunting everyone/ The Hamilton wrote: #1133 - 2014-12-20 07:10:43 UTC \| Like Wormhole dweller. These changes are glorious! I support these changes.. If you are quiting, can I have your stuffs? Not sure why people is so afraid of change. I guess when you are currently a 'l33t' pvper, people like to maintain status quo. Learning new things is hard..
Lug Muad'Dib Wise Humans Sword 21	Posted - 2014.12.20 10:40:48 - [1148] - Quote People will not quit, just be more risk averse, D-Scan immunity is dumb idea with dumb explanation. Where is the massive drawback for a so massive OP trait ?
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1961	Posted - 2014.12.20 10:43:32 - [1149] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: As a high sec ganker you clearly dont understand the issues here. I dont recal anyone that is complaining about these changes complaining about the strateos. In fact i dont remember anyone at all that i know complaining about it at any point. So bad strawman is bad. In all scenarios that i fight in, a ship immune to dscan is very much worse than a cloaky ship, and even though i dont live in wormholes, my limited understanding of them is that dscan immunity will be more powerful there than it will be where i am in FW. Arbitrary mechanics to make up for people who are terrible at eve and cant hide their fleet/bait a fight are a very bad move and encourage an undesirable meta that will be to some degree compulsory for all. As you correctly said, there are mechanics that already allow people to emulate this effectwith less powerful force recons, so encouraging this type of activity my taking the skill out of it and giving people ships close to ahac performace to do it with is demented. TBH im less concerned with plex campers than i am small roaming gangs of recons that warp into plexes with zero warning and create a 180km killzone. At least with the current force recons the player has a chance to spy the recon entering systems and plexes, hence a possible counter before a pointless gank. As an igorant poster that THINK i am a high sec ganker. you have no clue of the issues here. Logic is constant, regardless of the experience of the one using it. And if you THINK you understand more of small scale PVP then us.. then come for it. We are among the BEST you can find in whoel new eden regardign small scale PVP, enough that we almost never can get a fight agaisnt other mercs or low sec groups that previously fought us without beign at 4:1 disadvantage. But I do not need to gloat about us here, your shown of ignorance makes a good work of neutralizign your own opinion. If when ANY gang enters system you stay oblivious until somethign show on your D-Scan , then you are a HORRIBLE small scale PVPer. Your whole argument goes agaisnt itself. You say these changes are for clueles skillless players that cannot make things work by themselves. YOU are the oen that is whinning like a child because you willahve to pay a little bit more of attention anduse a little bit more of tactical knowledge. You will ahve to use your brain and get good positioning when any group enters local. You will nto be able to keep using a PVP skill of a bot, that keep doign what you were doign until somethign shows up o scan then you warp. If that is too hard for you, then you are the one that has no clue! If you think that by checking one of the 5 characters of a player you have any clue of all that player does, you are so ignroant of eve that you shoudl never even think about expressing your toughts. You simply were unable to eve put a singl e argument agaisnt my coutner arguments. That proves you are not discussing, you are winning just because thatis how you FEEL it. Feeling is emotion. I am using logic. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1961	Posted - 2014.12.20 10:46:09 - [1150] - Quote 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. Again, peopel do not have a single character in this game. And 30 peopel is a HUGE fleet. If you want to show skill in small scale PVP you stay under 5 peope. Over that the FC is mroe important then the members. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment

Arla Sarain 199	Posted - 2014.12.20 10:55:02 - [1151] - Quote Lug Muad'Dib wrote: People will not quit, just be more risk averse, D-Scan immunity is dumb idea with dumb explanation. Where is the massive drawback for a so massive OP trait ? No drawbacks Just further buffs, like the HAC resist profile to boot.
Adrie Atticus Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion 718	Posted - 2014.12.20 10:59:22 - [1152] - Quote 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.
Darth Fett Iris Covenant The Gorgon Empire 68	Posted - 2014.12.20 10:59:46 - [1153] - Quote How about adding any anti-MJD feature? This cheating "save me" button should be nerfed.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1264	Posted - 2014.12.20 11:00:19 - [1154] - Quote Kagura Nikon 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. Again, peopel do not have a single character in this game. And 30 peopel is a HUGE fleet. If you want to show skill in small scale PVP you stay under 5 peope. Over that the FC is mroe important then the members. Reading comprehension fail. I very rarely fly in fleets more than 10 people and usually fly with closer to 1. As for the rest of your drivel, no one said anything about being oblivious to changes in local. Just that there is no warning of them entering a plex. This change simply will require people to constantly check killboards of everyone that enters a system. Im not sure that a mechanic that sends players out of game is a good way to go. And seriously, if nearly all your kills are in high sec, you are a high sec ganker. Sorry to break that to you.
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1961	Posted - 2014.12.20 11:00:29 - [1155] - Quote Arla Sarain wrote: Lug Muad'Dib wrote: People will not quit, just be more risk averse, D-Scan immunity is dumb idea with dumb explanation. Where is the massive drawback for a so massive OP trait ? No drawbacks Just further buffs, like the HAC resist profile to boot. The drawback is implicit hat all other cruiser sized hull got massively buffed on last 18 months. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Verdis deMosays Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 78	Posted - 2014.12.20 11:02:41 - [1156] - Quote Darth Fett wrote: How about adding any anti-MJD feature? This cheating "save me" button should be nerfed. While resisting the temptation to be scathingly sarcastic, I'll point out that a scram shuts off MJDs.... Working as intended.
Ab'del Abu Atlantis Ascendant 171	Posted - 2014.12.20 11:04:12 - [1157] - 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.
per Terpene Conglomerate 36	Posted - 2014.12.20 11:10:30 - [1158] - Quote Darth Fett wrote: How about adding any anti-MJD feature? This cheating "save me" button should be nerfed. ever heard of scram or are you too scared to get close to your target?
Squatdog State Protectorate Caldari State 156	Posted - 2014.12.20 11:18:19 - [1159] - Quote Darth Fett wrote: How about adding any anti-MJD feature? This cheating "save me" button should be nerfed. Gold!
Verdis deMosays Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 78	Posted - 2014.12.20 11:21:55 - [1160] - Quote Also a few words on the Combat Recons. First, these ships, while getting HAC resists, are not HACs. Never will be. The damage bonuses just aren't there. After everything is settled out, they are at most ridiculously expensive T1 combat cruisers with a side of EWAR. Let me give an example: Rook: 5/7/3 layout, 5 launchers, 5%/level ROF bonus. ECM requires 4-5 mids to be effective, as well as low slots which compete for armor tank spots or BCS in order to boost DPS. Tradeoff? You can have ecm, tank, or DPS, but not all three. Cerberus: 6/5/4 layout, 6 launchers, 5% kinetic damage bonus, 5% ROF bonus, 10% flight time, and 10% velocity bonus. Made to do DPS and shield tanking well, only thing it sucks at is wear, but that's okay as those hams are tearing you a new one at 30+km. So please, read stats and do a quick fit or two before screaming about how OP something will be. I think this will be a nice feature that will bring combat recons into a place where people actually want to use them. And if I lose a C2 ratting drake to one, big deal, GF, and I'll go get my onyx hictor that puts out 450 DPS and show that combat recon what OP really is! Fly fun, enjoy the adrenaline.

Omega Flames Last Resort Inn 100	Posted - 2014.12.20 11:26:55 - [1161] - Quote HoruSeth wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Quote: I can tell you what will happen most likely: - Less fights because people are risk averse - A 2nd account with a Prober at all times will be must, not an option. I think this is a complex debate and I'm sure that none of us understand player behavior completely, but my experience is actually the opposite of what you're saying. That can not be your honest reply? The sad part is that that really is his honest answer.
Omega Flames Last Resort Inn 100	Posted - 2014.12.20 11:44:37 - [1162] - Quote Komodo Askold wrote: If the D-Scan inmunity thing turns out to be having more negative effects than expected, they can always take it out on the next release. The removal of teams is the only instance I can think of such a thing happening once it hit TQ, and since that was also stated in the teams removal dev blog apparently it's the only instance CCP can think of as well, so just how likely do you think it will be for them to remove it if it hits TQ?
Lug Muad'Dib Wise Humans Sword 22	Posted - 2014.12.20 12:16:48 - [1163] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: Arla Sarain wrote: Lug Muad'Dib wrote: People will not quit, just be more risk averse, D-Scan immunity is dumb idea with dumb explanation. Where is the massive drawback for a so massive OP trait ? No drawbacks Just further buffs, like the HAC resist profile to boot. The drawback is implicit hat all other cruiser sized hull got massively buffed on last 18 months. Sorry i didn't know only cruise hull can't scan them..
Gregor Parud 794	Posted - 2014.12.20 13:04:02 - [1164] - Quote D-scan immunity is too much of a buff for a ship that's quite powerful in the first place. They already get stats increases, increased resists and "less dumb" bonuses and layouts. There is no reason, nor need, to give it something like this other than "wouldn't it be cool if". Anyone who has any sense of history with EVE knows (or should know) how cool stuff like that generally pans out. I'm not saying it'll be super overpowered and it'll massively change the landscape or anything but at the same time there's simply no need for it. Not showing up on D-scan should have downsides, be it how covert ships come prenerfed or how a cloak will affect locking stats etc. With these changes there'll be quite powerful cruisers with a lot of tricks up their sleeves, HAC resists AND, oh yeah... you can't see them. Prenerf combat recons and keep the D-scan stuff or keep the stats and remove the d-scan immunity. If you want to give them "something to stand out" (as if that's somehow needed in the first place, they seem quite potent to me) then give them increased warp speed. THAT way they are actually Recons and they get something that enables them to chase a target.
Kmelx Matari Exodus 100	Posted - 2014.12.20 13:24:14 - [1165] - Quote rhiload Feron-drake wrote: Seeing all this small-gang pvp players who mostly never post on forums are actually posting on a balance thread. this is a sign that these changes will be DEVASTATING towards the small gang pvpers. also rip medium plexing in fw. going to have fun warping into 2 curses in my vexor. dont let these changes go through, there is a reason why people are actually taking time to post on this forum and you act like you blatantly ignore what these people are actually saying. It wasn't announced as a consultative measure. CCP did not announce it because they wanted our views on this, they announced it so that they could say they have consulted us about a decision they have already made. If you look at their behavior in this thread, you will see that it was announced without a full explanation of CCP's rationale for introducing this change, we've been promised this by Rise but he has not provided it. You will see within less than a day there was a 38 page thread of people posting their concerns about this change, along with all the worthless gankers high fiving each other and going around saying fk yeah we can abuse the st out of this when we blob people. If you look at the timings, Rise's initial post was made at 2014-12-18 14:57:04 UTC. His we've noticed you don't seem to like this change but zero f**ks given reply was made within less than a day at 2014-12-19 11:15:14 UTC and then CCP Seagull announced it as a the number one feature of Proteus at 2014-12-19 16:15. They "consulted" with the wider playerbase for less than 26 hours about this change before they made it the top features/balance announcement in Seagull's dev blog. No clearer indication that they had no intention of taking the players viewpoints on board was needed, it was a fait accompli, we've decided to inform you were are doing this announcement, taking into account the Christmas and New Year holidays and the intransigence of Rise's reply to the concerns raised, this "balance" change is going out in Proteus.
Kalihira Ultramar Independent Contracting 28	Posted - 2014.12.20 13:34:04 - [1166] - Quote The only problem with combat recons is their tank and in some cases their slot layout. Shouldn't they be like the EWAR equivalent of HACs? Right now, either T3's or some faction cruisers (hello ashimmu) are used in this role.
Joni Hariere The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos 30	Posted - 2014.12.20 13:42:15 - [1167] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Just finished reading everything that was posted over night. Here's what I can update with at the moment: 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. Thanks for all the feedback. MAYBE READ THAT DAMN FEEDBACK . D-Scan immunity destroys solopvp, prevents anyone flying cruisers in fw (medium plex) , not to talk about small gang pvp on lowsec. and how this is against common sense and everything in in game mechanics. checks prices of Elite Dangerous
Gregor Parud 797	Posted - 2014.12.20 13:46:54 - [1168] - Quote Joni Hariere wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Just finished reading everything that was posted over night. Here's what I can update with at the moment: 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. Thanks for all the feedback. MAYBE READ THAT DAMN FEEDBACK . D-Scan immunity destroys solopvp, prevents anyone flying cruisers in fw (medium plex) , not to talk about small gang pvp on lowsec. and how this is against common sense and everything in in game mechanics. checks prices of Elite Dangerous That's a bit over the top. There isn't much difference between a Falcon uncloaking on you or a Rook warping in on the fight, and the same goes for the other factions. It creates an out of whack balance where none is needed but it's not solo pvp shattering in any way, it's just a gimmick bonus that is in the realms of "well, it has to be sneaky somehow" where I personally would go for the "lets be more aggressive" with a warp speed bonus.
Mandrozolizus Hauptutus Pancerne Poziomki YARRR and CO 0	Posted - 2014.12.20 13:59:20 - [1169] - Quote Joni Hariere wrote: MAYBE READ THAT DAMN FEEDBACK . "Never [enter] into dispute or argument with another. I never saw an instance of one of two disputants convincing the other by argument. I have seen many, on their getting warm, becoming rude, & shooting one another. ... When I hear another express an opinion which is not mine, I say to myself, he has a right to his opinion, as I to mine; why should I question it? His error does me no injury.." Thomas Jefferson CCP aplies this, so the community should...
Kalihira Ultramar Independent Contracting 28	Posted - 2014.12.20 14:09:26 - [1170] - Quote Gregor Parud wrote: Joni Hariere wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Just finished reading everything that was posted over night. Here's what I can update with at the moment: 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. Thanks for all the feedback. MAYBE READ THAT DAMN FEEDBACK . D-Scan immunity destroys solopvp, prevents anyone flying cruisers in fw (medium plex) , not to talk about small gang pvp on lowsec. and how this is against common sense and everything in in game mechanics. checks prices of Elite Dangerous That's a bit over the top. There isn't much difference between a Falcon uncloaking on you or a Rook warping in on the fight, and the same goes for the other factions. It creates an out of whack balance where none is needed but it's not solo pvp shattering in any way, it's just a gimmick bonus that is in the realms of "well, it has to be sneaky somehow" where I personally would go for the "lets be more aggressive" with a warp speed bonus. There is, a rook, if YOU warp in on it (i.e. you enter a site) has no locking delay, has better tank and dps in addition to its ewar. It does not only screw with FW plexing, but also normal plexing. If im roaming in low/null to DED plex, in every system with neutrals, a site might be camped. You are giving a completely different (and non relevant) situation for the concerns he adresses, and I dont think you realize how this bonus might be abused. I thought CCP was being more reserved with buffing ships, instead of totally changing they way a certain class is flown which can might break certain aspects of the game. As I said a few posts back, combat recons should be the EWAR equivalent of HACs, leave the sneaky stuff to the force recons, they are quite good allready in this respect. The changes to those ships will make them abit more robust, which is good.

Araxmas Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact 2	Posted - 2014.12.20 14:19:42 - [1171] - Quote I get the feeling this is one of those "wait and see" changes. It will either add a lot of variety to pvp or completely frack stuff up. Personally I think the HAC resists are prob a bit much but I'd rather see their impact when live, then speculate what MIGHT happen. Also pretty much 99% of the doomsaying you can read here is repeated on nearly every eve change there has been.
Elisk Skyforge Night Raven Task Force Night Raven Alliance 53	Posted - 2014.12.20 14:25:33 - [1172] - Quote Now it makes sense calling them "recon" ships, I approve.
Gregor Parud 798	Posted - 2014.12.20 14:26:19 - [1173] - Quote Kalihira wrote: There is, a rook, if YOU warp in on it (i.e. you enter a site) has no locking delay, has better tank and dps in addition to its ewar. It does not only screw with FW plexing, but also normal plexing. If im roaming in low/null to DED plex, in every system with neutrals, a site might be camped. You are giving a completely different (and non relevant) situation for the concerns he adresses, and I dont think you realize how this bonus might be abused. I thought CCP was being more reserved with buffing ships, instead of totally changing they way a certain class is flown which can might break certain aspects of the game. As I said a few posts back, combat recons should be the EWAR equivalent of HACs, leave the sneaky stuff to the force recons, they are quite good allready in this respect. The changes to those ships will make them abit more robust, which is good. The covert recons get a Cloak Reactivation Delay change meaning they can recloak faster after having decloaked. It has NOTHING to do with a Rook and NOTHING to do with locking delay after decloaking or locking speed or anything you just mentioned.
Adrian Dixon Arbitrary Spaceship Destruction Immediate Destruction 157	Posted - 2014.12.20 14:27:06 - [1174] - Quote I am excited to see how this will work out. This is a good point; Diivil wrote: Combat recons should at least show up in dscan if you are on the same grid with them. Majority of Eve use dscan tools and it would be extremely frustrating to not be able to copy a certain ship type from dscan list when you can clearly see it in your own overview.
Yahrr The Tuskers The Tuskers Co. 19	Posted - 2014.12.20 14:27:21 - [1175] - Quote I like how people think that the d-scan immunity will help them when ratting in an anomaly. When ratting you create wrecks, wrecks can be d-scanned. As everyone and their mother will be flying these new recons, scanning for wrecks will become routine, so the only advantage of the d-scan is to the attacker. It's nice that the attacking party gets some love, but this really is too much. Though not actually cloaking the model, it will be just as, or more effective than the covert cloaked force recons. It won't decloak when you hop a gate and it has the ability to run and repair modules while cloaked. Added to that will be HAC resists and a huge ewar range with no reserved utility highslot for the cloaking module. Why would you still use a force recon? Combat recons will be better in almost any way. Skipping camps is the only advantage of the real cloakers I can think of. Why would you still use a HAC? A Hac might dish out a little more damage, but the ewar and cloaking of the combat recon will make dps a secondary priority. Why would you still use an interceptor or bomber? A Lachesis has a much longer point range, can damp the target for immunity and won't be on d-scan like an interceptor would be. Why would you still fly any other combat ship? None will stand a chance. 1v1 you can still for example outrun certain ships in a nano, but there won't be any fighting going on as it would be suicide. Against multiple recons it's always game over. You can't run, you can't shoot, you can't repair and wait for backup... and it appeared without warning. The force recons have strong limitations in their tank, dps and decloaking delay which balanced the surprise factor. The new combat recons won't have those limitations and will work like a roaming logonski.
Kalihira Ultramar Independent Contracting 29	Posted - 2014.12.20 14:33:47 - [1176] - Quote Gregor Parud wrote: Kalihira wrote: There is, a rook, if YOU warp in on it (i.e. you enter a site) has no locking delay, has better tank and dps in addition to its ewar. It does not only screw with FW plexing, but also normal plexing. If im roaming in low/null to DED plex, in every system with neutrals, a site might be camped. You are giving a completely different (and non relevant) situation for the concerns he adresses, and I dont think you realize how this bonus might be abused. I thought CCP was being more reserved with buffing ships, instead of totally changing they way a certain class is flown which can might break certain aspects of the game. As I said a few posts back, combat recons should be the EWAR equivalent of HACs, leave the sneaky stuff to the force recons, they are quite good allready in this respect. The changes to those ships will make them abit more robust, which is good. The covert recons get a Cloak Reactivation Delay change meaning they can recloak faster after having decloaked. It has NOTHING to do with a Rook and NOTHING to do with locking delay after decloaking or locking speed or anything you just mentioned. Dont critisize my post if you didn't read it properly..... I never said anything about the cloak reactivation delay chance to Force recons.
Gregor Parud 799	Posted - 2014.12.20 14:36:15 - [1177] - Quote Yahrr wrote: I like how people think that the d-scan immunity will help them when ratting in an anomaly. When ratting you create wrecks, wrecks can be d-scanned. As everyone and their mother will be flying these new recons, scanning for wrecks will become routine, so the only advantage of the d-scan is to the attacker. It's nice that the attacking party gets some love, but this really is too much. Though not actually cloaking the model, it will be just as, or more effective than the covert cloaked force recons. It won't decloak when you hop a gate and it has the ability to run and repair modules while cloaked. Added to that will be HAC resists and a huge ewar range with no reserved utility highslot for the cloaking module. Why would you still use a force recon? Combat recons will be better in almost any way. Skipping camps is the only advantage of the real cloakers I can think of. Why would you still use a HAC? A Hac might dish out a little more damage, but the ewar and cloaking of the combat recon will make dps a secondary priority. Why would you still use an interceptor or bomber? A Lachesis has a much longer point range, can damp the target for immunity and won't be on d-scan like an interceptor would be. Why would you still fly any other combat ship? None will stand a chance. 1v1 you can still for example outrun certain ships in a nano, but there won't be any fighting going on as it would be suicide. Against multiple recons it's always game over. You can't run, you can't shoot, you can't repair and wait for backup... and it appeared without warning. The force recons have strong limitations in their tank, dps and decloaking delay which balanced the surprise factor. The new combat recons won't have those limitations and will work like a roaming logonski. That's quite the hyperbole sperg and the majority of what you just said won't happen. ALL that will happen is combat recons which perform a support role in gang/fleets will be more survivable and some folks running around in Lachs, right up to the point where gang links become grid only because then they suddenly lose their speed and become sitting ducks,only catching morons or people off guard. The D-scan gimmick does not compare to the tactical advantage of a covert cloak, it's just that the Combat recons are already strong enough so that they don't NEED anything more, that's all.
Entity X-Factor Industries Synthetic Existence 789	Posted - 2014.12.20 14:36:44 - [1178] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners All eight Recons will have their resist profiles brought up to Heavy Assault Cruiser level All eight Recons will have the capacitor cost of warping reduced by roughly half Where appropriate, bonuses will be adjusted to match ship developer trends All eight Recons are having their capacitor pool and capacitor regeneration buffed (roughly 20% increase in cap regen) The average maximum velocity across the class is going up by around 20m/s And as usual, the Alliance Tournament variants get skipped? I'm still waiting for the promised unique battleships balance pass too. `Gòª......Gòæ...GòöGòù.Gòæ.Gòæ.GòöGòù.GòªGòæ.GòöGòùGòöGòªGòùGòöGòù` `Gòæ.GòöGòùGòöGòùGòöGòú.GòöGòùGòá..Gòá GòáGòùGòáGò¥.GòæGòá GòáGò¥GòæGòæGòæGòÜGòù` `Gò¬GòÉGòÜGò¥Gòæ.GòÜGò¥.GòÜGò¥Gòæ..GòÜGò¥GòæGòæGòÜGò¥.Gò¬GòÜGò¥GòÜGò¥Gòæ.GòæGòÜGò¥` Got Item?
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 96	Posted - 2014.12.20 14:37:48 - [1179] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: 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. And yet again CCP balances based on large fleet engagements instead of taking into consideration how it effects the ENTIRE game. Listen we get it, you only understand Nullsec blobs and highsec carebears. The real problem with EVE is that CCP is not involved enough with their own community to know where their problems lie. Do you even know what a lot of the popular streamers do? Do you even realize how many NEW subs we bring in a month? You want to know why? Because solo and small gang pvp is MUCH MORE ACCESSIBLE to a newbro. I'm so confused as to how you can on one hand claim to be working on the new player experience, and you do when it comes to superficial things such as tutorials and easier understanding. However, when it comes to the actual mechanics of how to play the game you CONSISTENTLY make it harder and harder on new bros. We HAVE fleet fights, they're NOT running from each other, they ARE ALREADY abusing insanely overpowered mechanics to make it THAT MUCH HARDER on the solo/small gang folks and you STILL seem to think that large scale PvP is the only PvP worth mentioning or balancing around. Complete garbage.
Aralieus The Inf1dels 235	Posted - 2014.12.20 14:41:10 - [1180] - Quote Davader wrote: Morwen Lagann wrote: Pilgrim without its neut amount bonus? One word: Ugh. ... Please, don't break the pilgrim! It is very nice close ranged anti-carebear killing machine, you are taking his most valuable bonus off! Why? Leave the range bonus for Curses, but please don't make a Pilgrim to be some weaker kind of a Curse. The pilgirm will be used even lesser than now if you change its main bonus! I agree fully. As a Recon V and avid pilgrim pilot I cannot stress enough the importance of the pilgrim having the neut strength to be able to take down targets in a timely manner. Leave the ranged cap warfare to the Curse and give the pilgrim its strength back and a bigger drone bay with the bandwidth to allow it to use 5 heavies. Please don't wreck the pilgrim by making it watered down curse without any uniqueness or bonus to set it apart. Oderint Dum Metuant

Gregor Parud 799	Posted - 2014.12.20 14:42:40 - [1181] - Quote Kalihira wrote: Dont critisize my post if you didn't read it properly..... I never said anything about the cloak reactivation delay chance to Force recons. Conceded. Still, a solo Rook is not a threat, it never was and it will never be. The second you come up with "but what if there's more" I'll counter with "then they can have a scout at the site entrance as well so they'll know when you warped and can uncloak".
Moraguth Ranger Corp Vae. Victis. 129	Posted - 2014.12.20 14:44:55 - [1182] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Quote: I can tell you what will happen most likely: - Less fights because people are risk averse - A 2nd account with a Prober at all times will be must, not an option. ...STUFF... I would be more worried with this mechanic that people have to spend a lot of time running probe scans when they really don't want to be than that they are avoiding engagements because of the possibility of Recons. I don't think this will be a problem but we'll have to wait and see. Everything I'm about to type comes from the perspective of living in wormhole space part time for a bit now. I seem to remember, not too long ago in fact, a very reasonable dev blog about the removal of clone costs. The rationale for the change was along the lines of "if it is a false choice, if it doesn't really add gameplay (it just punishes you for being forgetful), it doesn't make sense to be in the game". ... Or something along those lines. Consider that a paraphrase instead of an actual quote. Along those same lines, having to have a character always running combat probes, just for the most minute chance of detecting a possible hostile ship doesn't really add any fun to the game. It doesn't add any emergent gameplay and it doesn't really add actual choice. For smaller entities that cannot have an extra character doing nothing but hitting scan every few seconds (and I have this problem with d-scan in w-space in general), it is the opposite of adding fun. With that one ship change, you're making smaller entities have to decide between continuing to play the game they've been playing, or abandoning their w-space systems. In effect, you're going to turn w-space into a land of two extremes: either roaming pirates, or large organizations that can afford to have scouts on every wormhole 23/7 AND a person or two inside the WH constantly running combat probes. That's boring gameplay at its finest, and goes a long way to turning wormholes into low sec without gate guns or local - aka devoid of any real/meaningful activity. Pirates and gankbears love low sec.... no risk, all reward, easy peasy ganks. And now they'll love w-space too. For those with the defensive (and BUILDING sandcastles) mindset, w-space already had a great risk vs reward system in place. The careful player could mitigate most risks just fine even when they were solo. Now things will be completely different. I don't want to put words into your mouth, however it makes me wonder if maybe you have ulterior motives for this change. --- Here's a random and crazy idea.... maybe give those combat recons the ability to scoop the mobile scan inhibitor deployables (i forget their name, i never use them). That way we know something is out there but we don't know what. And they would be the only ship in the game that could scoop them up. They still effectively get their immunity to d-scan, but the locals have a chance of knowing something is up even if they don't know exactly what, without having to have a dedicated proper running 23/7 for safety/security. I got a Feature Added! Stop calling an Abaddon "abba-dawn". It is "uh-bad-in" dictionary.com/abaddon
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10858	Posted - 2014.12.20 14:52:13 - [1183] - Quote Dracvlad wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Just finished reading everything that was posted over night. Here's what I can update with at the moment: 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. What strong counter arguments, they are all chaff type HTFU cheer-leading or weak arguments, I was enticed back by the jump changes and the slight tilt towards role playing, but the D-scan immunity makes it certain death. I am not sure I will wait for your explanation before hitting the de-sub button, in fact damn it I am de-subbing now and I will put this as my reason. Its ill thought out and makes it even easier for the easy gank crowd, WTF are you doing! This might come a shock to the likes of you, but you aren't the only playerbase in EVE. These changes are beyond amazing. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Verdis deMosays Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 80	Posted - 2014.12.20 14:59:22 - [1184] - Quote I still would argue that the full-time d-scan immunity is a bit much. Make it disable when the CR is aligning or in warp, so that people have a chance to detect them at some point. Possibly make it a unique module? Scan Inhibition Generator: High slot, 1 pg, 10cpu. Provides immunity to directional scanners while active. Unable to be active while warping. Note: can only be fit to Combat Recons. Would behave like a cloak, with none of the disadvantages, and still make combat recons more appealing. I know they're one of the least flown ships in game, after EAFs. Would be nice to see them get some mclovins. After all, other than a curse, when was the last time you saw one in space?
Thanatos Marathon Phoibe Enterprises 370	Posted - 2014.12.20 15:08:24 - [1185] - Quote Recons online here we go. Get ready for the majority of gangs to have combat recon points, webs, scrams, damps, neuts, and jams. There will be no reason to fly any other comp as a go to for lowsec. You like fighting larger gangs outnumbered by using nano fits? Good luck, you are web'd into the ground. You like fighting larger gangs outnumbered by using Remote Reps and strong tanks? Good luck, you are neuted and jammed. You enjoy soloing in cruisers in Medium FW plexes? Get ready to lose a lot of cruisers while you gather intel on every single pilot in the region that can fly combat recons, by warping into the plex and getting your ship blown the hell up. This change as it stands, and without knowing why they are implementing it, makes me very sad. Ishtar's Online was bad enough for PVPers, Combat Recons online will decimate many solo/small gang pvp options.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10859	Posted - 2014.12.20 15:19:46 - [1186] - Quote Thanatos Marathon wrote: You like fighting larger gangs outnumbered by using nano fits? Good luck, you are web'd into the ground. You like fighting larger gangs outnumbered by using Remote Reps and strong tanks? Good luck, you are neuted and jammed. Honestly? Good. Both of those two things are incredibly no-fun for the opponent, they lead to binary fights in which you either have what you need to win or you just whelp helplessly. And you're crying the death of those things... because counterplay is actually possible now against either of them. I hate to tell you this, but the sky is not falling just because recons aren't unviable. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 96	Posted - 2014.12.20 15:20:30 - [1187] - Quote Verdis deMosays wrote: Would behave like a cloak, with none of the disadvantages, and still make combat recons more appealing. I know they're one of the least flown ships in game, after EAFs. Would be nice to see them get some mclovins. After all, other than a curse, when was the last time you saw one in space? I see them in low sec all the time, but that doesn't count because its not nullblobs. If they're not in nullblobs they're not in the game according to CCP.
Thanatos Marathon Phoibe Enterprises 370	Posted - 2014.12.20 15:23:44 - [1188] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Thanatos Marathon wrote: You like fighting larger gangs outnumbered by using nano fits? Good luck, you are web'd into the ground. You like fighting larger gangs outnumbered by using Remote Reps and strong tanks? Good luck, you are neuted and jammed. Honestly? Good. Both of those two things are incredibly no-fun for the opponent, they lead to binary fights in which you either have what you need to win or you just whelp helplessly. And you're crying the death of those things... because counterplay is actually possible now against either of them. I hate to tell you this, but the sky is not falling just because recons aren't unviable. Actually Kite and Counter Kite are used on a regular basis and enjoyed by many (I'll always get a giggle every time I think about killing a Garmur in a Derptron). RR gangs aren't as regular as they used to be, but still generate great fun because normally they are on grid till they either win or die. I hate to tell you this, but just because you don't understand the counters for various setups doesn't mean others don't. This change makes Combat recons a bit more than viable, it makes them OP in a massive way. That means they will be everywhere.
Kalihira Ultramar Independent Contracting 30	Posted - 2014.12.20 15:26:39 - [1189] - Quote Gregor Parud wrote: Kalihira wrote: Dont critisize my post if you didn't read it properly..... I never said anything about the cloak reactivation delay chance to Force recons. Conceded. Still, a solo Rook is not a threat, it never was and it will never be. The second you come up with "but what if there's more" I'll counter with "then they can have a scout at the site entrance as well so they'll know when you warped and can uncloak". True, I have been killed like that once (actually there was a rifter baiting on the beacon of a medium fw plex), but that is a principal use of force recons. You said in one of your posts above that combat recons will not have the same tactical advantages as cloaked force recons. I, and other people with me, where merely pointing out that it does in a number of situations. They are stepping on the toes of force recons, not totally outclassing them though. I am happy to see that you do agree with that the dscan immunity is completely unneeded along with the tanking, fitting and cap boosts they are getting allready. As I said several posts back, they should be the EWAR equivalent of HACs. They will not have HAC lvl tanks as far as I can see, just the same resists (less armor/shield HP), which is fine since EWAR is tank too.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10860	Posted - 2014.12.20 15:36:55 - [1190] - Quote Thanatos Marathon wrote: I hate to tell you this, but just because you don't understand the counters for various setups doesn't mean others don't. And I don't think you have a clue what I was talking about. Against a kite fleet, you either have the counter or you just don't take the fight. And it requires a very specific fleet comp to do so. That crowds out low skillpoint players(most notably newbies), and less established groups who can't manage the counter. Against reps, it's even worse since any damage you might do while fighting is erased. Those two comps you described crowd out potential for taking fights, since it's so binary. You either have it or you shouldn't take the fight in the first place. They are bad things. Quote: This change makes Combat recons a bit more than viable, it makes them OP in a massive way. How? By making them less than paper thin tank? That's been overdue for a long time. But what you really mean is that you can't see them beforehand, so you can take the one sided fight in your binary fleet comp. You want absolute certainty. Too damn bad. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.

Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9159	Posted - 2014.12.20 15:37:51 - [1191] - Quote Yahrr wrote: I like how people think that the d-scan immunity will help them when ratting in an anomaly. So you can't think far enough ahead to see what people would do with a ratting recon I see. In many systems, anomalies spawn in certain areas reliably. So, find a crap one, kill some ships, and BOOM every time you do another (good) anomaly, there are wrecks on scan... in multiple places. You don't even need to do that much as anoms tend to spawn near planets, if that planet has belts, just go clear the belts and wrecks on scan (most pvprs don't know that belt rats ar different from anom rats). And after you have been at it a while, there are wrecks all over anyways and they last for a couple hours. D-scan immunity and the fact that these 'ratting recons' can mount some 'gtfo ewar' will partially compensate for the slightly lower overall dps you can squeeze out of one of these new recons compared to proper hacs. The Curse will actually be king of the Ratting Recons because energy neuts slash an npcs 'chance to boost', making them more squishy (again compensating for the lower general dps). If you can't see how this is going to be awesome, you have to blind.
Thanatos Marathon Phoibe Enterprises 370	Posted - 2014.12.20 15:46:55 - [1192] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Thanatos Marathon wrote: I hate to tell you this, but just because you don't understand the counters for various setups doesn't mean others don't. And I don't think you have a clue what I was talking about. Against a kite fleet, you either have the counter or you just don't take the fight. And it requires a very specific fleet comp to do so. That crowds out low skillpoint players(most notably newbies), and less established groups who can't manage the counter. Against reps, it's even worse since any damage you might do while fighting is erased. Those two comps you described crowd out potential for taking fights, since it's so binary. You either have it or you shouldn't take the fight in the first place. They are bad things. Quote: This change makes Combat recons a bit more than viable, it makes them OP in a massive way. How? By making them less than paper thin tank? That's been overdue for a long time. But what you really mean is that you can't see them beforehand, so you can take the one sided fight in your binary fleet comp. You want absolute certainty. Too damn bad. Actually, their EWAR is balanced by their paper thin tanks. By improving their tanks they will already find their way into most fleets of 8 or more. Adding DSCAN immunity makes them so ridiculously usefull in solo/micro gang that their proliferation will wipe out many other comps (people just won't fly them). Also, derptrons are designed for newer pilots and are pretty good at catching kiters.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10860	Posted - 2014.12.20 15:50:59 - [1193] - Quote Thanatos Marathon wrote: Actually, their EWAR is balanced by their paper thin tanks. Or, it was, before the last few ewar nerfs anyway. They are the intended long range counter to reps afterall, but somehow they have a third of their hitpoints or less. Quote: By improving their tanks they will already find their way into most fleets of 8 or more. Good. Having an entire ship class that was useless for anything but the training model for a T3 is a bad thing. Quote: Adding DSCAN immunity makes them so ridiculously usefull in solo/micro gang that their proliferation will wipe out many other comps (people just won't fly them). If those fleet comps are as toxic as kiting has become in this game, good. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1270	Posted - 2014.12.20 15:54:13 - [1194] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Dracvlad wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Just finished reading everything that was posted over night. Here's what I can update with at the moment: 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. What strong counter arguments, they are all chaff type HTFU cheer-leading or weak arguments, I was enticed back by the jump changes and the slight tilt towards role playing, but the D-scan immunity makes it certain death. I am not sure I will wait for your explanation before hitting the de-sub button, in fact damn it I am de-subbing now and I will put this as my reason. Its ill thought out and makes it even easier for the easy gank crowd, WTF are you doing! This might come a shock to the likes of you, but you aren't the only playerbase in EVE. These changes are beyond amazing. Another advocate of the changes to recon dscanning. Another guy who has barely ever pvp'd.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10860	Posted - 2014.12.20 15:57:15 - [1195] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Another advocate of the changes to recon dscanning. Another guy who has barely ever pvp'd. I'm pretty open about this character basically being a forum alt for the longest time. Besides, you don't get on killmails as logi, which is what Kaarous has been for a while now until I joined Devils. But hey, keep playing the killboard game like it means anything. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Niskin League of the Lost 171	Posted - 2014.12.20 15:59:41 - [1196] - Quote People are freaking out in here like Combat Recons have been rebalanced to be Carriers with 5 Ishtars glued to them that just got d-scan immunity. Get a grip. If I'm in a wormhole combat site in a Drake and a solo Recon shows up, I'd call that an even fight, since I'm probably tanking sleepers too. If he has friends coming then I'm probably screwed. If I'm in a wormhole combat site in a Drake and a T3 cruiser shows up, I'm dead, probably before his friends even get there, assuming he even bothered to bring any. Not to mention that in both of these situations I have an escape option if they didn't pack a scram. A max skilled Lachesis would kill that option, unless the pilot wasn't paying attention when my MMJD went off. It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9160	Posted - 2014.12.20 16:13:45 - [1197] - Quote Niskin wrote: People are freaking out in here like Combat Recons have been rebalanced to be Carriers with 5 Ishtars glued to them that just got d-scan immunity. Get a grip. If I'm in a wormhole combat site in a Drake and a solo Recon shows up, I'd call that an even fight, since I'm probably tanking sleepers too. If he has friends coming then I'm probably screwed. If I'm in a wormhole combat site in a Drake and a T3 cruiser shows up, I'm dead, probably before his friends even get there, assuming he even bothered to bring any. Not to mention that in both of these situations I have an escape option if they didn't pack a scram. A max skilled Lachesis would kill that option, unless the pilot wasn't paying attention when my MMJD went off. The bolded part is so funny I had to blod it again. It's one of those "it's funny becuase it's true" moments lol. CCP, why you don't let me like his post 1 million tmes huh? People just aren't taking current conditions into account at all. It's like they are saying "OMG, now I will get tackled by a Curse I didn't see on D-scan (but could have seen if I had combat probes out) instead of the Pilgrim (that not even combat probes can pick up) that decloaked next to me, and that's terrible!!!" I've seen some really nonsense thinking here in Features and Ideas (I wonder if all those guys who said the Navy Raven will be crap after losing it's RoF bonus and utility slot are still around to claim this lol), but this reaction to a change (d-scan immunity) that is inherently weaker than something that already exists (Covert Cloaks) is mind boggling.
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9160	Posted - 2014.12.20 16:15:20 - [1198] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Another advocate of the changes to recon dscanning. Another guy who has barely ever pvp'd. Hey look, another guy appealing to the authority of his killboard when killboards mean nothing (in pvp or otherwise).
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1271	Posted - 2014.12.20 16:15:42 - [1199] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: If those fleet comps are as toxic as kiting has become in this game, good. Kiting is toxic? Kiting, counter kiting, baiting, hiding assets and numbers etc are all strategies at make eve pvp what it is. Invisibility to scans and the already powerful ewar profile of recons circumvent the need for any traditional pvp skills. Saying that kiting locks low sp toons into certain death is stupid. Anyone with a mwd, scram and a mind to fit properly can have a go at a kite. Impling that recons are a panacea for low sp toons to escape the tedium of being killed by kiters is so dumb im amazed you said it since recons are not well known for their low sp demands. All this does is limit the number of viable min/max doctrines to one for most people who cant or dont want to just blob the **** out of their target. It also means that large parts of the game are very easily locked out for solo and micro gang regardless of ship/sp (unless you bring your own recons lol) You are all over the place in this thread and seem to be advocating for this as a generic ccp fanboy.
Emilia Istis Alter Ego Inc. 7	Posted - 2014.12.20 16:17:12 - [1200] - Quote d-scan immunity is kinda OP, very difficult gameplay becomes even more difficult. (from the point of view of potential victims) in some situations that come to my mind is better than a cloak. Solution: maybe if it were possible to see it on the d-scan at a small distance, for example, less than 100.000 km or one million or maybe give them Cloake without Delay or a bonus to T2 cloak or they can stay in the cloak only for a limited time, then wait the appropriate cooldown now will arise very specific ships with a very big advantage, and a very small amount disadvantages, and the whole time talking about one. and yet he can have 10 thousand closest friends :) d-scan immunity is a very cool thing, but probably not in the game where you lose something, you lose it forever (too hardcore)

hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 96	Posted - 2014.12.20 16:25:33 - [1201] - Quote Here let me break down your response from a solo PvPers perspective so maybe you'll better understand the attitude that we're ***** TIRED OF. CCP Rise wrote: Just finished reading everything that was posted over night. Here's what I can update with at the moment: Biggest concern at the moment is the added EHP. Making recons a more realistic fleet option next to T3 cruisers is good, making them too tanky in smaller situations where their ewar already gives them a lot of damage evasion may be too much. Not sure if change is needed but will keep looking at this and update again asap. Because Nullblobs 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. Because solo and small gang PvPers they're a small portion of the playerbase anyways. CCP Rise [* wrote: The Pilgrim**. Opinions seem mixed, gaining neut range is obviously nice but many of you still feel that giving up neut strength is too harsh, or that some other added power is needed (more damage for instance). Will get back to you on this as soon as possible but it's possible that we will make adjustments. . Because High-sec/Null-sec care-bear gankers.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 251	Posted - 2014.12.20 16:29:07 - [1202] - Quote I am not sure why the dscan immunity is such a big deal. Instead of a Rapier, now i have a reason to fly a Hugin. What case does dscan change having a gang on a plex cloaked vers dscan immune? seriously whats the difference? And in WHs who the hell is flying around without a cloakie. We just don't fly non cloaks most of the time. I sure as hell aren't going to waste time ratting sleepers in anything smaller than a t3. It would just be far too slow. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9161	Posted - 2014.12.20 16:31:23 - [1203] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: But hey, keep playing the killboard game like it means anything. It's actually good, because in this forum section, having to fall back on killboard stats is the same as throwing an insult in other sections: It means that the poster knows he's wrong deep down and has to shore up his own confidence in some way. People with sound, logical arguments don't have to try to diminish their debate opponents by challenging their 'credentials' because their arguments are engouh to overcome opposition all by themselves. (who knew being a member of a high school debate club would come in handy 25,000 years in the future while flying space ships? ) You and I (and others, like Rise) know the truth here: Some who are reacting negatively to the change are being reasonable and have no horse in the race, BUT, many others are just people who have invested so much (too much) time in succeeding in the game by relying on and understanding and exploitationcurrent mechanics and this change threatens to knock them off the Throne of Elite PVP (or even pve if you listen to the wormhole people crying about d-scan immunity despite the fact that covert cloaking is way worse). It is a mistake to invest to heavily in learning the status quo to succeed in a game that has to be about change and redirection to survive. I don't like change just for change's sake, but I understand that good change is a good thing. We can debate whether HAC resists + d-scan immunity is too much, but claiming that d-scan immunty is the end of the world and the comming of Recons Online is just the same hurf-blerf we always see what a players 'special interest' is threatened.
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 96	Posted - 2014.12.20 16:33:52 - [1204] - Quote Delt0r Garsk wrote: I am not sure why the dscan immunity is such a big deal. Instead of a Rapier, now i have a reason to fly a Hugin. What case does dscan change having a gang on a plex cloaked vers dscan immune? seriously whats the difference? And in WHs who the hell is flying around without a cloakie. We just don't fly non cloaks most of the time. I sure as hell aren't going to waste time ratting sleepers in anything smaller than a t3. It would just be far too slow. Because if I warp to a medium with a slasher in it for a GF, all I have to do is wait a few seconds to know if there is a pilgrim on the other side because he has to decloak PRIOR to me arriving in the plex to be able to lock me. Furthermore, said pilgrim has to be 30km+ (outside of pointrange) away from the beacon to cloak.
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9161	Posted - 2014.12.20 16:34:31 - [1205] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: Here let me break down your response from a solo PvPers perspective so maybe you'll better understand the attitude that we're ***** TIRED OF. CCP Rise wrote: Just finished reading everything that was posted over night. Here's what I can update with at the moment: Biggest concern at the moment is the added EHP. Making recons a more realistic fleet option next to T3 cruisers is good, making them too tanky in smaller situations where their ewar already gives them a lot of damage evasion may be too much. Not sure if change is needed but will keep looking at this and update again asap. Because Nullblobs 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. Because solo and small gang PvPers they're a small portion of the playerbase anyways. CCP Rise [* wrote: The Pilgrim**. Opinions seem mixed, gaining neut range is obviously nice but many of you still feel that giving up neut strength is too harsh, or that some other added power is needed (more damage for instance). Will get back to you on this as soon as possible but it's possible that we will make adjustments. . Because High-sec/Null-sec care-bear gankers. You are aware that displaying irrational prejudice against something (ie, you over-use of the term 'nullblobs' which you use in every post) is a turn off and hurts your argument right? Because it outs you as so blatantly biased that your opinon thenmeans nothing. Just wanted to make sure you knew lol.
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 97	Posted - 2014.12.20 16:36:42 - [1206] - Quote I'm actually pointing out the irrational prejudice of CCP but sure yea whatever.
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9162	Posted - 2014.12.20 16:37:28 - [1207] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: Delt0r Garsk wrote: I am not sure why the dscan immunity is such a big deal. Instead of a Rapier, now i have a reason to fly a Hugin. What case does dscan change having a gang on a plex cloaked vers dscan immune? seriously whats the difference? And in WHs who the hell is flying around without a cloakie. We just don't fly non cloaks most of the time. I sure as hell aren't going to waste time ratting sleepers in anything smaller than a t3. It would just be far too slow. Because if I warp to a medium with a slasher in it for a GF, all I have to do is wait a few seconds to know if there is a pilgrim on the other side because he has to decloak PRIOR to me arriving in the plex to be able to lock me. Furthermore, said pilgrim has to be 30km+ (outside of pointrange) away from the beacon to cloak. So now you will have to be smarter, do something else, bring friends, and adapt. No where does CCP say "you will be able to do the same thing the same way for ever". While not all change is good, some change has to happen for a game to stay vital and interesting. If having to change tactics pushes you out of your comfort zone, the problem isn't the change, it's the fact that you allowed yourself to have a comfort zone in a competative game in the 1st place.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1272	Posted - 2014.12.20 16:42:02 - [1208] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: But hey, keep playing the killboard game like it means anything. It's actually good, because in this forum section, having to fall back on killboard stats is the same as throwing an insult in other sections: It means that the poster knows he's wrong deep down and has to shore up his own confidence in some way. People with sound, logical arguments don't have to try to diminish their debate opponents by challenging their 'credentials' because their arguments are engouh to overcome opposition all by themselves. (who knew being a member of a high school debate club would come in handy 25,000 years in the future while flying space ships? ) You and I (and others, like Rise) know the truth here: Some who are reacting negatively to the change are being reasonable and have no horse in the race, BUT, many others are just people who have invested so much (too much) time in succeeding in the game by relying on and understanding and exploitationcurrent mechanics and this change threatens to knock them off the Throne of Elite PVP (or even pve if you listen to the wormhole people crying about d-scan immunity despite the fact that covert cloaking is way worse). It is a mistake to invest to heavily in learning the status quo to succeed in a game that has to be about change and redirection to survive. I don't like change just for change's sake, but I understand that good change is a good thing. We can debate whether HAC resists + d-scan immunity is too much, but claiming that d-scan immunty is the end of the world and the comming of Recons Online is just the same hurf-blerf we always see what a players 'special interest' is threatened. Not even close. I would just like to point out that i have Recon and literally everything else to 5 in spaceship command. Ill fly whatever works. The problems i see come from how at the moment i have risk things to get content. With these recon changes i can effortlessly scout myself around and pick off targets with minimal effort risk or skill and a far greater conversion rate since people will get far less of a chance to run. Instead of putting words into peoples mouths you should really listen to what they say since it seems you have quite a lot to learn about debating (being unjustifiably patronising isnt winning), and about eve pvp too.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 251	Posted - 2014.12.20 16:42:07 - [1209] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: Delt0r Garsk wrote: I am not sure why the dscan immunity is such a big deal. Instead of a Rapier, now i have a reason to fly a Hugin. What case does dscan change having a gang on a plex cloaked vers dscan immune? seriously whats the difference? And in WHs who the hell is flying around without a cloakie. We just don't fly non cloaks most of the time. I sure as hell aren't going to waste time ratting sleepers in anything smaller than a t3. It would just be far too slow. Because if I warp to a medium with a slasher in it for a GF, all I have to do is wait a few seconds to know if there is a pilgrim on the other side because he has to decloak PRIOR to me arriving in the plex to be able to lock me. Furthermore, said pilgrim has to be 30km+ (outside of pointrange) away from the beacon to cloak. Not inside the plex, on the acceleration gate. Where we put our camps. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 97	Posted - 2014.12.20 16:42:48 - [1210] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: Delt0r Garsk wrote: I am not sure why the dscan immunity is such a big deal. Instead of a Rapier, now i have a reason to fly a Hugin. What case does dscan change having a gang on a plex cloaked vers dscan immune? seriously whats the difference? And in WHs who the hell is flying around without a cloakie. We just don't fly non cloaks most of the time. I sure as hell aren't going to waste time ratting sleepers in anything smaller than a t3. It would just be far too slow. Because if I warp to a medium with a slasher in it for a GF, all I have to do is wait a few seconds to know if there is a pilgrim on the other side because he has to decloak PRIOR to me arriving in the plex to be able to lock me. Furthermore, said pilgrim has to be 30km+ (outside of pointrange) away from the beacon to cloak. So now you will have to be smarter, do something else, bring friends, and adapt. No where does CCP say "you will be able to do the same thing the same way for ever". While not all change is good, some change has to happen for a game to stay vital and interesting. If having to change tactics pushes you out of your comfort zone, the problem isn't the change, it's the fact that you allowed yourself to have a comfort zone in a competative game in the 1st place. So I shouldn't be able to play solo forever as a PvPer is that what you're saying? Or are you saying I shouldn't be able to actively look for fights as a solo PvPer and should be instead forced to sit in my own plex baiting to look for fights? What I assume your saying is I shouldn't limit my fighting to plexes? Do you know what happens why you try to fight on a gate -10? Oh so I just need to not be -10? Then why even have it if there's no way to continue playing once you're there (obviously -10 characters are into PvP).

hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 97	Posted - 2014.12.20 16:43:47 - [1211] - Quote Delt0r Garsk wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: Delt0r Garsk wrote: I am not sure why the dscan immunity is such a big deal. Instead of a Rapier, now i have a reason to fly a Hugin. What case does dscan change having a gang on a plex cloaked vers dscan immune? seriously whats the difference? And in WHs who the hell is flying around without a cloakie. We just don't fly non cloaks most of the time. I sure as hell aren't going to waste time ratting sleepers in anything smaller than a t3. It would just be far too slow. Because if I warp to a medium with a slasher in it for a GF, all I have to do is wait a few seconds to know if there is a pilgrim on the other side because he has to decloak PRIOR to me arriving in the plex to be able to lock me. Furthermore, said pilgrim has to be 30km+ (outside of pointrange) away from the beacon to cloak. Not inside the plex, on the acceleration gate. Where we put our camps. In which case i spam the gate and warp away on the other side
Thanatos Marathon Phoibe Enterprises 371	Posted - 2014.12.20 16:51:28 - [1212] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: We can debate whether HAC resists + d-scan immunity is too much, but claiming that d-scan immunty is the end of the world and the comming of Recons Online is just the same hurf-blerf we always see what a players 'special interest' is threatened. It is the combination that will make it Combat Recons online. They won't be over utilized for Structure fights, but very rarely is solo/micro/small gang fighting done at a POS, etc. At the end of the day I'll end up using Combat Recons like every other PVP pilot who has the SP. I also have a scout alt, and a combat prober so the world won't come crashing down, it's just sad.
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9162	Posted - 2014.12.20 16:55:56 - [1213] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Not even close. I would just like to point out that i have Recon and literally everything else to 5 in spaceship command. Ill fly whatever works. The problems i see come from how at the moment i have risk things to get content. With these recon changes i can effortlessly scout myself around and pick off targets with minimal effort risk or skill and a far greater conversion rate since people will get far less of a chance to run. This is different from covert cloaking with no cloak deatcivation penalty on locking how exactly? This is the point that defeats entirley what you say, covert cloaks are WORSE than d-scan immunity. Quote: Instead of putting words into peoples mouths you should really listen to what they say since it seems you have quite a lot to learn about debating (being unjustifiably patronising isnt winning), and about eve pvp too. ] You do recall that is was YOU who started the ball rolling by trying to discredit people 'because killboard' right? No one is patronizing you, simply demonstrating why everythign you believe is measurably and demonstrably wrong. I predict this will be just like the Faction Battleship rebalance thread where people claimed that the Navy raven would be useless (ended up being even more popular for the things it's used for) or the pirate ship rebalance where people claimed the Rattlesnake with it's 'super drones' would suck....which is why you see null alliance have RATTLESNAKE FLEETS now because null alliances always make fleet comps out of ships that suck lol. I enjoyed the aftermaths of those discussions when reality proved the nay-sayers wrong (not that any of them ever admit it). I will enjoy the aftermath of this one when CCP implements this change, everything turns out fine and those of you so vocal in oppostion pretend like you never said anything
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1272	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:00:30 - [1214] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Not even close. I would just like to point out that i have Recon and literally everything else to 5 in spaceship command. Ill fly whatever works. The problems i see come from how at the moment i have risk things to get content. With these recon changes i can effortlessly scout myself around and pick off targets with minimal effort risk or skill and a far greater conversion rate since people will get far less of a chance to run. This is different from covert cloaking with no cloak deatcivation penalty on locking how exactly? This is the point that defeats entirley what you say, covert cloaks are WORSE than d-scan immunity. Quote: Instead of putting words into peoples mouths you should really listen to what they say since it seems you have quite a lot to learn about debating (being unjustifiably patronising isnt winning), and about eve pvp too. ] You do recall that is was YOU who started the ball rolling by trying to discredit people 'because killboard' right? No one is patronizing you, simply demonstrating why everythign you believe is measurably and demonstrably wrong. I predict this will be just like the Faction Battleship rebalance thread where people claimed that the Navy raven would be useless (ended up being even more popular for the things it's used for) or the pirate ship rebalance where people claimed the Rattlesnake with it's 'super drones' would suck....which is why you see null alliance have RATTLESNAKE FLEETS now because null alliances always make fleet comps out of ships that suck lol. I enjoyed the aftermaths of those discussions when reality proved the nay-sayers wrong (not that any of them ever admit it). I will enjoy the aftermath of this one when CCP implements this change, everything turns out fine and those of you so vocal in oppostion pretend like you never said anything Pubquiz, which cov ops cloak has no deactivation delay. Im looking for a ship class and bonus points for telling me why on earth would i be bothered by one of them tackling me. Why are you even posting when you clearly dont have a full grasp of even the current mechanics?
Thanatos Marathon Phoibe Enterprises 372	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:02:03 - [1215] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: This is different from covert cloaking with no cloak deatcivation penalty on locking how exactly? This is the point that defeats entirley what you say, covert cloaks are WORSE than d-scan immunity. Not in FW space they aren't. Acceleration gates make all the difference in the world when it comes to getting intel on cloaky vs dscan immune. [Edit: That's without even talking about locking delay]
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9162	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:07:30 - [1216] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: So I shouldn't be able to play solo forever as a PvPer is that what you're saying? Or are you saying I shouldn't be able to actively look for fights as a solo PvPer and should be instead forced to sit in my own plex baiting to look for fights? What I assume your saying is I shouldn't limit my fighting to plexes? Do you know what happens when you try to fight on a gate -10? Oh so I just need to not be -10? Then why even have it if there's no way to continue playing once you're there (obviously -10 characters are into PvP). So low sec only has gates and plexes, it doesn't have moons, planets, a star and billions of kilometers of space between those things. Hell someone call CCP and tell them low sec is broken lol. This post is an example of a person rationalizing why their comfort zone MUST exist. People do this to convince themselves that they don't need to adapt because "there is only one reasnable way anyways, so I can't adapt even if I wanted to". D-scan immunity changes very little. It costs very little on many ships to lnclude a scan probe launcher that lets you detect ANY uncloaked ship. If d-scan immunity is so dangerous, how then do you deal with covert cloaked ships for which not amount of combat probes will help you. I think it was you who said that the cloaked ship has to decloak BEFORE you get in the plex, right? Well, if you have scan probes out where he can see them, nothing changes at all. Hell, you don't even have to scan, jsut launching the probes andhainvg them out where a Combat Recon pilot can see them on d-scan would cause enough psycoligical unertainty to give you an advantage. You and others would be able to think of these things if you weren't too invested in the status quo.
Thanatos Marathon Phoibe Enterprises 372	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:11:12 - [1217] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: So I shouldn't be able to play solo forever as a PvPer is that what you're saying? Or are you saying I shouldn't be able to actively look for fights as a solo PvPer and should be instead forced to sit in my own plex baiting to look for fights? What I assume your saying is I shouldn't limit my fighting to plexes? Do you know what happens when you try to fight on a gate -10? Oh so I just need to not be -10? Then why even have it if there's no way to continue playing once you're there (obviously -10 characters are into PvP). So low sec only has gates and plexes, it doesn't have moons, planets, a star and billions of kilometers of space between those things. Hell someone call CCP and tell them low sec is broken lol. This post is an example of a person rationalizing why their comfort zone MUST exist. People do this to convince themselves that they don't need to adapt because "there is only one reasnable way anyways, so I can't adapt even if I wanted to". D-scan immunity changes very little. It costs very little on many ships to lnclude a scan probe launcher that lets you detect ANY uncloaked ship. If d-scan immunity is so dangerous, how then do you deal with covert cloaked ships for which not amount of combat probes will help you. I think it was you who said that the cloaked ship has to decloak BEFORE you get in the plex, right? Well, if you have scan probes out where he can see them, nothing changes at all. Hell, you don't even have to scan, jsut launching the probes andhainvg them out where a Combat Recon pilot can see them on d-scan would cause enough psycoligical unertainty to give you an advantage. You and others would be able to think of these things if you weren't too invested in the status quo. 1. You can't cloak within 30 of the capture point of a FW plex. 2. As an exercise Try shoehorning a combat probe launcher on a worm and tell me how it works out.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1272	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:11:22 - [1218] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: So I shouldn't be able to play solo forever as a PvPer is that what you're saying? Or are you saying I shouldn't be able to actively look for fights as a solo PvPer and should be instead forced to sit in my own plex baiting to look for fights? What I assume your saying is I shouldn't limit my fighting to plexes? Do you know what happens when you try to fight on a gate -10? Oh so I just need to not be -10? Then why even have it if there's no way to continue playing once you're there (obviously -10 characters are into PvP). So low sec only has gates and plexes, it doesn't have moons, planets, a star and billions of kilometers of space between those things. Hell someone call CCP and tell them low sec is broken lol. This post is an example of a person rationalizing why their comfort zone MUST exist. People do this to convince themselves that they don't need to adapt because "there is only one reasnable way anyways, so I can't adapt even if I wanted to". D-scan immunity changes very little. It costs very little on many ships to lnclude a scan probe launcher that lets you detect ANY uncloaked ship. If d-scan immunity is so dangerous, how then do you deal with covert cloaked ships for which not amount of combat probes will help you. I think it was you who said that the cloaked ship has to decloak BEFORE you get in the plex, right? Well, if you have scan probes out where he can see them, nothing changes at all. Hell, you don't even have to scan, jsut launching the probes andhainvg them out where a Combat Recon pilot can see them on d-scan would cause enough psycoligical unertainty to give you an advantage. You and others would be able to think of these things if you weren't too invested in the status quo. Thats like me saying you think communism sucks because you are too invested in the status quo. No, communism just sucks. Some things are just bad ideas.
Joshua Milton Blahyi Therapists Inc 52	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:11:42 - [1219] - Quote I am glad CCP was kind enough to release the counter to these recons before making these changes. No way confessor prices are going down to 40 mill anytime soon, there will be too much demand. Pilgrim really needs to be redone though. Being a weaker curse with a cloak is trash.
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 97	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:14:48 - [1220] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: So I shouldn't be able to play solo forever as a PvPer is that what you're saying? Or are you saying I shouldn't be able to actively look for fights as a solo PvPer and should be instead forced to sit in my own plex baiting to look for fights? What I assume your saying is I shouldn't limit my fighting to plexes? Do you know what happens when you try to fight on a gate -10? Oh so I just need to not be -10? Then why even have it if there's no way to continue playing once you're there (obviously -10 characters are into PvP). So low sec only has gates and plexes, it doesn't have moons, planets, a star and billions of kilometers of space between those things. Hell someone call CCP and tell them low sec is broken lol. This post is an example of a person rationalizing why their comfort zone MUST exist. People do this to convince themselves that they don't need to adapt because "there is only one reasnable way anyways, so I can't adapt even if I wanted to". D-scan immunity changes very little. It costs very little on many ships to lnclude a scan probe launcher that lets you detect ANY uncloaked ship. If d-scan immunity is so dangerous, how then do you deal with covert cloaked ships for which not amount of combat probes will help you. I think it was you who said that the cloaked ship has to decloak BEFORE you get in the plex, right? Well, if you have scan probes out where he can see them, nothing changes at all. Hell, you don't even have to scan, jsut launching the probes andhainvg them out where a Combat Recon pilot can see them on d-scan would cause enough psycoligical unertainty to give you an advantage. You and others would be able to think of these things if you weren't too invested in the status quo. Are you blatantly not reading anything anyone is posting? Also its quite clear that you have no idea what you're talking about. First of all my algos/tristan/dessy/frig is not going to have the cpu for a probe launcher. Second what fights are going on at moons? None... or pos bashes... i'm not solo bashing a pos. I should not have to have an alt to play "solo" in this game.

Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9162	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:17:34 - [1221] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Pubquiz, which cov ops cloak has no deactivation delay. Im looking for a ship class and bonus points for telling me why on earth would i be bothered by one of them tackling me. So you have yet to meet an ASB Stealth bomber that could hold you long enough for something else to decloak and kill you. Got it. As i said, I get it, you don't like it. Tough for you, if history (of CCP and Rise) is the guide, this will happen. You choice is adapt or unsub.
Khan Wrenth Hedion University Amarr Empire 85	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:17:56 - [1222] - Quote Okay, so I've only had time to read the first 29 pages of responses so far. And I think this entire thing is a very interesting topic indeed, from the top down. Lots of changes, lots of ideas, lots of excitement. That said, after taking in all that and processing all of the arguments for either side, I'd like to offer up my opinion now on one thing. The D-scan immunity. Yes, I saw the Dev post on page 38 that said it's staying. But I'd like to offer an idea, a perspective on what these ships do that might change a mind or two. Something to the combat recon that would serve it better instead of the d-scan immunity. It's a recon ship - any given race has two, so why don't we differentiate the roles more? The cloaky recon seems to be in a good spot overall with the upcoming changes. But with the combat recon, how's about we give it a role bonus for fitting an expanded core launcher plus signal strength on combat scanning probes? This will diverge the roles of the two ships in these ways. 1: Cloaky recon will be out and about looking for targets, or someone specific. It's quiet, it's discreet, and can covert cyno in buddies if it has to. The combat recon would be more forceful in its search. Being a sturdier and stronger ship with the coming upgrades, combine that with a better ability to fit and use combat scanners, and you have a ship that can aggressively hunt down prey. If we assume the removal of the d-scan immunity, this means that it is already more visible than its cloaky cousins, plus the explosion of combat scanner probes on the d-scan will be a further red alert to people in the area. Meaning it makes it easier for you to see them and get out of there, but only if you're paying attention. Because of his increased probe abilities, it's easier and faster for him to find YOU too. I'm imagining these things as inheriting the role of hunting down off-grid links, since they would then have the scanning power AND firepower to readily find and engage those command ships. Yes, other ships can scan down command ships which may or may not be made of glass depending on their fit, but smaller exploration frigates are not known for their massive firepower and you'd need a small army of them to take down a command ship before his reinforcements arrived. So each race will have a covert, quiet, sneaky recon vessel, and an aggressive bloodhound-esque hunter recon vessel. But hey that's just an idea. Maybe that's been presented in the other 30 pages I haven't gotten to yet (I will in due time, I have to get to sleep, then go to work, then head off for a short vacation so I won't be able to update myself on this topic for almost a week). No matter what happens with D-scan, I'm excited for the changes and even if there's a lot of voices opposing the d-scan immunity when it gets implemented, I'm certain in due time people will adapt and forget what all the noise was about in the first place. HTFU.-á Adapt or die.-á Beware the falcon punch.
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9165	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:25:21 - [1223] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: Are you blatantly not reading anything anyone is posting? Also its quite clear that you have no idea what you're talking about. First of all my algos/tristan/dessy/frig is not going to have the cpu for a probe launcher. Second what fights are going on at moons? None... or pos bashes... i'm not solo bashing a pos. And third the REASON that solo PvPers fight in plexes is not because that's all they know, it's because a plex has advantages for a solo player that open space does not (IE: you cannot warp to fleet mates outside or inside of a FW plex) I should not have to have an alt to play "solo" in this game. There it is. Talk to someone long enough, they will reveal the unreasonable sense of entitlement fueling their anger. CCP never promised anyone they could play this game 100% the way they want to at all times. If they did, I'd be running incursions and C6 complexes solo lol. This is the actual truth of EVE, but if you want to 'solo', you still can, just figure out new ways to do it. The fun part of games for well adjusted people is learning and doing new things and facing challenges (the fun part for maladjusted people is 'must win all the time'). What CCP is doing is going to be fun for lots of people. i'm sorry if you're not one of them but that's on you brother.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1272	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:31:40 - [1224] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: Are you blatantly not reading anything anyone is posting? Also its quite clear that you have no idea what you're talking about. First of all my algos/tristan/dessy/frig is not going to have the cpu for a probe launcher. Second what fights are going on at moons? None... or pos bashes... i'm not solo bashing a pos. And third the REASON that solo PvPers fight in plexes is not because that's all they know, it's because a plex has advantages for a solo player that open space does not (IE: you cannot warp to fleet mates outside or inside of a FW plex) I should not have to have an alt to play "solo" in this game. There it is. Talk to someone long enough, they will reveal the unreasonable sense of entitlement fueling their anger. CCP never promised anyone they could play this game 100% the way they want to at all times. If they did, I'd be running incursions and C6 complexes solo lol. This is the actual truth of EVE, but if you want to 'solo', you still can, just figure out new ways to do it. The fun part of games for well adjusted people is learning and doing new things and facing challenges (the fun part for maladjusted people is 'must win all the time'). What CCP is doing is going to be fun for lots of people. i'm sorry if you're not one of them but that's on you brother. Thats the smarmiest argument for a bait and switch scam ive heard today. CCP builds a game then changes a core rule and fanboys expect people not to question it lol.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10863	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:33:58 - [1225] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Impling that recons are a panacea for low sp toons to escape the tedium of being killed by kiters is so dumb im amazed you said it since recons are not well known for their low sp demands. Good thing I didn't actually say that. What I said was that if the Chicken Littles are correct and somehow Recons not being unviable somehow ruins kiting, that it's not a bad thing because kiting chokes out the little guy, and discourages people from taking fights. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9165	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:34:24 - [1226] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Thats like me saying you think communism sucks because you are too invested in the status quo. No, communism just sucks. Some things are just bad ideas. Ok, wat? I'm not saying anything like that at all. The fact that you so strongly resist what I'm saying (and what CCP is doing to one ship class in introducing a mechanic that is measurable weaker than the existing mechainc of covert ops cloaks) demonstrates a deep investment in the status quo. You claming that other posters beliefs are invalid due to their killboard stats (ie 'how succesful are you IN THE CURRENT STATUS QOU') is just another indicator lol. Change happens. Not all of it is good, and ALL change has (good and bad) unintended consequneces. I generally don't like change. In this case, the change in question will add value to an underused ship class while only negatively affecting a very small subset of people who don't want to adapt (the people who adapt, like those who will incorporate scan probe launchers on their ships, will be fine). That means that on-balance, most of the nay saying is just knee-jerk reactionary BS and CCP is safe (this time) to ignore it.
Thanatos Marathon Phoibe Enterprises 372	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:35:02 - [1227] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Pubquiz, which cov ops cloak has no deactivation delay. Im looking for a ship class and bonus points for telling me why on earth would i be bothered by one of them tackling me. So you have yet to meet an ASB Stealth bomber that could hold you long enough for something else to decloak and kill you. Got it. As i said, I get it, you don't like it. Tough for you, if history (of CCP and Rise) is the guide, this will happen. You choice is adapt or unsub. Thus Combat Recons Online.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1273	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:36:51 - [1228] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Impling that recons are a panacea for low sp toons to escape the tedium of being killed by kiters is so dumb im amazed you said it since recons are not well known for their low sp demands. Good thing I didn't actually say that. What I said was that if the Chicken Littles are correct and somehow Recons not being unviable somehow ruins kiting, that it's not a bad thing because kiting chokes out the little guy, and discourages people from taking fights. But recons that can warp in to a plex and create a 180km killzone dont kill new guys?, more than that they come with far less warning. Pretty sure this is a magnification of your objection to kiting so ill assume you agree with me about ninja recons.
Thanatos Marathon Phoibe Enterprises 372	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:37:51 - [1229] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Impling that recons are a panacea for low sp toons to escape the tedium of being killed by kiters is so dumb im amazed you said it since recons are not well known for their low sp demands. Good thing I didn't actually say that. What I said was that if the Chicken Littles are correct and somehow Recons not being unviable somehow ruins kiting, that it's not a bad thing because kiting chokes out the little guy, and discourages people from taking fights. Sorry to burst your bubble, but kiting is the life blood for many of the little guys. It's one of the few ways they can even attempt to take a fight against the big boys.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1273	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:38:34 - [1230] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Pubquiz, which cov ops cloak has no deactivation delay. Im looking for a ship class and bonus points for telling me why on earth would i be bothered by one of them tackling me. So you have yet to meet an ASB Stealth bomber that could hold you long enough for something else to decloak and kill you. Got it. As i said, I get it, you don't like it. Tough for you, if history (of CCP and Rise) is the guide, this will happen. You choice is adapt or unsub. A dual asb stealth bomber cannot scram anyone from 30km off the warp in where it would have to be to be able to cloak. So no, but do continue with your sage input. As for cov ops cloak i can only assure you it is not even close to as strong as dscan immunity will be.

Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9169	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:39:20 - [1231] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: fanboys . 1st of all, no one is telling anyone to not question something. You can question all you like. In this case, your questioning isn't questioning, it's pleading a case for not adding value to combat recon ships. Just wanted to illustrate the word In quoted. It's irratating when people use that word on a forum you have to PAY (either in plex or cash) to be able to post on. Somehow, people who use that word use it to suggest that others are blindly following CCP....while those same posters are blindly PAYING CCP MONEY. If you don't like CCP (or specific devs like Rise) why in hell are you continuing to give them money that they can use to further screw you over in the game they make lol?
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10864	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:40:56 - [1232] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Impling that recons are a panacea for low sp toons to escape the tedium of being killed by kiters is so dumb im amazed you said it since recons are not well known for their low sp demands. Good thing I didn't actually say that. What I said was that if the Chicken Littles are correct and somehow Recons not being unviable somehow ruins kiting, that it's not a bad thing because kiting chokes out the little guy, and discourages people from taking fights. But recons that can warp in to a plex and create a 180km killzone dont kill new guys?, more than that they come with far less warning. Pretty sure this is a magnification of your objection to kiting so ill assume you agree with me about ninja recons. What on earth is wrong with being hunted? That's a great thing, it will let people kill the freaking faction warfare farmers for once since their d-scan bots won't detect combat recons. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 97	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:41:42 - [1233] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: Are you blatantly not reading anything anyone is posting? Also its quite clear that you have no idea what you're talking about. First of all my algos/tristan/dessy/frig is not going to have the cpu for a probe launcher. Second what fights are going on at moons? None... or pos bashes... i'm not solo bashing a pos. And third the REASON that solo PvPers fight in plexes is not because that's all they know, it's because a plex has advantages for a solo player that open space does not (IE: you cannot warp to fleet mates outside or inside of a FW plex) I should not have to have an alt to play "solo" in this game. There it is. Talk to someone long enough, they will reveal the unreasonable sense of entitlement fueling their anger. CCP never promised anyone they could play this game 100% the way they want to at all times. If they did, I'd be running incursions and C6 complexes solo lol. This is the actual truth of EVE, but if you want to 'solo', you still can, just figure out new ways to do it. The fun part of games for well adjusted people is learning and doing new things and facing challenges (the fun part for maladjusted people is 'must win all the time'). What CCP is doing is going to be fun for lots of people. i'm sorry if you're not one of them but that's on you brother. Thats the smarmiest argument for a bait and switch scam ive heard today. CCP builds a game then changes a core rule and fanboys expect people not to question it lol. It's just a cop out because the argument I made was too strong and he/she has run out of ammunition due to his/her obvious lack of game knowledge. If subbing another account is what you call "adapting" then I'll see you in No Man's Sky.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10864	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:43:31 - [1234] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: It's just a cop out because the argument I made was too strong and he/she has run out of ammunition due to his/her obvious lack of game knowledge. If subbing another account is what you call "adapting" then I'll see you in No Man's Sky. I personally suggest Elite Dangerous instead. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Tuscor United System's Commonwealth 86	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:43:39 - [1235] - Quote great changes, looking forward to them going live. please stay strong on the scan immunity! T
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9169	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:43:50 - [1236] - Quote Thanatos Marathon wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Pubquiz, which cov ops cloak has no deactivation delay. Im looking for a ship class and bonus points for telling me why on earth would i be bothered by one of them tackling me. So you have yet to meet an ASB Stealth bomber that could hold you long enough for something else to decloak and kill you. Got it. As i said, I get it, you don't like it. Tough for you, if history (of CCP and Rise) is the guide, this will happen. You choice is adapt or unsub. Thus Combat Recons Online. Then bookmark this page. if that happens i'll come back here and say I was wrong. Will you and the other take the same challenge? Sidenote, I offered the same challenge to the people in the Faction BS and Pirate ship reblance threads. Not.a.single.one has shown up to admit they were wrong yet, so i do't hold much hope here either.
Thanatos Marathon Phoibe Enterprises 372	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:44:47 - [1237] - Quote FTFY Kaarous Aldural [i wrote: Gate camps, suicide ganking, and hot dropping people haven't been enough to wipe out solo/micro gang combat yet in FW. Why not see if un-dscannable Combat Recons with better stats can do the job? Even if it doesn't, at least we can keep those filthy solo pvpers out of medium and large plexes! [/i]
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 97	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:45:55 - [1238] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: It's just a cop out because the argument I made was too strong and he/she has run out of ammunition due to his/her obvious lack of game knowledge. If subbing another account is what you call "adapting" then I'll see you in No Man's Sky. I personally suggest Elite Dangerous instead. They'll have to make so HEFTY changes to the multiplayer aspect of the game before I can justify spending money on it.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10864	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:45:59 - [1239] - Quote Besides, how in the name of Zeus does this "kill solo"? It buffs solo a fair bit, since you can hunt people wtih Combat Recons now, with some actual potency. Hunting ratters for example just got a lot easier, ditto hunting wormhole bears. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Thanatos Marathon Phoibe Enterprises 372	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:46:23 - [1240] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Thanatos Marathon wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Pubquiz, which cov ops cloak has no deactivation delay. Im looking for a ship class and bonus points for telling me why on earth would i be bothered by one of them tackling me. So you have yet to meet an ASB Stealth bomber that could hold you long enough for something else to decloak and kill you. Got it. As i said, I get it, you don't like it. Tough for you, if history (of CCP and Rise) is the guide, this will happen. You choice is adapt or unsub. Thus Combat Recons Online. Then bookmark this page. if that happens i'll come back here and say I was wrong. Will you and the other take the same challenge? Sidenote, I offered the same challenge to the people in the Faction BS and Pirate ship reblance threads. Not.a.single.one has shown up to admit they were wrong yet, so i do't hold much hope here either. Yup, I'll gladly eat crow if FW lowsec space doesn't turn into Combat Recons Online. I doubt it will expand beyond that a hell of a lot cuz HACs, BS's, and CAPs will still be better for structure fights. I have no idea about WH's as I've only just started exploring them myself.

Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9172	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:46:25 - [1241] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: It's just a cop out because the argument I made was too strong and he/she has run out of ammunition due to his/her obvious lack of game knowledge. If subbing another account is how I'm expected to "adapt" in this game then I'll see you in No Man's Sky. ROFL, I bet you're one of those "No Man's Sky is gonna kill EVE" types too. Sidenote, going to play a game you actually like (until the No Man's Sky Devs rebalance you out of your comfort zone that is) is a great way to adapt .
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1273	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:46:28 - [1242] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: fanboys . 1st of all, no one is telling anyone to not question something. You can question all you like. In this case, your questioning isn't questioning, it's pleading a case for not adding value to combat recon ships. Just wanted to illustrate the word In quoted. It's irratating when people use that word on a forum you have to PAY (either in plex or cash) to be able to post on. Somehow, people who use that word use it to suggest that others are blindly following CCP....while those same posters are blindly PAYING CCP MONEY. If you don't like CCP (or specific devs like Rise) why in hell are you continuing to give them money that they can use to further screw you over in the game they make lol? Just like people complaining about incarna were just pleading for ccp to not add value to the game. The major problem here is you are apologising for ccp decisions in a discussion thread. There really isnt any problem with you putting your opinion forwards about liking it. Many people have done so and peaced out of the thread. The problem is that you seem to want to give feedback on other peoples feedback which makes you come off as a fan boy. You start an argument with someone then complain that they are arguing. Its pretty sad but standard on most forums today. And as i have already said, i will take advantage of these mechanics to the maximum. Exactly like i do with all other mechanics. Perhaps you capacity in game or imagination isnt as developed as mine but i can see this leading to a lot of pointless effortless ganks on a small pvp scale and a lot of fights are gonna come down to recon escalations if they have time to escalate at all. Now, what would be better than misrepresenting what i am saying in yet another post, is you commenting here about how whatever changes ccp make you are there, a willing soldier, rain or shine ready to accept even the worst changes in mechanics and we can all get on with it :)
Bakuhz Ebon Cartel Ebon Pestilence 167	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:47:37 - [1243] - Quote My Precious https://zkillboard.com/character/584042527/
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1273	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:50:02 - [1244] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Impling that recons are a panacea for low sp toons to escape the tedium of being killed by kiters is so dumb im amazed you said it since recons are not well known for their low sp demands. Good thing I didn't actually say that. What I said was that if the Chicken Littles are correct and somehow Recons not being unviable somehow ruins kiting, that it's not a bad thing because kiting chokes out the little guy, and discourages people from taking fights. But recons that can warp in to a plex and create a 180km killzone dont kill new guys?, more than that they come with far less warning. Pretty sure this is a magnification of your objection to kiting so ill assume you agree with me about ninja recons. What on earth is wrong with being hunted? That's a great thing, it will let people kill the freaking faction warfare farmers for once since their d-scan bots won't detect combat recons. Its a hell of a trade off to kill a few 300k isk stabbed farmers. The fact that is your aspiration says quite a lot.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10864	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:51:19 - [1245] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Just like people complaining about incarna were just pleading for ccp to not add value to the game. What? Protesting against pay to win/flushing years of dev time on a tech demo has nothing whatsoever to do with ship rebalancing. Totally incomparable things. Quote: The problem is that you seem to want to give feedback on other peoples feedback which makes you come off as a fan boy. Telling you that the sky isn't falling doesn't exactly qualify anyone as a fanboy. In fact, calling someone a "fanboy" is pretty much the biggest copout that exists in contemporary forum discourse. It's basically saying "I can't stand disagreement so I want to apply a negative label to try and silence them", and it's ******* pathetic. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 99	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:53:11 - [1246] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Besides, how in the name of Zeus does this "kill solo"? It buffs solo a fair bit, since you can hunt people wtih Combat Recons now, with some actual potency. Hunting ratters for example just got a lot easier, ditto hunting wormhole bears. It doesn't kill it, but it's definitely one more coolbro trap I'm going to have to endure, which there are already too many of (carrier drone asist, offgrid links on solo garmurs [as if they needed it], ect.), which is insanely frustrating. The main problem is if I warp into a plex thinking I'm getting a fairly even fight, there's no course of action I can take against there being an dscan immune recon on the inside of said plex. Furthermore if I'm in a plex and someone warps in on me, theres no warning of the dscan immune recon warping in. Honestly there's just no downside or balancing point. The covert recons drop cloak on the gate, have a locking delay, and have to fit an extra module in the highs. Just flat out balance-wise this makes the covert recons nearly 100% inferior in the few cases where they are currently used and gives the combat-recons an unnecessary buff even though they're already the ones that people actually use (at least in low sec).
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9172	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:53:26 - [1247] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: You start an argument with someone then complain that they are arguing. The denial and use of defense mechanisms is strong here. I wasn't the one who started the ball rolling by using a derogatory term (fanboy) or claiming that someone else's perspective was invlaid because of killboard stats. That, sir was you. In any event, this is gonna happen, more so because knowing Rise as we do (and his penchant for sticking to his guns) postings like yours just helped solidify his position. Therefore, thank you Crosi for you help in making D-Scan immune combat recons a reality Peace....out...
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10864	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:54:11 - [1248] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Its a hell of a trade off to kill a few 300k isk stabbed farmers. The fact that is your aspiration says quite a lot. Nothing of value is being lost, and my range of targets increases considerably. What's not to like? And yes, I like killing bots, it's why I donate to CODE. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Thanatos Marathon Phoibe Enterprises 372	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:55:16 - [1249] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: lots of stuff Hows that worm fit with the combat probes coming along?
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10864	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:57:37 - [1250] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: It doesn't kill it, but it's definitely one more coolbro trap I'm going to have to endure, which there are already too many of (carrier drone asist, offgrid links on solo garmurs [as if they needed it], ect.), which is insanely frustrating. Two of those things almost certainly should not exist. Viable recons almost certainly should. Quote: The main problem is if I warp into a plex thinking I'm getting a fairly even fight, there's no course of action I can take against there being an dscan immune recon on the inside of said plex. There are several. You just reject them because you think refusing to play an MMO with other people somehow makes you better than other people. Quote: Furthermore if I'm in a plex and someone warps in on me, theres no warning of the dscan immune recon warping in. See the above. Quote: Honestly there's just no downside or balancing point. Yeah, actually there is. It's just "cloak lite", giving you similar functionality while in warp but not on grid. The only major benefit is in fitting, which really doesn't mean much since most ships that fit cloaks do so with a fitting bonus anyway. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.

hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 99	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:06:24 - [1251] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: It doesn't kill it, but it's definitely one more coolbro trap I'm going to have to endure, which there are already too many of (carrier drone asist, offgrid links on solo garmurs [as if they needed it], ect.), which is insanely frustrating. Two of those things almost certainly should not exist. Viable recons almost certainly should. Quote: The main problem is if I warp into a plex thinking I'm getting a fairly even fight, there's no course of action I can take against there being an dscan immune recon on the inside of said plex. There are several. You just reject them because you think refusing to play an MMO with other people somehow makes you better than other people. Quote: Furthermore if I'm in a plex and someone warps in on me, theres no warning of the dscan immune recon warping in. See the above. Quote: Honestly there's just no downside or balancing point. Yeah, actually there is. It's just "cloak lite", giving you similar functionality while in warp but not on grid. The only major benefit is in fitting, which really doesn't mean much since most ships that fit cloaks do so with a fitting bonus anyway. I do actually fly in gangs, albeit small gangs. The main reason I fly solo or in small gangs is because I am looking for a challenge. I like to find challenges where my ability as a PvPer can surmount numbers, however with improper intel, and no way for me or my small gang to gain intel (aside from yet again one of us having a probing alt or shudders BEING the probing alt and we generally fly frigs and dessies because we have a lot of newbros so fitting a probe launcher isn't going to happen) it just gives another unneeded advantage to all the coolbros who want to pay to win. Dscan immunity not having some features of the covert cloak is not a downside. It is merely a(n arguably) lesser upside with no downside.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10866	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:13:12 - [1252] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: I do actually fly in gangs, albeit small gangs. The main reason I fly solo or in small gangs is because I am looking for a challenge. I however like to find challenges where my ability as a PvPer can surmount numbers, however with improper intel, and no way for me or my small gang to gain intel (aside from yet again one of us having a probing alt or shudders BEING the probing alt) it just gives another unneeded advantage to all the coolbros who want to pay to win. Dscan immunity not having some features of the covert cloak is not a downside. It is merely a(n arguably) lesser upside with no downside. If you fly in gangs then there is no problem. Your scout should have probes and a cloak anyway. Probes negate it's distance advantage, and having eyes on grid with a cloak shows you what's on grid waiting for you. Probes literally take seconds to get the same intel you would have gotten out of d-scan. So why all the "if you make me get another account I'll unsub and go play something else"? "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
maCH'EttE Mafia Redux 133	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:19:46 - [1253] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: I do actually fly in gangs, albeit small gangs. The main reason I fly solo or in small gangs is because I am looking for a challenge. I however like to find challenges where my ability as a PvPer can surmount numbers, however with improper intel, and no way for me or my small gang to gain intel (aside from yet again one of us having a probing alt or shudders BEING the probing alt) it just gives another unneeded advantage to all the coolbros who want to pay to win. Dscan immunity not having some features of the covert cloak is not a downside. It is merely a(n arguably) lesser upside with no downside. If you fly in gangs then there is no problem. Your scout should have probes and a cloak anyway. Probes negate it's distance advantage, and having eyes on grid with a cloak shows you what's on grid waiting for you. Probes literally take seconds to get the same intel you would have gotten out of d-scan. So why all the "if you make me get another account I'll unsub and go play something else"? I swear you must fly in large gangs, cuz your repetitive lip keeps saying, probes, probes, scouts, probes, probe scout, scout with combat probes, combat probes. you must not have a clue on how small gangs or solo combat works. Some people dont have the luxory of flying in 20+ gangs with links/sout/logi/ecm. wait let me guess, get a cloaky scout with probes.
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9175	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:20:28 - [1254] - Quote Thanatos Marathon wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: lots of stuff Hows that worm fit with the combat probes coming along? It came along fine once I installed a "I am not the only person flying" module ie a friend in a ship with combat probes. Or did I miss the memo from CCP that said you can do everything you want with 1 frigate sized ship and be safe from advanced CRUISERS like Combat Recons?
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 100	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:21:09 - [1255] - Quote Because small gangs do not have the manpower to suffice sacrificing another gun for a covert-ops scanner. Also because not a single PvPer I know out here wants to fly a cov-ops scanner in a PvP roam. I didn't say that, though I may not have been 100% clear. Here's what I meant. If subbing another account is how CCP expects me to PvP and continues making changes on that notion I will be forced to play a spaceshippewpew game where that is not the case as I cannot afford more than 1 sub.
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 100	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:23:30 - [1256] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Thanatos Marathon wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: lots of stuff Hows that worm fit with the combat probes coming along? It came along fine once I installed a "I am not the only person flying" module ie a friend in a ship with combat probes. Or did I miss the memo from CCP that said you can do everything you want with 1 frigate sized ship and be safe from advanced CRUISERS like Combat Recons? No you missed the memo where CCP said that to have the ability to pick fights intelligently you now need either a scanning alt or one of your friends (who is playing the game for pvp) has to fly around a scan ship instead.
Joshua Milton Blahyi Therapists Inc 54	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:23:56 - [1257] - Quote maCH'EttE wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: I do actually fly in gangs, albeit small gangs. The main reason I fly solo or in small gangs is because I am looking for a challenge. I however like to find challenges where my ability as a PvPer can surmount numbers, however with improper intel, and no way for me or my small gang to gain intel (aside from yet again one of us having a probing alt or shudders BEING the probing alt) it just gives another unneeded advantage to all the coolbros who want to pay to win. Dscan immunity not having some features of the covert cloak is not a downside. It is merely a(n arguably) lesser upside with no downside. If you fly in gangs then there is no problem. Your scout should have probes and a cloak anyway. Probes negate it's distance advantage, and having eyes on grid with a cloak shows you what's on grid waiting for you. Probes literally take seconds to get the same intel you would have gotten out of d-scan. So why all the "if you make me get another account I'll unsub and go play something else"? I swear you must fly in large gangs, cuz your repetitive lip keeps saying, probes, probes, scouts, probes, probe scout, scout with combat probes, combat probes. you must not have a clue on how small gangs or solo combat works. Some people dont have the luxory of flying in 20+ gangs with links/sout/logi/ecm. wait let me guess, get a cloaky scout with probes. Confessor. Has probes, DPS, can hide in small pieces away from scary recons.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10866	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:24:15 - [1258] - Quote maCH'EttE wrote: I swear you must fly in large gangs, cuz your repetitive lip keeps saying, probes, probes, scouts, probes, probe scout, scout with combat probes, combat probes. you must not have a clue on how small gangs or solo combat works. Some people dont have the luxory of flying in 20+ gangs with links/sout/logi/ecm. wait let me guess, get a cloaky scout with probes. Devils usually flies less than a dozen people. In our "stream snipe" of Lazarus Telraven the other day, we flew a smaller handful of pilots. We somehow manage to have scouts and eyes where we need them with little trouble. But all of your "I shouldn't have to" just exposes how fat and comfortable you've gotten with d-scan providing such perfect intel. Something comes along that bypasses that otherwise perfect trick, and you lot lose your freaking minds. What is wrong with your attitude? All I can think of for these ships is how much fun I will have hunting people in a Curse. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 9175	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:25:35 - [1259] - Quote maCH'EttE wrote: I swear you must fly in large gangs, cuz your repetitive lip keeps saying, probes, probes, scouts, probes, probe scout, scout with combat probes, combat probes. you must not have a clue on how small gangs or solo combat works. Some people dont have the luxory of flying in 20+ gangs with links/sout/logi/ecm. wait let me guess, get a cloaky scout with probes. Yo Kaarous, notice how these discussions always turn into the same thing whether is miniers whining about ganking or pvp'rs mad about the 'death of solo'? People don't want to have to cooperate with others to achieve their goals and blames CCP for not catering to their anti-social desires. Funny thing is how those same people look down their noses at people who can actually cooperate with others (null "blobbers", CODE, the organized Wormhole groups, goons, Marmite, RvB etc etc)
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 101	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:26:35 - [1260] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: maCH'EttE wrote: I swear you must fly in large gangs, cuz your repetitive lip keeps saying, probes, probes, scouts, probes, probe scout, scout with combat probes, combat probes. you must not have a clue on how small gangs or solo combat works. Some people dont have the luxory of flying in 20+ gangs with links/sout/logi/ecm. wait let me guess, get a cloaky scout with probes. Devils usually flies less than a dozen people. In our "stream snipe" of Lazarus Telraven the other day, we flew a smaller handful of pilots. We somehow manage to have scouts and eyes where we need them with little trouble. But all of your "I shouldn't have to" just exposes how fat and comfortable you've gotten with d-scan providing such perfect intel. Something comes along that bypasses that otherwise perfect trick, and you lot lose your freaking minds. What is wrong with your attitude? All I can think of for these ships is how much fun I will have hunting people in a Curse. Something comes along that bypasses that WITH NO DOWNSIDE and takes the place of its counterpart in every situation where I see it used (in lowsec) when said counterpart was already the lesser used of the two.

Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10866	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:28:47 - [1261] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: Something comes along that bypasses that WITH NO DOWNSIDE and takes the place of its counterpart in every situation where I see it used (in lowsec) when said counterpart was already the lesser used of the two. With the slight exception of cloak delay, a cov ops cloak is still the superior of the two mechanics. But let's not even pretend that you're here trying to look out for the cloaked recons. You're here to protect your niche from something that you think might rattle it some, simple as that. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 519	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:29:33 - [1262] - Quote Thanatos Marathon wrote: Thus Combat Recons Online. You know that everytime our ships get changed, EVE is dying, cannot be played anymore, kills everyone, the world ends, everything is impossible, must join goons, hate goons,.... First and foremost I have observed that most of the horror-ideas you have on TQ come from those very threads you were posting in. So by stating what could happen, you put ideas into everyones heads to prove you right. If you wouldn't respond nothing would happen or at least not much. People really don't like to think for themselves and need help for the tinyest things. So what to do? Yes, look in the forums, look at player videos and do the same thing they are doing. You should know that the recon changes are the anouncement of the sleeper cruiser change, coming to your client in early 2015 but you cannot see that far ahead. signature
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 103	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:34:20 - [1263] - Quote And thus all constructive conversation inevitably devolves into coolbros who plan on paying to win with said change downplaying everyone else's opinion because they wont "man up and plex another account" or "magically train all their newbros to scan" or "miraculously make low sec pvpers want to be the dedicated scanner for their fleet". And here I was trying to look at how this will realistically effect the portion of the game that I know. Silly me, I thought we were stating opinions here but I was mistaken. We're clearly just picking apart others opinions without having any constructive input of our own. My bad.
Sabrina Scatterbrain United Souls Research And Development 22	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:35:59 - [1264] - Quote Recons not on D-scan? So what you're saying is that you want wormhole space to be a bloodbath for a week and then completely dead? Or, is this a way to increase scout subs after banning isoboxer?
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10866	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:36:57 - [1265] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: And thus all constructive conversation inevitably devolves into coolbros who plan on paying to win with said change downplaying everyone else's opinion because they wont "man up and plex another account" or "magically train all their newbros to scan" or "miraculously make low sec pvpers want to be the dedicated scanner for their fleet". First of all, and coming from me it's especially damning, that is a massive run-on sentence. Secondly, you seem to act like scouts are some big gigantic unreasonable weight around your neck or something. Thirdly, what in the Burning Hells is a "coolbro", anyway? Quote: And here I was trying to look at how this will realistically effect the portion of the game that I know. Silly me, I thought we were stating opinions here but I was mistaken. We're clearly just picking apart others opinions without having any constructive input of our own. My bad. I have constructive input. CCP Rise, these are excellent changes, please do not bow to pressure from groups who are trying to argue their own self interest coming before proper ship balancing. The end. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kmelx Matari Exodus 106	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:41:05 - [1266] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Besides, how in the name of Zeus does this "kill solo"? It buffs solo a fair bit, since you can hunt people wtih Combat Recons now, with some actual potency. Hunting ratters for example just got a lot easier, ditto hunting wormhole bears. Solo pvping and a lot of small gang pvping which you do not understand as an "elite" high sec PVPer is about going out solo and looking for good fights. That is you fighting against the odds against gangs that are more numerous. basically you look for good challenging fights. Most of the time you are not hunting ratters per se but that is not unheard of, your just putting yourself in space and giving people the opportunity to fight you. Recon's do not have the dps to solo most combat ships. What they do have the ability to do is ruin good fights, they ruin small gang and solo fights because they are a massive force multiplier and convey an overwhelming advantage to the side who possesses them. Ranged neuts kill active tanks, neutralise guns that use cap and force kiting ships to stay outside of tackle range. Ranged tp's aid damage application at a distance and in close. Ranged webs ensure that a gang applies it's full dps to you, prevent kiting altogether and prevent you from withdrawing if something goes wrong. And ranged tackle prevent's withdrawal in the same way. Ranged damps and ewar and tracking disruption ensure you cannot even fight back as someone kills you. And the ability not to assess a fight for this or see it coming is massive buff to gate camps and plex campers and other bads who you can end up fighting. At the moment if I see a recon or T3 decloak there is a six or so second delay in which I have to react to that change. That allows me to react to the presence of the recon, I can lock it back and put drones on it, I can bail from the fight, I can change my positioning and burn towards it etc to put me in a better position to counter it, or I can burn outside of it's effective range. Covert ops recons have an excellent bonus and a significant disadvantage for holding that bonus, they get a locking timer and a weaker tank. In a small gang I can call a target switch to the recon and try to kill it due to it's weaker tank before it has a deleterious effect on the fight. Combat recons don't have a d-scan presence, as proposed, so there is no locking timer. so they hit the grid and two to three seconds after landing the fight is over. You can't see them coming and you can't react to their presence in time for it to do you any good, you can't cap them out because they now have better cap and you can't kill them before they've ruined the fight because they have HAC grade tanks. There is no drawback to these ships are proposed and no counter to them solo, in small gang, you can gimp your dps by bringing a Keres which might allow you to neutralize one enemy recon because recons have crazy locking ranges, how then do you also counter the army of T1 logi or T2 logi that gets brought into these fights if your paper thin Keres is busy with both staying alive and keeping a recon out of the fight? It's extremely difficult to break logi with dps, unless your all flying heavier ships and even then it can be all but impossible, some of the people we fight or have tried to fight bring more logi ships to the grid than we have dps ships in our gangs. They bring enough reps to rep the damage output of a gang five or more times our size. I realize that as an "elite" high sec PVPer you have a massive hard on for this change, because it would allow you to go out and gank carebears in high sec with massive impunity, they will not see you coming until your recon lands on grid. At which point they are dead, you like it because you enjoy a dull unchallenging style of PVP in which you almost always win or will win. The rest of us want challenging PVP but we don't want to die at every turn to a plague of unbalanced recons that we cannot see coming.
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 103	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:41:20 - [1267] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: Something comes along that bypasses that WITH NO DOWNSIDE and takes the place of its counterpart in every situation where I see it used (in lowsec) when said counterpart was already the lesser used of the two. With the slight exception of cloak delay, a cov ops cloak is still the superior of the two mechanics. But let's not even pretend that you're here trying to look out for the cloaked recons. You're here to protect your niche from something that you think might rattle it some, simple as that. I'm not here to protect my niche. I'm here to tell you how it will negatively effect my niche in hopes that a few changes to the mechanic will be made to keep it in line with the other ships. Like I said before, the covop cloak deactivates at the gate, the covops cloak cant be activated within 30km of the plex, the covops cloak has a locking delay, the covops cloak takes a high slot. The immunity to dscan has none of these, serves the only purpose that of covert recons (in lowsec) better while also having better base stats and better fitting. Meaning after this change I will not only very likely never see another covert recon in low sec, but I will also see an overuse of combat recons because the mechanic (if implemented in this way) is not correctly balanced.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 938	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:44:37 - [1268] - 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.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10866	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:44:38 - [1269] - Quote Kmelx, I stopped reading when you made a claim that e-honor should come before ship balancing. Do you have a TL;DR for that post? "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Lug Muad'Dib Wise Humans Sword 23	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:49:12 - [1270] - Quote All thing in eve need drawback, fast locking undetectable recon is no way, or solo and small gang will just never fight outside of novice and small plex, good luck to hunt people here with your recon... Kaarous Aldurald wrote: kiting chokes out the little guy, and discourages people from taking fights. Learn basic gameplay mechanic before posting perhaps ? D-Scan immunity is dumb.

Kmelx Matari Exodus 109	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:49:14 - [1271] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Kmelx, I stopped reading when you made a claim that e-honor should come before ship balancing. Do you have a TL;DR for that post? Sure TLDR: Your highsec ganker PVP viewpoint is worthless to the discussion of the effect this change will have on low and null sec solo and small gang PVP.
Rammix TheMurk 317	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:49:16 - [1272] - Quote I think combat recons should be visible on d-scan during first 5 seconds after entering a system. Similar to cloaky ships. OpenSUSE 13.2, wine 1.7.32 Covert cyno in highsec: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=296129&find=unread
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10867	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:51:07 - [1273] - Quote Lug Muad'Dib wrote: All thing in eve need drawback, fast locking undetectable recon is no way, or solo and small gang will just never fight outside of novice and small plex, good luck to hunt people here with your recon... Kaarous Aldurald wrote: kiting chokes out the little guy, and discourages people from taking fights. Learn basic gameplay mechanic before posting perhaps ? So you'd totally engage a Zealot fleet with a bunch of Thoraxes? "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10867	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:52:28 - [1274] - Quote Kmelx wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Kmelx, I stopped reading when you made a claim that e-honor should come before ship balancing. Do you have a TL;DR for that post? Sure TLDR: Your highsec ganker PVP viewpoint is worthless to the discussion of the effect this change will have on low and null sec solo and small gang PVP. And meanwhile, the opinions of people who pound their fist on the table screaming about how d-scan should be perfect so they never have to use scouts... are worthless in their entirety. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Adrie Atticus Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion 726	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:54:28 - [1275] - Quote Thanatos Marathon wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Pubquiz, which cov ops cloak has no deactivation delay. Im looking for a ship class and bonus points for telling me why on earth would i be bothered by one of them tackling me. So you have yet to meet an ASB Stealth bomber that could hold you long enough for something else to decloak and kill you. Got it. As i said, I get it, you don't like it. Tough for you, if history (of CCP and Rise) is the guide, this will happen. You choice is adapt or unsub. Thus Combat Recons Online. Go against an equally sized fleet of shield Ishtars and tell me how that went.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 938	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:55:29 - [1276] - Quote why are people talking about entire fleets of combat recons? are you guys ********?
Caval Marten Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 17	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:56:09 - [1277] - Quote 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.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 938	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:57:48 - [1278] - 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.
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 106	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:59:31 - [1279] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: I have constructive input. CCP Rise, these are excellent changes, please do not bow to pressure from groups who are trying to argue their own self interest coming before proper ship balancing. The end. not constructive input Kaarous Aldurald wrote: So you'd totally engage a Zealot fleet with a bunch of Thoraxes? not constructive input Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Kmelx, I stopped reading when you made a claim that e-honor should come before ship balancing. Do you have a TL;DR for that post? not constructive input Kaarous Aldurald wrote: First of all, and coming from me it's especially damning, that is a massive run-on sentence. Secondly, you seem to act like scouts are some big gigantic unreasonable weight around your neck or something. Thirdly, what in the Burning Hells is a "coolbro", anyway? not constructive input Kaarous Aldurald wrote: I have constructive input. CCP Rise, these are excellent changes, please do not bow to pressure from groups who are trying to argue their own self interest coming before proper ship balancing. The end. not constructive input Furthermore, https://zkillboard.com/character/1567529520/ my main (however not subbed atm). Will I exploit the **** out of this when he's subbed? Hell yea. Does that mean it's good for the game? Hell no. You're arguing for this so that you can overabuse the very imbalances that we're trying to discuss, discrediting our valid concerns, while offering absolutely no constructive counter-point by which we can take you seriously and actually have a debate. please stfu
Kmelx Matari Exodus 109	Posted - 2014.12.20 19:01:05 - [1280] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: it's a discussion, not a vote. that said, rise is still terrible. TBH were discussing it, CCP are not. From one of my earlier posts: Kmelx wrote: If you look at the timings, Rise's initial post was made at 2014-12-18 14:57:04 UTC. His we've noticed you don't seem to like this change but zero f**ks given reply was made within less than a day at 2014-12-19 11:15:14 UTC and then CCP Seagull announced it as a the number one feature of Proteus at 2014-12-19 16:15. They "consulted" with the wider playerbase for less than 26 hours about this change before they made it the top features/balance announcement in Seagull's dev blog. No clearer indication that they had no intention of taking the players viewpoints on board was needed, it was a fait accompli, we've decided to inform you were are doing this announcement, taking into account the Christmas and New Year holidays and the intransigence of Rise's reply to the concerns raised, this "balance" change is going out in Proteus.

Lug Muad'Dib Wise Humans Sword 23	Posted - 2014.12.20 19:01:53 - [1281] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: So you'd totally engage a Zealot fleet with a bunch of Thoraxes? If you don't see how kiting make solo/ small gang engage fight more often, and how a well FC loose no ship or make kill against kiting small gang, well, just go pvp and learn the very basic mechanic, it won't take years. D-Scan immunity is dumb.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10867	Posted - 2014.12.20 19:02:28 - [1282] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: You're arguing for this so that you can overabuse the very imbalances that we're trying to discuss, discrediting our valid concerns, while offering absolutely no constructive counter-point by which we can take you seriously and actually have a debate. No, I'm arguing for this because I actually want to fly these ships. They are cool as hell, and they've been pretty badly unviable for a long damned time now. Changes that improve them to be useful and viable are a positive. Being off of d-scan is unique, useful, and opens up a whole new dimension of combat in the game. And I truly don't care if said changes upset your little birdcage. Quote: please stfu You first. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Iain Cariaba 784	Posted - 2014.12.20 19:02:58 - [1283] - Quote Do I think dscan immunity is a good idea? No, I do not. I think all the rest of the changes to the recons are wonderful. However, when you combine the combat recon buffs with the dscan immunity, I think you get something way over powered. How will this effect my game? If I'm ratting, then no more waiting to see if the neut that just came in is an explorer, safe up immediately. If I'm out hunting other ratters, then flying anything other than a combat recon is stupid. Like all big changes CCP makes, I'll stick around and see what's up after the dust settles. Just a reminder to CCP, though. You are no longer the only option in the internet spaceships niche anymore. You would do well to remember this, and maybe start listening to your players. The players you drive away can now get their internet spaceship game play without having to return here, as they have had to do in the past. No, I have voiced my opinions. Since this thread has devolved into yet another circular argument, I shall not be looking at it again. I will bide my time, and see if the latest batch of changes is worth maintaining my subs, as always. EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 938	Posted - 2014.12.20 19:05:11 - [1284] - Quote so people are saying to 'just use probes'. how do I fit an expanded probe launcher to my thorax?
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 519	Posted - 2014.12.20 19:05:14 - [1285] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: 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 dear, I have made a suggestion for slot changes a few pages back. Feel free to comment and take a look. signature
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10867	Posted - 2014.12.20 19:06:26 - [1286] - Quote 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. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Caval Marten Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 17	Posted - 2014.12.20 19:06:54 - [1287] - Quote Kmelx wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: it's a discussion, not a vote. that said, rise is still terrible. TBH were discussing it, CCP are not. From one of my earlier posts: Kmelx wrote: If you look at the timings, Rise's initial post was made at 2014-12-18 14:57:04 UTC. His we've noticed you don't seem to like this change but zero f**ks given reply was made within less than a day at 2014-12-19 11:15:14 UTC and then CCP Seagull announced it as a the number one feature of Proteus at 2014-12-19 16:15. They "consulted" with the wider playerbase for less than 26 hours about this change before they made it the top features/balance announcement in Seagull's dev blog. No clearer indication that they had no intention of taking the players viewpoints on board was needed, it was a fait accompli, we've decided to inform you were are doing this announcement, taking into account the Christmas and New Year holidays and the intransigence of Rise's reply to the concerns raised, this "balance" change is going out in Proteus. Good point. And to trouser, I wasn't implying it was a vote, I just wanted to see how clear it was that there were really never any strong counter-arguments. The overwhelming amount of feedback i've seen is negative, just trying to figure out if it is my own confirmation bias though.
Lug Muad'Dib Wise Humans Sword 23	Posted - 2014.12.20 19:10:43 - [1288] - Quote TrouserDeagle do some solo without OGB, scout, etc.. Be in Shadow Cartel or any other big alliance don't mean "hey don't learn pvp, just stay in fleet and press F1 when FC ask you" D-Scan immunity is dumb.
Liet Ormand Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 9	Posted - 2014.12.20 19:11:12 - [1289] - Quote I have to say, after reading through this thread as it's grown: Most of the players here are passionate about Eve to the point of insanity. If I was CCP, I'd ignore most of this thread completely simply because so few people are rational in it. It's like watching the "Occupy" protests that happened in the US a couple years back. Everyone involved was angry about something and convinced that a movement was under way to make big changes. Yet if you talked to any two people about what they were protesting you'd get two different and sometimes conflicting answers. About all this thread is good for at the moment is seeing all the different ways outraged people can snipe at each other and at CCP-Rise.
Thenoran Tranquility Industries 26	Posted - 2014.12.20 19:14:00 - [1290] - Quote Modifying the Pilgrim bonus from strength to range will generally just make it a worse Curse. If the Curse is dscan immune, what is the difference between a Curse in a plex or a cloaked Pilgrim in a plex? The curse will have the additional neut strength and no targeting delay. Whilst it does improve the Pilgrim for a fleet, is that really what you want to use a Pilgrim for? Out of the 4 Force Recons, is a neut range bonus really going to make the Pilgrim that more desirable in a fleet? If you want to neut ships out why not just bring Curses instead and use a different Force Recon for the cyno? Furthermore, most Pilgrim fits have only two high slots available for neuts, the other two going to a probe launcher and the other to the cloak. That doesn't leave much neuting power at all, just two regular neuts with more range. Nothing is going get capped out by that anytime soon. The range bonus is also not needed as a replacement (if that was the intention) for the strength bonus because the Pilgrim can already dictate range due to its cloak. Yes it is forced into scram range but within that range and the neut strength bonus it will cap out just about anything within a few cycles. Naturally the target can have friends but that in itself has no relation to the Pilgrim. By swapping out the neut strength bonus, it becomes entirely a fleet only ship because it won't be able to kill anything on its own. And within fleets, those two (maybe three) medium neuts with NO neut strength bonus are just going get laughed at. Furthermore, the range works on the Curse because the Curse can kite with a shield tank. The Pilgrim is not only to slow itself to kite, but it is armor tanked, meaning it becomes a brick. If you want to give a buff, give it an addtional low slot for a stronger tank or a drone damage amp or an additional high slot for another neut or nos. The other alternative is to give a light range bonus IN ADDITION to the neut strength bonus so it can neut within warp disruptor range as well as warp scrambler range, say 20% like the strength bonus.

hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 106	Posted - 2014.12.20 19:16:14 - [1291] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: You're arguing for this so that you can overabuse the very imbalances that we're trying to discuss, discrediting our valid concerns, while offering absolutely no constructive counter-point by which we can take you seriously and actually have a debate. No, I'm arguing for this because I actually want to fly these ships. They are cool as hell, and they've been pretty badly unviable for a long damned time now. Changes that improve them to be useful and viable are a positive. Being off of d-scan is unique, useful, and opens up a whole new dimension of combat in the game. And I truly don't care if said changes upset your little birdcage. Quote: please stfu You first. Want to fly them? Come to lowsec, they have their place here and they're definitely not underpowered or underused. As a matter of fact I'd say they're pretty close to where they need to be barring maybe a few stat changes. Honestly, you're playing in a smaller birdcage than I am and acting like the entire game should revolve around you wanting to fly a different ship. You want to fly a new ship? Do something new. That's what I did.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 731	Posted - 2014.12.20 19:16:43 - [1292] - Quote Thenoran wrote: Modifying the Pilgrim bonus from strength to range will generally just make it a worse Curse. If the Curse is dscan immune, what is the difference between a Curse in a plex or a cloaked Pilgrim in a plex? The curse will have the additional neut strength and no targeting delay. Whilst it does improve the Pilgrim for a fleet, is that really what you want to use a Pilgrim for? Out of the 4 Force Recons, is a neut range bonus really going to make the Pilgrim that more desirable in a fleet? If you want to neut ships out why not just bring Curses instead and use a different Force Recon for the cyno? Furthermore, most Pilgrim fits have only two high slots available for neuts, the other two going to a probe launcher and the other to the cloak. That doesn't leave much neuting power at all, just two regular neuts with more range. Nothing is going get capped out by that anytime soon. The range bonus is also not needed as a replacement (if that was the intention) for the strength bonus because the Pilgrim can already dictate range due to its cloak. Yes it is forced into scram range but within that range and the neut strength bonus it will cap out just about anything within a few cycles. Naturally the target can have friends but that in itself has no relation to the Pilgrim. By swapping out the neut strength bonus, it becomes entirely a fleet only ship because it won't be able to kill anything on its own. And within fleets, those two (maybe three) medium neuts with NO neut strength bonus are just going get laughed at. Furthermore, the range works on the Curse because the Curse can kite with a shield tank. The Pilgrim is not only to slow itself to kite, but it is armor tanked, meaning it becomes a brick. If you want to give a buff, give it an addtional low slot for a stronger tank or a drone damage amp or an additional high slot for another neut or nos. The other alternative is to give a light range bonus IN ADDITION to the neut strength bonus so it can neut within warp disruptor range as well as warp scrambler range, say 20% like the strength bonus. The Pilgrim really should get the neut range and amount bonus. It will still not be as good as the Curse, because it will fit fewer neutralizers, but that is a reasonable trade-off for being completely. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10869	Posted - 2014.12.20 19:22:38 - [1293] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: Honestly, you're playing in a smaller birdcage than I am and acting like the entire game should revolve around you wanting to fly a different ship. You want to fly a new ship? Do something new. That's what I did. Says the guy arguing that his desire to not have scouts in his fleet should dictate game balance? "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 574	Posted - 2014.12.20 19:24:15 - [1294] - Quote The question is simply does the level of tedium surrounding pissing about scanning ALL the time....outweigh people's risk aversion. It probably does. Maybe not for a few weeks whilst novelty wears off, but it probably will. PS: remember to check under your bed for rooks.
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 106	Posted - 2014.12.20 19:40:46 - [1295] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: Honestly, you're playing in a smaller birdcage than I am and acting like the entire game should revolve around you wanting to fly a different ship. You want to fly a new ship? Do something new. That's what I did. Says the guy arguing that his desire to not have scouts in his fleet should dictate game balance? yet again, not constructive. I never said we don't have scouts, I said that I don't know a single PvPer who wants to be a probing scout for a combat fleet. We use scouts all the time, but all but requiring a probe launcher definitely hurts the folks who like to (or have to because newbros) fly small frig/dessy gangs and do not have the resources to sub an alt for that sole purpose. Furthermore what the hell does having scouts have to do with the size of my "birdcage". I've clearly broken you. I'm sorry.
Mei Khlolov The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 4	Posted - 2014.12.20 19:49:51 - [1296] - Quote 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.
Rollo Brinalle Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 12	Posted - 2014.12.20 19:55:06 - [1297] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Quote: I can tell you what will happen most likely: - Less fights because people are risk averse - A 2nd account with a Prober at all times will be must, not an option. I think this is a complex debate and I'm sure that none of us understand player behavior completely, but my experience is actually the opposite of what you're saying. 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. I would be more worried with this mechanic that people have to spend a lot of time running probe scans when they really don't want to be than that they are avoiding engagements because of the possibility of Recons. I don't think this will be a problem but we'll have to wait and see. Yes it is a complex debate and why it should be shelved until CCP has more information and can come back with a resounding message on why this is a positive change for the game because based on the feedback here there is enough pushback that I can conclude it's not a positive change for the game. Even the logic is flawed because your saying "If the people don't know the ships are there then they will fly in to take a fight." Well of course they are because they don't know the extra ships are there that's not risk avoidance that plain entrapment. People don't avoid fights because they are risk adverse they avoid them because the setups are no where near even and who's going continually fly with an FC that suicides the fleet all the time? Who's going to go after targets blindly? Here's an analogy for you if you go to your barber to get a hair cut and he starts off by slapping you in the face how long before you just stop going? If you keep landing in on a couple of ships and getting slapped in the face how long before you just don't go fighting. Or you find other ways by either combat scan everything or have a cloaky ship warp in to check the area. So now everyone runs the moment combat probes go out or the entrapment doesn't work because you're sending cloakies in on every small target. Or some other unspecified method to get intel on the targets. Regardless it's more work for the same amount of fights and not a positive change. In short, you're telling us CCP is implementing a mechanic they have no clue how it will affect the game. I mean you said it yourself "I don't think this will be a problem but we'll have to wait and see." Well read the forum because there is a lot of people who say it WILL be a problem for them and you don't need to wait and see. Again I say take it off the table go back to the brainstorming room and find another way to make recon ships more viable because hiding them is not a solution.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10872	Posted - 2014.12.20 19:55:08 - [1298] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: yet again, not constructive. How is that? I'm just countering your assertions. Claiming that the changes are bad because you can't be asked to bring probes is what's really not constructive here. Quote: We use scouts all the time, but all but requiring a probe launcher definitely hurts the folks who like to (or have to because newbros) fly small frig/dessy gangs and do not have the resources to sub an alt for that sole purpose. Plenty of people make it work. Your failings don't reflect on ship balance. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 938	Posted - 2014.12.20 19:56:30 - [1299] - 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.
Mei Khlolov The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 4	Posted - 2014.12.20 19:58:55 - [1300] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: mixed drone waves are cancer How so

TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 938	Posted - 2014.12.20 20:07:25 - [1301] - 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 ******'.
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 106	Posted - 2014.12.20 20:08:18 - [1302] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: yet again, not constructive. How is that? I'm just countering your assertions. Claiming that the changes are bad because you can't be asked to bring probes is what's really not constructive here. Quote: We use scouts all the time, but all but requiring a probe launcher definitely hurts the folks who like to (or have to because newbros) fly small frig/dessy gangs and do not have the resources to sub an alt for that sole purpose. Plenty of people make it work. Your failings don't reflect on ship balance. Yet again not constructive and this is definitely my last response to you. I know what you do, I've seen you post before, you're profession really doesn't need to be taken into consideration when it comes to balancing the game because what you do inherently thrives on imbalance. If they were changing something that ruined a character you had been training for years I would say otherwise, that would be where your opinion should come into consideration. This is not one of those scenarios. Furthermore, you're taking what I said out of context (again, this seems to be the only thing you do on the forums) and putting words in my mouth to prove what? You think I'm wrong? Saying you're wrong is not constructive criticism unless you're explaining to me why you're right. I don't even know what you're argument is. You've offered no reasons why this change should go into effect except "dscan shouldn't be perfect" which is another opinion an not a fact to support an opinion.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 938	Posted - 2014.12.20 20:12:49 - [1303] - 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.
Vincintius Agrippa F L O O D 67	Posted - 2014.12.20 20:17:24 - [1304] - Quote Well congrats, you have destroyed medium and up faction warfare sites, along with other dead space sites. Being able to enter system, warp to beacon, activate gate without being detected, Its too.......op. H. Its like a cloak without a cloak and its targeting and speed penalties. Perhaps a less drastic buff. May I suggest an immunity up to 10AU, 7.5Au minimum? Meaning you can get to within 10Au before being detected on d-scan. I mean d-scan has a max range of what, 14-15Au for ships? 7.5 Au sounds good. That's half d-scan range. `Only YOU can prevent internet bullying!`
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10875	Posted - 2014.12.20 20:24:37 - [1305] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: If they were changing something that ruined a character you had been training for years I would say otherwise, that would be where your opinion should come into consideration. This is not one of those scenarios. And this right here is why your opinion is irrelevant. It's just based on blatant selfishness. According to what you just said, a capital ship pilot holding onto his golden goose should have priority in balance discussions just because he's sunk a lot of time into it. Nevermind that carriers are broken, Titans were broken, and the jump range changes went through afterall, despite the objections of people who had been "training for years". **** no. And if you can't see how incredibly bad that is, then you're blind. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 251	Posted - 2014.12.20 20:25:49 - [1306] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: Delt0r Garsk wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: Delt0r Garsk wrote: I am not sure why the dscan immunity is such a big deal. Instead of a Rapier, now i have a reason to fly a Hugin. What case does dscan change having a gang on a plex cloaked vers dscan immune? seriously whats the difference? And in WHs who the hell is flying around without a cloakie. We just don't fly non cloaks most of the time. I sure as hell aren't going to waste time ratting sleepers in anything smaller than a t3. It would just be far too slow. Because if I warp to a medium with a slasher in it for a GF, all I have to do is wait a few seconds to know if there is a pilgrim on the other side because he has to decloak PRIOR to me arriving in the plex to be able to lock me. Furthermore, said pilgrim has to be 30km+ (outside of pointrange) away from the beacon to cloak. Not inside the plex, on the acceleration gate. Where we put our camps. In which case i spam the gate and warp away on the other side We use remote sebo instalockers... solo players never get away. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 731	Posted - 2014.12.20 20:28:00 - [1307] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: Honestly, you're playing in a smaller birdcage than I am and acting like the entire game should revolve around you wanting to fly a different ship. You want to fly a new ship? Do something new. That's what I did. Says the guy arguing that his desire to not have scouts in his fleet should dictate game balance? yet again, not constructive. I never said we don't have scouts, I said that I don't know a single PvPer who wants to be a probing scout for a combat fleet. We use scouts all the time, but all but requiring a probe launcher definitely hurts the folks who like to (or have to because newbros) fly small frig/dessy gangs and do not have the resources to sub an alt for that sole purpose. Furthermore what the hell does having scouts have to do with the size of my "birdcage". I've clearly broken you. I'm sorry. Good frigate gangs can really benefit from bringing along a prober. It opens up so many potential targets. But please, by all means, continue to limit yourself and give me one less thing to worry about. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 106	Posted - 2014.12.20 20:32:26 - [1308] - Quote Delt0r Garsk wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: Delt0r Garsk wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: Delt0r Garsk wrote: I am not sure why the dscan immunity is such a big deal. Instead of a Rapier, now i have a reason to fly a Hugin. What case does dscan change having a gang on a plex cloaked vers dscan immune? seriously whats the difference? And in WHs who the hell is flying around without a cloakie. We just don't fly non cloaks most of the time. I sure as hell aren't going to waste time ratting sleepers in anything smaller than a t3. It would just be far too slow. Because if I warp to a medium with a slasher in it for a GF, all I have to do is wait a few seconds to know if there is a pilgrim on the other side because he has to decloak PRIOR to me arriving in the plex to be able to lock me. Furthermore, said pilgrim has to be 30km+ (outside of pointrange) away from the beacon to cloak. Not inside the plex, on the acceleration gate. Where we put our camps. In which case i spam the gate and warp away on the other side We use remote sebo instalockers... solo players never get away. Oh... You clearly don't know how the acceleration gates work. I will refrain from enlightening you as that's one less trap I have to worry about ;)
Joshua Milton Blahyi Therapists Inc 54	Posted - 2014.12.20 20:44:51 - [1309] - Quote 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.
Tabimatha Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 2	Posted - 2014.12.20 20:52:12 - [1310] - Quote Please don't do the dscan immunity. It's so bad for solo and micro gang pvp. When you want to get busy in a system with a lot in local all you have is dscan to give you some small warning that you're about to get blobbed if everyone wakes up. Your example of how it could make people less risk averse since they don't see the two rooks is an example of how you get surprise permajammed and die doing nothing....not exactly a great pvp experience. Having to use scouts/alts to check every station and probe systems before engaging is just super annoying and slows down pvp terribly. Smart good pvpers who aren't risk averse will be forced to be more risk averse and/or forced into flying certain ships and styles. Please no.

TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 938	Posted - 2014.12.20 20:54:23 - [1311] - 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.
Gallowmere Rorschach Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation 892	Posted - 2014.12.20 20:55:46 - [1312] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Biggest concern at the moment is the added EHP. Making recons a more realistic fleet option next to T3 cruisers is good, making them too tanky in smaller situations where their ewar already gives them a lot of damage evasion may be too much. Not sure if change is needed but will keep looking at this and update again asap. 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. I can't say that I am a fan of the reasoning presented by these two points, when taken together. Do I like the idea of dscan immunity? Hell yes. If I had to chose between the two, would I take it over an EHP buff to the Recons? Absolutely not. The ships function relatively well as they are currently, but as you said, making them a more viable option to fleets, when compared to the T3s should be the more pressing issue here. Basically, if I were put in a position of having to choose one or the other, I'd take the most minor EHP increase over the dscan immunity any day of the week.
maCH'EttE Mafia Redux 133	Posted - 2014.12.20 20:56:11 - [1313] - Quote You are all MONKEYS playing in a sandbox controlled by NO GOOD CCP RISE AND CCP FONZIE.
Dani Maulerant Order of the Valkyrie LOADED-DICE 13	Posted - 2014.12.20 21:07:14 - [1314] - Quote So still no word on what the balancing drawback is for dscan immunity...
Ferris O'Shaunessy Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 0	Posted - 2014.12.20 21:12:21 - [1315] - Quote The d-scan immunity would certainly make for some unique opportunities, but applying a blanket immunity seems.. Contentious. What if the recons got a conditional immunity that wouldn't undermine their new unique role, but would still allow for balance? Something like they can be scanned at ranges less than 6au, and only when 'active', ie warping, fighting or using a prop mod. At longer ranges or when the ship is lurking passively, it remains off d-scan. Would that work at all?
John Seresso Duellos Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 1	Posted - 2014.12.20 21:16:22 - [1316] - Quote As a Pilgrim pilot I must say that change from strength to range bonus limits usability of this ship a lot. Like many people said before - this will wipe out the last reason to use Pilgrim over Curse. The range bonus totally breaks current applications of Pilgrim and makes it unusable. This is great small gang and solo ship which is able to cap out enemy. After changes it won't be able to cap out anything. It will rather cap out itself. The second thing about Proteus changes is dscan thingy. When I first read it I was "wow nice, this gives us a lot of opportunities", but after cool down and rethinking it, this is rather "wow this gives us a lot of opportunities to lost our ships". Dscan is something on what so many if not every EVE player rely on. If people can't trust their dscan, the risk/reward ratio will increase to much. I imagine it that after Proteus there will be only fleets of Combat Recons roaming around and exploration will move back to hi-sec. CCP please keep the FULL strength bonus on Pilgrim and rethink the idea of destructing the dscan reliance please.
Sabrina Scatterbrain United Souls Research And Development 22	Posted - 2014.12.20 21:55:24 - [1317] - 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. Yep, because you can get anyone, especially dumb new guys, to sit around with dycke in hand while you enjoy your game, or do you mean spend more money on another account... Either way your statement sucks nuts.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10877	Posted - 2014.12.20 21:59:57 - [1318] - Quote Sabrina Scatterbrain wrote: 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. Yep, because you can get anyone, especially dumb new guys, to sit around with dycke in hand while you enjoy your game, or do you mean spend more money on another account... Either way your statement sucks nuts. So, either my current and my previous corp are some of the best players in the game... or just using a freaking scout is not as hard as you make it out to be. Plenty of people get it done without breaking their banks or abusing their newbies. Idk what your problem is. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
The Renner Canadian Operations Yulai Federation 55	Posted - 2014.12.20 22:01:14 - [1319] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Just finished reading everything that was posted over night. Here's what I can update with at the moment: Biggest concern at the moment is the added EHP. Making recons a more realistic fleet option next to T3 cruisers is good, making them too tanky in smaller situations where their ewar already gives them a lot of damage evasion may be too much. Not sure if change is needed but will keep looking at this and update again asap. This is the single most important change recons needed, without the added EHP they will continue to be too flimsy for large fleets and largely replaced by T3 cruisers. 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. plz no, unless you think having an alt to watch the acceleration gate in a plex when there are other people in system should be a requirement now?
Sabrina Scatterbrain United Souls Research And Development 22	Posted - 2014.12.20 22:03:28 - [1320] - Quote 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.

Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10877	Posted - 2014.12.20 22:11:16 - [1321] - Quote 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. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Ehud Gera Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 23	Posted - 2014.12.20 22:18:58 - [1322] - Quote @CCP Rise. Can we get that explanation soon about the reasoning behind why you think Dscan immunity won't be OP? I've been waiting with bated breath. Especially (since you haven't released it yet), can you explain how it won't be OP in regards to small gang and solo? This is really important to a lot of us. Thanks so much in advance!!! Ehud PS: Playerbase includes many who want a balanced opportunity in Solo, Small Gang, and even those who just like to farm in WH's. I LIKE DOING WORK TO CATCH MY TARGETS. PPS: Perhaps ask guys like Wingspan TT if things like bomb deliveries would be as fun if pilots didn't have to work so hard to catch their targets. Cloaked ganking is it's own reward, Dscan Immunity is the easy button.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1273	Posted - 2014.12.20 22:19:14 - [1323] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: So, either my current and my previous corp are some of the best players in the game... or just using a freaking scout is not as hard as you make it out to be. Well it certainly isnt the first one and the second is hard if you are a solo or micro gang pvper Seems that you have presented yet another false dichotomy. it isnt about bank for some people, its about the quality of the game. We get it, you are a blobbing f1 monkey fighting in large groups where a few recons isnt really gonna be a game changer. There is a place for everyone in eve. Just because it makes no difference to you doesnt mean it doesnt have the potential to decimate long standing solo and micro gang pvp in this game. Making a change that no one asked or dreamed of and whos potential market is for perfectly one sided ganks seems so off the wall the motives for such a change are questionable. Recons will be used in fleets all the time if they have a good tank. That seems like a good motive for change. Making them solo ninja pwnmobiles is stupid. If you have any doubt that they are gonna be solo pwnmobiles, check my killboard in february.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10877	Posted - 2014.12.20 22:27:44 - [1324] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Well it certainly isnt the first one and the second is hard if you are a solo or micro gang pvper Which, I am. And I'm telling you, it's not hard. Quote: it isnt about bank for some people, its about the quality of the game. Except that the person I was addressing summed it up as "either you abuse your newbies by making them do it, or you pay for an extra account", which is quite simply not the case. That's the only false dichotomy here. Quote: We get it, you are a blobbing f1 monkey fighting in large groups where a few recons isnt really gonna be a game changer. I really don't think you do get it, to be honest I think you're just conjuring things to attack since you don't have anything else to do. I plan on using these. I will be buying several Curses the moment I get on my home computer and boot up my client. Quote: Just because it makes no difference to you doesnt mean it doesnt have the potential to decimate long standing solo and micro gang pvp in this game. And just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's not a positive change. This is pretty much the lowsec version of the jump range nerfs. People bawled about those far louder than you lot have about this, and it still went through. And it turns out it was for the better. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Ab'del Abu Atlantis Ascendant 176	Posted - 2014.12.20 22:30:56 - [1325] - 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.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1273	Posted - 2014.12.20 22:39:21 - [1326] - Quote You my friend are an f1 monkey. Post with your main if you want any credibility. I personally have an alt that scouts/boosts/probes. However, if you are saying people arnt gonna need to subvert newbs to this role and are not gonna need an alt i suggest you start linking fun viable fits for people to use with probe launchers. i dont have anything else to do so im lashing out? No, i think d-scan is a staple of eve pvp and should be there for people to rely on. I plan on using these recons too. Dont mistake my thinking its a **** idea for boycotting an advantage. I will use this to destruction. Jump changes caused more traffic through gates and less obscene escalations at will. This change in low sec will just force recon escalations. and people safing up from anyone that has a recon as active ship on their killboard or someone who has killed them with a recon before. I was personally in favor of changing power projection, even if i think a similar result could have been achieved without using a sledghammer, so again another straw man. Each time you draw parallels with something no one here has said you sound like an imbecile. Its like you are arguing with an imaginary foe. It really is amazing how ignorant you are.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10877	Posted - 2014.12.20 22:51:25 - [1327] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: You my friend are an f1 monkey. Post with your main if you want any credibility. Stop making lame appeals to credentials, and let your arguments stand on their own. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Albertus Lokbakor SPANI The Initiative. 0	Posted - 2014.12.20 22:56:42 - [1328] - Quote -First of all my opinion in this case is somewhat divided the "Directional scanners immunity on Reacons Ships" more than a good idea I think it is a lazy one like the interceptors nullifire change in the [Kronos] update a while ago, i understand that currently the Combat Reacon Ships have more combat and EW on them that recons capacity, o.k now why not simply rename the "Combat Reacon Ships" to something like "Electronic attack cruiser" and undersides of give them the "Directional scanners immunity" why not create a new line of ships exclusively capable of performing the role of -Reacons Ships for fleet operations or traveling through systems relatively safer than other ships to give intel- Now on this moment pilots are using the -Interceptors ships- to travel safely from system to system denying the purpose of this type of ships which is intercept and catch other ships...
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1275	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:03:04 - [1329] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: You my friend are an f1 monkey. Post with your main if you want any credibility. Stop making lame appeals to credentials, and let your arguments stand on their own. You keep implying you are not a basic f1 money by claiming you have a main. Im just saying this pillar of your credibility is shakey at best. As a basic f1 money your perspective on eve solo/micro/small gang pvp in fw low sec is easily disregarded. Only you can change that. Your reluctance to do so speaks volumes.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10877	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:06:41 - [1330] - Quote I took the liberty of ringing for the ISDs, since your dogged insistence on attacking me because you lack the wherewithal to attack my arguments has constituted a pretty huge derailing of the thread at this point. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.

Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1275	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:08:14 - [1331] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: I took the liberty of ringing for the ISDs, since your dogged insistence on attacking me because you lack the wherewithal to attack my arguments has constituted a pretty huge derailing of the thread at this point. You have no argument, thats why you are crying for mommy. i didnt insult or attack you. I just simply explained why your perspective lacks any credence.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10877	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:09:26 - [1332] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: You have no argument That's not true. I approve of the changes being made, and I find the assertion that the sky is falling as a result of them to be laughable, wildly off base, and alarmist at best. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1275	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:11:48 - [1333] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: You have no argument That's not true. I approve of the changes being made, and I find the assertion that the sky is falling as a result of them to be laughable, wildly off base, and alarmist at best. Another strawman. I didnt say anything about sky or falling. Perhaps i should contact ISD for your constant misrepresentation of what people are saying as tantamount to trolling.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10877	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:12:59 - [1334] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Another strawman. I didnt say anything about sky or falling. Talk about obtuse... "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1275	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:14:24 - [1335] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Another strawman. I didnt say anything about sky or falling. Talk about obtuse... I think i covered that in an edit. If anyone is alarmist its you thinking that people disagreeing with a core mechanic change is 'laughable'.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10877	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:16:07 - [1336] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Another strawman. I didnt say anything about sky or falling. Talk about obtuse... I think i covered that in an edit. If anyone is alarmist its you thinking that people disagreeing with a core mechanic change is 'laughable'. That's not alarmist, by literally every definition. That's dismissive, and rightly so, because the people wetting their pants about this are worthy of being laughed at. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1277	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:18:18 - [1337] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Another strawman. I didnt say anything about sky or falling. Talk about obtuse... I think i covered that in an edit. If anyone is alarmist its you thinking that people disagreeing with a core mechanic change is 'laughable'. That's not alarmist, by literally every definition. That's dismissive, and rightly so, because the people wetting their pants about this are worthy of being laughed at. Thinking a change is a bad idea and pointing out reasons and scenarios why isnt 'wetting their pants'. I dont think calling ISD here with all your figurative trolling and provocation is a good idea.
Thanatos Marathon Phoibe Enterprises 377	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:19:41 - [1338] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: You have no argument That's not true. I approve of the changes being made, and I find the assertion that the sky is falling as a result of them to be laughable, wildly off base, and alarmist at best. Dscan Change = Good for Ganking EHP change = Good for fleets Both combined = Recon Proliferation Recon Proliferation = bad news for baseball fans It's ok to like larger fleets. It is also ok to enjoy Ganking people over fighting them. No one is calling you bad people. I'm not saying the sky is falling, and I don't think Crosi is either. The sky didn't fall when they changed the Ishtar, it just changed what everyone trained for and flew. Will I shed a tear for certain styles of combat and ship selection that I won't use anymore due to Combat Recon Proliferation? Yes. Will that stop me from violencing Internet Spaceships? Nope.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10877	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:21:26 - [1339] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Thinking a change is a bad idea and pointing out reasons and scenarios why isnt 'wetting their pants'. There is very little reasoning going on, just a whole lot of "don't touch my niche!" and "wormholes will die!" and "How dare you make me have to use scouts!". I have not seen one legitimate post against the changes, and that includes yours, since all you've done is cry about my killboard and my use of an alt. You've offered nothing, just pointless quibbling. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Thanatos Marathon Phoibe Enterprises 377	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:23:04 - [1340] - Quote elitatwo wrote: Thanatos Marathon wrote: Thus Combat Recons Online. You know that everytime our ships get changed, EVE is dying, cannot be played anymore, kills everyone, the world ends, everything is impossible, must join goons, hate goons,.... First and foremost I have observed that most of the horror-ideas you have on TQ come from those very threads you were posting in. So by stating what could happen, you put ideas into everyones heads to prove you right. If you wouldn't respond nothing would happen or at least not much. People really don't like to think for themselves and need help for the tinyest things. So what to do? Yes, look in the forums, look at player videos and do the same thing they are doing. You should know that the recon changes are the anouncement of the sleeper cruiser change, coming to your client in early 2015 but you cannot see that far ahead. This post confuses me. You win. On T3 cruisers, as long as they have SP loss they won't be that common in FW corps/space.

Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1277	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:24:49 - [1341] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Thinking a change is a bad idea and pointing out reasons and scenarios why isnt 'wetting their pants'. There is very little reasoning going on, just a whole lot of "don't touch my niche!" and "wormholes will die!" and "How dare you make me have to use scouts!". I have not seen one legitimate post against the changes, and that includes yours, since all you've done is cry about my killboard and my use of an alt. You've offered nothing, just pointless quibbling. Talk about obtuse. Its clear to me that you are purposefully ignorant to what me and a good proportion of people have said in this thread. Your continued participation as a 'dscan immunity apologist' is obvious. And like any good fundamentalist, you will not hear anything anyone says as exemplified by this posting.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10877	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:25:46 - [1342] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Thinking a change is a bad idea and pointing out reasons and scenarios why isnt 'wetting their pants'. There is very little reasoning going on, just a whole lot of "don't touch my niche!" and "wormholes will die!" and "How dare you make me have to use scouts!". I have not seen one legitimate post against the changes, and that includes yours, since all you've done is cry about my killboard and my use of an alt. You've offered nothing, just pointless quibbling. Talk about obtuse. Its clear to me that you are purposefully ignorant to what me and a good proportion of people have said in this thread. Your continued participation as a 'dscan immunity apologist' is obvious. And like any good fundamentalist, you will not hear anything anyone says as exemplified by this posting. What's missing from the above is any form of actual argument against the changes, just more personal attacks against me for daring to like these changes. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Thanatos Marathon Phoibe Enterprises 377	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:27:18 - [1343] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: I have not seen one legitimate post against the changes So you don't think the impact this will have on medium/large plexes in FW space is concerning and worth considering?
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1277	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:27:48 - [1344] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Thinking a change is a bad idea and pointing out reasons and scenarios why isnt 'wetting their pants'. There is very little reasoning going on, just a whole lot of "don't touch my niche!" and "wormholes will die!" and "How dare you make me have to use scouts!". I have not seen one legitimate post against the changes, and that includes yours, since all you've done is cry about my killboard and my use of an alt. You've offered nothing, just pointless quibbling. Talk about obtuse. Its clear to me that you are purposefully ignorant to what me and a good proportion of people have said in this thread. Your continued participation as a 'dscan immunity apologist' is obvious. And like any good fundamentalist, you will not hear anything anyone says as exemplified by this posting. What's missing from the above is any form of actual argument against the changes, just more personal attacks against me for daring to like these changes. Objections have been repeated hundreds of times in this thread. I have no expectation that you will hear them if they are repeated one more time. Saying that no valid objections have been raised really is the last nail in your credibilities coffin. I doubt even CCP whatever his name is would deny that there are many legitimate gameplay concerns regarding these changes. Seems only you struggle to understand them.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10877	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:30:29 - [1345] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Objections have been repeated hundreds of times in this thread. And, as has been mentioned, they are ragey, whiny rants without substance, and most of them are tacitly happy with the shape they are in now as largely worthless. And you still refuse to actually address the topic. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1277	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:33:23 - [1346] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Objections have been repeated hundreds of times in this thread. And, as has been mentioned, they are ragey, whiny rants without substance, and most of them are tacitly happy with the shape they are in now as largely worthless. And you still refuse to actually address the topic. Only you are raging and lashing out right now. The topic has been addressed. Points have been raised. I have no expectation that you have a better capacity to understand now than you did at any other time.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10877	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:36:24 - [1347] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: The topic has been addressed. Points have been raised. Like what? Nevermind that all of them are wrong, but go ahead and give me an example, if one actually exists. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1277	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:38:38 - [1348] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: The topic has been addressed. Points have been raised. Like what? Nevermind that all of them are wrong, but go ahead and give me an example, if one actually exists. You really are well beyond the bounds now my friend. You have exposed your true purpose to simply troll.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10877	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:42:09 - [1349] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: The topic has been addressed. Points have been raised. Like what? Nevermind that all of them are wrong, but go ahead and give me an example, if one actually exists. You really are well beyond the bounds now my friend. You have exposed your true purpose to simply troll. I'm asking you to get on topic, cease personally attacking me (which is the first thing you did when you quoted any of my posts, for that matter) and actually address the topic with whatever theoretically legitimate arguments that you claim are already here. And you refuse. But somehow that makes me the troll. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1277	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:44:58 - [1350] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: The topic has been addressed. Points have been raised. Like what? Nevermind that all of them are wrong, but go ahead and give me an example, if one actually exists. You really are well beyond the bounds now my friend. You have exposed your true purpose to simply troll. I'm asking you to get on topic, cease personally attacking me (which is the first thing you did when you quoted any of my posts, for that matter) and actually address the topic with whatever theoretically legitimate arguments that you claim are already here. And you refuse. But somehow that makes me the troll. im sorry if i upset you and that somehow made it impossible for you to comprehend anyones posts. Doesnt make you, by definition, any less of a troll.

Thanatos Marathon Phoibe Enterprises 377	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:45:13 - [1351] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: The topic has been addressed. Points have been raised. Like what? Nevermind that all of them are wrong, but go ahead and give me an example, if one actually exists. You really are well beyond the bounds now my friend. You have exposed your true purpose to simply troll. Sorry Bro, you just got Crosi'd.
Zemfadel Hand Trade Society 6	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:47:44 - [1352] - Quote So, these changes sound great to me but I can see how they could be problematic. Especially in wh space where ships that are designed to be very heavy tackle will now be undetectable until they land on top of you...
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10877	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:52:40 - [1353] - Quote Zemfadel wrote: So, these changes sound great to me but I can see how they could be problematic. Especially in wh space where ships that are designed to be very heavy tackle will now be undetectable until they land on top of you... Couldn't you do that with a cloaked T3 anyway? "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Thanatos Marathon Phoibe Enterprises 377	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:53:28 - [1354] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Zemfadel wrote: So, these changes sound great to me but I can see how they could be problematic. Especially in wh space where ships that are designed to be very heavy tackle will now be undetectable until they land on top of you... Couldn't you do that with a cloaked T3 anyway? Nope, will show on DSCAN when it comes through the hole.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1279	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:54:35 - [1355] - Quote Thanatos Marathon wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Zemfadel wrote: So, these changes sound great to me but I can see how they could be problematic. Especially in wh space where ships that are designed to be very heavy tackle will now be undetectable until they land on top of you... Couldn't you do that with a cloaked T3 anyway? Nope, will show on DSCAN when it comes through the hole. Im sorry but there are better places than these forums to teach people basic mechanics. E-UNI springs to mind.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10877	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:55:48 - [1356] - Quote Thanatos Marathon wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Zemfadel wrote: So, these changes sound great to me but I can see how they could be problematic. Especially in wh space where ships that are designed to be very heavy tackle will now be undetectable until they land on top of you... Couldn't you do that with a cloaked T3 anyway? Nope, will show on DSCAN when it comes through the hole. For about five seconds, I guess. But that's too short of a time window to see without using a d-scan bot anyway. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Thanatos Marathon Phoibe Enterprises 378	Posted - 2014.12.20 23:57:45 - [1357] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Thanatos Marathon wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Zemfadel wrote: So, these changes sound great to me but I can see how they could be problematic. Especially in wh space where ships that are designed to be very heavy tackle will now be undetectable until they land on top of you... Couldn't you do that with a cloaked T3 anyway? Nope, will show on DSCAN when it comes through the hole. For about five seconds, I guess. But that's too short of a time window to see without using a d-scan bot anyway. rofl, its called clicking your mouse button.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10877	Posted - 2014.12.21 00:00:32 - [1358] - Quote 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. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 864	Posted - 2014.12.21 00:02:54 - [1359] - Quote Dude, do you think you guys could rebalance a ship class without introducing a new gimmick attribute that subverts core gameplay mechanics? I'd strongly encourage you not to make any hull immune to d-scans, but even if you are dead set on doing this, combat recons are the wrong hulls to give it to. Why in the name of all that is holy would you give the steath bonus to the brawl-y hull instead of the sneaky one? The whole point of making a distinction between combat- and force recons is that one gives up combat abilities to evade detection, while the other rolls the same support abilities into a class that's also capable of fighting, but at the cost of not being sneaky. The force recons could benefit from the d-scan immunity (allowing clever pilots to decloak whilst in warp to a target in order to wait out their recal timer without giving up the element of surprise), but would still have significant detractors (***-poor DPS, reduced tank, poorer slot layouts, etc) which would leave combat recons the superior choice for some usage scenarios. If you give the bonus to the combat recons, suddenly the only reason to use a force recon is if you want to be crossing on and off grids unseen or if you want to light covert cynos. Any time that you don't need to be entering grids, observing, and then leaving again without breaking cloak, a combat recon will be the better choice. You guys keep talking a strong game regarding "meaningful choices": but it doesn't seem like there's much of a choice here. To reiterate, I think the entire concept of d-scan immunity is an absolutely terrible idea* (if you want to move around without being seen on scans, that's what covert cloaking hulls are for). Please don't do this! But if you have to, at least give the absurd new bonus to a ship that can't also murderzone things by itself.
Nyjil Lizaru Aideron Robotics 34	Posted - 2014.12.21 00:07:42 - [1360] - Quote Ehud Gera wrote: @CCP Rise. Can we get that explanation soon about the reasoning behind why you think Dscan immunity won't be OP? I've been waiting with bated breath. Especially (since you haven't released it yet), can you explain how it won't be OP in regards to small gang and solo? This is really important to a lot of us. Thanks so much in advance!!! Ehud PS: Playerbase includes many who want a balanced opportunity in Solo, Small Gang, and even those who just like to farm in WH's. I LIKE DOING WORK TO CATCH MY TARGETS. PPS: Perhaps ask guys like Wingspan TT if things like bomb deliveries would be as fun if pilots didn't have to work so hard to catch their targets. Cloaked ganking is it's own reward, Dscan Immunity is the easy button. I, too, would like to see some reasoning for the change from CCP. It's odd that there has been no design purpose for this change given. Nyjil's corollary to Malcanis' Law: -á "Any attempt by CCP to smooth the learning curve of EVE Online will be carried out via the addition of extra factors and 'features' such that there is a net increase in complexity."

Ab'del Abu Atlantis Ascendant 177	Posted - 2014.12.21 00:07:46 - [1361] - 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?
Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 263	Posted - 2014.12.21 00:08:26 - [1362] - Quote The more I think about this, the less dramatic change it actually is. Yes, it affects some things more than others, but overall the D-scan immunity is a fresh new thing that will sprout new tactics, which is always awesome. Bring it on and keep it up CCP :) My Lachs are ready.
Angelo Schilling NerdHerd The Explicit Alliance 1	Posted - 2014.12.21 00:08:50 - [1363] - Quote Levina Windstar wrote: 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. Typical answer from a guy that doesn't have any clue how WH space is working. Let me enlight you : YOU DON'T NEED TO USE PROBES TO SCAN PPL IN WH IF YOUR GOOD AT USING D-SCAN. kthxbye YOU DO NEED TO USE PROBES IF THEYRE IN A SIG NOT AN ANOM kthxbye
Mei Khlolov The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 6	Posted - 2014.12.21 00:31:35 - [1364] - Quote Gonna weigh in on this. Dscan immunity is not going to be broken. It's effectively a different type of cloaking. Cloaking: + invisible on grid + Cannot be probed or dscanned - Can be spotted on dscan while moving through gates/holes. - targeting delay on decloak - uses a highslot Dscan immunity + Invisible even during gate/hole movement + no decloak delay/highslot use - always visible on grid (can be caught by gatecamps) - can be probed - warp deceleration acts as targeting delay Both styles have their advantages and disadvantages. The thing where Dscan immunity really excels is going through acceleration gates, undetected, but given the deceleration time, anyone even semi-aligned should still escape alive. As for things waiting inside plexes for you, well, we already have rapier gangs hiding in plexes.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1279	Posted - 2014.12.21 00:54:37 - [1365] - Quote An area of effect doomsday really excels at roflstomping everything on grid. Doesnt mean its balanced or even a good idea.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10882	Posted - 2014.12.21 00:59:04 - [1366] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: An area of effect doomsday really excels at roflstomping everything on grid. Doesnt mean its balanced or even a good idea. It's also an order of magnitude's difference to what is being discussed here. Gross exaggeration does not help your case. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1279	Posted - 2014.12.21 01:08:51 - [1367] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: An area of effect doomsday really excels at roflstomping everything on grid. Doesnt mean its balanced or even a good idea. It's also an order of magnitude's difference to what is being discussed here. Gross exaggeration does not help your case. I think you will find i drew no comparison. I just illustrated a situation where ambitious design decisions are made but failed to have the required foresight. I realise this is very hard concept for you to understand. Dont exert yourself over it. I was really commenting for people with a higher functional capacity.
Lug Muad'Dib Wise Humans Sword 26	Posted - 2014.12.21 01:08:57 - [1368] - Quote I still don't see why D-Scan immunity isn't a stupid mechanic and we still don't know the drawback. D-Scan immunity is dumb.
Helene Fidard 14	Posted - 2014.12.21 01:15:55 - [1369] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: Dude, do you think you guys could rebalance a ship class without introducing a new gimmick attribute that subverts core gameplay mechanics? I for one am eagerly awaiting the update where the absence of gimmickry itself becomes the gimmick.
Mei Khlolov The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 10	Posted - 2014.12.21 01:19:50 - [1370] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: I think you will find i drew no comparison. I just illustrated a situation where ambitious design decisions are made but failed to have the required foresight. I realise this is very hard concept for you to understand. Dont exert yourself over it. I was really commenting for people with a higher functional capacity. Its a good thing smart people like you make all the decisions for us dumb folks

MachineOfLovingGrace Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 2	Posted - 2014.12.21 01:29:13 - [1371] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: 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. I'm really confused you think this is overall a good idea. People don't work that way in my experience. Today I was on the recieving end of a similar situation. DSCAN a small plex, Tormentor inside, activate gate, the exact moment I cannot cancel warp anymore (really good timing, I must admit) poof a Griffin appears on DSCAN. Permajammed, gf. A few minutes later, warp into a plex with a single ship on DSCAN - 2 Griffins. Permajammed, gf. However, the presence of cloaking devices does not change my evaluation of risk. I am exactly as risk-averse as I was before. I am, however, frustrated that I had to watch my ship killed without any chance or fight at all, and a few new people on my red "ECM wcoughe, don't engage" list. I will think very hard to do any PVP with these guys in local. Because I'd be stupid If I didn't. So less fights for me and for them in the long run. Granted, I'm just one guy, but this effect adds up, I'd think. I'm not whining about ECM (death to ECM, though), I'm trying to make the point - You will not change people by game mechanics. If they are so risk averse that they do not engage in certain situations, forcing this situations on them will get them to a) work hard to get enough information (in this dicussion that would be more alts/scouts needed, probing, etc.) or b) they will just stop doing the risky thing, if this doesn't work or becomes too tedious. You will just make the game worse for those people. At best, you'll keep a zero sum of player satisfaction. I know that I do what I can to avoid cloakies (and will do with recons), but if it becomes too tedious of forces me into a playstyle I don't like - I'll stop doing this. This is only a game, after all.
Jon Joringer Zero-K 152	Posted - 2014.12.21 01:58:58 - [1372] - Quote Holy **** -- immune to directional scanning?! That's really strong and makes the idea of soloing in a combat recon pretty tantalizing.
Baneken Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light 434	Posted - 2014.12.21 02:37:25 - [1373] - Quote Also might notice that this doesn't change a thing in WH sites since the current meta is to use an insta warp sabre that snares you just as surely as any Lachesis or Arazu. As it is an Arazu / lach has normally a 60km point range with a RF point that costs a 140mils a pop, you need heat & boosts to get further (72km's with heat), any other point has 'only' 56/67,5km base range. Obviously normal 'caught from the site' -scheme doesn't involve booster alts because they would already have to be in the system to provide boosts for the points so 72km's is the absolute maximum you can squeeze out from a point range without rigs, implants or other special factors that I might have forgotten to mention. That was to clear up some of the '100km Lach point' drama lamas. Also current EHP in any reasonably fast moving Arazu fit is somewhere in 30k ehp (lach has about 51k in shield fit) which isn't much when we're talking about PvP buffer fits. The furious DPS of an Arazu is somewhere between non existent and laughable, lachesis does significantly better on the DPS front but medium rails only have around 40km's maximum range without T2 ammo (with a super gimped dps) so you still aren't going to be killed from a maximum point range. Also a lach has a current max MWD speed range of 1500m/s which with a 6,7s align time means that running from a Lach really shouldn't be your main concern assuming you know how to run from a point and assuming that the Lach didn't land under 27km's from you to use it's scram. Also currently Arazu with RF point fit goes for around 400mils and Lachesis is in the same ball bark so it's not like maximum range fitted gal recons are suddenly going to be everywhere considering how easy they are to kill.
Panther X High Flyers The Kadeshi 27	Posted - 2014.12.21 03:15:34 - [1374] - Quote Metal Icarus wrote: Spugg Galdon wrote: I predict Ishtars: Online will become Combat Recons: Online. Still better than Ishtars Online. ANYTHING is better than Ishtars Online. [b]Sick liaisons raised this monumental mark The sun sets forever over Blackwater Park[/b]
Terranid Meester Tactical Assault and Recon Unit 275	Posted - 2014.12.21 04:34:27 - [1375] - Quote Automatic D-scan immunity for combat recons, the more I think about it, is a terrible idea. Not only does it hurt solo play, but you get hac resists and people thinking they will be forced to fit probe launchers to their vessels everytime if they don't wish to warp to somewhere that is camped by a hundred force recons. You are basically forcing people into certain ship fittings to avoid getting caught, cloaked vessels as a person pointed out, have to maneuver into position carefully in order to not get caught. FW plexes full of force recons, thanks for ruining fw. You do not understand player behavior completely? Understandable. But this half-thought up idea means that someone at CCP hasn't really been paying attention to player behavior at all. Certainly havn't been playing the game on TQ TO understand at any rate. This idea lacks any application of foresight, a gross failure of game design.
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1664	Posted - 2014.12.21 04:44:24 - [1376] - 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. Well this just says that there need to be MANY more ways to mess with d-scan. Clicking the same button every few seconds for intel is just stupid game design. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Squatdog State Protectorate Caldari State 159	Posted - 2014.12.21 04:52:34 - [1377] - Quote Delt0r Garsk wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: Delt0r Garsk wrote: I am not sure why the dscan immunity is such a big deal. Instead of a Rapier, now i have a reason to fly a Hugin. What case does dscan change having a gang on a plex cloaked vers dscan immune? seriously whats the difference? And in WHs who the hell is flying around without a cloakie. We just don't fly non cloaks most of the time. I sure as hell aren't going to waste time ratting sleepers in anything smaller than a t3. It would just be far too slow. Because if I warp to a medium with a slasher in it for a GF, all I have to do is wait a few seconds to know if there is a pilgrim on the other side because he has to decloak PRIOR to me arriving in the plex to be able to lock me. Furthermore, said pilgrim has to be 30km+ (outside of pointrange) away from the beacon to cloak. Not inside the plex, on the acceleration gate. Where we put our camps. Gold! (they'll just spam activate and escape your 'camp')
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1279	Posted - 2014.12.21 04:56:03 - [1378] - Quote Squatdog wrote: Delt0r Garsk wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: Delt0r Garsk wrote: I am not sure why the dscan immunity is such a big deal. Instead of a Rapier, now i have a reason to fly a Hugin. What case does dscan change having a gang on a plex cloaked vers dscan immune? seriously whats the difference? And in WHs who the hell is flying around without a cloakie. We just don't fly non cloaks most of the time. I sure as hell aren't going to waste time ratting sleepers in anything smaller than a t3. It would just be far too slow. Because if I warp to a medium with a slasher in it for a GF, all I have to do is wait a few seconds to know if there is a pilgrim on the other side because he has to decloak PRIOR to me arriving in the plex to be able to lock me. Furthermore, said pilgrim has to be 30km+ (outside of pointrange) away from the beacon to cloak. Not inside the plex, on the acceleration gate. Where we put our camps. Gold! (they'll just spam activate and escape your 'camp') This dude being caught in a lie is painful enough without people pointing it out squattingmut. Though it does look like he killed a gnosis of yours recently. Convo me if you want tips on how to slide gates :)
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode ISD Community Communications Liaisons 3653	Posted - 2014.12.21 05:12:22 - [1379] - Quote Removed some off topic posts. ISD Dorrim Barstorlode Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department
Azzie Stardust Unimpressed Collectors 2	Posted - 2014.12.21 06:24:53 - [1380] - Quote Dscan immunity is not absolute, recons still probable right? It would be great be able to safe (and load) probe positions in system.

SyntaxPD PowerDucks PowerDucks Alliance 24	Posted - 2014.12.21 07:02:28 - [1381] - Quote Levina Windstar wrote: I like the undetectable feature but I think this will be wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too OP in WH. CCP plz... think about WH too! :/ Agreed. EVE pvp was always built on 2 factors: 1. Ganker's availability to get on target 2. Target's availability to detect ganker soon enough to get out. So, basically all sides have equal chances and result only depends on player actions. With this future target have no chances at all. Compare it to cloak, that put some disadvantages to your ship (recalibration and not instant cloaking), dscan needs to be balanced, make this a module, finally
Aapir Hole Violence Whole Squid 7	Posted - 2014.12.21 09:30:13 - [1382] - Quote It's been said before but it would make a lot more sense if the huginn and rapier weapons systems would be switched. As it stands the huginn will be a shield boat with 80km webs that has to be within 10k to apply damage with its main weapon system. The majority of shield comps depend on staying at range so it hardly ever gets to use those weapons. Right now some people just fit smarbombs in the gun slots because if the enemy fleet gets into autocannon range you've already lost the fight Meanwhile the rapier has a covert ops cloak with which it can get to point blank range before the engagement starts. It can also apply damage perfectly with rapid light missiles to 30km and with heavy missiles to 60km.
Shaleb Heworo Viziam Amarr Empire 42	Posted - 2014.12.21 10:31:31 - [1383] - Quote Aapir wrote: It's been said before but it would make a lot more sense if the huginn and rapier weapons systems would be switched. As it stands the huginn will be a shield boat with 80km webs that has to be within 10k to apply damage with its main weapon system. The majority of shield comps depend on staying at range so it hardly ever gets to use those weapons. Right now some people just fit smarbombs in the gun slots because if the enemy fleet gets into autocannon range you've already lost the fight Meanwhile the rapier has a covert ops cloak with which it can get to point blank range before the engagement starts. It can also apply damage perfectly with rapid light missiles to 30km and with heavy missiles to 60km. No, they shouldn't. The covert ops cloak makes the Rapier viable as a nullsec solo boat. Ranged damage application provided by missiles perfectly fits that concept. Same goes for the pilgrim and its neut range bonus. Ship balancing is actually done VERY well the more you look into it and I generally think that CCP really excells in that field. D-scan immunity however is a terrible idea since pilots will just be more eager dock up/safe up cloak and less fights will actually happen. But others have said that before.
Arla Sarain 201	Posted - 2014.12.21 10:43:01 - [1384] - Quote I am perplexed at how the D-SCAN invisibility is meant to increase the amount of fights. If the 2 vexors were alone and if the 2 vexors would have combat wincons that nobody would know about, people would engage them in any case if they knew they could handle 2 vexors. D-SCAN invisibility just allows you to put more people on grid prior to the fight with ... why the hell do I even bother. Sure you can fit probes. If you fly some gimped fit in a specific ship. Whatever.
Shaleb Heworo Viziam Amarr Empire 43	Posted - 2014.12.21 10:48:32 - [1385] - Quote I might add that force recons at least should get a much bigger cargo hold to really make them viable as solo boats. Especially the pilgrim will need much room fo cap boosters to extend its operational range fitting its role as a recon ship. This would also give solo pvpers some viable tool while d-scan invisible recons on top of ogb won't exactly make this playstyle more fun in general.
Marise Dinah Fiaskko Enterprises LOADED-DICE 0	Posted - 2014.12.21 10:52:33 - [1386] - Quote My biggest issue with the D-Scan immunity change is with regards to low sec combat sites. They are already very dangerous as you are getting hammered with NPCs, watching local and trying to incorporate D-Scan into your general gameplay. It's already very easy to get caught out by someone sneaking up on you and this just add another layer of difficulty. However, after considering it from the point of view of someone who is roaming low sec in a very expensive cruiser I think it does seem balanced. My plan is to take one of the combat recons into the sites and give anyone a shock when they come in :)
Tipa Riot Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 71	Posted - 2014.12.21 11:01:35 - [1387] - Quote I'm glad I trained into recons recently ;) I think combat recons will also present a good option (again) for solo players ... though I see two major new threats for players on the receiving side: 1. There is now a 2nd class of ships in the game beside bombers who can acquire locks without additional delay when coming out of "cloak" ... the only significant difference is, that they can't control this "cloak" as it is "switched off" automatically on same grid. 2. There was a reason why cloaking in FW plexes was crippled recently, now this mechanic is back. Furthermore, acceleration gate mechanic don't give you intel anymore to decide whether to stay or leave. Let's see how this works out on TQ, but imo this is big a balance pro ganker. I'm my own NPC alt.
Squatdog State Protectorate Caldari State 159	Posted - 2014.12.21 11:01:45 - [1388] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Though it does look like he killed a gnosis of yours recently. Convo me if you want tips on how to slide gates :) It involved the single most incompetent hotdrop I've ever seen. They bridged in a dozen stealth bombers and a Falcon to kill a Gnosis...then lost four of the stealth bomber and their bait Rupture. Three of the stealth bombers got blown up by station guns. PRO
Tryaz Improvised Tactics 93	Posted - 2014.12.21 11:07:42 - [1389] - Quote MachineOfLovingGrace wrote: I'm really confused you think this is overall a good idea. People don't work that way in my experience. Today I was on the recieving end of a similar situation. DSCAN a small plex, Tormentor inside, activate gate, the exact moment I cannot cancel warp anymore (really good timing, I must admit) poof a Griffin appears on DSCAN. Permajammed, gf. A few minutes later, warp into a plex with a single ship on DSCAN - 2 Griffins. Permajammed, gf. However, the presence of cloaking devices does not change my evaluation of risk. I am exactly as risk-averse as I was before. I am, however, frustrated that I had to watch my ship killed without any chance or fight at all, and a few new people on my red "ECM wcoughe, don't engage" list. I will think very hard to do any PVP with these guys in local. Because I'd be stupid If I didn't. So less fights for me and for them in the long run. Granted, I'm just one guy, but this effect adds up, I'd think. I'm not whining about ECM (death to ECM, though), I'm trying to make the point - You will not change people by game mechanics. If they are so risk averse that they do not engage in certain situations, forcing this situations on them will get them to a) work hard to get enough information (in this dicussion that would be more alts/scouts needed, probing, etc.) or b) they will just stop doing the risky thing, if this doesn't work or becomes too tedious. You will just make the game worse for those people. At best, you'll keep a zero sum of player satisfaction. I know that I do what I can to avoid cloakies (and will do with recons), but if it becomes too tedious of forces me into a playstyle I don't like - I'll stop doing this. This is only a game, after all. If you want good solo pvp why are you diving FW plexes? Sounds like those people weren't after a gf and you are probably just a nuisance to them. Get out of the nursery and take your frigate for a roam in Null. Catch is on fire at the moment with great targets for a solo pvper. Narrator of Chronicles of New Eden, the EVE audiobook series. Listen at www.soundcloud.com/chroniclesofneweden
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 251	Posted - 2014.12.21 11:44:47 - [1390] - Quote Squatdog wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Though it does look like he killed a gnosis of yours recently. Convo me if you want tips on how to slide gates :) It involved the single most incompetent hotdrop I've ever seen. They bridged in a dozen stealth bombers and a Falcon to kill a Gnosis...then lost four of the stealth bomber and their bait Rupture. Three of the stealth bombers got blown up by station guns. PRO You do know we are a NPSI public community where we have a lot of new bros right. If they followed the FC instructions they would have not died. But meh, its a bomber worth what? 50M? Good ship to learn in. We have fun. A lot of fun. Something most people in eve seem to miss. Like killing an Ishtar with probes. We also lost a lot of probes, but dude we killed a Ishtar with probes. Priceless. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.

Cable Udan Sabotage Incorporated Executive Outcomes 303	Posted - 2014.12.21 12:17:17 - [1391] - Quote When you get round to blops can they have D-scan immunity too. Pretty please Rise <3
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1290	Posted - 2014.12.21 12:19:19 - [1392] - Quote Delt0r Garsk wrote: You do know we are a NPSI public community where we have a lot of new bros right. If they followed the FC instructions they would have not died. But meh, its a bomber worth what? 50M? Good ship to learn in. We have fun. A lot of fun. Something most people in eve seem to miss. Like killing an Ishtar with probes. We also lost a lot of probes, but dude we killed a Ishtar with probes. Priceless. i get u
Aapir Hole Violence Whole Squid 7	Posted - 2014.12.21 12:32:53 - [1393] - Quote Shaleb Heworo wrote: Aapir wrote: It's been said before but it would make a lot more sense if the huginn and rapier weapons systems would be switched. As it stands the huginn will be a shield boat with 80km webs that has to be within 10k to apply damage with its main weapon system. The majority of shield comps depend on staying at range so it hardly ever gets to use those weapons. Right now some people just fit smarbombs in the gun slots because if the enemy fleet gets into autocannon range you've already lost the fight Meanwhile the rapier has a covert ops cloak with which it can get to point blank range before the engagement starts. It can also apply damage perfectly with rapid light missiles to 30km and with heavy missiles to 60km. No, they shouldn't. The covert ops cloak makes the Rapier viable as a nullsec solo boat. Ranged damage application provided by missiles perfectly fits that concept. Same goes for the pilgrim and its neut range bonus. Ship balancing is actually done VERY well the more you look into it and I generally think that CCP really excells in that field. D-scan immunity however is a terrible idea since pilots will just be more eager dock up/safe up cloak and less fights will actually happen. But others have said that before. Unless you are the kind of solo pilot who flies with links and rf point solo pvp still takes place at much closer ranges than fleet fights. Hence the reason for giving the huginn a longer weapon range. I'm also struggling to think of targets than you can kill with the rapier's anemic dps while not relying on the decloak bump to get point before they warp off.
Hard Carnt The Vendunari End of Life 2	Posted - 2014.12.21 13:13:00 - [1394] - Quote Will probably cancel my sub for 12 months in the hope that Dacian immunity is removed. Isn't that what cloaking is for?
Shaleb Heworo Viziam Amarr Empire 43	Posted - 2014.12.21 14:01:48 - [1395] - Quote Aapir wrote: Shaleb Heworo wrote: Aapir wrote: It's been said before but it would make a lot more sense if the huginn and rapier weapons systems would be switched. As it stands the huginn will be a shield boat with 80km webs that has to be within 10k to apply damage with its main weapon system. The majority of shield comps depend on staying at range so it hardly ever gets to use those weapons. Right now some people just fit smarbombs in the gun slots because if the enemy fleet gets into autocannon range you've already lost the fight Meanwhile the rapier has a covert ops cloak with which it can get to point blank range before the engagement starts. It can also apply damage perfectly with rapid light missiles to 30km and with heavy missiles to 60km. No, they shouldn't. The covert ops cloak makes the Rapier viable as a nullsec solo boat. Ranged damage application provided by missiles perfectly fits that concept. Same goes for the pilgrim and its neut range bonus. Ship balancing is actually done VERY well the more you look into it and I generally think that CCP really excells in that field. D-scan immunity however is a terrible idea since pilots will just be more eager dock up/safe up cloak and less fights will actually happen. But others have said that before. Unless you are the kind of solo pilot who flies with links and rf point solo pvp still takes place at much closer ranges than fleet fights. Hence the reason for giving the huginn a longer weapon range. I'm also struggling to think of targets than you can kill with the rapier's anemic dps while not relying on the decloak bump to get point before they warp off. First of all: Flying with links aint solo and personally i wouldn't touch that ****** mechanic. The Huginn can have missiles too but right now it makes a great arty boat. At 20km and with double webs it wil apply full dps in that role. The Rapier on the other Hand lacks the high slots and the second damage bonus to make a good arty boat therefore it`s better off with missiles. Dps isn't that anemic as you said. Especially when you factor in full damage application all the way down to dessies but i leave it to you to eft that yourself.
Fabulous Rod Darkfall Corp 65	Posted - 2014.12.21 14:12:12 - [1396] - Quote CCP Rise "rebalancing" amounting to hardly more than tinkering, once again.
Shaleb Heworo Viziam Amarr Empire 43	Posted - 2014.12.21 14:50:42 - [1397] - Quote I don't understand how CCP can disregard the gameplay style of so many of their players. D-scan immunity renders the most important tool unrelyable that solo pvpers OR players who generally do stuff on their own anywhere except in highsec have. Why would they furtner limit the ability of these players to circumvent the blob? When i fight in a busy nullsec system i naturally can't deploy probes i have to ping d-scan to know what comes in. With d-scan invisible instalocking recon squads (because that is what we are talking about) less pilots will take the risk of fighting in a busy system at all. Solo plexers won't plex in busy systems, gankers won't kill them due to a few seconds of negligence. Everybody loses. I mean that CCP rise guy is a former player, right? I can only guess that due to his own playstyle he somehow doesn't understand the reality of playing eve apart from big fleet fights. CCP should consider that this is a big part of their playerbase though because obviously they don't which is sad because they will lose subs with these players which is sad because Eve is generally an awesome game.
SPARTACUS VICTORIOUS Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2014.12.21 14:58:29 - [1398] - Quote minmatar ships get the rifter treatment again. why dose CCP hate us minmatar so much
Liura Rurii Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 0	Posted - 2014.12.21 15:02:11 - [1399] - Quote Usually I do not participate in these forum posts but from own experience and other comments elsewhere I found one glaring question I feel begs answering. Why do combat recons not have a scan bonus as well as a fitting attribute that make the expanded probe launchers viable? I mean, it is a recon FFS. If any ship in fleet should be able to sniff out others in safespots this would be it. It is said that the best weapon to kill a tank is another tank, and likewise with DSCAN immunity these ships should not only be able hide from DSCAN but also be able to find each other more easily. You could also make it so, that these ships are hidden on DSCAN from every ship except another recon. This would make them stand out compared to T3s. Looking at real life military, recon units will have superior capabilities in regards to electronics that enable them to hide from and spot enemy units. Recons in eve are more about electronic warfare than reconnaissance, but good recon enables you to set up fights and it is a big part of the game. Give the Falcon the bonus for the cloak, and give the Rook the bonus for the Expanded Probe launcher. It is not going to make it more OP, but instead open up the role and put it more in line with T3s. Likewise for the other races. The first comment I got from one of my pilots when I asked him to fly a recon in the future was "Well, then I will just take one of my T3s with a cloak". If I was to nerf anything with the combat recons, it would be their ability to do DPS. Doing DPS is not something a recon should be focussed on. One of my current Rook fits does 512 DPS within 25km, has 76/86/83/77 resists, 46.6K EHP, does 516m/s and fits two jammers. To me, that is a viable ship in a roaming gang. The DPS is not that much lower than other cruisers, but I can still jam out 2 hostile ships, if primaried, I have some of the higher resists in the gang combined with decent EHP. None of the numbers are overheated and its cap stable. It will break if neuted. I have absolutely no use of it, as a "recon" ship, it is pure fleet support in a brawl. With the coming changes, this fit will feature even more resists, more EHP, better weapons bonusses and cap! I understand very well, if some people would call this OP.
Mr Doctor Sex Machineguns 138	Posted - 2014.12.21 15:04:56 - [1400] - Quote Cant wait to see how many die because they think this makes them imune to probes too.

Kmelx Matari Exodus 114	Posted - 2014.12.21 15:28:58 - [1401] - Quote Shaleb Heworo wrote: I can only guess that due to his own playstyle he somehow doesn't understand the reality of playing eve apart from big fleet fights. CCP should consider that this is a big part of their playerbase though because obviously they don't which is sad because they will lose subs with these players which is sad because Eve is generally an awesome game. Actually he was a pretty prominent solo pvper called Kil2. He used to run a podcast and an in game channel called Bringing Solo Back, dedicated like the name says reinvigorating Solo pvp as a thing within eve and he was quite successful at doing this. His PVP videos are still up on Youtube, there are some genuinely good fights in there. Solo in BS and BCs, with some cruisers in there as well. I used to listen to his podcast a lot, and though I was already a solo PVPer, he and Kil2 inspired me to go out and solo PVP, I used to roam from one end of lowsec to the other looking for goodfights, in all sorts of hulls, but I don't view that playstyle as viable anymore due to the changes to the meta, the increased blobbyness and the changes that have been introduced since he joined CCP. His roots make it doubly ironic though, that many of the changes he has introduced or failed to object to have made the playstyle he advocated much more difficult, outside of throwaway frigs and destroyers in FW space or nullsec. Battleship roaming is painful these days, BCs are largely a thing of the past, the meta has changed so that they are rarely used, mostly due to the crazy buffing of cruisers and the warp speed changes which make it painful to roam with these larger ships. T1 logi is absurdly OP, to the point where you can't break it solo unelss your in a command ship or a BC, most camps or gangs run with multiple T1 logi, larger roaming gangs don't tend to bring T2 logi now, though, where they used to roam with 2 scimis, because they don't want to roam with less reps, so they recruit and bring more people and they bring 4 scythes, it's a change that encouraged blobbing. Most of the solo and small gang community that I chat with on a regular basis, are deeply dissapointed with him, there are glaring balance issues in the game at the moment, T1 logis, Ishtar's, Geddons, to name just a few, that remain unaddressed despite CCP moving to a release cycle where they could easily take these matters in hand. Personally I view him as a bit of a hypocrite these days, on the one hand he encouraged solo PVP when he played the game, but now he's working for CCP, he's made the playstyle he promoted something much more difficult. To the point that it is not worth doing in my opinion.
Shaleb Heworo Viziam Amarr Empire 44	Posted - 2014.12.21 16:07:02 - [1402] - Quote Kmelx wrote: Shaleb Heworo wrote: I can only guess that due to his own playstyle he somehow doesn't understand the reality of playing eve apart from big fleet fights. CCP should consider that this is a big part of their playerbase though because obviously they don't which is sad because they will lose subs with these players which is sad because Eve is generally an awesome game. Actually he was a pretty prominent solo pvper called Kil2. He and a corp mate of mine called Kovorix used to run a podcast and an in game channel called Bringing Solo Back, dedicated like the name says reinvigorating Solo pvp as a thing within eve and he was quite successful at doing this. His PVP videos are still up on Youtube, there are some genuinely good fights in there. Solo in BS and BCs, with some cruisers in there as well. I used to listen to his podcast a lot, and though I was already a solo PVPer, he and Kovorix inspired me to go out and solo PVP, I used to roam from one end of lowsec to the other looking for goodfights, in all sorts of hulls, but I don't view that playstyle as viable anymore due to the changes to the meta, the increased blobbyness and the changes that have been introduced since he joined CCP. His roots make it doubly ironic though, that many of the changes he has introduced or failed to object to have made the playstyle he advocated much more difficult, outside of throwaway frigs and destroyers in FW space or nullsec. Battleship roaming is painful these days, BCs are largely a thing of the past, the meta has changed so that they are rarely used, mostly due to the crazy buffing of cruisers and the warp speed changes which make it painful to roam with these larger ships. T1 logi is absurdly OP, to the point where you can't break it solo unelss your in a command ship or a BC, most camps or gangs run with multiple T1 logi, larger roaming gangs don't tend to bring T2 logi now, though, where they used to roam with 2 scimis, because they don't want to roam with less reps, so they recruit and bring more people and they bring 4 scythes, it's a change that encouraged blobbing. Most of the solo and small gang community that I chat with on a regular basis, are deeply dissapointed with him, there are glaring balance issues in the game at the moment, T1 logis, Ishtar's, Geddons, to name just a few, that remain unaddressed despite CCP moving to a release cycle where they could easily take these matters in hand. Personally I view him as a bit of a hypocrite these days, on the one hand he encouraged solo PVP when he played the game, but now he's working for CCP, he's made the playstyle he promoted something much more difficult. To the point that it is not worth doing in my opinion. lol, that's crazy. His videos actually inspired me to start playing Eve again. I made a trial account a few years ago but as many others I just couldn't cope with corp life, hierarchy and forced fleet ops. When i saw his videos i knew there was another way. to play eve. Sombeody should create a time portal and warp a d-scan invisiblble instalocking huginn + lachesis combo in his solo pvp videos to retroactive kill his fun as he will do with ours.
Lugh Crow-Slave 297	Posted - 2014.12.21 16:31:15 - [1403] - Quote the recons do need a bit of extra tank but i think the force recon may be getting a bit to much its true in a regular fleet they are primed and nuked but i'm worried about how much stronger this will make a black ops fleet and i'm worried about that because if they become to strong i'm sure CCPs reaction will be to nerf blopsing as a whole rather than look back at the force recons
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 942	Posted - 2014.12.21 16:32:41 - [1404] - 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.
Stitch Kaneland Ex Astris Opes 83	Posted - 2014.12.21 16:51:22 - [1405] - Quote Hard Carnt wrote: Will probably cancel my sub for 12 months in the hope that D-scan immunity is removed. Isn't that what cloaking is for? Can i have your stuff? Prob wont be removed.
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 155	Posted - 2014.12.21 16:54:00 - [1406] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners ...and what is the drawback they are getting with this? Cloak has targeting delay. Low-sec will be deserted sec. Recons will be first pirates choice if this hit TQ and after a month they will be playing with themselfs. Where is the conflit driver in this? It's one side buff. It's not like you were thinking combat recons are not useable let's make it more popular. Hull is as much popular as community think it is. You may have your opinion about Ishtar, TQ seems to differ. This bonus will be similiar. It won't have anything to do with "recon". You want D-scan remove ability? Make a module, with harsh fitting so hull won't have superb tank and combat possibilities. Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 155	Posted - 2014.12.21 16:56:44 - [1407] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: Can i have your stuff? Prob wont be removed. Then try to probe pirate jumping to system and warping to you with site prescanned. Best wishes for your hull and egg. Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
Fyery Phoenix EVE University Ivy League 0	Posted - 2014.12.21 17:31:32 - [1408] - Quote A lot has been said already, but let me stress this again: - PvPers will love this (cause they can catch people off guard now) - PvEers will HATE this (cause even if you know your DScan, it's not going to protect you any longer) I would suggest the following compromise: -->> Make the recon ships only non-detectable if they are more than 1 AU away from the scanner. <<-- -->> Give them a DScan Range Bonus (like 30 AU) instead <<-- -> This would still give them a surprise moment when trying to catch people ->They can scan other ships while outside of 1 AU while undetected -> PvE people can still detect the recon ships when they are very close, but they have to be even more on guard I really hope CCP will rethink their decision to hide ships from DScan. This would seriously break the game in many places.
Syrias Bizniz Krautfleet Warp to Cyno. 392	Posted - 2014.12.21 17:36:48 - [1409] - Quote I myself welcome the days on the Missions & Complexes subforum where people who ask for 'what ship is suited best for lowsec exploration' will get the Answer... GET A CURSE. Also: Love it. D-Scan makes LowSec pretty much as safe as you can be, unless you do not fck it up of course. This will add a bit more spice to the game. And when 2 people drop into local and you only see one ship on d-scan, you already have to assume it's a cloaky and that he will show up with the other dude. So actually, nothing really new. Also, keep in mind that in terms of DPS these ships are not to be underestimated, but also far from pwn-mobiles.
Shaleb Heworo Viziam Amarr Empire 44	Posted - 2014.12.21 17:39:40 - [1410] - Quote Jeremiah Saken wrote: Stitch Kaneland wrote: Can i have your stuff? Prob wont be removed. Then try to probe pirate jumping to system and warping to you with site prescanned. Best wishes for your hull and egg. That statement is why d-scan immnunity will create an environement where everybody saves up before he might get blobbed by scary invisible recons. It will 1) force people to fit an expanded probe launchers which they can't on most pve ships and which is pretty slow due to probe scan time 2) make them safe up/dock/cloak immediately when they see a potential threat entering local. Seriously, you have to give pvers and pvpers alike demanding mechanics to defend themselves from getting caught meaning that there is a margin for error. THIS is what will make fights happen: Overconfidence, the feeling of false security and not the certainty of permanent insecurity which will just lead to a higher level of evasion. Make d-scanning more sophistacted instead of bluntly rendering it useless against a certain class of ships which in terms of security effectively makes it totally useless. You could give recons the ability to be only detectable at a 15% degree angle. This would actually add an element of skill and planning to the scanning side and to the ambushing side. This is not about personal interest: Blunt d-scan immunity will just make the game worse. If you read this please consider this CCP Rise. The notion that you do may be ridiculous to some but afterall it's worth a try.

Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 266	Posted - 2014.12.21 18:04:46 - [1411] - Quote Buy deadspace loot while it's still affordable :)
Robert Parr Iron Tiger T3 Industries 23	Posted - 2014.12.21 18:05:11 - [1412] - Quote Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners OK...apart from my blood pressure being through the roof, I will attempt to explain the folly in this without the rage....that said, Cloaky campers....anyone???...is this ringing any bells??? Does anyone else realize what a horrible mechanic this is???? No counter, no solution, you are simply screwed. Might as well pack your bags and move to hi sec. It's not that you can't deploy a scanner...it's that it's not worth the effort. Seriously, Whiskey Tango Foxtrot are you thinking?!?!?!?!? As if the hunter does not have the advantage to begin with....as a mouse at least you have an opportunity to run with d-scan...now you don't even get that. You cannot be a better mouse, all you can do is leave....this is really, really bad!!!! Please reconsider.
Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 266	Posted - 2014.12.21 18:05:35 - [1413] - Quote Jeremiah Saken wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners ...and what is the drawback they are getting with this? Cloak has targeting delay. Low-sec will be deserted sec. Recons will be first pirates choice if this hit TQ and after a month they will be playing with themselfs. Where is the conflit driver in this? It's one side buff. It's not like you were thinking combat recons are not useable let's make it more popular. Hull is as much popular as community think it is. You may have your opinion about Ishtar, TQ seems to differ. This bonus will be similiar. It won't have anything to do with "recon". You want D-scan remove ability? Make a module, with harsh fitting so hull won't have superb tank and combat possibilities. Drawback is that they are visible on grid, unlike cloaked ships.
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 160	Posted - 2014.12.21 18:14:25 - [1414] - Quote Fyery Phoenix wrote: - PvPers will love this (cause they can catch people off guard now) - PvEers will HATE this (cause even if you know your DScan, it's not going to protect you any longer) It's obvious bonus to PvPers. They are like it now, superb change, so fun. In a time they won't have so many targets to shoot, what then? If they can hunt me without any drawbacks why i should take my ship to space? Is this content? Conflict driver? Rise thinks it would change the hull fleet wise. Wrong, it will unbalance whole game. There is no counter-measure. Low-sec is best example here. There are no probes on d-scan when pirates hunts you (if they are they are lame). Fozzie at least build fits around some bonuses and drawbacks. Ok we can put rigs on freighters but it's cost us total EHP before the change. I didn't read whole thread but 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. Strong counter-arguments? Anybody can link some? Post not by PvPers. Sometimes i find to post on forum futile. Immunity stays because Rise think it will be very interesting to se how this plays out... Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
Shaleb Heworo Viziam Amarr Empire 44	Posted - 2014.12.21 18:16:29 - [1415] - Quote Aiyshimin wrote: Jeremiah Saken wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners ...and what is the drawback they are getting with this? Cloak has targeting delay. Low-sec will be deserted sec. Recons will be first pirates choice if this hit TQ and after a month they will be playing with themselfs. Where is the conflit driver in this? It's one side buff. It's not like you were thinking combat recons are not useable let's make it more popular. Hull is as much popular as community think it is. You may have your opinion about Ishtar, TQ seems to differ. This bonus will be similiar. It won't have anything to do with "recon". You want D-scan remove ability? Make a module, with harsh fitting so hull won't have superb tank and combat possibilities. Drawback is that they are visible on grid, unlike cloaked ships. This is highly misleading. The demanded Drawback ofc refers to to normal rules not to another rule exception (cloaky hulls). I think what he meant was that d-scan invisibility without locking delay is immensely powerful compared to other unique abilies to evade detection/ambush people. That fact that combat recons get this ability on top of their superior stats make it especially problematic.
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 161	Posted - 2014.12.21 18:27:57 - [1416] - Quote Shaleb Heworo wrote: This is highly misleading. The demanded Drawback ofc refers to to normal rules not to another rule exception (cloaky hulls). I think what he meant was that d-scan invisibility without locking delay is immensely powerful compared to other unique abilies to evade detection/ambush people. That fact that combat recons get this ability on top of their superior stats make it especially problematic. Exactly what i meant. Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
Stitch Kaneland Ex Astris Opes 84	Posted - 2014.12.21 18:30:32 - [1417] - Quote Jeremiah Saken wrote: Stitch Kaneland wrote: Can i have your stuff? Prob wont be removed. Then try to probe pirate jumping to system and warping to you with site prescanned. Best wishes for your hull and egg. Maybe ill find the thrill of being surprised entertaining? Not only that but this is almost a non issue with the already available tools(not dscan). This coming from someone who exclusively solo pvps. Im not afraid of change. This also enables more solo tactics to utilize and defend against. Making the game more exciting and creating new content/counters.
Iebi Vyethar 24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2014.12.21 18:35:27 - [1418] - Quote I wonder why people get more Loyalty Points when plexing alone rather than getting more when doing it with friends. FW needs to be looked at, especially now when doing anything bigger than small outposts will be close to a death wish if doing it alone. Mining in nullsec ? Yeah right Covert HACs COVERT HACS
Shaleb Heworo Viziam Amarr Empire 45	Posted - 2014.12.21 18:50:14 - [1419] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: Jeremiah Saken wrote: Stitch Kaneland wrote: Can i have your stuff? Prob wont be removed. Then try to probe pirate jumping to system and warping to you with site prescanned. Best wishes for your hull and egg. Maybe ill find the thrill of being surprised entertaining? Not only that but this is almost a non issue with the already available tools(not dscan). This coming from someone who exclusively solo pvps. Im not afraid of change. This also enables more solo tactics to utilize and defend against. Making the game more exciting and creating new content/counters. I "exclusively solo pvp" myself and i tell you that we will have less targets in short notice. Have you read the arguments stated here? People will just not trust their d-scan anymore. As long as people will have the ability to warp/cloak/dock at any given time hightening insecurity will just drive more pilots to do just that. That is why d-san immunity is a good idea in theory but not within the given framework of eve pvp right now. You have to give people tools that are hard to use so they will eventually drop their guard which will provide the opportunity for an ambush. If you just take away their tools they will just evade you at the highest possible level. That is why a malus for enemy d-scan detection range or angle would lead to much more killing done by recons than with blunt immunity as it is planned now.
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 162	Posted - 2014.12.21 18:50:23 - [1420] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: This coming from someone who exclusively solo pvps. Im not afraid of change. This also enables more solo tactics to utilize and defend against. Making the game more exciting and creating new content/counters. And my coming from someone who exclusively solo pve, yet you will have adventage. Why? What counter? This change breaks game for me. You can land on grid undetected without targeting delay. Fun for you, not for me. We don't have even chances. It's not the flying, or way of thinking that gave you the advantage, it's OP hull bonus. I have no idea how to defend against, for now. Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration

Robert Parr Iron Tiger T3 Industries 25	Posted - 2014.12.21 19:18:48 - [1421] - Quote Fine, just fine...you want this then I guess flying combat recon will become more the norm...or you deploy a scanning alt...or you move to hi sec. Didn't want/need that mechanic anyway The problem here is not so much that this change is to the majority benefit of the pvp player, it's that the vast majority of ALL changes have been to the benefit of the pvp player. In fact, as a pve player the greatest moment has been laughing at all the tears over the recently implemented travel changes (i.e. jump fatigue). Here's a question, when is the last time there have been changes that benefit the pve player??? Please do not bring up those burner missions...that's not pve, it's pvp training (no desire for pvp, yes, I've tried it...I don't like it...yes, I know pvp is everywhere...I choose to minimize my involvment). I suppose the next easiest thing to point to are the buffs to the barges and exhumers. Yeah, that's great...the gankers have to work a little harder...but it does not provide any real additional content for the pve player (except, of course, the middle finger you can give to the ganker from the cockpit of your Skiff as you warp away). When is the last time the pve player was offered anything in terms of real content?? Anyone???....Buler, anyone??? Hey, CCP, there are dedicated pve players...they like (nope, correction, LOVE) to play this game...please throw us a friken bone once in a while (like more than everry 10 years)!!!!!!!
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 943	Posted - 2014.12.21 19:34:29 - [1422] - Quote but pve people are already completely immune to pvp. massive nerfs to your immunity are a good thing.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1290	Posted - 2014.12.21 19:38:06 - [1423] - Quote Fyery Phoenix wrote: A lot has been said already, but let me stress this again: - PvPers will love this (cause they can catch people off guard now) - PvEers will HATE this (cause even if you know your DScan, it's not going to protect you any longer) I would suggest the following compromise: -->> Make the recon ships only non-detectable if they are more than 1 AU away from the scanner. <<-- -->> Give them a DScan Range Bonus (like 30 AU) instead <<-- -> This would still give them a surprise moment when trying to catch people ->They can scan other ships while outside of 1 AU while undetected -> PvE people can still detect the recon ships when they are very close, but they have to be even more on guard I really hope CCP will rethink their decision to hide ships from DScan. This would seriously break the game in many places. Since you are speaking for pvpers. id just like to clarify that as a pvper this change is really bad. If i want to catch someone i dont mind putting effort in. The anatomy of a kill often consists of much more than warping to someone and pressing F1. Setting up the kill can often be the most rewarding part. I dont think an arbitrary mechanic to replace effort and skill is a good way to go.
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 229	Posted - 2014.12.21 19:44:28 - [1424] - Quote Hard Carnt wrote: Will probably cancel my sub for 12 months in the hope that D-scan immunity is removed. Isn't that what cloaking is for? Canceling because you cant handle a bit of an extra challenge. How weak of you. Unless you are trolling, then I said nice troll there.
Iebi Vyethar 24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2014.12.21 19:59:03 - [1425] - Quote Can you guys please stop with this PvP - PvE relation nonsense ? What you define (and with that I mean trying to create a different genre within this specific game) as PvE is often, and for most people, a source of income. It affects low and null sec space, militia and wardecced corps which is almost everyone - so trying to make a fictional difference between two fictional player types in this game is imo pretty useless. also Quote: If i want to catch someone i dont mind putting effort in. The anatomy of a kill often consists of much more than warping to someone and pressing F1. Setting up the kill can often be the most rewarding part. broke my heart and made me cry
Erasmus Grant EVE University Ivy League 7	Posted - 2014.12.21 20:28:57 - [1426] - Quote Being a scout in real life I know that not being detected is half the battle, but you also got to be able to detect and find the enemy. Is there someway to do this and make it unique to Recon ships? Maybe a more refine d-scan or ability to link up with other recon ships to triangulate a targets position?
Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 266	Posted - 2014.12.21 20:32:21 - [1427] - Quote Jeremiah Saken wrote: Stitch Kaneland wrote: This coming from someone who exclusively solo pvps. Im not afraid of change. This also enables more solo tactics to utilize and defend against. Making the game more exciting and creating new content/counters. And my coming from someone who exclusively solo pve, yet you will have adventage. Why? What counter? This change breaks game for me. You can land on grid undetected without targeting delay. Fun for you, not for me. We don't have even chances. It's not the flying, or way of thinking that gave you the advantage, it's OP hull bonus. I have no idea how to defend against, for now. The delay between you seeing him on grid and him being able to lock you is as long as cloak targeting delay. So after Proteus you just have to make sure to burn >80km from warp-in point when doing PVE. If you are in a ship that can PVE aligned, that's even better. What chages is that you may land on grid with sebod/reseboed recons that you coudn't see on dscan. Combat probes are mandatory equipment for every ship in null and lowsec, if you are not in gang with a prober.
Esmanpir Revenent Defence Corperation Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive 9	Posted - 2014.12.21 20:41:01 - [1428] - Quote Syzygium wrote: [quote=Gully Alex Foyle][quote=Syzygium][quote=CCP Rise] [b] @ CCP Rise: What kind of logic is it, to say "more fights will happen if people do not know what awaits them and so chose to fight where they normally would have ran away!" - think about what you just said there: You force frustration because you deny people to make the right decisions based on their scouting and experience. That is what people makes quit and saying "what a damn waste of time!" after they ran into a complete unwinnable fight just because the other side had "invisible units". Jesus... More fights will happen for those who are risk adverse or those who try to mostly stay out of PVP. As they try to continue in their game play of PVE, mining, FW, whatever, they will eventually come to a false sense of security and get caught and killed. Everyone wins, Pirates, PVP'rs, gankers, except those who play to PVE, Mine, etc. Standard CCP thought process...
Madner Kami Durendal Ascending Sindication 55	Posted - 2014.12.21 20:43:10 - [1429] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Quote: I can tell you what will happen most likely: - Less fights because people are risk averse - A 2nd account with a Prober at all times will be must, not an option. I think this is a complex debate and I'm sure that none of us understand player behavior completely, but my experience is actually the opposite of what you're saying. 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. The negative side for me is your other bullet point. Because people don't want to take unnecessary risk they will work very hard, sometimes doing something very boring or difficult, just to get at those last pieces of information. And they should. But we would want to avoid mechanics that obligate people to this kind of behavior too heavily without enough positive side to make the mechanic worthwhile. I would be more worried with this mechanic that people have to spend a lot of time running probe scans when they really don't want to be than that they are avoiding engagements because of the possibility of Recons. I don't think this will be a problem but we'll have to wait and see. By your reasoning, playing the game blinded, deafened and with both hands bound behind the back increases the fun factor. Frankly put, you have no idea wtf you are babbeling about.
Shaleb Heworo Viziam Amarr Empire 46	Posted - 2014.12.21 20:57:25 - [1430] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: but pve people are already completely immune to pvp. massive nerfs to your immunity are a good thing. But it's not nerfed! A tool that created margin for error has been or will be rendered useless! From my observations of player behaviour i can guarantee you that this will result in less fights happening since players will more often preemptively resort to the ultimate tool of pvp immunity: warp, cloak, dock! A good change on the other hand would be to hide recons from d-scan by angle or range since this would create even wider margin for error. Juicy Target X sits in a plex and he will only notice a recon when scanning at a 5% angle and because of the same scanning malus he will just notice the recon when it's right at the gate. In the heat of shooting rats he misses the beacon center by a few degrees too many and ofc he's not aligned when the 70km point lachesis warps in. In case of absolute d-scan immunity however Jucy Target X would have preemptively warped as soon as Stealthy Hunter Y entered system. Just as nullsec ratters just warp to station. In order to highten the probability of fights you can`t just make them blind, you have to give them something!

Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 163	Posted - 2014.12.21 21:03:53 - [1431] - Quote Esmanpir wrote: The delay between you seeing him on grid and him being able to lock you is as long as cloak targeting delay. I have no idea what you talking about. When he's coming out of warp? Deceleration? Aiyshimin wrote: So after Proteus you just have to make sure to burn >80km from warp-in point when doing PVE. If you are in a ship that can PVE aligned, that's even better. You have no idea what you talking about. Perfect conditions? In PvE? I cannot dictate where i will be on site, i go where loot cans are. Sometimes they are close sometimes more than 80 km. Esmanpir wrote: What chages is that you may land on grid with sebod/reseboed recons that you coudn't see on dscan. Combat probes are mandatory equipment for every ship in null and lowsec, if you are not in gang with a prober. Sure everybody will be using combat probes now, that will create even more content. Everybody in the system will be jumping into safe spots/stations every time i want to find explo site. Ppl are risk awerse. How many stories did you hear about players want to do some pew pew and nobody wanted to engage them? Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
Shaleb Heworo Viziam Amarr Empire 46	Posted - 2014.12.21 21:11:53 - [1432] - Quote Jeremiah Saken wrote: Esmanpir wrote: The delay between you seeing him on grid and him being able to lock you is as long as cloak targeting delay. I have no idea what you talking about. When he's coming out of warp? Deceleration? Aiyshimin wrote: So after Proteus you just have to make sure to burn >80km from warp-in point when doing PVE. If you are in a ship that can PVE aligned, that's even better. You have no idea what you talking about. Perfect conditions? In PvE? I cannot dictate where i will be on site, i go where loot cans are. Sometimes they are close sometimes more than 80 km. Esmanpir wrote: What chages is that you may land on grid with sebod/reseboed recons that you coudn't see on dscan. Combat probes are mandatory equipment for every ship in null and lowsec, if you are not in gang with a prober. Sure everybody will be using combat probes now, that will create even more content. Everybody in the system will be jumping into safe spots/stations every time i want to find explo site. Ppl are risk awerse. How many stories did you hear about players want to do some pew pew and nobody wanted to engage them? And everybody squeezing a combat probe launcher on their ships and start maniacly probing for recons as soon as somebody enters their system will surely be fun and make them renew their sub. No wait.... C'mon CCP you can do better than this! Make scanning more challenging and give combat recons a special ability in that regard instead of this dumb, destructive immunity!
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 575	Posted - 2014.12.21 21:17:36 - [1433] - Quote All this drama would make a lot more sense if cloaks didn't exist. Invisible ships aren't new. Invisible instant tackle isn't new. There are now a couple less 100% safe areas in eve - OH THE HUMANITY!! Quite frankly the volume of people crying they might not be able to avoid every fight, ever or only ever engage in favourable circumstance is shameful. Get back to high sec. I do feel for the Pirates, targets will thin a little at first. But it shouldn't last.
Aapir Hole Violence Whole Squid 7	Posted - 2014.12.21 21:34:35 - [1434] - Quote Shaleb Heworo wrote: First of all: Flying with links aint solo and personally i wouldn't touch that ****** mechanic. The Huginn can have missiles too but right now it makes a great arty boat. At 20km and with double webs it wil apply full dps in that role. The Rapier on the other Hand lacks the high slots and the second damage bonus to make a good arty boat therefore it`s better off with missiles. Dps isn't that anemic as you said. Especially when you factor in full damage application all the way down to dessies but i leave it to you to eft that yourself. I honestly don't care so much how far the rapier shoots and if you want to shoot mans solo with it go ahead. But the huginn is just a square peg trying to go through a round hole. It can only barely fit meta 650 artillery and it does so by downgrading its tank to two meta shield extenders. It doesn't have the grid to be a great arty boat, not by a long shot. As it stands the only dps it's going to do in a fleet larger than 5 is going to be with its drones.
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 165	Posted - 2014.12.21 21:40:25 - [1435] - Quote afkalt wrote: All this drama would make a lot more sense if cloaks didn't exist. Invisible ships aren't new. Invisible instant tackle isn't new. There are now a couple less 100% safe areas in eve - OH THE HUMANITY!! Cloaks have drawbacks. Invisible instant tackle? What are you talking about? Ask players why they are not leaving hisec? We have one more reason they won't. If we don't want 100% safe areas in EvE lets remove d-scan completely. You take what's land on grid or leave, only probes and visual scouting. afkalt wrote: I do feel for the Pirates, targets will thin a little at first. But it shouldn't last. It shouldn't? So you know the date when this will be rolled back? Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
Shaleb Heworo Viziam Amarr Empire 46	Posted - 2014.12.21 21:41:16 - [1436] - Quote Aapir wrote: Shaleb Heworo wrote: First of all: Flying with links aint solo and personally i wouldn't touch that ****** mechanic. The Huginn can have missiles too but right now it makes a great arty boat. At 20km and with double webs it wil apply full dps in that role. The Rapier on the other Hand lacks the high slots and the second damage bonus to make a good arty boat therefore it`s better off with missiles. Dps isn't that anemic as you said. Especially when you factor in full damage application all the way down to dessies but i leave it to you to eft that yourself. I honestly don't care so much how far the rapier shoots and if you want to shoot mans solo with it go ahead. But the huginn is just a square peg trying to go through a round hole. It can only barely fit meta 650 artillery and it does so by downgrading its tank to two meta shield extenders. It doesn't have the grid to be a great arty boat, not by a long shot. As it stands the only dps it's going to do in a fleet larger than 5 is going to be with its drones. Yes, you are absolutely right about the Huginn. I did the eft myself afterwards. Huginn definately needs much more grid to fit 720's or a different bonus
Squatdog State Protectorate Caldari State 160	Posted - 2014.12.21 21:49:23 - [1437] - Quote Fyery Phoenix wrote: A lot has been said already, but let me stress this again: - PvPers will love this (cause they can catch people off guard now) - PvEers will HATE this (cause even if you know your DScan, it's not going to protect you any longer) I would suggest the following compromise: -->> Make the recon ships only non-detectable if they are more than 1 AU away from the scanner. <<-- -->> Give them a DScan Range Bonus (like 30 AU) instead <<-- -> This would still give them a surprise moment when trying to catch people ->They can scan other ships while outside of 1 AU while undetected -> PvE people can still detect the recon ships when they are very close, but they have to be even more on guard I really hope CCP will rethink their decision to hide ships from DScan. This would seriously break the game in many places. 'PVP expert' with 50-20 kill/loss record? Big surprise. Let me fix your post for you: - Gankbears will love this (cause they can catch people off guard now, with zero skill) - Everyone else will HATE this (cause even if you know your DScan, it's not going to protect you any longer)
Hard Carnt The Vendunari End of Life 5	Posted - 2014.12.21 21:56:51 - [1438] - Quote Bring back square targeting icons, the old soundtrack and nano domis. It's all a conspiracy to get people to purchase more plex
Marlona Sky Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 5813	Posted - 2014.12.21 22:23:23 - [1439] - Quote Madner Kami wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Quote: I can tell you what will happen most likely: - Less fights because people are risk averse - A 2nd account with a Prober at all times will be must, not an option. I think this is a complex debate and I'm sure that none of us understand player behavior completely, but my experience is actually the opposite of what you're saying. 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. The negative side for me is your other bullet point. Because people don't want to take unnecessary risk they will work very hard, sometimes doing something very boring or difficult, just to get at those last pieces of information. And they should. But we would want to avoid mechanics that obligate people to this kind of behavior too heavily without enough positive side to make the mechanic worthwhile. I would be more worried with this mechanic that people have to spend a lot of time running probe scans when they really don't want to be than that they are avoiding engagements because of the possibility of Recons. I don't think this will be a problem but we'll have to wait and see. By your reasoning, playing the game blinded, deafened and with both hands bound behind the back increases the fun factor. Frankly put, you have no idea wtf you are babbeling about. You're being obtuse. The Paradox
Krystyn Serenity Rising LLC 404 Alliance Not Found 195	Posted - 2014.12.21 22:30:16 - [1440] - Quote 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

Moraguth Ranger Corp Vae. Victis. 132	Posted - 2014.12.21 22:40:10 - [1441] - Quote 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 you forgot: New WH plan, get out of the WH before the patch hits. I got a Feature Added! Stop calling an Abaddon "abba-dawn". It is "uh-bad-in" dictionary.com/abaddon
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 253	Posted - 2014.12.21 22:48:23 - [1442] - Quote How the hell does this affect WHs? We don't use ships that you dscan anyway. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Ehud Gera Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 26	Posted - 2014.12.21 22:54:19 - [1443] - Quote Delt0r Garsk wrote: How the hell does this affect WHs? We don't use ships that you dscan anyway. Wait.... you can rat while cloaked? Teach me this Voodoo!
Arla Sarain 204	Posted - 2014.12.21 23:07:43 - [1444] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: I think this is a complex debate and I'm sure that none of us understand player behavior completely, but my experience is actually the opposite of what you're saying. 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. The negative side for me is your other bullet point. Because people don't want to take unnecessary risk they will work very hard, sometimes doing something very boring or difficult, just to get at those last pieces of information. And they should. But we would want to avoid mechanics that obligate people to this kind of behavior too heavily without enough positive side to make the mechanic worthwhile. I would be more worried with this mechanic that people have to spend a lot of time running probe scans when they really don't want to be than that they are avoiding engagements because of the possibility of Recons. I don't think this will be a problem but we'll have to wait and see. Just remove D-SCAN for everyone all together then. At least then it justifies your notion for ALL ships. As in surprises everywhere and for everyone.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 1808	Posted - 2014.12.21 23:15:59 - [1445] - Quote Ehud Gera wrote: Wait.... you can rat while cloaked? Teach me this Voodoo! So what you are saying is MORE people might be ratting in WH's now. Since anyone who already Rats in WH's won't leave because they are already used to cloakies hunting them So..... This is actually a boost to WH population if people will use Recons to rat, not a nerf. Follow your thoughts through to their actual conclusion. Not simply try to score points.
Cartheron Crust Matari Exodus 157	Posted - 2014.12.21 23:26:22 - [1446] - Quote Arla Sarain wrote: CCP Rise wrote: I think this is a complex debate and I'm sure that none of us understand player behavior completely, but my experience is actually the opposite of what you're saying. 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. The negative side for me is your other bullet point. Because people don't want to take unnecessary risk they will work very hard, sometimes doing something very boring or difficult, just to get at those last pieces of information. And they should. But we would want to avoid mechanics that obligate people to this kind of behavior too heavily without enough positive side to make the mechanic worthwhile. I would be more worried with this mechanic that people have to spend a lot of time running probe scans when they really don't want to be than that they are avoiding engagements because of the possibility of Recons. I don't think this will be a problem but we'll have to wait and see. Just remove D-SCAN for everyone all together then. At least then it justifies your notion for ALL ships. As in surprises everywhere and for everyone. Why stop there? Remove D-scan AND local! More fights everywhere for everyone all the time!
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 168	Posted - 2014.12.21 23:30:37 - [1447] - Quote Cartheron Crust wrote: Why stop there? Remove D-scan AND local! More fights everywhere for everyone all the time! And Conncord. And common sense. Happy Ganksmas Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral EVEL Tendancies 1	Posted - 2014.12.21 23:34:28 - [1448] - Quote my 2 cents/ ( for those that can't read or looking for tldr, I will be releasing my audio book of all my eve posts soon, stay tuned ) When I started playing EVE I wanted to get into Covert ops and follow that chain of ships through to black ops. My idea of the pilot I would become in EVE, for various reasons was much different from reality. ( insert your troll here ) One of my biggest disappointments was the similarity between the two recon ships. Where Covert ops for example the two ships are both in the same category but very different. In fact most classes of ships that have two or more ships in them are different, even if its just down to weapons used or range. Yes they ( recons ) have some differences but my suggestion, or at least what I would like to see would be for each of them to be forced into fulfilling a different role but both using cloaks rather than not being detectable on scan. It seems to me they are the natural progression from covert ops and EA frigates so why not have them use those bonuses in quite different ways. Both use cloaks No targeting delay on the combat recon but a 15 sec reactivation and two bonuses to damage output and one to ecm The force recon would be the opposite, two bonuses to ecm and one to damage or even none to damage and three to ecm. Note: This is similar to how it is now but not across the board so the change wouldn't be so drastic. The not detectable by d-scan is quite a cool feature on its own and the bonus would go both ways, but the problem I see with it is that it's juts a gimmick to make the recon ship flyable because that's what CCP is working on. We will see heaps of them within the first few months until they buff some other ship and make another one irrelevant. It will also just force care bears into being even more care bears while making it easier again for gankers. And although I don't understand that gank mentality. ( which is basically, oh look a cat, kick the cat and proclaim, how superior you are to the cat ) I do understand it's importance to the game, I just think they have it pretty easy. TLDR: Give combat recons a cloak instead and change how it uses that cloak and the bonuses it gets. /2 cents
hellokittyonline Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 121	Posted - 2014.12.21 23:40:18 - [1449] - Quote I'd like to reiterate the biggest flaw with this change being that there is no downside to the bonus and it renders force recons almost 100% useless. In low-sec the most common use for force recons is sitting on the inside of a plex, cloaked, with a bait frig. However, getting caught by this is 100% avoidable by taking advantage of said downsides. For instance, when you land on a medium just wait a few seconds and spam dscan. Many of them will decloak preemptively in order to avoid the locking delay. If they wait until you come inside to decloak then all you have to do is break point (they'll be 30km away because of cloak) range/kill their bait/warp away before either lock you and you're good. With the new change this role will be replaced with Combat recons, that for whatever reason suffer none of these downsides and have better stats/fitting. All this on top of not losing a high slot to the cloak. How in the hell is this balanced? It's not.
d0cTeR9 Astro Technologies Apocalypse Now. 15	Posted - 2014.12.21 23:42:10 - [1450] - Quote Make sure those combat recon ships can't fit a cyno or cov ops cyno...

MachineOfLovingGrace Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 7	Posted - 2014.12.21 23:46:15 - [1451] - Quote Tryaz wrote: If you want good solo pvp why are you diving FW plexes? Sounds like those people weren't after a gf and you are probably just a nuisance to them. Get out of the nursery and take your frigate for a roam in Null. Catch is on fire at the moment with great targets for a solo pvper. Oh I think they were after good fights, just my and their definition of this fights were not exactly the same. I'm in low because I have no idea how to do logistics in null, am scared of bubbles, and am too casual at the moment to become more that much invested. I'm quite happy with doing some frig PVP in this game and not get completely slaughtered every fight. Can't expect a all-green killboard this way, I'm fine with that. I was just trying to make the point that forcing fights on players with game mechanics won't change their view of the game. People will get frustrated and feel cheated, and I'm not sure that's a good thing to aim for, even in EVE.
Sizeof Void Ninja Suicide Squadron 548	Posted - 2014.12.21 23:57:42 - [1452] - Quote I'm sure this has already been suggested, and I apologize for not plowing through 70+ pages of posts.... :) I think it makes more sense to make Recon ships immune to Local, rather than d-scan. It has never made sense to me why your ship would always automatically announce its presense to everyone in a low- or null-sec system anyways. Local defeats the purpose of "stealth". In both RL and fiction, you don't have many instances where your covert or recon team makes a public announcement or shoots off a flare when making a quiet incursion into a hostile area. Nor would you have your ATC transponder turned on in your B-2 bomber while flying a combat mission. In addition to Recons, I also think that Cov Ops, Black Ops, and BRs should also be immune to local. Maybe SBs, as well, but they would need to be nerfed somewhat. This would make covert operations much more interesting. Besides, thanks to WH space, we already know how immunity to Local affects gameplay - it is not an unknown which may have game-breaking side-effects.
Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 268	Posted - 2014.12.22 00:17:30 - [1453] - Quote Jeremiah Saken wrote: Esmanpir wrote: The delay between you seeing him on grid and him being able to lock you is as long as cloak targeting delay. I have no idea what you talking about. When he's coming out of warp? Deceleration? Aiyshimin wrote: So after Proteus you just have to make sure to burn >80km from warp-in point when doing PVE. If you are in a ship that can PVE aligned, that's even better. You have no idea what you talking about. Perfect conditions? In PvE? I cannot dictate where i will be on site, i go where loot cans are. Sometimes they are close sometimes more than 80 km. Esmanpir wrote: What chages is that you may land on grid with sebod/reseboed recons that you coudn't see on dscan. Combat probes are mandatory equipment for every ship in null and lowsec, if you are not in gang with a prober. Sure everybody will be using combat probes now, that will create even more content. Everybody in the system will be jumping into safe spots/stations every time i want to find explo site. Ppl are risk awerse. How many stories did you hear about players want to do some pew pew and nobody wanted to engage them? Combat recon warps to you, unseen on dscan. He arrives to your grid, you see him on your overview. From this moment it takes him as long to lock you as it would take if he was flying a force recon, and decloaked. No change here. If you are in a frigate running relics / datas, just warp out or cloak, he can't lock you fast enough.
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1665	Posted - 2014.12.22 00:50:21 - [1454] - Quote The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of 'Information Warfare' abilities being built into covert and recon ships. - A module or mode that allowed you to turn off local detection would be great. You could fool people into thinking you had left local while still being in system. - The trade off would be the introduction of a new probe which detects cloaked ships. There would have to be some careful balancing to make sure it didn't just become the default probe type. In combination with d-scan immune ships this would reduce the reliance on local and d-scan as perfect intel sources which I think would be good for the meta as a whole. It has come too calculated. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Prince Amygdala The Dutch East India Company Fidelas Constans 32	Posted - 2014.12.22 01:12:00 - [1455] - Quote 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.
Ab'del Abu Atlantis Ascendant 181	Posted - 2014.12.22 01:24:18 - [1456] - 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.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 872	Posted - 2014.12.22 01:26:11 - [1457] - Quote Kmelx wrote: Shaleb Heworo wrote: I can only guess that due to his own playstyle he somehow doesn't understand the reality of playing eve apart from big fleet fights. CCP should consider that this is a big part of their playerbase though because obviously they don't which is sad because they will lose subs with these players which is sad because Eve is generally an awesome game. Actually he was a pretty prominent solo pvper called Kil2. He and a corp mate of mine called Kovorix used to run a podcast and an in game channel called Bringing Solo Back, dedicated like the name says reinvigorating Solo pvp as a thing within eve and he was quite successful at doing this. His PVP videos are still up on Youtube, there are some genuinely good fights in there. Solo in BS and BCs, with some cruisers in there as well. I used to listen to his podcast a lot, and though I was already a solo PVPer, he and Kovorix inspired me to go out and solo PVP, I used to roam from one end of lowsec to the other looking for goodfights, in all sorts of hulls, but I don't view that playstyle as viable anymore due to the changes to the meta, the increased blobbyness and the changes that have been introduced since he joined CCP. His roots make it doubly ironic though, that many of the changes he has introduced or failed to object to have made the playstyle he advocated much more difficult, outside of throwaway frigs and destroyers in FW space or nullsec. Battleship roaming is painful these days, BCs are largely a thing of the past, the meta has changed so that they are rarely used, mostly due to the crazy buffing of cruisers and the warp speed changes which make it painful to roam with these larger ships. T1 logi is absurdly OP, to the point where you can't break it solo unelss your in a command ship or a BC, most camps or gangs run with multiple T1 logi, larger roaming gangs don't tend to bring T2 logi now, though, where they used to roam with 2 scimis, because they don't want to roam with less reps, so they recruit and bring more people and they bring 4 scythes, it's a change that encouraged blobbing. Most of the solo and small gang community that I chat with on a regular basis, are deeply dissapointed with him, there are glaring balance issues in the game at the moment, T1 logis, Ishtar's, Geddons, to name just a few, that remain unaddressed despite CCP moving to a release cycle where they could easily take these matters in hand. Personally I view him as a bit of a hypocrite these days, on the one hand he encouraged solo PVP when he played the game, but now he's working for CCP, he's made the playstyle he promoted something much more difficult. To the point that it is not worth doing in my opinion. I always joked with blackops buddies that Rise wants to cripple solo PVP so that the **** he did in his videos (as Kil2) can never be topped :P
h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral EVEL Tendancies 3	Posted - 2014.12.22 01:26:47 - [1458] - 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. Nobody is ever 100% safe in EVE ( unless you station trade ect ) but nobody is ever 100% unsafe either, everybody has a fighting/fleeting chance. The fear is removing that chance completely and swaying it towards the 100 % unsafe. Ab'del Abu wrote: 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. +1
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 874	Posted - 2014.12.22 01:30:43 - [1459] - Quote Aiyshimin wrote: Combat recon warps to you, unseen on dscan. He arrives to your grid, you see him on your overview. From this moment it takes him as long to lock you as it would take if he was flying a force recon, and decloaked. No change here. Are you a moron? That's a massive change! Before: ship visible on d-scan for the last 14 au of their warp Now: ship is just as un-detectable as a force recon The ENTIRE POINT of distinguishing between combat and force recons was that one was difficult to detect but fairly useless in direct combat, while the other combined the support abilites of the force recon with the damage and tank of a combat hull, but AT THE EXPENSE OF STEALTHINESS. Giving the combat recon the same element of surprise as the force recon completely steps all over the force recon's role in the game. It's stupid, and if you can't understand why then you're stupid. On another note, I'm really glad that "COMBAT RECONS WILL BE INVULNERABLE TO D-SCAN" is proudly announced as part of the Proteus featureset in the latest dev blog. What ever happened to consulting the community and getting feedback before unilaterally taking a dump on game mechanics?
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1665	Posted - 2014.12.22 01:56:43 - [1460] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: Now: ship is just as un-detectable as a force recon They are more detectable. Combat probes have much larger radius than d-scan. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.

Squatdog State Protectorate Caldari State 163	Posted - 2014.12.22 03:23:41 - [1461] - Quote Zappity wrote: Ganthrithor wrote: Now: ship is just as un-detectable as a force recon They are more detectable. Combat probes have much larger radius than d-scan. How many PVP or PVE ships typically fit combat probes?
Toxic Raioin Ministry of War Amarr Empire 7	Posted - 2014.12.22 03:39:12 - [1462] - Quote Do Amarr really need 2 drone/neut ships in the Recon line? i would rather one be bonused for missiles or LASERS. Now is a great time to do this.
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1667	Posted - 2014.12.22 03:52:01 - [1463] - Quote Squatdog wrote: Zappity wrote: Ganthrithor wrote: Now: ship is just as un-detectable as a force recon 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. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Squatdog State Protectorate Caldari State 163	Posted - 2014.12.22 04:03:17 - [1464] - Quote Zappity wrote: Squatdog wrote: Zappity wrote: Ganthrithor wrote: Now: ship is just as un-detectable as a force recon 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.
Mr Doctor Sex Machineguns 141	Posted - 2014.12.22 05:35:45 - [1465] - Quote Well they cant get a direct warpin on you without a cloaky and if you keep ratting while a hostile is in your system without at least aligning you deserve to die. For solo I think I'd probably prefer the old pilgrim than the new curse. This isnt anywhere near as broken as people are crying. I actually think its not quite as big a buff as recons needed.
Barrogh Habalu Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 822	Posted - 2014.12.22 06:09:50 - [1466] - Quote Toxic Raioin wrote: Do Amarr really need 2 drone/neut ships in the Recon line? i would rather one be bonused for missiles or LASERS. Now is a great time to do this. Neuts differ from all the rest EWar systems in that they compete with guns for high slots, hence the drones.
Please Turn The Tuskers The Tuskers Co. 37	Posted - 2014.12.22 06:18:00 - [1467] - Quote Poor me, I read most(if not all) of the posts in this thread. For as long as I can remember, posting on these forums always gets you in "trouble" sooner or later. Ignoring the obvious trolls, you still "have" to enter pointless debates with people that, for the most part, lack common sense. Their Eve's experience resumes to a lot of talking about Eve and not much playing Eve, where by playing Eve I mean being undocked, uncloaked and not in a POS. I already stated here my feelings on the recons changes(with so much talk about the D-Scan thingy the fact that balancing for CCP just means buff things has gone almost completely ignored). I do believe that a lot of the "the sky is falling" concerns are unjustified. People will adapt and move on with their lives. At the same time, I do believe these changes are just another step in the "look guys, we have no ******* clue what we're doing, but let's try this and see how it works" CCP's master plan. Ok, I might have been a little harsh here, however - transforming Eve Online in Alts Online even more than it already is sends an unpleasant message to all the people that are not complete strangers to critical thinking. The biggest problem Eve has/had(and probably will ever have) is the fact that core game-mechanics gives a huge incentive to have alts. Contrary to popular belief Eve is not hard, unless you're a complete moron. What holds true is the fact that Eve can be a very harsh place. However, the use of alts eliminates all that(and all the consequences for your actions) and unfortunately is the perfect counter/solution to most things in Eve. At this point, the forum warriors would say - "don't get an alt and get a friend instead" ignoring completely(since they don't play the game but just talk about it) that most task that are done on alts are: 1) So boring that no one with a drop of self-respect will want to do them on their mains; 2) They require so much trust that you prefer to not delegate them(broken game-mechanics again, trust in eve is kind of binary. complete trust or no trust at all). Also, if you're a new player and want to try different aspects of the game the "Skill-Points system" kind of sends you into the "let's make some alts business". 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). P.S. There was a lot of talk a few months ago about the average number of logged in people in Eve. I would very much like to see some statistics on the average number of logged in people in Eve that are undocked, uncloaked and not at a POS. Something, something, ... tells me you'll not like that number. Join TheTuskers, travel to exotic distant lands, meet exciting unusual people and ... kill them!
mulgrew Zero Weyland Mulgrew Corporation Dominatus Atrum Mortis 5	Posted - 2014.12.22 06:35:00 - [1468] - Quote can i just ask for a role bonus on the astero so it can fit an expanded probe launcher seems as well have tobe doing combat scanning to find some ships ?
mulgrew Zero Weyland Mulgrew Corporation Dominatus Atrum Mortis 5	Posted - 2014.12.22 06:49:26 - [1469] - Quote Vadeim Rizen wrote: this is so hilariously OP. inb4 recon nerf. ratters now can't even just keep an eye on d-scan and warp out before someone comes in to tackle.... tbh all they needed was a hitpoint and cap buff. can't wait to sit in a medium plex with an insta-lock arty huginn and blap unsuspecting frigs. also ive never seen a ratter wait for dscan they have local to tell them when to dock up dont they ?
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 171	Posted - 2014.12.22 07:04:15 - [1470] - Quote Aiyshimin wrote: Combat recon warps to you, unseen on dscan. He arrives to your grid, you see him on your overview. From this moment it takes him as long to lock you as it would take if he was flying a force recon, and decloaked. No change here. Force recons have decloaking delay bonus? Zappity wrote: Now or after Proteus? I imagine that probing will become more important for both activities. Which is fine. It's not. Lanucher for combat probes are hard to fit (CPU) which means you will need another ship to scout, which means usually activity will take more time, hulls, alt. If this game need another account to play something is wrong here. Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration

Ehud Gera Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 28	Posted - 2014.12.22 07:04:45 - [1471] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Ehud Gera wrote: Wait.... you can rat while cloaked? Teach me this Voodoo! So what you are saying is MORE people might be ratting in WH's now. Since anyone who already Rats in WH's won't leave because they are already used to cloakies hunting them So..... This is actually a boost to WH population if people will use Recons to rat, not a nerf. Follow your thoughts through to their actual conclusion. Not simply try to score points. Mate, here's how this works. I jump into a WH in my Recon, I dscan normally, no hits? I Dscan anoms on my "Wrecks" Tab. Find wrecks in an unfinished anom? Go pay it a visit. Whaddya know! A Ratting Recon, juicy KM inbound. All advantages to the attacker. No disadvantage given to balance out the dscan immunity. Blanket super Buff. Especially in WH's where intel is already hard to get and not given for free (IE: no local, no gates), now there's a piece of intel you can't even work to get without a probing alt, 2 or more visual scout alts, and extra time to run those probe scans.
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1669	Posted - 2014.12.22 07:06:43 - [1472] - Quote Squatdog wrote: Zappity wrote: Squatdog wrote: Zappity wrote: Ganthrithor wrote: Now: ship is just as un-detectable as a force recon 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. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 576	Posted - 2014.12.22 08:04:45 - [1473] - Quote Jeremiah Saken wrote: Aiyshimin wrote: Combat recon warps to you, unseen on dscan. He arrives to your grid, you see him on your overview. From this moment it takes him as long to lock you as it would take if he was flying a force recon, and decloaked. No change here. Force recons have decloaking delay bonus? Zappity wrote: Now or after Proteus? I imagine that probing will become more important for both activities. Which is fine. It's not. Lanucher for combat probes are hard to fit (CPU) which means you will need another ship to scout, which means usually activity will take more time, hulls, alt. If this game need another account to play something is wrong here. You don't /need/ two accounts, you just need to accept that sometimes **** happens and you're going to die. Like jumping into an unscouted gate camp, death is just as assured. People also forget this goes both ways - the recon warping to the ratter might be warping to a ratter and another few recons....
BaSSoM Black Betty Inc 0	Posted - 2014.12.22 08:18:08 - [1474] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Hello again o/ Finally, finally, Recons. I know you guys have been asking for a long time now so even though timing was pretty tight with vacations coming up I want to get this class in for January. We had a few big goals with Recons: Give Combat Recons something to make them stand out as a unique and interesting set of ships Close the gap somewhat between Recons and T3 Cruisers, though this will also be a goal during the T3 Cruiser rebalance Align Recons around ship developer trends established in other classes (Roden Lachesis should not use missiles for example) Address any other general balance issues or pain points (hello Pilgrim) Those goals lead us to the following major changes: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners "Dear" CCP Rise! Personally, I and my guys the last two updates arrive to put it mildly shocked... The feeling of solid, artful, INTERESTING game in which before each departure weigh and calculate many aspects, Your team creates a soft and fluffy rabbit, which can Pat eight year old girl. Along with that you enter such "INCREDIBLE" pack,You'd better worry about the technical sides of the client and if you have the answer that You are working on it, apparently not enough. Fourth update You forget to remove the BUG, white screen after the explosion, BUGS when writing text in the chat when you pass the gate and exiting the station. Regarding the disappearance of ships with radar, it is already aerobatics is not knowledge, I urge You to read physics textbooks for 5th and 6th grades, carefully study what the radio signal! Stop saturate EVE delusional innovations which affect the established game mechanics, get graphics, development of new vehicles that will expand the capabilities of the players. Now the mass majority of players are still misunderstanding what is happening and if it goes on, the newly arrived pilots will be no one to transfer knowledge about the game and teach the General concept of survival in EVE! P. S. Not that yours!
TuCZnak Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 16	Posted - 2014.12.22 08:36:44 - [1475] - Quote The lack of dev posts in this threadnought is disappointing...
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 171	Posted - 2014.12.22 08:53:06 - [1476] - Quote afkalt wrote: You don't /need/ two accounts, you just need to accept that sometimes ** happens and you're going to die. Like jumping into an unscouted gate camp, death is just as assured. Sometimes? What is this russian roulette? Do i even have to fly my ships or it will be a "10 minute-lost ship" rule? If i lost ship to unscanned gate camp it will be my fault. What did i suppose to do with ship without drawbacks to gank me? D-scan was the only tool to help and it won't guarantee i will escape. With current resolution (EFT), Rook for example, have 3,9 sec locking time on cruiser hull (without mods). No targeting delay. No chance to escape. Sure s... happens. What is the purpose of this hulls (combat recons) because it won't be recon. Please Turn wrote: At the same time, I do believe these changes are just another step in the "look guys, we have no ***** clue what we're doing, but let's try this and see how it works" CCP's master plan. Ooga-Chaka Ooga-Ooga... I can't stop this feeling Deep inside of me Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
Pine Marten Laurus Manus Concordia Incorporated II 80	Posted - 2014.12.22 08:53:07 - [1477] - Quote Love. It. All.
Edward Olmops DUST Expeditionary Team 230	Posted - 2014.12.22 09:09:25 - [1478] - Quote One more about D-Scan immunity: How will this work in combination wih FW plexes? If I understand it correctly, the Recon will be able to run the clock down WHILE BEING "CLOAKY". That is much more powerful than anything we had in those complexes before (except maybe having the enemies NPCs attack intruders but not you with standings 5.0+ like in old days :-D). Also it defeats several nerfs to cloaking in those complexes. Shouldn't these rules be changed to either: - Recons show on D-Scan if sitting next to a FW timer - Recons can't run FW timers down ??? Also: will anyone read this after 74 pages of threadnought?
ChromeStriker 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 805	Posted - 2014.12.22 09:19:38 - [1479] - Quote TuCZnak wrote: The lack of dev posts in this threadnought is disappointing... Its the weekend before Christmas dude.... seriously... entitled much lol No Worries
Melody Axon AA and MA 0	Posted - 2014.12.22 09:27:11 - [1480] - Quote Grm Makentor wrote: >dscan immune ships with covops cloaks in w-space jesus christ what were they thinking, so mandatory scouting alts on every hole now? Combat recon != Cloaky recon. Combats will be D-scan immune The cloaky ones will have the covops cloak. Neither have both.

Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1965	Posted - 2014.12.22 09:35:12 - [1481] - Quote BaSSoM wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Hello again o/ Finally, finally, Recons. I know you guys have been asking for a long time now so even though timing was pretty tight with vacations coming up I want to get this class in for January. We had a few big goals with Recons: Give Combat Recons something to make them stand out as a unique and interesting set of ships Close the gap somewhat between Recons and T3 Cruisers, though this will also be a goal during the T3 Cruiser rebalance Align Recons around ship developer trends established in other classes (Roden Lachesis should not use missiles for example) Address any other general balance issues or pain points (hello Pilgrim) Those goals lead us to the following major changes: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners "Dear" CCP Rise! Personally, I and my guys the last two updates arrive to put it mildly shocked... The feeling of solid, artful, INTERESTING game in which before each departure weigh and calculate many aspects, Your team creates a soft and fluffy rabbit, which can Pat eight year old girl. Along with that you enter such "INCREDIBLE" pack,You'd better worry about the technical sides of the client and if you have the answer that You are working on it, apparently not enough. Fourth update You forget to remove the BUG, white screen after the explosion, BUGS when writing text in the chat when you pass the gate and exiting the station. Regarding the disappearance of ships with radar, it is already aerobatics is not knowledge, I urge You to read physics textbooks for 5th and 6th grades, carefully study what the radio signal! Stop saturate EVE delusional innovations which affect the established game mechanics, get graphics, development of new vehicles that will expand the capabilities of the players. Now the mass majority of players are still misunderstanding what is happening and if it goes on, the newly arrived pilots will be no one to transfer knowledge about the game and teach the General concept of survival in EVE! P. S. Not that yours! Dude.. he is a GAME DESIGNER. You are complaining about hings of OTHER departments!!!! And youa re UTTERLY WRONG. GAme design changes are what keeps the game interesting. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 580	Posted - 2014.12.22 09:44:01 - [1482] - Quote Jeremiah Saken wrote: afkalt wrote: You don't /need/ two accounts, you just need to accept that sometimes **** happens and you're going to die. Like jumping into an unscouted gate camp, death is just as assured. If i lost ship to unscanned gate camp it will be my fault. How exactly are you scanning a gate camp BEFORE jumping in? Now you're just flat out making stuff up to suit the recon boogyman thing you've got going. Honestly, people are acting like there's going to be a half dozen recons around every corner.
Adrie Atticus Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion 743	Posted - 2014.12.22 09:46:29 - [1483] - Quote afkalt wrote: Jeremiah Saken wrote: Aiyshimin wrote: Combat recon warps to you, unseen on dscan. He arrives to your grid, you see him on your overview. From this moment it takes him as long to lock you as it would take if he was flying a force recon, and decloaked. No change here. Force recons have decloaking delay bonus? Zappity wrote: Now or after Proteus? I imagine that probing will become more important for both activities. Which is fine. It's not. Lanucher for combat probes are hard to fit (CPU) which means you will need another ship to scout, which means usually activity will take more time, hulls, alt. If this game need another account to play something is wrong here. You don't /need/ two accounts, you just need to accept that sometimes **** happens and you're going to die. Like jumping into an unscouted gate camp, death is just as assured. People also forget this goes both ways - the recon warping to the ratter might be warping to a ratter and another few recons.... "But you don't understand, EVE IS A SOLO GAME, NO FRIENDS ALLOWED!" Does this make the crying more understandable in this thread? Because it's all what it is, people crying fowl about having to have friends to play with.
Cassius Invictus Thou shalt not kill A Nest of Vipers 105	Posted - 2014.12.22 09:53:15 - [1484] - Quote Ehud Gera wrote: Delt0r Garsk wrote: How the hell does this affect WHs? We don't use ships that you dscan anyway. Wait.... you can rat while cloaked? Teach me this Voodoo! Lol if you are only able to PvE, maybe move to Hi Sec... i live in WH and those changes don't bother me at all. 1) You can still have a friend at the WH to detect any incoming. 2) Scan immune Recons will die to WH capms. 3) Recon gangs will die to standrad T3 gangs. 4) If u solo sleepers and and have no way to detect recons, than guess what: today cloacky proteus, loki or statios can kill you just as easily. 5) With the amount of firepower we have on grid when doing sleepers in C5-C6 i wish there was someone dumb enough to try to gank us with recons...
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1965	Posted - 2014.12.22 10:01:01 - [1485] - Quote Iebi Vyethar wrote: I wonder why people get more Loyalty Points when plexing alone rather than getting more when doing it with friends. FW needs to be looked at, especially now when doing anything bigger than small outposts will be close to a death wish if doing it alone. Ratting in nullsec ? Yeah right Covert HACs COVERT HACS That is just one example of the serious problem with reward system in game. It is skewed completely. Activities that are in dangerous locations and would benefit from a community must pay 2 times more than safe lone activities to be worth. But then anything that can be done by 2 average players can be done by a single high SP player with pimped setup ALONE. and then people will minmax it and do it alone The only place were this has been partially corrected (And the result is great in community manteinance) is incursions. A reward system that pays per member, not per final result. All activities should pay more or less like incursions. Otherwise minmaxing will ALWAYS result in people doing the activities alone. Simple example of solution. Make ratting of all forms pay part of its income with LP (concord LP). MAke everyone in fleet get the LP based on a curve of results the fleet had on the time of the income tick. That means... would be good to have PVPERs in fleet with the PVer. While the PVE people make money the people patrolling is also making SOME money. If you try to do it alone, you will NOT make more, because you are not sharing that LP.. it should be added to each member of the fleet within the constellation. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Belinda HwaFang Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate 39	Posted - 2014.12.22 10:05:33 - [1486] - Quote Cassius Invictus wrote: Lol if you are only able to PvE, maybe move to Hi Sec... i live in WH and those changes don't bother me at all. 1) You can still have a friend at the WH to detect any incoming. 2) Scan immune Recons will die to WH capms. 3) Recon gangs will die to standrad T3 gangs. 4) If u solo sleepers and and have no way to detect recons, than guess what: today cloacky proteus, loki or statios can kill you just as easily. 5) With the amount of firepower we have on grid when doing sleepers in C5-C6 i wish there was someone dumb enough to try to gank us with recons... Yes, i can see it won't affect you at all, but the (already deserted) lower class holes can now have combat recons camping in it and are invisible from dscan without a cloak.... This is fairly gamebreaking imo. Expect even more people to move out of lower class wormholes as a result. In nullsec where you have local it's fine, and in higher class wormholes where the stakes are already high it's fine, but this somewhat cripples the low end wormhole dweller / daytripper. HAC resist profile combat recon which you get no warning of until it's on grid! Sure, you can be constantly combat probing on an alt for it but.....I thought CCP was moving away from such nonsense.
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 171	Posted - 2014.12.22 10:06:55 - [1487] - Quote afkalt wrote: How exactly are you scanning a gate camp BEFORE jumping in? Now you're just flat out making stuff up to suit the recon boogyman thing you've got going. Honestly, people are acting like there's going to be a half dozen recons around every corner. I lived in lowsec and i know how pirates are ganking ships at explo sites. It will be way to easy with new recons. Adrie Atticus wrote: "But you don't understand, EVE IS A SOLO GAME, NO FRIENDS ALLOWED!" Does this make the crying more understandable in this thread? Because it's all what it is, people crying fowl about having to have friends to play with. Soooo friendly game mechanism to have scout on warp gate in combat site. We been there with loot bukkake, forcing team play when we don't want to team up. Every aspect of this game must force team play? It should not be easy to play solo but not impossible. Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
StuRyan Space Mutts 53	Posted - 2014.12.22 10:09:39 - [1488] - Quote Love it, what would round this off is if you make recon pilots invisible in local too..... delicious tears.
Ehud Gera Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 28	Posted - 2014.12.22 10:13:14 - [1489] - Quote A lot of people seem to think this game is about their style of play only. And I have tried most of the styles (Currently pvp focused) I assert that the Dscan Immunity is *unhealthy for the game* in general. For all styles of play. Gankers think its paradise until their targets dry up. PVE'rs who like to use small groups or solo find it an imbalance to risk/reward. 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!) I guess null fleets and the very large pvp groups might not be hurt... cause recons can only do so much to hurt them... Think about it in terms of overall game health please before spouting that the rest of us who don't like the change are ignorant. AND btw, it's a sandbox.... so maybe we shouldn't punish carebears and pve'rs for building their sandcastles just because they like a different layout... Food for thought. The day eve becomes one way to play is the day the sandbox dies. Punishing certain play types is the first and worst step toward this.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 580	Posted - 2014.12.22 10:41:30 - [1490] - Quote Jeremiah Saken wrote: afkalt wrote: How exactly are you scanning a gate camp BEFORE jumping in? Now you're just flat out making stuff up to suit the recon boogyman thing you've got going. Honestly, people are acting like there's going to be a half dozen recons around every corner. I lived in lowsec and i know how pirates are ganking ships at explo sites. It will be way to easy with new recons. So now you've moved to crying about exploration sites? If only there was a class of ship that could probe these sites and get there cloaked so that the big bad horrible recon can't hurt them. Man that would be super. They should call it like....covert ops or something. That would fix this problem right up. Oh. Wait. The only legitimate ~~complaint~~ point of note is medium plexes and even then, that boils down to "someone might PvP my isk farming ship" which is....yeah....let's leave that one there.

afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 580	Posted - 2014.12.22 10:48:46 - [1491] - Quote Ehud Gera wrote: AND btw, it's a sandbox.... so maybe we shouldn't punish carebears and pve'rs for building their sandcastles just because they like a different layout... We're not, the assertion is that PvEers should be exposed to danger and moving their risk away from 100% safety is not a bad thing. Destruction is the lifeblood of the game - if nothing blew up, the game wouldnt last 3 months. Industry: dead. Mining: Dead. Mission LP farming: Dead. Exploration loot: Dead. WH loot: Dead. Everything....dead. The entire game feeds ships exploding. More of those make it better for everyone in the long run/bigger picture. Even if sometimes it's inconvenient for the person exploding.
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 172	Posted - 2014.12.22 10:56:28 - [1492] - Quote afkalt wrote: So now you've moved to crying about exploration sites? Crying? No, i was about to start hunting lowsec explorers in my SB and with recon change there will be less targets to shoot. We will see who is crying after 3 months with this change, i'm not pvpers, i bet it wouldn't be me. Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
Squatdog State Protectorate Caldari State 165	Posted - 2014.12.22 10:57:35 - [1493] - Quote Quote: 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. Oh boy... In order to fit a cov-ops cloak, Force Recons sacrifice a lot of combat utility compared to their Combat Recon counterparts. Likewise, covops T3s are restricted to a crappy subsystem in place of something actually useful. Then there's the matter of getting decloaked on gates (and by anything within 2000m) on top of the targeting delay penalty. Something the new Jesus Recons won't have to deal with. That's how it's balanced.
Cassius Invictus Thou shalt not kill A Nest of Vipers 107	Posted - 2014.12.22 11:04:49 - [1494] - Quote Belinda HwaFang wrote: Yes, i can see it won't affect you at all, but the (already deserted) lower class holes can now have combat recons camping in it and are invisible from dscan without a cloak.... This is fairly gamebreaking imo. Expect even more people to move out of lower class wormholes as a result. In nullsec where you have local it's fine, and in higher class wormholes where the stakes are already high it's fine, but this somewhat cripples the low end wormhole dweller / daytripper. HAC resist profile combat recon which you get no warning of until it's on grid! Sure, you can be constantly combat probing on an alt for it but.....I thought CCP was moving away from such nonsense. I can see your point and i partially agree, but remember that 1) today the risk is the same it's just that there will be another ship class to be feared 2) guys form c5-c5 roam lower class WH and will remove any recon camp for you . Recons maybe good for killing lone PvE pilots, but will die to most standard WH fleets.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 253	Posted - 2014.12.22 11:09:19 - [1495] - Quote Cassius Invictus wrote: Ehud Gera wrote: Delt0r Garsk wrote: How the hell does this affect WHs? We don't use ships that you dscan anyway. Wait.... you can rat while cloaked? Teach me this Voodoo! .... 5) With the amount of firepower we have on grid when doing sleepers in C5-C6 i wish there was someone dumb enough to try to gank us with recons... EDIT: I just realized that a d-can immunity is essentialy a weaker cov ops cloak - it works the same expept you cant hide on grid and u can be combat probed. Thats it. Nothing broken. Yea us too. But alas most people that are prepared to hunt in C5-C6s tend to know better. Also if someone was stupid enough to take us on in a combat site, pop an extra escalation and watch them die to sleepers while whoring on the kills. Getting your enemies killed by NPCs --priceless. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 253	Posted - 2014.12.22 11:12:25 - [1496] - Quote Jeremiah Saken wrote: Soooo friendly game mechanism to have scout on warp gate in combat site. We been there with loot bukkake, forcing team play when we don't want to team up. Every aspect of this game must force team play? It should not be easy to play solo but not impossible. This is an MMOG. Massive Multiplayer Online Game. MMOG are like sex. Sure you can go solo, but its more fun in a group. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Shaqil Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 2	Posted - 2014.12.22 11:19:31 - [1497] - Quote Max Velocity PILGRIM = 198 (+34) CURSE = 205 (+30) FALCON = 192 (+23) ROOK = 194 (+24) ARAZU = 207 (+27) LACHESIS = 220 (+29) RAPIER = 230 (+38) HUGINN = 240 (+31) TALOS = 220!!! Well at least matari T2 Cruisers are faster then non matari Battle Cruiser! Is it just me or there is really something wrong with that?
Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 270	Posted - 2014.12.22 11:25:24 - [1498] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: Aiyshimin wrote: Combat recon warps to you, unseen on dscan. He arrives to your grid, you see him on your overview. From this moment it takes him as long to lock you as it would take if he was flying a force recon, and decloaked. No change here. Are you a moron? That's a massive change! Before: ship visible on d-scan for the last 14 au of their warp Now: ship is just as un-detectable as a force recon The ENTIRE POINT of distinguishing between combat and force recons was that one was difficult to detect but fairly useless in direct combat, while the other combined the support abilites of the force recon with the damage and tank of a combat hull, but AT THE EXPENSE OF STEALTHINESS. Giving the combat recon the same element of surprise as the force recon completely steps all over the force recon's role in the game. It's stupid, and if you can't understand why then you're stupid. On another note, I'm really glad that "COMBAT RECONS WILL BE INVULNERABLE TO D-SCAN" is proudly announced as part of the Proteus featureset in the latest dev blog. What ever happened to consulting the community and getting feedback before unilaterally taking a dump on game mechanics? No, but apparently you are. NBS. Before: Force Recon is not visible on dscan After: Combat Recon is not visible on dscan And 9 times out of 10 the tackler will still be an inty, because they are the only ships with even the slimmest chance of catching anything because of Local Chat. Recons aren't fast enough, that isn't changing. If you didn't use Force Recons before, you won't Combat Recons either. Basically the main issue with this change, but not with this change alone, is the increasing altification. Please Turn from Tuskers expressed this well in her post above. Fitting combat probes is simply not viable on most combat ships, so to keep your current capability you need to bring an alt, or force one gang member to a non-combat role. I'm afraid the pressure to roll new alts for everything is intendend business design by CCP.
Adrie Atticus Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion 747	Posted - 2014.12.22 11:36:03 - [1499] - Quote Jeremiah Saken wrote: afkalt wrote: How exactly are you scanning a gate camp BEFORE jumping in? Now you're just flat out making stuff up to suit the recon boogyman thing you've got going. Honestly, people are acting like there's going to be a half dozen recons around every corner. I lived in lowsec and i know how pirates are ganking ships at explo sites. It will be way to easy with new recons. Adrie Atticus wrote: "But you don't understand, EVE IS A SOLO GAME, NO FRIENDS ALLOWED!" Does this make the crying more understandable in this thread? Because it's all what it is, people crying fowl about having to have friends to play with. Soooo friendly game mechanism to have scout on warp gate in combat site. We been there with loot bukkake, forcing team play when we don't want to team up. Every aspect of this game must force team play? It should not be easy to play solo but not impossible. It's not impossible to play solo, a number of ships can just get away from a recon. If you're not prepared to jump into a recon, then that isn't really an issue which CCP should help you with. What is the mechanic which makes the game impossible if you cannot see recons on dscan? Fight aligned? Fit appropriate tank to handle a recon or 2 (they're not HAC-level DPS)? Don't run a site with multiple neuts in local?
Worrff Viziam Amarr Empire 51	Posted - 2014.12.22 12:04:16 - [1500] - Quote Kmelx wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Dscan immunity is staying. Asking for player feedback and then ignoring that feedback for the win. I seriously wonder why you even bother... So that it gives the IMPRESSION that they are listening. They will do whatever they want regardless. All the feedback about the new UI went unheeded and ignored. Been the same for years, nothing new. CCP Philosophy: If it works, break it. If itGÇÖs broken, leave it alone and break something else.

Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1293	Posted - 2014.12.22 12:19:09 - [1501] - Quote Aiyshimin wrote: Ganthrithor wrote: Aiyshimin wrote: Combat recon warps to you, unseen on dscan. He arrives to your grid, you see him on your overview. From this moment it takes him as long to lock you as it would take if he was flying a force recon, and decloaked. No change here. Are you a moron? That's a massive change! Before: ship visible on d-scan for the last 14 au of their warp Now: ship is just as un-detectable as a force recon The ENTIRE POINT of distinguishing between combat and force recons was that one was difficult to detect but fairly useless in direct combat, while the other combined the support abilites of the force recon with the damage and tank of a combat hull, but AT THE EXPENSE OF STEALTHINESS. Giving the combat recon the same element of surprise as the force recon completely steps all over the force recon's role in the game. It's stupid, and if you can't understand why then you're stupid. On another note, I'm really glad that "COMBAT RECONS WILL BE INVULNERABLE TO D-SCAN" is proudly announced as part of the Proteus featureset in the latest dev blog. What ever happened to consulting the community and getting feedback before unilaterally taking a dump on game mechanics? No, but apparently you are. NBS. Before: Force Recon is not visible on dscan After: Combat Recon is not visible on dscan And 9 times out of 10 the tackler will still be an inty, because they are the only ships with even the slimmest chance of catching anything because of Local Chat. Recons aren't fast enough, that isn't changing. If you didn't use Force Recons before, you won't Combat Recons either. Basically the main issue with this change, but not with this change alone, is the increasing altification. Please Turn from Tuskers expressed this well in her post above. Fitting combat probes is simply not viable on most combat ships, so to keep your current capability you need to bring an alt, or force one gang member to a non-combat role. I'm afraid the pressure to roll new alts for everything is intendend business design by CCP. I disagree roime, a combat recon could easily be fit to be very hard to avoid and snag anything in a plex. Wheras a force recon might be seen entering system and will be seen on the gate so a conscientious capsuleer at least has some warning. Lots of things could be used when you know your target is no threat. Hyperspacial rigs to reduce time landing on grid. A pair of overheated sebos. And still enough mids and lows left over for ewar and tank. Lach and huggin combos with a scout for gates (booster) could simply maraud around almost unchecked. Throw a rook and curse in there too, because, why not? Then you can fit nanos or damage mods instead of a tank.
Giribaldi PH0ENIX COMPANY Phoenix Company Alliance 31	Posted - 2014.12.22 12:33:20 - [1502] - Quote Worrff wrote: Kmelx wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Dscan immunity is staying. Asking for player feedback and then ignoring that feedback for the win. I seriously wonder why you even bother... So that it gives the IMPRESSION that they are listening. They will do whatever they want regardless. All the feedback about the new UI went unheeded and ignored. Been the same for years, nothing new. Agreed the new uo is ******* crap
LakeEnd FinFleet Northern Coalition. 69	Posted - 2014.12.22 12:51:53 - [1503] - Quote Since you dont have any idea what to actually do with Pilgrim, please make it better armor tanker. More low slots, resist bonus or something like that.
Belinda HwaFang Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate 40	Posted - 2014.12.22 13:00:47 - [1504] - Quote Let me clear up a few things for those people in this thread who clearly don't know too much about cloaky ships in EVE and their uses. Stealth Bombers (and technically Black Ops which aren't cloaky-warpy) are the only ships to not have a targeting delay when you decloak to point someone. That means all T3 cruisers and Force Recons (and Cov Ops) have at best a 5 second (with T2 Cov Ops Cloak) targetting delay after decloaking, meaning that agile and awake targets usually get away from them. Hence people using Stealth Bombers with Rockets or Small Turrets to gank exploration frigates. 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, and since they aren't a cloaky ship, they are a full combat strength ship, not a nerfed down combat ship to allow for the cloak. I'm posting this mainly for informational purposes, because it's clear from reading a few posts in this thread that some people don't actually understand these details, and why a combat recon that is immune to DSCAN becomes a lot more powerful than its cloaky counterpart. -- Fang
Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 272	Posted - 2014.12.22 13:03:52 - [1505] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: I disagree roime, a combat recon could easily be fit to be very hard to avoid and snag anything in a plex. Wheras a force recon might be seen entering system and will be seen on the gate so a conscientious capsuleer at least has some warning. Lots of things could be used when you know your target is no threat. Hyperspacial rigs to reduce time landing on grid. A pair of overheated sebos. And still enough mids and lows left over for ewar and tank. Lach and huggin combos with a scout for gates (booster) could simply maraud around almost unchecked. Throw a rook and curse in there too, because, why not? Then you can fit nanos or damage mods instead of a tank. I think I mentioned it earlier, but this will break the freestyle solo/micro roaming in medium plexes the way it currently exists. The workarounds to counter the recon threat are simply too laborous, and most people simply will not bother. I know I won't. This will push FW meta even more strongly to frigs, which is an unfortunate and most likely unconsidered side effect. Another ill-considered side effect is that increased EWAR flying around also buffs the Ishtar. However I was referring to catching bears, and nothing really changes for them. On the other hand, combat recons will also create new tactics for system pushing fleets, so it's not all bad. Furthermore outside FW plex roaming, new combat recons offer very interesting new tools for PVP.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1293	Posted - 2014.12.22 13:09:32 - [1506] - Quote Aiyshimin wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: I disagree roime, a combat recon could easily be fit to be very hard to avoid and snag anything in a plex. Wheras a force recon might be seen entering system and will be seen on the gate so a conscientious capsuleer at least has some warning. Lots of things could be used when you know your target is no threat. Hyperspacial rigs to reduce time landing on grid. A pair of overheated sebos. And still enough mids and lows left over for ewar and tank. Lach and huggin combos with a scout for gates (booster) could simply maraud around almost unchecked. Throw a rook and curse in there too, because, why not? Then you can fit nanos or damage mods instead of a tank. I think I mentioned it earlier, but this will break the freestyle solo/micro roaming in medium plexes the way it currently exists. The workarounds to counter the recon threat are simply too laborous, and most people simply will not bother. I know I won't. This will push FW meta even more strongly to frigs, which is an unfortunate and most likely unconsidered side effect. Another ill-considered side effect is that increased EWAR flying around also buffs the Ishtar. However I was referring to catching bears, and nothing really changes for them. On the other hand, combat recons will also create new tactics for system pushing fleets, so it's not all bad. Furthermore outside FW plex roaming, new combat recons offer very interesting new tools for PVP. Not really, beyond a prelim d-scan there is rarely a time regardless of the size of engagement, where your scout doesnt land on a gate with the hostile fleet or have eyes on grid with them. For a structure fight, after any 'warp in a wing of recons' strategy is done once its pretty easily anticipated based on local numbers. It really is an inane feature. It really only offers a tool for lazy gankers.
Stitch Kaneland Ex Astris Opes 84	Posted - 2014.12.22 13:12:46 - [1507] - Quote wow.. just wow. So many who are unwilling to adapt. To those talking about exploration sites, what is the difference here between a cloaked rapier/prot sitting on your gate, compared to a combat recon? Cloaked rapier/prot see's you coming on short range d-scan, uncloaks and waits for your to land. Or see's probes out, on the exploration site he's camping, waits till they disappear and then decloaks shortly after. You warp in and boom, recon sitting on gate, ready to blap you. This is no different. You see local go +1, and you keep checking dscan for probes. Since, if you're running a exploration site, they will have to probe you down as well. Unless they pre-probed the site, which in that case, shouldn't the person who spent a lot of effort get a reward? If you're unwilling to make sure your site is clear, and just barge in, then who's fault is that? If they're already in system, and a combat recon is camping the site, maybe you should.. i don't know.. warp to the site at 100km and see if someone is camping the gate? And if you're in an exploration boat, carry combat probes w/ expanded launcher! You have the bonuses right there. You can scan the site before jumping in to make sure they aren't chilling in the site. Doesn't change the fact that there might be 100 cloaked falcons/rapiers/pilgrims/arazu's in there (since this thread is full of strawman). Also, additional tools to consider: Killboards - look up someone who is sitting in system and you can't find them on dscan. Do they have kills/losses with combat recons? If yes, assume they're in a recon and either leave, find a new site, or grab some friends to bait and kill them. Common sense - don't barge into every site and expect safety, do your work with what you have available combat probes - again, if you're in an exploration ship already, running sites, before you warp into a site, drop probes and do a quick scan at your site. Those few options will have a major affect on adapting to this "issue". You will still run into the cloaked falcon/arazu/rapier/pilgrim from time to time, but that has been ongoing for quite awhile.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1293	Posted - 2014.12.22 13:16:52 - [1508] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: wow.. just wow. So many who are unwilling to adapt. To those talking about exploration sites, what is the difference here between a cloaked rapier/prot sitting on your gate, compared to a combat recon? Cloaked rapier/prot see's you coming on short range d-scan, uncloaks and waits for your to land. Or see's probes out, on the exploration site he's camping, waits till they disappear and then decloaks shortly after. You warp in and boom, recon sitting on gate, ready to blap you. This is no different. You see local go +1, and you keep checking dscan for probes. Since, if you're running a exploration site, they will have to probe you down as well. Unless they pre-probed the site, which in that case, shouldn't the person who spent a lot of effort get a reward? If you're unwilling to make sure your site is clear, and just barge in, then who's fault is that? If they're already in system, and a combat recon is camping the site, maybe you should.. i don't know.. warp to the site at 100km and see if someone is camping the gate? And if you're in an exploration boat, carry combat probes w/ expanded launcher! You have the bonuses right there. You can scan the site before jumping in to make sure they aren't chilling in the site. Doesn't change the fact that there might be 100 cloaked falcons/rapiers/pilgrims/arazu's in there (since this thread is full of strawman). Also, additional tools to consider: Killboards - look up someone who is sitting in system and you can't find them on dscan. Do they have kills/losses with combat recons? If yes, assume they're in a recon and either leave, find a new site, or grab some friends to bait and kill them. Common sense - don't barge into every site and expect safety, do your work with what you have available combat probes - again, if you're in an exploration ship already, running sites, before you warp into a site, drop probes and do a quick scan at your site. Those few options will have a major affect on adapting to this "issue". You will still run into the cloaked falcon/arazu/rapier/pilgrim from time to time, but that has been ongoing for quite awhile. Then you agree with us. The little difference it does make is that it is more powerful than a covert cloak. Then why give a combat ship the same strengths as a cloaky one when cloaks aready exist and require some techniques to use properly. Thinking a new mechanic is ******** is not the same as being unwilling to adapt. I base my understanding of how the new mechanics will be used on exactly how i am going to abuse them.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 586	Posted - 2014.12.22 13:18:19 - [1509] - Quote 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 Edited to add: Belinda HwaFang wrote: The little difference it does make is that it is more powerful than a covert cloak. It's not though, it's more powerful in a direct combat situation - in areas of space where you're hunting, laying in wait, traversing hostile space a cloak is infinitely superior. Dscan immunity rewards aggression, not hiding. The cloak rewards subterfuge, sneakiness. They're different tools for different jobs and actually when I think about it split the recon line nicely.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1293	Posted - 2014.12.22 13:21:40 - [1510] - Quote 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.

afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 586	Posted - 2014.12.22 13:24:36 - [1511] - Quote The actual message is irrelevant, the point I was trying to get across as I'm sure you're well aware is you're on grid WELL before you can lock. A more accurate message would be along the lines of interference from your warp. I'm going from memory and tbh the message text isn't something I care much about remembering verbatim so much as the mechanic. You're nitpicking if that's all you've got tbh.
rhiload Feron-drake TURN LEFT The Camel Empire 37	Posted - 2014.12.22 13:32:09 - [1512] - Quote anytime now you will change the d-scan immunity right rise? right?
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1293	Posted - 2014.12.22 13:33:25 - [1513] - Quote afkalt wrote: The actual message is irrelevant, the point I was trying to get across as I'm sure you're well aware is you're on grid WELL before you can lock. As you know, you need to be down at ~1/3 speed before any action is remotely possible. A more accurate message would be along the lines of interference from your warp. I'm going from memory and tbh the message text isn't something I care much about remembering verbatim so much as the mechanic. You're nitpicking if that's all you've got tbh. Ill be fitting 2 T2 hyperspacial velocity rigs to by ganking huggin. At 5au/s it should arrive on grid quite fast. With twin OH sebos it will lock very shortly after. Some things will get away. Far less likely if they have their prop mod on. Im not nitpicking, having flown in low sec for a while know i can tell you i will not be alone in abusing the hell out of this. There are probably 3 dozen people at the moment who often run around in my area in smartbombing proteus. Riskless pvp is very appealing to a lot of people.
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 172	Posted - 2014.12.22 13:34:49 - [1514] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: This is no different. You see local go +1, and you keep checking dscan for probes. Since, if you're running a exploration site, they will have to probe you down as well. Unless they pre-probed the site, which in that case, shouldn't the person who spent a lot of effort get a reward? If you're unwilling to make sure your site is clear, and just barge in, then who's fault is that? Most of them will be prescanned, and bookmarked on cans, so nothing you can do really. Stitch Kaneland wrote: If they're already in system, and a combat recon is camping the site, maybe you should.. i don't know.. warp to the site at 100km and see if someone is camping the gate? And if you're in an exploration boat, carry combat probes w/ expanded launcher! You have the bonuses right there. You can scan the site before jumping in to make sure they aren't chilling in the site. Doesn't change the fact that there might be 100 cloaked falcons/rapiers/pilgrims/arazu's in there (since this thread is full of strawman). Yep you don't know, SoE ship dedicated to exploring can't fit expanded launchers. Anyway pirates won't be sitting on sites the reason you wrote. Loled on your "tools", every explorer should now it already if not they desered to be ganked. Just because you like the change doesn't mean someone has else opinion on the matter, it has nothing to do with adapting. Exploration will change in a way i don't like because i know it will be huge backstab into explorers. I bet all fellow pirates at genesis are laughting now. Rise decided to take a peak what it will look like on TQ and what we can do? Caps lock him? EvE is not dying, tears will always flow. Wait for T3 rebalance... Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
Mr Floydy Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 257	Posted - 2014.12.22 13:36:15 - [1515] - Quote Cassius Invictus wrote: Lol if you are only able to PvE, maybe move to Hi Sec... i live in WH and those changes don't bother me at all. 1) You can still have a friend at the WH to detect any incoming. 2) Scan immune Recons will die to WH capms. 3) Recon gangs will die to standrad T3 gangs. 4) If u solo sleepers and and have no way to detect recons, than guess what: today cloacky proteus, loki or statios can kill you just as easily. 5) With the amount of firepower we have on grid when doing sleepers in C5-C6 i wish there was someone dumb enough to try to gank us with recons... Agreed on the whole, I'm definitely looking forward to seeing how 3) pans out in WH space. I don't think it will be as simple as Recon gangs dying to standard T3 fleets, it'll depend on the comp from both sides I think. Mixed fleets of Recons and T3s are going to be awesome to see in action :D
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 586	Posted - 2014.12.22 13:39:25 - [1516] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Ill be fitting 2 T2 hyperspacial velocity rigs to by ganking huggin. At 5au/s it should arrive on grid quite fast. With twin OH sebos it will lock very shortly after. Some things will get away. Far less likely if they have their prop mod on. Im not nitpicking, having flown in low sec for a while know i can tell you i will not be alone in abusing the hell out of this. There are probably 3 dozen people at the moment who often run around in my area in smartbombing proteus. Riskless pvp is very appealing to a lot of people. And as I'm sure you're aware that using 5 or 6 of your 6 mids (2 sebos, tackle, prop mod, web [perhaps 2]) leaves you pretty much tankless and will be smashed to pieces by even a T1 cruiser fit for fighting. Hell an assault frigate would probably ruin your day. So maybe you can kill little frigs asleep at the wheel. I'm not seeing the end of days here tbh.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1293	Posted - 2014.12.22 13:42:23 - [1517] - Quote afkalt wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Ill be fitting 2 T2 hyperspacial velocity rigs to by ganking huggin. At 5au/s it should arrive on grid quite fast. With twin OH sebos it will lock very shortly after. Some things will get away. Far less likely if they have their prop mod on. Im not nitpicking, having flown in low sec for a while know i can tell you i will not be alone in abusing the hell out of this. There are probably 3 dozen people at the moment who often run around in my area in smartbombing proteus. Riskless pvp is very appealing to a lot of people. And as I'm sure you're aware that using 5 or 6 of your 6 mids (2 sebos, tackle, prop mod, web [perhaps 2]) leaves you pretty much tankless and will be smashed to pieces by even a T1 cruiser fit for fighting. Hell an assault frigate would probably ruin your day. So maybe you can kill little frigs asleep at the wheel. I'm not seeing the end of days here tbh. pretty sure my 100mn ab dual web dual sebo huggin (speculative fit) can handle itself. If i dont like a particular cruiser i just make sure im flying with someone in a rook. Gankbears paradise.
Edward Olmops DUST Expeditionary Team 233	Posted - 2014.12.22 13:47:58 - [1518] - Quote 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, and since they aren't a cloaky ship, they are a full combat strength ship, not a nerfed down combat ship to allow for the cloak. Wrong. Yes, you can appear on grid out of nowhere. But the time it takes from the "plop" when you reach the grid until you have decelerated to 0m/s and are actually able to lock anything will still be a couple of seconds. Even with Warp speed rigs or the like you will be slower than a bomber. And although being a bit stronger than a force recon, the new Combat Recons will doubtless still be weaker than current T3s. Belinda HwaFang wrote: I'm posting this mainly for informational purposes, because it's clear from reading a few posts in this thread that some people don't actually understand these details, and why a combat recon that is immune to DSCAN becomes a lot more powerful than its cloaky counterpart. -- Fang The new Combat Recons will be stronger in some situations than their cloaked counterparts (hence the name). But they will neither be more powerful gankers than anything we have now (->Bomber for speed, T3 for power) nor outclass the Force Recon everywhere (->Black Ops, slip through Gate Camps).
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 586	Posted - 2014.12.22 13:49:18 - [1519] - Quote So, point is - the sky aint falling and your targets are confined to small stuff or bringing more ships. Why is it not a problem for you to hunt with someone else but for others to have backup? Why do these niche weird fits survive camps - perhaps because they have been scouted - so again why can't other people scout? All the arguments against this are pretty contrived/one rule for one set of players and another rule for others. Really are all boiling down to this: afkalt wrote: The only legitimate ~~complaint~~ point of note is medium plexes and even then, that boils down to "someone might PvP my isk farming ship" which is....yeah....let's leave that one there. . Your primary target type which you'll kill are just as killable today using rocket bombers. Last I checked the skies aren't raining dead covops.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1294	Posted - 2014.12.22 13:50:24 - [1520] - Quote afkalt wrote: Thats why t3's are not allowed to go into the places i intend to be ganking people. The only legitimate ~~complaint~~ point of note is medium plexes and e. . Your primary target type which you'll kill are just as killable today using rocket bombers. Last I checked the skies aren't raining dead covops.[/quote] You couldnt be more wrong. Theres a huge selection of frigs that will melt a rocket bomber even if backup eventually kills the frig. There are a huge number of cruisers that can be range tanked by a huggin. Some of the ones that it cannot range tank put out em damage which the huggin will have a 90% resist towards. I just dont think you are equipped to assess the strength of the ninja recon in getting a one sided engagement started or its combat strength one the fight is underway.


CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 4786	Posted - 2014.12.22 13:52:35 - [1521] - Quote 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. @ccp_rise

S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 51	Posted - 2014.12.22 13:53:42 - [1522] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: S'No Flake wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: Ripard Teg wrote: [quote=Antillie Sa'Kan] You guys say that like that situation doesn't prevent fights. I assure you it does. I have heard the phrase "These guys always have Falcon alts" prevent a fight quite a lot. That's because ECM has no counter play. How come no one ever decides not to fight due to "These guys always have Arazu/Pilgrim/Rapier alts" ??? Because all other types of EW has some degree of counter play. ECM is a broken light switch mechanic that needs to be banished from the game completely and replaced with something else. Something that does 'something' as often as the other EW but leaves room for counter play. You again with ECM has no counter? I told you once. Keres can lock faster and damp the damn Falcon to send him out of the grid. Even Arazu can lock faster than Falcon because of the scan res. Because ECM will miss cycles, Falcon pilots fill a full rack of ECM mods and no sebo which means even a T1 Celestits will make the Falcon to leave the grid. Geezzzz fly the damn thing for a week or two and see how much time you spend on grid compared with bouncing from planets or BMs. You are missing my point completely. I have flow ECM platforms many times. I don't think you did. I think you are lying because if you bothered to fly a Falcon for example, you would know, 90% of the time you will be off field in warp while that nice Arazu will keep people pinned on field, logis dampned and make Falcons run away with the tail between the legs ... well, or fly away
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 586	Posted - 2014.12.22 14:06:07 - [1523] - 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 you at least confirm if dscan immunity is staying or going in this pass (since it's literally all people seem to care about). Otherwise the feedback will be a bit haphazard. I appreciate an earlier post said it's staying, but would be good to clear up. Thanks
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 173	Posted - 2014.12.22 14:11:39 - [1524] - 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. Now this is sad. Leave it. Go to your family as well, it's xmas after all. Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
ChromeStriker 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 806	Posted - 2014.12.22 14:11:45 - [1525] - 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. If your the only one there I hope you've got some mulled wine and a mince pie on the go.... I think the best designs are made with that warm glow about your cheeks and those fuzzy little ideas in the back of your head like 'bet I could cut Fozzie's table in half with this fan...' Hard to say whats best for the Rook and Falcon without checking out ECM changes... No Worries
Omnathious Deninard Novis Initiis 2624	Posted - 2014.12.22 14:18:31 - [1526] - 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. We might be a large group of loud, sometimes rude, bitter vets but we are here with you.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 879	Posted - 2014.12.22 14:27:11 - [1527] - Quote Zappity wrote: Squatdog wrote: Zappity wrote: Ganthrithor wrote: Now: ship is just as un-detectable as a force recon 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. You're an idiot. Do you know how ridiculous it is to expect people to find something in your average EVE system using combat probes when they can't even get a fix on its general direction using d-scan? Protip: this is the exact reason CCP removed deep safes. To give you an idea of just how un-findable you are when you're not visible on d-scan, I used to park a Nyx in an off-scan safespot and never had a problem with being probed out. If people can't find a ****ing Nyx without the aid of a directional scan result, how do you expect them to find combat recons? Security through obscurity is very nearly as effective as actually being invisible in this game. Space is a big place, and pinning down one tiny object in the middle of it with combat probes without the foggiest idea of where to start is ridiculously hard. D-scan immunity will be 95% as good as having a cloak fit, but without ANY of the downsides of cloaking.
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 232	Posted - 2014.12.22 14:32:03 - [1528] - 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. Dont give in to the cry babies.
Moac Tor Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation 25	Posted - 2014.12.22 14:32:21 - [1529] - 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. Interesting, I didn't think the proposal needed too much further revision in my opinion. Also, hope those slave drivers are at least going to give you Christmas day off winks
Edward Olmops DUST Expeditionary Team 233	Posted - 2014.12.22 14:36:02 - [1530] - Quote ChromeStriker wrote: Hard to say whats best for the Rook and Falcon without checking out ECM changes... I had a vision just the other day of a revamped ECM that could be scripted to turn off INCOMING target locks. (i.e. you jam something to turn off remote reps hitting it)

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.

Barrett Fruitcake State War Academy Caldari State 1	Posted - 2014.12.22 19:46:14 - [1561] - Quote I hope CCP doesn't cave on a great new step in getting rid of perfect intel due to a bunch of players unwilling to adapt to such changes. Most of what has made Eve strong is the constant re-invention of the game. Don't lose sight of that. Oh yeah; adapt or cry in your bear threatening to unsub, only to adapt later once you realize your threatening to unsub has been used more than "crying wolf" and has lost its apparent effect.
Niskin League of the Lost 173	Posted - 2014.12.22 19:58:39 - [1562] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: Except when you're roaming around PvPing that means you need to log off/have an alt in every system. Log off, yes. Have alt in every system, no. Or alternatively you could just scout the plex in your pod, no logoff required. hellokittyonline wrote: 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. Nothing I described requires another sub. I have only ever had one account. I make suggestions based on how I would operate with my one account in the various situations that are being described. 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 19:58:41 - [1563] - Quote Barrett Fruitcake wrote: I hope CCP doesn't cave on a great new step in getting rid of perfect intel due to a bunch of players unwilling to adapt to such changes. Most of what has made Eve strong is the constant re-invention of the game. Don't lose sight of that. Oh yeah; adapt or cry in your bear threatening to unsub, only to adapt later once you realize your threatening to unsub has been used more than "crying wolf" and has lost its apparent effect. Do you even read bro? Clearly another scrub looking for ez kills. Most of the issued raised are from actual PvPers looking for changes that encourage skillbased, gimmick-free PvP instead of the war of alts we have right now.
Niskin League of the Lost 173	Posted - 2014.12.22 20:02:52 - [1564] - Quote Helene Fidard wrote: 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. Maybe I would be. Can you point to a patch note where this was changed? Or is this just due to differing lag between the two parties and CCP? 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 20:03:28 - [1565] - Quote Niskin wrote: As a true solo player I don't usually do this but https://zkillboard.com/character/367797693/solo/ ...
Madner Kami Durendal Ascending Sindication 56	Posted - 2014.12.22 20:10:53 - [1566] - Quote Barrett Fruitcake wrote: I hope CCP doesn't cave on a great new step in getting rid of perfect intel due to a bunch of players unwilling to adapt to such changes. So D-Scan is perfect intel nowadays? Seriously?
Adrie Atticus Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion 755	Posted - 2014.12.22 20:10:57 - [1567] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: One more thing. You can also restrict combat recons from fitting a cyno if you go with the no local route. Yes, let's create arbitrary rules to fit your world vision before considering that there might be other players around you. Same goes for the recons not showing up in scan btw, too many special bonuses on different ships leads to a jumbled mess. CovOps cloaks I can understand as that's more than 1 type of ship benefiting from it, but it's really only an extension to normal cloaking. (Are you finally sinking into Gevlon's level of self-entitlement we've been waiting for ages now?)
Wynta Rex Brave Operations - Lollipop Division Brave Collective 0	Posted - 2014.12.22 20:11:13 - [1568] - Quote If DScan Immunity is too powerful, I'd like the Combat Recon to get an extra utility high and the ability to fit a bomb launcher and a bonus to void and lockbreaker bombs. Make it a type of bomber that doesnt revolve around solely around bombing runs but can stand and fight.
w1ndstrike White Talon Holdings 12	Posted - 2014.12.22 20:15:35 - [1569] - Quote A follow up after seeing some of the shake-up and comments: if CCP is completely set on releasing this as it stands, there is one game system that can easily be adjusted to compensate: Lower the Fitting Requirements for Expanded Probe Launchers currently the biggest comment is "but the recons can be probed!" and that is fine, however that comment does not recognize the reality that there are very, very few ships that can fit a combat probe launcher without giving up LARGE amounts of combat ability due to the insane CPU requirement. the sole exception to this is T3 cruisers and the T3 destroyers...... T3 shouldn't be a requirement to fight T2s effectively. on that subject, why not give the force recons a role bonus to probe launcher fitting? it means you need to bring a recon to find a recon, but fits the cloaky/scout theme and the extension of the covops line (and gives explorers a cruiser that isn't a gnosis, T3 or stratios)
Paynus Maiassus UNITAS. Brave Collective 191	Posted - 2014.12.22 20:16:36 - [1570] - Quote Let's keep the DSCAN immunity. It's a fully new tactical situation. Real innovation. Stuff like this is too rare. Good show. This thread is proof that men get more hysterical than women. The world will still turn and with more options and a unique ship class. Next on the list should be damaging the blob so that fleet warfare can have some sort of option other than punching an alpha through logi. I'm tired of fitting what I am told to fit so I can undock and press F1. +1 DSCAN immunity.

TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 949	Posted - 2014.12.22 20:17:03 - [1571] - 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.
Niskin League of the Lost 174	Posted - 2014.12.22 20:22:03 - [1572] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: Niskin wrote: As a true solo player I don't usually do this but https://zkillboard.com/character/367797693/solo/ ... You don't usually link old loss mails that have nothing to do with the current conversation? I can see why. Seriously though. I used to fly with others, from about a month into playing the game in 2006 all the way up to a few years ago. Since then I've been operating on my own, because I don't have the time to commit to a group the way I'd like to. Most of the kills I've been involved in were not solo, but the few I've managed to get myself were before zkillboard existed. I'm not much of a solo PvP'er, my last attempt was in a Myrmidon if you want to look for that lossmail. I do have to do solo PvE in wormholes as that is where I currently live and have done both grouped and solo FacWar before. Basically I've been all over this game and have seen the many areas and aspects of it. I'm solo now, but have always only had one account. So what are you trying to accuse me of here anyway? It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow
Paynus Maiassus UNITAS. Brave Collective 191	Posted - 2014.12.22 20:22:04 - [1573] - Quote w1ndstrike wrote: A follow up after seeing some of the shake-up and comments: if CCP is completely set on releasing this as it stands, there is one game system that can easily be adjusted to compensate: Lower the Fitting Requirements for Expanded Probe Launchers currently the biggest comment is "but the recons can be probed!" and that is fine, however that comment does not recognize the reality that there are very, very few ships that can fit a combat probe launcher without giving up LARGE amounts of combat ability due to the insane CPU requirement. the sole exception to this is T3 cruisers and the T3 destroyers...... T3 shouldn't be a requirement to fight T2s effectively. on that subject, why not give the force recons a role bonus to probe launcher fitting? it means you need to bring a recon to find a recon, but fits the cloaky/scout theme and the extension of the covops line (and gives explorers a cruiser that isn't a gnosis, T3 or stratios) I agree that force recons that can't probe scan leaves a lot to be desired. The result would likely be that scan frigs would be relegated to a PvE role. I can live with that, frankly.
Asimov Isaaac Idun Investment Bank Outlanders United 0	Posted - 2014.12.22 20:26:12 - [1574] - Quote Dir Scan is basic game element that could be counted on to be reliable, honest and accurate. I can only think that CCP is getting desperate for game content as this gives high skill point people an unfair advantage against a lot of low skill people. People whom CCP has been trying to lure into 0.0. Give with one hand and take away with the other.
Alundil Isogen 5 803	Posted - 2014.12.22 20:30:42 - [1575] - Quote Asimov Isaaac wrote: Dir Scan is basic game element that could be counted on to be reliable, honest and accurate. I can only think that CCP is getting desperate for game content as this gives high skill point people an unfair advantage against a lot of low skill people. People whom CCP has been trying to lure into 0.0. Give with one hand and take away with the other. Out of curiosity, what is the exact "High SP" versus "Low SP" argument you're trying to make? I'm right behind you
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1295	Posted - 2014.12.22 20:34:57 - [1576] - Quote TrouserDeagle 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. are you going to bring solo back? I'm looking forward to it. Solo rook!
Marlona Sky Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 5825	Posted - 2014.12.22 20:42:01 - [1577] - Quote Adrie Atticus wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: One more thing. You can also restrict combat recons from fitting a cyno if you go with the no local route. Yes, let's create arbitrary rules to fit your world vision before considering that there might be other players around you. Same goes for the recons not showing up in scan btw, too many special bonuses on different ships leads to a jumbled mess. CovOps cloaks I can understand as that's more than 1 type of ship benefiting from it, but it's really only an extension to normal cloaking. (Are you finally sinking into Gevlon's level of self-entitlement we've been waiting for ages now?) It's not arbitrary. A cyno is a powerful tool to enable force projection. Being able to sneak around that is not something that the game needs. Your argument is simply weak that resorts to personal attacks rather than formulating a compelling argument. Too many ships with special bonuses is bad?? Are you really serious? I mean heaven forbid we have interesting choices in deciding what ship to fly right? The Paradox
Soldarius Deadman W0nderland The 99 Percent 971	Posted - 2014.12.22 20:42:39 - [1578] - Quote Liet Ormand wrote: Kevin Emoto wrote: Hey, I think this is perhaps one of the worst design decisions to come out of CCP in these dark last two years, but I'm a pirate who likes to hunt in LS and WH space and I know that this will be a mind numbingly effective tool while it lasts! And honestly, I love the tears of FW farmers when they lose a ship! Their sense of entitlement just makes me want to hunt them more and more. Now medium and large sites will invariably be avoided in short order, as well as LS and NS DED sites, now that I think about it. Now you can camp sites anywhere, and bubbles in NS and WH space with large fleets of tanky, invisible to DScan, instalocking combat recons. If you don't think that doesn't tickle the hearts of every pirate in LS, NS and WH space, you're kidding yourself. But don't worry, people who play eve to harvest and do industry are greedy, really really greedy, they'll find a way to get their 'easy money'. We'll continue the be able to kill the dumb ones for quite a while yet. You're kind of missing my point, though, I'm not talking about combat or how it affects the people involved. I'll re-state. If all the minerals currently being brought into the economy from WH farmers are cut off (as you expect they will be) then what will happen to the prices of everything made with them? For example, a rook is built with both Megacyte and Morphite. Do you think it's acceptable to pay considerably more for both as they become scarce? The amount of minerals brought to market from w-space is beyond insignificant. I would be more concerned about w-space relics and gases. Fortunately, sieged dreads and carrier don't give a whit about EWAR except neuts, and Ventures have +2 warp core strength on top of being very inexpensive. Also, the last time I checked, the vast majority of megacyte and morphite comes from nulsec. No, I don't think w-space resources are in danger of drying up over recon changes. http://youtu.be/owzhYNcd4OM http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Adrie Atticus Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion 760	Posted - 2014.12.22 20:51:21 - [1579] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: Adrie Atticus wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: One more thing. You can also restrict combat recons from fitting a cyno if you go with the no local route. Yes, let's create arbitrary rules to fit your world vision before considering that there might be other players around you. Same goes for the recons not showing up in scan btw, too many special bonuses on different ships leads to a jumbled mess. CovOps cloaks I can understand as that's more than 1 type of ship benefiting from it, but it's really only an extension to normal cloaking. (Are you finally sinking into Gevlon's level of self-entitlement we've been waiting for ages now?) It's not arbitrary. A cyno is a powerful tool to enable force projection. Being able to sneak around that is not something that the game needs. Your argument is simply weak that resorts to personal attacks rather than formulating a compelling argument. Too many ships with special bonuses is bad?? Are you really serious? I mean heaven forbid we have interesting choices in deciding what ship to fly right? We could make some ships immune to webification, some immune to direct interdiction, some immune to other random ewar and one which doesn't show up with scan probes. These are not good functions to have in the game, supers are already borderline broken because of ewar immunity.
mulgrew Zero Weyland Mulgrew Corporation Dominatus Atrum Mortis 9	Posted - 2014.12.22 21:07:13 - [1580] - Quote just a thought but if you want to be immune to dscan wouldnt you just fly a ship that has a covert ops cloak onit ? it is 1 of the reasons to have 1 fitted, im just wondering if this is a start of phasing out covert ships and lumping them all with dscan immunity ?

Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 179	Posted - 2014.12.22 21:13:41 - [1581] - Quote Adrie Atticus wrote: We could make some ships immune to webification, some immune to direct interdiction, some immune to other random ewar and one which doesn't show up with scan probes. These are not good functions to have in the game, supers are already borderline broken because of ewar immunity. but immune to d-scan is good? Do you even have kneecaps? Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
Ehud Gera Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 35	Posted - 2014.12.22 21:36:55 - [1582] - Quote Alundil wrote: Asimov Isaaac wrote: Dir Scan is basic game element that could be counted on to be reliable, honest and accurate. I can only think that CCP is getting desperate for game content as this gives high skill point people an unfair advantage against a lot of low skill people. People whom CCP has been trying to lure into 0.0. Give with one hand and take away with the other. Out of curiosity, what is the exact "High SP" versus "Low SP" argument you're trying to make? The ability to fly a well fit Recon requires a decent amount of training. Low SP pilots might begin to feel that in order for them to be competitive in this new environment they have to rush into a Recon. I find this to be another good reason to not just "shake things up" as seems to be one of the prevalent but not reasoning arguments for the change.
Ranger 1 Ranger Corp Vae. Victis. 6120	Posted - 2014.12.22 22:07:36 - [1583] - Quote Adrie Atticus wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: Adrie Atticus wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: One more thing. You can also restrict combat recons from fitting a cyno if you go with the no local route. Yes, let's create arbitrary rules to fit your world vision before considering that there might be other players around you. Same goes for the recons not showing up in scan btw, too many special bonuses on different ships leads to a jumbled mess. CovOps cloaks I can understand as that's more than 1 type of ship benefiting from it, but it's really only an extension to normal cloaking. (Are you finally sinking into Gevlon's level of self-entitlement we've been waiting for ages now?) It's not arbitrary. A cyno is a powerful tool to enable force projection. Being able to sneak around that is not something that the game needs. Your argument is simply weak that resorts to personal attacks rather than formulating a compelling argument. Too many ships with special bonuses is bad?? Are you really serious? I mean heaven forbid we have interesting choices in deciding what ship to fly right? We could make some ships immune to webification, some immune to direct interdiction, some immune to other random ewar and one which doesn't show up with scan probes. These are not good functions to have in the game, supers are already borderline broken because of ewar immunity. Specialized ships with interesting and unique advantages/disadvantages are a GOOD thing. The perceived need to have an army of alts to play (LOL), or the need / ability to have near perfect intel, are bad things. The whole point of this thread is to find a happy medium between these points, although in my personal opinion the more powerful a ship is in core attributes (Damage and Tank) the fewer special abilities it should have. There are many paths CCP can walk down right now, some of them still involve D-scan immunity (or perhaps even simply highly inaccurate D-scan results). Also, with few exceptions, any suggestion that limits the ability to do a capital ship hot drop is a good thing. The desire not to be ambushed by a group of capital ships is more detrimental to the willingness of the average player to engage in combat than lack of solid intel ever was... followed closely by Falcon of course. View the latest EVE Online developments and War Thunder game play by visiting Ranger 1 Presents.
Sabriz Adoudel Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 4185	Posted - 2014.12.22 22:35:39 - [1584] - Quote I strongly feel the Force Recons should go ahead as proposed with CCP explicitly stating "We are watching the D-scan immunity. If, in our opinion, it harms the game, it WILL be rolled back next release and replaced with (insert different bonus HERE)". One of the benefits of six weekly releases is that risks can be taken, and this is a bigish risk with both a high potential to drive conflict (i.e. upside) and also a high potential to reduce conflict by making players super-skittish. I'm just not sure which way this one will go. Chaos. Opportunity. Destruction. Excitement... Vote #1 Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10
Lvzbel Ixtab 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 43	Posted - 2014.12.22 22:39:18 - [1585] - Quote Niskin wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: Niskin wrote: As a true solo player I don't usually do this but https://zkillboard.com/character/367797693/solo/ ... You don't usually link old loss mails that have nothing to do with the current conversation? I can see why. Seriously though. I used to fly with others, from about a month into playing the game in 2006 all the way up to a few years ago. Since then I've been operating on my own, because I don't have the time to commit to a group the way I'd like to. Most of the kills I've been involved in were not solo, but the few I've managed to get myself were before zkillboard existed. I'm not much of a solo PvP'er, my last attempt was in a Myrmidon if you want to look for that lossmail. I do have to do solo PvE in wormholes as that is where I currently live and have done both grouped and solo FacWar before. Basically I've been all over this game and have seen the many areas and aspects of it. I'm solo now, but have always only had one account. So what are you trying to accuse me of here anyway? lol you even said it "As a true solo player" and they you said, "I'm not much of a solo PvP'er " get rekt, you are proposing unrealistic tactics for people that go to LS to look for fair fights and fast pace pvp that is one reason why most people fly frigates, not because is cheap but challenging
MRietfors Lumen et Umbra 0	Posted - 2014.12.22 23:11:58 - [1586] - Quote 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. Make D-scan immunity valid only if you are farther than 1Million KMs or so. Otherwise you goona lose most PVE players as you are already losing and exploration will suffer a lot. My 2 cents, MRi
Landrik Blake Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 2	Posted - 2014.12.22 23:17:07 - [1587] - Quote Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners This is way too strong an ability for Combat Recons. You're basically giving them a free cloak. Sure, there are some drawbacks, like the inability to hide on grid, but there are benefits too, like being invisible while undocking and using gates. It's effectively as good as a Cov-Ops cloak but on a stronger combat ship and without using a high slot. You're crazy if you don't think that's a big deal.
Kyle Yanowski Aideron Robotics 154	Posted - 2014.12.22 23:21:37 - [1588] - Quote 80 pages on this thread... CCP Rise dropped by the High Drag Podcast to talk about Recon Ships. You can listen to it here. (Rises commentary starts at 42:40) Host of the High Drag Eve Online Podcast ( http://highdrag.wordpress.com). Director of Aideron Robotics.
Niskin League of the Lost 175	Posted - 2014.12.22 23:22:01 - [1589] - Quote Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: lol you even said it "As a true solo player" and they you said, "I'm not much of a solo PvP'er " I only have one account, that makes me a solo player, that is a fact. I'm not very good at solo PvP, that is a fact. Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: get rekt, you are proposing unrealistic tactics for people that go to LS to look for fair fights and fast pace pvp that is one reason why most people fly frigates, not because is cheap but challenging I'm telling you what I would do if I was back doing solo FacWar with these proposed changes. You can do whatever you want. I like to do whatever gives me the most chance of survival without paying for a second account. How hard is it to dock up and pod-scout a few complexes? Or log on the alt on the same account who is already in a probe-capable ship nearby? It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow
Vargo Shahni Dalriada Visions 0	Posted - 2014.12.22 23:26:42 - [1590] - Quote Having just a flat ability of D-scan immunity seems a bit strange to me as one of Eve's great strengths is the amount of variability in outfitting of ships you come across. Would it not be better to give combat recons an extra utility high slot and create a new module that only they can fit which grants D-scan immunity. if the module needs to be activated then the recons would be briefly visible on D-scan like Covert-Ops.

Lvzbel Ixtab 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 43	Posted - 2014.12.22 23:39:50 - [1591] - Quote Niskin wrote: Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: lol you even said it "As a true solo player" and they you said, "I'm not much of a solo PvP'er " I only have one account, that makes me a solo player, that is a fact. I'm not very good at solo PvP, that is a fact. Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: get rekt, you are proposing unrealistic tactics for people that go to LS to look for fair fights and fast pace pvp that is one reason why most people fly frigates, not because is cheap but challenging I'm telling you what I would do if I was back doing solo FacWar with these proposed changes. You can do whatever you want. I like to do whatever gives me the most chance of survival without paying for a second account. How hard is it to dock up and pod-scout a few complexes? Or log on the alt on the same account who is already in a probe-capable ship nearby? Ill give you a scenario Im on my duo rep ishkur i found a merlin, incursus and rifter, I know i can take them but there is no way to know if a recon is there, i usually roam about 10-15 system so lets say my prober is 5 jump out. I log out and log back in bring my prober to that system, those guys move on to a different system while i was moving my prober, fight is gone do you really need Eve to be slower than it already is?
Barrett Fruitcake State War Academy Caldari State 2	Posted - 2014.12.22 23:44:56 - [1592] - Quote Vargo Shahni wrote: Having just a flat ability of D-scan immunity seems a bit strange to me as one of Eve's great strengths is the amount of variability in outfitting of ships you come across. Would it not be better to give combat recons an extra utility high slot and create a new module that only they can fit which grants D-scan immunity. if the module needs to be activated then the recons would be briefly visible on D-scan like Covert-Ops. You could say that about bubble immunity. No, I'm not saying bubble immunity should be moved to a high slot mod. I'm saying that eve shouldn't be only about modules on the ships. There should be things called "role bonuses", things that are just inherent to the ship hull, as they have been for many years.
Barrett Fruitcake State War Academy Caldari State 2	Posted - 2014.12.22 23:50:35 - [1593] - Quote Madner Kami wrote: Barrett Fruitcake wrote: I hope CCP doesn't cave on a great new step in getting rid of perfect intel due to a bunch of players unwilling to adapt to such changes. So D-Scan is perfect intel nowadays? Seriously? It's one of the tools that gives you far too much information for free, like local. You either know someone is in local or not. On D-scan, you either know they ship type, name and if they are on grid or not. There should be a point where their are more unknowns, than knowns. D-Scan should act more like scan probes and show unknown contacts at extreme ranges instead of always returning perfect information when you are in range. There should be a range of uncertainty.
2D34DLY4U BACKUPLEGION 17	Posted - 2014.12.22 23:50:54 - [1594] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Quote: I can tell you what will happen most likely: - Less fights because people are risk averse - A 2nd account with a Prober at all times will be must, not an option. I think this is a complex debate and I'm sure that none of us understand player behavior completely, but my experience is actually the opposite of what you're saying. 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. The negative side for me is your other bullet point. Because people don't want to take unnecessary risk they will work very hard, sometimes doing something very boring or difficult, just to get at those last pieces of information. And they should. But we would want to avoid mechanics that obligate people to this kind of behavior too heavily without enough positive side to make the mechanic worthwhile. I would be more worried with this mechanic that people have to spend a lot of time running probe scans when they really don't want to be than that they are avoiding engagements because of the possibility of Recons. I don't think this will be a problem but we'll have to wait and see. I don't know what player behavior will be like, however this is my intuition: Agree that risk aversion is a huge problem in terms of preventing engagements and/or forcing players to perform tedious tasks to a great length in order to gain an advantage / feel "safe", thus promoting uninteresting game play as opposed to fun fights which is what everyone wants. Agree that less information may lead players to accept there is a certain degree of risk in what they do and therefore lead them to take "leaps of faith" into the unknown, thus fighting risk aversion and generating good fights. Do not agree this will work since it acts in a one sided manner by benefiting campers (sitting on a beacon with 2 invisible to dscan friends ganking nerds) more than explorers (willing to venture into unknown by roaming). It seems to me you are thinking correctly and have the correct intention but you are acting in a way that does not benefit what you intend to do. Unless the lack of information is equal to everyone I don't think this will foster risk taking, instead it may promote risk averse behaviors even further - the issue of forcing everyone to bring a combat prober should be small when compared with the amount of players that will camp sites by sitting idly while waiting for easy kills, I suspect we will have much more of these than players that out of this change become willing to engage by accepting some degree of risk. I don't have a solution to this problem, one way to do it seems to be treat dscan and local as enemies of more engagements and force everyone to play with less information, another way to do it would be allow everyone to see everything but rework the engagement commitment/escape mechanics, however it seems a rethink of the engagement model / intel+visibility tools available to players is required in order to nail it and that by using this incremental approach you may actually be taking a step backwards. In general my gut feeling around this it that the more people roam around the better, since roaming is for sure a driver of engagements (it acts as a matchmaking queue of engagement possibilities); either you remove all information and then people will roam in the dark (what it seems to me you want to happen and will promote more engagements) or if you employ a piecemeal approach you may end up not achieving your desired objective or even worse, cornering players into the very same behaviors you wish to prevent (bad gameplay centered on defenders sitting idly, roamers docked and less overall fights). Unless you already did the rethink of the engagement model and this is just a first step... PS: please fix Pilgrim, it's slow armor ship that fights at close range so the neut range is kinda useless, even with MWD+point instead of AB+scram it will still be slower than everything else except what it cannot fight. Think U boat warfare in WW2 :)
Barrett Fruitcake State War Academy Caldari State 2	Posted - 2014.12.22 23:58:03 - [1595] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: Barrett Fruitcake wrote: I hope CCP doesn't cave on a great new step in getting rid of perfect intel due to a bunch of players unwilling to adapt to such changes. Most of what has made Eve strong is the constant re-invention of the game. Don't lose sight of that. Oh yeah; adapt or cry in your bear threatening to unsub, only to adapt later once you realize your threatening to unsub has been used more than "crying wolf" and has lost its apparent effect. Do you even read bro? Clearly another scrub looking for ez kills. Most of the issued raised are from actual PvPers looking for changes that encourage skillbased, gimmick-free PvP instead of the war of alts we have right now. Sorry, I didn't know I was going to run into the "real pvper's" of Eve when stating my opinion. Reducing the information available and creating more situations where you are unsure of what you are up against is not gimmick gameplay. Its taking Eve in more of a direction it should be. There should be less perfect information in all tools that we use to interact with other ships in space; Local, D-Scan, Probes, Map Statistics, and etc. Player skill should determine how good the intel we gain is. It shouldn't just be handed out. Removing some ships from d-scan gets us to stop using it as a crutch with perfect information.
Stan Durden Omega Tactical Group Reckoning Star Alliance 17	Posted - 2014.12.23 00:02:47 - [1596] - Quote Eve is hard. Most of us accept that. If you die it should be because you are doing it wrong. Adding the immunity to d-scan means in many more cases of choosing to take the fight or take the acceleration gate, will be doing it wrong. Many situations which used to give us PvP will turn from a manageable risk into a bad decision. Initially I like the sound of the new recon changes. However, consider the steps that will be necessary now to gather good intel and decide to take a fight... I think you will see a lot less fights happen in all areas of PvP, because people will be a lot less willing to engage. Of course a lot more ganks will happen. There are plenty of PvPers who only take ganks, and who don't really want to find good fights. For them these changes will really improve the game. For those of us who will also take fights which are risky, but manageable... those of us who chose to try to turn up the difficulty when we can... it will make it even more difficult to find a good fight imo. So in the end do you think this change will lead to more good fights, or more ganks? I will never say no to a free kill, but I would prefer changes that help generate good fights. I don't think this change will do that.
Barrett Fruitcake State War Academy Caldari State 2	Posted - 2014.12.23 00:03:44 - [1597] - Quote 2D34DLY4U wrote: PS: please fix Pilgrim, it's slow armor ship that fights at close range so the neut range is kinda useless, even with MWD+point instead of AB+scram it will still be slower than everything else except what it cannot fight. Think U boat warfare in WW2 :) Note: Many want range bonus on Pilgrim's energy warfare in order to be able to use it in new ways. A speed boost might help it though.
Barrett Fruitcake State War Academy Caldari State 2	Posted - 2014.12.23 00:09:14 - [1598] - Quote Stan Durden wrote: Eve is hard. Most of us accept that. If you die it should be because you are doing it wrong. Adding the immunity to d-scan means in many more cases of choosing to take the fight or take the acceleration gate, will be doing it wrong. Many situations which used to give us PvP will turn from a manageable risk into a bad decision. Initially I like the sound of the new recon changes. However, consider the steps that will be necessary now to gather good intel and decide to take a fight... I think you will see a lot less fights happen in all areas of PvP, because people will be a lot less willing to engage. Of course a lot more ganks will happen. There are plenty of PvPers who only take ganks, and who don't really want to find good fights. For them these changes will really improve the game. For those of us who will also take fights which are risky, but manageable... those of us who chose to try to turn up the difficulty when we can... it will make it even more difficult to find a good fight imo. So in the end do you think this change will lead to more good fights, or more ganks? I will never say no to a free kill, but I would prefer changes that help generate good fights. I don't think this change will do that. I have found that truly, good fights, have been a rarity in Eve mainly due to its sand box non-instanced no rules gameplay. We are not playing a space version of football, American or that other one. We are simulating a space struggle where there is great risk of being overwhelmed, and sometimes great reward for those willing to take that risk. It's a cold hard game, and it is rarely fair, and probably never should be.
Lug Muad'Dib Wise Humans Sword 31	Posted - 2014.12.23 00:09:17 - [1599] - Quote Barrett Fruitcake wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: Barrett Fruitcake wrote: I hope CCP doesn't cave on a great new step in getting rid of perfect intel due to a bunch of players unwilling to adapt to such changes. Most of what has made Eve strong is the constant re-invention of the game. Don't lose sight of that. Oh yeah; adapt or cry in your bear threatening to unsub, only to adapt later once you realize your threatening to unsub has been used more than "crying wolf" and has lost its apparent effect. Do you even read bro? Clearly another scrub looking for ez kills. Most of the issued raised are from actual PvPers looking for changes that encourage skillbased, gimmick-free PvP instead of the war of alts we have right now. Sorry, I didn't know I was going to run into the "real pvper's" of Eve when stating my opinion. Reducing the information available and creating more situations where you are unsure of what you are up against is not gimmick gameplay. Its taking Eve in more of a direction it should be. There should be less perfect information in all tools that we use to interact with other ships in space; Local, D-Scan, Probes, Map Statistics, and etc. Player skill should determine how good the intel we gain is. It shouldn't just be handed out. Removing some ships from d-scan gets us to stop using it as a crutch with perfect information. Except that won't happen, people will just take more times to get same intel, take time to send covert ops, take time to probe (boring for lot of player), at the end it just mean less fight. End of story. D-Scan immunity is dumb.
Barrett Fruitcake State War Academy Caldari State 2	Posted - 2014.12.23 00:15:05 - [1600] - Quote Lug Muad'Dib wrote: Except that won't happen, people will just take more times to get same intel, take time to send covert ops, take time to probe (boring for lot of player), at the end it just mean less fight. End of story. I know players want to use this "creates less fights" as the new "I'll unsub if you do" complaint, but I don't think it will gain you much in the end. At some point there is a critical mass of intel that say's we got most of what we need and you engage or you don't. Some want perfect information, which many of our tools give them now. It should be more about of imperfect intel and the willingness to take a gamble, not about waiting for the perfect intel. The perfect intel should never come.

Lvzbel Ixtab 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 43	Posted - 2014.12.23 00:19:54 - [1601] - Quote People that say that D-scan gives perfect intel are wrong, you can always hide the rest of a fleet in a different system or in a wh and many tactics to hide you true numbers
Edward Olmops DUST Expeditionary Team 234	Posted - 2014.12.23 00:25:35 - [1602] - Quote Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: People that say that D-scan gives perfect intel are wrong, you can always hide the rest of a fleet in a different system or in a wh and many tactics to hide you true numbers True! But imagine you want to hide your fleet in a wormhole. You warp there - you jump in and... then... OMG, it's full of Recons!!!11
Hard Carnt The Vendunari End of Life 5	Posted - 2014.12.23 00:37:58 - [1603] - Quote An interesting point is that of getting to much info for free from dscan - I can see the logic in this point so rather than op a class of ship by completely removing then why not change the de an mechanic - ie passively watching d scab gives you an unknown ship type return at an unknown distance in a vague direction. Actively scanning gives you much more detail such as ship type, range and direction but also alerts the contact that you're looking for him. Kind of like a Radar Warning Receiver style thing
Giribaldi PH0ENIX COMPANY Phoenix Company Alliance 31	Posted - 2014.12.23 01:59:54 - [1604] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Hopefully no typos or weirdnesses but its always possible so just let me know if something looks funny. 15:02 - I have to step out for a meeting. Back in an hour to start responding. 15:49 - fixed typos in Huginn and Curse slot layout =/ 16:51 - heading out for the day, will keep reading and post responses to your feedback tomorrow Friday - 11:16 - update post: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5322500#post5322500 Can we get another updat3. For the love of jesus, we want resist profiles. We want to know specifics about wet her we will see them in overview if ongrid. We want increased EHP because the givenue bonus uve given them are so marginal you will not notice it in pvp. 50 hp? That is nothing compared to the damage application of medium guns. Reasonably we need to see a 400 to 500 he P I crease on respective tank hp.
Alruan Shadowborn InterSun Freelance SONS of BANE 26	Posted - 2014.12.23 02:01:32 - [1605] - Quote Instead of making them invisible to D-Scan, why not make them un-scannable by Probes They could know you are there, but could do nothing about it OR Make it a distance based effect, over 10AU there is nothing, 5-10 AU shows as unknown signature1-5 AU shows as a ship and under 1 AU it shows what ship it is, or what class of ship maybe
Madner Kami Durendal Ascending Sindication 56	Posted - 2014.12.23 02:40:05 - [1606] - Quote Alruan Shadowborn wrote: Instead of making them invisible to D-Scan, why not make them un-scannable by Probes They could know you are there, but could do nothing about it Now is this satire or are you really ... ? Seriously? I mean... what?!
Stan Durden Omega Tactical Group Reckoning Star Alliance 17	Posted - 2014.12.23 02:45:35 - [1607] - Quote Barrett Fruitcake wrote: Stan Durden wrote: Eve is hard. Most of us accept that. If you die it should be because you are doing it wrong. Adding the immunity to d-scan means in many more cases of choosing to take the fight or take the acceleration gate, will be doing it wrong. Many situations which used to give us PvP will turn from a manageable risk into a bad decision. Initially I like the sound of the new recon changes. However, consider the steps that will be necessary now to gather good intel and decide to take a fight... I think you will see a lot less fights happen in all areas of PvP, because people will be a lot less willing to engage. Of course a lot more ganks will happen. There are plenty of PvPers who only take ganks, and who don't really want to find good fights. For them these changes will really improve the game. For those of us who will also take fights which are risky, but manageable... those of us who chose to try to turn up the difficulty when we can... it will make it even more difficult to find a good fight imo. So in the end do you think this change will lead to more good fights, or more ganks? I will never say no to a free kill, but I would prefer changes that help generate good fights. I don't think this change will do that. I have found that truly, good fights, have been a rarity in Eve mainly due to its sand box non-instanced no rules gameplay. We are not playing a space version of football, American or that other one. We are simulating a space struggle where there is great risk of being overwhelmed, and sometimes great reward for those willing to take that risk. It's a cold hard game, and it is rarely fair, and probably never should be. While it is not easy to find a good fight, it can be done. I have been in quite a few good fights during the years I have played Eve. I tend to believe that the people who can't find a good fight are simply unwilling to take them when they appear. If you are willing to take a truly good fight then you should be willing to lose your ship a lot more often then most people are. A good fight does not mean it needs to be fair. It typically means that both sides have a different advantages they are working with, which they think will give them the edge. No one takes a fight they are certain they will lose. But there are some pilots who are willing to take fights when they are not certain they will win. Certainly, there are large groups of "PvPers" who will run from the first sign that the victim may shoot back. But there are plenty of PvPers who are willing and able to take a good fight if they are given the opportunity. The point I was trying to make is lets not make it harder than it already is to find a good fight. Many good fights develop after some intel has been collected. A FC or a solo pilot can make a decision to engage based on a variety of information they may have gathered. Making it more difficult to gather accurate intel will not help people decide to engage, instead it will lead to a decision to withdraw more often because not enough information is available.
StuRyan Space Mutts 54	Posted - 2014.12.23 03:13:08 - [1608] - Quote Worrff wrote: Kmelx wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Dscan immunity is staying. Asking for player feedback and then ignoring that feedback for the win. I seriously wonder why you even bother... So that it gives the IMPRESSION that they are listening. They will do whatever they want regardless. All the feedback about the new UI went unheeded and ignored. Been the same for years, nothing new. And yet you are still playing the game?
StuRyan Space Mutts 54	Posted - 2014.12.23 03:21:35 - [1609] - Quote Personally recons needed a buff. With the UI changes to null sec anom runners it killed solo recons hunting ratters down. I am not sure this change brings that game play back but it for sure will make players actually pay more attention. As I always say, HTFU or go play WOTs if want an easy gameplay.
Barrett Fruitcake State War Academy Caldari State 3	Posted - 2014.12.23 04:23:33 - [1610] - Quote StuRyan wrote: Worrff wrote: Kmelx wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Dscan immunity is staying. Asking for player feedback and then ignoring that feedback for the win. I seriously wonder why you even bother... So that it gives the IMPRESSION that they are listening. They will do whatever they want regardless. All the feedback about the new UI went unheeded and ignored. Been the same for years, nothing new. And yet you are still playing the game? A few players complaining about it doesn't warrant removing it. Yes, a 80+ page thread is only a few players complaining.

Barrogh Habalu Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 828	Posted - 2014.12.23 05:54:06 - [1611] - Quote Okay, so now that Rise posted there somewhere that he's working on alternative suggestions, can we stop whining about d-scan immunity and focus of ships themselves? I, for one, am afraid of Pilgrim becoming/remaining not worth using, especially now that it's losing ability to fight heavier targets in favor of, uhm, what, being more consistent against faster cruisers and frigs? Not sure what we are looking at here.
Orvmus ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 5	Posted - 2014.12.23 06:27:35 - [1612] - Quote You have made Combat Recons stupidly powerful and refuse to so much as consider that making them d-scan immune is a bad idea. Where are the drawbacks to the immunity? Why not give it a hard-to-fit module which only combat recons can fit and make the ships give up a slot and fitting in order to use it? You are making them undetectable unless they are on-grid with you and there is zero counter to that. Much better resists, much better cap, faster across the board, more hitpoints, additional drone bay space for one of them AND being undetectable via d-scan? Solo players be damned, right? Not only that but you say that being undetectable in FW Plexes + Deadspace areas is something that you should look at but "won't be able to do before the next release" - So do what CCP have been touting as the main benefit of the new release schedule is and delay the damn update until you HAVE sorted it out, don't release a half-baked polished turd like you normally do. It was like listening to a child that thinks their ideas are the business and can't take criticism when I heard you on the podcast - "I have been waiting for a real reason that this is bad but haven't heard anything close so far." Start playing the game again Kil2, interact with those that don't have brown on their nose. To be clear: A Curse is going to be the first thing I'm flying post patch, followed by the rest of the Combat Recons as these ships are going to be ******** good. Combat Recon gangs here we come. What a terrible idea. /rant
Gwydion Voleur Anarchic Exploration 17	Posted - 2014.12.23 06:49:01 - [1613] - Quote Pilgrims need to keep the neut amount bonus. As I posted earlier, add the "old Nos" effect (or something) to buff the ship. Old Nos effect would at least free up another mid-slot for Ewar by eliminating the need for a cap booster, making it more effective without destroying the thing for which it is most known. As for the D-scan changes, if some type of immunity is inevitable, how about limiting the D-scan range for detecting Combat Recons? (Sorry if this has been said before, I can only read so many pages.) For example, Recon 1 and you are detectable at 10AU, then subtract 2AU for each level trained, so that diligent D-scanners pick up highly trained Recon pilots at 2 AU? Or even start at 5AU and get them at 1AU? Whatever. Blanket immunity largely (but not completely) removes the need for CovOps cloaks and overlaps the Combat and Force Recon roles too much.
Axloth Okiah Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 537	Posted - 2014.12.23 08:35:04 - [1614] - Quote Im loving dscan immunity. Finally it will be possible to catch nullbears in those gated plexes. W-Space Realtor
Squatdog State Protectorate Caldari State 168	Posted - 2014.12.23 08:54:07 - [1615] - 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. Hopefully this revised proposal will be: "All changes remain in place...except for unscannable Combat Recons, which is a terrible idea".
Zumbul Cvetkov Your Loss Dead Terrorists 6	Posted - 2014.12.23 09:06:48 - [1616] - Quote I dont like the idea of that D-scan immunity.. IF you at CCP wanna do something funny, then try this: I hereby ask CCP to remove D-Scan and Local chat from EVE completly !!!!! Make the fun for all the same.... CCP REMOVE D-SCAN AND LOCAL FROM EVE !!!
Marlona Sky Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 5829	Posted - 2014.12.23 10:18:34 - [1617] - Quote Squatdog 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. Hopefully this revised proposal will be: "All changes remain in place...except for unscannable Combat Recons, we are changing it to not appearing in local chat.". FTFY The Paradox
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 14333	Posted - 2014.12.23 10:40:25 - [1618] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: Squatdog 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. Hopefully this revised proposal will be: "All changes remain in place...except for unscannable Combat Recons, we are changing it to not appearing in local chat.". FTFY Sounds fun Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Gully Alex Foyle Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop 2882	Posted - 2014.12.23 11:03:02 - [1619] - Quote Barrett Fruitcake wrote: I have found that truly, good fights, have been a rarity in Eve mainly due to its sand box non-instanced no rules gameplay. We are not playing a space version of football, American or that other one. We are simulating a space struggle where there is great risk of being overwhelmed, and sometimes great reward for those willing to take that risk. It's a cold hard game, and it is rarely fair, and probably never should be. Depends on what you mean by 'good fight'. If a good fight is one where both sides have a 50% chance to win - then yes, you won't get many fights. Players estimate odds very differently, if both sides are looking for at least even odds you'll spend all your time deciding whether to engage or not and very little time actually fighting and having fun. If you're willing to engage with a 10-20% chance to win and enjoy the challenge, then your engagement range is much higher, you'll find many 'good fights', lose several but win some and have a lot of fun. That excludes only super-pussies that won't even fight with 80-90% odds in their favor (yes, there are several, but they really should be playing some other game, or sticking to highsec missions). Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 595	Posted - 2014.12.23 11:21:53 - [1620] - Quote Some of the best fights I've had are hopelessly outnumbered where we all die but take chunks of the enemy with us. 'Here we go, kill as many as we can - primary ....' Best fights ever, sure we could evade - but that's not what is all about is it?

Fromtheold Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2014.12.23 11:42:35 - [1621] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Just finished reading everything that was posted over night. Here's what I can update with at the moment: Biggest concern at the moment is the added EHP. Making recons a more realistic fleet option next to T3 cruisers is good, making them too tanky in smaller situations where their ewar already gives them a lot of damage evasion may be too much. Not sure if change is needed but will keep looking at this and update again asap. 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. The Pilgrim. Opinions seem mixed, gaining neut range is obviously nice but many of you still feel that giving up neut strength is too harsh, or that some other added power is needed (more damage for instance). Will get back to you on this as soon as possible but it's possible that we will make adjustments. RLML for Rook. Sure. Consider it done. More low slots for Lachesis. Not sure yet on this one, will talk it over here and see what we can do. Hope that answers some questions. I'm sure many of you would rather have more explanation for the dscan immunity change so I'll try to get that post together as soon as I can. Thanks for all the feedback. The resists are much needed. recons are way to squishy.
Tuscor United System's Commonwealth 86	Posted - 2014.12.23 12:18:25 - [1622] - Quote Please CCP Rise - don't give into the fear mongering - this needs to go live for a full test of the d-scan immunity.
Tuscor United System's Commonwealth 86	Posted - 2014.12.23 12:19:39 - [1623] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: Squatdog 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. Hopefully this revised proposal will be: "All changes remain in place...except for unscannable Combat Recons, we are changing it to not appearing in local chat.". FTFY Sounds fun Or this as an alternative! One or the other... dscan immunity or not appearing in local.
Tuscor United System's Commonwealth 86	Posted - 2014.12.23 12:22:28 - [1624] - Quote Gwydion Voleur wrote: Pilgrims need to keep the neut amount bonus. As I posted earlier, add the "old Nos" effect (or something) to buff the ship. Old Nos effect would at least free up another mid-slot for Ewar by eliminating the need for a cap booster, making it more effective without destroying the thing for which it is most known. As for the D-scan changes, if some type of immunity is inevitable, how about limiting the D-scan range for detecting Combat Recons? (Sorry if this has been said before, I can only read so many pages.) For example, Recon 1 and you are detectable at 10AU, then subtract 2AU for each level trained, so that diligent D-scanners pick up highly trained Recon pilots at 2 AU? Or even start at 5AU and get them at 1AU? Whatever. Blanket immunity largely (but not completely) removes the need for CovOps cloaks and overlaps the Combat and Force Recon roles too much. I disagree. You will never be able to be on grid but invisible in a combat recon (unless you fail fit a non-covops cloak). You will not be able to slow boat right up to a target to bump and grab them in a combat recon. You will not be able to jump and cloak and evade a gatecamp in a combat recon. I think there are sufficient differences.
Tuscor United System's Commonwealth 86	Posted - 2014.12.23 12:23:58 - [1625] - Quote Alruan Shadowborn wrote: Instead of making them invisible to D-Scan, why not make them un-scannable by Probes They could know you are there, but could do nothing about it ... They will do something about it... they will dock up and deny the fight!
Fromtheold Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2014.12.23 12:33:07 - [1626] - Quote The real issue with recon ships is that they have not enough resists, even if you keep them as is and fix the resist issue they will already be much better and actually useable.
Cassius Invictus Thou shalt not kill A Nest of Vipers 108	Posted - 2014.12.23 13:31:50 - [1627] - Quote Fromtheold wrote: The real issue with recon ships is that they have not enough resists, even if you keep them as is and fix the resist issue they will already be much better and actually useable. CCP Rise wrote: All eight Recons will have their resist profiles brought up to Heavy Assault Cruiser level Reading is a valuable skill .
Mr Doctor Sex Machineguns 142	Posted - 2014.12.23 13:31:57 - [1628] - Quote Thats kind of the point, they are hellishly powerful but not great in the tank department. They're called force multipliers for a reason.
Barrogh Habalu Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 830	Posted - 2014.12.23 14:04:56 - [1629] - Quote Cassius Invictus wrote: Fromtheold wrote: The real issue with recon ships is that they have not enough resists, even if you keep them as is and fix the resist issue they will already be much better and actually useable. CCP Rise wrote: All eight Recons will have their resist profiles brought up to Heavy Assault Cruiser level Reading is a valuable skill . Indeed: CCP Rise wrote: Just finished reading everything that was posted over night. Here's what I can update with at the moment: Biggest concern at the moment is the added EHP. Making recons a more realistic fleet option next to T3 cruisers is good, making them too tanky in smaller situations where their ewar already gives them a lot of damage evasion may be too much. Not sure if change is needed but will keep looking at this and update again asap. Mr Doctor wrote: Thats kind of the point, they are hellishly powerful but not great in the tank department. They're called force multipliers for a reason. There's another force multiplier, which is logi, there and enjoying full T2 resists. I can't cay that recons need those less if they are to be fielded in a fleet, although at this point there are other difficulties with that comparison, seeing how recons are generally becoming sneaky class.
S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 51	Posted - 2014.12.23 14:33:14 - [1630] - Quote hellokittyonline wrote: Delt0r Garsk wrote: I am not sure why the dscan immunity is such a big deal. Instead of a Rapier, now i have a reason to fly a Hugin. What case does dscan change having a gang on a plex cloaked vers dscan immune? seriously whats the difference? And in WHs who the hell is flying around without a cloakie. We just don't fly non cloaks most of the time. I sure as hell aren't going to waste time ratting sleepers in anything smaller than a t3. It would just be far too slow. Because if I warp to a medium with a slasher in it for a GF, all I have to do is wait a few seconds to know if there is a pilgrim on the other side because he has to decloak PRIOR to me arriving in the plex to be able to lock me. Furthermore, said pilgrim has to be 30km+ (outside of pointrange) away from the beacon to cloak. You are wrong. Any cloaky waiting for you will only have to do 2 things: 1. dscan 2. as soon as something it's on dscan, uncloak and cycle the mwd As soon as you land he will be in range of the beacon, uncloaked with all the mods preheated already locking you :)

S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 51	Posted - 2014.12.23 14:35:39 - [1631] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Not even close. I would just like to point out that i have Recon and literally everything else to 5 in spaceship command. Ill fly whatever works. The problems i see come from how at the moment i have risk things to get content. With these recon changes i can effortlessly scout myself around and pick off targets with minimal effort risk or skill and a far greater conversion rate since people will get far less of a chance to run. This is different from covert cloaking with no cloak deatcivation penalty on locking how exactly? This is the point that defeats entirley what you say, covert cloaks are WORSE than d-scan immunity. Quote: Instead of putting words into peoples mouths you should really listen to what they say since it seems you have quite a lot to learn about debating (being unjustifiably patronising isnt winning), and about eve pvp too. ] You do recall that is was YOU who started the ball rolling by trying to discredit people 'because killboard' right? No one is patronizing you, simply demonstrating why everythign you believe is measurably and demonstrably wrong. I predict this will be just like the Faction Battleship rebalance thread where people claimed that the Navy raven would be useless (ended up being even more popular for the things it's used for) or the pirate ship rebalance where people claimed the Rattlesnake with it's 'super drones' would suck....which is why you see null alliance have RATTLESNAKE FLEETS now because null alliances always make fleet comps out of ships that suck lol. I enjoyed the aftermaths of those discussions when reality proved the nay-sayers wrong (not that any of them ever admit it). I will enjoy the aftermath of this one when CCP implements this change, everything turns out fine and those of you so vocal in oppostion pretend like you never said anything Pubquiz, which cov ops cloak has no deactivation delay. Im looking for a ship class and bonus points for telling me why on earth would i be bothered by one of them tackling me. Why are you even posting when you clearly dont have a full grasp of even the current mechanics? Stealth bombers
S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 54	Posted - 2014.12.23 14:49:32 - [1632] - Quote Thanatos Marathon wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: lots of stuff Hows that worm fit with the combat probes coming along? MMO => Bring friends
S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 54	Posted - 2014.12.23 14:52:24 - [1633] - Quote maCH'EttE wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: hellokittyonline wrote: I do actually fly in gangs, albeit small gangs. The main reason I fly solo or in small gangs is because I am looking for a challenge. I however like to find challenges where my ability as a PvPer can surmount numbers, however with improper intel, and no way for me or my small gang to gain intel (aside from yet again one of us having a probing alt or shudders BEING the probing alt) it just gives another unneeded advantage to all the coolbros who want to pay to win. Dscan immunity not having some features of the covert cloak is not a downside. It is merely a(n arguably) lesser upside with no downside. If you fly in gangs then there is no problem. Your scout should have probes and a cloak anyway. Probes negate it's distance advantage, and having eyes on grid with a cloak shows you what's on grid waiting for you. Probes literally take seconds to get the same intel you would have gotten out of d-scan. So why all the "if you make me get another account I'll unsub and go play something else"? I swear you must fly in large gangs, cuz your repetitive lip keeps saying, probes, probes, scouts, probes, probe scout, scout with combat probes, combat probes. you must not have a clue on how small gangs or solo combat works. Some people dont have the luxory of flying in 20+ gangs with links/sout/logi/ecm. wait let me guess, get a cloaky scout with probes. You only need one. It's called hunter and it's usually a cloaky Arazu with combat probes :)

CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 4798	Posted - 2014.12.23 14:56:38 - [1634] - Quote Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. 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. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ @ccp_rise

S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 54	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:00:51 - [1635] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: so people are saying to 'just use probes'. how do I fit an expanded probe launcher to my thorax? Are you alone in your alliance?
Equto Imperium Technologies Evictus. 31	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:02:37 - [1636] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. 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. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ If everyone is worried about FW sites, just say that they put out a field that allows the recons to be D-Scanned, keeps its immunity in everything and is still useful until you land on the site.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1312	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:02:44 - [1637] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. 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. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ Glad to see y'all holding the line on the dscan immunity. I also think the pilgrim thing is a decent compromise. Good stuff. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
TheMercenaryKing StarFleet Enterprises Almost Awesome. 336	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:03:09 - [1638] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. 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. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ DScan immunity is the best bonus for this ship. Also, I would buff the combat recon resist profile, but not force. Combat recons would be the ones who need it.
Reagalan Amok. Goonswarm Federation 34	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:07:03 - [1639] - Quote "Let's close the gap between Tech 3s and Recons and make Recons more viable in fleets. We will do this by adding a bonus to D-scans, which won't ever affect fleets. Oh, we're also rolling back the resistances change, which would have made them more viable in fleets. Have fun playing Tech 3s Online."
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 597	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:07:42 - [1640] - Quote Not ANOTHER kinetic lock in :(

Equto Imperium Technologies Evictus. 31	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:08:22 - [1641] - Quote I agree that the combat recons need a small buff to their resist at least. While the D-scan immunity will make it easier to get targets, its useless if most targets can just chew through you before you can do much of anything.

CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 4798	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:17:54 - [1642] - Quote 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. @ccp_rise

S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 54	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:20:14 - [1643] - Quote Thanatos Marathon wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Zemfadel wrote: So, these changes sound great to me but I can see how they could be problematic. Especially in wh space where ships that are designed to be very heavy tackle will now be undetectable until they land on top of you... Couldn't you do that with a cloaked T3 anyway? Nope, will show on DSCAN when it comes through the hole. You mean you don't have eyes on the open worm holes and combat probes out looking for new sigs? Then d-scan immune or not, you will still burn in flames at some point ... combat recons or not :)
Fonac Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 110	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:21:43 - [1644] - 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. Good work Rise! I look forward to the black ops, and what you have in store for the ewar changes. Now, hold off on work and enjoy the christmas!
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 597	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:26:04 - [1645] - 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. Shouldn't the cloaky recons be weaker? Maybe a small boost to combats to seperate them?
Viktor Raybach GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 14	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:26:14 - [1646] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: We have T3 rebalance, black ops rebalance, and potential ewar module changes on the horizon to help address this as well. How exactly does a black ops rebalance affect the usability of recons in fleet fights?
Speedkermit Damo Demonic Retribution 371	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:31:54 - [1647] - Quote As if we didn't have more than enough stealthy cloaky bullshit already in this game. All this D-scan gimmick will do is make people even less likely to take fights than they already were. Don't get me wrong, I'll abuse the crap out of it, but it's still broken. Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.
Thanatos Marathon Phoibe Enterprises 381	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:32:07 - [1648] - Quote Viktor Raybach wrote: CCP Rise wrote: We have T3 rebalance, black ops rebalance, and potential ewar module changes on the horizon to help address this as well. How exactly does a black ops rebalance affect the usability of recons in fleet fights? blops fleets?
Equto Imperium Technologies Evictus. 31	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:32:45 - [1649] - Quote afkalt wrote: 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. Shouldn't the cloaky recons be weaker? Maybe a small boost to combats to seperate them? This is my worry, Force recons are suppose to be hit and run and possibly blackops gangs. Combat recons I thought were solo/fleet. While the combat has higher bonuses to their respective EWAR thats really the only thing separating them now.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 255	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:35:11 - [1650] - Quote Good job holding out on the tears. Not that there are all that many. As a perfect skills Rapier pilot, i look forward to having a reason to fly a hugin. Really looking forward to the t3 rebalance. Would love a bit of a nurf and then get rid of the SP loss. If the SP loss remains, i hope they don't get too nurfed. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.

Niskin League of the Lost 177	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:36:34 - [1651] - Quote Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: Ill give you a scenario Im on my duo rep ishkur i found a merlin, incursus and rifter, I know i can take them but there is no way to know if a recon is there, i usually roam about 10-15 system so lets say my prober is 5 jump out. I log out and log back in bring my prober to that system, those guys move on to a different system while i was moving my prober, fight is gone do you really need Eve to be slower than it already is? Isn't the timer on a plex like 20 minutes? So they'll probably be there a while. Or if they are baiting they will probably sit outside beacon range and will be there even longer. If they move on you can follow them, and you might catch them jumping a gate where you can see what they have. I'd recommend finding targets with your alt in the first place and then rushing to the fight with your main once you have the info you need. Then you'll be switching less and they may not associate the presense of your alt with an incoming threat. Solo PvP will require more effort if you want comparable intel to what you have today. Anytime they make a change to add difficulty it affects the solo players the most. This is unavoidable. Personally, I will now need to combat probe down my wormhole before getting into anything serious. And that still won't save me, it will just affirm that it's clear to get started, assuming there isn't a cloaky T3 waiting for me to show up on scan. It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow
Reagalan Amok. Goonswarm Federation 35	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:40:35 - [1652] - Quote Speedkermit Damo wrote: Don't get me wrong, I'll abuse the crap out of it, but it's still broken. Any time a game introduces a gamebreaking or imbalanced mechanic, a subset of players will see the change and think to themselves: "I can use this", and will proceed to support the mechanic wholeheartedly, regardless of how it affects the game. Anything that makes the game easier, anything that helps you win, is desirable. We saw it with the bubble immune interceptors, we saw it with the outrage over the retracted cloaking nerf, we see it here too. Mr. Damo. I applaud your honesty.
Thanatos Marathon Phoibe Enterprises 381	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:45:42 - [1653] - Quote Has anyone noticed how fast you can make a huginn, rapier, or lach with these changes? You might want to consider trimming 10 m/s or so off their increases. Once they are fit those things are going to be fast as hell.
Jean Luc Lemmont Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 502	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:53:17 - [1654] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. 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. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Have a great Christmas o/ I have literal tears of joy. Our RLML Rooks will blot out the sun. Will I get banned for boxing!?!?! This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury It's bonuses, not boni, you cretins.
Jean Luc Lemmont Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 502	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:54:26 - [1655] - Quote S'No Flake wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: so people are saying to 'just use probes'. how do I fit an expanded probe launcher to my thorax? Are you alone in your alliance? Friends? In an MMO? Are you daft man? I'll have to share my rewards!! Will I get banned for boxing!?!?! This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury It's bonuses, not boni, you cretins.
Equto Imperium Technologies Evictus. 31	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:56:37 - [1656] - Quote CCP Rise is the shield amount on the curse a typo? you say its going down by 187 to 1650 but the curse currently only has 1238 shields, that would be a massive increase not a decrease
S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 56	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:01:11 - [1657] - Quote Jeremiah Saken wrote: afkalt wrote: All this drama would make a lot more sense if cloaks didn't exist. Invisible ships aren't new. Invisible instant tackle isn't new. There are now a couple less 100% safe areas in eve - OH THE HUMANITY!! Cloaks have drawbacks. Invisible instant tackle? What are you talking about? Ask players why they are not leaving hisec? We have one more reason they won't. If we don't want 100% safe areas in EvE lets remove d-scan completely. You take what's land on grid or leave, only probes and visual scouting. afkalt wrote: I do feel for the Pirates, targets will thin a little at first. But it shouldn't last. It shouldn't? So you know the date when this will be rolled back? Cloaks have drawbacks if don't know how to use them. You can't lock right away after you uncloak? Bump the target out of alignment. You will be 2000m away when you uncloak so, he won't have time to react. You are waiting cloaked in that juicy relic site? When you see the target on D-Scan at < 1au, uncloak (and cycle your MWD to get in range if you are in a FW plex). By the time the target lands on grid your delay it's gone and you can do your job. Invisible instant tackle ... well, it's a dual faction AB fit + dc + dual asb stealth bomber. Enough HP to keep you locked until the gang comes and it doesn't have any lock delay caused by the cloak. Today you learned something new. Have fun!
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 951	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:04:16 - [1658] - 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 - [1659] - 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)?
TheMercenaryKing StarFleet Enterprises Almost Awesome. 336	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:10:48 - [1660] - 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. For ships like the Rook, shield tanked but most mids are used for ECM. With dropping of the resists, are there any thoughts of adjusting the Missile Velocity bonus to 4% shield resist per level?

S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 58	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:11:19 - [1661] - Quote 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?
Shaleb Heworo Viziam Amarr Empire 47	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:12:37 - [1662] - Quote You killed the pilgrim for solo. 24km neute range means that it will just easily 25km + orbited by point range bonused/linked inties now now it's just another fleet boat. Thanks.
S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 58	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:12:56 - [1663] - Quote mulgrew Zero wrote: can i just ask for a role bonus on the astero so it can fit an expanded probe launcher seems as well have tobe doing combat scanning to find some ships ? Astero can fit an expanded probe launcher you just have to make decisions and use some faction mods

CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 4810	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:13:52 - [1664] - Quote Equto wrote: CCP Rise is the shield amount on the curse a typo? you say its going down by 187 to 1650 but the curse currently only has 1238 shields, that would be a massive increase not a decrease Sorry, yes. 1650 was the armor amount and it got pasted twice :( Fixed now. @ccp_rise

S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 59	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:14:19 - [1665] - Quote mulgrew Zero wrote: can i just ask for a role bonus on the astero so it can fit an expanded probe launcher seems as well have tobe doing combat scanning to find some ships ? Astero can fit an expanded probe launcher you just have to make decisions and use some faction mods EDIT: i'm dumb, that is Stratios but i'll give osmium a try :)
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 951	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:17:36 - [1666] - 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.
S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 59	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:21:28 - [1667] - Quote afkalt wrote: Jeremiah Saken wrote: afkalt wrote: You don't /need/ two accounts, you just need to accept that sometimes **** happens and you're going to die. Like jumping into an unscouted gate camp, death is just as assured. If i lost ship to unscanned gate camp it will be my fault. How exactly are you scanning a gate camp BEFORE jumping in? With a <2s align inty :)
rhiload Feron-drake TURN LEFT The Camel Empire 37	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:25:42 - [1668] - Quote why are you so persistent with the perma invisible d-scan, there is no reason to use them over force recons anymore, and medium plexes will absolute death traps now, you this right? then why are you going through with it?
S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 59	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:26:01 - [1669] - Quote StuRyan wrote: Love it, what would round this off is if you make recon pilots invisible in local too..... delicious tears. I would also give them nullified drives :)
Stitch Kaneland Ex Astris Opes 91	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:28:14 - [1670] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. 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. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ So i suppose huginn PG isnt going to be touched? Looks like its 650s or nothing. Now with non hac level resists, it has no chance of being in close enough to apply dps with acs. Not much of a combat recon.

Altrue Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 1514	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:28:44 - [1671] - Quote Removing T2 resists : Not cool. This is mandatory for large fleet fights. And in small fights, given the skills requirements and the pricetags of these ships, this is far from OP. Signature Tanking - Best Tanking
Speedkermit Damo Demonic Retribution 371	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:29:21 - [1672] - 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. Hey you! Nerf Logi!!!! Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.
Shaleb Heworo Viziam Amarr Empire 47	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:30:22 - [1673] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. 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. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ This pilgrim change mans that it will be the only force recon without a meaningful defense against 30km + pointing inties. and these things are everywhere! It will also lose a lot of control against several targets on the field effectivly making it a bad solo boat again. Also: What about cargo holds? Recons should have big cargo holds to operate behind enemy lines and it also would make them more viable for solo. So I guess they get extra small cargo holds then?
Alundil Isogen 5 804	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:30:28 - [1674] - 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. You walked back on the ONE thing that would most likely have made the viable in a fleet scenario though. wut? Lach with a 4 lowslot tank and the same resist profile? lolnope.jpg You've added a novel mechanic (d-scan immunity) that I think will shake things up. In a cool and new way. GJ. However you've sacrificed the viability of the hull in various settings because of it's possible use/abuse in one setting. Instead of "waiting to see how it's actually" used and what people come up with as a counter mechanic. Not GJ. If you feel that the D-scan immunity is going to cause problems in small scale (and let's be perfectly honest - only in FW scenarios) there are other options that could have been on the table. From altering restricted ship classes on the only Plex size (cruiser/medium iirc) that this might be an issue to taking the d-scan change in another way altogether and flipping it in such a way that combat recon pilots aren't in local but the hull shows up on d-scan instead. Or, as your initial statement implied, not cave and watch and see. Tweak later if necessary. The 6-week dev cycle is purpose-made for this type of rapid iteration. I'm right behind you
MeBiatch GRR GOONS 2040	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:31:49 - [1675] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: 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)? fingers crossed for stacking penilties There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote: Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Equto Imperium Technologies Evictus. 32	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:32:16 - [1676] - Quote CCp rise might want to recheck your numbers still, that's not a decrease of 187 for the shields and the armor value currently its 1650 its 1463 so either thats wrong or there was a change as well. Havn't looked at the other numbers yet
MeBiatch GRR GOONS 2040	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:38:53 - [1677] - Quote Altrue wrote: Removing T2 resists : Not cool. This is mandatory for large fleet fights. And in small fights, given the skills requirements and the pricetags of these ships, this is far from OP. yeah not too sure why removal of the resist the one thing that make the ships good was removed. Kinda Lame if you ask me. There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote: Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 62	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:39:51 - [1678] - Quote Squatdog wrote: Quote: 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. Oh boy... In order to fit a cov-ops cloak, Force Recons sacrifice a lot of combat utility compared to their Combat Recon counterparts. Likewise, covops T3s are restricted to a crappy subsystem in place of something actually useful. Then there's the matter of getting decloaked on gates (and by anything within 2000m) on top of the targeting delay penalty. Something the new Jesus Recons won't have to deal with. That's how it's balanced. Most of the time the force recon using combat probes (expanded launcher) it's the Arazu hunter. It has enough slots to fit multiple points and damps to keep even stabbed ships on grid. There is no need to use combat probes on a Falcon which sits at 80k from the fight and it's using a full rack of jammers for example :)
MeBiatch GRR GOONS 2040	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:46:06 - [1679] - Quote cant see why without tech II resist i would use a lach over a celestis for a fleet fight. There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote: Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 62	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:48:26 - [1680] - Quote Belinda HwaFang wrote: Let me clear up a few things for those people in this thread who clearly don't know too much about cloaky ships in EVE and their uses. Stealth Bombers (and technically Black Ops which aren't cloaky-warpy) are the only ships to not have a targeting delay when you decloak to point someone. That means all T3 cruisers and Force Recons (and Cov Ops) have at best a 5 second (with T2 Cov Ops Cloak) targetting delay after decloaking, meaning that agile and awake targets usually get away from them. Hence people using Stealth Bombers with Rockets or Small Turrets to gank exploration frigates. 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, and since they aren't a cloaky ship, they are a full combat strength ship, not a nerfed down combat ship to allow for the cloak. I'm posting this mainly for informational purposes, because it's clear from reading a few posts in this thread that some people don't actually understand these details, and why a combat recon that is immune to DSCAN becomes a lot more powerful than its cloaky counterpart. -- Fang You should also know that the lock delay means almost nothing if you bump your target out of alignment when you decloak. Or you know, uncloak when the target it's in warp to the sweet relic side you are cloaky camping it.

Niart Gunn TURN LEFT The Camel Empire 33	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:53:14 - [1681] - Quote I like the changes to the Rook and the Lach, as well as the toned down resists, I'm still kinda doubting the Pilgrim's usefulness after this though. I also still have some issues with the fact that Covert Recons are basically paying with 2 slots (one less than Combat Recons as well as 1 high that they have to fit the cloak in) as well as one of their bonuses (cloak cpu) for their defining advantage, while the Combat Recons are getting half a Covert Ops cloak in form of the dscan immunity role bonus for no cost whatsoever. I just don't see how that can be considered balanced. PS: CCPls don't forget to up the resists of the Chameleon and the Moracha to Combat Recon level, they're Covert Recons too. Tyvm.
Alundil Isogen 5 804	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:53:29 - [1682] - Quote MeBiatch wrote: cant see why without tech II resist i would use a lach over a celestis for a fleet fight. Celestis with better ewar range, lower SP reqs and far more affordable. Seems like a no brainer. I'm right behind you
Equto Imperium Technologies Evictus. 32	Posted - 2014.12.23 16:56:43 - [1683] - Quote They fill different roles due to the disruptor range, but why not just use an arazu that can cloak ?
Longdrinks Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 159	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:03:49 - [1684] - Quote liking the tank updates and looking forward to how this plays out on TQ
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 239	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:07:41 - [1685] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. 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. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ Good update. The way to deal with the FW issue is just simply not allow recons into sites. I am happy you're standing your ground though and not giving in to FW complaints.
ivona fly Aideron Robotics 2	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:11:12 - [1686] - Quote Quote: ROOK Caldari Cruiser Bonuses: 7.5% bonus to kinetic missile damage (was 5% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile Launcher rate of fire) 10% reduction in ECM Target Jammer activation cost Recon Ships Bonuses: 30% bonus to ECM Target Jammer strength 10% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile max velocity Slot layout: 5H, 7M, 3L; 2 turrets, 5 launchers Fittings: 680 PWG(+80), 600 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 2050(+262) / 965(+9) / 960(+359) Capacitor (amount / capacitor per second) : 1250(+187) / 3.93/s(+.83) Mobility (max velocity / agility / align time): 194(+24) / .61 / 10.76s(-.04s) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25 / 25 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 150km / 259 / 10 Sensor strength: 32 Gravimetric Signature radius: 170(-3) Please no, I hate this one damage type thing, and seeing as you say the changes are in part, to allow it to fight vs T3 and T2 well : Ishtar, Eagle, Cerb, Tengu and proteus will not even take damage from it because of 90% resists. and outside the Loki (used instead of recon) and Legion they are what I see used the most in these types of battles.
S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 63	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:15:15 - [1687] - 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. 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. You really hate ECM don't you? Why there are entire fleets flying celestis and not entire fleets flying blackbirds? Because ECM it's worst than damps? Right? :rolleyes:
Lvzbel Ixtab 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 43	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:19:39 - [1688] - Quote S'No Flake wrote: 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. 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. You really hate ECM don't you? Why there are entire fleets flying celestis and not entire fleets flying blackbirds? Because ECM it's worst than damps? Right? :rolleyes: Yes they are all you have to do is get closer with damps, with ECM there is nothing you can do
ivona fly Aideron Robotics 2	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:24:07 - [1689] - Quote Actually in a larger ship a bunch of resdamps + rangedamps + TIDI can mean you explode before you ever get a lock, seems like same effect if it happens to you.
S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 63	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:25:50 - [1690] - Quote Barrett Fruitcake wrote: Madner Kami wrote: Barrett Fruitcake wrote: I hope CCP doesn't cave on a great new step in getting rid of perfect intel due to a bunch of players unwilling to adapt to such changes. So D-Scan is perfect intel nowadays? Seriously? It's one of the tools that gives you far too much information for free, like local. You either know someone is in local or not. On D-scan, you either know they ship type, name and if they are on grid or not. There should be a point where their are more unknowns, than knowns. D-Scan should act more like scan probes and show unknown contacts at extreme ranges instead of always returning perfect information when you are in range. There should be a range of uncertainty. IT should take into consideration sensor strength and sig radius. The smaller your sig radius it is, a smaller angle should be needed to detect you. The better sensor strength you have, you should only show on short range scan.

2D34DLY4U BACKUPLEGION 18	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:26:54 - [1691] - Quote How about if we reduce the dscan immunity to while in warp only? This would not break the dscan tools, still make players have to deal with the uncertainty factor of a combat recon landing on them at any moment and would preventing camping abuse.
Marlona Sky Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 5829	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:28:37 - [1692] - Quote S'No Flake wrote: 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. 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. You really hate ECM don't you? Why there are entire fleets flying celestis and not entire fleets flying blackbirds? Because ECM it's worst than damps? Right? :rolleyes: There is a couple reasons why they choose the Celestis over Blackbirds. First, the Celestis is armor tanked and works well with their already existing logistics which is armor related. Then there is the fact the Celestis's bonus is so strong it means it can be effective at over 100km. Also having an armor buffer does not make your signature radius bloom which means you are less susceptible to bombing runs as opposed to say a shield buffer Blackbird. As I said before, the issue with damps is a close second, but ECM overall is still the bigger problem. I did suggest changing damps to something that disrupts drones you know. Maybe you just have not read everything, which is fine. There is a lot of comments in this thread. The Paradox
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 597	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:31:00 - [1693] - Quote Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: S'No Flake wrote: 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. 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. You really hate ECM don't you? Why there are entire fleets flying celestis and not entire fleets flying blackbirds? Because ECM it's worst than damps? Right? :rolleyes: Yes they are all you have to do is get closer with damps, with ECM there is nothing you can do Logis fear damps a HELL of a lot more, but by all means worry about a 'maybe' from ECM.
ivona fly Aideron Robotics 3	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:33:46 - [1694] - Quote Honsetly I thought Blackbird was mostly amour tanked, where it gets 30k+ tank (be that with crap resists) most gangs dont bother to even logi them
S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 63	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:34:35 - [1695] - Quote afkalt wrote: Not ANOTHER kinetic lock in :( Yes. I hate this too. At some point they say they want to go away from the damage type bonus on caldari and they are doing pretty much the same old thing thing since then. Thanks god for Kestrel.
ivona fly Aideron Robotics 3	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:37:12 - [1696] - Quote S'No Flake wrote: afkalt wrote: Not ANOTHER kinetic lock in :( Yes. I hate this too. At some point they say they want to go away from the damage type bonus on caldari and they are doing pretty much the same old thing thing since then. Thanks god for Kestrel. and caracal..... oh yeah rapid light missiles ... heavy missiles etc etc, can we get just turrets on the caracal with a range bonus ccplz :)
ivona fly Aideron Robotics 3	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:39:43 - [1697] - Quote afkalt wrote: Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: S'No Flake wrote: 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. 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. You really hate ECM don't you? Why there are entire fleets flying celestis and not entire fleets flying blackbirds? Because ECM it's worst than damps? Right? :rolleyes: Yes they are all you have to do is get closer with damps, with ECM there is nothing you can do Logis fear damps a HELL of a lot more, but by all means worry about a 'maybe' from ECM. Yeah I have to think about a sensor booster or remote sensor booster, even at the expensive of tank sometimes because of damps, or you have to ball up :( the scythe has crap locking range to start with
Midnight Hope Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 153	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:56:18 - [1698] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ I admit I did not read all 85 pages in the thread, and it may have already been covered, but it would be nice to know what motivates this. Why do you think recons need to have scan immunity? What issue is this addressing? Perhaps explaining the reasons behind the change would help us understand (digest) it better.
Shaleb Heworo Viziam Amarr Empire 48	Posted - 2014.12.23 17:58:15 - [1699] - Quote It is NOT aybout fw complexes. If you enforce uncertainty on people they will just retreat to the next level of relative certainty meaing they won't warp to places without preprobing it. This will severly limit the freedom of movement for small gangs and solo players since the smaller the gang the less likely they can afford a dedicated prober/fit an expanded probe launcher on their breacher You have to give people TOOLS that create margin for error and you have to create and environnement where people move freely under the pretense of relative security. I'm sorry, but there seem to be basic misundertstandings of player/human behaviour that drive these changes. It's really hard to watch.
Aureus Ahishatsu Deadspace Knights 76	Posted - 2014.12.23 18:00:34 - [1700] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: J 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. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that. I don't understand what you are talking about here. Most of the people who have raised concerns have had very definitive points they were making about situations that are very real (wh's, fw). Meanwhile the only argument being made against it is 'mm tears" and 'nom nom nom gonna love killing bears now' neither of which contributes anything. The Faction Warfare concern is very legitimate in that it doesn't even favor those who are playing the game for faction warfare. In fact it benefits those who simply wish to be a nuisance to those participating in faction warfare. Wormhole are also a major concern considering they do not even have a local to see if the people are present. The only argument I have seen is that 'the warp landing time is about the same as a decloak time". This is only part of the problem though, Combat recons also in general put out more dps than a force recon. not to mention the argument is "you can still probe them!" Great so now everyone is going to be expected to carry expanded probe launchers? The fitting requirements on these alone mean you are going to be sacrificing a significant portion of your CPU rendering your ship near useless if you ever get in any kind of fight. If they're going to implement this change a MINIMUM combat probes should be loadable into regular probe launchers. Also I agree with CCP in that the recons suffer from an identity crisis. For large fleet battles this feature is pretty much irrelevant other than enemy fleet composition from dscans. Even this though is more for observational sake. Finally with the weapon uniformity across ship manufactures you also just created the EXACT problem which you alleviated with the command ships. Players have to choose either a weapon type, or play style but not both. the minmater you either are combat and projectiles or missiles and cloak, caldari are the opposite with missiles for combat and hybrids for force recon. IMO they should have made the ships like the command ships in that either variant can cloak, but at the sacrifice of a weapon slot. with that you can just throw the d-scan immunity into the trash where it belongs. It is a feature that is useless in the majority of the situations, but VERY op in niche roles.

Aureus Ahishatsu Deadspace Knights 76	Posted - 2014.12.23 18:05:39 - [1701] - Quote To add to my previous comment, what exactly is CCP's goal with the combat recon? You can't just say you want it to be unique it already is. Everyone was fine with the buffs to hp and the changes to slots etc. but this d-scan immunity had to have some type of gameplay goal in mind. IF you could share it with us that would be more useful than "we wanted to make it UNIQUE!" Furthermore if you want to make it unique, stop calling the damn things recon ships and just call them what they really are, electronic warfare cruisers (EWAC's).
Cassius Invictus Thou shalt not kill A Nest of Vipers 108	Posted - 2014.12.23 18:28:17 - [1702] - 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. CCP Rise form one side I completely agree, from the another I was hoping that recons could now be used in T3 gangs instead of neut legions or ECM Tengus. If you pull back resists it won't happen. Maybe decreasing their e-war a little is a way to go? Also do we really need both tracking disruption and neut on curse and pilgrim? Maybe curse should get another bonus instead (resists. drone speed and tracking)? Maybe T2 resists should stay only on Combat recons but be romoved from cloaky ones? Keep working guys .
Ehud Gera Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 36	Posted - 2014.12.23 18:45:59 - [1703] - Quote Why DSCAN immunity? Why? Please, tell us. Is there a well thought out reason for this besides "moar ganks will happen"? I liked the resist bonuses because it lent something to the fleet role this ship could take, but the Dscan thing threw a monkey wrench in and now it's the priority thing. Can you tell us why you want this ship to be a gankers paradise but not fill out the much more practical role of fleet recon EWAC (Ewar Cruiser)
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 597	Posted - 2014.12.23 18:51:46 - [1704] - Quote Ehud Gera wrote: Why DSCAN immunity? Why? Please, tell us. Is there a well thought out reason for this besides "moar ganks will happen"? I liked the resist bonuses because it lent something to the fleet role this ship could take, but the Dscan thing threw a monkey wrench in and now it's the priority thing. Can you tell us why you want this ship to be a gankers paradise but not fill out the much more practical role of fleet recon EWAC (Ewar Cruiser) I'd venture, and this is but a guess, that they are meant for small work. In the fleet setting there's no real point in not using the T1s. The bonuses are the same (unless you're failing and using ecm), the life expectancy isn't enough of a gap to justify the cost on a hull liable to be primary/secondary. It'd be nice to have them in larger fleets, but I imagine practical bounds/considerations will always prevent it. Plus it gives low skilled people something useful to fly (t1 variants) in large fights.
Thenoran Tranquility Industries 30	Posted - 2014.12.23 19:01:56 - [1705] - Quote Better changes for sure, but I'd still prefer if the Pilgrim kept the full 20% neut strength bonus. Keep in mind that most Pilgrim fits can only bring two Medium neuts, the other two slots going to the cloak and a probe launcher. With a 10% bonus at V and two Medium neuts, you're still only neuting 540 cap every 12 seconds (which a cap booster can deal with). With a 20% bonus it goes to 720 cap (which is what it does now), which is a more pressuring amount to deal with and allows the Pilgrim to holds its own more. It already suffers against the Curse in mobility, neut range and how many neuts can be fitted as well as not being dscan immune. (it has a cloak instead (which eats up a high slot) but that bring a decloak targeting delay) That it has less range and mobility is fine (trade-in for the cloak) but at the very least the neuting target of a Pilgrim should really get their capacitor hammered or you'll still be better off flying a dscan immune Curse.
Ehud Gera Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 37	Posted - 2014.12.23 19:07:59 - [1706] - Quote Consider this bonus: Recons: Invisible to local chat. Cannot fit Regular Cynos. What does this do? Allows the Recon to do well, "recon". It's hidden in some ways, it gives incentive to the pilot to actually do recon instead of making it a gank mobile, while still upping the "Gank factor" for the unwary. It makes afk farmers and lazy carebears work a bit harder cause now they actually have to watch dscan and gather intel from scouts etc. But it makes it counterable, and interesting (especially in Null).Low sec dwellers are usually a bit more paranoid so they will be a little less affected but not a lot, and WH's, well in WH's everyone is incognito anyway, whether in a Recon or not you have to do "recon" because there are no gates, no local, etc. Making them not appear on local will truly make Recons unique. To balance it you allow them to only use Covert cynos. Or maybe you want them to be able to Cyno regularly, I just think it would be cool to see more blops being used by allowing the Recon to have that niche role. Thoughts?
Niskin League of the Lost 177	Posted - 2014.12.23 19:09:15 - [1707] - Quote Aureus Ahishatsu wrote: I don't understand what you are talking about here. Most of the people who have raised concerns have had very definitive points they were making about situations that are very real (wh's, fw). Meanwhile the only argument being made against it is 'mm tears" and 'nom nom nom gonna love killing bears now' neither of which contributes anything. The Faction Warfare concern is very legitimate in that it doesn't even favor those who are playing the game for faction warfare. In fact it benefits those who simply wish to be a nuisance to those participating in faction warfare. Yeah, that's what we did in here, ignored all the posts about real situations. I mean I certainly didn't explain how T3 cruisers were still more likely to get a kill on you. Nor did I include some tips to avoid recon ganks in that same post. Later on I didn't help a guy out who didn't understand his defensive options properly. Then I certainly didn't recap the first 52 pages and address the concerns about FacWar plexes. Nor did I present a comparison of being ganked in a wormhole by a combat recon versus a T3 cruiser. That's just me, and I'm not the only one arguing in good faith in this thread. There have been some good situations brought up, and all have counters, but not everybody is happy with having to use counters where they didn't have to before. I can understand that, but this is EVE, things will change and sometimes they will get harder. It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow
Equto Imperium Technologies Evictus. 32	Posted - 2014.12.23 19:10:09 - [1708] - Quote Ehud Gera wrote: Consider this bonus: Recons: Invisible to local chat. Cannot fit Regular Cynos. What does this do? Allows the Recon to do well, "recon". It's hidden in some ways, it gives incentive to the pilot to actually do recon instead of making it a gank mobile, while still upping the "Gank factor" for the unwary. It makes afk farmers and lazy carebears work a bit harder cause now they actually have to watch dscan and gather intel from scouts etc. But it makes it counterable, and interesting (especially in Null).Low sec dwellers are usually a bit more paranoid so they will be a little less affected but not a lot, and WH's, well in WH's everyone is incognito anyway, whether in a Recon or not you have to do "recon" because there are no gates, no local, etc. Making them not appear on local will truly make Recons unique. To balance it you allow them to only use Covert cynos. Or maybe you want them to be able to Cyno regularly, I just think it would be cool to see more blops being used by allowing the Recon to have that niche role. Thoughts? Removing from local is not likely to happen, I don't know if its ever going to happen but thats a MAJOR change that likely breaks a few things that probably shouldn't ever be broken. Stop suggesting it.
Komodo Askold No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad 254	Posted - 2014.12.23 19:13:27 - [1709] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. 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. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ Thanks for the update! Those seem reasonable tweaks and arguments. Good to see the D-Scan inmunity is staying, and that you are open to further tweaking in case it does not work well. I wonder if they could get a bit more tank by slightly increasing their buffer (all of them), so they keep the reduced resists but a pinch more of buffer, without being that overtanked for smaller engagements. I'm not so sure about the kinetic damage bonus on the Rook. Sure, it also helps RLML, but it also reduces versatility, which should be missiles' trademark. Other Caldari ships already had that bonus removed for their improvement, such as the Phoenix. I understand a rate of fire bonus might not work that well with RLML, but what about a flat damage bonus, independant on warhead type? For example, 5%.
BadAssMcKill ElitistOps 951	Posted - 2014.12.23 19:19:06 - [1710] - Quote Can we stop with ****** kinetic damage bonuses tia

Helene Fidard 21	Posted - 2014.12.23 19:19:09 - [1711] - Quote So the design goal with the Pilgrim is to have a little bonus to everything and be good at nothing?
Grookshank Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 42	Posted - 2014.12.23 19:22:48 - [1712] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. 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. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ I do not understand the change on the resist profile. Recons will not be fleet viable compared to t3s without a serious buff to their tank, which was one of the stated goal of the balance change to them.
Shaleb Heworo Viziam Amarr Empire 49	Posted - 2014.12.23 19:26:16 - [1713] - Quote just give the pilgrim its full range and neut bonus and give the curse a bonus to drone speed and tracking and maybe a bigger drone ba. As it stands now the pilgrim is pityful compared to its d-can invisible cousin AND to the other recons.
Ehud Gera Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 37	Posted - 2014.12.23 19:31:29 - [1714] - Quote Equto wrote: Ehud Gera wrote: Consider this bonus: Recons: Invisible to local chat. Cannot fit Regular Cynos. What does this do? Allows the Recon to do well, "recon". It's hidden in some ways, it gives incentive to the pilot to actually do recon instead of making it a gank mobile, while still upping the "Gank factor" for the unwary. It makes afk farmers and lazy carebears work a bit harder cause now they actually have to watch dscan and gather intel from scouts etc. But it makes it counterable, and interesting (especially in Null).Low sec dwellers are usually a bit more paranoid so they will be a little less affected but not a lot, and WH's, well in WH's everyone is incognito anyway, whether in a Recon or not you have to do "recon" because there are no gates, no local, etc. Making them not appear on local will truly make Recons unique. To balance it you allow them to only use Covert cynos. Or maybe you want them to be able to Cyno regularly, I just think it would be cool to see more blops being used by allowing the Recon to have that niche role. Thoughts? Removing from local is not likely to happen, I don't know if its ever going to happen but thats a MAJOR change that likely breaks a few things that probably shouldn't ever be broken. Stop suggesting it. Excuse me for having an opinion that i reasoned out on the forum. "that likely breaks a few things that probably shouldn't ever be broken." Like Dscan reliably picking up uncloaked ships lol? Please if you're gonna enter the argument don't tell me not to have an opinion, tell me why yours is more sound.
Kalihira Ultramar Independent Contracting 31	Posted - 2014.12.23 19:32:43 - [1715] - 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. Guess you will have to nerf T3 tanks into the ground, atleast when using their racial EWAR subsystems, else the current issues will presist. I dont get why you would hassle over the tank of Crecons, but insist on keeping the "unique" dscan immunity you invented, which, again, will break aspects of the game. Let them be abit more squishy then their HAC cousins, but only a tad, keep their DPS low, and maybe weaken them in some other way (low sensor strength, high sig, low speeds, low agility, low max locked targets, capacitor). my combat recons are gathering dust beceause if anyone sneezes at them, they pop....
Equto Imperium Technologies Evictus. 33	Posted - 2014.12.23 19:39:51 - [1716] - Quote Ehud Gera wrote: Equto wrote: Ehud Gera wrote: Consider this bonus: Recons: Invisible to local chat. Cannot fit Regular Cynos. What does this do? Allows the Recon to do well, "recon". It's hidden in some ways, it gives incentive to the pilot to actually do recon instead of making it a gank mobile, while still upping the "Gank factor" for the unwary. It makes afk farmers and lazy carebears work a bit harder cause now they actually have to watch dscan and gather intel from scouts etc. But it makes it counterable, and interesting (especially in Null).Low sec dwellers are usually a bit more paranoid so they will be a little less affected but not a lot, and WH's, well in WH's everyone is incognito anyway, whether in a Recon or not you have to do "recon" because there are no gates, no local, etc. Making them not appear on local will truly make Recons unique. To balance it you allow them to only use Covert cynos. Or maybe you want them to be able to Cyno regularly, I just think it would be cool to see more blops being used by allowing the Recon to have that niche role. Thoughts? Removing from local is not likely to happen, I don't know if its ever going to happen but thats a MAJOR change that likely breaks a few things that probably shouldn't ever be broken. Stop suggesting it. Excuse me for having an opinion that i reasoned out on the forum. "that likely breaks a few things that probably shouldn't ever be broken." Like Dscan reliably picking up uncloaked ships lol? Please if you're gonna enter the argument don't tell me not to have an opinion, tell me why yours is more sound. Because in almost any rebalance thread all I ******* see is people saying remove it from local, remove local, you know it wouldn't be a problem if you removed local. NONE of that is helpful. Its not a viable rebalance, its not productive, and as you said unlike the d-scan immunity only TRUELY affects nullsec, in lowsec there is normally one to two people in systems you want anyways and in highsec there is too many to be useful. Wormhole already has no local but it also has no static gates. Removing local is not happening and likely never will happen because its not helpful to anyone and doesn't fix anything.
Ehud Gera Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 37	Posted - 2014.12.23 19:43:40 - [1717] - Quote Equto wrote: Ehud Gera wrote: Equto wrote: Ehud Gera wrote: Consider this bonus: Recons: Invisible to local chat. Cannot fit Regular Cynos. What does this do? Allows the Recon to do well, "recon". It's hidden in some ways, it gives incentive to the pilot to actually do recon instead of making it a gank mobile, while still upping the "Gank factor" for the unwary. It makes afk farmers and lazy carebears work a bit harder cause now they actually have to watch dscan and gather intel from scouts etc. But it makes it counterable, and interesting (especially in Null).Low sec dwellers are usually a bit more paranoid so they will be a little less affected but not a lot, and WH's, well in WH's everyone is incognito anyway, whether in a Recon or not you have to do "recon" because there are no gates, no local, etc. Making them not appear on local will truly make Recons unique. To balance it you allow them to only use Covert cynos. Or maybe you want them to be able to Cyno regularly, I just think it would be cool to see more blops being used by allowing the Recon to have that niche role. Thoughts? Removing from local is not likely to happen, I don't know if its ever going to happen but thats a MAJOR change that likely breaks a few things that probably shouldn't ever be broken. Stop suggesting it. Excuse me for having an opinion that i reasoned out on the forum. "that likely breaks a few things that probably shouldn't ever be broken." Like Dscan reliably picking up uncloaked ships lol? Please if you're gonna enter the argument don't tell me not to have an opinion, tell me why yours is more sound. Because in almost any rebalance thread all I ******* see is people saying remove it from local, remove local, you know it wouldn't be a problem if you removed local. NONE of that is helpful. Its not a viable rebalance, its not productive, and as you said unlike the d-scan immunity only TRUELY affects nullsec, in lowsec there is normally one to two people in systems you want anyways and in highsec there is too many to be useful. Wormhole already has no local but it also has no static gates. Removing local is not happening and likely never will happen because its not helpful to anyone and doesn't fix anything. Chill out. I said for one unique ship type. Recons won't break the game if they can't be seen in local. It will actually just open up a unique opportunity and roles. Farming in Sov null is easier than anywhere else. Plz....logic, not tears mate.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 1882	Posted - 2014.12.23 19:43:54 - [1718] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. noooooooo......
Equto Imperium Technologies Evictus. 33	Posted - 2014.12.23 19:46:13 - [1719] - Quote Ehud Gera wrote: Equto wrote: Ehud Gera wrote: Equto wrote: Ehud Gera wrote: Consider this bonus: Recons: Invisible to local chat. Cannot fit Regular Cynos. What does this do? Allows the Recon to do well, "recon". It's hidden in some ways, it gives incentive to the pilot to actually do recon instead of making it a gank mobile, while still upping the "Gank factor" for the unwary. It makes afk farmers and lazy carebears work a bit harder cause now they actually have to watch dscan and gather intel from scouts etc. But it makes it counterable, and interesting (especially in Null).Low sec dwellers are usually a bit more paranoid so they will be a little less affected but not a lot, and WH's, well in WH's everyone is incognito anyway, whether in a Recon or not you have to do "recon" because there are no gates, no local, etc. Making them not appear on local will truly make Recons unique. To balance it you allow them to only use Covert cynos. Or maybe you want them to be able to Cyno regularly, I just think it would be cool to see more blops being used by allowing the Recon to have that niche role. Thoughts? Removing from local is not likely to happen, I don't know if its ever going to happen but thats a MAJOR change that likely breaks a few things that probably shouldn't ever be broken. Stop suggesting it. Excuse me for having an opinion that i reasoned out on the forum. "that likely breaks a few things that probably shouldn't ever be broken." Like Dscan reliably picking up uncloaked ships lol? Please if you're gonna enter the argument don't tell me not to have an opinion, tell me why yours is more sound. Because in almost any rebalance thread all I ******* see is people saying remove it from local, remove local, you know it wouldn't be a problem if you removed local. NONE of that is helpful. Its not a viable rebalance, its not productive, and as you said unlike the d-scan immunity only TRUELY affects nullsec, in lowsec there is normally one to two people in systems you want anyways and in highsec there is too many to be useful. Wormhole already has no local but it also has no static gates. Removing local is not happening and likely never will happen because its not helpful to anyone and doesn't fix anything. Chill out. I said for one unique ship type. Recons won't break the game if they can't be seen in local. It will actually just open up a unique opportunity and roles. Farming in Sov null is easier than anywhere else. Plz....logic, not tears mate. I tried to use logic but all I hear is screams for a removal of local, noone tends to listen to criticism of that idea just replying with the line "You know it wouldn't be a problem without local". Just because you can't see someone doesn't make them not a problem, obvious by the hate for d-scan immunity.
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 27	Posted - 2014.12.23 19:47:58 - [1720] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. 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. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ Unfortunate that the resist buff doesn't look like it will go through. Honestly I think the resist buff is would have been more useful in the long run than the d-scan immunity for most uses. "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen

2D34DLY4U BACKUPLEGION 19	Posted - 2014.12.23 19:48:26 - [1721] - Quote Thenoran wrote: Better changes for sure, but I'd still prefer if the Pilgrim kept the full 20% neut strength bonus. Keep in mind that most Pilgrim fits can only bring two Medium neuts, the other two slots going to the cloak and a probe launcher. With a 10% bonus at V and two Medium neuts, you're still only neuting 540 cap every 12 seconds (which a cap booster can deal with). With a 20% bonus it goes to 720 cap (which is what it does now), which is a more pressuring amount to deal with and allows the Pilgrim to holds its own more. It already suffers against the Curse in mobility, neut range and how many neuts can be fitted as well as not being dscan immune. (it has a cloak instead (which eats up a high slot) but that bring a decloak targeting delay) That it has less range and mobility is fine (trade-in for the cloak) but at the very least the neuting target of a Pilgrim should really get their capacitor hammered or you'll still be better off flying a dscan immune Curse. Agree, also remember there is no use for a Pilgrim vs. a Stratios since the latter is also cloaked, has more mobility, dps, basically everything... The only niche use for the Pilg comes IMO from the ship bonus allowing room for the combat probe launcher, cloak and 2 neuter that requires too much bling to fit on the Stratios IMO (barring offlining/on lining stuff all the time and/or mobile depot). I really like a design that can cloak, combat probe but when it fights has to be at close range and committed, the longer range is useless since if it has the two prior abilities and it can also fight at range it will become too OP (cloak, pick targets and escape at same time is too much), seems that by giving it range you are approaching this idea yet since you are unable to realize it fully you end up stuck in the middle with a useless design. Or perhaps there is some way to make it work that I don't see...
Ranger 1 Ranger Corp Vae. Victis. 6123	Posted - 2014.12.23 19:49:27 - [1722] - Quote Orvmus wrote: You have made Combat Recons stupidly powerful and refuse to so much as consider that making them d-scan immune is a bad idea. Where are the drawbacks to the immunity? Why not give it a hard-to-fit module which only combat recons can fit and make the ships give up a slot and fitting in order to use it? You are making them undetectable unless they are on-grid with you and there is zero counter to that. Much better resists, much better cap, faster across the board, more hitpoints, additional drone bay space for one of them AND being undetectable via d-scan? Solo players be damned, right? Not only that but you say that being undetectable in FW Plexes + Deadspace areas is something that you should look at but "won't be able to do before the next release" - So do what CCP have been touting as the main benefit of the new release schedule is and delay the damn update until you HAVE sorted it out, don't release a half-baked polished turd like you normally do. It was like listening to a child that thinks their ideas are the business and can't take criticism when I heard you on the podcast - "I have been waiting for a real reason that this is bad but haven't heard anything close so far." Start playing the game again Kil2, interact with those that don't have brown on their nose. To be clear: A Curse is going to be the first thing I'm flying post patch, followed by the rest of the Combat Recons as these ships are going to be ******** good. Combat Recon gangs here we come. What a terrible idea. /rant Wait, I though Interceptors having bubble immunity was going to ruin EVE and would be the only thing flown. Oh yeah, that didn't happen either. View the latest EVE Online developments and War Thunder game play by visiting Ranger 1 Presents.
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 27	Posted - 2014.12.23 20:03:48 - [1723] - 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. Curious why you guys are going with the dmg type constraint on the Rook? That's a serious limiting factor for missile boats. Also...specifically for the Rook. Would you consider giving the Combat Recons the upgraded resist profile and not the Force Recon? This gives you a much more viable option for fleets but keeps the Force Recon side from getting to out of hand. "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
Yuri Thorpe Positive Failure Black Legion. 51	Posted - 2014.12.23 20:07:51 - [1724] - 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. So blackops will be getting love >:D
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 239	Posted - 2014.12.23 20:08:14 - [1725] - Quote Midnight Hope wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ I admit I did not read all 85 pages in the thread, and it may have already been covered, but it would be nice to know what motivates this. Why do you think recons need to have scan immunity? What issue is this addressing? Perhaps explaining the reasons behind the change would help us understand (digest) it better. Listen to the latest hydrostatic podcast. Rise was on there talking about it. Can find a link at www.totaleve.com Or here https://highdrag.wordpress.com/2014/12/22/hd-47-arise-high-drag-is-two/
Necharo Rackham The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 47	Posted - 2014.12.23 20:17:19 - [1726] - Quote S'No Flake wrote: You should also know that the lock delay means almost nothing if you bump your target out of alignment when you decloak. Or you know, uncloak when the target it's in warp to the sweet relic side you are cloaky camping it. In small gang/solo fights bumping out of alignment won't be a tactic because of the difficulty of doing so when everyone is moving around, and uncloaking whilst in warp shows up on dscan. At the moment, in smaller fights the main defence to the Falcon de-cloaking is to get drones onto it before it can target and jam you. In any case, if you think the change makes no difference because it is reproducible already, why argue for it?
Komi Toran Paragon Trust The Bastion 479	Posted - 2014.12.23 20:24:52 - [1727] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. Reasonable roll back. However, please roll back the shield nerf to the Curse as well. CCP Rise wrote: With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. This just means the Pilgrim won't be good at anything. It won't have the distance to hit anything that burns away, and it won't have the destabilization power to keep slow targets capped out. Caught between two decent choices, you picked the third terrible one.
Jezza McWaffle No Vacancies 164	Posted - 2014.12.23 20:30:44 - [1728] - Quote With this change originally HAC + Recon fleet was looking very much interesting and viable, now with the reduction to resists ok just go back to T3's since theres still no use for Recons in a fleet. C6 Wormhole blog http://holelotofwaffle.wordpress.com/
Equto Imperium Technologies Evictus. 33	Posted - 2014.12.23 20:32:14 - [1729] - Quote Jezza McWaffle wrote: With this change originally HAC + Recon fleet was looking very much interesting and viable, now with the reduction to resists ok just go back to T3's since theres still no use for Recons in a fleet. I see recons still used alot in blops fleets whenever people can fly them however with the change to jump range we got 1 good jump an hour, so 1 kill a day after setup and waiting before we have to stand down.
Orchid Fury University of Caille Gallente Federation 13	Posted - 2014.12.23 20:35:57 - [1730] - Quote please scrap the dscan immunity and give combat recons t2 resits instead. fleets really need viable support cruisers, currently combat recons implode if they receive a fart. and the only alternative are t3s. dscan immunity seems nice however force recons seem better suited for these roles.

Lvzbel Ixtab 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 43	Posted - 2014.12.23 20:54:25 - [1731] - Quote Altirius Saldiaro wrote: Midnight Hope wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ I admit I did not read all 85 pages in the thread, and it may have already been covered, but it would be nice to know what motivates this. Why do you think recons need to have scan immunity? What issue is this addressing? Perhaps explaining the reasons behind the change would help us understand (digest) it better. Listen to the latest hydrostatic podcast. Rise was on there talking about it. Can find a link at www.totaleve.com Or here https://highdrag.wordpress.com/2014/12/22/hd-47-arise-high-drag-is-two/ He didn't said anything other than explain how you can get away if you are ratting in wh, but then he was confronted by how it will affect FW space and he had no answer for it, saying that limiting D-scan immunity in FW plexes would be ready on time for Proteus. Basically what i got from it, is that he is delivering something half done and not sure about the Pros or Cons
MeBiatch GRR GOONS 2041	Posted - 2014.12.23 21:02:06 - [1732] - Quote Orchid Fury wrote: please scrap the dscan immunity and give combat recons t2 resits instead. fleets really need viable support cruisers, currently combat recons implode if they receive a fart. and the only alternative are t3s. dscan immunity seems nice however force recons seem better suited for these roles. I second that. If you want to keep concept of dscan then just make it so acceleration gates dont decloak force recons and give combat recons tech ii resistance There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote: Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Bronson Hughes The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration 978	Posted - 2014.12.23 21:05:37 - [1733] - Quote While I like the 4/7/4 Lachesis, I'm not a fan of it being the only combat recon without a damage bonus. The first iteration of the Lachesis made up for this by having 5 turret hardpoints, but now with only 4 hardpoints it's primary weapon damage will be somewhat lackluster. The other developer-specific bonus in this case (Roden) is Medium Hybrid Turret rate of fire. Could you consider swapping the tracking bonus to the RoF bonus? The tracking bonus is nice and will help apply damage to smaller targets, but the RoF bonus will help apply more damage to all targets, not just small/fast ones, and put it more on-par with the other combat recons in terms of damage potential. Thanks. CCP Falcon's thoughts on suicide ganking. Reading Comprehension: so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I want to create content, not become content.
Shaleb Heworo Viziam Amarr Empire 50	Posted - 2014.12.23 21:07:45 - [1734] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Equto wrote: CCP Rise is the shield amount on the curse a typo? you say its going down by 187 to 1650 but the curse currently only has 1238 shields, that would be a massive increase not a decrease Sorry, yes. 1650 was the armor amount and it got pasted twice :( Fixed now. can you please adress cargo holds? Please at least make them big enough have an extended range of operation. This would finally be something individual players would benefit from. this also could a feature of the force recons since as it stands now they lookpretty pale compared to combat recons
TuCZnak Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 18	Posted - 2014.12.23 21:08:49 - [1735] - Quote Wow, so change that everyone was applauding (HAC resists) gets scraped, and change generating this threadnought (d-scan immunity) is staying. Apparently only because CCP Rice likes it and doesn't have problem with ignoring opinions different from his own. Nice going.
Bronson Hughes The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration 978	Posted - 2014.12.23 21:10:44 - [1736] - Quote Jezza McWaffle wrote: With this change originally HAC + Recon fleet was looking very much interesting and viable, now with the reduction to resists ok just go back to T3's since theres still no use for Recons in a fleet. I can understand rolling back the Force Recon buff back to current Combat Recon levels. They're meant to be stealthy support, not front-line support. But if your CCP's is to actually get Combat Recons on the field and in fleets in favor of T3s, they would be much better served by leaving Combat Recons with T2 HAC resists. Without them, folks will just keep flying T3s for fleets and swap to Combat Recons for semi-cloaky ambush situations. CCP Falcon's thoughts on suicide ganking. Reading Comprehension: so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I want to create content, not become content.
Arla Sarain 214	Posted - 2014.12.23 21:11:37 - [1737] - Quote Instead of making them desirable in fleets where they are weak, you decided to settle with making them even stronger in small gangs and yet still weak in fleets. Cool.
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 27	Posted - 2014.12.23 21:14:24 - [1738] - Quote TheMercenaryKing wrote: 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. For ships like the Rook, shield tanked but most mids are used for ECM. With dropping of the resists, are there any thoughts of adjusting the Missile Velocity bonus to 4% shield resist per level? That might be a legit trade off. I would like to retain a damage bonus of some sort but the missile velocity exchange for resists would work fairly well. "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 240	Posted - 2014.12.23 21:19:45 - [1739] - Quote For FW, the smart players will have friends scouting the acceleration gate while they capture the site. Going into the site, the smart players will have a scout go in something fast to see if its clear. Being lazy and trying to do FW solo is just going to place yourself at a higher risk. FW will have to just adapt or die.
XvXTeacherVxV Nightmare Machinery 114	Posted - 2014.12.23 21:37:41 - [1740] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Hopefully no typos or weirdnesses but its always possible so just let me know if something looks funny. 15:02 - I have to step out for a meeting. Back in an hour to start responding. 15:49 - fixed typos in Huginn and Curse slot layout =/ 16:51 - heading out for the day, will keep reading and post responses to your feedback tomorrow Friday - update post: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5322500#post5322500 Tuesday - update two: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5335877#post5335877 I really like these changes, d-scan immunity included. I had hoped the huginn would get the same high-slot treatment as the fleet scythe, but I'll take a missile rapier instead I suppose. The way you're going with the Pilgrim could work, but I think it would be better if the Pilgrim had another high-slot and the same neut bonuses as the curse but half the dronebay and bandwidth (25/75 instead of 50/150). Or maybe a 5% bonus to drone damage instead of 10%. That would cut back on the DPS it can field without limiting it's EWAR as much, which would bring it more in line with the rest of the force recon class when compared with combat recons (cloak + full ewar but limited damage). `Can you see the rapier?: http://imgur.com/aFelCpv,GH6lqDE`

Arline Kley PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 474	Posted - 2014.12.23 21:40:48 - [1741] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Are the design team actually going to roll this out on SiSi first before release, get the test results so you can actually see how broken it is before you release it to TQ? or are you just going to take a blind leap of faith and then shrug when everything goes wrong? I hope to heavens that you choose the better option. Blessed are those that carry the Empress' Light; with it they destroy the shadows
Warde Guildencrantz TunDraGon Cynosural Field Theory. 1178	Posted - 2014.12.23 21:42:20 - [1742] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: black ops rebalance Fix_the_widow.jpg Second_line_of_blops.jpg TunDraGon Director ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us My ship fits
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 242	Posted - 2014.12.23 21:48:56 - [1743] - Quote Arline Kley wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Are the design team actually going to roll this out on SiSi first before release, get the test results so you can actually see how broken it is before you release it to TQ? or are you just going to take a blind leap of faith and then shrug when everything goes wrong? I hope to heavens that you choose the better option. Broken? Hasn't even released on SiSi yet. Broken means it doesnt work. Are you saying that CCP will not be able to make Combat Recons immune to dscan?
Otto Kring Imperial Guardians Skeleton Crew. 8	Posted - 2014.12.23 21:51:36 - [1744] - Quote Now I want to fly these
Generaloberst Kluntz Isogen 5 42	Posted - 2014.12.23 21:52:43 - [1745] - Quote Equto wrote: Ehud Gera wrote: Equto wrote: Ehud Gera wrote: Consider this bonus: Recons: Invisible to local chat. Cannot fit Regular Cynos. What does this do? Allows the Recon to do well, "recon". It's hidden in some ways, it gives incentive to the pilot to actually do recon instead of making it a gank mobile, while still upping the "Gank factor" for the unwary. It makes afk farmers and lazy carebears work a bit harder cause now they actually have to watch dscan and gather intel from scouts etc. But it makes it counterable, and interesting (especially in Null).Low sec dwellers are usually a bit more paranoid so they will be a little less affected but not a lot, and WH's, well in WH's everyone is incognito anyway, whether in a Recon or not you have to do "recon" because there are no gates, no local, etc. Making them not appear on local will truly make Recons unique. To balance it you allow them to only use Covert cynos. Or maybe you want them to be able to Cyno regularly, I just think it would be cool to see more blops being used by allowing the Recon to have that niche role. Thoughts? Removing from local is not likely to happen, I don't know if its ever going to happen but thats a MAJOR change that likely breaks a few things that probably shouldn't ever be broken. Stop suggesting it. Excuse me for having an opinion that i reasoned out on the forum. "that likely breaks a few things that probably shouldn't ever be broken." Like Dscan reliably picking up uncloaked ships lol? Please if you're gonna enter the argument don't tell me not to have an opinion, tell me why yours is more sound. Because in almost any rebalance thread all I ******* see is people saying remove it from local, remove local, you know it wouldn't be a problem if you removed local. NONE of that is helpful. Its not a viable rebalance, its not productive, and as you said unlike the d-scan immunity only TRUELY affects nullsec, in lowsec there is normally one to two people in systems you want anyways and in highsec there is too many to be useful. Wormhole already has no local but it also has no static gates. Removing local is not happening and likely never will happen because its not helpful to anyone and doesn't fix anything. Removing local is the cure for nullsec, bear.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 733	Posted - 2014.12.23 21:58:53 - [1746] - Quote Thank you for the update, Rise. Glad to see that you have listened to both sides in this contentious debate. I'm looking forward to the wrinkle presented by giving d-scan immunity to the combat recon ships. I understand the difficulties of giving recons the full T2 resistance profile. While it would have been great for fleets, it would have been tough for small gang. Merry Christmas and may the New Year bring us all great content, fresh energy from CCP, and hopefully an adjustment to the Ishtar. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Equto Imperium Technologies Evictus. 36	Posted - 2014.12.23 22:00:08 - [1747] - Quote Generaloberst Kluntz wrote: Equto wrote: Ehud Gera wrote: Equto wrote: Ehud Gera wrote: Consider this bonus: Recons: Invisible to local chat. Cannot fit Regular Cynos. What does this do? Allows the Recon to do well, "recon". It's hidden in some ways, it gives incentive to the pilot to actually do recon instead of making it a gank mobile, while still upping the "Gank factor" for the unwary. It makes afk farmers and lazy carebears work a bit harder cause now they actually have to watch dscan and gather intel from scouts etc. But it makes it counterable, and interesting (especially in Null).Low sec dwellers are usually a bit more paranoid so they will be a little less affected but not a lot, and WH's, well in WH's everyone is incognito anyway, whether in a Recon or not you have to do "recon" because there are no gates, no local, etc. Making them not appear on local will truly make Recons unique. To balance it you allow them to only use Covert cynos. Or maybe you want them to be able to Cyno regularly, I just think it would be cool to see more blops being used by allowing the Recon to have that niche role. Thoughts? Removing from local is not likely to happen, I don't know if its ever going to happen but thats a MAJOR change that likely breaks a few things that probably shouldn't ever be broken. Stop suggesting it. Excuse me for having an opinion that i reasoned out on the forum. "that likely breaks a few things that probably shouldn't ever be broken." Like Dscan reliably picking up uncloaked ships lol? Please if you're gonna enter the argument don't tell me not to have an opinion, tell me why yours is more sound. Because in almost any rebalance thread all I ******* see is people saying remove it from local, remove local, you know it wouldn't be a problem if you removed local. NONE of that is helpful. Its not a viable rebalance, its not productive, and as you said unlike the d-scan immunity only TRUELY affects nullsec, in lowsec there is normally one to two people in systems you want anyways and in highsec there is too many to be useful. Wormhole already has no local but it also has no static gates. Removing local is not happening and likely never will happen because its not helpful to anyone and doesn't fix anything. Removing local is the cure for nullsec, bear. That would be applicable if I was a bear but im not, sorry to ruin your name calling. Removing local is not a cure for anything
Arline Kley PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 475	Posted - 2014.12.23 22:00:35 - [1748] - Quote Altirius Saldiaro wrote: Broken? Hasn't even released on SiSi yet. Broken means it doesnt work. Are you saying that CCP will not be able to make Combat Recons immune to dscan? Broken meaning unbalanced in relation to the rest of gameplay. I have full confidence that CCP can code them in. But it's balancing it against the rest of the game - that's the real rub. Blessed are those that carry the Empress' Light; with it they destroy the shadows
Lvzbel Ixtab 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 43	Posted - 2014.12.23 22:05:23 - [1749] - Quote Arline Kley wrote: Altirius Saldiaro wrote: Broken? Hasn't even released on SiSi yet. Broken means it doesnt work. Are you saying that CCP will not be able to make Combat Recons immune to dscan? Broken meaning unbalanced in relation to the rest of gameplay. I have full confidence that CCP can code them in. But it's balancing it against the rest of the game - that's the real rub. Even if it goes on Sisi It would not reflect real abuse and interactions
Generaloberst Kluntz Isogen 5 42	Posted - 2014.12.23 22:08:57 - [1750] - Quote From what i see, EvE playerbase (including myself) can be a big disappointment to the devs sometimes. I mean, what are recons supposed to be? Subspecialty ships, highly specific ewar. They are supposed to be flown and warped APART from main fleets, they aren't supposed to take primary dps, therefore they aren't expected to be tanky or dps ships. Nevertheless the average EvE (me too) player wants t2 resists and broad damage type in ze missiles. Dudes they're not supposed to be fleet warped with main dps. They should land at range. Or, they should immediately try to pull range. Rise I'm sorry for my incompetence.

Shaleb Heworo Viziam Amarr Empire 50	Posted - 2014.12.23 22:11:53 - [1751] - Quote Generaloberst Kluntz wrote: From what i see, EvE playerbase (including myself) can be a big disappointment to the devs sometimes. I mean, what are recons supposed to be? Subspecialty ships, highly specific ewar. They are supposed to be flown and warped APART from main fleets, they aren't supposed to take primary dps, therefore they aren't expected to be tanky or dps ships. Nevertheless the average EvE (me too) player wants t2 resists and broad damage type in ze missiles. Dudes they're not supposed to be fleet warped with main dps. They should land at range. Or, they should immediately try to pull range. Rise I'm sorry for my incompetence. buttlicking level 5
Equto Imperium Technologies Evictus. 36	Posted - 2014.12.23 22:12:04 - [1752] - Quote Generaloberst Kluntz wrote: From what i see, EvE playerbase (including myself) can be a big disappointment to the devs sometimes. I mean, what are recons supposed to be? Subspecialty ships, highly specific ewar. They are supposed to be flown and warped APART from main fleets, they aren't supposed to take primary dps, therefore they aren't expected to be tanky or dps ships. Nevertheless the average EvE (me too) player wants t2 resists and broad damage type in ze missiles. Dudes they're not supposed to be fleet warped with main dps. They should land at range. Or, they should immediately try to pull range. Rise I'm sorry for my incompetence. I don't want t2 resist as I think thats probably too much, however currently they are paper thin if you fit them for their ewar purpose or near useless for their ewar purpose if you fit them for tank. I believe that I shouldn't be afraid of other cruisers as a combat recon on a 1v1 because I have a 1/3 the health and 1/3 the dps they have.
Generaloberst Kluntz Isogen 5 42	Posted - 2014.12.23 22:14:16 - [1753] - Quote Equto wrote: That would be applicable if I was a bear but im not, sorry to ruin your name calling. Removing local is not a cure for anything A PVPer fearing local chat removal.
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 242	Posted - 2014.12.23 22:15:09 - [1754] - Quote Arline Kley wrote: Altirius Saldiaro wrote: Broken? Hasn't even released on SiSi yet. Broken means it doesnt work. Are you saying that CCP will not be able to make Combat Recons immune to dscan? Broken meaning unbalanced in relation to the rest of gameplay. I have full confidence that CCP can code them in. But it's balancing it against the rest of the game - that's the real rub. Then saying "broken" is using the wrong word. Unbalanced is the better word to use. Although that is still opinionated. The balance is combat probes, scouts and intelligence. There are counters to it already in game. Players are just too lazy to want to use them.
Generaloberst Kluntz Isogen 5 44	Posted - 2014.12.23 22:17:43 - [1755] - Quote Yeah put those damps, jams, webs, neuts to good use. Also I have no problem with buttlicking don't be racist.
Equto Imperium Technologies Evictus. 36	Posted - 2014.12.23 22:19:44 - [1756] - Quote Generaloberst Kluntz wrote: Equto wrote: That would be applicable if I was a bear but im not, sorry to ruin your name calling. Removing local is not a cure for anything A PVPer fearing local chat removal. Where have I said I fear it? Maybe you can point me to that comment. I said it solves nothing and does nothing but allow you to get cheap ganks on bears. I would rather have meaningful small gang combat than managing to get a drop on a 30 day old character because he has no idea what local is. D-Scan removal allows me to strategically make perches and engage fights that I have a rough idea at winning rather than no local which would require 99% of eve both for wars, lowsec, and nullsec to get more alts in cloakies to sit on gates. EDIT: Not to mention me spending extra time in each system to determine if anyone is there when looking for kills in an area of space with only a few major hotspots every 10 jumps or so. I would rather jump in and know, hey there isn't anyone here, lets not launch probes.
Generaloberst Kluntz Isogen 5 44	Posted - 2014.12.23 22:26:09 - [1757] - Quote Equto wrote: Generaloberst Kluntz wrote: Equto wrote: That would be applicable if I was a bear but im not, sorry to ruin your name calling. Removing local is not a cure for anything A PVPer fearing local chat removal. Where have I said I fear it? Maybe you can point me to that comment. I said it solves nothing and does nothing but allow you to get cheap ganks on bears. I would rather have meaningful small gang combat than managing to get a drop on a 30 day old character because he has no idea what local is. D-Scan removal allows me to strategically make perches and engage fights that I have a rough idea at winning rather than no local which would require 99% of eve both for wars, lowsec, and nullsec to get more alts in cloakies to sit on gates. 1. If you're 30 days into this game and still don't know what local is, WoW is that way-------> 2. Pls don't come to wspace you'll put shame on yourself and your bros because you depend on local to breathe. 3. Balls come back pls I miss you.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1295	Posted - 2014.12.23 22:27:38 - [1758] - Quote So you are keeping the d-scan immunity whos use is hard to imagine outside of easy ganks on the smaller scale of things. And basically keeping the tanks as they are which is the only reason no one uses them. Well, i can see what they pay you guys for.
Lvzbel Ixtab 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 44	Posted - 2014.12.23 22:33:26 - [1759] - Quote Equto wrote: Generaloberst Kluntz wrote: From what i see, EvE playerbase (including myself) can be a big disappointment to the devs sometimes. I mean, what are recons supposed to be? Subspecialty ships, highly specific ewar. They are supposed to be flown and warped APART from main fleets, they aren't supposed to take primary dps, therefore they aren't expected to be tanky or dps ships. Nevertheless the average EvE (me too) player wants t2 resists and broad damage type in ze missiles. Dudes they're not supposed to be fleet warped with main dps. They should land at range. Or, they should immediately try to pull range. Rise I'm sorry for my incompetence. I don't want t2 resist as I think thats probably too much, however currently they are paper thin if you fit them for their ewar purpose or near useless for their ewar purpose if you fit them for tank. I believe that I shouldn't be afraid of other cruisers as a combat recon on a 1v1 because I have a 1/3 the health and 1/3 the dps they have. I think they are ok as they only way to deal with current Recons specially the falcon is try to get your drones on the Falcon before it jams you out, because if you dont blap them right away they have the potential to disable multiple ships at once. So being paper thin is good trade off for being D-scan immune and Ewar ships
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1295	Posted - 2014.12.23 22:36:55 - [1760] - Quote Arline Kley wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Are the design team actually going to roll this out on SiSi first before release, get the test results so you can actually see how broken it is before you release it to TQ? or are you just going to take a blind leap of faith and then shrug when everything goes wrong? I hope to heavens that you choose the better option. You can test it works on SISI but you cant prove how dumb dscan immunity is since everyone is in just one nullsec system. Altirius Saldiaro wrote: Good update, except for the kinetic damage bonus. The way to deal with the FW issue is just simply not allow recons into sites. I am happy you're standing your ground though and not giving in to FW complaints. Funny thing is that outside of FW sites, theye going to be pretty much as useless as they are now. Losing the tank means they probably wont be viable for pve as people were hoping, not useful for fleets. Still handy for warping into plexes and dropping 90km webs and points on whoevers in there though.

Lvzbel Ixtab 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 44	Posted - 2014.12.23 22:45:35 - [1761] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Arline Kley wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Are the design team actually going to roll this out on SiSi first before release, get the test results so you can actually see how broken it is before you release it to TQ? or are you just going to take a blind leap of faith and then shrug when everything goes wrong? I hope to heavens that you choose the better option. You can test it works on SISI but you cant prove how dumb dscan immunity is since everyone is in just one nullsec system. Altirius Saldiaro wrote: Good update, except for the kinetic damage bonus. The way to deal with the FW issue is just simply not allow recons into sites. I am happy you're standing your ground though and not giving in to FW complaints. Funny thing is that outside of FW sites, theye going to be pretty much as useless as they are now. Losing the tank means they probably wont be viable for pve as people were hoping, not useful for fleets. Still handy for warping into plexes and dropping 90km webs and points on whoevers in there though. At the end they will end up as Troll ships use to pull out those cheesy kills because not still have not found a viable role for them. I would much rather see them having an exteded D-Scan range and some decent tank and actual act like REAL Recon ships
Roel Yento Death Row inc 41	Posted - 2014.12.23 22:49:16 - [1762] - Quote Equto wrote: Generaloberst Kluntz wrote: Equto wrote: That would be applicable if I was a bear but im not, sorry to ruin your name calling. Removing local is not a cure for anything A PVPer fearing local chat removal. Where have I said I fear it? Maybe you can point me to that comment. I said it solves nothing and does nothing but allow you to get cheap ganks on bears. I would rather have meaningful small gang combat than managing to get a drop on a 30 day old character because he has no idea what local is. D-Scan removal allows me to strategically make perches and engage fights that I have a rough idea at winning rather than no local which would require 99% of eve both for wars, lowsec, and nullsec to get more alts in cloakies to sit on gates. EDIT: Not to mention me spending extra time in each system to determine if anyone is there when looking for kills in an area of space with only a few major hotspots every 10 jumps or so. I would rather jump in and know, hey there isn't anyone here, lets not launch probes. Removing local adds the necessity of having scouts in your fleets that know how to actually scout. It also makes having a combat prober in your fleet that knows how how to do so important. It also means you need to pay attention to details and people that actively scout help keep your pve efforts safer as opposed to relying on local chat to know if you are safe or not. It makes eve harder having no local but it also increases the chances of fights happening lopsided or equal. What is wrong with spending time hunting for people? Right now you jump into system and know your risk level. No local, the side with better intel and planning has upper hand. Also, you don't need alts on all gates, it's okay to take the chance that no one swings by or pay a new player in corp or alliance to watch gates while you make money. Could even ask someone ship spinning to listen for sound. Not wanting to take risks or share profits is because of greed, not because of needing alts to scout.
Azazel The Misanthrope Animadversion Tactical Operations Index Legion of Immortal Corporations 39	Posted - 2014.12.23 22:49:54 - [1763] - Quote I think that the combat recons should at least have a significantly reduced sensor strength to compensate for this.
Omnathious Deninard Novis Initiis 2632	Posted - 2014.12.23 22:50:23 - [1764] - Quote Losing the resists is disappointing, keeping the d-scan immunity gimmic seems questionable considering the amount to negative feedback it has received. Careful with this change it seems to be treading the same water as loot spew, and we all know how that turned out.
Equto Imperium Technologies Evictus. 37	Posted - 2014.12.23 23:01:52 - [1765] - Quote Roel Yento wrote: Equto wrote: Generaloberst Kluntz wrote: Equto wrote: That would be applicable if I was a bear but im not, sorry to ruin your name calling. Removing local is not a cure for anything A PVPer fearing local chat removal. Where have I said I fear it? Maybe you can point me to that comment. I said it solves nothing and does nothing but allow you to get cheap ganks on bears. I would rather have meaningful small gang combat than managing to get a drop on a 30 day old character because he has no idea what local is. D-Scan removal allows me to strategically make perches and engage fights that I have a rough idea at winning rather than no local which would require 99% of eve both for wars, lowsec, and nullsec to get more alts in cloakies to sit on gates. EDIT: Not to mention me spending extra time in each system to determine if anyone is there when looking for kills in an area of space with only a few major hotspots every 10 jumps or so. I would rather jump in and know, hey there isn't anyone here, lets not launch probes. Removing local adds the necessity of having scouts in your fleets that know how to actually scout. It also makes having a combat prober in your fleet that knows how how to do so important. It also means you need to pay attention to details and people that actively scout help keep your pve efforts safer as opposed to relying on local chat to know if you are safe or not. It makes eve harder having no local but it also increases the chances of fights happening lopsided or equal. What is wrong with spending time hunting for people? Right now you jump into system and know your risk level. No local, the side with better intel and planning has upper hand. Also, you don't need alts on all gates, it's okay to take the chance that no one swings by or pay a new player in corp or alliance to watch gates while you make money. Could even ask someone ship spinning to listen for sound. Not wanting to take risks or share profits is because of greed, not because of needing alts to scout. Because if I go roaming alone, hey some people do that, then I don't have room for a combat prober and a scout and a whole host of other fleet positions. Nor do I have the free time to spend 6 hours going through 6-7 systems just to find **** all. Also local does not tell you risk level, it gives you a number of people. That number alone doesn't tell you the fleet composition, if they are in a fleet, if they are communicating, or if they even ready to attack you. In the fleets I have been in the FC will ask for numbers and then what are they. A fleet of 30.... alright what are they, all hulks. 30 for a fleet of 5 would seems like death, local did not tell me they are hulks that why you get intel. I wish people would stop saying its the perfect intel tool, its not. It tells you 2 things 1. they are in system and 2. who they are. Using those two things you often can't determine anything unless your a miner/ratter in which case you leave anyways or you already have intel on them. Without local the solo and small gang pvp dies, its going to be long, boring, and often without kills. Fleets won't care, if you have 300 dudes sure stick some out with some probes and see whats around.
Frothgar Rolled Out Black Legion. 104	Posted - 2014.12.23 23:03:10 - [1766] - Quote Could you update the OP with the new resist profile? I'm a bit disappointed with recons still being a total non-factor for fleet fights, perhaps a solution would be a touch more less sig and we could look at the total overall resists are. I think somewhere there is a good balance of sig/resists or even range that will make them viable for some degree of fleet fights. I'm thinking some way to increase optimal for TDs/Damps/Painters through the use of distortion amps like ECM uses? Granted I'm some sort of masochist who wants to see sniper BS return ;)
Generaloberst Kluntz Isogen 5 44	Posted - 2014.12.23 23:04:24 - [1767] - Quote FYI there are plenty of tools for that, like Pirate's Little Helper, evewho etc.
Lvzbel Ixtab 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 45	Posted - 2014.12.23 23:05:45 - [1768] - Quote Roel Yento wrote: Equto wrote: Generaloberst Kluntz wrote: Equto wrote: That would be applicable if I was a bear but im not, sorry to ruin your name calling. Removing local is not a cure for anything A PVPer fearing local chat removal. Where have I said I fear it? Maybe you can point me to that comment. I said it solves nothing and does nothing but allow you to get cheap ganks on bears. I would rather have meaningful small gang combat than managing to get a drop on a 30 day old character because he has no idea what local is. D-Scan removal allows me to strategically make perches and engage fights that I have a rough idea at winning rather than no local which would require 99% of eve both for wars, lowsec, and nullsec to get more alts in cloakies to sit on gates. EDIT: Not to mention me spending extra time in each system to determine if anyone is there when looking for kills in an area of space with only a few major hotspots every 10 jumps or so. I would rather jump in and know, hey there isn't anyone here, lets not launch probes. Removing local adds the necessity of having scouts in your fleets that know how to actually scout. It also makes having a combat prober in your fleet that knows how how to do so important. It also means you need to pay attention to details and people that actively scout help keep your pve efforts safer as opposed to relying on local chat to know if you are safe or not. It makes eve harder having no local but it also increases the chances of fights happening lopsided or equal. What is wrong with spending time hunting for people? Right now you jump into system and know your risk level. No local, the side with better intel and planning has upper hand. Also, you don't need alts on all gates, it's okay to take the chance that no one swings by or pay a new player in corp or alliance to watch gates while you make money. Could even ask someone ship spinning to listen for sound. Not wanting to take risks or share profits is because of greed, not because of needing alts to scout. I kind of agree but the reason why I dont see this viable is because you are asking someone to get on a Prober (if you want to do it fast) and that leaves this person out of the fight. No one want to scout their ass off and not get into the fight and this comes from a person who prefer role in a fleet is scouting, so people will end up just having an alt doing it and if this change forces you to have a second account active I dont think is a great idea
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 881	Posted - 2014.12.23 23:10:39 - [1769] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ Honestly what is wrong with you? You take the perfectly reasonable changes (things like resist profiles) and nerf them back to where they started, but you keep the dumbest goddamn overpowered gimmick attribute since interdiction nullification because why not right? Literally "IM CCP RISE AND IM RIGHT ABOUT EVERYTHING OK!" I hope the yule lads steal your sausages.
Infrequent Vanilla. 68	Posted - 2014.12.23 23:11:04 - [1770] - Quote I retract my previous applause of these changes, some of them are great still yes, but the T2 resist profile was needed to make recons actually viable in a fleet or in most situations infact. Yes you can still trick a fleet into thinking there is no recon on field (If they're dumb enough not to put eyes on you) but they will still die as soon as they see you on field and they will still die solo to that ratter they were trying to catch for their friends to gank. So we will still see swarms of EWAR T3s and nothing will change (Yes yes they're going to rebalance T3s but not to the point where you would pick T1 tank over actual tank). Honestly if you want a combat recon to be any form of combat ship, give it the resists, if you want to give a stealth gimmick, give it to the force recon. Don't screw over both. -1

Lucas Quaan Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 80	Posted - 2014.12.23 23:11:49 - [1771] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. Noooo! :( They still lacked the MWD sig bonus that made HACs viable, at least give them one of those. Quote: The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. I still rather liked the RoF bonus for the RLMLs with the idea that you could potentially burn down a target during a jam cycle and get out. Not a huge fan of the type specific missile bonuses on anything, but the extra fitting is nice. Could we perhaps get the velocity bonus to lights too if you are going to favour RLMLs anyway?
Ab'del Abu Atlantis Ascendant 188	Posted - 2014.12.23 23:17:39 - [1772] - 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.
Lvzbel Ixtab 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 46	Posted - 2014.12.23 23:21:47 - [1773] - Quote Infrequent wrote: I retract my previous applause of these changes, some of them are great still yes, but the T2 resist profile was needed to make recons actually viable in a fleet or in most situations infact. Yes you can still trick a fleet into thinking there is no recon on field (If they're dumb enough not to put eyes on you) but they will still die as soon as they see you on field and they will still die solo to that ratter they were trying to catch for their friends to gank. So we will still see swarms of EWAR T3s and nothing will change (Yes yes they're going to rebalance T3s but not to the point where you would pick T1 tank over actual tank). Honestly if you want a combat recon to be any form of combat ship, give it the resists, if you want to give a stealth gimmick, give it to the force recon. Don't screw over both. -1 Even with having eyes on the fleet, most FC's will just send their recons to the nearest planet to hide them from scouts, at least that's what i would do as an FC, but i do agree they need to be paper thin as a trade off
xCUSx Hunter Killers. Forsaken Asylum 56	Posted - 2014.12.23 23:21:55 - [1774] - Quote Yeah, honestly I'd rather lose the scan immunity and get the T2 resist profile, at least for Combat Recons. One of the major roles of these ships is fleet multiplication/disruption, but if they get chased off grid after 20secs by a single wave of drones then whats the point? Just my casual 2 cents.
Roel Yento Death Row inc 41	Posted - 2014.12.23 23:23:48 - [1775] - Quote Equto wrote: Roel Yento wrote: Equto wrote: Generaloberst Kluntz wrote: Equto wrote: That would be applicable if I was a bear but im not, sorry to ruin your name calling. Removing local is not a cure for anything A PVPer fearing local chat removal. Where have I said I fear it? Maybe you can point me to that comment. I said it solves nothing and does nothing but allow you to get cheap ganks on bears. I would rather have meaningful small gang combat than managing to get a drop on a 30 day old character because he has no idea what local is. D-Scan removal allows me to strategically make perches and engage fights that I have a rough idea at winning rather than no local which would require 99% of eve both for wars, lowsec, and nullsec to get more alts in cloakies to sit on gates. EDIT: Not to mention me spending extra time in each system to determine if anyone is there when looking for kills in an area of space with only a few major hotspots every 10 jumps or so. I would rather jump in and know, hey there isn't anyone here, lets not launch probes. Removing local adds the necessity of having scouts in your fleets that know how to actually scout. It also makes having a combat prober in your fleet that knows how how to do so important. It also means you need to pay attention to details and people that actively scout help keep your pve efforts safer as opposed to relying on local chat to know if you are safe or not. It makes eve harder having no local but it also increases the chances of fights happening lopsided or equal. What is wrong with spending time hunting for people? Right now you jump into system and know your risk level. No local, the side with better intel and planning has upper hand. Also, you don't need alts on all gates, it's okay to take the chance that no one swings by or pay a new player in corp or alliance to watch gates while you make money. Could even ask someone ship spinning to listen for sound. Not wanting to take risks or share profits is because of greed, not because of needing alts to scout. Because if I go roaming alone, hey some people do that, then I don't have room for a combat prober and a scout and a whole host of other fleet positions. Nor do I have the free time to spend 6 hours going through 6-7 systems just to find **** all. Also local does not tell you risk level, it gives you a number of people. That number alone doesn't tell you the fleet composition, if they are in a fleet, if they are communicating, or if they even ready to attack you. In the fleets I have been in the FC will ask for numbers and then what are they. A fleet of 30.... alright what are they, all hulks. 30 for a fleet of 5 would seems like death, local did not tell me they are hulks that why you get intel. I wish people would stop saying its the perfect intel tool, its not. It tells you 2 things 1. they are in system and 2. who they are. Using those two things you often can't determine anything unless your a miner/ratter in which case you leave anyways or you already have intel on them. Without local the solo and small gang pvp dies, its going to be long, boring, and often without kills. Fleets won't care, if you have 300 dudes sure stick some out with some probes and see whats around. Solo pilot has solo equipment, you can't do it all in one ship. You set your ship up and either fight someone or stick to your engagement profile. No scout because you are solo? Of course not, you are solo. No probes because solo? You chose the ship and fit. Local isn't perfect intel but you can learn a lot about someone in eve with just their character name like ships used, fits used, gang or solo usually, areas of opperation, times they tend to pvp more often, and more. It may take hours to check a few systems and get good intel for invasion or big future gank but doesn't take that long to find a quick fight if people are in system uncloaked.
h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral EVEL Tendancies 4	Posted - 2014.12.23 23:25:10 - [1776] - Quote We know there are going to be some problems but we don't really care. We are going to implement it anyway, because.... I want to. Sorry to be blunt but it sounds like somebody in a job role that doesn't have the experience to be there. ( note: it's not just about the game ) According to the way this has been talked about from CCP then this is being rushed. Surely by now you have seen the effects of what happens when game developers rush things? You guys have no need to rush it, we have enough to play with for a few months. There are a lot of arguments both ways, you would think at the very least, this would make the people taking your money to say, lets not rush it we should look into it more, we should test it ourselves . Or at least come to the community and say we have an idea, it's game changing and we don't really know what will happen, we are going to implement it on the main server for a month and use that as feedback. If A happens then it stays, if B happens then we will review it. But instead we have, what seems like a personal agenda to get something into the game, rather than something that is better for the game in general. And before you get all excited this actually goes both ways. I think these changes will be bad but I actually have no idea. Even if it turns out to be the best EVE change ever I would still expect it to go through more testing than asking a forum full of over opinionated nerds what they think. Rushed ideas are not resolved ideas. no matter how good they may seem.
Pinky Feldman Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 748	Posted - 2014.12.23 23:28:18 - [1777] - Quote The d-scan immunity really won't give Combat Recons any extra capabilties over the current Force Recons in regards to ganking. Setting up inside of a plex: Combat Recon: Can setup inside of plex off d-scan with tackle mods overheated waiting for someone to fall into their trap. Force Recon: Can setup inside of a plex cloaked off d-scan and decloak when a target appears on short scan to overheat mods. Ganking someone inside of a plex. Combat Recon: Hidden from d-scan as you hit the acceleration gate. Visible to target for 5-10 seconds in warp as you land before you can actually tackle anything. Red flashy warping in more likely to trigger warp out reflex for unsuspecting target. Force Recon: Appear on d-scan for 4-6 seconds as you hit the gate then recloak. There is chance you land out of range of beacon and can maneuver into position. Even if beacon decloaks you, at most you have the 5-6 second lock delay depending on skills. Better element of suprise. 4-6 seconds of appearing on d-scan really isn't much at all and unless the person is spamming the d-scan button, you're probably going to go unnoticed. If the person is spamming the d-scan button and paying that much attention, then they're already dead anyways. I think the most disappointing thing here is the lack of any meaningful changes. Sig radius isn't really that big of a deal for small gang stuff. Speed is absolutely everything, and these things will still get kited or brawled down by all flavors of cruiser. I doubt there are many people here who remember how much fun the dual neut HML shield Curse used to be in small gang/solo PVP. I'd link some of the TenTron Curse solo PVP videos here, but it appears he took his youtube channel down. The moar you cry the less you pee
Roel Yento Death Row inc 41	Posted - 2014.12.23 23:37:38 - [1778] - Quote Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: Roel Yento wrote: Equto wrote: Generaloberst Kluntz wrote: Equto wrote: That would be applicable if I was a bear but im not, sorry to ruin your name calling. Removing local is not a cure for anything A PVPer fearing local chat removal. Where have I said I fear it? Maybe you can point me to that comment. I said it solves nothing and does nothing but allow you to get cheap ganks on bears. I would rather have meaningful small gang combat than managing to get a drop on a 30 day old character because he has no idea what local is. D-Scan removal allows me to strategically make perches and engage fights that I have a rough idea at winning rather than no local which would require 99% of eve both for wars, lowsec, and nullsec to get more alts in cloakies to sit on gates. EDIT: Not to mention me spending extra time in each system to determine if anyone is there when looking for kills in an area of space with only a few major hotspots every 10 jumps or so. I would rather jump in and know, hey there isn't anyone here, lets not launch probes. Removing local adds the necessity of having scouts in your fleets that know how to actually scout. It also makes having a combat prober in your fleet that knows how how to do so important. It also means you need to pay attention to details and people that actively scout help keep your pve efforts safer as opposed to relying on local chat to know if you are safe or not. It makes eve harder having no local but it also increases the chances of fights happening lopsided or equal. What is wrong with spending time hunting for people? Right now you jump into system and know your risk level. No local, the side with better intel and planning has upper hand. Also, you don't need alts on all gates, it's okay to take the chance that no one swings by or pay a new player in corp or alliance to watch gates while you make money. Could even ask someone ship spinning to listen for sound. Not wanting to take risks or share profits is because of greed, not because of needing alts to scout. I kind of agree but the reason why I dont see this viable is because you are asking someone to get on a Prober (if you want to do it fast) and that leaves this person out of the fight. No one want to scout their ass off and not get into the fight and this comes from a person who prefer role in a fleet is scouting, so people will end up just having an alt doing it and if this change forces you to have a second account active I dont think is a great idea T3's have a subsystem for scanning, can still shoot so they can be on killboards if that is what people want. Also confessor can fit combat probes i hear though haven't flown one. Some drone ships would be good candidates for probers or some ewar ships too.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1295	Posted - 2014.12.23 23:39:30 - [1779] - Quote I personally think i can use the dscan immunity to get cheap gankg more often that with a cloak. Also, its not very common to arrive on a gate and the person inside not know you are there. With a hostile in system its not uncommon to spam scan. What i am curious about, is why the change at all. There has been no clarification of its intended purpose. Please tell me its not just to keep a few staff members busy since they dont have any better changes to work towards.
Pinky Feldman Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 748	Posted - 2014.12.23 23:47:47 - [1780] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: I personally think i can use the dscan immunity to get cheap gankg more often that with a cloak. Also, its not very common to arrive on a gate and the person inside not know you are there. With a hostile in system its not uncommon to spam scan. What i am curious about, is why the change at all. There has been no clarification of its intended purpose. Please tell me its not just to keep a few staff members busy since they dont have any better changes to work towards. Yeah though if you're paying that much attention to d-scan you'll have no problem simply warping out as they land on grid. Whenever I ran plexes, half the time I didn't even bother spamming d-scan since you generally have plenty of time to alt tab to your client and click the warp button as soon as you catch the hostile landing in your plex. Even then, if you pre-align and activate the gate right as you hit the limit of your decloak, you can re-cloak almost immediately. If you're not dilligent enough to do this with Force Recons, then you're probably not going to be that effective setting traps with the new Combat Recons. These have more significant implications for wormhole PVP than anything else really. The moar you cry the less you pee

epicurus ataraxia Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude 1452	Posted - 2014.12.24 00:19:42 - [1781] - Quote Re the caldari recons, Just a quick query, is the lack of velocity bonus on rapid lights just a typo and just copying from the old bonus? If you are going to favour rapid lights as you seem to be doing by changing from rate of fire to damage, I imagine that was your intention? As a suggestion, rather than limiting bonused damage to kinetic, could you please make it kinetic and thermal missiles to give some combat choice? This choice has Worked on the guristas ships. Disappointed on the removal of T2 resists, that felt approriate as an improvement. Possibly the traditional caldari 4% resist bonus per level would be an acceptable alternative There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
Casirio Rolled Out Black Legion. 561	Posted - 2014.12.24 00:19:48 - [1782] - Quote 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
Lvzbel Ixtab 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 47	Posted - 2014.12.24 00:21:35 - [1783] - Quote Pinky Feldman wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: I personally think i can use the dscan immunity to get cheap gankg more often that with a cloak. Also, its not very common to arrive on a gate and the person inside not know you are there. With a hostile in system its not uncommon to spam scan. What i am curious about, is why the change at all. There has been no clarification of its intended purpose. Please tell me its not just to keep a few staff members busy since they dont have any better changes to work towards. Yeah though if you're paying that much attention to d-scan you'll have no problem simply warping out as they land on grid. Whenever I ran plexes, half the time I didn't even bother spamming d-scan since you generally have plenty of time to alt tab to your client and click the warp button as soon as you catch the hostile landing in your plex. Even then, if you pre-align and activate the gate right as you hit the limit of your decloak, you can re-cloak almost immediately. If you're not dilligent enough to do this with Force Recons, then you're probably not going to be that effective setting traps with the new Combat Recons. These have more significant implications for wormhole PVP than anything else really. Some more speed would go a long way in opening up them to useful small gang roles like they used to have before the other Cruisers got massive speed buffs. You know u cant cloak anymore inside a plex within 30km of the beacon, secondly most people here complaining about FW space are no talking about farming, most people that farm are stab anyways we are talking about actual pvp inside plexes and outside
Ehud Gera Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 40	Posted - 2014.12.24 00:21:46 - [1784] - Quote h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral wrote: We know there are going to be some problems but we don't really care. We are going to implement it anyway, because.... I want to. Sorry to be blunt but it sounds like somebody in a job role that doesn't have the experience to be there. ( note: it's not just about the game ) According to the way this has been talked about from CCP then this is being rushed. Surely by now you have seen the effects of what happens when game developers rush things? You guys have no need to rush it, we have enough to play with for a few months. There are a lot of arguments both ways, you would think at the very least, this would make the people taking your money to say, lets not rush it we should look into it more, we should test it ourselves . Or at least come to the community and say we have an idea, it's game changing and we don't really know what will happen, we are going to implement it on the main server for a month and use that as feedback. If A happens then it stays, if B happens then we will review it. But instead we have, what seems like a personal agenda to get something into the game, rather than something that is better for the game in general. And before you get all excited this actually goes both ways. I think these changes will be bad but I actually have no idea. Even if it turns out to be the best EVE change ever I would still expect it to go through more testing than asking a forum full of over opinionated nerds what they think. Rushed ideas are not resolved ideas. no matter how good they may seem. I've said a lot in this forum, but this guy said everything right^^
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 953	Posted - 2014.12.24 00:23:09 - [1785] - 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?
Lvzbel Ixtab 0ne Percent. Odin's Call 47	Posted - 2014.12.24 00:27:21 - [1786] - Quote Ehud Gera wrote: h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral wrote: We know there are going to be some problems but we don't really care. We are going to implement it anyway, because.... I want to. Sorry to be blunt but it sounds like somebody in a job role that doesn't have the experience to be there. ( note: it's not just about the game ) According to the way this has been talked about from CCP then this is being rushed. Surely by now you have seen the effects of what happens when game developers rush things? You guys have no need to rush it, we have enough to play with for a few months. There are a lot of arguments both ways, you would think at the very least, this would make the people taking your money to say, lets not rush it we should look into it more, we should test it ourselves . Or at least come to the community and say we have an idea, it's game changing and we don't really know what will happen, we are going to implement it on the main server for a month and use that as feedback. If A happens then it stays, if B happens then we will review it. But instead we have, what seems like a personal agenda to get something into the game, rather than something that is better for the game in general. And before you get all excited this actually goes both ways. I think these changes will be bad but I actually have no idea. Even if it turns out to be the best EVE change ever I would still expect it to go through more testing than asking a forum full of over opinionated nerds what they think. Rushed ideas are not resolved ideas. no matter how good they may seem. I've said a lot in this forum, but this guy said everything right^^ Yes well said, just because CCP is in a 8 week cycle doesnt mean they have to release game changing mechanics every time, i mean cmon how many changes can you put up every 8 weeks. Now CCP feels force to release big stuff every 8 weeks.
Cant tell Ifserious Caldari Provisions Caldari State 6	Posted - 2014.12.24 00:50:40 - [1787] - Quote Pulling the T2 resist is a terrible idea.....CCP WHY... Recons are not used because they die way to fast ,its no fun to land on grid and get insta blapped before even having the chance to play :( Remove the immune to D-scan and keep the t2 resists or somthin...
Rhavas Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 357	Posted - 2014.12.24 00:53:00 - [1788] - 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. In other words, "We're going to nerf the **** out of the T3 tank." sigh Again, Rise, please balance for wormholes too, not just massive null blobs. Author of Interstellar Privateer Shattered Planets, Wormholes and Game Commentary
Ehud Gera Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 40	Posted - 2014.12.24 00:55:50 - [1789] - Quote Overwhelming feedback might help guys... Rise plz keep t2 resists and remove the DSCAN immunity +1 It seems like we're not being heard, so let's keep the thread naught alive
Casirio Rolled Out Black Legion. 561	Posted - 2014.12.24 01:04:30 - [1790] - Quote Rhavas wrote: 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. In other words, "We're going to nerf the **** out of the T3 tank." sigh Again, Rise, please balance for wormholes too, not just massive null blobs. yeah, I spent most of my Eve time in wspace. and flying t3's for literally every fight is ***** lame. it's gonna happen whether wormholers or nullsecers like it or not. or lowsecers like it or not. why dont you * at CCP about bringing T2 cruisers like RECONS into play, so they can actually be used. and maybe T3's wont get nerfed to ** and everyone will be happy. seriously whining about T3's is the wrong approach.

Cant tell Ifserious Caldari Provisions Caldari State 7	Posted - 2014.12.24 01:06:39 - [1791] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. 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. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ Thats fine..... we will continue to fit damps and TDs to our t1 frgs, domi and ishtars. Good fight ccp rise good fight.
Solaris Vex Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 3	Posted - 2014.12.24 01:08:44 - [1792] - Quote Most combat recons are still inferior to their t1 counterparts, the rook for example can only get ecm optimal range out to ~65km compared to the blackbirds more then 100km optimal. The descan immunity is only useful in very niche situations, like being a hard to find fighter bunny in anons and running relic/data wormhole sites with less risk.
Rhavas Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 359	Posted - 2014.12.24 01:09:28 - [1793] - Quote Casirio wrote: Rhavas wrote: 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. In other words, "We're going to nerf the **** out of the T3 tank." sigh Again, Rise, please balance for wormholes too, not just massive null blobs. yeah, I spent most of my Eve time in wspace. and flying t3's for literally every fight is ***** lame. it's gonna happen whether wormholers or nullsecers like it or not. or lowsecers like it or not. why dont you * at CCP about bringing T2 cruisers like RECONS into play, so they can actually be used. and maybe T3's wont get nerfed to ** and everyone will be happy. seriously whining about T3's is the wrong approach. I think in the original post that could happen. You'd notice if you'd been paying attention that this is in response to the second round of alterations, where it has now been backpedaled far enough that the only way to achieve balance now is nerfing the crap out of T3s, rather than finding a balance as the original plan sounded like it was going. I support the original proposal, with increased resists. Author of Interstellar Privateer Shattered Planets, Wormholes and Game Commentary
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1676	Posted - 2014.12.24 01:11:15 - [1794] - Quote I listened to Podside 266 - yes please for cloaking granulation! Local cloak and d-scan cloak would be awesome. And a special upgrade for the Nestor d-scan so it can detect cloaked ships and decloak them if it isolates to 5 degrees! Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Alruan Shadowborn InterSun Freelance SONS of BANE 26	Posted - 2014.12.24 01:15:23 - [1795] - Quote Shaleb Heworo wrote: It is NOT aybout fw complexes. If you enforce uncertainty on people they will just retreat to the next level of relative certainty meaing they won't warp to places without preprobing it. This will severly limit the freedom of movement for small gangs and solo players since the smaller the gang the less likely they can afford a dedicated prober/fit an expanded probe launcher on their breacher You have to give people TOOLS that create margin for error and you have to create and environnement where people move freely under the pretense of relative security. I'm sorry, but there seem to be basic misundertstandings of player/human behaviour that drive these changes. It's really hard to watch. CCP Rise already said it, albeit in a different way, and he is not wrong. Once the dust settles, people will choose the path of simplest execution. Could they probe out every entry and exit, yes, will they, probably not as people fly a plethora of ships not just Recon's and so it is simpler to take a risk. If no-one was prepared to take a risk in this game, like everyone keeps whining, then there would be no losses, as every engagement is a risk. Everyone bangs on how a whole range of ships are broken, Inties, the Ishtar, T3's, etc. So why do we not only see those being flown?? People still make choices, and over time laxity leads to people ignoring even obvious dangers, ie i know there is a gate camp but my inty will land at 0 and get through the gate before they can do anything. Then on the otherside they get pointed by the instalocker and die. Sh\|t happens Maybe rather than whining, people should work on a counter to these ships too
scimichar Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 232	Posted - 2014.12.24 01:24:56 - [1796] - Quote Thanks for giving the Rook a kinetic only bonus. Now it won't ever be useful against most ships.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 886	Posted - 2014.12.24 01:26:27 - [1797] - Quote Alruan Shadowborn wrote: Everyone bangs on how a whole range of ships are broken, Inties, the Ishtar, T3's, etc. So why do we not only see those being flown?? If you ever flew in nullsec, you'd see that 90% of the ships you see taking gates are now interceptors (if only there were a mechanic where every time a travel-fit inty warps out of a camp with impunity, the devs responsible for nullifying them got punched in the unmentionables-- it's certainly what I want to do when I watch them insta-warp off), that Ishtars and their ridiculous droneboat bretheren (VNI, Gila, and to some extent the Worm) are by far the most compelling ships to bring to a small gang fight, outclassing every other HAC / faction cruiser option by miles (they do tons of damage to targets of any size, don't have to worry about optimal ranges or tracking, don't use ammo, get tons of free utility highslots, and their one downside-- destructible drones-- was dealt with when CCP added mobile depots that allow you to use a communal prowler alt to shove unlmited numbers of replacement drones into the ships if you somehow lose them). T3s are also broken in that they do everything a force recon does, but do it while being un-catchable while traveling (yay interdiction nullification) and actually fitting a tank, at the expense (if you can call it that) of shorter EWAR range (but not short enough to render them unviable).
Tiberian Deci Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 30	Posted - 2014.12.24 01:40:08 - [1798] - Quote So I'm new to this thread, but has anyone chimed in on how it may be abused in wormholes? Does that sound a little carebear-y, yes. But If I'm willing to put the time in to watching my dscan to stay safe its kinda scummy that there will be one class of ships I can't do anything about.
Alruan Shadowborn InterSun Freelance SONS of BANE 26	Posted - 2014.12.24 01:42:23 - [1799] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: Alruan Shadowborn wrote: Everyone bangs on how a whole range of ships are broken, Inties, the Ishtar, T3's, etc. So why do we not only see those being flown?? If you ever flew in nullsec, you'd see that 90% of the ships you see taking gates are now interceptors (if only there were a mechanic where every time a travel-fit inty warps out of a camp with impunity, the devs responsible for nullifying them got punched in the unmentionables-- it's certainly what I want to do when I watch them insta-warp off), that Ishtars and their ridiculous droneboat bretheren (VNI, Gila, and to some extent the Worm) are by far the most compelling ships to bring to a small gang fight, outclassing every other HAC / faction cruiser option by miles (they do tons of damage to targets of any size, don't have to worry about optimal ranges or tracking, don't use ammo, get tons of free utility highslots, and their one downside-- destructible drones-- was dealt with when CCP added mobile depots that allow you to use a communal prowler alt to shove unlmited numbers of replacement drones into the ships if you somehow lose them). T3s are also broken in that they do everything a force recon does, but do it while being un-catchable while traveling (yay interdiction nullification) and actually fitting a tank, at the expense (if you can call it that) of shorter EWAR range (but not short enough to render them unviable). Thanks for making my point. There are still wide ranges of ships used, all the tears are because people might need to change their playstyle or do something different, the horror. You are right though, I am not a GÇ£super-leet blue donut pvperGÇ¥ and I am sure I will die to some of these, but I bet I will die to plenty of other things too. You can understand why DevGÇÖs move on from CCP from time to time with the toxic community that whines about EVERYTHING Things will change, people will adapt, welcome to EVE
Dun'Gal Myriad Contractors Inc. 172	Posted - 2014.12.24 01:46:51 - [1800] - Quote Dscan immunity sounds awesome, it's fresh, interesting and adds a new dimension to both solo and fleet combat. It's a good change, and if you argue otherwise, you need your head checked. Getting rid of the resists on combat recons is... a bit of a kick in the junk. You want to make them more viable/used platforms, but instead you make them significantly more vulnerable (especially for ships which are typically pretty light on the tank anyway.) I fail to see the logic here, but if it was to be a choice between dscan immunity and lighter tank.... I guess I can accept a lighter tank, though not happily. Updated changes to the pilgrim are a step in the right direction but I still don't see that as being much of an improvement. Giving it range is kinda meh, as in most cases, particularly for the solo pilots they want to be up close and personal anyway, abusing tracking scripts and neuting to take little to no damage. Reducing the neut strength (even if not as harshly) and giving it a marginal boost in range is a bit silly for the reason I just posted. It's generally going to want to be up close and personal with it's target and for those that can effectively stay outside of that range, well the marginal increase in neut range isn't enough for it to make any difference for the pilgrim, it's still getting kited and killed in the end. I can see some edge cases where having that extra range might be nice for scram kiting but those will be some rare engagements for the pilgrim indeed. TL;DR I think your original proposal was a much better proposal than your recently updated changes, and in the case of the pilgrim I think you need to go back to the drawing board entirely.

Marlona Sky Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 5831	Posted - 2014.12.24 01:53:05 - [1801] - Quote Tiberian Deci wrote: So I'm new to this thread, but has anyone chimed in on how it may be abused in wormholes? Does that sound a little carebear-y, yes. But If I'm willing to put the time in to watching my dscan to stay safe its kinda scummy that there will be one class of ships I can't do anything about. Bro, do you even combat probe? The Paradox
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1298	Posted - 2014.12.24 01:58:04 - [1802] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: Tiberian Deci wrote: So I'm new to this thread, but has anyone chimed in on how it may be abused in wormholes? Does that sound a little carebear-y, yes. But If I'm willing to put the time in to watching my dscan to stay safe its kinda scummy that there will be one class of ships I can't do anything about. Bro, do you even combat probe? And the award for CCP sycophant of the thread goes to ...
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 27	Posted - 2014.12.24 02:03:17 - [1803] - Quote Infrequent wrote: I retract my previous applause of these changes, some of them are great still yes, but the T2 resist profile was needed to make recons actually viable in a fleet or in most situations infact. Yes you can still trick a fleet into thinking there is no recon on field (If they're dumb enough not to put eyes on you) but they will still die as soon as they see you on field and they will still die solo to that ratter they were trying to catch for their friends to gank. So we will still see swarms of EWAR T3s and nothing will change (Yes yes they're going to rebalance T3s but not to the point where you would pick T1 tank over actual tank). Honestly if you want a combat recon to be any form of combat ship, give it the resists, if you want to give a stealth gimmick, give it to the force recon. Don't screw over both. -1 The more I've been considering the updated post from CCP Rise I think my initial instincts were correct that the T2 resists were really what I was keen to have on the Recon boats. The d-scan immunity could in fact be a pretty nifty tool to use for small gang operations or raiding mining areas and w-space. I will have a pretty fun time of working out ways to take advantage of the new capability. That said, I saw far more utility in the updated resistance profile, cap & fitting room, and adjustment in weapons profiles...particularly for the Combat Recon ships. A few other folks have mentioned it but really they are E-War cruisers, not actually recon specialists. They often get called as primary targets for upon arrival on the field and rightly so - they can create some havoc if not dealt with quickly. If you do a quick cost benefit analysis of the Blackbird vs a T2 Recon ship...right now not a lot of incentive to fly the dramatically more expensive and arguably equal or lesser effective ship. If you increase it's survivability noticeably (comparable resists to HACs and perhaps the MWD sig reduction) that would be worth the outlay in ISK per ship. Even with some tune-ups to a few stats and the d-scan immunity its just not that attractive of ship without the combat survivability. I'm positive that some folks will have some creative uses for the ship and see some nice successes i'm just not convinced it's going to be worth the SP investment for the Combat Recons. I think if you split the difference and the Combat Recons were supplied the HAC level combat survivability and you left the Force Recons truly rely on stealth and cloaking for survivability that would be a very solid way to provide some unique options for the Recon class ships. Let the d-scan immunity go in as well and monitor that ship capability closely and see if that's what needs to truly be tuned, removed, or iterated on but don't walk away from the opportunity to supply some real interest and life into the Recon Class ships. "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
Murdok46 State War Academy Caldari State 0	Posted - 2014.12.24 02:11:28 - [1804] - Quote bring back the T2 RESISTS ... would be great to fly a recon in a fleet but i dont guess they want recons used in fleets ... Just t3's???
Gallowmere Rorschach Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation 920	Posted - 2014.12.24 02:19:47 - [1805] - Quote Ehud Gera wrote: Overwhelming feedback might help guys... Rise plz keep t2 resists and remove the DSCAN immunity +1 It seems like we're not being heard, so let's keep the thread naught alive Yeah, this is exactly what I was worried about, when I posted my feedback a couple of days ago, after Rise said "Dscan immunity is staying, but EHP is being looked into". Seriously, for the love of god, if it has to be one or the other, drop the immunity and give us the resists.
Jonah KaMate Aesir Executive Solutions 0	Posted - 2014.12.24 02:22:31 - [1806] - Quote I'm not a big fan of the d-scan immunity but I'll learn to work around it in complexes or when i'm mining. I do think the combat recon ships should get better eHP with the buffed damage resistances. For most applications the d-scan immunity is partially useful at best and I'll just run a T1 EWAR cruiser because I assume i'll get popped at first opportunity. Bottom line: If the T2 resists were staying I would probably put some real training into Recon ships...the d-scan immunity just isn't that useful to me in how I play to make it an acceptable choice instead of T1 varieties.
Noxisia Arkana Deadspace Knights 411	Posted - 2014.12.24 03:07:42 - [1807] - Quote I will go ahead and throw my opinion in here: Not a fan of dscan immunity. It makes flying the ship neat in a fleet because you can sit on a plex and surprise the hell out of a lot of solo players. Hide fleet numbers, etc. It makes flying the ship fun but kind of defeats the purpose of all of the tools we rely on in wh space. -1
h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral EVEL Tendancies 6	Posted - 2014.12.24 03:13:17 - [1808] - Quote The thing that bugs me is, Recon ships could be so damn cool, with a bit of thought and some effort they could have a proper place in EVE fleets and solo. But they are broken and we are being told they are being fixed under the guise of a new game mechanic by a dev team with thinned ranks over the holiday season. It's not that I am not grateful. That's hard word and dedication we can all respect, but that's hard to see when something is being rushed out the door. Recons are broken.... Adding Dscan immunity won't fix it. Recons are not going to be fixed, they are going to be edited to the point where they are different from before, because it was on their list of stuff to do. I expect them to be looked at again when the next recon fix comes by in a few years. I would love to see CCPs notes for Recon goals, in fact I would love them to release their goal lists before they release how they are going to achieve them. ( that's just me though i'm sure. ) DSCAN Immunity : it's a new mechanic which although shows new and innovative thinking sets a dangerous standard. What other ships will get this in the future? How will the creative EVE pilots use this to guarantee kills. I for one am going to sit on small plex gates and wait for frigates to warp in and make them pop while they can't lock me. If it does need to be nerfed how will this be handled ? If it does need to be removed then what happens to combat recons without that skill? Will it even get nerfed if it proves to be OP, Ishtars anyone? Can't you just add a cloak to them but change the bonuses it gets from a cloak? that way CCP still get their tear making machines and we don't have to invent a new mechanic just for one ship, everybody is happy. Resists : I don't think I know enough about fleet mechanics to understand just how important HAC level resists are but I do know that solo a recon with those resists could be far too strong when you add in EWAR to that mix. IMO squishy with range bonuses and only damage application bonuses would be okay. Not really a solution but my point is that recons are broken because of the way they are used and treated, Strip them back to just the hull type then make a list of what you want recons to do and how you want them to be used in general then add bonuses and slot layout to them and make them an actual viable ship, they start to look pretty damn good I reckon. Also cause I have nowhere else to put this... Whats up with amar ewar? - All other races ewar effects all ships 100% of the time - Tracking disrupt only works on guns not missiles - Neuts only work if they are active tanked and use heavy cap modules. ( unless you can cap them out ) - Neuts also are on ships that use cap for armor repairs and lazors, the two heavy ass cap using modules, they are also high slot modules. Always wondered.
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 29	Posted - 2014.12.24 04:18:59 - [1809] - Quote h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral wrote: ... Resists : I don't think I know enough about fleet mechanics to understand just how important HAC level resists are but I do know that solo a recon with those resists could be far too strong when you add in EWAR to that mix. IMO squishy with range bonuses and only damage application bonuses would be okay. TLDR: Not really a solution but my point is that recons are broken because of the way they are used and treated, Strip them back to just the hull type then make a list of what you want recons to do and how you want them to be used in general then add bonuses and slot layout to them and make them an actual viable ship, they start to look pretty damn good I reckon. ... Reference the resists...really survivability period...it would make them a more formidable ship in solo work, however, a little bit of ECCM goes a very long way in countering ECM. The effects in small gang fights are real but they certainly aren't jamming any more targets or any more effectively just lasting on the field a little longer. They would be far from invincible but certainly more serviceable than they are now. Additionally, they still sacrifice any serious tank lo run their primary functionality. The resists and mild eHP buff gives really gives them more cushion to GTFO or call for logi if you happen to have anything with reps handy. As I noted earlier the d-scan immunity frankly just isn't enough to make you want to run the ships over their T1 cousins for the vast majority of applications or the current Force Recon varieties. Consider this...what if you are trying to make essentially an Electronic Attack Cruiser; in theory it would share a fair amount of mobility and shouldn't be left behind in survivability to apply it's "attack" effects the way other ships apply lethal effects. As for the TLDR - well said and I tend to agree with you. As pointed out, treat it like what it is, a T2 EWAR Cruiser and that has nothing to do with Recon work. The bonuses should focus on applying its effects. If the intent is to make it more of a recon boat then focus the bonuses on that (i.e. bare bones offensive capability, good speed, very low sig, big bonus to scan range and resolution, target painting, cloak, etc). "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
Orvmus ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 7	Posted - 2014.12.24 04:35:23 - [1810] - Quote For the love of all things holy, get rid of dscan immunity and keep the resists. Even better would be putting some thought in to how Recons could be improved instead of just stat buffs and a ****** Cloak for the non-cloaky version. Prior to this change people who are on the ball with d-scan know what they are coming up against, they know when something is creeping up on them. They are rewarded with knowledge for being active and vigilant, this change removes that reward. Can you even see how many people there are against this change?? This entire thread is full of them, it has more replies than things 10 times its age. I mean seriously, it's looking like it will overtake the Jump Drive changes with it's current** post count which should tell you something, the players are rallying and they are telling you that they don't like it. Listen to us for a change. I also want to express how disappointed I am that this is being so rushed, you are saying that there will be problems and that you don't have the time to resolve them by next release. The entire point of this new release schedule is to stop things like that from happening, so that these game changing and possibly game breaking changes are actually fleshed out and the foreseeable problems have been resolved.

HiddenPorpoise Under Dark Sins of our Fathers 292	Posted - 2014.12.24 04:49:10 - [1811] - Quote D-scan immunity is staying because they figured out a chunk of legacy code and they're gonna prove it even if it kills us.
CW Itovuo The Executioners Capital Punishment. 49	Posted - 2014.12.24 04:51:12 - [1812] - Quote Ehud Gera wrote: Overwhelming feedback might help guys... Rise plz keep t2 resists and remove the DSCAN immunity +1 It seems like we're not being heard, so let's keep the thread naught alive Threadnaughts are irrelevant. CCP does what CCP wants to do. The forum is simply a pressure release valve to mitigate the rage. Having said that... My Christmas wish: D-Scan immune seems a bit daft since 4 of the 8 ships get a bonus to Cloakyness. Pilgrim is still not awesome ......Range...Neut amount Curse 37k 30/s Pilgrim 13k 30/s current Pilgrim 25k 22/s CCP proposed Pilgrim 18k 30/s CW's proposed While the increase in range is nice, the reduced nueting efficiency is lame given that the Pilgrim only has 4H spots. That's not a lot of nueting power if you've got a Cloak & Cyno fitted. I've always thought the Pilgrims role is: decloak, scram, "OH HAI!" in local, cyno, neut, wave to fleetmates, loot target wreck. The range increase does little for the surpise/decloak/scram/cyno. On the flip side, in a fleet fight who would want a Pilgrim over a Curse? Less range and less neuting capacity. I'd like to see the Pilgrim gain a high spot, have it's neut range modified to +7.5% per level making a medium neut good to aprox. 18k while retaining it's current drain bonus. Then bump it's scan resolution up above 300, so when it uncloaks, it has a chance to grabbing something before it warps away.
Torgeir Hekard I MYSELF AND ME 115	Posted - 2014.12.24 04:52:15 - [1813] - Quote Soo. Since everyone and their shmother already discussed the rest of the changes, I'm only going to ask this. Okay, so lach gets the fourth low to "get a viable armour tank". ...Meanwhile since force and combat recons will have same resists, we already have a 4low lach. It's called Arazu and will have the very same lows and the very same resist profile. The difference being one has a covops cloak and a covert cyno, the other has the stupid gimmick and 16% more mids. So what's the actual difference between the two? Well, other then arazu being useful in blops.
Cant tell Ifserious Caldari Provisions Caldari State 11	Posted - 2014.12.24 04:58:27 - [1814] - Quote Please CCP keep the t2 resists and get rid of the D-scan immunity if something needs to get changed. Please
CW Itovuo The Executioners Capital Punishment. 49	Posted - 2014.12.24 05:19:56 - [1815] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Have a great Christmas o/ Ah yes, ye ol' stealth Caldari "nerf-bonus". No "free release" is complete w/o it. It's like the gift you receive @ the office Christmas party... the same tin of Fruitcake that's been making it's rounds for the past 12 years. Hooray Caldari !
The Renner Canadian Operations Yulai Federation 59	Posted - 2014.12.24 05:37:01 - [1816] - Quote So the one change recons really needed (increased ehp) gets dropped in favor of some gimmick change, meh.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 888	Posted - 2014.12.24 05:52:54 - [1817] - Quote As an additional complaint, why does the Pilgrim get stuck with terrible range on its primary offensive tool? You don't see the Rapier being stuck with shorter ranged webs than a Huginn. You don't see an Arazu being unable to point as far as a Lachesis. The Falcon and Rook get the same ECM bonus. Man up and give the poor Pilgrim the same neuting bonuses as the Curse. There's no reason for the Amarr force recon to get a special gimping, particularly since you've already gone and taken a dump all over the effectiveness of both their offensive tools (TDs don't work against drones or missiles, the two best small-gang weapons systems at the moment, and ASBs have seriously impacted the effectiveness of neuts vs active tanks in solo / small gang settings).
Torgeir Hekard I MYSELF AND ME 115	Posted - 2014.12.24 06:04:57 - [1818] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: As an additional complaint, why does the Pilgrim get stuck with terrible range on its primary offensive tool? You don't see the Rapier being stuck with shorter ranged webs than a Huginn. You don't see an Arazu being unable to point as far as a Lachesis. The Falcon and Rook get the same ECM bonus. Man up and give the poor Pilgrim the same neuting bonuses as the Curse. Quite frankly, current curse and pilgrim are more or less in a good spot. That is, they are 2 different ships, and each of them has a different use. One is a sneaky U-Boat brick, the other is a WTFPwnzor McKillah for small gangs. Meanwhile the other recons have an identity crisis. Huggin and Rapier are fleet long webs. One a bit more cloaky, the other a bit more tanky. Lach and Arazu are fleet long points. One is a bit more cloaky, the other a bit more tanky. Falcon is a falcon. And rook competes with the primae for the title of an ultimate joke of a ship. The proposed changes will only make it worse, though. The difference will be the one type cloaky and the other type cloaky. And all equally (un)tanky. And a pilgrim will be a curse ******** little brother.
fox targaryen Nordwaffe 3	Posted - 2014.12.24 06:12:00 - [1819] - Quote 10/10 troll on the market speculators; so much for getting recons to be used more in fleets
Cant tell Ifserious Caldari Provisions Caldari State 12	Posted - 2014.12.24 06:35:12 - [1820] - Quote The Renner wrote: So the one change recons really needed (increased ehp) gets dropped in favor of some gimmick change, meh. So true it hurts my eve feelings. We were having so many great patches. I guess we were due for a bad one......

Tira Janau Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 3	Posted - 2014.12.24 06:50:29 - [1821] - Quote CCP "Mouthpiece" Rise is still here and active, good to know. You take a perfectly reasonable change (giving combat recons t2 resists or slot changes and even maybe gasp the ability to do combat), and say naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah. But the crappy, gimmicky and only abuse-able mechanic? Lets just keep that regardless of what the playerbase says, my god Rise. No dscan and cloaking is the cloaky recon's job, how freaking hard is that to accept? You don't need to slap a useless bow on the combat recon; you just have to make the product decent. P.S. Love the rlml change to the rook, still peddling your crappy RLML base to the public.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 889	Posted - 2014.12.24 06:54:09 - [1822] - Quote Torgeir Hekard wrote: Ganthrithor wrote: As an additional complaint, why does the Pilgrim get stuck with terrible range on its primary offensive tool? You don't see the Rapier being stuck with shorter ranged webs than a Huginn. You don't see an Arazu being unable to point as far as a Lachesis. The Falcon and Rook get the same ECM bonus. Man up and give the poor Pilgrim the same neuting bonuses as the Curse. Quite frankly, current curse and pilgrim are more or less in a good spot. That is, they are 2 different ships, and each of them has a different use. One is a sneaky U-Boat brick, the other is a WTFPwnzor McKillah for small gangs. Meanwhile the other recons have an identity crisis. Huggin and Rapier are fleet long webs. One a bit more cloaky, the other a bit more tanky. Lach and Arazu are fleet long points. One is a bit more cloaky, the other a bit more tanky. Falcon is a falcon. And rook competes with the primae for the title of an ultimate joke of a ship. The proposed changes will only make it worse, though. The difference will be the one type cloaky and the other type cloaky. And all equally (un)tanky. And a pilgrim will be a curse ******** little brother. Except the Pilgrim is in a terrible place right now. Its effectiveness has been stealth-nerfed into the ground: - Its neuts no longer affect a big slice of active tanks (most people fitting gimmicky solo ships use ASBs) - Its local tank is no longer competitive with the DPS output of modern ships (lots of T1 stuff has been buffed, and a ton of combat and PvE fits now lean towards drones and missiles-- neither of which the Pilgrim can mitigate) - Its DPS output is pathetic, especially if it has to devote slots to an armor tank I used to fly the Pilgrim way back in the day-- back when people had skillpoint-based troubles fitting perfect ratting ships, when rats weren't programmed to defend ratters by switching targets to gankers, etc-- and even then it was a pretty touch-and-go, niche ship. If you stumbled across the right ratting battleship, you could kill it (barely). I remember engaging a ratting Apoc back in ~2009: I killed it, but it was a very close fight (Pilgrim in structure), and that was against literally the Pilgrim's ideal target (heavily cap-dependent, tracking-limited, only packing a very rudimentary ratting tank, etc). These days they apparently have trouble with un-defended mining barges: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzIoG0MqUxw I'd be fine if they kept the Pilgrim as a U-boat (I'm hard for U-boats), but if they want that to work it needs to get a big bonus to local tanking, an afterburner speed bonus, a lot more DPS, or some combination of the above. As it stands it just doesn't cut it. As for the Curse, well, I can't recall the last time I saw one fielded. I'd be curious to see what its usage numbers are compared to the other recons, but I'd waged it's one of the least-flown T2 cruisers in the game. I've played with fits in EFT, but there's no way to make one useful for small gang work: they're too slow, too fat, and not tanky enough-- especially given how close they have to be to their targets. If Curses did ~2200m/s with a couple of nanos fit and could neut to ~50km instead of ~37km, one might be tempted to fly one. As it is, though, you're stick in a hull that maxes out at 1700m/s, turns like a brick, and has to sit frighteningly close to its targets to be effective. It's sad because cap warfare on a skirmishing platform could be really useful, but because of the way the Curse is implemented it's just not practical as a skimisher.
Wynta State War Academy Caldari State 1	Posted - 2014.12.24 06:59:52 - [1823] - Quote Might as well put in my thoughts even though they probably won't get read. First, lets start with the role of the Recon ships. There are two type, the Force and the Combat Recon. They both share EWAR bonuses, but the Force specializes in Covert Cyno's for BLOP fleets, and the Combat focuses on being an actual combat vessel. These roles, for the most part, are clear if somewhat oddly implemented. Since I focus on Caldari ships I'll use them as examples. The Falcon can fit a Cloak, Cyno, and two guns, or a Cloak or Cyno and 3 Guns. It does receive bonuses to Guns as well as ECM and Cyno. Because of the abysmal damage, it is probably best to use the Falcon for Cynos and ECM only. A well equipped Falcon can have a ECM reach of 100km, far outreaching it's guns range. My understanding of the Falcon is this, it is a forward scout of a Black Ops Fleet or maybe just a normal small, that once the fleet engages, the Falcon can provide some EWAR at a safe range. It is by no means a combat vessel and as such, should rely on aligning as a defense. My suggestion is to move the Falcon and its Force Recon brothers into this more niche role of forward scout. Here are my suggested changes for the Falcon. Caldari Cruiser bonuses: 10% reduction in ECM Target Jammer activation cost 30% bonus to ECM Target Jammer strength Recon Ships bonuses: 20% bonus to Combat Scanner Probe strength 20% reduction in Cloaking Devices CPU requirement 10% reduction in scan time of Combat Scanner Probes. Role Bonus: 80% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator liquid ozone consumption 50% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator duration GÇó Can fit Covert Ops Cloaking Device and Covert Cynosural Field Generator GÇó Cloak reactivation delay reduced to 5 seconds With these changes would be -1 High, better base agility and time to warp. So the standard build would have 3 Highs of Cloak/Cyno/Expanded Scanner. Mids of a Prop Mod, ECM (Or other EWAR), small buff tank. And lows being DCU and other utility (or tank for Armor ships) The Combat Recon is as different to this as the Covert Frigates are to each other. Where as the Buzzard and Falcon would be scouts, the Rook would be like the Manticore. The Rook is the evolution of the Blackbird, a fleet EWAR boat. Because it is supposed to be part of a fleet as Logi is, it has to be able to survive a fleet environment more that just warping at the first sign of aggression. The Combat Recon ship is a HAC that trades damage, and some tank, for utility. Now the HAC is a damage dealer, almost all of its ship bonuses go toward damage. The Eagle gets range and the Cerb gets more damage, then the Rook gets the Utility. That is the Combat Recon role, EWAR while in fleets, and some damage. Here are my suggested changes for the Rook. Caldari Cruiser bonuses: 5% bonus to Light, Heavy Missile, and Heavy Assault Missile Launcher rate of fire 10% reduction in ECM Target Jammer activation cost Recon Ships bonuses: 30% bonus to ECM Target Jammer strength 10% bonus to Light, Heavy Missile, and Heavy Assault Missile max velocity Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners +HAC Resist Profile This would be the initial suggested change plus the addition of light missiles to the ROF bonus to encourage RLML on it. Now the Rook needs a means to survive outside of instantly warp out on yellow boxes so T2 resists are necessary if the Rook doesn't inherit the Blackbird's ECM range. These changes would be the less severe changes that would morph the Rook into a fighting vessel with utility instead of the gun and run vessel that the Falcon would be. Another option would be completely change the Combat Recon's role to Purely a EWAR boat. And that could be done multiple ways but here is one I liked. Caldari Cruiser bonuses: 10% reduction in ECM Target Jammer activation cost 4% bonus to all shield resistances Recon Ships Bonuses: 30% bonus to ECM Target Jammer and Lockbreaker Bomb strength 10% bonus to ECM Target Jammer Range and Lockbreaker Bomb flight time Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners GÇó Can fit Bomb Launcher With this you could add a couple more EWAR bombs, like a bomb that slows in a radius for 5-10sec for Minmatar, one that either warp disrupts for 5-10 for the Gals or a 5-10 sec disruption, and then void bombs for Amarr. Where Stealth Bombers are for hit and run bombing runs, Combat Recons can utilize EWAR bombs in either a bombing run fashion or as part of a normal fleet.
Varren Dar'khel Starforged Ascendancy Order of the Exalted 43	Posted - 2014.12.24 07:17:30 - [1824] - Quote Lose the D-Scan and Keep T2 resists. The fact that we have to argue this hard for a design decision that a toddler could flaws in is pathetic. The D-Scan change fundamentally breaks the available intel tools we use in WH space. And the resists we're the only good change you made, the ships need them. They are T2 ships give them T2 resists. Also fix the Pilgrim and give it +1 High Slot.
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 29	Posted - 2014.12.24 07:22:09 - [1825] - Quote Wynta wrote: snip . Excellent laydown of the issues that have been nagging me about this balance pass on Recons. I do like the proposal for the Falcon in that it's innovative and carves out a clear niche role. I'm not sure it will be much more effective than an Astero or Straitos in the role you desire but I can follow the logic. At it's core, trading tank for cloak is pretty understandable. As for the Rook, I am pretty keen on making it a viable small gang and fleet combat ship (i.e. have some staying power in the fight) but you lost me a bit on the lock breaker bomb and EWAR bomb pieces. I actually think the original proposal that CCP Rise put out on the Rook is a solid idea and wouldn't mind starting with other than the kinetic weapon bonus constraint. For the Rook, I think that could even consider splitting the Recon skill bonus at Jam Strength and 10% to ECM range per level. I'm ok with the missile ROF bonus as long as it includes RLMLS. Any damage bonus really shouldn't be so dependent on a single damage type like this either. Last note but the most important...it needs the buffed resists. It will never run HAC eHP because you'll need those slots to do your EWAR job in a gang or a fleet which really means the most direct way to effect survivability is a bug to the resists. BLUF: Force Recons...the cloaky Falcon Punch and scout is legit. The Combat Recon needs to be a viable combat ship first and then we can get unique capabilities on the table. "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
Wynta State War Academy Caldari State 1	Posted - 2014.12.24 07:35:37 - [1826] - Quote Jaysen Larrisen wrote: Wynta wrote: snip . Excellent laydown of the issues that have been nagging me about this balance pass on Recons. I do like the proposal for the Falcon in that it's innovative and carves out a clear niche role. I'm not sure it will be much more effective than an Astero or Straitos in the role you desire but I can follow the logic. At it's core, trading tank for cloak is pretty understandable. As for the Rook, I am pretty keen on making it a viable small gang and fleet combat ship (i.e. have some staying power in the fight) but you lost me a bit on the lock breaker bomb and EWAR bomb pieces. I actually think the original proposal that CCP Rise put out on the Rook is a solid idea and wouldn't mind starting with other than the kinetic weapon bonus constraint. For the Rook, I think that could even consider splitting the Recon skill bonus at Jam Strength and 10% to ECM range per level. I'm ok with the missile ROF bonus as long as it includes RLMLS. Any damage bonus really shouldn't be so dependent on a single damage type like this either. Last note but the most important...it needs the buffed resists. It will never run HAC eHP because you'll need those slots to do your EWAR job in a gang or a fleet which really means the most direct way to effect survivability is a bug to the resists. BLUF: Force Recons...the cloaky Falcon Punch and scout is legit. The Combat Recon needs to be a viable combat ship first and then we can get unique capabilities on the table. I agree with you I thought that the previous verison of the buff with the DScan immunity and T2 resists were somewhat powerful but not overpowered. I want the Combat Recon to be a combat vessel with EWAR that can survive fleet combat while staying, but should they not do that, just scrap it and make a complete redesign. It needs to work and be fleet viable or it needs to be remade from scratch.
Mei Khlolov The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 13	Posted - 2014.12.24 07:44:26 - [1827] - Quote Tira Janau wrote: CCP "Mouthpiece" Rise is still here and active, good to know. You take a perfectly reasonable change (giving combat recons t2 resists or slot changes and even maybe gasp the ability to do combat), and say naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah. But the crappy, gimmicky and only abuse-able mechanic? Lets just keep that regardless of what the playerbase says, my god Rise. No dscan and cloaking is the cloaky recon's job, how freaking hard is that to accept? You don't need to slap a useless bow on the combat recon; you just have to make the product decent. P.S. Love the rlml change to the rook, still peddling your crappy RLML base to the public. A bitter response like this means he must be doing something right.
Tira Janau Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 3	Posted - 2014.12.24 07:53:56 - [1828] - Quote Mei Khlolov wrote: A bitter response like this means he must be doing something right. If by "right" you mean fudging up? I guess so.
Pinky Feldman Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 750	Posted - 2014.12.24 08:04:11 - [1829] - Quote Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: Pinky Feldman wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: I personally think i can use the dscan immunity to get cheap gankg more often that with a cloak. Also, its not very common to arrive on a gate and the person inside not know you are there. With a hostile in system its not uncommon to spam scan. What i am curious about, is why the change at all. There has been no clarification of its intended purpose. Please tell me its not just to keep a few staff members busy since they dont have any better changes to work towards. Yeah though if you're paying that much attention to d-scan you'll have no problem simply warping out as they land on grid. Whenever I ran plexes, half the time I didn't even bother spamming d-scan since you generally have plenty of time to alt tab to your client and click the warp button as soon as you catch the hostile landing in your plex. Even then, if you pre-align and activate the gate right as you hit the limit of your decloak, you can re-cloak almost immediately. If you're not dilligent enough to do this with Force Recons, then you're probably not going to be that effective setting traps with the new Combat Recons. These have more significant implications for wormhole PVP than anything else really. Some more speed would go a long way in opening up them to useful small gang roles like they used to have before the other Cruisers got massive speed buffs. You know u cant cloak anymore inside a plex within 30km of the beacon, secondly most people here complaining about FW space are no talking about farming, most people that farm are stab anyways we are talking about actual pvp inside plexes and outside I do and I wasn't explicitly referring to killing farmers. Assuming the entire point of d-scan immunity is the element of suprise, it's implied that any target you would attempt to kill is going to want to run because what you're bringing can kill it with ease. My above post was responding to Crosi's claims that it's not very common to arrive on a gate and the person inside not knowing you're there with the point that anyone paying that much attention is going to be able to get away anyways. Getting to the point of being unable to cloak within 30km of the beacon, it's actually better if you land inside the plex cloaked with a 5 second delay before you can lock compared to warping into the plex uncloaked with no lock delay. The element of suprise is much better when you appear out of nowhere on their overview compared to a moving object across their screen which they are more likely to reflexively respond to. The moar you cry the less you pee
Torgeir Hekard I MYSELF AND ME 115	Posted - 2014.12.24 08:12:26 - [1830] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: Except the Pilgrim is in a terrible place right now. Its effectiveness has been stealth-nerfed into the ground: Well, it wasn't so much stealth-nerfed, as it fell prey to the power creep. The thing is, pilgrim desperately needs the neut amount bonus, because 3 (or even 2) unbonused neuts just don't cut it if you want to hunt something bigger than a cruiser. But making it a cloaky curse is a wrong direction. It kinda strays into another ship territory, and if it will be balanced around long neuts, it's most likely going to lose it's U-Boat capabilities even more. Ganthrithor wrote: As for the Curse, well, I can't recall the last time I saw one fielded. I'd be curious to see what its usage numbers are compared to the other recons, but I'd wager it's one of the least-flown T2 cruisers in the game. I've played with fits in EFT, but there's no way to make one useful for small gang work: they're too slow, too fat, and not tanky enough-- especially given how close they have to be to their targets. I've seen some curses and they are pretty annoying in small roaming gangs. And the speed boost will probably help them. But i think one of the reasons they are seldom used is because they scare people away. If you bring a recon with your small gang, your potential targets start to get serious and bring their own heavy stuff But yes, with the advent of neut geddons curse could probably use some range buff.

Shilalasar Dead Sky Inc. 138	Posted - 2014.12.24 08:25:28 - [1831] - Quote h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral wrote: Whats up with amar ewar? - All other races ewar effects all ships 100% of the time - Tracking disrupt only works on guns not missiles - Neuts only work if they are active tanked and use heavy cap modules. ( unless you can cap them out ) - Neuts also are on ships that use cap for armor repairs and lazors, the two heavy ass cap using modules, they are also high slot modules. Always wondered. ecm doesn-¦t work 100% of times and neuts work on supers, sieged and triaged ships.
Cassius Invictus Thou shalt not kill A Nest of Vipers 109	Posted - 2014.12.24 08:44:56 - [1832] - Quote Squatdog wrote: Quote: For the love of all things holy, get rid of dscan immunity and keep the resists. This. Yep. D-scan is nice but resists are so much important. I don't see how this would break a game: now u use e-war fitted t3 instead. I would like to see combat recons used as less tanky but better e-war platforms than t3. But now the tank is so low that it has no point... also youGÇÖre not going to give t3 t1 resists profile are you? For solo work... again: cloaky T3 and stratios are already doing what you're afraid new recons would do. Sure they have e-war, but their tank and dps are rather unimpressive (essentially a solo guy can be ewared but he takes a long time to kill during which time he may stop being solo). It does not kill ishtars either... EDIT: and, you know, in Drones Online Ewar is not that powerful asset anymore...
Alex PROTOSS The First Foundation SOLAR FLEET 2	Posted - 2014.12.24 09:49:47 - [1833] - Quote CCP Rise, maybe you will create a new module (passive in hi-slot) for combat recons that will give them immune to d-scan and reduce resists. And give them back resists profile from HAC's?
Wynta State War Academy Caldari State 1	Posted - 2014.12.24 10:00:56 - [1834] - Quote Alex PROTOSS wrote: CCP Rise, maybe you will create a new module (passive in hi-slot) for combat recons that will give them immune to d-scan and reduce resists. And give them back resists profile from HAC's? Then it would be a cloak. The DScan immunity is best compared to a stealth bombers cloak, invisible and no targeting delay, except for when you are on grid. That is the cloak's greatest strength, not the DScan invisibility but the ongrid invisibility. If your using the Recon offensively, in that you are hunting targets, and for the sake of argument we are doing FW (since that is half of what people are worried about), then when you are in a plex you have sufficent time to warp off if you are paying attention. The problem people have with the invisibility is that they want to be aggressive and drop on someone but they want to know exactly what they are getting into. It doesn't work that way. All you have to do is assume every plex your going into is occupied, if your running with a fleet have a combat prober, fleets usually have a accel gate watcher anyway, and now the Dscan immunity is gone. It isnt like there is no counterplay, because there is plenty, people are just lazy.
Utari Onzo 13. Enigma Project 92	Posted - 2014.12.24 10:25:50 - [1835] - Quote Chiming in to say I don't mind the d-scan changes for combat recons. CCP can keep them or lsoe them, but for the love of god keep t2 resists. New York, Paris, Peckham, Jita 13. is recruiting
Rabkillz Concordiat Spaceship Samurai 3	Posted - 2014.12.24 10:41:55 - [1836] - Quote I literally never post here, but as a long term Lach pilot (My fav ship), insta dieing to a swarm of Ishtars or Tengus was something I learnt to accept...T2 resists is something that we really really need, not dscan invisibility...I've gone from being excited about being some use in large fleet battles to extremly dissapointed. Regardless of resist profile they will die in small gang combat if the opposing fleet does their job properly. Its being implied they wont die, what a load of rubbish, (Give me 99% resists and I'll still die constantly :p) if your annoyed that the opposing guys bought a Lach/Huggin to a small gang fight, don't play fair, kill their logi first and then the recons.
Alex PROTOSS The First Foundation SOLAR FLEET 3	Posted - 2014.12.24 10:51:32 - [1837] - Quote Wynta wrote: Then it would be a cloak. It's not a same, cloak give you immune to combat probes.
5pitf1re 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 1	Posted - 2014.12.24 10:51:41 - [1838] - Quote Please get rid of dscan immunity and get back the t2 resists. Why do you have to make it more complicated than necessary? Just listen to your player base, you know the people that actually play this game and know what's going on.
Mandrozolizus Hauptutus Pancerne Poziomki YARRR and CO 1	Posted - 2014.12.24 11:18:50 - [1839] - Quote I LOVE this tactics of CCP to leave nobody happy: neither those who love T2 resists, nor those who hate dscan immunity. In this scenario everybody is dissatisfied. And this is the way the sales/marketing manager should perform!
Andros Omega PANTH-EON 0	Posted - 2014.12.24 11:22:47 - [1840] - Quote Count my vote for no D-Scan immunity, thats what a cloak is for, and allow T2 resists. I love roaming in a Pilgrim, and I love WH space, but even I don't like the idea of D-scan immunity in W-Space.

Mr Doctor Sex Machineguns 142	Posted - 2014.12.24 11:24:09 - [1841] - Quote Would it be possible to give the Pilgrim a range bonus and an amount bonus BUT the amount bonus only reaches 12km then out beyond that it neuts the normal amount but has the range bonus. Perhaps full curse bonuses might seem too powerful but removing its amount bonus makes it kind of crappy against a lot of targets. That said I'm not sure why curse bonus on pilgrim is OP yet an Arazu that can scram and damp any ship to under its scram range isnt.....
Generaloberst Kluntz Isogen 5 47	Posted - 2014.12.24 11:31:57 - [1842] - Quote RISE Keep up the nice work The trail of tears shows you're in the right direction. Maybe T2 resists? But I don't think it's really that important, I still see lots of Huginn kills in fleets nowadays, meaning that people actually use them a lot.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1299	Posted - 2014.12.24 11:42:30 - [1843] - Quote The Renner wrote: So the one change recons really needed (increased ehp) gets dropped in favor of some gimmick change, meh. Better than that it gets dropped because in combination with the stupid gimmick it becomes too powerful in small scale pvp. Its only a catch 22 because rise already put his foot down on dscan immunity dooming this balance pass on recons to be a complete failure. TBH, recons with t2 resists wouldve been quite a headache even if you could see them coming, so in a way i do agree with rise on that. i just dont get the dscan change specially since its probably one of the major factors making a proper buff to recon tanks undesirable.
Omnathious Deninard Novis Initiis 2633	Posted - 2014.12.24 12:03:18 - [1844] - Quote Generaloberst Kluntz wrote: RISE Keep up the nice work The trail of tears shows you're in the right direction. So negative feedback means there doing something right? Ergo positive feedback means something is broken or OP and therefore is bad feedback. This would mean the only valid feedback is inconclusive feedback which leads to running is circles. To sum things up no feedback is best feedback.
Zurakaru Kino Zurakaru LTD 6	Posted - 2014.12.24 12:20:52 - [1845] - Quote Bah, humbug to the updated changes. The resist profiles would have made the ships interesting again. Oh well. But, this stupid love for Kinetic damage on Caldari ships is just...plain...dumb. Might as well make all missiles kinetic only.
Owen Levanth Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration 363	Posted - 2014.12.24 13:04:34 - [1846] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. 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. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ I'll have to say, why the fear of T2 resists on the recons? They're still a bit light on HP compared to other T2 cruisers and of course, if you go back on full T2 resists I fully expect you to nerf T3s into the ground, because otherwise everyone will go back to T3s and forget recons exist, again. Especially the Pilgrim is ****** over again. Personally, I find it sad and silly how you first give the recons some much needed staying power, then you take a rusty saw and cripple them again. This it totally senseless.
Mr Floydy Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 257	Posted - 2014.12.24 14:14:01 - [1847] - Quote Shame that we've dropped the resists... They'd not have had the staying power of HACs or other T2 ships due to no MWD Sig bonus / base HP other classes have. I guess we'll see how things pan out. I'm liking the Pilgrim change to be a combination of range and strength. Should be a nice potent ship now :)
Niskin League of the Lost 182	Posted - 2014.12.24 14:38:47 - [1848] - Quote I think the revision of the resists says more about what they plan to do with the T3 rebalance than anything else. If they want Recon resists to be below HAC resists then I can't imagine they want T3 resists to be much higher than HAC resists. There has to be some reason to fly each individual class of ship. Recons with HAC resists will always be chosen over HAC's, so that fixes nothing. That's not to say that Recons shouldn't have higher resists, just that balance-wise there should be a difference between the classes. To really know how Recons will balance out long term we need to know what other changes are coming for its competing hulls. But in the meantime I think looking at the balance of Damage versus Tank is where the balance should happen for Recons. D-scan immunity is a game changer, a mechanic to shake things up, that's why it's not being traded for other forms of balance. If a better tank makes the Recons more viable in fleets then I think that makes sense, but the trade off should be in damage output. That addresses most of the concerns of solo pilots, that these things will be solo-pwnmobiles. And fleet pilots will be happy with more tank so they can survive and apply EWAR longer. The damage output of a recon is already negligible in a fleet fight anyway, so a decrease there wouldn't affect them. It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow
raging star Circle Of Chaos 16	Posted - 2014.12.24 14:45:10 - [1849] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. 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. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ I can't understand why you guys are making things so complicated, just keep the t2 resist and do away with the d-scan immunity. And for the love of god almighty stop with the damage specific bonuses.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10932	Posted - 2014.12.24 14:59:03 - [1850] - Quote I'm disappointed in the rollback of hitpoints. Hitpoints was the major thing these ships needed, as being squishy was keeping them from seeing use at almost any scale of combat. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.

Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 22	Posted - 2014.12.24 16:45:14 - [1851] - Quote I've read the last ten pages or so and It is troubling that so many people don't understand the value of the d-scan immunity change. Rise hasn't explained the reasoning for why this is a necessary change but I think I know what they are after and I support it. Its not a gimmick, and its not "broken". It will mean some significant changes in low- and null-sec which will, for once, force you to learn some new techniques. If you have the discipline to change and adapt, making combat recons immune to d-scan will help you, too. Try to think of ways that this change will help you instead of just complaining. O. Faeces
Jean Luc Lemmont Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 507	Posted - 2014.12.24 16:47:04 - [1852] - Quote Bronson Hughes wrote: Jezza McWaffle wrote: With this change originally HAC + Recon fleet was looking very much interesting and viable, now with the reduction to resists ok just go back to T3's since theres still no use for Recons in a fleet. I can understand rolling back the Force Recon buff back to current Combat Recon levels. They're meant to be stealthy support, not front-line support. But if your CCP's is to actually get Combat Recons on the field and in fleets in favor of T3s, they would be much better served by leaving Combat Recons with T2 HAC resists. Without them, folks will just keep flying T3s for fleets and swap to Combat Recons for semi-cloaky ambush situations. I have to agree with this. Drop the Dscan immunity for Combat recons (we really do not need more gimmicky bonuses) - give them the HAC resist profile instead. Adjust the Lach's bonus to a ROF bonus to make it more viable against a wider variety of targets, and I think you can call them done. Will I get banned for boxing!?!?! This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury It's bonuses, not boni, you cretins.
Soldarius Deadman W0nderland The 99 Percent 980	Posted - 2014.12.24 16:52:55 - [1853] - Quote CCP, your terribad forums won't let me use more than 3 quote blocks, no matter if they are nested or not. Get a real forum. Now then. Back to topic... "Let's close the gap between Tech 3s and Recons and make Recons more viable in fleets. We will do this by adding a bonus to D-scans, which won't ever affect fleets. Oh, we're also rolling back the resistances change, which would have made them more viable in fleets. Have fun playing Tech 3s Online." QFT "Not ANOTHER kinetic lock in :(" QFT "How exactly does a black ops rebalance affect the usability of recons in fleet fights?" QFT. It doesn't. Force Recons and T3s use too much jump fuel to be used in more than token numbers. Grookshank wrote: I do not understand the change on the resist profile. Recons will not be fleet viable compared to t3s without a serious buff to their tank, which was one of the stated goal of the balance change to them. QFT. Also, now you will have to gut T3s to the point of uselessness to enable combat recons to resume their role as the harder-to-kill recon. Shaleb Heworo wrote: This pilgrim change mans that it will be the only force recon without a meaningful defense against 30km + pointing inties. and these things are everywhere! It will also lose a lot of control against several targets on the field effectivly making it a bad solo boat again. Also: What about cargo holds? Recons should have big cargo holds to operate behind enemy lines and it also would make them more viable for solo. So I guess they get extra small cargo holds then? It has always been a bad solo boat. It will still be a bad solo boat. But at least now it can neut out a tackler or target at long point range. Inty got you pointed at 30km? Sick some drones on it. Sling shot out or into neut range and kill him. With only a 12km range, it wasn't a reliable tactic except against absolutely terrible pilots. You can also choose to fit either a third neut or an expanded rpobe launcher. The Curse was always the solo neut recon. CCP Rise, I am disappoint. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
sten mattson Virtus Crusade Curatores Veritatis Alliance 80	Posted - 2014.12.24 17:59:51 - [1854] - Quote dropping the one thing that was a major goal in your rebalancing effort - make recons more viable in fleets - just so that that can keep staying off dscan is kind of moot. in the end, what will save your ship more? that the enemy cant scout it until the fighting starts? or that it has more tank than a regular t1 cruiser? also, the pilgrim is slightly better now with half bonuses, but why does it need to loose half the neut bonus? every other recon gets all their full bonuses - force or combat recon. not to mention that every other neut focused ships will have a higher neut amount bonus than the pilgrim, wich is supposed to be the pinnacle of neuting (bhaalgorn excluded). And every other neut bonused ship still have a higher highslot count when full neut fitted than the pilgrim. as for the curse, i still think for it to become an armor tanker it needs another lowslot, or its t2 resists back :P IMMA FIRING MA LAZAR!!!
gascanu Bearing Srl. 200	Posted - 2014.12.24 18:11:48 - [1855] - Quote Quote: FALCON Role Bonus: 80% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator liquid ozone consumption 50% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator duration GÇó Can fit Covert Ops Cloaking Device and Covert Cynosural Field Generator GÇó Cloak reactivation delay reduced to 5 seconds Caldari Cruiser Bonuses: 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage 10% reduction in ECM Target Jammer activation cost hey Rise, why the hell do you nerf falcon in to the ground? you remove the optimal ecm bonus and you replace it with this? Quote: 10% reduction in ECM Target Jammer activation cost this is a frigate bonus, not a recon ship bonus... you want to nerf ecm into the ground? ok, your choice, but give caldari recons some kind of usefful bonus not this crap. you give falcon 3 guns, a dmg bonus, and 3 low slots...really? oh, and 2 light drones... is this some kind of joke? how about you decide what role this ship should do in eve? atm the falcon is some kind of lame rook, with a cov op cloak; with these proposed changes there is no need anyone will use a falcon over a rook; same ecm bonuses, lower ehp/dmg, say hello to the new "pilgrim'....
S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 83	Posted - 2014.12.24 18:25:18 - [1856] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: Tiberian Deci wrote: So I'm new to this thread, but has anyone chimed in on how it may be abused in wormholes? Does that sound a little carebear-y, yes. But If I'm willing to put the time in to watching my dscan to stay safe its kinda scummy that there will be one class of ships I can't do anything about. Bro, do you even combat probe? And the award for CCP sycophant of the thread goes to ... And the award for the most lazy pilot goes to ....
S'No Flake WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 83	Posted - 2014.12.24 18:27:45 - [1857] - Quote Mei Khlolov wrote: Tira Janau wrote: CCP "Mouthpiece" Rise is still here and active, good to know. You take a perfectly reasonable change (giving combat recons t2 resists or slot changes and even maybe gasp the ability to do combat), and say naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah. But the crappy, gimmicky and only abuse-able mechanic? Lets just keep that regardless of what the playerbase says, my god Rise. No dscan and cloaking is the cloaky recon's job, how freaking hard is that to accept? You don't need to slap a useless bow on the combat recon; you just have to make the product decent. P.S. Love the rlml change to the rook, still peddling your crappy RLML base to the public. A bitter response like this means he must be doing something right. Oh.. the tears in this thread proves that ^2 :)
Yahrr The Tuskers The Tuskers Co. 22	Posted - 2014.12.24 18:42:39 - [1858] - Quote S'No Flake wrote: Mei Khlolov wrote: Tira Janau wrote: A bitter response A bitter response like this means he must be doing something right. Oh.. the tears in this thread proves that ^2 :) Maybe you should apply as marketing director. I heard that ignoring people is a well valued skill in that profession.
Soldarius Deadman W0nderland The 99 Percent 980	Posted - 2014.12.24 18:52:19 - [1859] - 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. m8, how can you go on about recons possibly becoming too tanky when we have 250k EHP Lokis and Proteii throwing webs and long points out to 80km? I know your background. I know you used to be a small-gang and solo pvper before going to work for CCP. So I understand where you're coming from. But you clearly are not seeing the whole picture. T3s are so much better than combat recons that there is literally no reason to ever use a recon when you have a T3 pilot. They are ridiculously OP. The only reason we don't see more Jamgus is because they don't get a strength bonus. The only reason we don't see more neut Legions is because they don't get a range bonus; the same bonus that the Pilgrim lacked and is now getting. Legions and Proteii don't get TD or damp bonuses. Niether does the Loki get a TP bonus. So they will never be seen. Caldari only needs one EWAR. If you need long-range webs or long points and you have a Loki or Proteus available, you take the T3 because it won't get dumpstered in the first 20 seconds. If you need the covert cloak for blops, np, just slap that covert recon subsystem on and call it good. When you need a tanked cyno ship, you bring the Proteus or Legion and tank it up to 250k EHP because it has a cruiser sigRad and a BS buffer. But when you want ECM, you bring a Falcon. Why? Covert cloak and not terrible range. Covert ships can at least get onto field, into position, and apply its EWAR, even if it is weaker than the combat recons. Combat Recons do not have that luxury. They have shorter range than force recons on their EWAR. So they must by necessity have a better tank. Otherwise there is no reason to field them, especially when T3s can do the job and be reasonably assured of not dying instantly. Whatever buffs are not applied to combat recons will have to be made up in nerfs to T3s. And since T3s are better HACs and Recons than HACs and Recons, you will have to gut them. So split the difference by buffing Recon resists to full T2 levels. Then you can nerf T3s so that they are not better than HACs with some sort of PG and/or tank nerfs, and apply only a slight nerf to their EWAR capabilities. 50% reduction in loki/proteus EWAR bonuses sounds about right. Leave the Tengu and Legion where they are. T3s will be fine if they still have more tank than a recon so long as they aren't just as effective. CCP Rise, if you do not buff combat recon tanks, you will have no choice but to gut T3s for everything. Give Combat Recons full T2 resists. I honestly do not believe they will suddenly become oppressive in small gangs because we already have T3s doing exactly that in both small gangs and large fleets. The need for them to be at closer range means they will be in more danger. Then you can look at T3 EWAR and ECM and maybe make some retroactive adjustments to keep all four lines of ships (F/C Recons, HACs, and T3s) viable and interesting. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Vala Ancalagon Aideron Robotics 1	Posted - 2014.12.24 18:55:43 - [1860] - 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. I don't understand, if one of the goals was to make them viable for fleets, pulling the resists back is counterproductive. You just guaranteed that they won't be used that way now. Also not sure what T3/blops/ewar changes has to do with fleet recon use.

Barrogh Habalu Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 832	Posted - 2014.12.24 18:57:37 - [1861] - Quote Thinking about this, I realized that it may be a good idea to just give us "normal" T2 EWar cruiser in position of combat recon. Resists, 2 racial EWar forms - and that's it, no need for both recons to try to be sneaky... and even more sneaky. I'm not against d-scan immunity or whatever mech like that, I just think that having something simple will go a long way, all the while we can test new ideas on new ships. For example, how about d-scan immunity on, say, Caldari and Minmatar T3 destroyers in one of their configurations?
Grath Telkin Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 2684	Posted - 2014.12.24 19:27:06 - [1862] - Quote Man all these people crying about the resists, if they stayed, why would you ever fly hacs? Damage? In fleets damage output rarely matters, but the ewar utility would have dumpstered the hacs Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Crosi Wesdo War and Order 1301	Posted - 2014.12.24 19:29:06 - [1863] - Quote Orange Faeces wrote: I've read the last ten pages or so and It is troubling that so many people don't understand the value of the d-scan immunity change. Rise hasn't explained the reasoning for why this is a necessary change but I think I know what they are after and I support it. Its not a gimmick, and its not "broken". It will mean some significant changes in low- and null-sec which will, for once, force you to learn some new techniques. If you have the discipline to change and adapt, making combat recons immune to d-scan will help you, too. Try to think of ways that this change will help you instead of just complaining. O. Faeces I know exactly what values they have and how they will be used. That is why i think they are ****.
Bronson Hughes The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration 990	Posted - 2014.12.24 19:31:31 - [1864] - Quote The more I think about it, the more I am opposed to the D-Scan immunity for Combat Recons. Not because I think it's a bad idea, overpowered, "gimmicky", etc., but because it does nothing to meet CCP's stated goals of improving their viability in fleets. It's a pure scouting/solo/recon gang bonus, it doesn't add anything to Combat Recons in terms of fleet viability when T3s are available that will do the job better, in a far more survivable platform. CCP, drop the D-Scan immunity bonus for Combat Recons and give them full T2 HAC resists instead. That will better meet your stated goals without overpowering Combat Recons in small gang situations. EDIT: To be perfectly clear, I'd be fine with Combat Recons keeping the D-Scan Immunity bonus and getting the full T2 HAC resist profile. It just seems that CCP isn't okay with them keeping both, so if CCP has to choose, I'd rather have the one that will better meet their stated goals. If you're looking for an appropriate platform to grant D-Scan immunity, consider Electronic Attack Frigates. They are sufficiently high-tech to warrant the bonus, it would give them additional an additional role as non-cloaky gang scout, and it would put your shiny new bonus into play. CCP, please consider this. (In addition to compensating for the Lachesis having only 4 hardpoints and no damage bonus.) CCP Falcon's thoughts on suicide ganking. Reading Comprehension: so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I want to create content, not become content.
Ehud Gera Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 49	Posted - 2014.12.24 19:43:20 - [1865] - Quote Barrogh Habalu wrote: Thinking about this, I realized that it may be a good idea to just give us "normal" T2 EWar cruiser in position of combat recon. Resists, 2 racial EWar forms - and that's it, no need for both recons to try to be sneaky... and even more sneaky. I'm not against d-scan immunity or whatever mech like that, I just think that having something simple will go a long way, all the while we can test new ideas on new ships. For example, how about d-scan immunity on, say, Caldari and Minmatar T3 destroyers in one of their configurations? There's a cool thought^ do something new with new ships, then DSCAN immunity can have a downside, like massively reduced tank until you get it switched to combat mode or whatever. Stick with your real goal with recon. Call it an Electronic attack Cruiser, give it fleet ready resists and do some gimmickry with the new t3's (where you can apply downsides to the upside of immunity and not make it a gimmick but a tactical decision point)
Herzog Wolfhammer Sigma Special Tactics Group 5943	Posted - 2014.12.24 19:53:00 - [1866] - Quote Actually the saddest thing about a D-scan immune ship is that the best defense against it will turn out to be the reliable, free, and instant intel of Local. Meaning that Local will never go away or stop being the instant free intel tool that it already is. Bring back DEEEEP Space!
SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 252	Posted - 2014.12.24 20:15:00 - [1867] - Quote Wow CCP Rise that was some bad back-pedalling. 5 less sig radius will have no change result in fleet combat for recons. Scrap the d-scan immunity, give the full t2 hac resist bonus. I was looking forward to this balance pass. Was.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 889	Posted - 2014.12.24 20:28:12 - [1868] - Quote gascanu wrote: Quote: FALCON Role Bonus: 80% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator liquid ozone consumption 50% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator duration GÇó Can fit Covert Ops Cloaking Device and Covert Cynosural Field Generator GÇó Cloak reactivation delay reduced to 5 seconds Caldari Cruiser Bonuses: 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage 10% reduction in ECM Target Jammer activation cost Quote: 10% reduction in ECM Target Jammer activation cost this is a frigate bonus, not a recon ship bonus... you want to nerf ecm into the ground? I don't think the current ship balance team knows how to deviate from having a fixed set of bonuses span a manufacturer's entire range of ships. It's the same stuff I complained about when they first started their rebalancing spree... they're turning EVE into a game where each race has like four basic ships, each duplicated in various sizes. So boring and so ineffective. Individual hulls need to be designed and balanced on an individual basis so they can shine. That said, I also think ECM needs a complete re-work anyway, so there's also that...
Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 22	Posted - 2014.12.24 20:39:50 - [1869] - Quote Crosi Wesdo wrote: I know exactly what values they have and how they will be used. That is why i think they are ****. You know the bonus will be used for solo/small-gang and non-consensual surprises, as well as camping plexes? I'll assume your problem is with the camping plexes part (because no real EVE player opposes solo/small-gang warfare). Why should you get to farm with almost no risk of getting killed in the face... repeatedly... in game? O. Faeces
W Sherman Elric Blackstone Holdings Sev3rance 6	Posted - 2014.12.24 20:48:53 - [1870] - Quote FC you want a EWAR recon or a webby loki? Bring the loki the recon will just die to fast. That was the old answer. The short term answer was "cool bring your EWAR we can actually field them without them going insta pop" The new answer? "Bring the loki the recon will just die to fast" Nice job you morons, you fixed a ship and then you killed it.

SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 253	Posted - 2014.12.24 20:51:40 - [1871] - Quote Eve Proteus: Better to just fly Protus.
Wynta State War Academy Caldari State 2	Posted - 2014.12.24 20:55:29 - [1872] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Man all these people crying about the resists, if they stayed, why would you ever fly hacs? Damage? In fleets damage output rarely matters, but the ewar utility would have dumpstered the hacs Range, HACs have double a recons range in most instances.
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 245	Posted - 2014.12.24 21:05:45 - [1873] - Quote Varren Dar'khel wrote: Lose the D-Scan and Keep T2 resists. The fact that we have to argue this hard for a design decision that a toddler could flaws in is pathetic. The D-Scan change fundamentally breaks the available intel tools we use in WH space. And the resists we're the only good change you made, the ships need them. They are T2 ships give them T2 resists. Also fix the Pilgrim and give it +1 High Slot. There's no change to dscan. 4 ships will be immune, but they arent changing dscan. To say it breaks the tools used in wspace is ridiculous. Combat probes and scouts are used in wspace. Thats 2 tools that arent affected. When I say scouts, I mean a cloaked ship watching the hole.
Stitch Kaneland Ex Astris Opes 91	Posted - 2014.12.24 21:13:43 - [1874] - Quote will these changes be put onto the test server? I'd like to test a few fits out and see if they're viable.
h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral EVEL Tendancies 10	Posted - 2014.12.24 22:03:38 - [1875] - Quote Altirius Saldiaro wrote: [ To say it breaks the tools used in wspace is ridiculous. Combat probes and scouts are used in wspace. Thats 2 tools that arent affected. When I say scouts, I mean a cloaked ship watching the hole. No it isn't, not everybody has multiple accounts and multiple alts and nor should they be forced into it. Dscan at least gave you a chance. If you missed somebody on Dscan and you got ganked it was your fault, now you never had a chance, unless of course you sub a new character. The game mechanics should at least be viable for a single character to play and participate above just being there to get ganked.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10942	Posted - 2014.12.24 22:39:22 - [1876] - Quote h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral wrote: No it isn't, not everybody has multiple accounts and multiple alts and nor should they be forced into it. Nor should it be the sole point of balancing, either. Fun and innovative mechanics should not be held back merely because some people object to non-solo activities. Quote: The game mechanics should at least be viable for a single character to play and participate above just being there to get ganked. Why? Last time I checked, this was a multiplayer game. Choosing to handicap yourself should not merit additional consideration when it comes to game balance. Quote: In contrast to that, the attacker/hunter must also use the tools at his disposal to find and attack the victim. But he must use these tools in a way that does not give him away and does not get him killed by other hunters doing the same. Absolutely none of which aren't 100% mitigated by correct use of d-scan. That's the point of this. To make it so there are more dimensions to this besides "Are they using d-scan or not?" Right now it's really binary, and that is a bad thing. Quote: So, the only people in favour of this mechanic are those that are already doing the ganking. So we are clear, I think ganking is for those that still miss their mouth when they try to eat, but regardless of my thoughts on it everybody should be able to participate, even the special kids. I just think they heave it easy enough as it is.[ /b] Yeah, somehow I have my doubts as to your impartiality here. Just sayin'. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral EVEL Tendancies 13	Posted - 2014.12.25 00:01:30 - [1877] - Quote Quote: Quote: To say it breaks the tools used in wspace is ridiculous. Combat probes and scouts are used in wspace. Thats 2 tools that arent affected. When I say scouts, I mean a cloaked ship watching the hole. Quote: No it isn't, not everybody has multiple accounts and multiple alts and nor should they be forced into it. Quote: Nor should it be the sole point of balancing, either. Fun and innovative mechanics should not be held back merely because some people object to non-solo activities. Ahhh, say what now? Choosing to fund one account is neither objecting to solo activities nor restricting yourself to them. My point was a response to the counter about tools used in wormhole space. For many many reasons you can find yourself solo in a WH doing various activites, if you can afford to have a tag along character that just sits on or in a WH then good for you but your argument goes both ways, Fun and innovative mechanics should not be enforced merely because some people object to solo activities.
h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral EVEL Tendancies 13	Posted - 2014.12.25 00:02:15 - [1878] - Quote Quote: Quote: The game mechanics should at least be viable for a single character to play and participate above just being there to get ganked. Quote: Why? Last time I checked, this was a multiplayer game. Choosing to handicap yourself should not merit additional consideration when it comes to game balance. Where is this choice coming from? it isn't for you to say who can and can't afford to pay for multiple accounts Its also not for you to debate the validity of others choices about how they spend their real life money. Yes this is a multi player game, that means at least one attacker and one defender, or two parties. You and me. you don't have to roam in big fleets just to participate in the multiplayer facets of Eve. Your argument here is about balance? Dscan immunity does not bring balance. Quote: In contrast to that, the attacker/hunter must also use the tools at his disposal to find and attack the victim. But he must use these tools in a way that does not give him away and does not get him killed by other hunters doing the same. Quote: Absolutely none of which aren't 100% mitigated by correct use of d-scan. That's the point of this. To make it so there are more dimensions to this besides "Are they using d-scan or not?" Right now it's really binary, and that is a bad thing. I am finding it hard to understand your sentence structure, are you saying it is 100% mitigated by Dscan? If so then shouldn't Dscan itself be looked at? Shouldn't we be looking at different ways for everybody to survive or get killed? The game is quite old, it is bound to seem binary as we repeat the process so many times. I don't think anybody is suggesting EVE should not evolve but we are suggesting that this change will bring a huge gain by one group of players which have no need for the gain.
h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral EVEL Tendancies 13	Posted - 2014.12.25 00:03:40 - [1879] - Quote Quote: Yeah, somehow I have my doubts as to your impartiality here. Just sayin'. That statement has nothing to do with being impartial. I am however impartial to changes being made. Quote: Impartiality (also called evenhandedness or fair-mindedness) is a principle of justice holding that decisions should be based on objective criteria, rather than on the basis of bias, prejudice, or preferring the benefit to one person over another for improper reasons. The funny thing is I think we all agree that recons need to be updated, I just see gankers so blinded with joy at the change that they can't see or refuse to look at the picture as a whole. Yes Dscan immunity could be cool, but it's not the buff recons need, its just a rushed change under the guise of recon balancing. Also if you are so partial to team activities or just roaming with your 5 alts, then keep dscan immunity and remove combat recons damage dealing potential. So then at least you have an ewar tackle boat that has some tank while you get your other five characters into the WH. Seems like a pretty fair trade of to me.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10943	Posted - 2014.12.25 00:56:23 - [1880] - Quote You screwed up those quotes right royal. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.

h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral EVEL Tendancies 13	Posted - 2014.12.25 01:07:57 - [1881] - Quote Yeah sorry about that, to many wines to figure out what i'm doing.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10943	Posted - 2014.12.25 01:09:40 - [1882] - Quote h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral wrote: That statement has nothing to do with being impartial. I am however impartial to changes being made. No you are not. You have explicitly said that you are against d-scan immunity because it impacts positively on something you don't like. That's about as far from impartial as it's possible to be. Quote: The funny thing is I think we all agree that recons need to be updated, I just see gankers so blinded with joy at the change that they can't see or refuse to look at the picture as a whole. Yes Dscan immunity could be cool, but it's not the buff recons need, its just a rushed change under the guise of recon balancing. Every little bit helps, since they're damned determined to not give them workable hitpoint levels. You seem to be under the assumption that the hitpoint boost would have happened without the d-scan immunity, and you're mistaken. Quote: Also if you are so partial to team activities or just roaming with your 5 alts, then keep dscan immunity and remove combat recons damage dealing potential. So then at least you have an ewar tackle boat that has some tank while you get your other five characters into the WH. Seems like a pretty fair trade of to me. Quit bolding for emphasis on entire paragraphs, it's obnoxious. And no, I'll take the d-scan immunity with a viable dps platform, thanks. Nevermind that I don't run five alts, it's two at most. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
CW Itovuo The Executioners Capital Punishment. 52	Posted - 2014.12.25 01:20:48 - [1883] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Man all these people crying about the resists, if they stayed, why would you ever fly hacs? Damage? In fleets damage output rarely matters, but the ewar utility would have dumpstered the hacs Just can't imagine Shadoo shouting Armor Recons, Armor Recons, ARRRRMMMMOOOOR RECONS. Fleet DPS - totally overrated.
h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral EVEL Tendancies 13	Posted - 2014.12.25 01:47:16 - [1884] - Quote Quote: No you are not. You have explicitly said that you are against d-scan immunity because it impacts positively on something you don't like. That's about as far from impartial as it's possible to be. yes I am. I am against Dscan immunity but I have looked at it objectively and it does weigh strongly in favor of one group which doesn't need such a strong buff causing imbalance. Being impartial also means against imbalance. The Dscan thing doesn't weigh strongly enough in favor of any other activity in EVE for it to be justifiably considered as good for the everybody. Also, I never said I don't like gankers, I actually said it doesn't require much intelligence to do but it is a part of eve, a necessary part of eve too. I would also be against miners not being on Dscan fro example , as that would stack the odds in the other groups favor. Quote: Every little bit helps, since they're damned determined to not give them workable hitpoint levels. You seem to be under the assumption that the hitpoint boost would have happened without the d-scan immunity, and you're mistaken. Every little bit does help. The key word there would be little. Can you point me in the direction to where I made this assumption? Quote: Quit bolding for emphasis on entire paragraphs, it's obnoxious. And telling me what to do isn't? You are just arguing for the sake of it. try to stay on topic fella. Quote: And no, I'll take the d-scan immunity with a viable dps platform, thanks. Of course you will. Ill send you a bib for xmas.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10943	Posted - 2014.12.25 01:54:36 - [1885] - Quote h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral wrote: Being impartial also means against imbalance. And d-scan is unbalanced. It's getting a counter now. Quote: Also, I never said I don't like gankers Let's not be obtuse. Quote: Every little bit does help. The key word there would be little. Can you point me in the direction to where I made this assumption? The part where you called it the wrong buff for recons. You seem to think that if this goes away that they will get the hitpoint buff. And that is not the case. And since it's not the case, I am going to try and live with what we get. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 24	Posted - 2014.12.25 01:57:26 - [1886] - Quote h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral wrote: ... The funny thing is I think we all agree that recons need to be updated, I just see gankers so blinded with joy at the change that they can't see or refuse to look at the picture as a whole. Yes Dscan immunity could be cool, but it's not the buff recons need, its just a rushed change under the guise of recon balancing. ... If people who enjoy the odd gank seem happy about a change like this, it may be because they've watched their hunting opportunities being slowly deteriorated since 2006. Since the faster update schedule has been in effect, these changes have been coming so quickly that we don't have time to reason about it with CCP. The last CSM minutes, for example, contained a nauseating exchange between the CSM and Fozzie that signified the end for several long-standing lifestyles in the game, while giving nothing back to the affected players. Perhaps the d-scan/recon change is their way of address that? Its hard to say. The ironic thing about this d-scan/combat recon change is that there are several good counters to this change in most contexts that will probably net your kind more kills than it will net for griefers, you just need to think about it a bit more and adapt. O. Faeces
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 245	Posted - 2014.12.25 02:24:39 - [1887] - Quote h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral wrote: Altirius Saldiaro wrote: [ To say it breaks the tools used in wspace is ridiculous. Combat probes and scouts are used in wspace. Thats 2 tools that arent affected. When I say scouts, I mean a cloaked ship watching the hole. No it isn't, not everybody has multiple accounts and multiple alts and nor should they be forced into it. .[/b] Apparently you misunderstood me. I never said anything about multiple accounts and alts. I am talking about friends. I understand that most of you are anti-social nerds, probably living with your mother's, but this is an MMO. There are thousands of other players in this game. Go find some friends, form up a fleet, and work together. Dont be scared to make new friends and fly with them.
Feodor Romanov Caldari Special Forces OLD MAN GANG 7	Posted - 2014.12.25 02:34:44 - [1888] - Quote I like DC immunity and I am sure that it will change nothng in FW plexes. Most of things that pilots will do in Combat Recons anyone can do nowdays in Force Recons. And Force ones can cross the jump gates easily. The main thing I expected from Combat Recons is HAC resists and EHP boosts for fleet fights. There will be no HAC resists, I think that is mistake. Tha main problem of Combat Recons is DPS and optimal range. I am afraid Lachesis will become The Shield Solo PVP kiting monster with 70 km optimal range, 300 DPS, 2-3 Damps and 2000+ m/s speed (without links and imps). If that power will not be enough, Lach can make the duo with Arty Huginn: 70km optimal, 300 DPS, 2 webs, 2000 m/s speed. That is very bad! I want to see this pair united in trio with The Holy shield kiting 70km optimal range Curse! Nerf the Hull, boost the shields, change 1 high to med slots and bonus to neuts range from 40% to 60% as Huginn has on webs. Only mad fit missiles on Curse, so Curse do not need them anyway. Also will be awesome, if heated neuts will buff the range but not the amount. Merry Christmas! Holy Curse!
h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral EVEL Tendancies 13	Posted - 2014.12.25 02:48:16 - [1889] - Quote Quote: The part where you called it the wrong buff for recons. You seem to think that if this goes away that they will get the hitpoint buff. And that is not the case. You make an assumption that I made an assumption and call me obtuse? Quote: Apparently you misunderstood me. I never said anything about multiple accounts and alts. I am talking about friends. I understand that most of you are anti-social nerds, probably living with your mother's, but this is an MMO. There are thousands of other players in this game. Go find some friends, form up a fleet, and work together. Dont be scared to make new friends and fly with them. I understood you, for a worm hole corp that's true. Although if I want to run c3 sites solo ( not in a wh corp ) I now have to ask a corp mate to come along and scan probe and a few others to sit on the holes? Are they doing this for free or are we splitting the profits? What if I am in a wormhole corp and my play time sits a few hours outside of the main group of players? I think in that case I should actually just ask in local if there is anybody about and see if they will help me scout , that's how you make friends?
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10944	Posted - 2014.12.25 03:00:50 - [1890] - Quote I would ask you why you're in a wormhole as a casual, solo player without anyone to help you. It's one of EVE's most effort intensive activities. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.

Yahrr The Tuskers The Tuskers Co. 23	Posted - 2014.12.25 03:03:30 - [1891] - Quote Altirius Saldiaro wrote: ...this is an MMO. There are thousands of other players in this game. Go find some friends, form up a fleet, and work together. Are you volunteering for watching one of the entrances to your wormhole location so the rest of the fleet can do it's thing, or do you recruit noobs for that? I'm asking this as this 'defending' will be much like mining, boring as hell and not worth Gé¼15 per month. It will be different in that you can't do it while watching youtube. So in the end it is about alts.
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 520	Posted - 2014.12.25 03:15:53 - [1892] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: ... Individual hulls need to be designed and balanced on an individual basis so they can shine. That said, I also think ECM needs a complete re-work anyway, so there's also that... That seems to be on the horizon. Have patience, the day is nigh. signature
Wynta State War Academy Caldari State 2	Posted - 2014.12.25 03:47:25 - [1893] - Quote Also wanted to throw in that 5 Sig Radius reduction on a shield tank comes out to nothing.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 744	Posted - 2014.12.25 04:00:29 - [1894] - Quote Yahrr wrote: Altirius Saldiaro wrote: ...this is an MMO. There are thousands of other players in this game. Go find some friends, form up a fleet, and work together. Are you volunteering for watching one of the entrances to your wormhole location so the rest of the fleet can do it's thing, or do you recruit noobs for that? I'm asking this as this 'defending' will be much like mining, boring as hell and not worth Gé¼15 per month. It will be different in that you can't do it while watching youtube. So in the end it is about alts. There is a lovely program called OnTopReplica. Check it out. It's free. Basically, it allows you to view all or part of your Eve screen all the time. I generally stick my scouting alts on a gate, on a wormhole, or in a complex, then set up this program so I can view the overview portion of the scouts' screen at all times. If I see something show up on the screen, I alt tab over and take a closer look. It works really beautifully. It enables me to employ all my alts even with only two screens. It even works while you are watching Youtube videos. I know people hate being told to "bring friends" or "get an alt," but Eve is a complex game. One pilot cannot usually do everything necessary to ensure its own survival. That is a good thing. Insisting on solo, especially if you are an established player who can afford to PLEX an alt (or have a real job and some disposable income), is really stupid in an MMO. If you have a philosophical objection to alts, get some friends. When I was a new player, older players let me follow along while they ran missions. I got the loot and salvage, they got company. I'm sure you could find a way to make it worth someone's time to scout for you. Bring friends or get alts. Otherwise, please stop complaining. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Omnathious Deninard Novis Initiis 2638	Posted - 2014.12.25 04:16:33 - [1895] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: Yahrr wrote: Altirius Saldiaro wrote: ...this is an MMO. There are thousands of other players in this game. Go find some friends, form up a fleet, and work together. Are you volunteering for watching one of the entrances to your wormhole location so the rest of the fleet can do it's thing, or do you recruit noobs for that? I'm asking this as this 'defending' will be much like mining, boring as hell and not worth Gé¼15 per month. It will be different in that you can't do it while watching youtube. So in the end it is about alts. There is a lovely program called OnTopReplica. Check it out. It's free. Basically, it allows you to view all or part of your Eve screen all the time. I generally stick my scouting alts on a gate, on a wormhole, or in a complex, then set up this program so I can view the overview portion of the scouts' screen at all times. If I see something show up on the screen, I alt tab over and take a closer look. It works really beautifully. It enables me to employ all my alts even with only two screens. It even works while you are watching Youtube videos. I know people hate being told to "bring friends" or "get an alt," but Eve is a complex game. One pilot cannot usually do everything necessary to ensure its own survival. That is a good thing. Insisting on solo, especially if you are an established player who can afford to PLEX an alt (or have a real job and some disposable income), is really stupid in an MMO. If you have a philosophical objection to alts, get some friends. When I was a new player, older players let me follow along while they ran missions. I got the loot and salvage, they got company. I'm sure you could find a way to make it worth someone's time to scout for you. Bring friends or get alts. Otherwise, please stop complaining. Point is things should not be balanced around bring an alt, because in all circumstances that what d-scan invisibility requires. No one is going to be willing to spen there night in a combat probing ship hitting scan every 10 seconds with a recon filter set. No one will be willin to sit at a WH waiting to tell others that a neutral has entered.
Joshua Milton Blahyi Therapists Inc 58	Posted - 2014.12.25 04:29:52 - [1896] - Quote Omnathious Deninard wrote: Point is things should not be balanced around bring an alt, because in all circumstances that what d-scan invisibility requires. No one is going to be willing to spen there night in a combat probing ship hitting scan every 10 seconds with a recon filter set. No one will be willin to sit at a WH waiting to tell others that a neutral has entered. T3's and D3's can both run probes on a combat fit. No need for an alt if you demand near immunity. Want to run something else solo you take the risk. Most of the carebear complaints revolve around not wanting to share the results of their pve with other people. If you are so opposed to working with other people why even play an MMO?
Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 25	Posted - 2014.12.25 04:31:43 - [1897] - Quote h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral wrote: ... Although if I want to run c3 sites solo ( not in a wh corp ) I now have to ask a corp mate to come along and scan probe and a few others to sit on the holes? Are they doing this for free or are we splitting the profits? ... This line of argument is obviously nonsense. You already have this problem with T3s either alone or in gangs, and having eyes on all of the wormhole entrances is the only thing that would help you in that case -- the prober wouldn't do you any good anyway. The only difference with the recon d-scan change is a few hundred million isk for the hunter. I'm not sure how you are able to confuse these issues, but you should probably give up this line of objection. O. Faeces
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 1884	Posted - 2014.12.25 04:49:57 - [1898] - Quote Omnathious Deninard wrote: FT Diomedes wrote: Yahrr wrote: Altirius Saldiaro wrote: ...this is an MMO. There are thousands of other players in this game. Go find some friends, form up a fleet, and work together. Are you volunteering for watching one of the entrances to your wormhole location so the rest of the fleet can do it's thing, or do you recruit noobs for that? I'm asking this as this 'defending' will be much like mining, boring as hell and not worth Gé¼15 per month. It will be different in that you can't do it while watching youtube. So in the end it is about alts. There is a lovely program called OnTopReplica. Check it out. It's free. Basically, it allows you to view all or part of your Eve screen all the time. I generally stick my scouting alts on a gate, on a wormhole, or in a complex, then set up this program so I can view the overview portion of the scouts' screen at all times. If I see something show up on the screen, I alt tab over and take a closer look. It works really beautifully. It enables me to employ all my alts even with only two screens. It even works while you are watching Youtube videos. I know people hate being told to "bring friends" or "get an alt," but Eve is a complex game. One pilot cannot usually do everything necessary to ensure its own survival. That is a good thing. Insisting on solo, especially if you are an established player who can afford to PLEX an alt (or have a real job and some disposable income), is really stupid in an MMO. If you have a philosophical objection to alts, get some friends. When I was a new player, older players let me follow along while they ran missions. I got the loot and salvage, they got company. I'm sure you could find a way to make it worth someone's time to scout for you. Bring friends or get alts. Otherwise, please stop complaining. Point is things should not be balanced around bring an alt, because in all circumstances that what d-scan invisibility requires. No one is going to be willing to spen there night in a combat probing ship hitting scan every 10 seconds with a recon filter set. No one will be willin to sit at a WH waiting to tell others that a neutral has entered. if you think we should balance gameplay around solo, you are in essence asking to nerf group gameplay. Why would you want that.?
Omnathious Deninard Novis Initiis 2638	Posted - 2014.12.25 05:12:47 - [1899] - Quote Rowells wrote: Omnathious Deninard wrote: FT Diomedes wrote: Bring friends or get alts. Otherwise, please stop complaining. Point is things should not be balanced around bring an alt, because in all circumstances that what d-scan invisibility requires. No one is going to be willing to spen there night in a combat probing ship hitting scan every 10 seconds with a recon filter set. No one will be willin to sit at a WH waiting to tell others that a neutral has entered. if you think we should balance gameplay around solo, you are in essence asking to nerf group gameplay. Why would you want that.? Not asking for group play to be nerfed, i am stating that things should not be introduced that all but require the use of an alt.
Yun Kuai Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop 234	Posted - 2014.12.25 05:14:47 - [1900] - Quote h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral wrote: Quote: The part where you called it the wrong buff for recons. You seem to think that if this goes away that they will get the hitpoint buff. And that is not the case. You make an assumption that I made an assumption and call me obtuse? Quote: Apparently you misunderstood me. I never said anything about multiple accounts and alts. I am talking about friends. I understand that most of you are anti-social nerds, probably living with your mother's, but this is an MMO. There are thousands of other players in this game. Go find some friends, form up a fleet, and work together. Dont be scared to make new friends and fly with them. I understood you, for a worm hole corp that's true. Although if I want to run c3 sites solo ( not in a wh corp ) I now have to ask a corp mate to come along and scan probe and a few others to sit on the holes? Are they doing this for free or are we splitting the profits? What if I am in a wormhole corp and my play time sits a few hours outside of the main group of players? I think in that case I should actually just ask in local if there is anybody about and see if they will help me scout , that's how you make friends? You know there is this thing called risk. If you completely negate all the risk, you should be playing hello kitty online. You choose to live in an environment without local to notify you someone is in system with you. How are these changes any different than you logging on after a cloaky T3 or recon is already in system waiting for you to start running sites? The fact is, yes this change will allow hunters to hunt more effectively. However, lets not choose to ignore the myriad of changes that have effectively stopped people from hunting true solo; AI aggression changes, can't take an acceleration gate cloaked anymore, the session change timer that doesn't let you immediately take a gate after decloaking, the FW beacon "bubble" that won't let you cloak inside, nerfs to ewar strength so we can overheat a few cycles for pre-nerf strength ewar, etc. So to answer this: "What if I am in a wormhole corp and my play time sits a few hours outside of the main group of players? " You suck it up and play. If you get tackled by a lachesis from 50km while he's plinking away you. Watch as the sleepers switch to him. Drop a mobile depot, fit on 1 stab, and warp back to your POS. I mean really....lives in a WH and can't pvp.... --------------------------------------------------------::::::::::::--:::-----:::---::::::::::::--------------:::----------:::----:::---:::----------------------:::::::-------:::---:::----::::::-------------------:::-----------:::--:::----:::---------------------::::::::::::----:::::::----:::::::::::::-------

h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral EVEL Tendancies 13	Posted - 2014.12.25 05:37:33 - [1901] - Quote You should probably read my earlier posts about risk being 50/50, I can't be arsed explaining it. I am pretty sure this topic is about to go full circle anyways, so not much more to be said I would think. I think there are some good points either way on this, even if the blind refuse to think so. At the end of the day I guess we have no choice and probably never did. Lets see how it pans out. Also you do realize my questions were generic? I haven't farmed WH's in a year or two. But if it makes you feel better I can't PVP either.
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 246	Posted - 2014.12.25 07:09:59 - [1902] - Quote Yahrr wrote: Altirius Saldiaro wrote: ...this is an MMO. There are thousands of other players in this game. Go find some friends, form up a fleet, and work together. Are you volunteering for watching one of the entrances to your wormhole location so the rest of the fleet can do it's thing, or do you recruit noobs for that? I'm asking this as this 'defending' will be much like mining, boring as hell and not worth Gé¼15 per month. It will be different in that you can't do it while watching youtube. So in the end it is about alts. Past couple corps Ive been in, when we ran sites as a corp, our scouts got paid. Everyone who participated in the sites, cleaning up the sites and scouting all got paid. Didnt matter which task you were doing, we all split the pot. You just have to find some good people who care more about playing EVE together and less about how much isk they can make on their own. Hell if you are more concerned with making isk on your own and not giving a cut to Corp mates willing to watch your back, then you deserve to die by a combat recon.
Please Turn The Tuskers The Tuskers Co. 42	Posted - 2014.12.25 08:15:56 - [1903] - Quote Altirius Saldiaro wrote: Yahrr wrote: Altirius Saldiaro wrote: ...this is an MMO. There are thousands of other players in this game. Go find some friends, form up a fleet, and work together. Are you volunteering for watching one of the entrances to your wormhole location so the rest of the fleet can do it's thing, or do you recruit noobs for that? I'm asking this as this 'defending' will be much like mining, boring as hell and not worth Gé¼15 per month. It will be different in that you can't do it while watching youtube. So in the end it is about alts. Past couple corps Ive been in, when we ran sites as a corp, our scouts got paid. Everyone who participated in the sites, cleaning up the sites and scouting all got paid. Didnt matter which task you were doing, we all split the pot. You just have to find some good people who care more about playing EVE together and less about how much isk they can make on their own. Hell if you are more concerned with making isk on your own and not giving a cut to Corp mates willing to watch your back, then you deserve to die by a combat recon. Haha, this guy is the perfect example on what I was saying here: " ... people that lack common sense". Dude(if I may call you that), you're arguing on the topic of "Alts Online <-> Eve Online" and you've put yourself in the boat of people that are using the same old cliches: sandbox, get some friends, eve is hard, etc. but you've done that using a forum, what for it, a forum alt. I mean, it is either that or your past couple corps exist only in your imagination. Join TheTuskers, travel to exotic distant lands, meet exciting unusual people and ... kill them!
AngelFood 21	Posted - 2014.12.25 08:23:28 - [1904] - Quote Mechanics changing like this is desperate and ill considered. Fail more.
Odithia Rondass 76	Posted - 2014.12.25 09:22:42 - [1905] - Quote Is it possible to have the best of both world with Combat Recon being front line ewar ship having HAC Resist and Force Recon being the sneaky ship with covop cloak (possibly with Dscan immunity in addition to that, though it's a bit redundant).
Yahrr The Tuskers The Tuskers Co. 23	Posted - 2014.12.25 13:01:03 - [1906] - Quote Altirius Saldiaro wrote: Yahrr wrote: Altirius Saldiaro wrote: ...this is an MMO. There are thousands of other players in this game. Go find some friends, form up a fleet, and work together. Are you volunteering for watching one of the entrances to your wormhole location so the rest of the fleet can do it's thing, or do you recruit noobs for that? I'm asking this as this 'defending' will be much like mining, boring as hell and not worth Gé¼15 per month. It will be different in that you can't do it while watching youtube. So in the end it is about alts. Past couple corps Ive been in, when we ran sites as a corp, our scouts got paid. Everyone who participated in the sites, cleaning up the sites and scouting all got paid. Didnt matter which task you were doing, we all split the pot. You just have to find some good people who care more about playing EVE together and less about how much isk they can make on their own. Hell if you are more concerned with making isk on your own and not giving a cut to Corp mates willing to watch your back, then you deserve to die by a combat recon. Don't worry about me. I got my group of friends and we all happily follow each other into a fight we cannot win, laughing with a bottle of rum in the hand. My problem with the 'watch all entrances all the time' suggestion is that it leads to horribly boring gameplay. IF you could even call it gameplay. Everyone that ever mined in Eve (yep, that includes me), knows that it's boring as hell. It's just no fun. Everyone that has been ECM'ed knows that if you have nothing to do, no buttons to press, Eve isn't such a fun game anymore. Should we really introduce more of that?
Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 25	Posted - 2014.12.25 13:30:36 - [1907] - Quote I decided to look up your post on this, since I'm curious what you were going on about. Turns out all of your issues are redundant with T3/cloaky ships already in the game... Please Turn wrote: On the D-Scan immunity As one of my corp mates said: "this seems like a weird idea; it seems CCP run out of ideas and they said - let's try a weird one this time". I couldn't agree more with what he said. I'm pretty sure the people that enjoy "ganking" as a game-play style love this change(I'm just not sure that another tool for this activity was really needed). I just can't see the solo and the small gang PvP lovers(the ones that love the "gud fites" and not ganks) liking this change. It breaks the more powerful tool they have/had: D-Scan(I guess the only good news is the fact that you can get sisters combat probes on a confessor, lol). I'm so "excited" to see how this change will affect the Eve PvP streams, which are, for the most part, centered around PvP action at FW plexes. As for the 'gud fites' crowd, there is no context in which the new d-scan immune combat recons will be any different than an existing cloaky recon, or cloaky T3. You still need to think before you warp somewhere in an expensive ship. So, no change there. Please Turn wrote: On Balancing things(in general and on recons in particular): It's really sad to see that the balancing process is unidirectional: let's buff everything and keep doing it over and over again. I feel recons were already unique and in a good place when looked at them in zoom-in mode. The zoom-out was/is the problem, mainly the fact that T3-Cruisers are preferred over everything(especially in small/medium gang context) because for some reason CCP decided to make them good at ***** everything. So, as long as you have little risk of dying they are the preferred ship for almost every activity. To make justice for recons a T3-Cruisers nerf(as in don't let them overlap with recons unique abilities) is/was more apropiate. Buffing things that are underused instead of nerfing things that are overused means everyone finds their assumptions about their ships shifting over time. Cap warfare, for example, now is less relevant because of the introduction of ASB and AAR modules. You deal with it or you burn. You felt safe in the past, warping around alone in something expensive, or worrying someone would dishonor a 1-v-1, because an assailant spent 700M isk on their ship? Well, now you have to consider assailants who spent 350M isk as well. This is not some revolutionary change that can't be overcome with a shade more discipline on your behalf. Please Turn wrote: On people pretending to be solo PvP'ers:** Get the hell out. When 90% of your kills are the result of gate-camping just shut up, please ... None of my chars have participated in a gate camp since 2010, but if you are comforted by being sentimental, go for it. O. Faeces
maCH'EttE Mafia Redux 135	Posted - 2014.12.25 14:01:34 - [1908] - Quote Yahrr wrote: Altirius Saldiaro wrote: Yahrr wrote: Altirius Saldiaro wrote: ...this is an MMO. There are thousands of other players in this game. Go find some friends, form up a fleet, and work together. Are you volunteering for watching one of the entrances to your wormhole location so the rest of the fleet can do it's thing, or do you recruit noobs for that? I'm asking this as this 'defending' will be much like mining, boring as hell and not worth Gé¼15 per month. It will be different in that you can't do it while watching youtube. So in the end it is about alts. Past couple corps Ive been in, when we ran sites as a corp, our scouts got paid. Everyone who participated in the sites, cleaning up the sites and scouting all got paid. Didnt matter which task you were doing, we all split the pot. You just have to find some good people who care more about playing EVE together and less about how much isk they can make on their own. Hell if you are more concerned with making isk on your own and not giving a cut to Corp mates willing to watch your back, then you deserve to die by a combat recon. Don't worry about me. I got my group of friends and we all happily follow each other into a fight we cannot win, laughing with a bottle of rum in the hand. My problem with the 'watch all entrances all the time' suggestion is that it leads to horribly boring gameplay. IF you could even call it gameplay. Everyone that ever mined in Eve (yep, that includes me), knows that it's boring as hell. It's just no fun. Everyone that has been ECM'ed knows that if you have nothing to do, no buttons to press, Eve isn't such a fun game anymore. Should we really introduce more of that? WHO ARE YOU KIDDING, GETTING PERMA JAMMED OR ANY OTHER ELECTRONIC COUNTER MEASURES AT DISTANCES OF OVER 80+, 90+ EVEN 100+KM AND NOT BEING ABLE TO LOCK, SHOOT AT ANYTHING AND BEING RAPED WITH NO CHOICES OF DOING JACK SHIEUAT, IS FUN.
MachineOfLovingGrace Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 7	Posted - 2014.12.25 14:02:05 - [1909] - Quote Orange Faeces wrote: As for the 'gud fites' crowd, there is no context in which the new d-scan immune combat recons will be any different than an existing cloaky recon, or cloaky T3. You still need to think before you warp somewhere in an expensive ship. So, no change there. ... except the problem got bigger (more ships can do this), the ships involved in setting traps got cheaper (as you pointed out yourself), there's no risk in SP loss involved now, and there's another arbitrary exception to fundamental game rules (wasn't eve meant to become more streamlined and easier to understand?). So yes, I'd say there is a pretty big change here. A lot of people are worried that their style of play will become harder and be less fun, and I can see why.
Joshua Milton Blahyi Therapists Inc 59	Posted - 2014.12.25 15:07:41 - [1910] - Quote MachineOfLovingGrace wrote: So yes, I'd say there is a pretty big change here. A lot of people are worried that their style of play will become harder and be less fun, and I can see why. There are two components that need to be addressed seperately so here we go. PvE is going to get harder: Good. PvE in this game is already an exceptional borefest. There is little to no challenge, no variety, and it very quickly becomes a rote memorization exercise. Having more capsuleer spawns in signatures is a good thing, for both the hunter and the hunted. Anything that makes shooting red crosses less mundane is a good thing. Also, this change might help alter the current low sec dynamic of having your scanning alt finding your next site while your Ishtar pretty much afks the one you are currently in. PvE is going to get less fun: I didn't know it was possible to get less fun than it already is. PvE in this game is pretty bad. The only "fun" involved is in seeing how much ISK you are generating. The carebear style of play will always survive. I don't intend to stop doing PvE, and these changes are not even going to slow me down.

X Gallentius Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop 2723	Posted - 2014.12.25 16:38:17 - [1911] - Quote Grookshank wrote: I do not understand the change on the resist profile. Recons will not be fleet viable compared to t3s without a serious buff to their tank, which was one of the stated goal of the balance change to them. So then use T3 recons for fleet work and use Combat recons for small gang.
Sitting Bull Lakota Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 3	Posted - 2014.12.25 18:20:42 - [1912] - Quote The kinetic only bonus was removed from several caldari ships during the grand tiericide initiative because it severely limited ship fitting options which directly impacts player creativity along with ship versatility. We like it up here, bathing in the warm light of unpredictable damage types rocketing through space. Please don't take us back down that dark and scary road D: As for the newly proposed bonus set for pilgrims; 3 medium neuts is better than 2, but splitting up the current level of bonus is not a "buff" which the pilgrim so desperately needs. It is a "tweak" which neither increases nor decreases its viability. The pilgrim needs more. Not much more, but more. If the pilgrim cannot have the same range and strength boni as the curse, then at least let the pilgrim have its 20% neut/nos strength bonus and add a 20% range bonus. Give the pilgrim just enough of a range boost to give it neuting power out to point range. Please reconsider and give these ships the Tech II resist profile. I'm digging the increased fitting, speed, and decreased sig on these ships, and Tech II resists will help to round them out. Dunno about the long term implications of d-scan immunity, but it sounds new and exciting. Anything to get those recons out onto the field. I'm all for it.
Generaloberst Kluntz Isogen 5 50	Posted - 2014.12.25 18:57:24 - [1913] - Quote Omnathious Deninard wrote: Generaloberst Kluntz wrote: RISE Keep up the nice work The trail of tears shows you're in the right direction. So negative feedback means there doing something right? Ergo positive feedback means something is broken or OP and therefore is bad feedback. This would mean the only valid feedback is inconclusive feedback which leads to running is circles. To sum things up no feedback is best feedback. See, Merry Bobmas. . Now, when Hyperion expansion was about to be launched, I and a lot of other guys complained a lot. . In the end, the expansion was good. When Phoebe was about to be launched, it was tears all over nullsex space. In the end, it was a refreshing expansion. (Plus Bob bathed in nullbears tears lol). Now it's Proteus and we see couple bittervets complaining. Guess what. If it were a real feedback from all players, Rise would surely take it seriously. But only a couple lazy lowseccers, naah. Do you see any snuffbox here, nope. Do you see any CSM here, nope. Do you see any wspace representative here, nope? (Appart from a few bad bears) so yeah Rise, you're in the right direction.
Generaloberst Kluntz Isogen 5 50	Posted - 2014.12.25 19:15:24 - [1914] - Quote Yahrr wrote: Altirius Saldiaro wrote: Yahrr wrote: Altirius Saldiaro wrote: ...this is an MMO. There are thousands of other players in this game. Go find some friends, form up a fleet, and work together. Are you volunteering for watching one of the entrances to your wormhole location so the rest of the fleet can do it's thing, or do you recruit noobs for that? I'm asking this as this 'defending' will be much like mining, boring as hell and not worth Gé¼15 per month. It will be different in that you can't do it while watching youtube. So in the end it is about alts. Past couple corps Ive been in, when we ran sites as a corp, our scouts got paid. Everyone who participated in the sites, cleaning up the sites and scouting all got paid. Didnt matter which task you were doing, we all split the pot. You just have to find some good people who care more about playing EVE together and less about how much isk they can make on their own. Hell if you are more concerned with making isk on your own and not giving a cut to Corp mates willing to watch your back, then you deserve to die by a combat recon. Don't worry about me. I got my group of friends and we all happily follow each other into a fight we cannot win, laughing with a bottle of rum in the hand. My problem with the 'watch all entrances all the time' suggestion is that it leads to horribly boring gameplay. IF you could even call it gameplay. Everyone that ever mined in Eve (yep, that includes me), knows that it's boring as hell. It's just no fun. Everyone that has been ECM'ed knows that if you have nothing to do, no buttons to press, Eve isn't such a fun game anymore. Should we really introduce more of that? You are a shame to The Tuskers tradition. And to your own name Yahrr.
Ehud Gera Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 53	Posted - 2014.12.25 19:15:39 - [1915] - Quote The stated goal for the recon was to make it a more viable option over t3's. Without the resists it is simply not going to fill that goal. Why use DSCAN immunity when I can use a cloaky proteus? Why use a fleet recon when t3's are 10x better? The only way to achieve your goal at this point CCP is to give t3's a big enough nerf that they're not cost effective. HOWEVER: then at that point why not use T1 cruisers instead of either? Give t2 resists to recons! No other change needed to "fix" Recons (oh, except plz rollback the kinetic only on Rook for the love of Bob, nerf the overall DPS a tiny bit if you want [or dont] but let us choose damage types! Tactics shouldn't be limited by prejudiced hull bonuses CCP Missile Haters) CCP you never really stated a goal for DSCAN immunity that cloaks can't fill, but you stated a legitimate goal that everyone agreed on with resists that make recons a fleet option over t3's. You need to deliver on your real goals. Have that integrity please. 90% of posts since your update want you to go back to t2 resists and 80% of those would rather have resists than DSCAN immunity if that's the choice. Are you going to listen? Or not?
Jitamule Momaki Taxes are for losers Twilight Imperium 1	Posted - 2014.12.25 19:55:55 - [1916] - Quote k i love the rest of the changes but the Dscan one i fear will break Wh space... your only defence in Wh is not getting caught. EX Seeing them on Dscan and GTFOing before they land on you. i fear any and all Wh hunters worth they're salt will use this to they're advantage and any Wh ratter will have to have yet another Alt for Wh picketing and with the last Wh change being more holes connect that's near impossible to watch all your exit's so one can rat "safely". tbh i don't see a point in the Dscan change if you're already buffing them, not to mention you're pretty much removing the Covop's cloak usefulness. as half of it is so you wont get caught on Dscan before you land. i fully endorse buffing the crap out of Recon's but this Dscan thing rub's me the wrong way and i assume all other Wh dweller's as i stated it basicly breaks any "saftey" artifical or otherwise from any Wh system. Tl:DR Dscan will break any Wh "Safety" and it will be vertiually impossible to not get ganked in Wh if someones looking for you. and null's the point of the Covert op's cloak i hope this part of the change gets removed prior to TQ install Thanks for reading o7
Generaloberst Kluntz Isogen 5 52	Posted - 2014.12.25 20:19:41 - [1917] - Quote Jitamule Momaki wrote: k i love the rest of the changes but the Dscan one i fear will break Wh space... your only defence in Wh is not getting caught. EX Seeing them on Dscan and GTFOing before they land on you. i fear any and all Wh hunters worth they're salt will use this to they're advantage and any Wh ratter will have to have yet another Alt for Wh picketing and with the last Wh change being more holes connect that's near impossible to watch all your exit's so one can rat "safely". tbh i don't see a point in the Dscan change if you're already buffing them, not to mention you're pretty much removing the Covop's cloak usefulness. as half of it is so you wont get caught on Dscan before you land. i fully endorse buffing the crap out of Recon's but this Dscan thing rub's me the wrong way and i assume all other Wh dweller's as i stated it basicly breaks any "saftey" artifical or otherwise from any Wh system. Tl:DR Dscan will break any Wh "Safety" and it will be vertiually impossible to not get ganked in Wh if someones looking for you. and null's the point of the Covert op's cloak i hope this part of the change gets removed prior to TQ install Thanks for reading o7 If you are a wspace resident you should have hole control (unless you're in a C1) . If you live in a C2 it means two Orca passes close your connections. Frig holes can be bubbled and watched by cloaky scouts. Higgs rig makes it easy to close bigger connections. I pve in wspace and fail to see how dscan immunity will make it riskier, unless some no-life shoots for logofski traps in which case he would kill you anyway. Also before Dscan immunity you can still die ( and we do) if the aggressor comes from a connection more than 14.3 AU because a cloaky prot will jump into system, cloaks and warps to you unseen and approach, bump and lock, pop. So I'd say covops cloak is still more dangerous because only dscan immunity won't keep an agressor invisible when he enters grid with you. And you'd still see and hear him jumping into system if you reasonably have a scout in that pesky connection. Get gud.
Cledus Snowman Snow Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 5	Posted - 2014.12.25 21:53:05 - [1918] - Quote TuCZnak wrote: Wow, so change that everyone was applauding (HAC resists) gets scraped, and change generating this threadnought (d-scan immunity) is staying. Apparently only because CCP Rice likes it and doesn't have problem with ignoring opinions different from his own. Nice going. Agreed +1
ceeberus Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2014.12.26 00:11:31 - [1919] - Quote Cledus Snowman Snow wrote: TuCZnak wrote: Wow, so change that everyone was applauding (HAC resists) gets scraped, and change generating this threadnought (d-scan immunity) is staying. Apparently only because CCP Rice likes it and doesn't have problem with ignoring opinions different from his own. Nice going. Agreed +1 nothing else to say, good job ccp dbag
Amanda Orion Open University of Celestial Hardship Art of War Alliance 34	Posted - 2014.12.26 00:58:38 - [1920] - Quote maCH'EttE wrote: WHO ARE YOU KIDDING, GETTING PERMA JAMMED OR ANY OTHER ELECTRONIC COUNTER MEASURES AT DISTANCES OF OVER 80+, 90+ EVEN 100+KM AND NOT BEING ABLE TO LOCK, SHOOT AT ANYTHING AND BEING RAPED WITH NO CHOICES OF DOING JACK SHIEUAT, IS FUN. The people who get ganked dont like it much either. But if someone is going to have fun, someone has to pay... :p

afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 613	Posted - 2014.12.26 01:49:48 - [1921] - Quote Give dscan immunity to force recons. Give Combat recons full resist set.
Stitch Kaneland Ex Astris Opes 92	Posted - 2014.12.26 01:59:47 - [1922] - Quote afkalt wrote: Give dscan immunity to force recons. Give Combat recons full resist set. I might actually give the huginn a second look if that were the case. As it sits now, its just in an awkward position (as usual for minmatar). Not enough PG to fit long range weapons to suit its web and TP bonus (since a/c dont really need better tracking provided by TP). Now without the resists its not suitable to brawl with a/c's. So its high are probably going to filled with neuts to peel tackle off, as it has been already. Since the anemic dps with relatively poor range of 650's isn't worth gimping the fit over.
Segraina Skyblazer Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2014.12.26 02:07:24 - [1923] - Quote Nice changes. +1 from me. Just to clarify since I haven't use recons before, does that mean that the covert ops recons already have D-scan immunity when cloaked and uncloaked?
Khamal Kahn Flipsiders 1	Posted - 2014.12.26 02:26:29 - [1924] - Quote I virtually never comment in forums while reading and enjoying the comments of others, but this is a case where I must voice my opinion. UNCLOAKED recons invisible to dscan??!! That's one of the worst ideas I've seen yet! *For so long whspace has simply been ignored by CCP. Now instead of ignored whspace dwellers are being given the royal shaft with this insane idea.* A past post wrongly assumed any recon would have to probe someone down before attacking and that dscan would pick up the combat probes, thus alerting the careful whspace dweller. Has that person been in a wormhole lately? Various site/sig types require no probing, nor do customs offices where the PI transfer occurs. A probe launcher isn't required to find and attack ships in such locations. All this soon-to-be super recon has to do is warp from site to site without fear of discovery or ever having to drop a probe and strike. And as we all know, standard combat sites are a favorite due to the simplicity of running them, particularly in C1-C3 sites where solo PvE can be done. It's even worse for whspace miners since gravs no longer require probing. I'm sitting here in my corp's POS able to warp to multiple grav sites without launching a single probe or using bookmarks. So it now appears that unless the recon is specifically and visually seen entering the wormhole they won't be discovered. They or their fleet of recons can decloak, use no cloak, or whatever they wish so long as they aren't on grid. The only exception is the second or two that the present cov-ops cloak capable recons are on dscan prior to recloaking. The need for cloaking will be drastically reduced. I realize there are other reasons to cloak, but a primary use is (or was) to avoid dscan. Well, apparently not anymore if this recon change idiocy occurs. I realize Pirates and other gankers love the idea, and good for them. I wish them enjoyment in EVE and realize they are more numerous than those of us who simply want the freedom and flexibility of whspace life. Since their numbers are large I suspect EVE will cater to them and the big Sov alliances just as they always have at the expense of others. *When will CCP ever begin to really care about those of us who live and play in whspace?* This idea is a serious issue to those like myself who wouldn't even play EVE if not for whspace. Now we have less of a reason to continue. With this upcoming change the term "site running" in whspace will have a new meaning. It will now be defined as dscan invulnerable recon gankers running from site to site free from one of their primary obstacles ... DSCAN
Midori Tsu Evolution Northern Coalition. 133	Posted - 2014.12.26 03:41:55 - [1925] - Quote I don't quite understand the reasoning behind keeping the D-Scan immunity but scrapping the resist bonuses. The former people are complaining about (and getting praise) while the latter was getting nothing BUT praise. With the changes as they are currently proposed, Recons will not be anymore competitive with T3s compared to before hand. At the very least, give the recons a straight HP buff. I personally think the D-Scan immunity is a dumb idea that benefits only those who fly solo, and will not make them any more competitive with T3s in fleets. As for the pilgrim, i don't think its an amazing change as i personally think the pilgrim is the only recon that is currently in a good spot, other may disagree with that though. The kinetic damage bonus to the Rook is kind of silly and i don't think it will change its usage.
HiddenPorpoise Under Dark Sins of our Fathers 295	Posted - 2014.12.26 04:07:14 - [1926] - Quote I think this is a bad idea; that said, I will take full advantage of it hoping they take it out. I think that the people saying that FW gates will be camped are simply uncreative, it's so much worse if you are inventive. Many people won't do anything if there are hostiles in system that aren't on scan at all. The logical move from there is to dump an empty ship somewhere, something people won't consider valuable enough to combat scan so that they never notice the recons. So, the most logical move is to put down a procurer and one venture for each additional recon so miner count and local match with a can on the warp in point on the belt. Hot droppers won't usually aim at something that likely to escape, cloakys mostly warp to zero in low/null because of the random rocks that want them dead, and solo ships are just doomed. If the plan is for every nice looking d-scan to be vetted by combat probes fights are gonna suck.
Khamal Kahn Flipsiders 2	Posted - 2014.12.26 04:46:16 - [1927] - Quote Midori Tsu wrote: As for the pilgrim, i don't think its an amazing change as i personally think the pilgrim is the only recon that is currently in a good spot, other may disagree with that though. The kinetic damage bonus to the Rook is kind of silly and i don't think it will change its usage. I absolutely agree. The Pilgrim is already a great Recon ship if a person knows how to use it. Anyone who doesn't acknowledge the fear that a suddenly decloaked Pilgrim causes just hasn't played the game long enough or know how devastating a properly fitted and used Pilgrim can be, particularly if you have a corpmate along for the ride to provide smothering DPS. As for the Rook, compared to the paper thin tank of the Falcon when their mid slots have the necessary ECM mods, it is a superman of a ship that will largely negate the use for a Falcon in many cases if the recon change is instituted since the supposed recon changes will make the Falcon obsolete in many respects in whspace. If the change happens, my Rook will be in the SMA ready for boarding. In fact, I think I'll go ahead and bring it into the hole now since it seems CCP is determined to apply this illogical DSCAN invulnerability nonsense.
Ehud Gera Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 57	Posted - 2014.12.26 04:48:46 - [1928] - Quote Segraina Skyblazer wrote: Nice changes. +1 from me. Just to clarify since I haven't use recons before, does that mean that the covert ops recons already have D-scan immunity when cloaked and uncloaked? No, no it does not. The DSCAN immunity is redundant and gimmicky. As many proponents for DSCAN immunity have argued it is basically just the same as a cloak (except you don't have to fit it...but on the other hand you can't evade gate camps as easily) It really doesn't make any sense to do DSCAN immunity, using a cloak is DSCAN immunity, why do we need a gimmick on a hull type that desperately needs a unique role and t2 resists would give it that. With this iteration you won't see recons used in new roles, you'll just see them used in niche ganking scenarios where you might have seen their cloaky brothers instead.
Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 28	Posted - 2014.12.26 05:46:01 - [1929] - Quote Ehud Gera wrote: ... It really doesn't make any sense to do DSCAN immunity, using a cloak is DSCAN immunity, why do we need a gimmick on a hull type that desperately needs a unique role and t2 resists would give it that. ... Amazing -- they design a ship 'cloak' mechanic that keeps the ship off d-scan, but prevents them from AFK cloaking in your farming systems, and you carebears still complain. Never saw that one coming...
Khamal Kahn Flipsiders 3	Posted - 2014.12.26 05:53:25 - [1930] - Quote Ehud Gera wrote: ...[snip] ... It really doesn't make any sense to do DSCAN immunity, using a cloak is DSCAN immunity, why do we need a gimmick on a hull type that desperately needs a unique role and t2 resists would give it that. With this iteration you won't see recons used in new roles, you'll just see them used in niche ganking scenarios where you might have seen their cloaky brothers instead. Well stated Mr. Gera! Very well indeed. T2 resists on the non-CovOps cloak capable recons would be a much better direction. And yes, all this will produce is a new iteration or variation of ganking. As a dedicated wormhole dweller the proposed recon ship changes are exceedingly troublesome to see. It will very significantly impact wormhole operations in a bad way. I'm not whining (well, maybe I am). I'm simply lamenting the sadly common "who cares" attitude that CCP seems to apply to dedicated whspace dwellers.

Ehud Gera Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 57	Posted - 2014.12.26 06:01:38 - [1931] - Quote Orange Faeces wrote: Ehud Gera wrote: ... It really doesn't make any sense to do DSCAN immunity, using a cloak is DSCAN immunity, why do we need a gimmick on a hull type that desperately needs a unique role and t2 resists would give it that. ... Amazing -- you give a ship a 'cloak' that keeps them off d-scan, but prevents them from AFK cloaking in your farming systems, and you carebears still complain. Never saw that one coming... Mate quit with name calling. If I'm anything it's not a carebear. Reply to what is relevant, recons don't need DSCAN immunity they need a new resist profile to make them a viable fleet option. I will use these to gank if they're given DSCAN immunity too, I just know it's not what is healthy for the game. And btw pve carebears in recons still produce scannable intel (wrecks) that an intelligent hunter can identify, gankers do not, therefore the argument that it effects both play styles equally can be easily argued. Did you think about that, or read about it on an early page of the forum before posting your drivel of "grr carebear whiners!" Ask yourself this: can I do almost anything in a cloaky ship with a tiny bit more work and skill what I could do in a DSCAN immune ship? The answer is mostly yes. Now ask yourself can I replace t3's as the only good option for higher end fleet ewar with the new recons. The answer is no. It just doesn't make sense.
Joshua Milton Blahyi Therapists Inc 62	Posted - 2014.12.26 06:13:09 - [1932] - Quote Khamal Kahn wrote: Ehud Gera wrote: ...[snip] ... It really doesn't make any sense to do DSCAN immunity, using a cloak is DSCAN immunity, why do we need a gimmick on a hull type that desperately needs a unique role and t2 resists would give it that. With this iteration you won't see recons used in new roles, you'll just see them used in niche ganking scenarios where you might have seen their cloaky brothers instead. Well stated Mr. Gera! Very well indeed. T2 resists on the non-CovOps cloak capable recons would be a much better direction. And yes, all this will produce is a new iteration or variation of ganking. As a dedicated wormhole dweller the proposed recon ship changes are exceedingly troublesome to see. It will very significantly impact wormhole operations in a bad way. I'm not whining (well, maybe I am). I'm simply lamenting the sadly common "who cares" attitude that CCP seems to apply to dedicated whspace dwellers. You are whining that you will be facing increased risk. You are also whining because you intentionally overstated your case in your first post on this page. The only thing your posts make me wonder is why you even live in holes if you are so afraid of other people. You can do your pve with much less risk elsewhere.
Joshua Milton Blahyi Therapists Inc 62	Posted - 2014.12.26 06:15:02 - [1933] - Quote Ehud Gera wrote: Orange Faeces wrote: Ehud Gera wrote: ... It really doesn't make any sense to do DSCAN immunity, using a cloak is DSCAN immunity, why do we need a gimmick on a hull type that desperately needs a unique role and t2 resists would give it that. ... Amazing -- you give a ship a 'cloak' that keeps them off d-scan, but prevents them from AFK cloaking in your farming systems, and you carebears still complain. Never saw that one coming... Mate quit with name calling. If I'm anything it's not a carebear. Reply to what is relevant, recons don't need DSCAN immunity they need a new resist profile to make them a viable fleet option. I will use these to gank if they're given DSCAN immunity too, I just know it's not what is healthy for the game. And btw pve carebears in recons still produce scannable intel (wrecks) that an intelligent hunter can identify, gankers do not, therefore the argument that it effects both play styles equally can be easily argued. Did you think about that, or read about it on an early page of the forum before posting your drivel of "grr carebear whiners!" Ask yourself this: can I do almost anything in a cloaky ship with a tiny bit more work and skill what I could do in a DSCAN immune ship? The answer is mostly yes. Now ask yourself can I replace t3's as the only good option for higher end fleet ewar with the new recons. The answer is no. It just doesn't make sense. You are right, they should add back the T2 resists and leave the bears to their tears.
Khamal Kahn Flipsiders 3	Posted - 2014.12.26 06:21:10 - [1934] - Quote Ehud Gera wrote: Orange Faeces wrote: Ehud Gera wrote: ... It really doesn't make any sense to do DSCAN immunity, using a cloak is DSCAN immunity, why do we need a gimmick on a hull type that desperately needs a unique role and t2 resists would give it that. ... Amazing -- you give a ship a 'cloak' that keeps them off d-scan, but prevents them from AFK cloaking in your farming systems, and you carebears still complain. Never saw that one coming... Mate quit with name calling. If I'm anything it's not a carebear. Reply to what is relevant, recons don't need DSCAN immunity they need a new resist profile to make them a viable fleet option. I will use these to gank if they're given DSCAN immunity too, I just know it's not what is healthy for the game. And btw pve carebears in recons still produce scannable intel (wrecks) that an intelligent hunter can identify, gankers do not, therefore the argument that it effects both play styles equally can be easily argued. Did you think about that, or read about it on an early page of the forum before posting your drivel of "grr carebear whiners!" Ask yourself this: can I do almost anything in a cloaky ship with a tiny bit more work and skill what I could do in a DSCAN immune ship? The answer is mostly yes. Now ask yourself can I replace t3's as the only good option for higher end fleet ewar with the new recons. The answer is no. It just doesn't make sense. Ditto. ESPECIALLY "...I just know it's not what is healthy for the game. ..." That's the point. In the grand scheme of things with all player styles considered the proposed recon DSCAN invulnerability is a step in the wrong direction. If ship rebalancing or usage is the goal, DSCAM immunity is a mistake unless you want the game to become nothing more than a gank-fest (at least in whspace). Mr. Gera's suggestions regarding T2 resists for non-CovOps cloak recons is a better approach. I am sometimes a carebear and sometimes not. It actually depends on which account I'm playing at the time. One of my accounts is a pure industrial guy. My others are not. As with other EVE players, that gives me perspective from all directions. This proposed change is not good for the game. PERIOD! Oh. Just to remind the carebear haters. They wouldn't have ships to fly, guns or turrets to fire, ammo to use, or mods to fit were it not for carebears. Too often players forget that basic fact of the EVE universe.
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 250	Posted - 2014.12.26 06:33:12 - [1935] - Quote I cant wait till these changes release on TQ. Reading all these tears has been so much fun. I cant wait to see all the tears that will flow in GD from all the morons who don't pay attention to upcoming changes. Especially in game. So many are going to die from these changes. Its going to be great!!!
Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 28	Posted - 2014.12.26 06:40:40 - [1936] - Quote Ehud Gera wrote: Mate quit with name calling. If I'm anything it's not a carebear. Reply to what is relevant, recons don't need DSCAN immunity they need a new resist profile to make them a viable fleet option. Considering most of the objections to the d-scan immunity are without any merit considering the existence of other cloaking PVP ships, I'd say that I've tired of responding with substance to some of the people in this thread. Asking me to respond to the merits of an argument is rather rich, considering that whats most important about this role bonus is what it portends for cloaking mechanics. Having said that, I'll review some of your notes below for any sign of 'relevance'. Ehud Gera wrote: I will use these to gank if they're given DSCAN immunity too, I just know it's not what is healthy for the game. And btw pve carebears in recons still produce scannable intel (wrecks) that an intelligent hunter can identify, gankers do not, therefore the argument that it effects both play styles equally can be easily argued. Did you think about that, or read about it on an early page of the forum before posting your drivel of "grr carebear whiners!" Ask yourself this: can I do almost anything in a cloaky ship with a tiny bit more work and skill what I could do in a DSCAN immune ship? The answer is mostly yes. Now ask yourself can I replace t3's as the only good option for higher end fleet ewar with the new recons. The answer is no. It just doesn't make sense. I have considered that because I exploit related information already in other situations and in previous versions of the scanning rules... so long ago. But it has nothing to do with what we are discussing here. The only relevant part of your note is the last paragraph, where you repeat one of Rise's points for updating recons -- making them viable for fleet action. That certainly hinges on the T2 resists. But what makes you think that these two bonuses are an either-or? Rise never said that in his note. He restated his interest in holding onto the D-scan bonus, and for the obvious reason that it represents an innovative way to address one of the long-standing issues with cloaking, namely that AFK cloakers prevent players from using their systems. This is a way to address that, and we should find a way to bring this into the game in a way that will give it a real shot of working. We don't have to have an either-or situation. The fact that you see it as an either-or debate about T2 resists versus D-scan capability assumes you know how CCP will balance this out, and I am hoping that we really can have both somehow. Try to be open minded. O. Faeces
Khamal Kahn Flipsiders 3	Posted - 2014.12.26 06:59:12 - [1937] - Quote Altirius Saldiaro wrote: I cant wait till these changes release on TQ. Reading all these tears has been so much fun. I cant wait to see all the tears that will flow in GD from all the morons who don't pay attention to upcoming changes. Especially in game. So many are going to die from these changes. Its going to be great!!! I speak on behalf of those in whspace who actually possess less skill than myself. Despite my fervent opposition to the proposed DSCAN invulnerability, if I were to speak from a selfish individual perspective I would say "Bring it on!". Whspace dwellers are not stupid or fearful as some would believe. We realize the lust such recon changes will instill in the hearts of gankers looking for what they think are easy kills in their DSCAN invisible ships, and we know how to bait a trap for such mindless bloodlust. The hunters may become the hunted, and tears may originate from unexpected sources. The proposed recon change is a nonsensical approach that I loathe, but defensive measures can be enacted so as to become offensive and to make it more destructive to gankers than they may realize. I just wish I didn't have to waste time with such foolishness. My opposition is not due to fear of loosing ships or pods. Heck, we all know that's part of the game. It is due to sincere opinion of what is best for the game and all participants. I also try to speak for less skilled players whom I hope to give voice and whom I hope will enjoy EVE, particularly those in whspace. Whatever happens, I'll deal with it unless it ceases to be enjoyable. Regardless, tears of sorrow is an impossibility - at least from me.
Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 28	Posted - 2014.12.26 07:05:44 - [1938] - Quote Khamal Kahn wrote: ... The hunters may become the hunted, and tears may originate from unexpected sources. The proposed recon change is a nonsensical approach that I loathe, but defensive measures can be enacted so as to become offensive and to make it more destructive to gankers than they may realize... It took you 4.5 hours to figure this out. You are ahead of many of the other people commenting on this thread. Congratulations. O. Faeces
Khamal Kahn Flipsiders 3	Posted - 2014.12.26 07:52:29 - [1939] - Quote Orange Faeces wrote: Khamal Kahn wrote: ... The hunters may become the hunted, and tears may originate from unexpected sources. The proposed recon change is a nonsensical approach that I loathe, but defensive measures can be enacted so as to become offensive and to make it more destructive to gankers than they may realize... It took you 4.5 hours to figure this out. You are ahead of many of the other people commenting on this thread. Congratulations. O. Faeces Thank you. Sincerely. But I had it figured out from the very start. That's not the point. Also, the impact is most severe in C1-C3 wormholes. I welcome gankers in their DSCAN invulnerable cruise recon to try to gank at a C4-C6 PvE site. The whspace residents could just sit back and watch the sleepers chew them to bits in short order without having to fire a shot. I actually don't do PvE in whspace much because I find it a bit boring after years of such things and know there are other ways of making ISK and blowing up ships. I'm more of a PvP minded character or - in the case of my alt - PI and industry minded. From a PvP perspective I view whspace as a confined space in which small scale, less laggy and more "in your face" battles can occur - much like a boxing ring or cage-match fight. I like that. I despise the massive "if you're primaried, you're dead" fleet battles that don't really test skill so much as it does statistics and probability of being the target. The more personal skirmishes and challenges of whspace is a major reason I like it there. My original and continuing point is that this proposed recon change alters whspace activity in a way that will almost certainly impact ISK revenue and whspace operations to make an already difficult life even more so. I don't like my money being messed with. I'm sure you understand. Also, a BIG point is that it is yet one more example of CCP's continuing ignoring of whspace in general - except for where it negatively impacts whspace players. Real positive changes to whspace are all but absent in EVE updates except for minor tweaks here and there. Whspace seems to be CCP's regret. It almost seems like they hope it goes away since they so rarely enact any game changes that benefit it. The lack of POS enhancement is a perfect example. As stated, I am trying to provide voice to those who DO enjoy whspace PvE and other non-PvP whspace game play. I just hope CCP considers such player desires and doesn't force all whspace players to either embrace PvP or leave EVE. I respect and understand those who are drooling for the DSCAN invisible recon. Were I purely a whspace intruder looking for what I view as a cheap thrill, I'd be drooling also. And yes, I want them to enjoy the game also. I simply believe this is not a good direction to bring about enhanced enjoyment for all player styles. Instead and as usual, it ignores whspace wishes and caters to the PvP only and pirate/ganker players. Basically, I simply want ALL player types to enjoy this superb game, and I fear the not so minor (in whspace) changes this brings may drive people out of whspace if the hordes of gankers I fear will enter that space materializes. That, from someone who strives to bring people INTO whspace corps and increase their presence in EVE, is not a positive development.
Ehud Gera Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 59	Posted - 2014.12.26 07:59:32 - [1940] - Quote Orange Faeces wrote: The only relevant part of your note is the last paragraph, where you repeat one of Rise's points for updating recons -- making them viable for fleet action. That certainly hinges on the T2 resists. But what makes you think that these two bonuses are an either-or? Rise never said that in his note. He restated his interest in holding onto the D-scan bonus, and for the obvious reason that it represents an innovative way to address one of the long-standing issues with cloaking, namely that AFK cloakers prevent players from using their systems. This is one idea to address that, and we should find a way to bring new ideas into the game. We don't have to have an either-or situation. The fact that you see it as an either-or debate about T2 resists versus D-scan capability assumes you know how CCP will balance this out, and I am hoping that we really can have both somehow. Try to be open minded. O. Faeces I didn't make it either/or CCP Rise did. The fact is the response to the outcry about the DSCAN change was to take back the t2 resists. Rise pulled that trigger. But he was not wrong either, t2 resists and DSCAN immunity together is ridiculously powerful. Why ever use a cloaky recon? It's brother gets a free high slot and t2 resists... It just can't run camps and afk cloak What he did about it was the wrong measure, he took away the right bonus for the wrong one. Get it in your head that these "tears" are someone else's reasoned logic based on the current meta and where we see the health of that meta going with the proposed changes. It's called feedback.

Amarisen Gream The ArK's Hammer ArK Alliance 56	Posted - 2014.12.26 08:22:22 - [1941] - Quote I read it some where else, but as combat recon are immune to D-scan it would be nice to see Force recon have the other end of the spectrum where they could D-scan cloaked ships (possibly include Comabt recons as d-scannable). xoxo Amarisen Gream
Wynta State War Academy Caldari State 2	Posted - 2014.12.26 08:55:50 - [1942] - Quote I keep reading that the D-Scan Immunity will somehow break the game, FW and W-Space especially. I wanted to out line why this is not true. The balancing of a ship occurs when its strengths are offset by weaknesses. These strengths and weaknesses come, for the most part, in a power triangle; a ship is balanced around damage, defense, and utility. Lets compare the Rook to the Cerberus, the Cerberus is a damage ship primarily that can fit a good tank, but it lacks utility aside from the MWD bonus. The Rook would sacrifice some of the Damage (1 Launcher, 2 Ship Bonuses, and a Low.), some tank (1 Mid, and a couple more to fit ECM), but gains equivalent utility (ECM in the Mids, and D-Scan Immunity). Now there are two problems with the balancing of Combat Recons, the T2 Resists and the D-Scan Immunity. First I want to argue why the D-Scan Immunity is balanced by comparing it to the Stealth Bomber. The stealth bomber is balanced because it sacrifice all of its defense for damage and utility. A big portion of that utility is its cloak. Not only can the SB warp while cloaked, not have a scan res penalty, but also no cloaked targeting delay. The SB can pop out of cloak and instantly begin locking any ship. To highlight these strengths I'll lists them. The SB is immune to D-Scan, Combat Probes, Overview, and can instantly lock; for all this they get no tank and big damage. The Combat Recon gets immune to D-Scan and Instant targeting, for this they sacrifice some tank and some damage. The Combat Recon specializes in Utility, they sacrifice damage and tank, gain Utility mostly from EWAR, but also slightly from D-Scan immunity, a lesser cloak. But if the D-Scan immunity is balanced by a reduced tank and damage, then why should it also get T2 Resists. Because it's strength is its weakness. In solo PvP you could easily run from a Recon, you don't want to fight, as soon as they land on grid because a good player prealigns. Now if they don't, then another good pilot could brawl with the Recon and probably come out on top because they have more damage and tank. Once the fight begins, the D-Scan immunity is pointless. In small gang fights, the D-Scan immunity has less of an impact, because you will probably be grouping with ships that don't have this bonus, the only advantage it gives you is that a D-Scanned fleet may appear smaller than the reality. If you are are running head long into another fleet without Combat Probing or using a cloaked scout on the enemy grid, then you deserve to lose. The further away from solo PvP the Recon gets, the less power the D-Scan Immunity gives. Now for fleet combat, the D-Scan Immunity is pointless, the problem facing fleet combat is that EWAR is usually primaried, and with T1 resists, they become way too fragile for their cost, and become outclassed by their T1 counterparts. The T2 resists are not the huge buff to the solo pvp'er, they are a buff to the fleet pvp'er. The D-Scan Immunity is the buff to Solo PvP, one that offers more than enough counterplay. Both are needed inorder to make the Combat Recon a viable ship in both fleet and solo.
X Gallentius Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop 2727	Posted - 2014.12.26 09:12:16 - [1943] - Quote They could have gone a couple ways with these ships. One way is to make them true fleet ships which means high resists, but very poor damage application. That way they could survive in fleet, but not be too OP when it comes to solo work.
Hugh Knight Usque Ad Mortem TCC. 7	Posted - 2014.12.26 12:53:07 - [1944] - Quote well from a wormholers point of view it goes like this.........yay on the whole i think change is good and is needed, i see a lot of poeple moaning, for you guys you should hit esc and close program then logon to account management and de-sub. all the changes and exploits as you see it can be used by YOU too. w-space has always required a team (and a team that knows what it is doing) so for the w-space carebears get in a team or get out. for FW people, and i only know about FW as i pop a lot of you is, yes i will sit in a FW plex waiting for you to come in for me to shout point web scram on comms and ride the **** train but guess what you can now sit in the plex too and not be d-scanned down if you get caught it will be beacuse you are not watching local not hitting d-scan for the probes, but lets face it most FW guys are stabbed so they will just warp off anyway. Eve is about adapting let CCP release it we can balance things out after we have real data. oh by the way i have recon 5 so double yay.
Mr MID Fremen Sietch The Gorgon Empire 0	Posted - 2014.12.26 13:25:44 - [1945] - Quote You should add mid slot for the Huginn, otherwise it sucks comparing to new Rapier.
Generaloberst Kluntz Isogen 5 63	Posted - 2014.12.26 14:07:06 - [1946] - Quote Khamal Kahn wrote: Altirius Saldiaro wrote: I cant wait till these changes release on TQ. Reading all these tears has been so much fun. I cant wait to see all the tears that will flow in GD from all the morons who don't pay attention to upcoming changes. Especially in game. So many are going to die from these changes. Its going to be great!!! I speak on behalf of those in whspace who actually possess less skill than myself. Despite my fervent opposition to the proposed DSCAN invulnerability, if I were to speak from a selfish individual perspective I would say "Bring it on!". Whspace dwellers are not stupid or fearful as some would believe. We realize the lust such recon changes will instill in the hearts of gankers looking for what they think are easy kills in their DSCAN invisible ships, and we know how to bait a trap for such mindless bloodlust. The hunters may become the hunted, and tears may originate from unexpected sources. The proposed recon change is a nonsensical approach that I loathe, but defensive measures can be enacted so as to become offensive and to make it more destructive to gankers than they may realize. I just wish I didn't have to waste time with such foolishness. My opposition is not due to fear of loosing ships or pods. Heck, we all know that's part of the game. It is due to sincere opinion of what is best for the game and all participants. I also try to speak for less skilled players whom I hope to give voice and whom I hope will enjoy EVE, particularly those in whspace. Whatever happens, I'll deal with it unless it ceases to be enjoyable. Regardless, tears of sorrow is an impossibility - at least from me. Wspace is not a place for the unskilled ones. Unless they're learning in a Corp. This change makes it no harder for Wspace: you needed to have a brain before, you still need now. You needed to scout open connections while ratting, you still need now You needed to roll unwanted holes, guess what. Too much moaning , tear jar is at a point it's not amusing anymore.
Soldarius Deadman W0nderland The 99 Percent 988	Posted - 2014.12.26 14:09:03 - [1947] - Quote h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral wrote: Resists : I don't think I know enough about fleet mechanics to understand just how important HAC level resists are but I do know that solo a recon with those resists could be far too strong when you add in EWAR to that mix. IMO squishy with range bonuses and only damage application bonuses would be okay. If you don't understand how that stuff works, how can you say its OP? Most people don't even know how any EWAR works other than webs and warp disruptors, because the tutorial covers that. Currently, a solo recon simply isn't very strong. Could they kill a frigate? Sure. But so can a Confessor, or a Thrasher, or another frigate. Does that make every ship in the game OP? Of course not. Solo recons get absolutely smashed in the current environment. They lack dps and tank. And you won't kill anything if you can't keep it on field. It has more to do with picking the proper time to engage than with recons being OP (or not.) It isn't that the Falcon is OP. Its that the pilot chose just the right time and place to maximize its ability crush your hopes and dreams. So, pilots OP? http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Generaloberst Kluntz Isogen 5 63	Posted - 2014.12.26 14:15:21 - [1948] - Quote Soldarius wrote: h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral wrote: Resists : I don't think I know enough about fleet mechanics to understand just how important HAC level resists are but I do know that solo a recon with those resists could be far too strong when you add in EWAR to that mix. IMO squishy with range bonuses and only damage application bonuses would be okay. If you don't understand how that stuff works, how can you say its OP? Most people don't even know how any EWAR works other than webs and warp disruptors, because the tutorial covers that. Currently, a solo recon simply isn't very strong. Could they kill a frigate? Sure. But so can a Confessor, or a Thrasher, or another frigate. Does that make every ship in the game OP? Of course not. Solo recons get absolutely smashed in the current environment. They lack dps and tank. And you won't kill anything if you can't keep it on field. It has more to do with picking the proper time to engage than with recons being OP (or not.) It isn't that the Falcon is OP. Its that the pilot chose just the right time and place to maximize its ability crush your hopes and dreams. So, pilots OP? Awesome
Soldarius Deadman W0nderland The 99 Percent 988	Posted - 2014.12.26 14:39:29 - [1949] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Man all these people crying about the resists, if they stayed, why would you ever fly hacs? Damage? In fleets damage output rarely matters, but the ewar utility would have dumpstered the hacs In that case, why is PL flying Slippery Petes instead of Jamgus? http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Pen Ris Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 8	Posted - 2014.12.26 15:39:24 - [1950] - Quote Soldarius wrote: Grath Telkin wrote: Man all these people crying about the resists, if they stayed, why would you ever fly hacs? Damage? In fleets damage output rarely matters, but the ewar utility would have dumpstered the hacs In that case, why is PL flying Slippery Petes instead of Jamgus? Don't give him ideas; there are nearly enough virtue probers to deal with the blight of slippery petes. :p

Niskin League of the Lost 185	Posted - 2014.12.26 15:40:07 - [1951] - Quote Niskin's D-Scan Immunity Solution Desk is now Open This service is being provided for those who aren't aware of their options when faced with the possibility of an attack by one or more D-Scan immune Force Recons. If you are likely to find yourself in this situation and would like suggestions on how to handle it, please fill out the following form and wait for a reply: 1. I am operating in ( ) High-Sec, ( ) Low-Sec, ( ) Null-Sec, ( ) Wspace 2. Please list the content you are trying to run: ________________________________ 3. I am operating ( ) Solo, ( ) Multiboxing, ( ) In a Fleet 4. Please list any additional information that better qualifies your situation: ______________________________ All solutions provided will be for the number of accounts you specified that you have. It may require the use of an alt on the same account, but never the acquisition of additional accounts. If your risk level was already higher before the changes, the solution may point out how you were already at a similar risk and how those risks compare. Solutions may require you to put in more effort than you had to previously. This service is brought to you by the Foundation for people who can't help but rehash the same sht over and over again because they didn't read the whole thread. The FFPWCHBRTSSOAOABTDRTWT is a non-profit organization, created for the benefit of all capsuleers. It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship*. -MooMooDachshundCow
Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 31	Posted - 2014.12.26 16:20:31 - [1952] - Quote Niskin wrote: Niskin's D-Scan Immunity Solution Desk is now Open ... How do I 'Like' a post more than once?
maCH'EttE Mafia Redux 138	Posted - 2014.12.26 16:35:41 - [1953] - Quote Soldarius wrote: h3llra1z3r3 Arkaral wrote: Resists : I don't think I know enough about fleet mechanics to understand just how important HAC level resists are but I do know that solo a recon with those resists could be far too strong when you add in EWAR to that mix. IMO squishy with range bonuses and only damage application bonuses would be okay. If you don't understand how that stuff works, how can you say its OP? Most people don't even know how any EWAR works other than webs and warp disruptors, because the tutorial covers that. Currently, a solo recon simply isn't very strong. Could they kill a frigate? Sure. But so can a Confessor, or a Thrasher, or another frigate. Does that make every ship in the game OP? Of course not. Solo recons get absolutely smashed in the current environment. They lack dps and tank. And you won't kill anything if you can't keep it on field. It has more to do with picking the proper time to engage than with recons being OP (or not.) It isn't that the Falcon is OP. Its that the pilot chose just the right time and place to maximize its ability crush your hopes and dreams. So, pilots OP? Are you saying Ewar, whether falcon/celes/rapier/curse..../.... are not OP?
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 180	Posted - 2014.12.26 17:31:00 - [1954] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Train for missiles they say, you will be able to choose damage they say... Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
Generaloberst Kluntz Isogen 5 67	Posted - 2014.12.26 17:33:54 - [1955] - Quote Niskin wrote: Niskin's D-Scan Immunity Solution Desk is now Open This service is being provided for those who aren't aware of their options when faced with the possibility of an attack by one or more D-Scan immune Force Recons. If you are likely to find yourself in this situation and would like suggestions on how to handle it, please fill out the following form and wait for a reply: 1. I am operating in ( ) High-Sec, ( ) Low-Sec, ( ) Null-Sec, ( ) Wspace 2. Please list the content you are trying to run: ________________________________ 3. I am operating ( ) Solo, ( ) Multiboxing, ( ) In a Fleet 4. Please list any additional information that better qualifies your situation: ______________________________ All solutions provided will be for the number of accounts you specified that you have. It may require the use of an alt on the same account, but never the acquisition of additional accounts. If your risk level was already higher before the changes, the solution may point out how you were already at a similar risk and how those risks compare. Solutions may require you to put in more effort than you had to previously. This service is brought to you by the Foundation for people who can't help but rehash the same sht over and over again because they didn't read the whole thread*. The FFPWCHBRTSSOAOABTDRTWT is a non-profit organization, created for the benefit of all capsuleers. Now you shot one in, Niskin. But correct: it's Combat Recons, not Force Recons. Plaswan
Yahrr The Tuskers The Tuskers Co. 24	Posted - 2014.12.26 17:50:44 - [1956] - Quote Generaloberst Kluntz wrote: You are a shame to The Tuskers tradition. And to your own name Yahrr. I know. :( I even saved my very first iskies to buy a cormorant so I could mine with eight lasers, it didn't help. It was back in the day when the newbie directions were "get a ship, get mining", while all I wanted from the game is to be evil... Those first weeks, their still haunting me. It goes better now that I mine miners with antimatter. :) I was wondering though, how long it will take before someone takes a d-scan immune recon to low sec to mine with... No it won't be me, but I'm sure that one day you click your dscan and find mining drones, but no matching barge. Some other things about d-scan immunity to think about are the repairing of modules while being cloakish and the relatively save log-off with a timer. Cloaking modules don't stay active after pulling a logoffski ehhh I mean after getting dc'ed.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 749	Posted - 2014.12.26 18:40:41 - [1957] - Quote Wynta wrote: I keep reading that the D-Scan Immunity will somehow break the game, FW and W-Space especially. I wanted to out line why this is not true. The balancing of a ship occurs when its strengths are offset by weaknesses. These strengths and weaknesses come, for the most part, in a power triangle; a ship is balanced around damage, defense, and utility. Lets compare the Rook to the Cerberus, the Cerberus is a damage ship primarily that can fit a good tank, but it lacks utility aside from the MWD bonus. The Rook would sacrifice some of the Damage (1 Launcher, 2 Ship Bonuses, and a Low.), some tank (1 Mid, and a couple more to fit ECM), but gains equivalent utility (ECM in the Mids, and D-Scan Immunity). Now there are two problems with the balancing of Combat Recons, the T2 Resists and the D-Scan Immunity. First I want to argue why the D-Scan Immunity is balanced by comparing it to the Stealth Bomber. The stealth bomber is balanced because it sacrifice all of its defense for damage and utility. A big portion of that utility is its cloak. Not only can the SB warp while cloaked, not have a scan res penalty, but also no cloaked targeting delay. The SB can pop out of cloak and instantly begin locking any ship. To highlight these strengths I'll lists them. The SB is immune to D-Scan, Combat Probes, Overview, and can instantly lock; for all this they get no tank and big damage. The Combat Recon gets immune to D-Scan and Instant targeting, for this they sacrifice some tank and some damage. The Combat Recon specializes in Utility, they sacrifice damage and tank, gain Utility mostly from EWAR, but also slightly from D-Scan immunity, a lesser cloak. But if the D-Scan immunity is balanced by a reduced tank and damage, then why should it also get T2 Resists. Because it's strength is its weakness. In solo PvP you could easily run from a Recon, you don't want to fight, as soon as they land on grid because a good player prealigns. Now if they don't, then another good pilot could brawl with the Recon and probably come out on top because they have more damage and tank. Once the fight begins, the D-Scan immunity is pointless. In small gang fights, the D-Scan immunity has less of an impact, because you will probably be grouping with ships that don't have this bonus, the only advantage it gives you is that a D-Scanned fleet may appear smaller than the reality. If you are are running head long into another fleet without Combat Probing or using a cloaked scout on the enemy grid, then you deserve to lose. The further away from solo PvP the Recon gets, the less power the D-Scan Immunity gives. Now for fleet combat, the D-Scan Immunity is pointless, the problem facing fleet combat is that EWAR is usually primaried, and with T1 resists, they become way too fragile for their cost, and become outclassed by their T1 counterparts. The T2 resists are not the huge buff to the solo pvp'er, they are a buff to the fleet pvp'er. The D-Scan Immunity is the buff to Solo PvP, one that offers more than enough counterplay. Both are needed inorder to make the Combat Recon a viable ship in both fleet and solo. This is a good post, but I think you are jumping too far along the spectrum from big fleets to solo. Small gang is in the middle of those two extremes. To me, small gang is ten-twenty ships. E-war is most devastating in these small gang fights. If my ten meets your ten, the struggle for e-war dominance may well determine the outcome of the fight. Recon ships, EAFs, and their T1 counterparts are valuable force multipliers. The harder it is to kill the utility ship - be it Curse, Huginn, Falcon, etc - the longer it is on the field. I don't necessarily agree that these ships should all be squishy, but I think that is why they left them squishy. CCP wants ships to die. I know from listening to Rise during the AT - which is its own little freakish world - that he hates fleet comps which are designed primarily to stay alive. It's boring. Loss is exciting to watch. Loss drives the economy. Yet Eve players are generally very risk averse. We hate losing ships. Most of us will reach for whatever advantage we can get. That's why we bring OGB, Falcons, logistics, etc to most fights - or why the nano/kiting meta has been dominant for years. So, consider the implications of the original proposal for Combat Recons - decent damage, T2 resists, faster, and generally more potent than what we have now. Consider the Rook - currently one of the worst ships in the game. How horrible it would be to fight a small gang of 6 Rooks with 2 Scimitars, a Huginn, and a Lachesis, with OGB in support? They might not kill that much, but man would that suck to fight with a equivalent gang. As you started to add more tackle and more Rooks, it would just get worse to deal with. Until you get to the scale where we are no longer talking small gang. There are other people in this thread with more well-established PVP resumes than me. Is what I am proposing a strawman? Do you think that is not a concern? Because if it is not a concern, than perhaps we can make a good argument for keeping the T2 resistances. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Swiftstrike1 Swiftstrike Incorporated 855	Posted - 2014.12.26 19:47:07 - [1958] - Quote This would be a great springboard for an ECM overhaul.... Conveniently enough, that link leads to a forum thread on exactly that topic! I have requested that it be unlocked due to it being suitably topical at the moment, but have so far not received a response. Perhaps some kindly dev reading this post could do the honours? Targeting, Sensors and ECM Overhaul
2D34DLY4U BACKUPLEGION 19	Posted - 2014.12.26 20:36:19 - [1959] - Quote I don't think the issue is if this will break the game or not, most of these things are hardly game breaking plus with some hundred thousand players and hundreds of ships in such a complex ecosystem there is ample room to adapt to whatever changes are made to a small subset of ships, if one fights the urge for hype melodrama based on vague assumptions about disaster scenarios one can easily see that none of this is the end of the world. Besides everyone learning how to deal with the changes: Worse case scenario #1 these ships will continue to be ignored. Worse case scenario #2 these ships will be over used in some specific circumstances and will be toned down in a month or so. (on that topic I liked the first iteration on interceptors with fast align and bubble immunity, grrrrrr to whoever complained and lead to that roll back) The point I feel is worth discussing is if these changes support better and more fun game play or not, at the end of the day this should be a core idea behind every design decision - "Will this change make players have more fun? Will it allow them to interact and find ways of doing cool new stuff? Does this promote rewarding and fun game play? Will the time spent playing EVE doing these things feel better spent than doing some other stuff in game or playing some other game?". This is what matters, not if this will break the game or not since I really don't think it will and I trust CCP to have the capacity to anticipate game breaking changes (to some extent ). - d scan immunity for in warp ships seems cool since it promotes roaming and introduces some degree of lack of information as Rise intended, perma d scan immunity for me acts as an incentive for camping to farm easy ganks, what IMO is less interesting game play - note I don't do FW and hardly care about it, further that I am well aware of how to deal with it, what we are discussing is the merit of the change itself, seems obvious that players will chose easy kills and this will promote what is pretty bland game play that after a few weeks makes logging off to go play some other game look like a good idea (both for the gankers and the ganked). - was looking to put some time into my cloaky scanning alt by flying something that is not a T3 or Stratios but still fun, Pilgrim looked good for it since I like submarine warfare since "Silent Service" way back, don't care if I can only catch smaller fish and can take all the drawbacks as long as the ship makes some sense, don't like the proposed changes so far nor think the ship makes much sense to me atm, but whatever - I'll wait and see.
Niskin League of the Lost 189	Posted - 2014.12.26 20:55:02 - [1960] - Quote Generaloberst Kluntz wrote: Now you shot one in, Niskin. But correct: it's Combat Recons, not Force Recons. Plaswan That's what I get for posting before coffee... Thanks It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow

Arla Sarain 217	Posted - 2014.12.26 21:42:39 - [1961] - Quote Jeremiah Saken wrote: CCP Rise wrote: The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Train for missiles they say, you will be able to choose damage they say... You get to choose kinetic. git gud and all
Blavish Perkone Caldari State 0	Posted - 2014.12.26 22:31:27 - [1962] - Quote No resist fix? Guess i'm having a pilgrim sale. again
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 32	Posted - 2014.12.26 23:09:58 - [1963] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: This is a good post, but I think you are jumping too far along the spectrum from big fleets to solo. Small gang is in the middle of those two extremes. To me, small gang is ten-twenty ships. E-war is most devastating in these small gang fights. If my ten meets your ten, the struggle for e-war dominance may well determine the outcome of the fight. Recon ships, EAFs, and their T1 counterparts are valuable force multipliers. The harder it is to kill the utility ship - be it Curse, Huginn, Falcon, etc - the longer it is on the field. I don't necessarily agree that these ships should all be squishy, but I think that is why they left them squishy. CCP wants ships to die. I know from listening to Rise during the AT - which is its own little freakish world - that he hates fleet comps which are designed primarily to stay alive. It's boring. Loss is exciting to watch. Loss drives the economy. Yet Eve players are generally very risk averse. We hate losing ships. Most of us will reach for whatever advantage we can get. That's why we bring OGB, Falcons, logistics, etc to most fights - or why the nano/kiting meta has been dominant for years. So, consider the implications of the original proposal for Combat Recons - decent damage, T2 resists, faster, and generally more potent than what we have now. Consider the Rook - currently one of the worst ships in the game. How horrible it would be to fight a small gang of 6 of the originally-proposed buffed Rooks with 2 Scimitars, a Huginn, and a Lachesis, with OGB in support? They might not kill that much, but man would that suck to fight with a equivalent gang. As you started to add more tackle and more Rooks, it would just get worse to deal with. Until you get to the scale where we are no longer talking small gang. There are other people in this thread with more well-established PVP resumes than me. Is what I am proposing a strawman? Do you think that is not a concern? Because if it is not a concern, than perhaps we can make a good argument for keeping the T2 resistances. I don't think you are proposing a straw man but I don't think you are looking at the base issue. The d-scan immunity in the small gang scenario is moot unless the majority of your comp is combat recons. You would can still be seen in local so there shouldnt be serious surprise and it wouldn't be long before a response fleet got together and hunted you down on gates and started alpha striking to wipe you up with a quickness. The bigger issue for me is that the T1 equivalent cruisers can be equally if not more effective in the scenario you propose for dramatically less ISK outlay. Consider a decently skilled Blackbird pilot with the range bonuses and selectable damage types available you get in the same scenario you posit. You probably wouldn't be able to even get tackle on the ship if he's got his business together. Also, tip of the day - ECCM is very effective against ECM and most folks don't mount the modules but gripe about it a fair amount. If you are paying for T2 capability that should include some upgraded survivability. The d-scan immunity doesn't help you at all once the fights on; it might help you get the jump on some guys but it is in no way a trade off for the dmg resists in the long run. You still won't get near HAC survivability since your running mostly Ewar related mods and little in the way of tank and damage modules but they will help. What is frustrating is that there is a totally mixed set of messages coming out for these ships. Do you want an Electonic Attack Cruiser or do you want a cloaky BLOPS capable EWAR ship. The cloaky BLOPS ewar ships are taken care of pretty well as a group with Force recon ships. The combat oriented electronic attack cruisers are stuck in some weird limbo where they are getting the worst end of both aspects. The term "recon" in these ship classes is total red herring as well. I'm interested to see how the d-scan immunity works out but that doesn't really do anything to actually make the "combat recons" more viable in combat on the whole. "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 752	Posted - 2014.12.27 00:45:52 - [1964] - Quote Jaysen Larrisen wrote: FT Diomedes wrote: This is a good post, but I think you are jumping too far along the spectrum from big fleets to solo. Small gang is in the middle of those two extremes. To me, small gang is ten-twenty ships. E-war is most devastating in these small gang fights. If my ten meets your ten, the struggle for e-war dominance may well determine the outcome of the fight. Recon ships, EAFs, and their T1 counterparts are valuable force multipliers. The harder it is to kill the utility ship - be it Curse, Huginn, Falcon, etc - the longer it is on the field. I don't necessarily agree that these ships should all be squishy, but I think that is why they left them squishy. CCP wants ships to die. I know from listening to Rise during the AT - which is its own little freakish world - that he hates fleet comps which are designed primarily to stay alive. It's boring. Loss is exciting to watch. Loss drives the economy. Yet Eve players are generally very risk averse. We hate losing ships. Most of us will reach for whatever advantage we can get. That's why we bring OGB, Falcons, logistics, etc to most fights - or why the nano/kiting meta has been dominant for years. So, consider the implications of the original proposal for Combat Recons - decent damage, T2 resists, faster, and generally more potent than what we have now. Consider the Rook - currently one of the worst ships in the game. How horrible it would be to fight a small gang of 6 of the originally-proposed buffed Rooks with 2 Scimitars, a Huginn, and a Lachesis, with OGB in support? They might not kill that much, but man would that suck to fight with a equivalent gang. As you started to add more tackle and more Rooks, it would just get worse to deal with. Until you get to the scale where we are no longer talking small gang. There are other people in this thread with more well-established PVP resumes than me. Is what I am proposing a strawman? Do you think that is not a concern? Because if it is not a concern, than perhaps we can make a good argument for keeping the T2 resistances. I don't think you are proposing a straw man but I don't think you are looking at the base issue. The d-scan immunity in the small gang scenario is moot unless the majority of your comp is combat recons. You would can still be seen in local so there shouldnt be serious surprise and it wouldn't be long before a response fleet got together and hunted you down on gates and started alpha striking to wipe you up with a quickness. The bigger issue for me is that the T1 equivalent cruisers can be equally if not more effective in the scenario you propose for dramatically less ISK outlay. Consider a decently skilled Blackbird pilot with the range bonuses and selectable damage types available you get in the same scenario you posit. You probably wouldn't be able to even get tackle on the ship if he's got his business together. Also, tip of the day - ECCM is very effective against ECM and most folks don't mount the modules but gripe about it a fair amount. If you are paying for T2 capability that should include some upgraded survivability. The d-scan immunity doesn't help you at all once the fights on; it might help you get the jump on some guys but it is in no way a trade off for the dmg resists in the long run. You still won't get near HAC survivability since your running mostly Ewar related mods and little in the way of tank and damage modules but they will help. What is frustrating is that there is a totally mixed set of messages coming out for these ships. Do you want an Electonic Attack Cruiser or do you want a cloaky BLOPS capable EWAR ship. The cloaky BLOPS ewar ships are taken care of pretty well as a group with Force recon ships. The combat oriented electronic attack cruisers are stuck in some weird limbo where they are getting the worst end of both aspects. The term "recon" in these ship classes is total red herring as well. I'm interested to see how the d-scan immunity works out but that doesn't really do anything to actually make the "combat recons" more viable in combat on the whole. I agree with you, they should be regarded as Electronic Attack Cruisers. Then balance them to make them effective in that role. The d-scan immunity is a gimmick. If it wasn't in this thread, we could be having a good discussion about the role these ships should fill in all scales of combat. The thread would also be about ten pages long, instead of nearly a hundred. I'm not saying the d-scan immunity needs to go - I'm saying that in two months it won't be an issue. In two months, I'll still be asking for Blackbirds in my gangs instead of Rooks. We'll still be relying on web Lokis and point Proteii in fleets (unless Tech 3 cruisers get nerfed so hard they are even worse then Combat Recons). On the other hand, at least some of the other changes will make the ship class slightly less awful as a whole. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Wynta State War Academy Caldari State 2	Posted - 2014.12.27 02:50:27 - [1965] - Quote I think that it must be said that the Force Recon ships are pretty well balanced and their role is laid out well. They do not need the T2 resists because they are not a combat ship. They are a Black Ops ship whose tank is ECM and the element of surprise. If the cruiser class consists of different specialities (Logistic Cruiser=Logistics, HAC=Damage, HIC=Pure Tackle, Recon=Racial EWAR) then why is the Recon so absurdly outclassed by the T3, which, from my understanding, was supposed to be an adaptive hull that was good at everything but master of nothing. Now my last post may have gotten a tad bit disorganized the further down I got but let me try to rephrase my argument. 1. The D-Scan Immunity offers both a defensive and offensive advantage. A. The Offensive advantage is like a cloaked bomber, in that they can drop in on a victim and instantly lock them. B. The Defensive advantage is like a normal cloak, in that they cannot be located via D-Scan. 2. The Offensive advantages can be countered by being aware of local, and by prealigning, because even if they are able to drop in on a victims, those victims paying attention and prealigning will not die. 3. The Defensive advantages can be countered by any cloaked ship that does on-grid scouting and any combat prober. Since every advantage offers counterplay, it is balanced. Next lets talk about T2 Resists. This argument stems from the previous statement about cruiser roles and how Recon should be the premiere Racial EWAR ship. 1. Fleets are made up of different roles: Damage, Logistics, Tackle, and EWAR. 2. Each hull size (Frigate and Cruiser especially) have a T2 class that specializes in each of these roles. 3. These T2 ships are designed to fulfill these roles in fleet combat with a similar sized fleet. A. I'm trying to make these points apply as universally as possible. Cruiser vs Cruiser fleets or small gang. 4. Multiple problems arise with the Cruiser EWAR. A. T3 Strategic Cruiser can perform the EWAR role almost as well as Recons, but with a laughably stronger tank. B. T1 Cruiser EWAR ships can perform the EWAR role almost as well as Recons with similar amount of tank, from a safer range, and at 10% of the cost. 5. In order to alleviate the problems that arise with 4a and 4b there needs to be a massive rebalancing of Combat Recons. They need to be able to survive fleet combat, and have EWAR that outclasses T1 enough to justify the cost difference. 6. HAC resists provide enough tank for the Combat Recon to survive fleet combat, IDK what to do about the EWAR balancing.
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 32	Posted - 2014.12.27 03:37:45 - [1966] - Quote Wynta wrote: I think that it must be said that the Force Recon ships are pretty well balanced and their role is laid out well. They do not need the T2 resists because they are not a combat ship. They are a Black Ops ship whose tank is ECM and the element of surprise. If the cruiser class consists of different specialities (Logistic Cruiser=Logistics, HAC=Damage, HIC=Pure Tackle, Recon=Racial EWAR) then why is the Recon so absurdly outclassed by the T3, which, from my understanding, was supposed to be an adaptive hull that was good at everything but master of nothing. Now my last post may have gotten a tad bit disorganized the further down I got but let me try to rephrase my argument. 1. The D-Scan Immunity offers both a defensive and offensive advantage. A. The Offensive advantage is like a cloaked bomber, in that they can drop in on a victim and instantly lock them. B. The Defensive advantage is like a normal cloak, in that they cannot be located via D-Scan. 2. The Offensive advantages can be countered by being aware of local, and by prealigning, because even if they are able to drop in on a victims, those victims paying attention and prealigning will not die. 3. The Defensive advantages can be countered by any cloaked ship that does on-grid scouting and any combat prober. Since every advantage offers counterplay, it is balanced. Next lets talk about T2 Resists. This argument stems from the previous statement about cruiser roles and how Recon should be the premiere Racial EWAR ship. 1. Fleets are made up of different roles: Damage, Logistics, Tackle, and EWAR. 2. Each hull size (Frigate and Cruiser especially) have a T2 class that specializes in each of these roles. 3. These T2 ships are designed to fulfill these roles in fleet combat with a similar sized fleet. A. I'm trying to make these points apply as universally as possible. Cruiser vs Cruiser fleets or small gang. 4. Multiple problems arise with the Cruiser EWAR. A. T3 Strategic Cruiser can perform the EWAR role almost as well as Recons, but with a laughably stronger tank. B. T1 Cruiser EWAR ships can perform the EWAR role almost as well as Recons with similar amount of tank, from a safer range, and at 10% of the cost. 5. In order to alleviate the problems that arise with 4a and 4b there needs to be a massive rebalancing of Combat Recons. They need to be able to survive fleet combat, and have EWAR that outclasses T1 enough to justify the cost difference. 6. HAC resists provide enough tank for the Combat Recon to survive fleet combat, IDK what to do about the EWAR balancing. That is a pretty distilled and at least from my perspective accurate argument. +1 The concern that CCP Rise noted when stepping back from the T2 resists was the concern that it might be too powerful in small gang combat. I honestly don't see it getting to that point or certainly not more powerful than many other currently available ships. Again, nice pithy capture of the issue and a clean logical argument. I honestly hope CCP Rise and team take look at the discussion and at least give it full consideration. They may or may not put in the T2 resists at least for the Combat Recons but it won't be for lack of very solid and well thought out arguments for them being in. "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
Michael Oskold Adversity. Psychotic Tendencies. 2	Posted - 2014.12.27 03:43:37 - [1967] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. 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. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ Meybe drop the dscan immunity and give combat recons hac resists so they actually do what they are already only used for. right now i see no difference between the two recons. 1 runs a cloak and the other isnt visible on dscan. why are they both attempting to do the same thing?
Iam Widdershins Project Nemesis 882	Posted - 2014.12.27 03:55:48 - [1968] - Quote Serious post: These changes are pretty neat and all, but the Huginn just hasn't been the same since you nerfed its engine trails from verdant green to the current Minmatar standard. The removable of a discernible engine signature from combat recons presents an excellent opportunity: Make all four ships have green engine trails. Green is objectively the best color, after all. Lobbying for your right to delete your signature
Tipod Incognito iHarvest Industries 0	Posted - 2014.12.27 04:26:35 - [1969] - Quote Most common misconceptions are: -Carebear A: "This will benefit the evil piratez D=" -Carebear B: "You haz cloaky stuff outside d-scan anyway, just have to watch local" Now the evil solo/small gang pilot cant trust dem d-scans anymore and their only chance of counterplay is praying to god. What used to be falcons will turn to rooks offgrid, this is a game changer, you could expect to get jumped by cloacky stuff but you knew it would be risky for them too as they're weak and expensive. Now the hidden aces comes with quality tank. To achieve a similar combat weight pre-proteus you had to dump shitloads of extra isk just for the cloak feature (T3, stratios), and lets face it, even if you did nothing turns the tides of a fight like ewar.
Wynta State War Academy Caldari State 3	Posted - 2014.12.27 07:25:26 - [1970] - Quote Michael Oskold wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. 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. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ Meybe drop the dscan immunity and give combat recons hac resists so they actually do what they are already only used for. right now i see no difference between the two recons. 1 runs a cloak and the other isnt visible on dscan. why are they both attempting to do the same thing? D-Scan Immunity and cloak are two different things. The Force Recon is primarily a Black Ops scout, it can fit a covert cyno and has cyno bonuses, because of this, they must have a cloak inorder to fly with other cloaking ships. D-Scan immunity acts like a cloak but is not a cloak, and therefore the Combat Recon cannot fly with these types of fleets without decloaking them. Since the Force Recon is primarily a BLOPs ship they get the cloak and EWAR but sacrifice almost all their damage and tank. I think D-Scan immunity is as close to a Cloak as CCP could give without giving them one, because a blackops fleet with a cloaked Combat recon would be overpowered.

Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 32	Posted - 2014.12.27 07:33:52 - [1971] - Quote Wynta wrote: D-Scan Immunity and cloak are two different things. The Force Recon is primarily a Black Ops scout, it can fit a covert cyno and has cyno bonuses, because of this, they must have a cloak inorder to fly with other cloaking ships. D-Scan immunity acts like a cloak but is not a cloak, and therefore the Combat Recon cannot fly with these types of fleets without decloaking them. Since the Force Recon is primarily a BLOPs ship they get the cloak and EWAR but sacrifice almost all their damage and tank. I think D-Scan immunity is as close to a Cloak as CCP could give without giving them one, because a blackops fleet with a cloaked Combat recon would be overpowered. Also, consider the role the Force Recon plays when scouting for a larger.... Force. It needs to be able to provide warp-ins, which means it has to be able to cloak on grid or it will get blapped by towers or whatnot. D-scan immune combat recons wont be suited for scouting anything that requires on-grid knowledge. o.F.
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 32	Posted - 2014.12.27 10:16:37 - [1972] - Quote Orange Faeces wrote: Wynta wrote: D-Scan Immunity and cloak are two different things. The Force Recon is primarily a Black Ops scout, it can fit a covert cyno and has cyno bonuses, because of this, they must have a cloak inorder to fly with other cloaking ships. D-Scan immunity acts like a cloak but is not a cloak, and therefore the Combat Recon cannot fly with these types of fleets without decloaking them. Since the Force Recon is primarily a BLOPs ship they get the cloak and EWAR but sacrifice almost all their damage and tank. I think D-Scan immunity is as close to a Cloak as CCP could give without giving them one, because a blackops fleet with a cloaked Combat recon would be overpowered. Also, consider the role the Force Recon plays when scouting for a larger.... Force. It needs to be able to provide warp-ins, which means it has to be able to cloak on grid or it will get blapped by towers or whatnot. D-scan immune combat recons wont be suited for scouting anything that requires on-grid knowledge. o.F. You just cited one of the key points why I think the d-scan immunity really isn't the bogey man that some have made it out to be. "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 32	Posted - 2014.12.27 10:18:26 - [1973] - Quote Wynta wrote: Michael Oskold wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. 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. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ Meybe drop the dscan immunity and give combat recons hac resists so they actually do what they are already only used for. right now i see no difference between the two recons. 1 runs a cloak and the other isnt visible on dscan. why are they both attempting to do the same thing? D-Scan Immunity and cloak are two different things. The Force Recon is primarily a Black Ops scout, it can fit a covert cyno and has cyno bonuses, because of this, they must have a cloak inorder to fly with other cloaking ships. D-Scan immunity acts like a cloak but is not a cloak, and therefore the Combat Recon cannot fly with these types of fleets without decloaking them. Since the Force Recon is primarily a BLOPs ship they get the cloak and EWAR but sacrifice almost all their damage and tank. I think D-Scan immunity is as close to a Cloak as CCP could give without giving them one, because a blackops fleet with a cloaked Combat recon would be overpowered. Why do you think a combat recon would be overpowered with a cloak? It is no more effective at Ewar or DPS than a Falcon already is? "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
Mister Holder Faceless Men 14	Posted - 2014.12.27 11:15:59 - [1974] - Quote Welp, them removing the t2 resist profile just made them useless again. I would rather use a t1 ewar cruiser fully fit at 10% the cost and damn near the same effectiveness as a recon hull, or a t3 with infinity more tank/versatility, and the same effectiveness. Recon: -Terrible dps - check -Terrible resist - check -Similar Ewar to t1/t3 cruiser based hull - check But hey, at least they won't see you coming on d-scan. Being sneaky, and all is great, but when you have ** poor dps, ** poor tank, and no real advantage you just get ate up by most other ships. This is why Black Ops battleships are used for bridging, and that's about it. Until CCP realized that being sneaky isn't such as large an advantage as they think it is maybe things will start to get correctly balanced in the covert lines. Why spend 200m on a Recon hull when a t1 ewar bonus hull is what, under 10m for slightly less tank, and same ewar effectiveness? Is being unable to be seen on d-scan worth 190m? IMO, not even remotely close to being worth it.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5700	Posted - 2014.12.27 12:53:05 - [1975] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. You know what might be neat? If Kaalakiota decided to upgrade their technology, or be innovative, or skill up, or maybe even steal real technology from another corporation so they could have a decent launcher bonus on their ships. Get some storyline people on this asap! I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
Barrogh Habalu Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 834	Posted - 2014.12.27 13:08:31 - [1976] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: I agree with you, they should be regarded as Electronic Attack Cruisers. Then balance them to make them effective in that role. I agree as well. It would be a good to have a focused baseline of designs before making more "hybrid" (as in, middle ground between specialist ships) ships. Who we are kidding, after all, there are plenty of specialist ships in EVE already, especially T2. Honour of performing several roles with one fit (giving up some effectiveness at each ofc) can go to new T3s - they can be already built like that, all that is needed tbh is to make sure different SSs don't promote stacking bonuses for a single role, but with huge min-maxing roof.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 891	Posted - 2014.12.27 15:58:18 - [1977] - Quote I still get the feeling that most of the people in this thread saying, "Dude, all you need is a ship with combat probes," have never had to probe anything. Have fun when you get to some ~60au system and need to probe out a recon that's moving around the system periodically. Hint: the only way you'll ever get a fix on the recon is sheer luck.
Paynus Maiassus Capital Munitions 199	Posted - 2014.12.27 16:21:25 - [1978] - Quote To chime in again, I personally think the Lachesis and Rook don't particularly need HAC resists because their tank should be their incredible range. In large fleets they should have a separate anchor and FC and just be used smartly. In my short time in Brave I've noticed the extreme positive tactical effect of bringing a largish fleet of Tengus and Eagles to an engagement with our more experienced players plus bringing a second fleet of a gazillion noobs in Mauluses. I am not strategically in the know, and I guess maybe the idea was to bring them in so they can feel like they are participating and KM *****. Regardless the reason, PL has become extremely reluctant to engage, even in slippery petes. Being able to shut down an enemy from 80K away is a pretty impressive force multiplier. Previously, the Pilgrim was something of a niche ship, not preferred to hunter-killer for SB fleets because its neut bonus would not take much effect before the enemy was zapped by the 50 SBs. However, as a solo hunter or as a HK for a small BLOPs gang it was great because of its superior tank and the extreme effectiveness of its neuts in situations where the enemy is not expected to die instantaneously. I personally would prefer a neut strength bonus to a neut range bonus like it was but just bring the resists up to HAC level making it attractive in situations where tank matters. You just warp up to your target at zero anyway. You want to neut faster. And you want tank to survive longer. I haven't really thought about the Huginn and Rapier. I suspect that their 'problems' are more along the lines of not being properly used by the player base really. I guess in summary, I think the pre-Proteus Caldari and Gallente recons don't need balancing. They just need to be properly used by the players. They should never engage up close. The Amarr recons don't need their EWAR bonuses changed. They just need the HAC resists. They should never engage far away. I have no comment on the Minmatar ships. I've already commented on it, but to restate, I like the DSCAN immunity for the combat recons. I like encouraging CCP to be bold and increase options. Yeah, it may break some stuff, but they always have the option to pull it on the one hand, or more exciting even, to modify the characteristic, or even more exciting than that, develop modules and ships that will provide a counter to the new threat. Instead of screaming for them to keep things just as they are, we need to be saying, 'if you're going to implement X, it's going to break Y, so then you'll also need to implement Z.' We do not need to be saying, 'if you're going to implement X, it's going to break Y, so don't implement X.' If we don't let them be bold with these recons, and we whine every time there's a major change, then we will NEVER get them to make changes to blob warfare, logi chains, etc. I love Eve more than I've ever loved any game, but there's some seriously lame parts of it. If we scream every time there's a major upset to the mix and insist they leave things as they are, we'll be stuck forever. So let them do the DSCAN immunity, let's see what it breaks, provide feedback, use the CSM to influence them, and see how they fix it.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 891	Posted - 2014.12.27 16:40:04 - [1979] - Quote The problem with the Rapier is that its only viable niche is as a screening ship for a gang, but because it has no tank, no cap, and is too slow, it can't even be useful there. If you want to gatecamp and keep things from burning back to gate, you need a Daredevil (for the scan-res and web that actually stops things). If you want to stop things dead while being able to tank, you need a Vigilant. If you want to attend a fleet fight, you need a Loki (for the tank). If you want to skirmish, you don't really have a good option (the recons are squishy and slow, the Loki is slow and fat with bad web range). If you want to do recon-y things, you want a Loki (since it does everything that the Rapier does, but has a better tank for holding tackle on targets it catches, and is also bubble immune, which renders it basically an invulnerable scout). As a side note, they should really just remove T3 cruisers from the game. They don't make any sense from a balance perspective (90% of their potential configurations are just expensive garbage, while the few configurations that DO work out-perform their T2 equivalents by a large margin) and their re-configurability gimmick doesn't really work either since you can't swap rigs around-- I've ended up with four Lokis because it's just so wasteful having to dumpster full sets of rigs all the time to change one hull to a different fit.
Dun'Gal Myriad Contractors Inc. 174	Posted - 2014.12.27 17:06:39 - [1980] - Quote Man so many butt hurt bears here, and listening to these wormholers crying about dscan immunity makes me wonder if I missed an update that prevents people who live in wormholes from using these ships to there advantage? I mean, if you are worried about a ship with no cloak catching you because it's not on dscan, what exactly is preventing you from hiding one of these ships to counter gank? The potential for surprise buttsex goes both ways. And honestly if your only argument is that this forces you to have an alt/friend help you, especially when you complain about having to share rewards with your fleet mate, then the problem here isn't dscan immunity... it's your lazy, greedy and self-entitled attitude. They really should bring back the T2 resists, but I can work around that much like (as a primarily solo pilot) I am going to have to work around the possibility of a sneaky combat recon pilot making an appearance in my pvp encounters with no warning.

Dun'Gal Myriad Contractors Inc. 174	Posted - 2014.12.27 17:11:57 - [1981] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: I still get the feeling that most of the people in this thread saying, "Dude, all you need is a ship with combat probes," have never had to probe anything. Have fun when you get to some ~60au system and need to probe out a recon that's moving around the system periodically. Hint: the only way you'll ever get a fix on the recon is sheer luck. Also this is about as short sighted a post I've seen here. There's no need to get a fix on it because the complaint has so far been that dscan immunity makes it too hard to know that one is there. Simply picking one up with combat probes should be enough to make you err on the side of caution. Getting a 100% warpable hit is not necessary for that intel.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 754	Posted - 2014.12.27 17:18:29 - [1982] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: I still get the feeling that most of the people in this thread saying, "Dude, all you need is a ship with combat probes," have never had to probe anything. Have fun when you get to some ~60au system and need to probe out a recon that's moving around the system periodically. Hint: the only way you'll ever get a fix on the recon is sheer luck. Yes, this will be a serious problem unless the dude is actually afk. When you are combat probing, having your friends say, "he is within 10 AU of Planet 10, but not visible on d-scan from the sun" is very useful. Even then, it can be very hard to locate a reasonably agile ship." This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 754	Posted - 2014.12.27 17:23:46 - [1983] - Quote Dun'Gal wrote: Ganthrithor wrote: I still get the feeling that most of the people in this thread saying, "Dude, all you need is a ship with combat probes," have never had to probe anything. Have fun when you get to some ~60au system and need to probe out a recon that's moving around the system periodically. Hint: the only way you'll ever get a fix on the recon is sheer luck. Also this is about as short sighted a post I've seen here. There's no need to get a fix on it because the complaint has so far been that dscan immunity makes it too hard to know that one is there. Simply picking one up with combat probes should be enough to make you err on the side of caution. Getting a 100% warpable hit is not necessary for that intel. Presumably you would like to be able to kill the recon, not just know that he is there. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Paynus Maiassus Capital Munitions 201	Posted - 2014.12.27 17:24:29 - [1984] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: The problem with the Rapier is that its only viable niche is as a screening ship for a gang, but because it has no tank, no cap, and is too slow, it can't even be useful there. If you want to gatecamp and keep things from burning back to gate, you need a Daredevil (for the scan-res and web that actually stops things). If you want to stop things dead while being able to tank, you need a Vigilant. If you want to attend a fleet fight, you need a Loki (for the tank). If you want to skirmish, you don't really have a good option (the recons are squishy and slow, the Loki is slow and fat with bad web range). If you want to do recon-y things, you want a Loki (since it does everything that the Rapier does, but has a better tank for holding tackle on targets it catches, and is also bubble immune, which renders it basically an invulnerable scout). As a side note, they should really just remove T3 cruisers from the game. They don't make any sense from a balance perspective (90% of their potential configurations are just expensive garbage, while the few configurations that DO work out-perform their T2 equivalents by a large margin) and their re-configurability gimmick doesn't really work either since you can't swap rigs around-- I've ended up with four Lokis because it's just so wasteful having to dumpster full sets of rigs all the time to change one hull to a different fit. Thanks for the insights on the Minmatar. Just so you know, I am betting the Strategic Cruiser nerf is going to be very extreme and cause more tears than this thread. I am also betting the T3 nerf comes in the next patch or two. So don't fret. They are a grand and unique idea and should not be removed from the game. But they should be nerfed hard. It will happen. Just when it does, don't go crying about your poor Loki.
Generaloberst Kluntz Isogen 5 68	Posted - 2014.12.27 17:55:11 - [1985] - Quote Paynus Maiassus wrote: To chime in again, I personally think the Lachesis and Rook don't particularly need HAC resists because their tank should be their incredible range. In large fleets they should have a separate anchor and FC and just be used smartly. In my short time in Brave I've noticed the extreme positive tactical effect of bringing a largish fleet of Tengus and Eagles to an engagement with our more experienced players plus bringing a second fleet of a gazillion noobs in Mauluses. I am not strategically in the know, and I guess maybe the idea was to bring them in so they can feel like they are participating and KM *****. Regardless the reason, PL has become extremely reluctant to engage, even in slippery petes. Being able to shut down an enemy from 80K away is a pretty impressive force multiplier. Previously, the Pilgrim was something of a niche ship, not preferred to hunter-killer for SB fleets because its neut bonus would not take much effect before the enemy was zapped by the 50 SBs. However, as a solo hunter or as a HK for a small BLOPs gang it was great because of its superior tank and the extreme effectiveness of its neuts in situations where the enemy is not expected to die instantaneously. I personally would prefer a neut strength bonus to a neut range bonus like it was but just bring the resists up to HAC level making it attractive in situations where tank matters. You just warp up to your target at zero anyway. You want to neut faster. And you want tank to survive longer. I haven't really thought about the Huginn and Rapier. I suspect that their 'problems' are more along the lines of not being properly used by the player base really. I guess in summary, I think the pre-Proteus Caldari and Gallente recons don't need balancing. They just need to be properly used by the players. They should never engage up close. The Amarr recons don't need their EWAR bonuses changed. They just need the HAC resists. They should never engage far away. I have no comment on the Minmatar ships. I've already commented on it, but to restate, I like the DSCAN immunity for the combat recons. I like encouraging CCP to be bold and increase options. Yeah, it may break some stuff, but they always have the option to pull it on the one hand, or more exciting even, to modify the characteristic, or even more exciting than that, develop modules and ships that will provide a counter to the new threat. Instead of screaming for them to keep things just as they are, we need to be saying, 'if you're going to implement X, it's going to break Y, so then you'll also need to implement Z.' We do not need to be saying, 'if you're going to implement X, it's going to break Y, so don't implement X.' If we don't let them be bold with these recons, and we whine every time there's a major change, then we will NEVER get them to make changes to blob warfare, logi chains, etc. I love Eve more than I've ever loved any game, but there's some seriously lame parts of it. If we scream every time there's a major upset to the mix and insist they leave things as they are, we'll be stuck forever. So let them do the DSCAN immunity, let's see what it breaks, provide feedback, use the CSM to influence them, and see how they fix it. Best post in thread.
Komi Toran Paragon Trust The Bastion 499	Posted - 2014.12.27 18:12:09 - [1986] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: Presumably you would like to be able to kill the recon, not just know that he is there. Knowing that he is there is the first step to killing him. Besides, if you have no hope of scanning down a Combat Recon in a 60AU system, then you really have no hope of scanning any cruiser-sized vessel down, either, D-Scan immunity or no.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 893	Posted - 2014.12.27 18:29:33 - [1987] - Quote Dun'Gal wrote: Ganthrithor wrote: I still get the feeling that most of the people in this thread saying, "Dude, all you need is a ship with combat probes," have never had to probe anything. Have fun when you get to some ~60au system and need to probe out a recon that's moving around the system periodically. Hint: the only way you'll ever get a fix on the recon is sheer luck. Also this is about as short sighted a post I've seen here. There's no need to get a fix on it because the complaint has so far been that dscan immunity makes it too hard to know that one is there. Simply picking one up with combat probes should be enough to make you err on the side of caution. Getting a 100% warpable hit is not necessary for that intel. You do realize that you don't even get a ship class indication on a poor-quality probe hit, right? Making a particular recon indistinguishable from some unpiloted Mammoth sitting in someone's POS somewhere, or whatever. Security through obscurity is nearly as effective as being entirely un-probeable.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 893	Posted - 2014.12.27 18:33:43 - [1988] - Quote Paynus Maiassus wrote: Just so you know, I am betting the Strategic Cruiser nerf is going to be very extreme and cause more tears than this thread. I am also betting the T3 nerf comes in the next patch or two. So don't fret. They are a grand and unique idea and should not be removed from the game. But they should be nerfed hard. It will happen. Just when it does, don't go crying about your poor Loki. They should be removed. I don't see a way to nerf them enough to allow the T2 ships to shine without rendering the T3s totally worthless. Regardless, I won't be shedding any tears for my Lokis if it means I won't have to deal with the 25% of nullsec that doesn't fly travel inties flying covert / nullified T3s.
scorchlikeshiswhiskey Cirrius Technologies O X I D E 350	Posted - 2014.12.27 18:34:02 - [1989] - Quote Damn, the kinetic bonus is rearing it's ugly head again? If I needed convincing that the Rook won't be worth the ISK, this was it. Or maybe it was the lack of any kind of survivability bonus on a T2 "combat" hull. Either way, I am underwhelmed again. Good job.
Devil Seven Objectless Hatred. Legion Galactic Council 1	Posted - 2014.12.27 18:53:31 - [1990] - Quote RAPIER Role Bonus: 80% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator liquid ozone consumption 50% reduction in Cynosural Field Generator duration GÇó Can fit Covert Ops Cloaking Device and Covert Cynosural Field Generator GÇó Cloak reactivation delay reduced to 5 seconds Minmatar Cruiser Bonuses: 10% bonus to Missile damage (was medium projectile turret rate of fire) 10% bonus to Target Painter effectiveness Recon Ships Bonuses: 60% bonus to Stasis Webifier optimal range 20% reduction in Cloaking Devices CPU requirement Slot layout: 3H, 6M, 5L; 1 turrets, 3 launchers(+2) Should get a 5th low slot for a high slot would help a lot

Barrogh Habalu Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 834	Posted - 2014.12.27 18:59:43 - [1991] - Quote Paynus Maiassus wrote: To chime in again, I personally think the Lachesis and Rook don't particularly need HAC resists because their tank should be their incredible range. In large fleets they should have a separate anchor and FC and just be used smartly. In my short time in Brave I've noticed the extreme positive tactical effect of bringing a largish fleet of Tengus and Eagles to an engagement with our more experienced players plus bringing a second fleet of a gazillion noobs in Mauluses. I am not strategically in the know, and I guess maybe the idea was to bring them in so they can feel like they are participating and KM *****. Regardless the reason, PL has become extremely reluctant to engage, even in slippery petes. Being able to shut down an enemy from 80K away is a pretty impressive force multiplier. Previously, the Pilgrim was something of a niche ship, not preferred to hunter-killer for SB fleets because its neut bonus would not take much effect before the enemy was zapped by the 50 SBs. However, as a solo hunter or as a HK for a small BLOPs gang it was great because of its superior tank and the extreme effectiveness of its neuts in situations where the enemy is not expected to die instantaneously. I personally would prefer a neut strength bonus to a neut range bonus like it was but just bring the resists up to HAC level making it attractive in situations where tank matters. You just warp up to your target at zero anyway. You want to neut faster. And you want tank to survive longer. I haven't really thought about the Huginn and Rapier. I suspect that their 'problems' are more along the lines of not being properly used by the player base really. I guess in summary, I think the pre-Proteus Caldari and Gallente recons don't need balancing. They just need to be properly used by the players. They should never engage up close. The Amarr recons don't need their EWAR bonuses changed. They just need the HAC resists. They should never engage far away. I have no comment on the Minmatar ships. I've already commented on it, but to restate, I like the DSCAN immunity for the combat recons. I like encouraging CCP to be bold and increase options. Yeah, it may break some stuff, but they always have the option to pull it on the one hand, or more exciting even, to modify the characteristic, or even more exciting than that, develop modules and ships that will provide a counter to the new threat. Instead of screaming for them to keep things just as they are, we need to be saying, 'if you're going to implement X, it's going to break Y, so then you'll also need to implement Z.' We do not need to be saying, 'if you're going to implement X, it's going to break Y, so don't implement X.' If we don't let them be bold with these recons, and we whine every time there's a major change, then we will NEVER get them to make changes to blob warfare, logi chains, etc. I love Eve more than I've ever loved any game, but there's some seriously lame parts of it. If we scream every time there's a major upset to the mix and insist they leave things as they are, we'll be stuck forever. So let them do the DSCAN immunity, let's see what it breaks, provide feedback, use the CSM to influence them, and see how they fix it. Reposting for visibility. Among other things, this is because some points need not to be drown in DScan-related discussion. Sometimes I feel that this bonus warrants separate thread.
Kmelx Matari Exodus 119	Posted - 2014.12.27 19:25:04 - [1992] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. And he swings... And he misses again... No one that I've noticed was complaining about the proposal to increase the tanks on these ships, so that they could be viable in fleets again. So what do you do, you propose to decrease the tanks on these ships. The outcry in this thread is about one thing and one thing only d-scan immunity. If you want to balance these ships which presumably you do, remove the d-scan immunity, leave the tank alone from the proposed levels and leave the cap as it was before the proposals, or maybe nerf it a bit, so that these ships have strong bonuses and a draw back to those bonuses, which is the cap. If they appear on d-scan, have strong bonuses, but a cap limit to the amount of time they can run those bonuses or they have to make fitting compromises to use the aforementioned bonuses then the ships would be balanced. The outcry would stop and we could all get on with doing something other than complaining about these changes.
Komi Toran Paragon Trust The Bastion 500	Posted - 2014.12.27 20:10:19 - [1993] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: It's vastly easier to probe down a ship that shows up on d-scan, since a prober can have their gang mates fly around the system and report where the target shows up on d-scan, allowing the prober to position their probes to pick up an initial hit very quickly. It's having to probe the entire volume of a solar system just to get an initial hit (remember, you need a strong enough hit to show that your target is the recon ship rather than some other piece of spacejunk) that's problematic to the point of absurdity. That's a load of BS. if you set your scan probe selection to Ships, then you're only going to see Ship signatures, not random space junk. Furthermore, the scan IDs of your fleet mates don't change from scan to scan, and you can set your list to ignore them. And that also means once you get a hit identified as a combat recon (not that hard, really) you now know what scan ID to look for, regardless of the signal strength. The only thing that's going to thwart your scanning is if the ship's pilot is paying attention and warping from safe spot to safe spot, but that would ruin your efforts to narrow his location down through D-Scan just the same.
flaming phantom T.R.I.A.D Ushra'Khan 74	Posted - 2014.12.27 21:02:54 - [1994] - Quote I also wish that they didn't remove the projectile turrets from the rapier. I really liked it with Artys. Now I am going to have to train t2 Heavy missiles. Not a big deal, just a minor rant All great men have mustaches
Paynus Maiassus Capital Munitions 202	Posted - 2014.12.27 21:04:05 - [1995] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: Paynus Maiassus wrote: Just so you know, I am betting the Strategic Cruiser nerf is going to be very extreme and cause more tears than this thread. I am also betting the T3 nerf comes in the next patch or two. So don't fret. They are a grand and unique idea and should not be removed from the game. But they should be nerfed hard. It will happen. Just when it does, don't go crying about your poor Loki. They should be removed. I don't see a way to nerf them enough to allow the T2 ships to shine without rendering the T3s totally worthless. Actually you can nerf them pretty severely and they will still have a lot of uses. Their intended use is to be able to mix and match functions so they can provide combinations of functions but not as well as T2 single function ships. For instance, if you want a cloak logistics ship, you need to go with a T3. There isn't anything that can provide that function other than a T3. Should they logi as well as a Guardian? No. For the price and the skill point loss, maybe as well as an Auguror. But to have an interdiction nullified and/or cloaky logi ship in itself is useful. Having an interdiction nullified combat ship is useful. Look at the slippery pete. The problem is they are the best combat ships in the game. That's the problem. A Tengu should be able to be interdiction nullified and fight, but about like a Moa or a Caracal. Not better than an Eagle or a Cerb. So actually, the nerving will probably be pretty straight forward. You can still do what you could, but crappier. They should not have the same scan bonuses as a scan frig. They should not have the same logi bonuses as logi. Etc. But this is a Recon thread, not a T3 thread. Just continuing the discussion. I'm sure there will be more talking about this either in preparation for the T3 nerf or as soon as the initial nerf is announced.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 1890	Posted - 2014.12.27 22:58:05 - [1996] - Quote Paynus Maiassus wrote: Ganthrithor wrote: The problem with the Rapier is that its only viable niche is as a screening ship for a gang, but because it has no tank, no cap, and is too slow, it can't even be useful there. If you want to gatecamp and keep things from burning back to gate, you need a Daredevil (for the scan-res and web that actually stops things). If you want to stop things dead while being able to tank, you need a Vigilant. If you want to attend a fleet fight, you need a Loki (for the tank). If you want to skirmish, you don't really have a good option (the recons are squishy and slow, the Loki is slow and fat with bad web range). If you want to do recon-y things, you want a Loki (since it does everything that the Rapier does, but has a better tank for holding tackle on targets it catches, and is also bubble immune, which renders it basically an invulnerable scout). As a side note, they should really just remove T3 cruisers from the game. They don't make any sense from a balance perspective (90% of their potential configurations are just expensive garbage, while the few configurations that DO work out-perform their T2 equivalents by a large margin) and their re-configurability gimmick doesn't really work either since you can't swap rigs around-- I've ended up with four Lokis because it's just so wasteful having to dumpster full sets of rigs all the time to change one hull to a different fit. Thanks for the insights on the Minmatar. Just so you know, I am betting the Strategic Cruiser nerf is going to be very extreme and cause more tears than this thread. I am also betting the T3 nerf comes in the next patch or two. So don't fret. They are a grand and unique idea and should not be removed from the game. But they should be nerfed hard. It will happen. Just when it does, don't go crying about your poor Loki. It's not necessarily the Loki I'm too worried about, it's the tengu in the proteus
McChicken Combo HalfMayo The Happy Meal 171	Posted - 2014.12.27 23:10:58 - [1997] - Quote Paynus Maiassus wrote: The Amarr recons don't need their EWAR bonuses changed. They just need the HAC resists. They should never engage far away. This guy. Since they announced ditching the higher resist profile, 15-20% more armor HP and a hairs increase in PG would be fine. ~ Bookmarks in overview ~ Fleet improvements
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 894	Posted - 2014.12.27 23:23:15 - [1998] - Quote Komi Toran wrote: Ganthrithor wrote: It's vastly easier to probe down a ship that shows up on d-scan, since a prober can have their gang mates fly around the system and report where the target shows up on d-scan, allowing the prober to position their probes to pick up an initial hit very quickly. It's having to probe the entire volume of a solar system just to get an initial hit (remember, you need a strong enough hit to show that your target is the recon ship rather than some other piece of spacejunk) that's problematic to the point of absurdity. That's a load of BS. if you set your scan probe selection to Ships, then you're only going to see Ship signatures, not random space junk. Furthermore, the scan IDs of your fleet mates don't change from scan to scan, and you can set your list to ignore them. And that also means once you get a hit identified as a combat recon (not that hard, really) you now know what scan ID to look for, regardless of the signal strength. The only thing that's going to thwart your scanning is if the ship's pilot is paying attention and warping from safe spot to safe spot, but that would ruin your efforts to narrow his location down through D-Scan just the same. All your points only apply if the prober has pre-scanned the system before the recon shows up, and then happens to catch the recon on a scan just as it jumps in. If you haven't pre-scanned (thus getting signature IDs for all your gang mates as well as every random ship floating around in space in that system-- piloted or not--, you're gonna have a bad time. If you're just chillin and you see a recon ship jump through a gate and warp off, and you launch probes to find it, it's gonna be next to impossible in a large system since you'll have no idea at all where to put probes to start looking. If someone in a normal ship is rolling safe spots, you can at least spread a few people around the system and have them use their D-scanners to call out ROUGHLY where the target is warping. You can then look for patterns and figure out approximately where to start running probes. It at least makes sure that your target has to move safes very frequently and avoid using the same spots repeatedly in order to evade you. With a d-scan immune recon ship, people will just warp off to a random safe and it will take several minutes for the prober to even figure out what half of the solar system the target is sitting in. It will be a MUCH slower process to find a recon than it will be for any other kind of non-cloaked ship.
Devil Seven Objectless Hatred. Legion Galactic Council 1	Posted - 2014.12.27 23:54:13 - [1999] - Quote The D-scan immunity is fine because any good fleet has a scout that is worth a damn and can prob the system down in less then 5 minutes. And can find who he is with only reason this is going to be a problem is for the solo players which suck at the game anyways as this is a mmo so having a friend will always be helpful
Komi Toran Paragon Trust The Bastion 501	Posted - 2014.12.28 00:37:31 - [2000] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: All your points only apply if the prober has pre-scanned the system before the recon shows up, and then happens to catch the recon on a scan just as it jumps in. Unless you're doing this in a high-traffic system, no. It will take you all of 10 seconds to exclude non-target ships. Ganthrithor wrote: If someone in a normal ship is rolling safe spots, you can at least spread a few people around the system and have them use their D-scanners to call out ROUGHLY where the target is warping. You can then look for patterns and figure out approximately where to start running probes. It at least makes sure that your target has to move safes very frequently and avoid using the same spots repeatedly in order to evade you. With a d-scan immune recon ship, people will just warp off to a random safe and it will take several minutes for the prober to even figure out what half of the solar system the target is sitting in. It will be a MUCH slower process to find a recon than it will be for any other kind of non-cloaked ship. And this is all irrelevant: If he's paying attention, he will avoid you. If he isn't, you will catch him. This is exactly as it is now. D-Scan immunity only provides the illusion of safety, which is why after this change you will find more combat recons being successfully probed down and killed than before. You know, I'm kinda concerned what would happen if I told you the impact cloaks have on both D-Scan and probing.

Kmelx Matari Exodus 121	Posted - 2014.12.28 00:49:40 - [2001] - Quote Devil Seven wrote: The D-scan immunity is fine because any good fleet has a scout that is worth a damn and can prob the system down in less then 5 minutes. So basically it would be like roaming is now, only much slower and more tedious. Your selling it to me as a gameplay change that will really benefit eve. So if you wanted to roam a fleet 10 jumps, and for arguments sake it takes 3 mins to fully probe a system as you have an alt with maxed skills and a virtue set, it would only take you a massive isk and skillpoint investment and 30 mins to do 10 jumps, that's practically speedy...oh wait what. [/quote]
Kmelx Matari Exodus 121	Posted - 2014.12.28 00:52:36 - [2002] - Quote Double posting ftw
Jon Joringer Zero-K 153	Posted - 2014.12.28 03:36:16 - [2003] - Quote Not all that thrilled at the redacted HAC resists. They were one of the more exciting of the proposed changes.
Leto Thule Obsidian Cadre 1788	Posted - 2014.12.28 04:08:21 - [2004] - Quote I like the changes. I liked them more with the tank increase, but w/e. Faction warfare plexes are, at present, run by FRIGATES. Very rarely you will see a few corps that run cruiser gangs. So, if you want the medium LP, maybe bring something that wont be instablapped by awaiting recon ships. Everyone complains about how FW is broken, but I think this will finally start enticing players to use something other than t1 frigs to pvp with. Nothing is stopping FW fleets from ALSO bringing recon fleets, and the Dscan immunity works both ways. And seriously, dont cry about ECM, cry that you didnt fit to counter it or train up your skills in the sensor operation for your chosen ship racial. Every single thing in this game has a counter. Just because people dont want to fit the counters into their cookie-cutter fits doesnt mean the mechanic is broken. WH space is going to be a bit more tricky, but as always, WH corps will develop tactics to overcome it. People should start thinking more like dropbears and less like carebears. Watching the hole while your corp is running sites may be boring, but you do what you can if you want to be useful. One suggestion I would make to CCP, bring back the HAC resists for the ships that are intended for close range combat. Big Fat Forum Meanie and Thanatos Scammer
Generaloberst Kluntz Isogen 5 71	Posted - 2014.12.28 04:13:19 - [2005] - Quote Adapting. That'sWhat makes EvE brilliant.
Squatdog State Protectorate Caldari State 176	Posted - 2014.12.28 08:44:20 - [2006] - Quote Quote: Faction warfare plexes are, at present, run by FRIGATES. Very rarely you will see a few corps that run cruiser gangs. So, if you want the medium LP, maybe bring something that wont be instablapped by awaiting recon ships. Everyone complains about how FW is broken, but I think this will finally start enticing players to use something other than t1 frigs to pvp with. Nothing is stopping FW fleets from ALSO bringing recon fleets, and the Dscan immunity works both ways. T1 frigates typically have NOWHERE NEAR enough DPS to effectively run medium plexes. Stick to what you know.
Khan Wrenth Hedion University Amarr Empire 87	Posted - 2014.12.28 13:07:21 - [2007] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Stop being so anti social, even jerks like us have managed to find people that like scanning, you dont need an alt, you need a new friend, one who likes to probe. I found a friend who likes probing, but now I walk funny. :\ HTFU.-á Adapt or die.-á Beware the falcon punch.
Generaloberst Kluntz Isogen 5 71	Posted - 2014.12.28 13:42:16 - [2008] - Quote Squatdog wrote: Quote: Faction warfare plexes are, at present, run by FRIGATES. Very rarely you will see a few corps that run cruiser gangs. So, if you want the medium LP, maybe bring something that wont be instablapped by awaiting recon ships. Everyone complains about how FW is broken, but I think this will finally start enticing players to use something other than t1 frigs to pvp with. Nothing is stopping FW fleets from ALSO bringing recon fleets, and the Dscan immunity works both ways. T1 frigates typically have NOWHERE NEAR enough DPS to effectively run medium plexes. Stick to what you know. Nope.
Leto Thule Obsidian Cadre 1791	Posted - 2014.12.28 14:17:47 - [2009] - Quote Squatdog wrote: Quote: Faction warfare plexes are, at present, run by FRIGATES. Very rarely you will see a few corps that run cruiser gangs. So, if you want the medium LP, maybe bring something that wont be instablapped by awaiting recon ships. Everyone complains about how FW is broken, but I think this will finally start enticing players to use something other than t1 frigs to pvp with. Nothing is stopping FW fleets from ALSO bringing recon fleets, and the Dscan immunity works both ways. T1 frigates typically have NOWHERE NEAR enough DPS to effectively run medium plexes. Stick to what you know. Um. What? I wasn't aware of a DPS requirement. But then again I don't fly cheap-o t1 fits, so I don't have problems. Big Fat Forum Meanie and Thanatos Scammer
Lugh Crow-Slave 346	Posted - 2014.12.28 15:22:03 - [2010] - Quote I think i would have rather had the resists over D-scan immunity

Yazzinra Scorpion Ventures Rim Worlds Protectorate 54	Posted - 2014.12.28 15:47:34 - [2011] - Quote Shouldn't the tracking bonus on the Lachesis be 7.5 per level? 10% seems a bit high when combined with the optimal bonus. Not sure if its been mentioned in all this d- scan discussion.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 894	Posted - 2014.12.28 18:24:14 - [2012] - Quote Komi Toran wrote: And this is all irrelevant: If he's paying attention, he will avoid you. If he isn't, you will catch him. This is exactly as it is now. D-Scan immunity only provides the illusion of safety, which is why after this change you will find more combat recons being successfully probed down and killed than before. You know, I'm kinda concerned what would happen if I told you the impact cloaks have on both D-Scan and probing. It is absolutely relevant, because it vastly decreases the effort threshold required to not get caught, which in turn vastly decreases the benefits of bringing a cloak, which totally breaks the relationship between the force recons and the combat recons. Obviously fitting a cloak makes a ship impossible to probe out, but that's exactly why the ships that are designed around that mechanic make other sacrifices that combat recons do not.
Arla Sarain 222	Posted - 2014.12.28 18:35:49 - [2013] - Quote Komi Toran wrote: you will find more combat recons being successfully probed down and killed than before. Do you know how combat probing works? Half of it relies on D-SCAN. No Combat recon is going to get probed down unless they are AFK. Just stop already. D-SCAN immunity is dumb.
warbds Stoli Holdings 9	Posted - 2014.12.28 20:06:14 - [2014] - Quote Dumb indeed. WH space is now only for big alliances. Creating content no destroying you mean! Small corporations can't do anything in wormholes which was restricted after the last dumb wormhole patch really do you have brains? Or do you only want big alliances? Which I personaly hate!!!
Devil Seven Objectless Hatred. Legion Galactic Council 2	Posted - 2014.12.28 21:48:12 - [2015] - Quote warbds wrote: Dumb indeed. WH space is now only for big alliances. Creating content no destroying you mean! Small corporations can't do anything in wormholes which was restricted after the last dumb wormhole patch really do you have brains? Or do you only want big alliances? Which I personaly hate!!! W-space is unaffected by the d-scan change as you have probe looking for you or being used by you and a fleet will still use interdictors and hics to catch you and w-space normaly intended for bigger alliances as it's like null sec
Devil Seven Objectless Hatred. Legion Galactic Council 2	Posted - 2014.12.28 21:51:01 - [2016] - Quote Arla Sarain wrote: Komi Toran wrote: you will find more combat recons being successfully probed down and killed than before. Do you know how combat probing works? Half of it relies on D-SCAN. No Combat recon is going to get probed down unless they are AFK. Just stop already. D-SCAN immunity is dumb. There are a lot of idiots in eve
Generaloberst Kluntz Isogen 5 75	Posted - 2014.12.28 21:53:48 - [2017] - Quote Devil Seven wrote: warbds wrote: Dumb indeed. WH space is now only for big alliances. Creating content no destroying you mean! Small corporations can't do anything in wormholes which was restricted after the last dumb wormhole patch really do you have brains? Or do you only want big alliances? Which I personaly hate!!! W-space is unaffected by the d-scan change as you have probe looking for you or being used by you and a fleet will still use interdictors and hics to catch you and w-space normaly intended for bigger alliances as it's like null sec Nope either. Wspace in majority does not complain about dscan immunity and we actually like it. But it's not intended for large alliances lolwat.
Shilalasar Dead Sky Inc. 140	Posted - 2014.12.28 23:24:09 - [2018] - Quote Generaloberst Kluntz wrote: Nope either. Wspace in majority does not complain about dscan immunity and we actually like it. But it's not intended for large alliances lolwat. That-¦s funny since almost everybody I talked to thinks it is a ****** change. It will keep soloplayers out of the lowerclasses so less people to play with and shoot at. Ofc this does not matter for the higherclasses where a few recons are no threat to your farming but just some more salvage after dreadblapping. And the reasoning for this new mechanic is "it is cool and more fights will happen because of bad intel"......
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 615	Posted - 2014.12.28 23:39:31 - [2019] - Quote Paynus Maiassus wrote: Actually you can nerf them pretty severely and they will still have a lot of uses. Just not WH. Which is what they're built for. A sufficiently heavy T3 nerf demands a massive WH shakeup.
Dun'Gal Myriad Contractors Inc. 176	Posted - 2014.12.29 01:12:00 - [2020] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: Don't forget that things will rarely progress to this stage (scanning every system) anyway, because of the high possibility that the random unaccounted for dude in system is either cloaked or docked. In a lot of instances people will just move on through without even looking, because the effort required to find the combat recon is high and the possibility of being rewarded with a kill is very low. Unless people watched a recon enter the system and warp off to a safe, they're not going to bother. You realize that you have just changed your argument entirely, you've literally pointed out exactly why there's nothing wrong with dscan immunity, because it will be no different than it is now. That extra person in local is either cloaked/docked, if cloaked he may show up on grid with you, if docked you have nothing to worry about. In the case of dscan immunity its the same thing. He's either in a combat recon somewhere, or docked - the same outcome will take place. In the case of wormhole systems, any corporation living in w-space is going to have an active prober on pretty much all the time anyway, so yea the scanning will take place, and they will likely have every ship sig scanned out ahead of time anyway, new sig shows up with nothing on dscan, looks like theres a combat recon in system time to take precautions.

Akemon Numon Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 5	Posted - 2014.12.29 01:38:48 - [2021] - Quote Looks like the 'let's give Recons too many buffs and then keep the one we (ccp) wanted from before we even released info on the patch change. Let them argue for a few hundred pages and then go with what we intended from the beginning. See players you do make a "difference" and we monitored and followed the discourse closely, however...
Joshua Milton Blahyi Therapists Inc 66	Posted - 2014.12.29 01:44:35 - [2022] - Quote Akemon Numon wrote: Looks like the 'let's give Recons too many buffs and then keep the one we (ccp) wanted from before we even released info on the patch change. Let them argue for a few hundred pages and then go with what we intended from the beginning. See players you do make a "difference" and we monitored and followed the discourse closely, however... People cried, the resists got rolled back. Your argument is invalid.
Flyinghotpocket Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica 481	Posted - 2014.12.29 02:00:13 - [2023] - Quote was gonna probably stay for this t2 res recons but meh, now that to many cry babies who got wronged by a curse somewhere cried enough to get t2 res takin off. cry more you babies. maybe you can get t1 frigates nerfed as well while your at it. Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
Flyinghotpocket Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica 481	Posted - 2014.12.29 02:02:41 - [2024] - Quote Generaloberst Kluntz wrote: Squatdog wrote: Quote: Faction warfare plexes are, at present, run by FRIGATES. Very rarely you will see a few corps that run cruiser gangs. So, if you want the medium LP, maybe bring something that wont be instablapped by awaiting recon ships. Everyone complains about how FW is broken, but I think this will finally start enticing players to use something other than t1 frigs to pvp with. Nothing is stopping FW fleets from ALSO bringing recon fleets, and the Dscan immunity works both ways. T1 frigates typically have NOWHERE NEAR enough DPS to effectively run medium plexes. Stick to what you know. Nope. nope what? name me 50% of the t1 frigates that typicaly can run medium plexs? hell give me even 33% of t1 frigates that can. Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
Squatdog State Protectorate Caldari State 178	Posted - 2014.12.29 03:33:27 - [2025] - Quote Quote: nope what? name me 50% of the t1 frigates that typicaly can run medium plexs? hell give me even 33% of t1 frigates that can. The players applauding D-scan immunity are almost invariably gankbears and noobs (and their alts) who don't know how the game mechanics actually work. I too would like to hear about these med-farming T1 frigs.
Komi Toran Paragon Trust The Bastion 504	Posted - 2014.12.29 04:14:25 - [2026] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: It is absolutely relevant, because it vastly decreases the effort threshold required to not get caught, Oh please. You look at D-Scan. Do you see combat probes within x AU? Warp off. That's the effort it takes now. That's the effort it will take in the future. Actually, scratch that, it will take more effort in the future as before you could actually wait until there were ships on D-Scan before warping off. Now, you have to consider that the prober is warping combat recons of their own on top of you. Arla Sarain wrote: Do you know how combat probing works? Half of it relies on D-SCAN. You rely so heavily on D-Scan because it is the most convinient tool available. Remove it, and suddenly the spread formation has a use (among several other strategies). Arla Sarain wrote: No Combat recon is going to get probed down unless they are AFK. Strange. That's exactly how it is now, and yet the game has survived. Arla Sarain wrote: Just stop already. D-SCAN immunity is dumb. I counter your offer with HTFU. The tools to deal with this exist in game already. Learn to use them. Or don't and whine.
SuperSpyScoutGirl Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2014.12.29 05:56:50 - [2027] - Quote Quick question just to ensure I am right. Hypothetically if I am operating in hostile territory without docking rights, it will be possible for me to eject from my combat recon in order to change ships and the recon will still not appear on d-scan because the immunity is a property of the ship, not a property of the piloted ship? Of course, the ship will still be scannable with combats (or within a scan inhibited area that will be scannable), but I can deal with that. Just want to be certain of the mechanics so I can plan to be able to use a couple of ships when I don't have any other support close at hand.
Akemon Numon Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 5	Posted - 2014.12.29 06:17:18 - [2028] - Quote Joshua Milton Blahyi wrote: Akemon Numon wrote: Looks like the 'let's give Recons too many buffs and then keep the one we (ccp) wanted from before we even released info on the patch change. Let them argue for a few hundred pages and then go with what we intended from the beginning. See players you do make a "difference" and we monitored and followed the discourse closely, however... People cried, the resists got rolled back. Your argument is invalid. in-+va-+lid is your reading skills, go back to the beginning of the thread and READ the posts to the point where ccp backtracked the Resists. Almost not a negative word about them, and most applauded them. And this is not an argument. It is an observation of a repeated method by which ccp makes these unpopular changes to the game.
Wynta State War Academy Caldari State 4	Posted - 2014.12.29 08:10:07 - [2029] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: I still get the feeling that most of the people in this thread saying, "Dude, all you need is a ship with combat probes," have never had to probe anything. Have fun when you get to some ~60au system and need to probe out a recon that's moving around the system periodically. Hint: the only way you'll ever get a fix on the recon is sheer luck. If it is constantly hopping around system wont it also be difficult to DSCAN it
Catherine Laartii Dominion Fleet Group Templis CALSF 447	Posted - 2014.12.29 10:01:42 - [2030] - Quote ivona fly wrote: Quote: ROOK Caldari Cruiser Bonuses: 7.5% bonus to kinetic missile damage (was 5% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile Launcher rate of fire) 10% reduction in ECM Target Jammer activation cost Recon Ships Bonuses: 30% bonus to ECM Target Jammer strength 10% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile max velocity Slot layout: 5H, 7M, 3L; 2 turrets, 5 launchers Fittings: 680 PWG(+80), 600 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 2050(+262) / 965(+9) / 960(+359) Capacitor (amount / capacitor per second) : 1250(+187) / 3.93/s(+.83) Mobility (max velocity / agility / align time): 194(+24) / .61 / 10.76s(-.04s) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25 / 25 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 150km / 259 / 10 Sensor strength: 32 Gravimetric Signature radius: 170(-3) Please no, I hate this one damage type thing, and seeing as you say the changes are in part, to allow it to fight vs T3 and T2 well : Ishtar, Eagle, Cerb, Tengu and proteus will not even take damage from it because of 90% resists. and outside the Loki (used instead of recon) and Legion they are what I see used the most in these types of battles. Well seen as you are not giving them any tank none of my my post matters, they will just get crushed in fleets now anyway put whatever weapons on them and leave them as the paranoia-cons :) While it is lamentable for a variety of reasons to be locked into a single damage bonus, the fact remains that it is actually quite a lot more viable this way as a RLM boat than even the Caracal to an extent. The straight single damage bonus means that in addition to not having to worry about swapping between multiple ammo types, the alpha damage without the RoF bonus means you do more with less, so you the missiles you DO have before the reload timer cuts out count for more. I wish they'd give it a bonus to light missile velocity, tho.

Catherine Laartii Dominion Fleet Group Templis CALSF 447	Posted - 2014.12.29 10:08:10 - [2031] - Quote Shaleb Heworo wrote: It is NOT aybout fw complexes. If you enforce uncertainty on people they will just retreat to the next level of relative certainty meaing they won't warp to places without preprobing it. This will severly limit the freedom of movement for small gangs and solo players since the smaller the gang the less likely they can afford a dedicated prober/fit an expanded probe launcher on their breacher You have to give people TOOLS that create margin for error and you have to create and environnement where people move freely under the pretense of relative security. I'm sorry, but there seem to be basic misundertstandings of player/human behaviour that drive these changes. It's really hard to watch. I really think this is a serious misconception on yours and a lot of other peoples' part. The dscan immunity won't magically change how people like myself in FW play mainly due to the fact that we either travel in groups or the stuff we fly solo is either very cheap or very mobile. Cowering in fear over combat recons is laughably stupid since you can either get friends or fight in one of the smaller complexes. It literally changes nothing for how we do things, other than getting a surprise fight or two. At most it makes cruiser fights in complexes a little more interesting, since while we have to watch out for them bringing combat recons to the fight, the same deal wtih with arazus and falcons currently exists anyway, so it's a non-issue. I predict a lot more Curses being used for the cruiser fleets, I think.
Arla Sarain 228	Posted - 2014.12.29 11:08:09 - [2032] - Quote Komi Toran wrote: Ganthrithor wrote: It is absolutely relevant, because it vastly decreases the effort threshold required to not get caught, Oh please. You look at D-Scan. Do you see combat probes within x AU? Warp off. That's the effort it takes now. That's the effort it will take in the future. Actually, scratch that, it will take more effort in the future as before you could actually wait until there were ships on D-Scan before warping off. Now, you have to consider that the prober is warping combat recons of their own on top of you. Arla Sarain wrote: Do you know how combat probing works? Half of it relies on D-SCAN. You rely so heavily on D-Scan because it is the most convinient tool available. Remove it, and suddenly the spread formation has a use (among several other strategies). Arla Sarain wrote: No Combat recon is going to get probed down unless they are AFK. Strange. That's exactly how it is now, and yet the game has survived. Arla Sarain wrote: Just stop already. D-SCAN immunity is dumb. I counter your offer with HTFU. The tools to deal with this exist in game already. Learn to use them. Or don't and whine. Combat recon sees your probes in spread formation. Combat recon warps. Good luck catching combat recons with D-SCAN immunity.
Dvesk Sunie Dark-Rising Federation 45	Posted - 2014.12.29 11:09:24 - [2033] - Quote I read most of post concerning Pilgrim changes. There are people who think that range is great and neut amount can be neglected. And there are those who think amount can not be neglected. As we all know Pilgrim has always suffered from range restrictions. Yes, you can choose what or when to engage , but if you are engaging more than 1 target ( happens a lot in solo pvp! ) and one of them can kite, after you kill what you can, you will be a sitting duck. Your drones would NOT be able to catch 4.5-5 km/s speeding Raptor or any other inty and you would just sit there and might as well eject. So I think to make it more balanced and viable, I would really love to see pilgrim maintaining it's Neut Amount Bonus, because that is what it made it so awesome to fly even against cap-boosted ships, as you could still neut them out, BUT adding SOME range. Why not give it Dragoon like or smaller ( Dragoon has 20%) neut range bonus? With 10% Neut and Vampire range, Pilgrim Medium Neutralizers would have 19km range with RECON 5. That is 61% more neut range. It still keeps Pilgrim inside "brawling" field, but now it can actually neut targets before they get on top of you,or after lighting a Cyno it can be used ot neut target which are , well at 19km from you. And in all honesty, If you take dragoon as basic ship for that line, I see two possible lines: Both lines focus on TD Bonuses, as well as Arbitrator, which makes perfect sense. But then, mixing two ship bonuses to match one another is a bad way in order to make them special and unique. The way I see specalized Amarr Recon ships : Pilgrim - CLOAK+Strong Neut amount(40% bonus )+Small range(10-15% bonus)+SLOW+ARMOR Cruse - NO CLOAK + SMALLER NEUT AMOUNT(10-15% bonus )+ HIGH RANGE(40% bonus)+ FAST+ SHIELD I think that is what CCP should be aiming for in specializing ships. Other than that, Might as well change nothing, Neut range was the only difficulty with the Pilgrim. Just a SLIGHT change to it might do wonders. When I saw that CCP Hammer going down on Pilgrim neut amount it almost made my cry. No no no, dont fix it if it ain't broken.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Stop playing eve, start living it
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 615	Posted - 2014.12.29 11:20:11 - [2034] - Quote Arla Sarain wrote: Good luck catching combat recons with D-SCAN immunity. Nobody actively trying to avoid probes is ever getting caught if they're not afk. This is hardly a "new" thing.
Oxide Ammar 188	Posted - 2014.12.29 11:28:55 - [2035] - Quote Think about it the other way, recon ships became best ship for ratting and exploring, especially the Rook Lady Areola Fappington: -áSolo PVP isn't dead!-á You just need to make sure you have your booster, remote rep, cyno, and emergency Falcon alts logged in and ready before you do any solo PVPing.
Beidorion eldwardan Corporation Danmark Tactical Narcotics Team 22	Posted - 2014.12.29 11:33:47 - [2036] - Quote For the love of god - throw away that ****** d-scan idea and give us the resist profile -¦just to point something out - a recon need to use a minimum of two slots for prob mod and function so in effect its not going to have a great tank AND renom function as it stand now they are simply to weak. the reletive low amount of ships it takes to alpha one of the field means that its not a viable option for fleets and also - 4 lowslots does not an armor tank make so total do over or pleae admit that you really have no clue as to how we use the ships you let us play with until you break them... again
Shilalasar Dead Sky Inc. 141	Posted - 2014.12.29 12:15:41 - [2037] - Quote afkalt wrote: Arla Sarain wrote: Good luck catching combat recons with D-SCAN immunity. Nobody actively trying to avoid probes is ever getting caught if they're not afk. This is hardly a "new" thing. Actively avoiding is one thing, but a good combatprober will get you within one cycle so about 6 secs scantime + 2-4 warptime of the probes. Without d-scan you will most likely need 3 or more cycles, around a 30 second window, way too long to catch anyone not multiboxing 3+ accounts.
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION The Obsidian Front 588	Posted - 2014.12.29 13:29:44 - [2038] - Quote Looking forward to setting up some traps in low sec with combat recons. 3 of you in local. Put 3 cheap mining barges in the belt/ice field. Get into your CR's and sit and wait for them to warp to what looks like a mining fleet.
Barrogh Habalu Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 840	Posted - 2014.12.29 13:45:31 - [2039] - Quote Spugg Galdon wrote: Looking forward to setting up some traps in low sec with combat recons. 3 of you in local. Put 3 cheap mining barges in the belt/ice field. Get into your CR's and sit and wait for them to warp to what looks like a mining fleet. Get two buddies with you so the number of ships on dscan equals amount of people in local.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 14376	Posted - 2014.12.29 13:47:20 - [2040] - Quote Arla Sarain wrote: Combat recon sees your probes in spread formation. Combat recon warps. Good luck catching combat recons with D-SCAN immunity. How is this any different to me bouncing safes in a mega? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship

Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION The Obsidian Front 588	Posted - 2014.12.29 13:49:11 - [2041] - Quote Barrogh Habalu wrote: Spugg Galdon wrote: Looking forward to setting up some traps in low sec with combat recons. 3 of you in local. Put 3 cheap mining barges in the belt/ice field. Get into your CR's and sit and wait for them to warp to what looks like a mining fleet. Get two buddies with you so the number of ships on dscan equals amount of people in local. Sorry. Isn't that what I said. I thought I had made it clear enough without actually stating that.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 738	Posted - 2014.12.29 14:29:04 - [2042] - Quote So based on the wh mass / range push back AND the push back on the D-scan immunity.... CCP - the PVP community at large doesn't want ganking tools. We want PVP tools. These gimmicks we're pushing back on are gank tools. We're not looking to log in and gank folks (sure we all do it pretty much every time it comes up, but it's NOT the thing we log in to do), we're looking to log in and PVP. Please just knock it off w/ the gank stuff. We're not 100,000 14 year olds that continually get a kick out of ganking. You are sequentially ruining a great PVP game with cheesey gank mechanics.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 738	Posted - 2014.12.29 14:40:18 - [2043] - Quote Beidorion eldwardan wrote: For the love of god - throw away that ****** d-scan idea and give us the resist profile -¦just to point something out - a recon need to use a minimum of two slots for prob mod and function so in effect its not going to have a great tank AND renom function as it stand now they are simply to weak. the reletive low amount of ships it takes to alpha one of the field means that its not a viable option for fleets and also - 4 lowslots does not an armor tank make so total do over or pleae admit that you really have no clue as to how we use the ships you let us play with until you break them... again Giggle, you're trying to take the D-scan immunity gank buff and use it for pvp.... and OMG it's not working. You're trying to do it right, but sadly thanks to CCP 'you're doing it wrong' Just work on ganking - actual PVP is so 2009.
ISD Supogo ISD Community Communications Liaisons 389	Posted - 2014.12.29 15:13:35 - [2044] - Quote Removed a post. Quote: 31. Abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers is prohibited. CCP operate a zero tolerance policy on abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers. This includes but is not limited to personal attacks, trolling, GÇ£outingGÇ¥ of CCP employee or ISD volunteer player identities, and the use of any former player identities when referring to the aforementioned parties. Our forums are designed to be a place where players and developers can exchange ideas in a polite and friendly manner for the betterment of EVE Online. Players who attack or abuse employees of CCP, or ISD volunteers, will be permanently banned from the EVE Online forums across all their accounts with no recourse, and may also be subject to action against their game accounts. ISD Supogo Lieutenant Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department
Bronson Hughes The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration 1022	Posted - 2014.12.29 15:51:47 - [2045] - Quote SuperSpyScoutGirl wrote: Quick question just to ensure I am right. Hypothetically if I am operating in hostile territory without docking rights, it will be possible for me to eject from my combat recon in order to change ships and the recon will still not appear on d-scan because the immunity is a property of the ship, not a property of the piloted ship? Of course, the ship will still be scannable with combats (or within a scan inhibited area that will be scannable), but I can deal with that. Just want to be certain of the mechanics so I can plan to be able to use a couple of ships when I don't have any other support close at hand. In theory, yes. I'd try this on the test server to verify once the changes become available though. A rather interesting idea.... CCP Falcon's thoughts on suicide ganking. Reading Comprehension: so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I want to create content, not become content.
Soldarius Deadman W0nderland The 99 Percent 998	Posted - 2014.12.29 16:03:33 - [2046] - Quote Bronson Hughes wrote: SuperSpyScoutGirl wrote: Quick question just to ensure I am right. Hypothetically if I am operating in hostile territory without docking rights, it will be possible for me to eject from my combat recon in order to change ships and the recon will still not appear on d-scan because the immunity is a property of the ship, not a property of the piloted ship? Of course, the ship will still be scannable with combats (or within a scan inhibited area that will be scannable), but I can deal with that. Just want to be certain of the mechanics so I can plan to be able to use a couple of ships when I don't have any other support close at hand. In theory, yes. I'd try this on the test server to verify once the changes become available though. A rather interesting idea.... A very interesting and possibly abusable idea when you get 200+ recon pilots doing this. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 738	Posted - 2014.12.29 17:20:16 - [2047] - Quote Soldarius wrote: Bronson Hughes wrote: SuperSpyScoutGirl wrote: Quick question just to ensure I am right. Hypothetically if I am operating in hostile territory without docking rights, it will be possible for me to eject from my combat recon in order to change ships and the recon will still not appear on d-scan because the immunity is a property of the ship, not a property of the piloted ship? Of course, the ship will still be scannable with combats (or within a scan inhibited area that will be scannable), but I can deal with that. Just want to be certain of the mechanics so I can plan to be able to use a couple of ships when I don't have any other support close at hand. In theory, yes. I'd try this on the test server to verify once the changes become available though. A rather interesting idea.... A very interesting and possibly abusable idea when you get 200+ recon pilots doing this. Abusable as in free ships for me and 199 of my closest friends? Combats still work on them. I would love to see the 200 pilot egg scramble to hop back in thier ships as my smartbombing raven of epic glory goes to work on them. This is the first positive for a bad idea in the whole thread. I think the Baltec dude would be the only one to go for floating 200 recons in space... which would leave him roughly (not too good at maths) 199 pilots short of doing it. Large scale I think it's something we can talk about, but no one is actually ever going to leave 200 combat scannable curse in space.... then again, if they were all in unique safe spots.... hmmm......
X ATM092 Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension 460	Posted - 2014.12.29 17:54:03 - [2048] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: 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. I believe this process can be streamlined somewhat if you just make people's **** randomly blow up, call that content and then make a large animated middle finger appear in the middle of their screen. Content created where the normal desire for players to avoid losing ships would have forced them to be more cautious.
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 181	Posted - 2014.12.29 18:24:38 - [2049] - Quote X ATM092 wrote: I believe this process can be streamlined somewhat if you just make people's **** randomly blow up, call that content and then make a large animated middle finger appear in the middle of their screen. Content created where the normal desire for players to avoid losing ships would have forced them to be more cautious. Fot those who want fights d-scan immunity won't change anything, for those who don't flying will be even more paranoid. A note about risk aversion: I'm doing combat sites and anomalies in hisec lately, just chilling from my ventures to null. It's insane in caldari space! You know that story? "An Ishtar, Gila and Worm warped to guristas refuge?" I saw a higsec system with more than 40 players in it. Next jump was lowsec, 0 players, scanner was green. I'm partially agree with Rise that knowing too much may spoil the fun (just like the time i jumped into whole pack of bnewbies, 600 mil in cargo, heart on the shoulder) but i don't think it's the right way to change it. Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
X ATM092 Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension 461	Posted - 2014.12.29 18:45:36 - [2050] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: 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. So basically what happened here is you thought about how it makes people feel when they think they're having a really close fight and then a falcon decloaks and thought to yourself "Why limit that to just falcons? Why not all recons?". Now, in your example, they can have that feeling when they land on grid with two rooks without falcons even needing to be there. hashtag content created hashtag Rise2014. I'll be scouting every gang with a cloaky nullified linkalt of course but there again I already take ambitious aggressive fights which could go either way while actively ignoring the people who have no chance against me because for me risk is a big part of what I pvp for. I don't get any joy from having someone land expecting to fight what I have minus recons, being dead before it starts, and basically being able to f1 afk which is apparently your idea of content. What I like is fighting even or against the odds and trying to persevere through skill and for that I'll need to stop relying so much on dscan and start getting cloaky nullified eyes on grid so I can get a better idea of what the odds are. Fights which are over before they're begun are not good content, making a larger proportion of fights a complete waste of time does not make eve a more content rich environment for the losers or the winners of said fights, even if more fights take place overall.

Alexis Nightwish 65	Posted - 2014.12.29 20:13:12 - [2051] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. In other words, you're buffing the defenses of the cloak-capable force recons, while giving nothing to the non-cloaking combat recons (5 sig isn't going to make any difference to the non-Minmatar as they're still well above 125). The Cov Ops cloak is an extremely powerful offensive and defensive module. Please give the non-cloaking combat recons the full T2 resists so that the changes align with the realities of our internet spaceship game. CCP Rise wrote: With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. A lot of people are against this change, but I actually like it. In my mind, the cloaky recons shouldn't hit as hard (with DPS or EWAR) as their non-cloaky counterparts. Don't forget how strong a Cov Ops cloak is. Outside of metagaming, the most powerful tool to enable a pilot to choose when, where, and even if he/she is going to engage is the Cov Ops cloak. Having that module and good range, but a paper tank and weaker application of effects seems balanced to me. 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. Love the slot move :) Have you considered having Roden Shipyards selling the rights to CreoDron and giving the Lach a drone bonus? You could replace the med hybrid tracking bonus with a drone HP/damage/tracking/whatever bonus. This is a Gallente ship after all, and its drone bay is as large as the Curse and Pilgrim's. No drone bonus on either Gal recon seems odd to me. CCP Rise wrote: The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. groan That god damn kinetic lock in! Just change the "typical Kaalakiota bonus" to missile RoF and make a bunch of ships suck much less in one fell swoop! Also, give the Rook harder hitting ECM because at the moment, why use the Rook when you can use the Falcon (does it better) or the Blackbird (does it cheaper)? CCP Rise wrote: Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ So instead of putting in a weaker version of the Dscan immunity, and nudging up its power if it seemed too weak, you put it in as full strength, blanket 100% Dscan immune, combat-probing-alts-are-now-required bullshit. Power Projection: A Brighter Future
KIller Wabbit The Scope Gallente Federation 848	Posted - 2014.12.29 20:25:16 - [2052] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ A game breaking ******* bullshit mechanic. You should be ashamed. CCP .. always first with the wrong stuff CSM .. CCP Shills with a vacation plan
Faren Shalni Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 106	Posted - 2014.12.29 20:49:37 - [2053] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ There is no middle ground on this, you either have it or you dont, same as bubble immunity. This bonus will be abused to hell in FW and WH space the 2 places where dscan is your primary (and only (yes yes yes I know about combat probes but you try fitting a probe launcer on a combat/pve ship just to see what's uncloaked just off grid is a joke) source of intel [quote=CCP Rise] We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. [quote=CCP Rise] Im sorry but the tank on recons is terrible and really needed the buff. going back on this is a really poor decision same as keeping the dscan immunity So Much Space
Niskin League of the Lost 190	Posted - 2014.12.29 21:18:59 - [2054] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: So based on the wh mass / range push back AND the push back on the D-scan immunity.... CCP - the PVP community at large doesn't want ganking tools. We want PVP tools. These gimmicks we're pushing back on are gank tools. We're not looking to log in and gank folks (sure we all do it pretty much every time it comes up, but it's NOT the thing we log in to do), we're looking to log in and PVP. Please just knock it off w/ the gank stuff. We're not 100,000 14 year olds that continually get a kick out of ganking. You are sequentially ruining a great PVP game with cheesey gank mechanics. Ganking is an important aspect of any open PvP world. And I say that as a person who is more likely to be the gankee than the ganker. There has to be a level of risk to the ways we earn ISK, and balancing that level is just as important as anything else. My apologies if I'm remembering this wrong, but I believe I've previously seen you post something along the lines of "we should be able to spend a little time earning money and then use that to go out and do consensual PvP." That goes along with what you said about PvP versus ganking. But the truth is that they are both important aspects of the game. Without ganking we'd just be lazily earning money and effectively be playing some kind of hybrid between WoW Arena's and Counterstrike. I've done open world PvP in other games and hated it. There wasn't any real warning, if somebody wanted to gank you they could probably pull it off without you having a chance to avoid it. EVE balances that out pretty well, there are tools for the ganker and tools for the gankee. In both cases, if those tools aren't used they put that person at a serious disadvantage. The D-scan changes for Combat Recons shake that up a little bit, but they don't break it. They gain advantages offgrid but gain nothing on grid. So while you can call this a tool for ganking, it's also a tool that can be easily mitigated. That's been covered repeatedly in this thread. The folks in FacWar will likely have to work a little harder than us wspacers to mitigate it, but plenty of options have been presented for that. Without ganking, legitimate forms of PvP would be nullified, like baiting, or surviving due to their fear of being baited. Now that I've made this post the chances that my Drake will get blown up tonight will be magically increased, but that is what keeps the game alive. The mechanics are what make the game fun, but the risk is what keeps it interesting. It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 37	Posted - 2014.12.29 21:47:53 - [2055] - Quote I'm pretty curious to hear from CCP Rise soon. As much as folks have thrown rocks at him (and I was tempted) he has tried to respond to our feedback earlier in the thread and adjust. We may not like some of the proposed adjustments based on how they effect us but I do appreciate the work the balance team are putting in. That said, from my narrow perspective of the Caldari Recons...I like any positive change but I'm concerned if we don't get these right it will be years before Recons are effectively touched again to repair or optimize something that could be done here. 1) d-scan immunity...I'm ok with either way. I think there are some creative things we can pull off with it and it ups the ante for certain activites for sure but it's not a make or break thing for me at all. 2). The kinetic damage lock in for the Rook is a pain point. It directly attacks one the biggest strengths (selectable damage) of a weapons line that honestly probably Needs a little help already. Either go back to the 5% damage buff per level or increase the damage of kinetic warheads from the 7.5% per level to 10% per level. 3). T2 resists for the combat recons...this is a critical addition that I honestly think needs to go through. Without them there isn't much "combat" staying power, particualry when compared to other T2 hulls. The d-scan immunity simply isn't enough to come near justifying the ISK cost of a T2 Rook over a T1 Blackbird. 4) Compared utility to like ship hulls... As noted above the Falcon does just as well, has full cloak & cyno capability and the Blackbird is far far cheaper and arguably has a better ECM bonus focused on increased range. You could make a case that the Blackbird might be more survivable than the Rook because of that. I would recommend looking at a similar bonus structure to what was proposed in the Amarr line: give a combined range and jam strength bonus but at an obviously reduced level. "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
Nyjil Lizaru Aideron Robotics 34	Posted - 2014.12.29 21:52:08 - [2056] - Quote Lugh Crow-Slave wrote: I think i would have rather had the resists over D-scan immunity 2nd Nyjil's corollary to Malcanis' Law: -á "Any attempt by CCP to smooth the learning curve of EVE Online will be carried out via the addition of extra factors and 'features' such that there is a net increase in complexity."
SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 268	Posted - 2014.12.29 22:16:46 - [2057] - Quote 3rd. CCP Rise you won't be seeing more recons in fleet unless they get those resists. Remember what the whole point of the balance pass was.
Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 35	Posted - 2014.12.29 23:14:01 - [2058] - Quote SFM Hobb3s wrote: 3rd. CCP Rise you won't be seeing more recons in fleet unless they get those resists. Remember what the whole point of the balance pass was. It wasn't the whole point. It was part of the point. Hopefully Rise will keep sufficient resists to make Combat recons useful for more than just one new use. O.F.
Irya Boone Never Surrender. 424	Posted - 2014.12.29 23:15:23 - [2059] - Quote NOOOO !! give them the T2 tank back CCP it's time to remove Off Grid Boost and Put Them on Killmail too, add Logi on killmails .... Open that damn door !!
Mei Khlolov The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 16	Posted - 2014.12.29 23:22:18 - [2060] - Quote I will use them either way, but I also think the t2 tank should come back. Based on the pyfa files I was messing with, it really didn't add so much to be overpowered.

Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 897	Posted - 2014.12.29 23:28:01 - [2061] - Quote Komi Toran wrote: Ganthrithor wrote: It is absolutely relevant, because it vastly decreases the effort threshold required to not get caught, Oh please. You look at D-Scan. Do you see combat probes within x AU? Warp off. That's the effort it takes now. That's the effort it will take in the future. Actually, scratch that, it will take more effort in the future as before you could actually wait until there were ships on D-Scan before warping off. Now, you have to consider that the prober is warping combat recons of their own on top of you. Arla Sarain wrote: Do you know how combat probing works? Half of it relies on D-SCAN. You rely so heavily on D-Scan because it is the most convinient tool available. Remove it, and suddenly the spread formation has a use (among several other strategies). Arla Sarain wrote: No Combat recon is going to get probed down unless they are AFK. Strange. That's exactly how it is now, and yet the game has survived. Ah yes, the HTFU/adapt crowd. Be honest: you'd applaud any change no matter how ridiculous if it gave you the chance to smugly denounce everyone else as a bunch of nullbear whiners. The spread formation can suck a girthy carrot. Combat probing only works as a mechanic because you can use d-scans to get an initial fix. Without it you're looking at a lengthy, tedious process just like scanning signatures. Pro-tip: this works better for things that move once a day than things that move once a minute. Not to mention the fact that it now mandates that people bring a probing alt just to get the most basic combat intel. Talk about a pain in the dongue. Wynta wrote: If it is constantly hopping around system wont it also be difficult to DSCAN it Not unless the system you're in is absolutely massive. It's fairly easy to spread a few gang members across celestials and have them pick targets up on somewhat narrow scans (often with approximate ranges as well). This can tell you within a few seconds where to put your probes.
SuperSpyScoutGirl Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 3	Posted - 2014.12.30 01:16:09 - [2062] - Quote Soldarius wrote: Bronson Hughes wrote: SuperSpyScoutGirl wrote: Quick question just to ensure I am right. Hypothetically if I am operating in hostile territory without docking rights, it will be possible for me to eject from my combat recon in order to change ships and the recon will still not appear on d-scan because the immunity is a property of the ship, not a property of the piloted ship? Of course, the ship will still be scannable with combats (or within a scan inhibited area that will be scannable), but I can deal with that. Just want to be certain of the mechanics so I can plan to be able to use a couple of ships when I don't have any other support close at hand. In theory, yes. I'd try this on the test server to verify once the changes become available though. A rather interesting idea.... A very interesting and possibly abusable idea when you get 200+ recon pilots doing this. For a fleet of 200 pilots to do this, that's at least 400 ships you are moving into a hostile area in order to implement it. Combats would be out looking for the ships well before the operation is setup, ready to go. The logistics around used this for a large fleet would be a nightmare. Small scale tactic.
Jenshae Chiroptera The Volition Cult 675	Posted - 2014.12.30 03:11:10 - [2063] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: 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. Nope. Check local. See 10. D-scan - see 5. Assume 5 are Recons. Avoid fight. CSM Ten movement for change. EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims. Status: Rabid carebear Blog
East Windstar Viziam Amarr Empire 424	Posted - 2014.12.30 03:51:11 - [2064] - Quote Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Nope. Check local. See 10. D-scan - see 5. Assume 5 are Recons. Avoid fight. You won't see 5 on D-scan, they will not be on D-scan at all. Looks like you have never used the D-scan.
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 38	Posted - 2014.12.30 04:31:34 - [2065] - Quote East Windstar wrote: Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Nope. Check local. See 10. D-scan - see 5. Assume 5 are Recons. Avoid fight. You won't see 5 on D-scan, they will not be on D-scan at all. Looks like you have never used the D-scan. I think Jenshae was saying that if you see 10 people in local and only 5 ships on scan just assume the delta equals recon ships to be safe. "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
Mario Putzo Welping and Dunking. 982	Posted - 2014.12.30 05:32:10 - [2066] - Quote DSCAN Change is stupid. Here is a fix. Why have two ships filling the same roles? Just give Combat Recons a cov ops cloak, and drop their EWAR capabilities. Increase their tanks and dps output. Force Recons lose their weapon fittings, and are refocused primarily for EWAR, and Scan Probe use. I think trying to shoe horn in an entire new mechanic when you have 2 ships doing essentially the same thing is redundant and gimmicky. Just split the roles and be done with it.
KIller Wabbit The Scope Gallente Federation 848	Posted - 2014.12.30 06:44:19 - [2067] - Quote East Windstar wrote: Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Nope. Check local. See 10. D-scan - see 5. Assume 5 are Recons. Avoid fight. You won't see 5 on D-scan, they will not be on D-scan at all. Looks like you have never used the D-scan. Math is hard. CCP loves you. CCP .. always first with the wrong stuff CSM .. CCP Shills with a vacation plan
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 620	Posted - 2014.12.30 08:28:03 - [2068] - Quote Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: CCP Rise wrote: 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. Nope. Check local. See 10. D-scan - see 5. Assume 5 are Recons. Avoid fight. Please tell me (and I'm being serious) how this is any different from the force recons today? Decloaking delay is irrelevant as you'll be hard tackled by the other 5. Lack of 'power' not wholly relevant because there are 5. If you only ever take fights when you can account for every pilot in local you must take many....
Adrie Atticus Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion 794	Posted - 2014.12.30 09:04:26 - [2069] - Quote Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: CCP Rise wrote: 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. Nope. Check local. See 10. D-scan - see 5. Assume 5 are Recons. Avoid fight. Unless the system is smaller than 14AU and you're in the dead center, this is the norm even now. I just have to assume that something is camping one of the gates not in DScan range. Or are you living in a system which has everything in range of Dscan and never leave it?
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 14382	Posted - 2014.12.30 09:50:27 - [2070] - Quote Its interesting to see so many getting worked up over the Dscan trick when its effectively the same as any ship with a cov ops cloak, the only difference is the rook can be probed down. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship

Benito Arias Angry Mustellid The Periphery 64	Posted - 2014.12.30 12:16:09 - [2071] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Its interesting to see so many getting worked up over the Dscan trick when its effectively the same as any ship with a cov ops cloak, the only difference is the rook can be probed down. This probably because one of the the goals of this balance pass, as stated in the OP, is to "Give Combat Recons something to make them stand out as a unique and interesting set of ships", another is to "Close the gap somewhat between Recons and T3 Cruisers, though this will also be a goal during the T3 Cruiser rebalance". None of the abovementioned goals are met by making Combat Recons blend with Force Recons (if indeed the D-scan thingy is effectively almost the same as Covops cloak), neither by keeping their tanking ability inferior when their well-established role, so far, has been that of an E-war platform actively engaging the enemy with the rest of the fleet (and then there are T3 cruisers with 5 times the EHP).
MachineOfLovingGrace Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 7	Posted - 2014.12.30 12:22:31 - [2072] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Its interesting to see so many getting worked up over the Dscan trick when its effectively the same as any ship with a cov ops cloak, the only difference is the rook can be probed down. People already don't like being ganked by surprises. There will be (potentially) more ganks by surprise. Result: People are not happy about more surprises. That seems very reasonable to me.
CALAMYTY DIVA Vizzam Tribe Society 0	Posted - 2014.12.30 12:40:17 - [2073] - Quote Ross Sylibus wrote: I don't see how this doesn't make WH space completely unlivable for most of EVE. Yup,especialy new players....When they first time found the courage to go to WH and do all tips and tricks friends tell them,checking dscan,nothing there and...pock*!theyr killed. Great :-D
CALAMYTY DIVA Vizzam Tribe Society 0	Posted - 2014.12.30 12:47:58 - [2074] - Quote Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Check local. See 10. D-scan - see 5. Assume 5 are Recons. Avoid fight. What about WH?
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 14383	Posted - 2014.12.30 12:59:14 - [2075] - Quote CALAMYTY DIVA wrote: Ross Sylibus wrote: I don't see how this doesn't make WH space completely unlivable for most of EVE. Yup,especialy new players....When they first time found the courage to go to WH and do all tips and tricks friends tell them,checking dscan,nothing there and...pock!theyr killed. Great :-D So, how do you handle cov ops fitted ships? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship*
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 741	Posted - 2014.12.30 13:27:19 - [2076] - Quote Niskin wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: So based on the wh mass / range push back AND the push back on the D-scan immunity.... CCP - the PVP community at large doesn't want ganking tools. We want PVP tools. These gimmicks we're pushing back on are gank tools. We're not looking to log in and gank folks (sure we all do it pretty much every time it comes up, but it's NOT the thing we log in to do), we're looking to log in and PVP. Please just knock it off w/ the gank stuff. We're not 100,000 14 year olds that continually get a kick out of ganking. You are sequentially ruining a great PVP game with cheesey gank mechanics. stuff you said . I gank folks all the time. We all do. We take what we can get. I'm not against it. I'm saying CCP should be adding PVP tools/mechanics. They shouldn't be adding more ganking mechanics. We'll figure out the gank angle all on our own. Mass/Range - So we could more easily gank folks rolling wh. It was a ploy by risk averse folks not willing to go all in and engage folks on the rolled in side of a wh that was getting rolled. 100s of pages of 'don't do this' they did it and wh pvp is suffering for several reasons. It's easier to gank rollers, but it's much more difficult (suicidal in many cases) to put a capital ship through a wh for the express purpose of pvp. It's been months and they won't publish any stats on what the change did to wh pvp, so I'm fairly confident many of us were correct in our predictions of the outcome of said change. D-scan immunity - What is it supposed to do?? I'm not asking for player opinions or conjecture. I'm looking for CCP to flat out state what they thought we would do with this. Recons needed something a little special sure, but taking away Dscan?? Stop smoking the bad stuff. Making it easier to gank folks doesn't shake the game up. It just adds another avenue for cheap one sided fights. (and yeah, we've already stocked are wh hangars w/ various ships/fits to punish folks with this new borked mechanic - shield curse/armor curse/cap stable curse.... 2 flavors of lachesis - we're set!) A lot of folks keep saying it's no different than (fill in cov ops boat). It is different. Many times I have uncloaked in my proteus w/ 54km point and watched an alert player warp off as I count down my uncloaking delay timer. The alert player had an out. The ONLY ship this doesn't apply to is the bomber. It's pretty fragile, so a guy has a reasonable chance of popping it and getting away. A D-scan immune recon can land w/ sensor booster running and pretty much instalock and thanks to the new hac tanks, they will be able to withstand reasonable dps until their backup arrives. It's totally different. Then there is the 'but you can just use combat probes to detect them' - this is another kick in the nutz to solo/small groups of guys. Expanded probe launchers take a ton of CPU and would/will reduce fits including them to garbage. Of course if you're in a large alliance - someone can cloak a cov ops in system w/ combats out and go that way. I like change. Change favors the agile and adaptable (and I'm pretty sure that has favored me and mine over the years). I don't like bad changes. There is a difference.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 741	Posted - 2014.12.30 13:43:46 - [2077] - Quote CALAMYTY DIVA wrote: Ross Sylibus wrote: I don't see how this doesn't make WH space completely unlivable for most of EVE. Yup,especialy new players....When they first time found the courage to go to WH and do all tips and tricks friends tell them,checking dscan,nothing there and...pock*!theyr killed. Great :-D Most folks accept wh space as a big game of Marco Polo w/ space guns already. There are already 1000 dirty tricks in the wh bag - this isn't going to be a huge game changer for wh space. No local is clearly more deadly than D-scan immunity. I predict it will add a few more ganks to guys that were going to get ganked by other means anyways - this will just be more efficient time wise for the gankers. You don't need all the time consuming sneaky setups. Find them, lachesis in on them, insta-lock, bring bubble, process ship and pod, rinse and repeat. It will be very safe to gas in recon ships in wh space, though I don't see a lot of folks lining up to fit gas harvesters on their rooks. Other PVE activities will also be super safe.... as long as you don't create any wrecks. Just some quick brainstorming for gank immune wh activities: Recon gassing (ick) and pirate faction relic/data sites in the low ends using a recon (no wrecks involved). There is a lot of opportunity for low end day trippping in a hacking combat recon. Scan the crap down w/ your covert ops ship and then come back in your hacking curse and double dog dare someone to scan you down and gank you.
Niskin League of the Lost 195	Posted - 2014.12.30 14:53:07 - [2078] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: I gank folks all the time. We all do. We take what we can get. I'm not against it. I'm saying CCP should be adding PVP tools/mechanics. They shouldn't be adding more ganking mechanics. We'll figure out the gank angle all on our own. They are making a change that will shake things up, that is good for the game. There is much more to this change than just ganking, that's just the benefit that's easiest to see. We've gotten into this before. You seem to think CCP should only make certain kinds of changes, but they need to be able to make a change wherever they see an opportunity. When they added Warp To Zero that was a change that negatively impacted ganking, this is a change that positively impacts it. Finding balance requires the freedom to make changes wherever they are needed. Serendipity Lost wrote: Mass/Range - So we could more easily gank folks rolling wh. It was a ploy by risk averse folks not willing to go all in and engage folks on the rolled in side of a wh that was getting rolled. 100s of pages of 'don't do this' they did it and wh pvp is suffering for several reasons. It's easier to gank rollers, but it's much more difficult (suicidal in many cases) to put a capital ship through a wh for the express purpose of pvp. It's been months and they won't publish any stats on what the change did to wh pvp, so I'm fairly confident many of us were correct in our predictions of the outcome of said change. That thread went about a hundred pages and has hardly moved since the change went in. My understanding is that the effect hasn't been nearly as bad as people thought. For purely rolling holes it seems people have adapted. The affect on pvp caps jumping in is a legitimate beef though. Serendipity Lost wrote: D-scan immunity - What is it supposed to do?? I'm not asking for player opinions or conjecture. I'm looking for CCP to flat out state what they thought we would do with this. Recons needed something a little special sure, but taking away Dscan?? Stop smoking the bad stuff. Making it easier to gank folks doesn't shake the game up. It just adds another avenue for cheap one sided fights. (and yeah, we've already stocked are wh hangars w/ various ships/fits to punish folks with this new borked mechanic - shield curse/armor curse/cap stable curse.... 2 flavors of lachesis - we're set!) Per the part that I bolded: Yes, it does. That's exactly what it does. Shaking things up means breaking the cycle of complacency. Feel the irony here for a second. You live in a C5 wormhole with a group and now have additional options for engaging when you find a target. I live in a C2 wormhole, with a C5 static, solo and now have to be more careful when running sites. You are literally more likely to be the one using these rejuvenated recons to kill me than anybody else I've argued with in this thread. Yet, I'm the one arguing for the changes and you are arguing against them. Serendipity Lost wrote: A lot of folks keep saying it's no different than (fill in cov ops boat). It is different. Many times I have uncloaked in my proteus w/ 54km point and watched an alert player warp off as I count down my uncloaking delay timer. The alert player had an out. The ONLY ship this doesn't apply to is the bomber. It's pretty fragile, so a guy has a reasonable chance of popping it and getting away. A D-scan immune recon can land w/ sensor booster running and pretty much instalock and thanks to the new hac tanks, they will be able to withstand reasonable dps until their backup arrives. It's totally different. My understanding is that you should be bumping them as you decloak. That's what I'm expecting from whatever suddenly appears on my overview. If a T3 decloaks on me I will try to escape, but generally expect to die, unless he didn't pack a scram. But more generally, without a cloaky warp-in the Recon is going to land in a place on the grid that can be predicted. Only the Lachesis has the tools to overcome this disadvantage. If there is a cloaky warp-in then an Interceptor could catch you just as easily as any Recon warping in could. It would be on grid very quickly after you saw it on scan, possibly ready to lock faster than the Combat Recon due to warp deceleration. Serendipity Lost wrote: Then there is the 'but you can just use combat probes to detect them' - this is another kick in the nutz to solo/small groups of guys. Expanded probe launchers take a ton of CPU and would/will reduce fits including them to garbage. Of course if you're in a large alliance - someone can cloak a cov ops in system w/ combats out and go that way. I like change. Change favors the agile and adaptable (and I'm pretty sure that has favored me and mine over the years). I don't like bad changes. There is a difference. The combat probe option hurts solo players the most, though I've found in this game that most solo players are multiboxers. So the field of people affected is even smaller. I've already pointed out in this thread how true solo players can mitigate this with an alt on the same account. People are acting like they don't use scouts, I don't know... maybe they don't anymore. If this change gets people back to using them then that's just another good reason for it. It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 255	Posted - 2014.12.30 14:54:19 - [2079] - Quote KIller Wabbit wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ A game breaking ******* bullshit mechanic. You should be ashamed. How exactly will this break the game? It hasn't even released yet. You cry too much. Oh wait, I forgot all you little kids are home for the holidays. No wonder there's so much whining.
Niskin League of the Lost 195	Posted - 2014.12.30 15:00:16 - [2080] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: Just some quick brainstorming for gank immune wh activities: Recon gassing (ick) and pirate faction relic/data sites in the low ends using a recon (no wrecks involved). There is a lot of opportunity for low end day trippping in a hacking combat recon. Scan the crap down w/ your covert ops ship and then come back in your hacking curse and double dog dare someone to scan you down and gank you. You are grasping here. Venture's cost ~250k ISK and huff gas faster than anything with 5 Turret slots (max Gas Harvesters per ship based on skill level 5). They also have 2 points of warp core stability. Why would I huff gas in a Recon which is in the 100-200m ISK range? Not to mention the 5000m3 Ore Bay and that the Recon would have to drop a can to huff gas, and need a hauler. Hacking is the same deal, Frigates are cheap and the one you will use for hacking will have bonuses for that activity. There is no good reason to use an expensive Recon over a Frigate that costs less than 1M ISK. It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow

Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 741	Posted - 2014.12.30 15:42:54 - [2081] - Quote Niskin wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: Just some quick brainstorming for gank immune wh activities: Recon gassing (ick) and pirate faction relic/data sites in the low ends using a recon (no wrecks involved). There is a lot of opportunity for low end day trippping in a hacking combat recon. Scan the crap down w/ your covert ops ship and then come back in your hacking curse and double dog dare someone to scan you down and gank you. You are grasping here. Venture's cost ~250k ISK and huff gas faster than anything with 5 Turret slots (max Gas Harvesters per ship based on skill level 5). They also have 2 points of warp core stability. Why would I huff gas in a Recon which is in the 100-200m ISK range? Not to mention the 5000m3 Ore Bay and that the Recon would have to drop a can to huff gas, and need a hauler. Hacking is the same deal, Frigates are cheap and the one you will use for hacking will have bonuses for that activity. There is no good reason to use an expensive Recon over a Frigate that costs less than 1M ISK. You're just a hater. See the (ick) after the recon gasser? Ick is a technical word for not desirable. (and ditch the venture - the 10k hold of the prospect is to die for - don't bother w/ a cloak) The pirate data/relic sites are super easy to hack. Anyone that can use the t2 variants of the mini game modules can do them easily in any ship. As far as there is no reason to use and expensive recon over a frigate that costs 1 M isk... it's immune to D-scan is one reason. It can wonk up on any unsuspecting t1 frigate that warps into the site (that's right, MY hacking combat recon is going to pwnt YOUR t1 frig as soon as it lands), so that's 2 reasons. And I did preface it w/ (and I quote) 'Just some quick brainstorming.....' I will be sitting in relic/data sites in a combat recon. Please bring on your T1 frigatry.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 897	Posted - 2014.12.30 16:23:08 - [2082] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Its interesting to see so many getting worked up over the Dscan trick when its effectively the same as any ship with a cov ops cloak, the only difference is the rook can be probed down. The difference is that the Falcon is pre-gimped as a combat ship, while the Rook is gonna dump out a ton of DPS with RLMLs in addition to jamming and being incredibly sneaky. And don't forget that you can always fit a regular cloak on the Rook if you need to go AFK.
Niskin League of the Lost 195	Posted - 2014.12.30 16:29:17 - [2083] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: You're just a hater. See the (ick) after the recon gasser? Ick is a technical word for not desirable. (and ditch the venture - the 10k hold of the prospect is to die for - don't bother w/ a cloak) The pirate data/relic sites are super easy to hack. Anyone that can use the t2 variants of the mini game modules can do them easily in any ship. As far as there is no reason to use and expensive recon over a frigate that costs 1 M isk... it's immune to D-scan is one reason. It can wonk up on any unsuspecting t1 frigate that warps into the site (that's right, MY hacking combat recon is going to pwnt YOUR t1 frig as soon as it lands), so that's 2 reasons. And I did preface it w/ (and I quote) 'Just some quick brainstorming.....' I will be sitting in relic/data sites in a combat recon. Please bring on your T1 frigatry. LOL, I'm a hater. That's a new one. It's not my fault your ideas are terrible. So I should use a 25m ISK Prospect over a 250k ISK Venture because it has twice the Ore Hold? Most gas sites I run have 4500m3 in them, some have 7500m3. I think I can handle making two trips on those rare occasions... Saying the pirate sites are easy to hack doesn't make your case any better, it just means you don't have to waste time finding a frigate with the right bonus if you are that good at them. I personally prefer the bonused hull, I've yet to go 6/6 on a site and I don't need any help failing them. Now if you're sitting in a pirate site in a Recon hoping to get a kill, that makes sense. I'm not really worried about losing a Frigate but I'll probably still Combat Probe the sites I plan to warp to, as a new important habit. But if you want to sit in a site and wait for a gank, the only advantage the Combat Recon gives you over the Force Recon is being able to actually hack the cans. I'm not sure that's an important enough difference considering you're still busted when the Combat Probes get in range. It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow
Dark Drifter Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance 146	Posted - 2014.12.30 17:06:16 - [2084] - Quote what id the D-scan imunity was a 'skill related bonus. say 2.8AU reduction to D-scan Visability per RECON level this leaves tyou with a .3au window of opertunity to see your agressor/impending death on D scan if they have recon ships to 5
Aureus Ahishatsu Deadspace Knights 82	Posted - 2014.12.30 17:52:12 - [2085] - Quote [quote=CCP Rise] Align Recons around ship developer trends established in other classes (Roden Lachesis should not use missiles for example) [/qoute] I know this isn't the most discussed topic but this seems like a rather harsh inconvenience for the Caldari/ Minmatar. The Gallente/ Amarr don't need to worry about really cross training anything. However now Minmatar recon pilots will be REQUIRED to train missiles to fly the cloaked ship. While the Lore concept works for the command ship, it seems rather hampering for the recons. Particularly since a lot of scouts are alts who are not training. All those alts will now be required to train missiles if they even want to put a weapon on the rapier. I would personally recommend taking one of two approaches to fix the problem. A) Make Caldari/ Minmatar ships like the Fleet Scythe in that they all have dual weapon bonuses B) Go the same route you already went with Command ships by making both viable. Ex. all recons can equip cloak, at the expense of a high slot.
Aureus Ahishatsu Deadspace Knights 83	Posted - 2014.12.30 18:14:25 - [2086] - Quote Niskin wrote: Aureus Ahishatsu wrote: I don't understand what you are talking about here. Most of the people who have raised concerns have had very definitive points they were making about situations that are very real (wh's, fw). Meanwhile the only argument being made against it is 'mm tears" and 'nom nom nom gonna love killing bears now' neither of which contributes anything. The Faction Warfare concern is very legitimate in that it doesn't even favor those who are playing the game for faction warfare. In fact it benefits those who simply wish to be a nuisance to those participating in faction warfare. Yeah, that's what we did in here, ignored all the posts about real situations. I mean I certainly didn't explain how T3 cruisers were still more likely to get a kill on you. Nor did I include some tips to avoid recon ganks in that same post. Later on I didn't help a guy out who didn't understand his defensive options properly. Then I certainly didn't recap the first 52 pages and address the concerns about FacWar plexes. Nor did I present a comparison of being ganked in a wormhole by a combat recon versus a T3 cruiser. That's just me, and I'm not the only one arguing in good faith in this thread. There have been some good situations brought up, and all have counters, but not everybody is happy with having to use counters where they didn't have to before. I can understand that, but this is EVE, things will change and sometimes they will get harder. Sorry for the long response but holidays and all.... Niskin you listed helping an individual with a single instance as a counter. That's just an individual not knowing one aspect of gameplay (combat probes while scanning), not countering an entire play style (fleet recon viability). Second all of you're arguments are about how much more dangerous the T3's are. Ok? so what? this article isn't even about the T3's other than one line mentioning how they are making the recons closer to them. A fitted recon isn't even half the cost of a T3 with subsystems. Not to mention for wealthy PVP'ers they will happily throw d-scan immune recons at people over t3's simply for the skill loss avoidance. Your entire argument base is that it's ok to make the recons deadlier because other things are worse. To put it bluntly I'll quote my friend who read your article. it's like you are saying "don't worry about the piranhas in the water, because there are alligators nearby."
Niskin League of the Lost 206	Posted - 2014.12.30 18:48:04 - [2087] - Quote Aureus Ahishatsu wrote: Sorry for the long response but holidays and all.... Niskin you listed helping an individual with a single instance as a counter. That's just an individual not knowing one aspect of gameplay (combat probes while scanning), not countering an entire play style (fleet recon viability). The guy thought he couldn't hack a can and scan with combat probes at the same time. I pointed out that he could, and now he'll be safer for it. My point is that not everybody arguing in this thread knows how every mechanic works, including myself. If I see a place where somebody would benefit from knowledge then I give it to them, just the same as I read others posts to gather info I didn't have. Aureus Ahishatsu wrote: Second all of you're arguments are about how much more dangerous the T3's are. Ok? so what? this article isn't even about the T3's other than one line mentioning how they are making the recons closer to them. A fitted recon isn't even half the cost of a T3 with subsystems. Not to mention for wealthy PVP'ers they will happily throw d-scan immune recons at people over t3's simply for the skill loss avoidance. Your entire argument base is that it's ok to make the recons deadlier because other things are worse. To put it bluntly I'll quote my friend who read your article. it's like you are saying "don't worry about the piranhas in the water, because there are alligators nearby." T3's exist now and with similar fits they cost 2-3x as much as Recons. You don't have to faction fit a T3 to pull off a cloaky gank. They are also quite prevalent, there are people flying T3's for PvP in every area of the game. People keep saying that "this makes blah blah blah more dangerous" and I'm pointing out that it doesn't. It gives those who would attack you some additional options, but they already have some good options as it is. It would be more accurate to say that I am saying "Be careful, there are both piranhas and alligators in this water." But more realistically the number of assailants is going to stay about the same, you just don't know if they will show up in a piranha suit or an alligator suit... and really, does it matter? You're gonna get eaten either way if you aren't careful. It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow
Mario Putzo Welping and Dunking. 984	Posted - 2014.12.30 18:50:39 - [2088] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Its interesting to see so many getting worked up over the Dscan trick when its effectively the same as any ship with a cov ops cloak, the only difference is the rook can be probed down. Probably because it is a needless change, and a needles addition to the game. If its no different why not just slap a cov ops cloak on the combat recons? When you have to start rescinding changes before they even go live than its probably not worth the adjustment. Increasing resist profiles on Combat Recons was a good idea, it would let them be more apt in performing their intended function...combat. Now that this is not going to happen the DSCAN change seems rather redundant, to the point it seems like CCP is just shoehorning a change for change sake. Like I said earlier, the change is **, it offers nothing new to the game, and doesn't actually solve the issue with Combat Recons being utter ** in combat situations. Like I said above. The best fix is to split the recon roles instead of having the mashup we currently have. Combat Recons should be functional in a Combat Role, Force Recons should be more suited for a support role (force multiplier). Anything other than defining the ships into 2 distinct role ideologies is just a placebo. Like you said, its no different than having a Cov Ops cloak...so why do we need to add it to the game at all...especially at the cost of something a ship line desperately needs.
Stitch Kaneland Ex Astris Opes 97	Posted - 2014.12.30 19:39:28 - [2089] - Quote Force recons lose ability to cloak, but gain dscan immunity, combat recons get HAC resists and bigger EHP pool. I mean whats the point of one being able to cloak and the other having a semi-cloak, but neither are good in a fleet role. Id be happy to jump a gate in null with the lone sabre with falcon alt, and actually see the risk averse ******* before trying to engage. may not show up on dscan, but at least i know a falcon is there on gate when i jump in. Just a thought.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 1898	Posted - 2014.12.30 21:19:04 - [2090] - Quote since we rolled back on some of the other changes, can we consider the probe fitting bonus for combat recons?

Catherine Laartii Dominion Fleet Group Templis CALSF 452	Posted - 2014.12.30 22:09:00 - [2091] - Quote Barrogh Habalu wrote: Spugg Galdon wrote: Looking forward to setting up some traps in low sec with combat recons. 3 of you in local. Put 3 cheap mining barges in the belt/ice field. Get into your CR's and sit and wait for them to warp to what looks like a mining fleet. Get two buddies with you so the number of ships on dscan equals amount of people in local. Or better yet, if oyu live out there just ditch the ships in the belt and get into the CR's. You'd be amazed at how many people take that bait since it's EXACTLY what it looks like to them.
Jenshae Chiroptera The Volition Cult 686	Posted - 2014.12.30 22:51:36 - [2092] - Quote Jaysen Larrisen wrote: East Windstar wrote: Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Nope. Check local. - See 10. D-scan - see 5. Assume 5 are Recons. Avoid fight. You won't see 5 on D-scan, they will not be on D-scan at all. Looks like you have never used the D-scan. I think Jenshae was saying that if you see 10 people in local and only 5 ships on scan just assume the delta equals recon ships to be safe. Yup. CALAMYTY DIVA wrote: What about WH? Just blobs invading temporarily. I won't try live in them again. Did a year before frigate holes. CSM Ten movement for change. EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims. Status: Rabid carebear Blog
Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 38	Posted - 2014.12.31 03:00:03 - [2093] - Quote Mario Putzo wrote: baltec1 wrote: Its interesting to see so many getting worked up over the Dscan trick when its effectively the same as any ship with a cov ops cloak, the only difference is the rook can be probed down. ... Increasing resist profiles on Combat Recons was a good idea, it would let them be more apt in performing their intended function...combat. Now that this is not going to happen the DSCAN change seems rather redundant, to the point it seems like CCP is just shoehorning a change for change sake. Like I said earlier, the change is **, it offers nothing new to the game, and doesn't actually solve the issue with Combat Recons being utter ** in combat situations. Like I said above. The best fix is to split the recon roles instead of having the mashup we currently have. Combat Recons should be functional in a Combat Role, Force Recons should be more suited for a support role (force multiplier). Anything other than defining the ships into 2 distinct role ideologies is just a placebo. Like you said, its no different than having a Cov Ops cloak...so why do we need to add it to the game at all...especially at the cost of something a ship line desperately needs. Saying the d-scan immunity doesn't offer something new to the game is just false. It is introducing a "cloak" that: you can't go AFK without the risk of getting popped. (Eliminating deep-safes was another change that helped in this direction.) you can't use for tower warp-ins, cloaky fleet warp-ins, or cov-ops cyno activities (because the force recon is balanced for this with lower DPS). does make some ganks easier, but after five years of continuous nerfs to this play-style I think we're in safe territory. As for the fleet viability, I thought about this a bit more. In CCP Rise's statement, he didn't say that he would go back to the existing resist profile. He may make the resist profile such that addition of hardeners would make it viable for fleet at the expense of some EWAR functionality; Or, he can tune it so that it would be viable in a typical null-sec fleet but only with the addition of a slightly higher mix of logistics. It may still be viable for fleet action. We just don't know until he comes back from vacation. Its not an either-or. So, I say, keep your pants on until the changes are clarified. I'm hopeful that a creative change like this can be made to work. O. Faeces
Mario Putzo Welping and Dunking. 988	Posted - 2014.12.31 03:29:04 - [2094] - Quote Orange Faeces wrote: Mario Putzo wrote: baltec1 wrote: Its interesting to see so many getting worked up over the Dscan trick when its effectively the same as any ship with a cov ops cloak, the only difference is the rook can be probed down. ... Increasing resist profiles on Combat Recons was a good idea, it would let them be more apt in performing their intended function...combat. Now that this is not going to happen the DSCAN change seems rather redundant, to the point it seems like CCP is just shoehorning a change for change sake. Like I said earlier, the change is **, it offers nothing new to the game, and doesn't actually solve the issue with Combat Recons being utter in combat situations. Like I said above. The best fix is to split the recon roles instead of having the mashup we currently have. Combat Recons should be functional in a Combat Role, Force Recons should be more suited for a support role (force multiplier). Anything other than defining the ships into 2 distinct role ideologies is just a placebo. Like you said, its no different than having a Cov Ops cloak...so why do we need to add it to the game at all...especially at the cost of something a ship line desperately needs. Saying the d-scan immunity doesn't offer something new to the game is just false. It is introducing a "cloak" that: you can't go AFK without the risk of getting popped. (Eliminating deep-safes was another change that helped in this direction.) you can't use for tower warp-ins or on-grid intel. you can't use for fleet warp-ins because you'll get popped you can't use for cov-ops cyno activities (because the force recon is balanced for this with lower DPS). does make some ganks easier, but after five years of continuous nerfs to this play-style I think we're in safe territory. As for the fleet viability, I thought about this a bit more. In CCP Rise's statement, he didn't say that he would go back to the existing resist profile. He may make the resist profile such that addition of hardeners would make it viable for fleet at the expense of some EWAR functionality; Or, he can tune it so that it would be viable in a typical null-sec fleet but only with the addition of a slightly higher mix of logistics. It may still be viable for fleet action. We just don't know until he comes back from vacation. Its not an either-or. So, I say, keep your pants on until the changes are clarified. I'm hopeful that a creative change like the d-scan immunity can be balanced with other play styles. O. Faeces Doesn't stop people fitting a cloak to their ship like they did before and going afk, decloak to warp don't show on dscan... Why not just give it cov ops cloak? Its the same damn thing. Couldn't use it for reliable warp ins or on grid intel before. No Change. Couldn't use it for fleet warp ins before. No Change. Couldn't use it for cov op cyno activity. No Change Does make some ganks easier. So do T3's by a great deal more Which can Fit a cov ops cloak Provide Warp Ins and Intel Provide Fleet Warp ins Use Cov Op Cynos/Blops So do Force Recons So do SOE Cruisers/Frigs. So you get the ability to not show up on dscan while you are uncloaked. Whoopy **. Its a placebo change that isn't going to change anything. 5 second target delay from warping to a grid, or 5 second target delay uncloaking. It is literally the exact same functionality as it used to have. How about instead of sucking up this crap heap of a tweak you actually make an argument to make these ships truly useful. If a cloaky T3 or Stratios can pack 500+DPS and 70K+EHP...why the hell shouldn't a Combat Recon? Ask yourself. Does this change solve an issue that is causing this particular ship class to be underused. Does not showing up on DSCAN solve the issues with Combat Recons being underused. If that answer is no, then the change isn't worth it, ESPECIALLY, when the exact same mechanic already exists in game that solves this apparent issue. If Combat Recons are not being used because people know they are there, change their permissions on using Covert Cloaks. Boom mail me my check.
Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 38	Posted - 2014.12.31 03:38:27 - [2095] - Quote Mario Putzo wrote: Doesn't stop people fitting a cloak to their ship like they did before and going afk, decloak to warp don't show on dscan... Why not just give it cov ops cloak? Its the same damn thing. Couldn't use it for reliable warp ins or on grid intel before. No Change. Couldn't use it for fleet warp ins before. No Change. Couldn't use it for cov op cyno activity. No Change Does make some ganks easier. So do T3's by a great deal more Which can Fit a cov ops cloak Provide Warp Ins and Intel Provide Fleet Warp ins Use Cov Op Cynos/Blops So do Force Recons So do SOE Cruisers/Frigs. So you get the ability to not show up on dscan while you are uncloaked. Whoopy **. Its a placebo change that isn't going to change anything. 5 second target delay from warping to a grid, or 5 second target delay uncloaking. It is literally the exact same functionality as it used to have. How about instead of sucking up this crap heap of a tweak you actually make an argument to make these ships truly useful. If a cloaky T3 or Stratios can pack 500+DPS and 70K+EHP...why the hell shouldn't a Combat Recon? Ask yourself. Does this change solve an issue that is causing this particular ship class to be underused. Does not showing up on DSCAN solve the issues with Combat Recons being underused. If that answer is no, then the change isn't worth it, ESPECIALLY, when the exact same mechanic already exists in game that solves this apparent issue. If Combat Recons are not being used because people know they are there, change their permissions on using Covert Cloaks. Boom mail me my check. Its always most fun when people miss their own point! Now you are arguing that there is no change in the combat recon for many of the features of this limited 'cloak' but you still don't want it. This is because you're original point was that you want the T2 resists INSTEAD**. My last paragraph, which you conveniently ignored in your response, explains why it is not necessarily an either-or decision between T2 resists and d-scan immunity. The resists can be adjusted to make them fleet capable. Its not that hard to imagine how that would work. If Rise wants to make combat recons Cov-Ops capable instead of d-scan immune, thats fine by me, but it does miss an opportunity to adjust the cloak mechanics in a way that prevents AFK cloaking. And to answer your question about whether combat recons will be more used with the d-scan immunity, my answer is yes it will. This limited 'cloak' capabiliity will have an effect on their use, and its nonsense to argue that it wont. There are many other changes in his list that help with this and there are lots of other issues to discuss, but the answer is yes. O. Faeces
Mario Putzo Welping and Dunking. 989	Posted - 2014.12.31 03:58:29 - [2096] - Quote Orange Faeces wrote: Its always most fun when people miss their own point! Now you are arguing that there is no change in the combat recon for many of the features of this limited 'cloak' but you still don't want it. This is because, you're original point was that you want the T2 resists INSTEAD. My last paragraph, which you conveniently ignored in your response, explains why it is not necessarily an either-or decision between T2 resists and d-scan immunity. The resists can be adjusted to make them fleet capable. Its not that hard to imagine how that would work. If Rise wants to make combat recons Cov-Ops capable instead of d-scan immune, thats fine by me, but it does miss an opportunity to adjust the cloak mechanics in a way that prevents AFK cloaking. And to answer your question about whether combat recons will be more used with the d-scan immunity, my answer is yes it will. This limited 'cloak' capabiliity will have an effect on their use, and its nonsense to argue that it wont. There are many other changes in his list that help with this and there are lots of other issues to discuss, but the answer is yes. O. Faeces You are right my original point was I want T2 resists on my Combat Recon so it is Combat Viable for its price point. Did you know that a Blackbird can perform the exact same functionality as a Rook for a fraction of the cost. The same applies to all of the T1 Cruiser EWAR ships vs their comparable "Combat Recons". There is a huge gap in cost effective utility. On the other side for only a couple hundred more mil you can get a T3 that absolutely *** all over anything a Combat Recon does. Showing up on DSCAN is the least of this ship class' worries. T2 Resists would absolutely bump its cost effectiveness to the point I might say, ill bring this Rook instead of my Blackbird, because it might not get volleyed off field the moment I land on grid. I didn't acknowledge your last paragraph because it offers little to the discussion. CCP Rise can do anything he wants, and he usually does. He can set resists to anywhere he wants and he will, but that isn't the only issue with Recons. Why do I have 2 ships that perform essentially the same functionality. Is my paltry DPS from a Rook what you want (Kinetic Only no less!) If you want me to put down DPS why not let me use a Caracal, I get the better Damage and a similar tank for a fraction of the cost, its not like I can fit a Rook with Gank and Tank. And ECM. You can't have it all... If Rise is serious about tweaking this class, he absolutely needs to split the class. If you want to DPS as a Recon you bring a Combat Recon. Get rid of the Ewar bonuses and make it combat focused. Hell slap on a 4% Resist/level bonus over one of the EWAR bonuses to give it some added resist love. If you want to EWAR bring a Force Recon. Get rid of combat bonuses and add scanning bonuses, you know for recon . Also please stop saying limited cloak. If someone wants to AFK cloak in your system, they will just fit a ***** cloaking device to their ship. The DSCAN change is a placebo that is in no way going to impact the utility of Combat Recons. As long as I get more bang for my buck whelping Blackbirds and Caracals, or flying a T3, there is absolutely no reason at all to ever fly a Combat Recon. Combat Recons need to be vastly improved in terms of their ability to engage in Combat. Not hide from it better.
Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 38	Posted - 2014.12.31 04:41:39 - [2097] - Quote Mario Putzo wrote: You are right my original point was I want T2 resists on my Combat Recon so it is Combat Viable for its price point. Did you know that a Blackbird can perform the exact same functionality as a Rook for a fraction of the cost. The same applies to all of the T1 Cruiser EWAR ships vs their comparable "Combat Recons". There is a huge gap in cost effective utility. On the other side for only a couple hundred more mil you can get a T3 that absolutely *** all over anything a Combat Recon does. I took a moment to run the numbers for the null-sec HAC loadouts that were popular in my days in 0.0 (recent history on another toon). Using 3 mid-slots the HAC achieved 11k - 27k EHP (depending on damage type). We usually achieved very robust fleet tank with about 7-8 logistics for a group of 40 HACs. Now, to tank up a combat recon with the resists as they were, we needed to plug a resist hole, so to achieve comparable tank numbers (13k - 27k EHP) on the combat recon we needed 4 mids. So these recons were as durable as the HACs and fit in with the same ratio of logistics to combat ships. This left 3 mids left for EWAR or tackle. Not a great tradeoff but reasonable for the cost, especially if the recons were huginn or lachesis which give the fleet robust tackle bonuses. Now, if I try the same thing with a celestis or a blackbird, and use 4 mids for tank, I can't get more than 8k - 14k EHP, which will mean they can be popped before logistics get on them, and we'd need a higher ratio of logis in fleet. It just wont work. Furthermore, this means only 1-2 mids remain for EWAR. This is not viable for HAC+Logi fleet disciplines. So, I'm not sure what you mean by, "Did you know that a Blackbird can perform the exact same functionality as a Rook for a fraction of the cost." It is a statement, that in light of your interest in fleet viability of combat recons, is plainly false in my experience. Is there another cruiser fleet discpline that you had in mind when you made this statement? If not, I'm just not sure how to respond to your claims. Mario Putzo wrote: ... Also please stop saying limited cloak. If someone wants to AFK cloak in your system, they will just fit a ***** cloaking device to their ship. The DSCAN change is a placebo that is in no way going to impact the utility of Combat Recons. As long as I get more bang for my buck whelping Blackbirds and Caracals, or flying a T3, there is absolutely no reason at all to ever fly a Combat Recon. Combat Recons need to be vastly improved in terms of their ability to engage in Combat. Not hide from it better. Given my explanation above, I certainly think there is a cost advantage to the combat recon over the T3 in the fleet context, regardless of recent market trends. You are right that they can still fit a cloak module. If the d-scan invulnerability experiment goes well, I wouldn't be surprised if there were ... additional changes to all cloaks in the future. Think about it... O. Faeces
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 45	Posted - 2014.12.31 05:08:56 - [2098] - Quote Orange Faeces wrote: .... My last paragraph, which you conveniently ignored in your response, explains why it is not necessarily an either-or decision between T2 resists and d-scan immunity. The resists can be adjusted to make them fleet capable. Its not that hard to imagine how that would work. If Rise wants to make combat recons Cov-Ops capable instead of d-scan immune, thats fine by me, but it does miss an opportunity to adjust the cloak mechanics in a way that discourages AFK cloaking by making pilots trade off DPS or cargo space for cloaks and/or depots. And to answer your question about whether combat recons will be more used with the d-scan immunity, my answer is yes it will. This limited 'cloak' capabiliity will have an effect on their use, and its nonsense to argue that it wont. There are many other changes in his list that help with this and there are lots of other issues to discuss, but the answer is yes. O. Faeces Orange, You make solid points and so does Mario frankly. The the root problem is what are we doing to separate the Blackbird, Rook, and Falcon with this change? From a purely EWAR perspective...not really anything. So then I start looking at what is the point of the 3 different ships? The Blackbird is pretty straight forward - it's a purely an EWAR platform and can engage with a huge range advantage. The Falcon and Rook share the exact same EWAR bonus both have paper thin hp now. The T1 hull and Force Recon are both in solid position...the outlier is the Combat Recon. Trying to apply the d-scan immunity either in-lieu of or at the expense of legitimate eHP to the a dedicated EWAR platform that needs fleet survivability, particularly given that it will likely be a primary target in any group fight. Let me be clear, I'm not saying the d-scan immunity won't be useful and generate some - some - creative play but it's nowhere near worth the cost based on comparable alternatives. The full T2 resists would go a long way into helping justify the cost. If the EWAR bonus was adjusted to something utilizing increments of both the intensity of the Falcon and range of the Blackbird that would be a way to make the ship unique and useful. "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 45	Posted - 2014.12.31 05:34:34 - [2099] - Quote Orange Faeces wrote: Mario Putzo wrote: You are right my original point was I want T2 resists on my Combat Recon so it is Combat Viable for its price point. Did you know that a Blackbird can perform the exact same functionality as a Rook for a fraction of the cost. The same applies to all of the T1 Cruiser EWAR ships vs their comparable "Combat Recons". There is a huge gap in cost effective utility. On the other side for only a couple hundred more mil you can get a T3 that absolutely *** all over anything a Combat Recon does. I took a moment to run the numbers for the null-sec HAC loadouts that were popular in my days in 0.0 (recent history on another toon). Using 3 mid-slots the HAC achieved 11k - 27k EHP (depending on damage type). We usually achieved very robust fleet tank with about 7-8 logistics for the group. Now, to tank up a combat recon with the resists as they were, we needed to plug a resist hole, so to achieve comparable tank numbers (13k - 27k EHP) on the combat recon we needed 4 mids. So these recons were as durable as the HACs and fit in with the same ratio of logistics to combat ships. This left 3 mids left for EWAR or tackle. Not a great tradeoff but reasonable for the cost, especially if the recons were huginn or lachesis which give the fleet robust tackle bonuses. Now, if I try the same thing with a celestis or a blackbird, and use 4 mids for tank, I can't get more than 8k - 14k EHP, which will need a higher number of logis in fleet and more likely that they can be popped before logistics get on them. It just wont work. Furthermore, this means only 1-2 mids remain for EWAR. This is not viable for HAC+Logi fleet disciplines. So, I'm not sure what you mean by, "Did you know that a Blackbird can perform the exact same functionality as a Rook for a fraction of the cost." It is a statement, that in light of your interest in fleet viability of combat recons, is plainly false in my experience. Is there another cruiser fleet discpline that you had in mind when you made this statement? If not, I'm just not sure how to respond to your claims. Mario Putzo wrote: ... Also please stop saying limited cloak. If someone wants to AFK cloak in your system, they will just fit a ***** cloaking device to their ship. The DSCAN change is a placebo that is in no way going to impact the utility of Combat Recons. As long as I get more bang for my buck whelping Blackbirds and Caracals, or flying a T3, there is absolutely no reason at all to ever fly a Combat Recon. Combat Recons need to be vastly improved in terms of their ability to engage in Combat. Not hide from it better. Given my explanation above, I certainly think there is a cost advantage to the combat recon over the T3 in the fleet context, regardless of recent market trends. You are right that they can still fit a cloak module. If the d-scan invulnerability experiment goes well, I wouldn't be surprised if there were ... additional changes to all cloaks in the future. Think about it... O. Faeces edit -- I should mention that the fleet arrangement is much less beneficial for Force Recons, as they stand. The resist profile results in fewer than 3 remaining mids (in all cases), usually only 1 remains, to make the tank viable. So, there's little overlap in that sense -- the force recon's role as cloaky scout/cyno/cov-ops/etc is not an issue. Adding a form of sneakiness to the Combat recon is a viable way to get it used in other settings. Ok, I've got to ask...if we are talking about actually fleet operations - the d-scan immunity seems to me will be even of lesser value. Once you get even a small fleet up the EWAR capability is in far greater demand than any theoretical "recon" function it could preform...there are simply better ships for that but nothing better for EWAR. Honestly...really seems like the combat recon aren't anything to do with "recon" they are much more of a Electronic Attack Cruiser. To that end, they should probably be treated as such. In reference to your point earlier about HP differences between the Blackbird and Rook..you are correct there is a difference. My numbers weren't quite as dramatic as yours but your set up makes sense. That said, a decently skilled Blackbird pilot can jam a lot of targets from a very long range...much longer than the Rook. So can a Blackbird do at least as good of a job disrupting a fleet as a Rook, yes, it can. Not always by any stretch but that certainly doesn't mean it's not at least nearly as effective. I won't go into the T3 bit since CCP Rise did make it pretty clear there is a future pass on T3's and the sound of it is that they will be noticeably toned down across several facets. "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 38	Posted - 2014.12.31 06:15:49 - [2100] - Quote Jaysen Larrisen wrote: Ok, I've got to ask...if we are talking about actually fleet operations - the d-scan immunity seems to me will be even of lesser value. Once you get even a small fleet up the EWAR capability is in far greater demand than any theoretical "recon" function it could preform...there are simply better ships for that but nothing better for EWAR. Honestly...really seems like the combat recon aren't anything to do with "recon" they are much more of a Electronic Attack Cruiser. To that end, they should probably be treated as such. In reference to your point earlier about HP differences between the Blackbird and Rook..you are correct there is a difference. My numbers weren't quite as dramatic as yours but your set up makes sense. That said, a decently skilled Blackbird pilot can jam a lot of targets from a very long range...much longer than the Rook. So can a Blackbird do at least as good of a job disrupting a fleet as a Rook, yes, it can. Not always by any stretch but that certainly doesn't mean it's not at least nearly as effective. I won't go into the T3 bit since CCP Rise did make it pretty clear there is a future pass on T3's and the sound of it is that they will be noticeably toned down across several facets. Jaysen, Well, there could be some wrinkles in how the d-scan immunity affects HAC fleet behavior. As it stands today, the mix of Huginns vs. Lachesis that an opposing FC sees on scan can affect where they put position logistics anchor. If they see damping heavy group with few webs and no TP bonuses, they'll want to keep their logistics anchor close to the HACs. D-scan immunity means more unknowns going into a HAC fight. With the d-scan immunity change, FCs will have to count local, subtract the on-scan HACs/Logis and then consider the possibilities for the number of possible remaining combat recons. But I'm willing to concede that this is a minor effect for the d-scan immunity on fleet fights. (edit - note that this is a very simplistic example. there are many people who know a LOT more than I do about fleet tactics, but its just a simple example) On the other hand, you make a reasonable point about blackbird vs. rook, ie range bonus vs. no bonus. This is a much more specific point about ECM-range balance that isn't a direct tie to the discussion of d-scan immunity. I can understand, however, why you would want the rook to have a superior tank given that it has to stay close to achieve the ECM effect, of course. All I can say on that is that with a 4-midslot tank on the rook, you have similar tank capability as the other combat recons, so staying with the HACs is viable, even if ECM is rarely the right choice for those types of fleet fights. And that seems to be more to the point -- its not that you can't tank up the rook and still have 3 mids free, but since there is no tackle benefit to these mids, why bring a rook to a fleet fight when a blackbird can stay relatively safe at range and jam things. That is the point that you two are making. You and Mario Putzo aren't complaining that people wont bring combat recons to fleet fights because they can and do (as I've shown). You are complaining that people wont bring Rooks to fleet fights! Now that I have understood why you two are so emo, I again feel confident in saying that this is not relevant to the d-scan immunity discussion. What you are concerned with is the Rook/Blackbird tradeoffs -- not the combat recons in general. All I can say on that is, the problem you are concerned with is how to balance ECM bonuses across the Blackbird hull cruisers and that is a discussion for a very different thread indeed. Its not that it isn't important, it just shouldn't derail the benefits the other combat recons are getting. O. Faeces

Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 46	Posted - 2014.12.31 07:20:56 - [2101] - Quote Orange Faeces wrote: Jaysen, Well, there could be some wrinkles in how the d-scan immunity affects HAC fleet behavior. As it stands today, the mix of Huginns vs. Lachesis that an opposing FC sees on scan can affect where they put position logistics anchor. If they see damping heavy group with few webs and no TP bonuses, they'll want to keep their logistics anchor close to the HACs. D-scan immunity means more unknowns going into a HAC fight. With the d-scan immunity change, FCs will have to count local, subtract the on-scan HACs/Logis and then consider the possibilities for the number of possible remaining combat recons. But I'm willing to concede that this is a minor effect for the d-scan immunity on fleet fights. (edit - note that this is a very simplistic example. there are many people who know a LOT more than I do about fleet tactics.) On the other hand, you make a reasonable point about blackbird vs. rook, ie range bonus vs. no bonus. This is a much more specific point about ECM-range balance that isn't a direct tie to the discussion of d-scan immunity. I can understand, however, why you would want the rook to have a superior tank given that it has to stay close to achieve the ECM effect, of course. All I can say on that is that with a 4-midslot tank on the rook, you have similar tank capability as the other combat recons, so staying with the HACs is viable, even if ECM is rarely the right choice for those types of fleet fights. And that seems to be more to the point -- its not that you can't tank up the rook and still have 3 mids free, but since there is no tackle benefit to these mids, why bring a rook to a fleet fight when a blackbird can stay relatively safe at range and jam things. That is the point that you two are making. You and Mario Putzo aren't complaining that people wont bring combat recons to fleet fights because they can and do (as I've shown). You are complaining that people wont bring Rooks to fleet fights! Now that I have understood why you two are so emo, I again feel confident in saying that this is not relevant to the d-scan immunity discussion. What you are concerned with is the Rook/Blackbird tradeoffs -- not the combat recons in general. All I can say on that is, the problem you are concerned with is how to balance ECM bonuses across the Blackbird hull cruisers and that is a discussion for a very different thread indeed. Its not that it isn't important, it just shouldn't derail the benefits the other combat recons are getting. O. Faeces There are some that would rather d-scan not come into the game at all...again, I am not one of them. I think its a novel mechanic; I just don't value you perhaps to the degree that you do I totally disagree that discussions about the Rook/Falcon aren't relevant to the Recon ship discussion...all Recon ships are getting reworked, including Rooks and Falcons. Several role / hull perks are changing and that makes it specifically the purview of the discussion points that at least I have been trying to engage you in. This thread is not specifically the focused on the d-scan immunity component of the Recon ship update and I'm addressing things from the perspective of the ships themselves and not just that sole component. If you think that's "emo"...lol...you have a very different definition of that than i do. The 4 racial recon ships all use different flavors of non-lethal effects to augment the fight such as neuts, damps, painters, and ECM. That is being addressed (in the form of bonuses and such) along with DPS, eHP, general hull changes, etc in this update, correct? I'm pretty sure that it is so what I'm discussing is specific to the Caldari hulls in this manner. As i've noted i'm totally fine with the d-scan immunity being in play. Rise indicating that he felt the d-scan immunity in conjunction with T2 resists would be too powerful and most of what i've seen since his announcement is advocating that folks would rather have the resists in lieu of the D-scan immunity based on what they feel are relative value of each capability. You did make an earlier point that it is very possible that Rise & Co will increase the resists from current levels to something below the HAC level. I don't speak for anyone else on this but my perception of his comments (which i went back and looked at again) is that they didn't want the ships too powerful in small gang fights. I happen to disagree that they will be anymore OP in small fleets than any number of ships out there. As for your comments on Recons as part of larger HAC-centric fleets...sure i'll buy that. That is also one specific type of fleet comp and not the complete picture of things. You are correct that ECM / ECCM is a topic in and of itself, no argument there, and I'm not fencing with folks on that in here either. I'm specifically addressing ships and the greater Recon role in the ship stable of the game. "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
Mario Putzo Welping and Dunking. 990	Posted - 2014.12.31 07:29:16 - [2102] - Quote Orange Faeces wrote: I took a moment to run the numbers for the null-sec HAC loadouts that were popular in my days in 0.0 (recent history on another toon). Using 3 mid-slots the HAC achieved 11k - 27k EHP (depending on damage type). We usually achieved very robust fleet tank with about 7-8 logistics for the group. Now, to tank up a combat recon with the resists as they were, we needed to plug a resist hole, so to achieve comparable tank numbers (13k - 27k EHP) on the combat recon we needed 4 mids. So these recons were as durable as the HACs and fit in with the same ratio of logistics to combat ships. This left 3 mids left for EWAR or tackle. Not a great tradeoff but reasonable for the cost, especially if the recons were huginn or lachesis which give the fleet robust tackle bonuses. Now, if I try the same thing with a celestis or a blackbird, and use 4 mids for tank, I can't get more than 8k - 14k EHP, which will need a higher number of logis in fleet and more likely that they can be popped before logistics get on them. It just wont work. Furthermore, this means only 1-2 mids remain for EWAR. This is not viable for HAC+Logi fleet disciplines. So, I'm not sure what you mean by, "Did you know that a Blackbird can perform the exact same functionality as a Rook for a fraction of the cost." It is a statement, that in light of your interest in fleet viability of combat recons, is plainly false in my experience. Is there another cruiser fleet discpline that you had in mind when you made this statement? If not, I'm just not sure how to respond to your claims. Thanks for proving my point. Nice support ship odd you didn't once mention DPS, about the only stat the Rook significantly blows away the blackbird. While you were salvaging your 27K EHP Rook for 3 ECM module, My Blackbird is sitting at ~28K EHP with 4ECM modules a prop mod and a Point. I have only 40 DPS though, your fit should be around 270-340 depending on if you went for BCUs or not. Of course we don't know because you were to focused on telling us about the ECM on there. I put a Cloak, Probe Launcher and 2 Nuets on mine. Since im not sure what role your Rook is in your 40 man gang (are you EWAR? Tackle? DPS? Im just not sure). My Blackbird is dual purpose. It can be a Hunterseeker, and it can function as a support ewar ship. While enjoying Armor fleets, it isn't shy sitting at 70K Applying up to 5 Jams in a shield fleet either. Do you see my point yet? Your argument is that the Rook a COMBAT Recon ship is better at applying ECM than a Blackbird when shield fit. because it can use more ECM, heck you didn't even mention is 57% advantage over the BB either in likelihood to jam more often. I would almost say sorry for the bait post about the blackbird, but it really did emphasize my point, that people view Combat Recons as Force multipliers and not Combat ships. Perhaps CCPs focus should would be better spent on differentiating Combat Recons from Force Recons? I mean if the metric is based on how much more EWAR? they can provide then T1 cruiser, isn't that an issue since each racial Force Recon is better in every aspect in applying EWAR? Again I will say that CCP is offering up a placebo change instead of an actual role defying change that is needed. DSCAN change is nothing more than something to make a next to worthless (the tackle ships aside) group of ships seem useful. When all it offers is a gimmick cloak...that has already raised one huge concern in FW and its not even on the test server. It is a bad adjustment that entirely misses the issue with the ship class. Combat Recons are not suitable for combat roles in their current state, because they have no defined role. Are they a Combat ship? or an Ewar ship? Should I bring a HAC or a Force Recon instead? Or a BB as the case may be. The Gimmick change would be neat...if the ships were at all useful for anything that Cov Cloaky ships don't do better.
Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 41	Posted - 2014.12.31 08:47:54 - [2103] - Quote Mario Putzo wrote: Thanks for proving my point. Nice support ship odd you didn't once mention DPS, about the only stat the Rook significantly blows away the blackbird. While you were salvaging your 27K EHP Rook for 3 ECM module, My Blackbird is sitting at ~28K EHP with 4ECM modules a prop mod and a Point. I have only 40 DPS though, your fit should be around 270-340 depending on if you went for BCUs or not. Of course we don't know because you were to focused on telling us about the ECM on there. I put a Cloak, Probe Launcher and 2 Nuets on mine. Since im not sure what role your Rook is in your 40 man gang (are you EWAR? Tackle? DPS? Im just not sure). My Blackbird is dual purpose. It can be a Hunterseeker, and it can function as a support ewar ship. While enjoying Armor fleets, it isn't shy sitting at 70K Applying up to 5 Jams in a shield fleet either. Do you see my point yet? First of all, I outlined a shield-HAC doctrine. The recons in the gang are focused on adding tackle and EWAR capability while having a tank that is consistent with the fleet. If they have any DPS at all it is a tertiary factor. Your inclusion of spaghetti tackle and neuts is... quaint but not the best use of a pod pilot. If you had proper skills/wallet your FC would have demanded something much more focused from you. Second, the EHP numbers I stated were only for the shields (since thats all that matters for logi compatibility). The total EHP of the HACs I was describing is no less than 35k EHP, and up to 45k for the higher resisted damage types. Your 28k EHP BB is actually only 23k (and thats not even the worst pattern!!) when looking at the armor (again, for logi compatibility). Your fit is not viable for fleet as it will be alpha'd off the field before logi reps can do anything about it. The range benefit is unlikely to be of much advantage against fleet-HACs or fleet-BS since they can easily apply damage at that range. On the otherhand, a Rook could be viable in a shield-fleet from a tank perspective. Notice that Rise doubled down on making the Rook unsuitable for armor tanking in the proposed changes. Finally, your point was that T2 resists are a preferable buff to d-scan immunity, but my post showed something very clearly -- that HAC/logi fleets are already viable with combat recons. So I don't see your point. Indeed, you have failed to make any argument that doesn't crumble for lack of understanding of the game. Your continued issue with the Rook/Blackbird balance is further evidence that your concern really has NOTHING to do with d-scan immunity issues. It's really about the relative positions of the rook and blackbird specifically, as well as how ECM works (or doesn't work) in large scale engagements. While the rook bonuses may indeed need work, you continue to miss that d-scan immunity has nothing fundamental to do with the caldari EWar issues. Caldari Ewar issues are only 1/4th of the recon story, and ECM is the root cause for that, not the tank on your Rook. I urge you to cross train the other races so that you will have to tools you need to solve the different challenges you face in the game. Focusing only on one race pigeon-holes you in this game. Your narrow view of how the rook/blackbird performance affects the whole recon picture is evidence of very limited experience in the game. Maybe it is an area that needs to be addressed but not at the expense of the overall balance changes needed for recons. O. Faeces
rsantos TEC-NOLOGY Sorry We're In Your Space Eh 25	Posted - 2014.12.31 11:07:41 - [2104] - Quote Quote: you can't go AFK without the risk of getting popped. (Eliminating deep-safes was another change that helped in this direction.) Go AFK off-grid in Dead Space all you want! Good luck finding the recon!
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION The Obsidian Front 591	Posted - 2014.12.31 11:22:04 - [2105] - Quote [quote CCP Rise] We had a few big goals with Recons: GÇó Give Combat Recons something to make them stand out as a unique and interesting set of ships GÇó Close the gap somewhat between Recons and T3 Cruisers, though this will also be a goal during the T3 Cruiser rebalance GÇó Align Recons around ship developer trends established in other classes (Roden Lachesis should not use missiles for example) GÇó Address any other general balance issues or pain points (hello Pilgrim) [/quote] I've been doing a hell of a lot of theory crafting and I'm not sure you've really achieved these goals. Your concept is a good one however [IMHO] it just doesn't fit. The issue is this: Force Recons are good because they fill the role of covert recon (perhaps FR's should be renamed to "Covert Recons"). This lets them slot into small gang and Blops fleets easily. They really don't need that much of a rebalance as they're already extremely useful. Combat Recons are supposed to fill the role of Fleet EWAR platform but they don't because of [reasons]. The main reason Combat Recons don't pass the bar is simply survivability. They also have no range bonuses to their primary EWAR. This lack of EWAR projection and survivability makes them poor choices in the role that they should fill. The D-Scan immunity bonus is a gimmick. I've bolded that because it's very important that this is understood. It helps this hull in no way shape or form for it's (what should be) intended role of Fleet EWAR. If you want to have a recon cruiser have D-Scan immunity you should create a new hull that is the "Attack Recon". That would then make sense. So the lineup would look like this: Force Recon: (Name should really be Covert Recon) - Covert EWAR platform - Strong EWAR - Mediocre EHP - Poor Mobility - Poor Damage Combat Recon: - Fleet EWAR Platform - Strong EWAR - Strong EWAR Projection - Large EHP - Poor Mobility - Poor Damage Attack Recon: - Solo / Ambush EWAR Platform (Immune from D-Scan) - Strong EWAR - Strong Damage - Good Mobility - Poor EHP Then the ships will actually fill roles instead of the CR's becoming the new Ishtars. Bonuses would look like this: Force Recons: Damage Bonus Primary EWAR Effectiveness Bonus Secondary EWAR Range Bonus (Caldari get ??) Replace Cloak CPU reduction bonus with damage Projection Role Bonuses: Can fit covert cloak -100% CPU need for cloaks Cyno bonuses and can use covert cyno Combat Recons: Primary EWAR Range Bonus (Curse receives very strong neut / nos range bonus) Primary EWAR Strength Bonus Secondary EWAR range bonus (Curse receives Drone Damage Rook receives Explosion Radius) Damage Projection Bonus Role Bonus: 20% to resistances Attack Recons: Primary EWAR Strength Bonus Secondary EWAR range bonus Damage Projection Bonus Damage Bonus Role Bonus: Can't be detected by D-Scan.
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 184	Posted - 2014.12.31 11:55:58 - [2106] - Quote Why you keep calling those hulls: recon? They have nothing to do with a recon job. They are support vessels. Spugg Galdon wrote: Attack Recon: - Solo / Ambush EWAR Platform (Immune from D-Scan) - Strong EWAR - Strong Damage - Good Mobility - Poor EHP and countermeasure to this ship is what? Strong EWAR means you won't even target this thing while it keep spitting balls of fire at you. Poor EHP? You won't need that. Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 747	Posted - 2014.12.31 12:02:15 - [2107] - Quote If you want to make them actual recon ships that fill a recon roll.... take them out of local. I'm inclined to agree w/ the guy above - as it is now, they are electronic attack cruisers. There is no sneaky or recon for a ship that you can see entering local. You're currently making some brave strides towards returning the game to its former fun and glory. I think now is the right time to take recons out of local chat. It's inevitable that someday there will be a ship that doesn't show up in local. Now is the time.... Go for it!
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 184	Posted - 2014.12.31 12:23:37 - [2108] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: I'm inclined to agree w/ the guy above - as it is now, they are electronic attack cruisers. There is no sneaky or recon for a ship that you can see entering local. You're currently making some brave strides towards returning the game to its former fun and glory. I think now is the right time to take recons out of local chat. It would make more sense than d-scan imunnity for recon role. Rise took strange way to balance them. We don't know how much T3 will be nerfed, i pressume role bonuses like ewar or dps will be worse than on T2 hulls. Thus we don't know in what state are bonuses on T2 hulls, should we nerf them or buff them? Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION The Obsidian Front 592	Posted - 2014.12.31 12:37:26 - [2109] - Quote Jeremiah Saken wrote: Why you keep calling those hulls: recon? They have nothing to do with a recon job. They are support vessels. Spugg Galdon wrote: Attack Recon: - Solo / Ambush EWAR Platform (Immune from D-Scan) - Strong EWAR - Strong Damage - Good Mobility - Poor EHP and countermeasure to this ship is what? Strong EWAR means you won't even target this thing while it keep spitting balls of fire at you. Poor EHP? You won't need that. Drones and FoF missiles (lol). When I say poor EHP a really do mean poor. As in next to none. It's mobility would also only be "good". Not Excellent. It wouldn't be unstoppable but it would mean that combat recons could be combat recons instead of making them crap at fleet work so that they can be gank boats
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 184	Posted - 2014.12.31 12:55:23 - [2110] - Quote Spugg Galdon wrote: When I say poor EHP a really do mean poor. As in next to none. It's mobility would also only be "good". Not Excellent. It wouldn't be unstoppable but it would mean that combat recons could be combat recons instead of making them crap at fleet work so that they can be gank boats What's "good" mean? I agree with CCP that ships with more than one role shouldn't be best at both or more. So HACs best at dealing damage, logi and ECM ship at appropriate role, T3 medicore at every above in cruiser class but have ability to switch it. Your attack recon proposal give two role bonuses with high level to one ship, that's why i think it's unbalance. D-scan immunity must be tested on TQ to show it's worth. I don't presume sky will fall on our heads. Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration

Soldarius Deadman W0nderland The 99 Percent 1005	Posted - 2014.12.31 14:13:38 - [2111] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: Niskin wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: Just some quick brainstorming for gank immune wh activities: Recon gassing (ick) and pirate faction relic/data sites in the low ends using a recon (no wrecks involved). There is a lot of opportunity for low end day trippping in a hacking combat recon. Scan the crap down w/ your covert ops ship and then come back in your hacking curse and double dog dare someone to scan you down and gank you. You are grasping here. Venture's cost ~250k ISK and huff gas faster than anything with 5 Turret slots (max Gas Harvesters per ship based on skill level 5). They also have 2 points of warp core stability. Why would I huff gas in a Recon which is in the 100-200m ISK range? Not to mention the 5000m3 Ore Bay and that the Recon would have to drop a can to huff gas, and need a hauler. Hacking is the same deal, Frigates are cheap and the one you will use for hacking will have bonuses for that activity. There is no good reason to use an expensive Recon over a Frigate that costs less than 1M ISK. You're just a hater. See the (ick) after the recon gasser? Ick is a technical word for not desirable. (and ditch the venture - the 10k hold of the prospect is to die for - don't bother w/ a cloak) The pirate data/relic sites are super easy to hack. Anyone that can use the t2 variants of the mini game modules can do them easily in any ship. As far as there is no reason to use and expensive recon over a frigate that costs 1 M isk... it's immune to D-scan is one reason. It can wonk up on any unsuspecting t1 frigate that warps into the site (that's right, MY hacking combat recon is going to pwnt YOUR t1 frig as soon as it lands), so that's 2 reasons. And I did preface it w/ (and I quote) 'Just some quick brainstorming.....' I will be sitting in relic/data sites in a combat recon. Please bring on your T1 frigatry. That isn't hate, m8. Its common sense. Nothing beats a Venture for gas huffing. Your recon won't even lock the Venture before it warps out, and even if it does, it won't be able to hold it because of that +2 warp core strength. We won't talk about a prop mod. The 10km3 ore bay on the Prospect is nice. But the lack of warp core strength will get it killed, since even if one were to fit a covert ops cloak, it has to be within 1500m to activate its gas harvesters. So it can't cloak on demand. But it can at least scout the site while cloaked. But imo the added cost isn't worth the risk. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 748	Posted - 2014.12.31 14:18:45 - [2112] - Quote My prospect fit Highs - 2 T2 huffers (no cloak) Mids - cloud scanner thinger, invul field, mwd (i live in a pulsar, so....) Lows - all stabs (that would be +3 which if my maths is correct is roughly 1 better than +2) I'll take this fit and double the huff bay all day every day. edit - and the cost at 25 mil is kind of meh for a wh guy - I'm more worried about getting bubbled and podded
Soldarius Deadman W0nderland The 99 Percent 1005	Posted - 2014.12.31 14:33:22 - [2113] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: My prospect fit Highs - 2 T2 huffers (no cloak) Mids - cloud scanner thinger, invul field, mwd (i live in a pulsar, so....) Lows - all stabs (that would be +3 which if my maths is correct is roughly 1 better than +2) I'll take this fit and double the huff bay all day every day. edit - and the cost at 25 mil is kind of meh for a wh guy - I'm more worried about getting bubbled and podded also - I'm fitting out a pair of lachesis w/ sensor boosters and TS scramblers... just for ventures. I'm moving the TS scrams from my stratios to my lachesis and calling it an improvement on success chances vs ventures in gas sites. Huffers beware. Hmm... not bad. The only issue I see is when the sleepers show up. Same issue for the Venture. Since it takes 26 minutes to mine 5km3 of gas, you're pretty much guaranteed to have to leave long before ever filling 10km3. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 50	Posted - 2014.12.31 15:01:19 - [2114] - Quote Jeremiah Saken wrote: Why you keep calling those hulls: recon? They have nothing to do with a recon job. They are support vessels. Spugg Galdon wrote: Attack Recon: - Solo / Ambush EWAR Platform (Immune from D-Scan) - Strong EWAR - Strong Damage - Good Mobility - Poor EHP and countermeasure to this ship is what? Strong EWAR means you won't even target this thing while it keep spitting balls of fire at you. Poor EHP? You won't need that. I think it depends not the EWAR being applied. Example...lots of folks beef about ECM and it's pretty strong if folks haven't skilled up their sensor hardening. More importantly, the hard counter to ECM is ECCM and that works very well but few folks want to mount the module. You might get stung a time or too by guys that like to run jams but I bet you can bait them and use a little ECCM to help give them a bad day. All that being said...i don't think we need a 3rd Recon Ship platform at the moment. I would just like to have clear and useful distinctions between the Force and Combat varieties and equally important just make sure that the T2 version is clearly more capable than the T1 version (i.e. Rook vs Blackbird). "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
Arla Sarain 229	Posted - 2014.12.31 17:42:51 - [2115] - Quote Orange Faeces wrote: I urge you to cross train the other races so that you will have to tools you need to solve the different challenges you face in game. O. Faeces This is a bit ironic. I'm not saying it's wrong, cos I figured I'd have to do it myself a while back and did it, but the games premise is that you train for something specialised and supplement and compensate for the weakness of others. Yet as it stands, because the game is built on counters to counters of counters, you need to train pretty much bloody everything. Hopefully CCPs new direction of demolishing the "mastery of routine strategies" and rebuilding EVE to favor the clever will change it. The D-SCAN change may or may not be part of the new direction. It's a cool idea, but attaching it to 1 class of ships is what's bad. If CCP wants to be brave, they should just remove D-SCAN all together, and consider making combat probing the standard (with additional changes of course, in regards to hull bonuses, implants and such).
Faren Shalni Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 109	Posted - 2014.12.31 18:39:16 - [2116] - Quote Arla Sarain wrote: Orange Faeces wrote: I urge you to cross train the other races so that you will have to tools you need to solve the different challenges you face in game. O. Faeces This is a bit ironic. I'm not saying it's wrong, cos I figured I'd have to do it myself a while back and did it, but the games premise is that you train for something specialised and supplement and compensate for the weakness of others. Yet as it stands, because the game is built on counters to counters of counters, you need to train pretty much bloody everything. Hopefully CCPs new direction of demolishing the "mastery of routine strategies" and rebuilding EVE to favor the clever will change it. The D-SCAN change may or may not be part of the new direction. It's a cool idea, but attaching it to 1 class of ships is what's bad. If CCP wants to be brave, they should just remove D-SCAN all together, and consider making combat probing the standard (with additional changes of course, in regards to hull bonuses, implants and such). while your at it remove local from all space.....................it will go down so well So Much Space
Niskin League of the Lost 217	Posted - 2014.12.31 18:39:45 - [2117] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: If you want to make them actual recon ships that fill a recon roll.... take them out of local. I'm inclined to agree w/ the guy above - as it is now, they are electronic attack cruisers. There is no sneaky or recon for a ship that you can see entering local. You're currently making some brave strides towards returning the game to its former fun and glory. I think now is the right time to take recons out of local chat. It's inevitable that someday there will be a ship that doesn't show up in local. Now is the time.... Go for it! Why is that better? And why is it inevitable? I mean I know why it might be better for somebody in w-space where this wouldn't change anything at all... but why is is better everywhere else? It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow
Mario Putzo Welping and Dunking. 996	Posted - 2014.12.31 18:47:30 - [2118] - Quote Orange Faeces wrote: First of all, recons in a HAC fleet are focused on adding tackle and EWAR capability while having a tank that is consistent with the fleet. Same thing would go for a BS fleet. If they have any DPS at all it is a tertiary factor. Your inclusion of spaghetti tackle and neuts is... quaint but not the best use of a pod pilot. If you had proper skills/wallet your FC would have demanded something much more focused from you. You are still missing the point. What is the difference between Force Recons, and Combat Recons? They provide the exact same desired role. Application of EWAR. Why do we have 2 ship lines providing the same role? One should be focused on providing Combat options from a Recon perspective, the other EWAR. The fact you consider their DPS to be a tertiary factor is pretty much the whole point. I mean if all you want is jam cycles you would be silly not to just use the BBIRD both ships are going to be Alphad off the field, at least the BBIRD (even armor fit) is going to be sitting well outside most engagement ranges, with an AB to mitigate any long range damage and only costs 1/10th that of a Recon. Heck if you want to get real amped up use a SEBO in a fleet role with a target range script and sit at 140 in you Bbird. The simple fact is Combat Recons do not have a role in combat, they share a role with Force Recons, the latter of which is better suited to support a fleet, with its capacity for Covert Cynos, and of course Covert Ops Cloak. Lets look at this from another perspective. What other cruisers exist in a combat recon like role...well there is the Stratios, and T3's. Both can fit Covert Ops cloaks, Both can pump out 500+DPS, Both can use Black Ops bridges, both can have tanks north of 70KEHP. So if the above is true, why should Combat Recons not enjoy a similar capacity? Why should they be exempt from Black Ops? Or from having a tank similar to that of a T1 Cloaky Pirate Faction cruiser. So you have a ship class that offers inferior support, and inferior offensive options to comparable ships, and is marginally more effective at performing a support role than a dedicated T1 Cruiser is. And DSCAN immunity is what CCP has come up with? A Force Recon is still going to be better in a support capacity A Stratios is still going to be better in an offensive capacity A Blackbird is still going to be more cost effective than the rook not showing up on DSCAN. It is a placebo change. T2 Resists would absolutely give Combat Recons a shot in the leg in a combat role. Changing the bonuses on the Recons to clearly split the two would be a good change, no toe stepping. Giving Combat Recons a cloak and letting them Blops would be a good change. All three of these things together would solve the entire cluster **** of Recons, and actually maybe make people value combat recons in a combat role, instead of just making a Force Recon wannabe that can't cloak. But hey hiding from DSCAN is super intuitive because people can't AFK cloak like that! I guess Combat Recons will always have their place though, hiding in FW plexes ganking easy targets because its the only engagements they can take without a 10 man Logi wing.
Niskin League of the Lost 217	Posted - 2014.12.31 18:55:13 - [2119] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: My prospect fit Highs - 2 T2 huffers (no cloak) Mids - cloud scanner thinger, invul field, mwd (i live in a pulsar, so....) Lows - all stabs (that would be +3 which if my maths is correct is roughly 1 better than +2) I'll take this fit and double the huff bay all day every day. edit - and the cost at 25 mil is kind of meh for a wh guy - I'm more worried about getting bubbled and podded +1 WCS is nice, but it's still 100x more expensive. The thing I think you are missing is that the doubled Ore Bay is mostly useless for huffing gas. The rats will spawn and interrupt you long before you fill it, and even before you would have filled the Venture's smaller bay. So you will have to warp out anyway, and it makes sense to drop off what you have huffed so far before you go back. There is at least one site where the rats spawn first so the larger bay could benefit you there, but that might be the only one, I'd have to check. If 25m ISK is pocket change to you then fly it, I'm not going to tell you not to. It's just that until people are spacerich it's highly inefficient to fly that over a Venture. It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 753	Posted - 2014.12.31 19:05:43 - [2120] - Quote Niskin wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: If you want to make them actual recon ships that fill a recon roll.... take them out of local. I'm inclined to agree w/ the guy above - as it is now, they are electronic attack cruisers. There is no sneaky or recon for a ship that you can see entering local. You're currently making some brave strides towards returning the game to its former fun and glory. I think now is the right time to take recons out of local chat. It's inevitable that someday there will be a ship that doesn't show up in local. Now is the time.... Go for it! Why is that better? And why is it inevitable? I mean I know why it might be better for somebody in w-space where this wouldn't change anything at all... but why is is better everywhere else? Stop hating dude. Whatever I did to you.... I'm sorry. I really am. Recon (outside of eve) means to gather intelligence without being detected. Look at all the standing armies of the earth.... their recon forces don't roll around in tanks. They get dropped behind lines, gather intelligence and get out. If a recon ship alerts everyone to their presence (by showing up in local) there is no stealth involved. My suggestion is to make recons not show up in local to parallel the real world stealth associated with recon activities. Put away your vendeta and re read my post. I didn't say it would be better or worse. I just put out an idea for a feature. Liten up buttercup.

Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 753	Posted - 2014.12.31 19:07:00 - [2121] - Quote Niskin wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: My prospect fit Highs - 2 T2 huffers (no cloak) Mids - cloud scanner thinger, invul field, mwd (i live in a pulsar, so....) Lows - all stabs (that would be +3 which if my maths is correct is roughly 1 better than +2) I'll take this fit and double the huff bay all day every day. edit - and the cost at 25 mil is kind of meh for a wh guy - I'm more worried about getting bubbled and podded +1 WCS is nice, but it's still 100x more expensive. The thing I think you are missing is that the doubled Ore Bay is mostly useless for huffing gas. The rats will spawn and interrupt you long before you fill it, and even before you would have filled the Venture's smaller bay. So you will have to warp out anyway, and it makes sense to drop off what you have huffed so far before you go back. There is at least one site where the rats spawn first so the larger bay could benefit you there, but that might be the only one, I'd have to check. If 25m ISK is pocket change to you then fly it, I'm not going to tell you not to. It's just that until people are spacerich it's highly inefficient to fly that over a Venture. I really am sorry. EDIT: I don't want to say you're doing it wrong, but I activate gas sites as I scan them down. Once I'm done scanning I clear the rats (I may have to make a sammich or something to fill the 20 min, but you get the point). Once the rats are cleaned up, I go back in and get all the gas. If you're just ninja-ing the sites until the rats spawn, the yeah, 25 mil will always be a lot of isk for you. Do the whole site (the whole site gets you more isk than part of a site).
Niskin League of the Lost 217	Posted - 2014.12.31 19:32:09 - [2122] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: Stop hating dude. Whatever I did to you.... I'm sorry. I really am. I don't hate you, it's just that I almost never agree with you. When you post things I think about them and I can't see where you are coming from or even how you think those things are good. So I respond and point that out. You may have noticed I agreed with you on something in another thread yesterday, because for once we actually had the same opinion. This time I really didn't know what you were going for so I asked. I didn't even disagree, just asked for an explanation. Serendipity Lost wrote: Recon (outside of eve) means to gather intelligence without being detected. Look at all the standing armies of the earth.... their recon forces don't roll around in tanks. They get dropped behind lines, gather intelligence and get out. If a recon ship alerts everyone to their presence (by showing up in local) there is no stealth involved. My suggestion is to make recons not show up in local to parallel the real world stealth associated with recon activities. Put away your vendeta and re read my post. I didn't say it would be better or worse. I just put out an idea for a feature. Liten up buttercup. That's all I was asking for, an explanation of why you thought that was a good proposal. I'm not sure where I got "better" from, I must have mixed up a few posts. I still like d-scan immunity over not showing in local, but at least I now understand why you prefer the other one. It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow
Niskin League of the Lost 217	Posted - 2014.12.31 19:44:50 - [2123] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: I really am sorry. EDIT: I don't want to say you're doing it wrong, but I activate gas sites as I scan them down. Once I'm done scanning I clear the rats (I may have to make a sammich or something to fill the 20 min, but you get the point). Once the rats are cleaned up, I go back in and get all the gas. If you're just ninja-ing the sites until the rats spawn, the yeah, 25 mil will always be a lot of isk for you. Do the whole site (the whole site gets you more isk than part of a site). That's a pretty good system if you have the time to run a bunch of sites, and would make the larger bay more effective. I'm not ninja-ing the sites, I just don't normally have much time so I start huffing to start the timer. When the rats spawn I switch ships, kill and salvage, and huff the rest of the gas. If I have more time I start another site and repeat. My ISK woes are completely due to limited play time. If I played twice as much I'd be more well off because I'm just above breaking even now and more playtime would double or triple the rate that I progress above that line. But I'm fine with that. 25m ISK isn't a ton on it's own, but when I can achieve the same level of income while risking 1/100th of the cost I'm going to do that unless I have a good reason not to. As I said in the other post, I usually have trouble understanding where you are coming from. Posts like the one I quoted are helpful in understanding the differences in how we play. It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow
Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 41	Posted - 2014.12.31 20:00:54 - [2124] - Quote Mario Putzo wrote: ... In my position, I sometime forget that in addition to having very limited in-game knowledge, some EVE players have not finished even the most modest education. Best of luck with your situation.
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 52	Posted - 2014.12.31 20:18:38 - [2125] - Quote Mario Putzo wrote: Orange Faeces wrote: First of all, recons in a HAC fleet are focused on adding tackle and EWAR capability while having a tank that is consistent with the fleet. Same thing would go for a BS fleet. If they have any DPS at all it is a tertiary factor. Your inclusion of spaghetti tackle and neuts is... quaint but not the best use of a pod pilot. If you had proper skills/wallet your FC would have demanded something much more focused from you. You are still missing the point. What is the difference between Force Recons, and Combat Recons? They provide the exact same desired role. Application of EWAR. Why do we have 2 ship lines providing the same role? One should be focused on providing Combat options from a Recon perspective, the other EWAR. The fact you consider their DPS to be a tertiary factor is pretty much the whole point. I mean if all you want is jam cycles you would be silly not to just use the BBIRD both ships are going to be Alphad off the field, at least the BBIRD (even armor fit) is going to be sitting well outside most engagement ranges, with an AB to mitigate any long range damage and only costs 1/10th that of a Recon. Heck if you want to get real amped up use a SEBO in a fleet role with a target range script and sit at 140 in you Bbird. The simple fact is Combat Recons do not have a role in combat, they share a role with Force Recons, the latter of which is better suited to support a fleet, with its capacity for Covert Cynos, and of course Covert Ops Cloak. Lets look at this from another perspective. What other cruisers exist in a combat recon like role...well there is the Stratios, and T3's. Both can fit Covert Ops cloaks, Both can pump out 500+DPS, Both can use Black Ops bridges, both can have tanks north of 70KEHP. So if the above is true, why should Combat Recons not enjoy a similar capacity? Why should they be exempt from Black Ops? Or from having a tank similar to that of a T1 Cloaky Pirate Faction cruiser. So you have a ship class that offers inferior support, and inferior offensive options to comparable ships, and is marginally more effective at performing a support role than a dedicated T1 Cruiser is. And DSCAN immunity is what CCP has come up with? A Force Recon is still going to be better in a support capacity A Stratios is still going to be better in an offensive capacity A Blackbird is still going to be more cost effective than the rook not showing up on DSCAN. It is a placebo change. T2 Resists would absolutely give Combat Recons a shot in the leg in a combat role. Changing the bonuses on the Recons to clearly split the two would be a good change, no toe stepping. Giving Combat Recons a cloak and letting them Blops would be a good change. All three of these things together would solve the entire cluster **** of Recons, and actually maybe make people value combat recons in a combat role, instead of just making a Force Recon wannabe that can't cloak. But hey hiding from DSCAN is super intuitive because people can't AFK cloak like that! I guess Combat Recons will always have their place though, hiding in FW plexes ganking easy targets because its the only engagements they can take without a 10 man Logi wing. Mario, I am definetly on board with highlighting the differences in the Combat & Force Recon ships but I don't think the giving them a CovOps cloak capability is necessarily the way to go. If you gave it the T2 resists and CovOps cloak I could see dropping a mid slot from it. I think one of the bigger things they could do to help would actually be to adjust the EWAR bonus on the Rook itself. I'm personally in favor having the BBIRD bonuses instead of the Rook bonus. The 15% jam strength and 12.5% optimal jam range per level would be much more hand on the T2 than the current 30% jam strength. Additionally...if we do stay with the kinetic damage type lock-in then the dmg bonus should be 10% per level not 7.5%. "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
DR BiCarbonate Basgerin Pirate 93	Posted - 2014.12.31 21:09:34 - [2126] - Quote Hey rise, like the changes mostly, Guess eve is gonna change to Curse + ishtar online. Speaking of the ishtar, the last "nerf" (lol) you did months ago didnt do **. you mentioned it might be to easy on it. Its time for a change. Nerf that thing out of the game. its extremely unhealthy for the balance of the game. so *** boring. pretty much all i ever see is the ishtar. People have had their fun. It's time. Nerf the ** out of the ishtar.
Mario Putzo Welping and Dunking. 996	Posted - 2014.12.31 21:50:42 - [2127] - Quote Jaysen Larrisen wrote: [quote=Mario Putzo] Mario, I am definetly on board with highlighting the differences in the Combat & Force Recon ships but I don't think the giving them a CovOps cloak capability is necessarily the way to go. If you gave it the T2 resists and CovOps cloak I could see dropping a mid slot from it. I think one of the bigger things they could do to help would actually be to adjust the EWAR bonus on the Rook itself. I'm personally in favor having the BBIRD bonuses instead of the Rook bonus. The 15% jam strength and 12.5% optimal jam range per level would be much more hand on the T2 than the current 30% jam strength. Additionally...if we do stay with the kinetic damage type lock-in then the dmg bonus should be 10% per level not 7.5%. I think it is a step in the right direction, giving it Cov Ops cloak now makes it a very viable option for combat use in Black Ops fleets, again a role held currently by T3's and Stratios, not a T2 Combat Cruiser in sight. Absolutely though the fitting layouts would need to be restructured. 6/5/4(C+M) and 6/4/5(A+G) would be a good starting point id wager. I think that your ECM adjustment for the Rook would be better suited for the Falcon to be honest. Especially if we hope to diversify the two ships from each other. It would be a nice bonus to replace the loss of the combat bonus on Force recons. I already know that I am pissing into the wind, Rise has his heart set on yet another gimmick that doesn't actually provide uniqueness to a ship line that is already inferior in all of its roles. But it sure would be nice to see a Combat Recon actually capable of Combat.
Barrett Fruitcake State War Academy Caldari State 7	Posted - 2014.12.31 22:26:34 - [2128] - Quote DR BiCarbonate wrote: Hey rise, like the changes mostly, Guess eve is gonna change to Curse + ishtar online. Speaking of the ishtar, the last "nerf" (lol) you did months ago didnt do **. you mentioned it might be to easy on it. Its time for a change. Nerf that thing out of the game. its extremely unhealthy for the balance of the game. so *** boring. pretty much all i ever see is the ishtar. People have had their fun. It's time. Nerf the ** out of the ishtar. How can Eve become anything other than Theory-crafting Online.
VonKolroth Section 8. Fatal Ascension 45	Posted - 2015.01.01 01:15:33 - [2129] - Quote I really, really hope that the age of Mega EHP T3's is ending with the T3 balance. This is really the main reason what we see them used for everything, They are good enough at EWAR, they are good enough at fleet boosts, good enough at projecting damage, and yet they maintain a EHP that rivals Navy/T2 battleships in almost all of these case and don't take much longer to train into them then Recons or Command Ships. If a T3 pilot wants that uber-EHP, other aspects of the ship should be seriously gimped compared to ships that are specialized for a role... ...It's going be T3/Ishtars online until Battleships, Command Ships, and Recons fulfill their role better then t3's do. This is EvE, we will mini-max everything you give us room to. Personally, The main thing I find irritating about D-SCAN immunity is it does very little for combat recons in large scale fleets. Large scale fleets should always have combat probes on the field, and we have Intel all the things. The secondary thing is it will be good for campers and HD fleets (since roaming hostiles are used to seeing a sea of docked up blues as it is). Wormhole space is already crazy and I don't know ehough about WH life to really formulate an opinion on how it will effect things there. It doesn't seem to be a role bonus that seems to promote actual hunting of targets in hostile space, which is something this game needs a lot more of... I would like to see a Recon role bonus that would do something to promote hunting/reconnaissance... Range bonus to D-SCAN Sensors that let it warp to any ships outside of 150km+ Ability to D-SCAN cloaked ships Be the only ship in the game that can sling probes that find cloaked ships. Cloakers can D-SCAN for 'Cloak Field Probes'. That would be a boon if we are going to occupancy based SOV. ...Any or a few of these seem so much more 'Recon' and much more interesting. The last thing EvE really needs is more sneaky stuff. We've gotten a bunch of new ships in the last year alone that warp around cloaked. We need better/more tools to hunt down and engage targets. Sent from my Gallente Erabus Titan on -FA- SRP
Rroff Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 883	Posted - 2015.01.01 03:03:34 - [2130] - Quote VonKolroth wrote: I really, really hope that the age of Mega EHP T3's is ending with the T3 balance. This is really the main reason what we see them used for everything, People (gross generalisation) are usually cheap, especially when it means risking things... you have to ask why then that T3s are significantly more prevalent and the simple answer isn't that its due to T3s being OP but that the cheap option is not upto the task.

CW Itovuo The Executioners Capital Punishment. 53	Posted - 2015.01.01 05:36:46 - [2131] - Quote VonKolroth wrote: I would like to see a Recon role bonus that would do something to promote hunting/reconnaissance... [list] Sensors that let it warp to any ships outside of 150km+ Recons would be cool if they could warp to ships INSIDE of 150km. That would be unique. No special module, just align & warp. Or warp short... or even warp long... But we won't see that. Next release is less happening in less than 2 weeks. In a couple of days, they'll mirror the test server. People will comment. CCP will go ahead and release it "as is" and never look back. Sigh.
Alexis Nightwish 68	Posted - 2015.01.01 06:54:47 - [2132] - Quote CW Itovuo wrote: snip Next release is less happening in less than 2 weeks. In a couple of days, they'll mirror the test server. People will comment. CCP will go ahead and release it "as is" and never look back. Sigh. So true it hurts Power Projection: A Brighter Future
VonKolroth Section 8. Fatal Ascension 48	Posted - 2015.01.01 07:58:37 - [2133] - Quote Rroff wrote: VonKolroth wrote: I really, really hope that the age of Mega EHP T3's is ending with the T3 balance. This is really the main reason what we see them used for everything, People (gross generalisation) are usually cheap, especially when it means risking things... you have to ask why then that T3s are significantly more prevalent and the simple answer isn't that its due to T3s being OP but that the cheap option is not upto the task. This is a risk vs. reward game we're all playing, anyone who keeps playing EvE past the first 6 months should have a grasp of that. T3's simply do a close enough job to many misc. specialized roles with monster EHP with the Signature of a cruiser... If they are available, we will use them and only them while other ships are neglected. Only fools will use the other ships out of some misbegotten sense of principle. If they do, they will lose to those who don't. Period. Sent from my Gallente Erabus Titan on -FA- SRP
VonKolroth Section 8. Fatal Ascension 49	Posted - 2015.01.01 08:09:29 - [2134] - Quote CW Itovuo wrote: VonKolroth wrote: I would like to see a Recon role bonus that would do something to promote hunting/reconnaissance... [list] Sensors that let it warp to any ships outside of 150km+ Recons would be cool if they could warp to ships INSIDE of 150km. That would be unique. No special module, just align & warp. Or warp short... or even warp long... But we won't see that. Next release is less happening in less than 2 weeks. In a couple of days, they'll mirror the test server. People will comment. CCP will go ahead and release it "as is" and never look back. Sigh. I don't even care if any of the ideas listed are ideal, or even good. I stand by the idea we don't need any more anti-intel or sneaky stuff that makes it more difficult for small gangs and solo players to hunt or engage other players. I do think everyone needs better tools to promote those things. D-SCAN Immunity for recons seems like a missed opportunity to put a tool like that in the hands of a 'reconnaissance' pilot. Instead I think all this change is going to accomplish is us seeing more Combat Recons sitting on bubbles (not particularly fun) and more Combat Recons sitting in Sites (also not fun). CCPlease give us more reasons to not sit in one system all the time. Sent from my Gallente Erabus Titan on -FA- SRP
Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 290	Posted - 2015.01.01 08:54:42 - [2135] - Quote DR BiCarbonate wrote: Hey rise, like the changes mostly, Guess eve is gonna change to Curse + ishtar online. Speaking of the ishtar, the last "nerf" (lol) you did months ago didnt do **. you mentioned it might be to easy on it. Its time for a change. Nerf that thing out of the game. its extremely unhealthy for the balance of the game. so *** boring. pretty much all i ever see is the ishtar. People have had their fun. It's time. Nerf the ** out of the ishtar. Pretty much all you ever see is the Ishtar, but it's not even in your corp's top 10 ships, you don't seem to lose ships against Ishtars or kill them on any kind of frequency? Less than 30% of your all time HAC mails are Ishtars. HAC mails are 1.2% of your all mails. But yeah guess it's easier to jump on the forum whiner bandwagon than sticking to reality.
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION The Obsidian Front 594	Posted - 2015.01.01 09:05:54 - [2136] - Quote Aiyshimin wrote: DR BiCarbonate wrote: Hey rise, like the changes mostly, Guess eve is gonna change to Curse + ishtar online. Speaking of the ishtar, the last "nerf" (lol) you did months ago didnt do **. you mentioned it might be to easy on it. Its time for a change. Nerf that thing out of the game. its extremely unhealthy for the balance of the game. so *** boring. pretty much all i ever see is the ishtar. People have had their fun. It's time. Nerf the ** out of the ishtar. Pretty much all you ever see is the Ishtar, but it's not even in your corp's top 10 ships, you don't seem to lose ships against Ishtars or kill them on any kind of frequency? Less than 30% of your all time HAC mails are Ishtars. HAC mails are 1.2% of your all mails. But yeah guess it's easier to jump on the forum whiner bandwagon than sticking to reality. Perhaps it's because they don't like to fly ishtars because it's boring. And because they don't like to fly them and because the Ishtar is the only HAC that can go toe to toe with the Ishtar they simply don't engage them. Right now. If you're not using an Ishtar you're doing it wrong. If you can't see how overpowered the Ishtar is you're delusional. And this is from me who abuses the nutmeg out of how overpowered the Ishtar is.
Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 290	Posted - 2015.01.01 10:15:08 - [2137] - Quote Spugg Galdon wrote: Perhaps it's because they don't like to fly ishtars because it's boring. And because they don't like to fly them and because the Ishtar is the only HAC that can go toe to toe with the Ishtar they simply don't engage them. Right now. If you're not using an Ishtar you're doing it wrong. If you can't see how overpowered the Ishtar is you're delusional. And this is from me who abuses the nutmeg out of how overpowered the Ishtar is. You missed the point, in reality Ishtar has minimal effect on the poster. Most people seem to be doing it wrong then. Why the naive hyperbole and unbacked claims? Could sentry drone tracking be toned down? Yes, but Ishtar as a ship is just like all other hacs.
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 55	Posted - 2015.01.01 15:19:21 - [2138] - Quote I wonder if CCP Rise & team would consider something like simply swapping some bonuses around for the Caldari ships. 1) Take the spilt range / intensity bonus to ECM from the Blackbird and put it on the Falcon. The Falcon has the thinnest tank; uses range and stealth for survivability and should be the furthest away from direct combat if possible. With the small hull buffs noted in Rise's OP it will be in excellent shape. 2) Take the intensity bonus from the Falcon and put that on the Blackbird. Very solid ECM capability and T1 cruiser hull performance. 3) Keep the current Rook bonus but beef up the eHP to legit T2 levels but not to current HAC levels... I would say roughly 90% of HAC level. I don't like the kinetic dmg lock-in but they could consider upping the proposed kinetic damage bonus of 7.5% per level to 10% per level or perhaps a slight buff to drone bandwidth and bay (25 / 25 up to 30 / 30). I don't think the D-scan immunity is going to be overpowered in conjunction with these ships. You also have two very specific hard counters you can bring to the table in the form of ECCM and kinetic dmg resist mods. I think this gets you value and equally important differentiation for each of the ships in this chain from T1 to Combat Recon to Force Recon. Either way...as noted earlier in the thread I assume the final numbers will be coming out in a week or so and we'll see what's up. "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
Suede Caldari Provisions Caldari State 18	Posted - 2015.01.01 17:16:01 - [2139] - Quote Jaysen Larrisen wrote: I wonder if CCP Rise & team would consider something like simply swapping some bonuses around for the Caldari ships. 1) Take the spilt range / intensity bonus to ECM from the Blackbird and put it on the Falcon. The Falcon has the thinnest tank; uses range and stealth for survivability and should be the furthest away from direct combat if possible. With the small hull buffs noted in Rise's OP it will be in excellent shape. 2) Take the intensity bonus from the Falcon and put that on the Blackbird. Very solid ECM capability and T1 cruiser hull performance. 3) Keep the current Rook bonus but beef up the eHP to legit T2 levels but not to current HAC levels... I would say roughly 90% of HAC level. I don't like the kinetic dmg lock-in but they could consider upping the proposed kinetic damage bonus of 7.5% per level to 10% per level or perhaps a slight buff to drone bandwidth and bay (25 / 25 up to 30 / 30). I don't think the D-scan immunity is going to be overpowered in conjunction with these ships. You also have two very specific hard counters you can bring to the table in the form of ECCM and kinetic dmg resist mods. I think this gets you value and equally important differentiation for each of the ships in this chain from T1 to Combat Recon to Force Recon. Either way...as noted earlier in the thread I assume the final numbers will be coming out in a week or so and we'll see what's up. All Covert OPS Should also be getting this as well as bonus not just recon ships. will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners ships like Purifier Manticore Nemesis Hound just silly giving to the recon class ships Stands to more sence to give to the ship which are set on that path class ships ccp give the bonus to the right ships type
Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 41	Posted - 2015.01.01 18:52:53 - [2140] - Quote I just wanted to add a note from my personal communications -- If Rise had said that all Combat recons would now be able to fit cov-ops cloaks, given them an extra high-slot and the appropriate CPU role bonus, the thread would have been 15 pages, not 106. People are just confused by the d-scan immunity change and think it is somehow game-breaking, when its really just a way to introduce a cloak mechanic with more desirable properties for the long-term. Using the term 'gimmick' to describe the d-scan change, however, ignores the beneficial properties of this type of long-term transition for certain ships, in spite of the similarities it will have on some aspects of play. O. Faeces

Iain Cariaba 833	Posted - 2015.01.01 23:13:51 - [2141] - Quote Anyone want to place bets on how long after combat recons get d-scan immunity it'll be before F&I gets flooded with suggestions on every single other ship size getting the same treatment? EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
Corraidhin Farsaidh Farsaidh's Freeborn 881	Posted - 2015.01.02 01:53:59 - [2142] - Quote Iain Cariaba wrote: Anyone want to place bets on how long after combat recons get d-scan immunity it'll be before F&I gets flooded with suggestions on every single other ship size getting the same treatment? There's already been at least one suggestion I've seen so far...
Cassius Invictus Thou shalt not kill A Nest of Vipers 118	Posted - 2015.01.02 07:33:10 - [2143] - Quote DR BiCarbonate wrote: Hey rise, like the changes mostly, Guess eve is gonna change to Curse + ishtar online. Speaking of the ishtar, the last "nerf" (lol) you did months ago didnt do **. you mentioned it might be to easy on it. Its time for a change. Nerf that thing out of the game. its extremely unhealthy for the balance of the game. so *** boring. pretty much all i ever see is the ishtar. People have had their fun. It's time. Nerf the out of the ishtar. DonGÇÖt be ridiculous sir! You can also see Vexor Navy quite often . If I see Ishtars in WH space more often than t3, than yes itGÇÖs fked up.
Faren Shalni Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 109	Posted - 2015.01.02 08:40:31 - [2144] - Quote Cassius Invictus wrote: DR BiCarbonate wrote: Hey rise, like the changes mostly, Guess eve is gonna change to Curse + ishtar online. Speaking of the ishtar, the last "nerf" (lol) you did months ago didnt do **. you mentioned it might be to easy on it. Its time for a change. Nerf that thing out of the game. its extremely unhealthy for the balance of the game. so *** boring. pretty much all i ever see is the ishtar. People have had their fun. It's time. Nerf the out of the ishtar. DonGÇÖt be ridiculous sir! You can also see Vexor Navy quite often . If I see Ishtars in WH space more often than t3, than yes itGÇÖs fked up. While I cant say for other corps I do know our corp uses the Ishtar on a daily basis, in fact I have gone without flying my T3 in WH combat for weeks at a time. Null Roam - Ishtar Pulsar - Consider the Ishtar Black hole - Ishtar Fight at 0m on a WH in any of the above - T3 (But often someone will bring an Ishtar) So Much Space
Cassius Invictus Thou shalt not kill A Nest of Vipers 118	Posted - 2015.01.02 08:50:33 - [2145] - Quote Faren Shalni wrote: While I cant say for other corps I do know our corp uses the Ishtar on a daily basis, in fact I have gone without flying my T3 in WH combat for weeks at a time. Null Roam - Ishtar Pulsar - Consider the Ishtar Black hole - Ishtar Fight at 0m on a WH in any of the above - T3 (But often someone will bring an Ishtar) While I can't be sure I think that Ishtar is not getting nerfed because of the null lobby - it's their primary farming ship (ab orbit, deploy heavy drones to kill rats, go afk) and nerfing it would force them to actually play the game and farm with more expensive, easier to catch battleships. But now we will have curse + ishtar so i guess it's a sign of progress .
BallsOfSteel TheKings Wings of Evil 0	Posted - 2015.01.02 10:28:10 - [2146] - Quote Arbitrary bonuses sound like something out of korean fantasy grind fest rather a sci-fi game. Risk/reward radio is way off with this one, will encourage to stay in high sec more people who plex.
Iebi Vyethar 24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire 1	Posted - 2015.01.02 10:42:08 - [2147] - Quote Funny how CCP gradually makes life unbearable for people with thin wallets who live in lowsec, while vets literally swim in hundreds of billions. This change may look appealing and maybe fun to some, because it's totally unfair - but in return all it will achieve will be the opposite. Repeated changes of this kind make the game boring and linear in the end. Players will never surrender to the game and choose to lose ships because the game was made this way, but find other ways instead, or simply do something else (perhaps just play another game). I may sound controvesial now, but how am I supposed to farm isk - what if I want to pirate ? Why was ship insurance introduced ? No sentry jamming ? Warp to zero where ever I go ? The Risk- Averse players are people who often have thin wallets, and the ship they undock is often a good part of their total wealth. That is their playstyle. Feel free to judge them but keep in mind that the best excuse for this ''rebalance'' joke is the Risk Averse pvp-er, how people love to call it. This guy will now have to sweat even more to be able to afford what he wants to fly because of a change made for changes' sake, pushed by people who farm moons and blob since the dawn of time, and have long forgotten what this game has to, or might have to offer
Mary Jane Moonbeam Shiva Furnace 4	Posted - 2015.01.02 11:34:09 - [2148] - Quote Iebi Vyethar wrote: Funny how CCP gradually makes life unbearable for people with thin wallets who live in lowsec, while vets literally swim in hundreds of billions. This change may look appealing and maybe fun to some, because it's totally unfair - but in return all it will achieve will be the opposite. Repeated changes of this kind make the game boring and linear in the end. Players will never surrender to the game and choose to lose ships because the game was made this way, but find other ways instead, or simply do something else (perhaps just play another game). I may sound controvesial now, but how am I supposed to farm isk - what if I want to pirate ? Why was ship insurance introduced ? No sentry jamming ? Warp to zero where ever I go ? The Risk- Averse players are people who often have thin wallets, and the ship they undock is often a good part of their total wealth. That is their playstyle. Feel free to judge them but keep in mind that the best excuse for this ''rebalance'' joke is the Risk Averse pvp-er, how people love to call it. This guy will now have to sweat even more to be able to afford what he wants to fly because of a change made for changes' sake, pushed by people who farm moons and blob since the dawn of time, and have long forgotten what this game has to, or might have to offer Erm, what?
Zx00F True Capsuleers 1	Posted - 2015.01.02 12:12:19 - [2149] - Quote Rook: Caldari Cruiser Bonuses: 7.5% bonus to kinetic missile damage Why? This is a bad idea... Give us all dmg types. Dmg lockin is bad mkay?
Wynta State War Academy Caldari State 6	Posted - 2015.01.02 13:05:20 - [2150] - Quote Jaysen Larrisen wrote: I wonder if CCP Rise & team would consider something like simply swapping some bonuses around for the Caldari ships. 1) Take the spilt range / intensity bonus to ECM from the Blackbird and put it on the Falcon. The Falcon has the thinnest tank; uses range and stealth for survivability and should be the furthest away from direct combat if possible. With the small hull buffs noted in Rise's OP it will be in excellent shape. 2) Take the intensity bonus from the Falcon and put that on the Blackbird. Very solid ECM capability and T1 cruiser hull performance. 3) Keep the current Rook bonus but beef up the eHP to legit T2 levels but not to current HAC levels... I would say roughly 90% of HAC level. I don't like the kinetic dmg lock-in but they could consider upping the proposed kinetic damage bonus of 7.5% per level to 10% per level or perhaps a slight buff to drone bandwidth and bay (25 / 25 up to 30 / 30). I don't think the D-scan immunity is going to be overpowered in conjunction with these ships. You also have two very specific hard counters you can bring to the table in the form of ECCM and kinetic dmg resist mods. I think this gets you value and equally important differentiation for each of the ships in this chain from T1 to Combat Recon to Force Recon. Either way...as noted earlier in the thread I assume the final numbers will be coming out in a week or so and we'll see what's up. I think it is safe to say that if someone is going to invest time into learning Recon Ships, there should be some benefit to doing so. If Recons are going to be balanced as the best in class at EWAR then it cannot be outclassed by a T1. The Force Recon's home is in BLOP fleets and as such is perfectly balanced for them with minimal tank and the briefness of those fights. Force Recon damage blows and it should blow because it is a utility and support ship. Take off the Racial Cruiser bonus that goes to damage and put a range bonus on them. While the Force Recon is a designed for small hit and run fights, the Combat Recon's are for full blown fleet fights. Make their bonuses revolve around EWAR and surviving. And if you are giving them damage bonuses, for heavens sake, don't restrict the damage type, are already unpopular.

Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 60	Posted - 2015.01.02 13:40:41 - [2151] - Quote Wynta wrote: Jaysen Larrisen wrote: I wonder if CCP Rise & team would consider something like simply swapping some bonuses around for the Caldari ships. 1) Take the spilt range / intensity bonus to ECM from the Blackbird and put it on the Falcon. The Falcon has the thinnest tank; uses range and stealth for survivability and should be the furthest away from direct combat if possible. With the small hull buffs noted in Rise's OP it will be in excellent shape. 2) Take the intensity bonus from the Falcon and put that on the Blackbird. Very solid ECM capability and T1 cruiser hull performance. 3) Keep the current Rook bonus but beef up the eHP to legit T2 levels but not to current HAC levels... I would say roughly 90% of HAC level. I don't like the kinetic dmg lock-in but they could consider upping the proposed kinetic damage bonus of 7.5% per level to 10% per level or perhaps a slight buff to drone bandwidth and bay (25 / 25 up to 30 / 30). I don't think the D-scan immunity is going to be overpowered in conjunction with these ships. You also have two very specific hard counters you can bring to the table in the form of ECCM and kinetic dmg resist mods. I think this gets you value and equally important differentiation for each of the ships in this chain from T1 to Combat Recon to Force Recon. Either way...as noted earlier in the thread I assume the final numbers will be coming out in a week or so and we'll see what's up. I think it is safe to say that if someone is going to invest time into learning Recon Ships, there should be some benefit to doing so. If Recons are going to be balanced as the best in class at EWAR then it cannot be outclassed by a T1. The Force Recon's home is in BLOP fleets and as such is perfectly balanced for them with minimal tank and the briefness of those fights. Force Recon damage blows and it should blow because it is a utility and support ship. Take off the Racial Cruiser bonus that goes to damage and put a range bonus on them. While the Force Recon is a designed for small hit and run fights, the Combat Recon's are for full blown fleet fights. Make their bonuses revolve around EWAR and surviving. And if you are giving them damage bonuses, for heavens sake, don't restrict the damage type, are already unpopular. I do think we are on the same page with this. Upon further review, I think swapping the Blackbird EWAR bonus to the Rook might actually be better. Force Recons and T1's will need less of a range advantage from my perspective. The Rook could use the range bonus to increase it's survivability quite a bit. As for the damage bonus things...i'm not a fan of the kinetic lock in and the options I'm offering in that regard to simply iterate on what Rise put out to make the change more palatable. That said, I would actually prefer the old RoF bonus, however, I would really like to increase the drone bay and bandwidth to 30 / 30. This allows you to put out 3 medium EWAR or utility drones for fleet support or a little extra dmg drones for self defense. "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
Soldarius Deadman W0nderland The 99 Percent 1005	Posted - 2015.01.02 15:05:54 - [2152] - Quote On kinetic damage bnous; let's look at T2 resists profiles, shall we? Amarr: Primary resist type: Explosive. Secondary: Kinetic Minmatar: Primary: EM. Secondary: Thermal. Caldari: Primary: Thermal. Secondary: Kinetic. Gallente: Primary: Kinetic. Secondary: Thermal. Kinetic and Thermal are the most resisted damage types for T2 ships. So giving a kinetic bonus to anything is a slap in the face. Do you ever see Gallente ships with thermal bonuses? Only on a Stealth Bomber, same as every other race. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
rsantos TEC-NOLOGY Sorry We're In Your Space Eh 25	Posted - 2015.01.02 16:20:27 - [2153] - Quote Soldarius wrote: On kinetic damage bnous; let's look at T2 resists profiles, shall we? Amarr: Primary resist type: Explosive. Secondary: Kinetic Minmatar: Primary: EM. Secondary: Thermal. Caldari: Primary: Thermal. Secondary: Kinetic. Gallente: Primary: Kinetic. Secondary: Thermal. Kinetic and Thermal are the most resisted damage types for T2 ships. So giving a kinetic bonus to anything is a slap in the face. Do you ever see Gallente ships with thermal bonuses? Only on a Stealth Bomber, same as every other race. Gime ma EM damage hybrid ammo!
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 60	Posted - 2015.01.02 16:40:58 - [2154] - Quote Soldarius wrote: On kinetic damage bnous; let's look at T2 resists profiles, shall we? Amarr: Primary resist type: Explosive. Secondary: Kinetic Minmatar: Primary: EM. Secondary: Thermal. Caldari: Primary: Thermal. Secondary: Kinetic. Gallente: Primary: Kinetic. Secondary: Thermal. Kinetic and Thermal are the most resisted damage types for T2 ships. So giving a kinetic bonus to anything is a slap in the face. Do you ever see Gallente ships with thermal bonuses? Only on a Stealth Bomber, same as every other race. Thats a pretty good point. You highlight why they should go with either a much higher kinetic damage buff or go back to DPS application buffs that allow for damage type selection. "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
Faren Shalni Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 109	Posted - 2015.01.02 16:58:55 - [2155] - Quote Jaysen Larrisen wrote: Soldarius wrote: On kinetic damage bnous; let's look at T2 resists profiles, shall we? Amarr: Primary resist type: Explosive. Secondary: Kinetic Minmatar: Primary: EM. Secondary: Thermal. Caldari: Primary: Thermal. Secondary: Kinetic. Gallente: Primary: Kinetic. Secondary: Thermal. Kinetic and Thermal are the most resisted damage types for T2 ships. So giving a kinetic bonus to anything is a slap in the face. Do you ever see Gallente ships with thermal bonuses? Only on a Stealth Bomber, same as every other race. Thats a pretty good point. You highlight why they should go with either a much higher kinetic damage buff or go back to DPS application buffs that allow for damage type selection. Or just a general Damage bonus would do Hell i would even settle for a 5% to all damage types with a 7.5% to kinetic. at least you get options rather than the current lots of kinetic damage with pathetic Em, therm &explosive damage So Much Space
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 14415	Posted - 2015.01.02 18:23:45 - [2156] - Quote Soldarius wrote: On kinetic damage bnous; let's look at T2 resists profiles, shall we? Amarr: Primary resist type: Explosive. Secondary: Kinetic Minmatar: Primary: EM. Secondary: Thermal. Caldari: Primary: Thermal. Secondary: Kinetic. Gallente: Primary: Kinetic. Secondary: Thermal. Kinetic and Thermal are the most resisted damage types for T2 ships. So giving a kinetic bonus to anything is a slap in the face. Do you ever see Gallente ships with thermal bonuses? Only on a Stealth Bomber, same as every other race. Every single T2 ship in the game has a resistance to hybrid ammo. Rook will manage just fine. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 1855	Posted - 2015.01.02 23:07:51 - [2157] - Quote Soldarius wrote: On kinetic damage bnous; let's look at T2 resists profiles, shall we? Amarr: Primary resist type: Explosive. Secondary: Kinetic Minmatar: Primary: EM. Secondary: Thermal. Caldari: Primary: Thermal. Secondary: Kinetic. Gallente: Primary: Kinetic. Secondary: Thermal. Kinetic and Thermal are the most resisted damage types for T2 ships. So giving a kinetic bonus to anything is a slap in the face. Do you ever see Gallente ships with thermal bonuses? Only on a Stealth Bomber, same as every other race. It's almost like T2 Ship resist profiles are designed specifically to resist their opposite races primary damage profile. So of course you see Kinetic a lot when lots of Kinetic damage is done. Thermal is just as common a resist for T2's btw. Only EM & Explosive don't feature much on T2's, and that's because nowhere near as much does EM or Explosive damage. And of course, this is ONLY T2 ships. There are more than just T2 ships in the game, and Resist != Immunity.
Tsra H.E.L.P.e.R Astraeaus 0	Posted - 2015.01.03 02:10:07 - [2158] - Quote Totally in favor of these changes, should shake things up a bit. Gonna make my WH thug lyfe even more interesting. I would love to see you swap the slot layouts for the lachesis and the huginn however. The huginn gets bonuses to two mid slot modules, so if you want to run both (plus another slot for a point, assuming small gang or solo pvp), plus a prop mod, you're left with only 2 mid slots which means any shield tank will be pretty thin. The new low slot should open up armor fits but that feels pretty weird on a ship designed for speed and agility. The lachesis gets bonuses to two mid slot mods as well, but one of them is a point which you should have already. Assuming you want to run both damps and a point for the bonuses plus a prop mod you have 4 mid slots left for a shield tank. It just seems like if you want to fly the ships for their bonuses and in the intended style, the lachesis has a 2 slot advantage over the huginn. Probably wont matter anyway though with all the nano curses running around
Ghaustyl Kathix Rising Thunder 46	Posted - 2015.01.03 04:49:54 - [2159] - Quote I've changed my tune a bit with these changes. I actually don't think the d-scan immunity really does much that covert-ops cloaking doesn't already do. People have brought up a lot of situations that will be "broken" with the d-scan changes. 1): "What if I'm running an anomaly in wormhole-space, this guy can warp straight to me and point me immediately." Covert-ops is better at this. You can have an alt or corp-mate run combat scan probes to see a combat recon. If you're solo, then the combat recon still has a delay while he's finishing warp. You can also move away from the warp-in, so the combat recon has to move to get to you. If you're pointed by sleepers in the anomaly, then a covert-ops cloak would've grabbed you anyway. For signatures, look for combat probes. 2): "I can't get a 1v1 fight against this guy because he could have a combat recon off-grid that I can't see on d-scan." He could also have a covert-ops ship off-grid that you can't see on d-scan. You can turn off your cloak as you land so the calibration delay ends as you finish warp. 3): "A combat recon can land on me as I'm hacking containers and I can't see him on d-scan" You can see the combat probes on d-scan. If you don't see those, you can see (and hear! Love those warp-in/out effects!) the combat recon landing and be out of there before he's locked you, as well. Also, most relic and data sites I've seen have containers pretty far from the warp-in. 4): "These risk-averse carebears can farm their sites risk-free since nobody can see them on d-scan!" Combat recons aren't amazing solo combat ships for sites. Their tanks are a bit weak; they probably wouldn't be able to handle a 4/10. Also, rat wrecks appear on d-scan. If they have the presence of mind to destroy wrecks as soon as they make them (at which point they'll still show up for a second while they lock them), then good. Braindead carebear-ism should die a horrible death, but if people are taking the proper steps to pay attention to reduce risk while they're doing PvE in a dangerous environment (reduce, but they can still never eliminate it) then more power to them. 5): "This makes AFK cloakers better!" How? You can't scan down someone who's cloaked, you can scan down someone who's immune to d-scan. I am a little concerned about medium FW complexes, though (larges are no problem; they have no acceleration gate, so you can warp a cloaked scout at range, for example). The wiki says that T2 cruisers can enter them, and if that's the case you can't be sure there wouldn't be two or three Curses in there. One solution would be to prevent T2 cruisers from entering mediums. Temporary solution for players is to pick fights in small complexes instead. In other cases, I don't think it's going to be as good as broken or amazing as most think it'll be. I will agree, though, blanket immunity feels like poor design though (I still think bastion mode should have a resistance to EWar effects instead of an immunity to them).
The Arbiter Murders and Executions 0	Posted - 2015.01.03 15:29:33 - [2160] - Quote Siobhan MacLeary wrote: Quote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners I'd like to know more about the reason you chose this, of all things. You realize this is going to make them pretty overpowered in wormholes, right? You'll literally never see Combat Recons coming until they appear on grid. I feel recons getting the dscan change is a small but indirect nerf to T3 viability in the economic sense. Less PVE in wormholes equals less tech 3 cruisers, which then equals higher market value and makes T3's even more painful to lose, at which point you might just use a slightly buffed recon anyway unless you have a nich+¬ use for the T3 that can't be filled by a vastly cheaper ship. I think this closes the gap nicely without altering too much, and gives wormholes four new cruisers for PVP. I also agree on the changes suggested for Arazu and Lachesis, since right now they are more about the long point and a lot less about the damp than their predecessor the Celestis. I suggest giving the Arazu more damping power and drones as bonused weapon system, while the Lachesis can keep being the long point combat machine it is. This allows for a diversity in damp ships, making one more of a support ship and one a pseudo-HAC with longpoint.

Mario Putzo Welping and Dunking. 1002	Posted - 2015.01.03 16:38:31 - [2161] - Quote The Arbiter wrote: Siobhan MacLeary wrote: Quote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners I'd like to know more about the reason you chose this, of all things. You realize this is going to make them pretty overpowered in wormholes, right? You'll literally never see Combat Recons coming until they appear on grid. I feel recons getting the dscan change is a small but indirect nerf to T3 viability in the economic sense. Less PVE in wormholes equals less tech 3 cruisers, which then equals higher market value and makes T3's even more painful to lose, at which point you might just use a slightly buffed recon anyway unless you have a nich+¬ use for the T3 that can't be filled by a vastly cheaper ship. Marginal impact at best. Combat Recons are not going to be any real threat to wormhole PVE players or at least not any more of a threat than already exists with the Stratios and other T3's. They simply do not have the capability of being a strike ship (especially in WHs), because of their design limitations and the "hybrid tax". I would gladly invite any Combat Recon to come visit me in a WH Site while im slugging it out with Seekers in my Tengu. Here is how it would go down. CR warps into my site. Seekers target/shoot CR. I target/shoot CR. CR Dies. I keep playing. They don't have the damage to be a threat, and they do not have the tank to play in sites...and unlike T3's, SB's, Astero, Stratios, or heck even some Force Recons, they can not come into the site with me without taking aggression from the sleepers. I feel comfortable in saying that Combat Recons will have no tangible impact on PVE in WH's, or at least not anymore than is already present with the other ships I mentioned. * For people who are unaware of what a hybrid tax is, it is a base reduction in quality of an entity that serves to function in more than one role at the same time. In this case the Combat Recons sees an innate reduction to its combat capacity (Damage/Tank) because it serves the secondary function of providing EWAR. As such people don't like them because they are not optimized in performing a singular role and are often bested by other ships that can perform those roles. Now if CCP were to axe the EWAR capability from Combat Recons and change the EWAR bonuses to more combat specific ones (more damage, +resists etc) then Combat Recons might actually have the capacity to be a real threat to people. As it stands right now, DSCAN immunity is nothing more than a Gimmick trick on a ship class that has no defined role, and inferior in operation compared to ships that do have defined roles (or be made to have defined roles in the case of T3s).
Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 290	Posted - 2015.01.03 18:41:38 - [2162] - Quote Mario Putzo wrote: The Arbiter wrote: Siobhan MacLeary wrote: Quote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners I'd like to know more about the reason you chose this, of all things. You realize this is going to make them pretty overpowered in wormholes, right? You'll literally never see Combat Recons coming until they appear on grid. I feel recons getting the dscan change is a small but indirect nerf to T3 viability in the economic sense. Less PVE in wormholes equals less tech 3 cruisers, which then equals higher market value and makes T3's even more painful to lose, at which point you might just use a slightly buffed recon anyway unless you have a nich+¬ use for the T3 that can't be filled by a vastly cheaper ship. Marginal impact at best. Combat Recons are not going to be any real threat to wormhole PVE players or at least not any more of a threat than already exists with the Stratios and other T3's. They simply do not have the capability of being a strike ship (especially in WHs), because of their design limitations and the "hybrid tax". I would gladly invite any Combat Recon to come visit me in a WH Site while im slugging it out with Seekers in my Tengu. Here is how it would go down. CR warps into my site. Seekers target/shoot CR. I target/shoot CR. CR Dies. I keep playing. They don't have the damage to be a threat, and they do not have the tank to play in sites...and unlike T3's, SB's, Astero, Stratios, or heck even some Force Recons, they can not come into the site with me without taking aggression from the sleepers. I feel comfortable in saying that Combat Recons will have no tangible impact on PVE in WH's, or at least not anymore than is already present with the other ships I mentioned. * For people who are unaware of what a hybrid tax is, it is a base reduction in quality of an entity that serves to function in more than one role at the same time. In this case the Combat Recons sees an innate reduction to its combat capacity (Damage/Tank) because it serves the secondary function of providing EWAR. As such people don't like them because they are not optimized in performing a singular role and are often bested by other ships that can perform those roles. Now if CCP were to axe the EWAR capability from Combat Recons and change the EWAR bonuses to more combat specific ones (more damage, +resists etc) then Combat Recons might actually have the capacity to be a real threat to people. As it stands right now, DSCAN immunity is nothing more than a Gimmick trick on a ship class that has no defined role, and inferior in operation compared to ships that do have defined roles (or be made to have defined roles in the case of T3s). There are no other ships in game that can perform the role of a Curse, Huginn or Lachesis. The dominant fleet comp today depends on the unique features of Huginns and Lachesises. As what comes to wh hunting, the CR used will be an armor Lach, acting as the primary tackler for the gankers, and you certainly can't shoot him. Best protection against it will be to position yourself +80km from the site warpin point. The change from today's ganking tools isn't dramatic, tho.
Mario Putzo Welping and Dunking. 1003	Posted - 2015.01.03 19:48:13 - [2163] - Quote Aiyshimin wrote: [quote=Mario Putzo] There are no other ships in game that can perform the role of a Curse, Huginn or Lachesis. The dominant fleet comp today depends on the unique features of Huginns and Lachesises. As what comes to wh hunting, the CR used will be an armor Lach, acting as the primary tackler for the gankers, and you certainly can't shoot him. Best protection against it will be to position yourself +80km from the site warpin point. The change from today's ganking tools isn't dramatic, tho. With the exception of the Curse, the respective Force Recons of Minmatar and Gallente and Caldari are nearly the exact same as the Combat Recons, with similar fitting. A quick comparison Lach (4/7/4) 10% bonus to Hybrids Tracking 20% bonus to Points 7.5% bonus to Damps 10% to Hybrid Optimal Arazu (4/6/4) 5% bonus to Hybrids 20% bonus to points 7.5% bonus to Damps Cov Ops Cloak Cov Ops Cyno So what do you gain here...better tracking and optimal range damage wise? I suppose that would be nice. I guess if you shield fit them it would also be beneficial to have a Lach for that extra mid slot. Lach has 1 more weapon but the Arazu gets 25% more damage which is close in straight up damage potential...as well as the free slot to place a cloak in, or a missile launcher to actually end up having more upfront total damage output than the Lachesis if thats your thing. The Lach has a bit more base Armor HP, but nothing to write home about, and a bit quicker lock speed, again nothing exceptional. Then the Arazu has the ability to forgo any damage, and act in a pure utility role with Cov Ops Cloak, Cov Ops Cyno can be an on grid warp in as well. Similar story between the Huginn and Rapier, and the Rook and Falcon. The only Combat Recon with a notable increase in its base functionality is the Curse vs the Pilgrim, the rest of them are all more or less carbon copies, with the same EWAR application and similar damage application. And after the change. 1 will have a Cov Ops cloak, the other will have DSCAN immunity...or Gimp Cloak. Force Recons still can do Black Ops, Combat Recons still can not. Pretty freaking unique eh!.
epicurus ataraxia Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude 1455	Posted - 2015.01.03 22:31:55 - [2164] - Quote Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: Iain Cariaba wrote: Anyone want to place bets on how long after combat recons get d-scan immunity it'll be before F&I gets flooded with suggestions on every single other ship size getting the same treatment? There's already been at least one suggestion I've seen so far... The one ship that would really benefit, and it is not in the cruiser class, Is the Nestor. It would remove the biggest downside to using it in wormhole space, and would not "frighten" people like the suggestion that it would benefit from a covert ops cloak. Warping with a covert fleet, is not currently a sane action outside of the home wormhole, or at best a controlled static. This would allow the nestor to travel, playing to its main advantage, the low mass, which is currently wasted. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
Mario Putzo Welping and Dunking. 1004	Posted - 2015.01.03 23:18:29 - [2165] - Quote epicurus ataraxia wrote: Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: Iain Cariaba wrote: Anyone want to place bets on how long after combat recons get d-scan immunity it'll be before F&I gets flooded with suggestions on every single other ship size getting the same treatment? There's already been at least one suggestion I've seen so far... The one ship that would really benefit, and it is not in the cruiser class, Is the Nestor. It would remove the biggest downside to using it in wormhole space, and would not "frighten" people like the suggestion that it would benefit from a covert ops cloak. Warping with a covert fleet, is not currently a sane action outside of the home wormhole, or at best a controlled static. This would allow the nestor to travel, playing to its main advantage, the low mass, which is currently wasted. Just need to repurpose the Nestor to be a Blops ship honestly. Not one that can bridge folks, but one that can jump to cyno beacons. MMMMM Black Ops Logistics. One can dream.
Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 42	Posted - 2015.01.03 23:41:43 - [2166] - Quote The transition of this thread from dialog about the Recons to Ishtar/Nestor balance signals that substantive contributions are now complete. Its encouraging that most people have really come around in the last 40 pages... O. Faeces
KIller Wabbit The Scope Gallente Federation 849	Posted - 2015.01.04 00:15:34 - [2167] - Quote Orange Faeces wrote: The transition of this thread from dialog about the Recons to Ishtar/Nestor balance signals that substantive contributions are now complete. Its encouraging that most people have really come around in the last 40 pages... O. Faeces No, it's because CCP has declared that they don't care what we think - no matter what, game breaking mechanic is going to be shoved down our throats. CCP .. always first with the wrong stuff CSM .. CCP Shills with a vacation plan
Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 42	Posted - 2015.01.04 00:19:47 - [2168] - Quote KIller Wabbit wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ A game breaking ******* bullshit mechanic. You should be ashamed. The claim that d-scan immunity is somehow game-breaking has been well refuted, even by its most ardent opponents. Do you have something else you wanted to add? O. Faeces
Mario Putzo Welping and Dunking. 1004	Posted - 2015.01.04 00:58:47 - [2169] - Quote KIller Wabbit wrote: Orange Faeces wrote: The transition of this thread from dialog about the Recons to Ishtar/Nestor balance signals that substantive contributions are now complete. Its encouraging that most people have really come around in the last 40 pages... O. Faeces No, it's because CCP has declared that they don't care what we think - no matter what, game breaking mechanic is going to be shoved down our throats. Its hardly a gamebreaking mechanic. It is literally no different than having a Cov Ops cloaking device fitted to a ship. So I don't know why you are worked up about it. I mean you could say something sensible like. The gimmick change is a placebo that offers no distinct difference between a Force Recon and a Combat Recon. They are still the same ships, with Force Recons still offering more utility to a fleet as a whole. As such I think CCP should focus more on actually making Combat Recons, combat capable, instead of providing them some gimmick to masquerade as a unique function in everyday use.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 776	Posted - 2015.01.04 03:13:47 - [2170] - Quote Mario Putzo wrote: CCP should focus more on actually making Combat Recons, combat capable Completely agree with this. As specialized T2 ships, Combat Recons need to offer more to a fleet than their T1 counterparts - that should be equal or superior performance and superior survivability. The Greatest Ship Ever. Credit to Shahfluffers.

Mario Putzo Welping and Dunking. 1004	Posted - 2015.01.04 03:38:48 - [2171] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: Mario Putzo wrote: CCP should focus more on actually making Combat Recons, combat capable Completely agree with this. As specialized T2 ships, Combat Recons need to offer more to a fleet than their T1 counterparts - that should be equal or superior performance and superior survivability. One thing they should definitely be capable of doing is Black Ops. They should be the combat arm of Black Ops gangs, where Force Recons fulfill the support role of Black Ops gangs. Currently you get to choose between T3's or the Stratios for combat Black Ops cruisers. Honestly CCP should just make these HACs -1 weapon slot, and give them the Cov Ops cloak. Of course get rid of their EWAR bonus, in favor of a 4% Resist bonus per level of their respective racial cruisers. No gimmicky bullshit. A defined role that is clearly absent from Cruiser sized T2 ships. And a ship that while not as capable in direct fleet combat as HACs can hide their numbers and inflict decent damage with adequate survivability. It also gives Force Recons a defined role as "masters" of EWAR. Win, win win, and no gimmick mechanic that doesn't actually add anything to the game.
Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 42	Posted - 2015.01.04 03:50:38 - [2172] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: Mario Putzo wrote: CCP should focus more on actually making Combat Recons, combat capable Completely agree with this. As specialized T2 ships, Combat Recons need to offer more to a fleet than their T1 counterparts - that should be equal or superior performance and superior survivability. I've already shown that the Combat Recons have survivability on par with HACs, especially Huginn, Rook and Lach. As for EWAR superiority, with the exception of the Blackbird/Rook/Falcon range-bonus inversion, I think an EWAR rebalance is separate from the work of a recon ship rebalance. O. F.
Mario Putzo Welping and Dunking. 1005	Posted - 2015.01.04 04:02:26 - [2173] - Quote Orange Faeces wrote: FT Diomedes wrote: Mario Putzo wrote: CCP should focus more on actually making Combat Recons, combat capable Completely agree with this. As specialized T2 ships, Combat Recons need to offer more to a fleet than their T1 counterparts - that should be equal or superior performance and superior survivability. I've already shown that the Combat Recons have survivability on par with HACs, especially Huginn, Rook and Lach. As for EWAR superiority, with the exception of the Blackbird/Rook/Falcon range-bonus inversion, I think an EWAR rebalance is separate from the work of a recon ship rebalance. O. F. And the Rapier, Huginn, and Falcon can all get a similar tank with the same flexibility, similar DPS, and better EWAR. The ships are the same son. Time to split their roles. If CCP is serious about making Combat Recons unique they will stick them with HAC like Combat and no EWAR, and remove the combat bonuses from Force Recon. I don't even know how you can continue to make an argument that Force Recons, and Combat Recons aren't the same ******* thing with only one having a Cov Ops cloaking device. It boggles my mind really. After this change the only effective difference between Combat Recons and Force Recons will be: The Curse is a bit better than the Pilgrim at EWAR The Huginn is a bit better than the Rapier in Damage The Rook has less applied damage than the Falcon The Lachesis has a bit application with damage than the Arazu And Combat Recons can land on grid uncloaked without showing on DSCAN. Of course Force Recons can do this too.
Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 42	Posted - 2015.01.04 06:47:18 - [2174] - Quote Mario Putzo wrote: And the Rapier, Huginn, and Falcon can all get a similar tank with the same flexibility, similar DPS, and better EWAR. ... Your first claim isn't exactly correct. I ran the fits for making the rapier and arazu (which is what I think you meant) for HAC fleet/gang compatibility. At least for shield gangs, these just don't measure up without using both rig slots to plug the other hole, or using an additional mid-slot. It depends on how much alpha the opposition has, but Lach and Huginn perform better for that role. You're right that it isn't black and white, and some of the suggestions in page 106 (I think it was) would be helpful, but your chief claim isn't valid. O. Faeces
PastyWhiteDevil Mayhem and Ruin Point Blank Alliance 4	Posted - 2015.01.04 08:04:47 - [2175] - Quote imo if you make the lach mostly turrets you will drastically nerf it. currently i run 3 heavies and 2 425 autos so my dmg is not dependent on cap. in the mids i run a 10mn mwd, a true sansha scram (22 km range with recon 5) 3 lse's an invuln and an active em ward. dcu, bcu and a caldari navy pdu in the lows. 3 t2 extender rigs with heat i deal about 400 dps, have some 70k ehp w/o links or bonuses and can passively tank like 240 dps (more w/ heated hardeners. this is one of the most fun ships to jump into ppl with solo. you basically can't kite it w/o links or a point bonused ship (27km scram when heated), and your missiles and drones ensure dmg application even it you get neuted out. please do not ruin this ships by making it all hybrid turrets. the split weapons in conjunction with the drones worked fine. and if you must give it more turret slots at least consider allowing it to use all missles as well for those of us who like to fly it in this unorthodox manner. also d-scan immune is op. it should be shortened range. or possibly make it so that if you have any sort of timer it is visible on d-scan (so as to at least slow down it overpowered-ness)
Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 290	Posted - 2015.01.04 09:04:31 - [2176] - Quote Mario Putzo wrote: Aiyshimin wrote: [quote=Mario Putzo] There are no other ships in game that can perform the role of a Curse, Huginn or Lachesis. The dominant fleet comp today depends on the unique features of Huginns and Lachesises. As what comes to wh hunting, the CR used will be an armor Lach, acting as the primary tackler for the gankers, and you certainly can't shoot him. Best protection against it will be to position yourself +80km from the site warpin point. The change from today's ganking tools isn't dramatic, tho. With the exception of the Curse, the respective Force Recons of Minmatar and Gallente and Caldari are nearly the exact same as the Combat Recons, with similar fitting. A quick comparison Lach (4/7/4) 10% bonus to Hybrids Tracking 20% bonus to Points 7.5% bonus to Damps 10% to Hybrid Optimal Arazu (4/6/4) 5% bonus to Hybrids 20% bonus to points 7.5% bonus to Damps Cov Ops Cloak Cov Ops Cyno So what do you gain here...better tracking and optimal range damage wise? I suppose that would be nice. I guess if you shield fit them it would also be beneficial to have a Lach for that extra mid slot. Lach has 1 more weapon but the Arazu gets 25% more damage which is close in straight up damage potential...as well as the free slot to place a cloak in, or a missile launcher to actually end up having more upfront total damage output than the Lachesis if thats your thing. The Lach has a bit more base Armor HP, but nothing to write home about, and a bit quicker lock speed, again nothing exceptional. Then the Arazu has the ability to forgo any damage, and act in a pure utility role with Cov Ops Cloak, Cov Ops Cyno can be an on grid warp in as well. Similar story between the Huginn and Rapier, and the Rook and Falcon. The only Combat Recon with a notable increase in its base functionality is the Curse vs the Pilgrim, the rest of them are all more or less carbon copies, with the same EWAR application and similar damage application. And after the change. 1 will have a Cov Ops cloak, the other will have DSCAN immunity...or Gimmick Cloak. Force Recons still can do Black Ops, Combat Recons still can not. Pretty freaking unique eh!. Mate the Lachs are indeed shield tanked and currently the Arazu just can't do it. It has almost 30k less EHP. Nobody gives a **** about recon dps, their unique feature is to be long range tackle in shield fleetsand like said, there are no alternatives and the dominant fleet comp today hinges on the existence of the combat recons. They aren't "unused crap", they are ships which Ishtars Online depends on.
Mario Putzo Welping and Dunking. 1008	Posted - 2015.01.04 16:47:46 - [2177] - Quote Aiyshimin wrote: Mate the Lachs are indeed shield tanked and currently the Arazu just can't do it. It has almost 30k less EHP. Nobody gives a ** about recon dps, their unique feature is to be long range tackle in shield fleetsand like said, there are no alternatives and the dominant fleet comp today hinges on the existence of the combat recons. They aren't "unused crap", they are ships which Ishtars Online depends on. I didn't say they were unused crap, I said they are marginally better than Force Recons in performing the EXACT same role, and that this Gimmick change is going to do nothing to enhance that An Arazu will still be just about equal as a Lach after this change in a combat role, yet still have its host of other beneficial utility. I think my favorite line though is. No one gives a ** about recon dps. Case in point as to why these changes miss the mark. Combat Recons should combat. Force Recons should specialize in EWAR. Also 30K more EHP from a Lach vs and Arazu....hue hue hue. You high son?
Freelancer117 So you want to be a Hero 225	Posted - 2015.01.04 22:24:03 - [2178] - Quote Quote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners This is a nice change in the ship stats, plz keep it balanced when force recons lose a high slot equipping a cloak and combat recon do not lose a slot getting this new stat. The players will make a better version of the game, then CCP initially plans. http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg
Solaris Vex Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 4	Posted - 2015.01.04 22:27:00 - [2179] - Quote As it stands only the huginn and lachesis are viable in nullsec fleets and this patch will not change that, or the fact that T3s do the job better then recons themselves. Please bring fozzie back.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1067	Posted - 2015.01.05 11:19:59 - [2180] - Quote would be nice too hear from rise if any further changes are being considered from the many suggestions put forward key ones being - curse, arazu and lachesis need an extra low slot and more pg too make armour tanking them viable - force recons lack of usable high slots (-1 slots compared too combat recons effectively -3 highs after cloak/cyno) - high sig radius on most of them - consider removing the cpu for cloak bonus .. compensate any cpu needed .. thus allowing a new bonus for force recons (dps) - maybe look at the minnie recons again, an armour tanking huginn maybe? and some of mine - reduce the web range bonuses please.. also nerfing the skirmish links would help the well OP ranges here - making curse a proper missile khanid ship .. think missile ashimmu with TD's Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.

Azazel The Misanthrope Animadversion Tactical Operations Index Legion of Immortal Corporations 39	Posted - 2015.01.05 13:19:30 - [2181] - Quote Seriously, if you are going to make them immune to d-scan they need to have serious scan resolution penalties so they are n't just sitting around everywhere in space waiting to instant lock whatever shows up and hold it there forever.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1067	Posted - 2015.01.05 14:12:44 - [2182] - Quote Azazel The Misanthrope wrote: Seriously, if you are going to make them immune to d-scan they need to have serious scan resolution penalties so they are n't just sitting around everywhere in space waiting to instant lock whatever shows up and hold it there forever. lock range nerf is in order for sure they have huge lock ranges Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
Hicksimus Volatile Instability Resonance. 509	Posted - 2015.01.05 19:34:23 - [2183] - Quote I'm going to move into a C1/C2 with dual static. I will rotate my statics until I find something to attack.....their only warning will be a new signature. Seems fair to me! But maybe because I will be the one winning. Recruitment Officer: What type of a pilot are you? Me: I've been described as a Ray Charles with Parkinsons and a drinking problem.
Mario Putzo Welping and Dunking. 1014	Posted - 2015.01.05 19:42:58 - [2184] - Quote Hicksimus wrote: I'm going to move into a C1/C2 with dual static. I will rotate my statics until I find something to attack.....their only warning will be a new signature. Seems fair to me! But maybe because I will be the one winning. Right because you couldn't already be doing this with T3's, Force Recons, Stratios. I honestly don't understand how people think this change is significant at all, let alone game breaking. Its a gimmick cloak that functions really no different than a cov ops cloak. It isn't unique, its not special, and it is entirely redundant addition to the game. AKA a Gimmick.
Hamish McRothimay Norse Complex Inc 2	Posted - 2015.01.05 22:07:29 - [2185] - Quote @ccp_rise Has the opening post been updated to reflect latest resists / sig radius / slot changes / power grid etc etc ? .
Aroye Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 9	Posted - 2015.01.06 01:19:46 - [2186] - Quote Has anyone considered giving force recons a "no targeting delay after decloak" instead of d-scan immunity? Combat recons don't have a cloak so it may make sense to only let them have the new d-scan immunity.
PastyWhiteDevil Mayhem and Ruin Point Blank Alliance 4	Posted - 2015.01.06 03:44:03 - [2187] - Quote Aroye wrote: Has anyone considered giving force recons a "no targeting delay after decloak" instead of d-scan immunity? Combat recons don't have a cloak so it may make sense to only let them have the new d-scan immunity. force recons are not getting d-scan immunity. they only want to give it to combat recons.
PastyWhiteDevil Mayhem and Ruin Point Blank Alliance 4	Posted - 2015.01.06 03:53:05 - [2188] - Quote is there anyone else who thinks making the lach all hybrid with a tracking and optimal bonus is stupid? please keep or increase the rof bonus to hams and heavies increase the hybrid dmg bonus and then give it th ability to fit all missiles or all turrets. the lachesis is not there for dmg projection while in a gang. this change is not well thought out. all it does is gimp scram lach's in solo or small gang situations and severely hinder its versatility.
Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 297	Posted - 2015.01.06 07:44:47 - [2189] - Quote Mario Putzo wrote: Hicksimus wrote: I'm going to move into a C1/C2 with dual static. I will rotate my statics until I find something to attack.....their only warning will be a new signature. Seems fair to me! But maybe because I will be the one winning. Right because you couldn't already be doing this with T3's, Force Recons, Stratios. I honestly don't understand how people think this change is significant at all, let alone game breaking. Its a gimmick cloak that functions really no different than a cov ops cloak. It isn't unique, its not special, and it is entirely redundant addition to the game. AKA a Gimmick. No, you can't do that with T3s, Force Recons, Stratios, because you see all those ships on dscan when they enter the system. I honestly don't undestand how people without any clue about EVE Online or the game mechanics insist on posting in these F&I threads.
Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 297	Posted - 2015.01.06 07:52:47 - [2190] - Quote Mario Putzo wrote: Aiyshimin wrote: Mate the Lachs are indeed shield tanked and currently the Arazu just can't do it. It has almost 30k less EHP. Nobody gives a ** about recon dps, their unique feature is to be long range tackle in shield fleetsand like said, there are no alternatives and the dominant fleet comp today hinges on the existence of the combat recons. They aren't "unused crap", they are ships which Ishtars Online depends on. I didn't say they were unused crap, I said they are marginally better than Force Recons in performing the EXACT same fleet role, and that this Gimmick change is going to do nothing to enhance that An Arazu will still be just about equal as a Lach after this change in a combat role, yet still have its host of other beneficial utility. I think my favorite line though is. No one gives a about recon dps. Case in point as to why these changes miss the mark. Combat Recons should combat. Force Recons should specialize in EWAR. Also 30K more EHP from a Lach vs an Arazu....hue hue hue. You high son? Yes, currently Lach gets about 30k more EHP than Arazu, Are you ****** son, hue hue hue? After change Lach is still faster, has better layout, more tank, more scan res and lock range, harder to jam and on top of it does way more damage, which means that it's still a better choice for fleet combat than Arazu, which has only cyno time and fuel reduction as selling points in fleet context.

Hicksimus Volatile Instability Resonance. 511	Posted - 2015.01.06 11:19:21 - [2191] - Quote Mario Putzo wrote: Right because you couldn't already be doing this with T3's, Force Recons, Stratios. You must be new to the idea of wormholes. When d-scan is all you've got you spam it and when you spam it you see every ship you just listed before it can re-cloak with the exception of when it is more than 14.3 AU away. My new plan ONLY warns them if they know to run away when a new sig appears and that's a significant change. Recruitment Officer: What type of a pilot are you? Me: I've been described as a Ray Charles with Parkinsons and a drinking problem.
Gabriel Karade Noir. Suddenly Spaceships. 215	Posted - 2015.01.06 14:39:36 - [2192] - Quote PastyWhiteDevil wrote: this is quite literally my favorite ship in game. please don't ruin it. lest we forget that roden favors MISSILES The Roden missiles brain-bug has been stupid since the day it appeared. It's only taken like 5 years to get it squashed - now (as per my ancient 'Gallente Mk II' thread) at least there is some sense restored to the Gallente line: Duvolle - Blasters Roden - Railguns Creodron - Drones War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Niskin League of the Lost 218	Posted - 2015.01.06 14:43:17 - [2193] - Quote 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. It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow
King Fu Hostile Cutthroat Industries We need wards. 313	Posted - 2015.01.06 15:39:41 - [2194] - Quote 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.
Speedkermit Damo Demonic Retribution 375	Posted - 2015.01.06 15:39:50 - [2195] - Quote Have you nerfed Ishtars yet CCP Rise? Have you nerfed Logi yet? Getting bored with Ishtarceptors online. Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.
Niskin League of the Lost 219	Posted - 2015.01.06 16:20:31 - [2196] - Quote 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. It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow
Aladar Dangerface Absolutely Certain 60	Posted - 2015.01.06 17:46:09 - [2197] - 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 have, i would say it is about 2-4 seconds that you will remain on dscan after you cloak but there defo is a delay between cloaking and disappearing from dscan and i have absoutley no doubt about it. I don't need twitter. I'm already following you.
Promiscuous Female GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 540	Posted - 2015.01.06 21:30:22 - [2198] - Quote lmbo you people are still talking about this
Alexis Nightwish 70	Posted - 2015.01.06 21:43:08 - [2199] - Quote Aladar Dangerface wrote: 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 have, i would say it is about 2-4 seconds that you will remain on dscan after you cloak but there defo is a delay between cloaking and disappearing from dscan and i have absoutley no doubt about it. This is true. I've seen cov ops on Dscan for 2 sometimes even 3 scans before they vanish. Let's not forget that if you're in a fleet, you're all spamming Dscan and getting multiple scans per second. Now you're required to have eyes on every WH (and outside your FW plex too?) as being vigilant with Dscan is no longer sufficient to give you warning of an incoming threat. Which means alts. Any change that requires alts to play competitively is a bad change IMO. And just after they nerfed ISboxer too. One step forward, one step back. sigh Power Projection: A Brighter Future
Kynric Sky Fighters 238	Posted - 2015.01.06 23:15:18 - [2200] - Quote Before the change it is possible to fit the Huginn with weapons that project sufficient to match the webs without resorting to fitting modules. The proposed will have to use the new low for a reactor if arty is desired. A bit more powergrid to facilitate fitting artillery or a falloff bonus for autocannons or switching the ship back to launchers would make the vessel more attractive. As it stands it seems rather less interesting than the current version which rarely gets used as another ship always seems like a much better choice.

Yahrr The Tuskers The Tuskers Co. 25	Posted - 2015.01.07 02:28:11 - [2201] - Quote Alexis Nightwish wrote: This is true. I've seen cov ops on Dscan for 2 sometimes even 3 scans before they vanish. Let's not forget that if you're in a fleet, you're all spamming Dscan and getting multiple scans per second. The same goes for being on other people's overview after cloaking. At least with the old effect, after your ships got fully cloaked, the ship's bracket remained visible in space, overview and d-scan for a few seconds. When they nerfed cloakers going through deadspace gates we tested if you would land fully cloaked on the other side and in most occasions there was a short flash of flashy red on the target's overview, even while the cloaker was already completely cloaked before being halfway the warp. I haven't been juggling with EFT's files, but when I look at the slots and bonuses of the force recons versus the combat recons, I want to kick myself for not selling my old cloakies. They're almost obsolete now unless you want to light a Christmas tree in someone's backyard or have to skip a camped gate.
2D34DLY4U BACKUPLEGION 20	Posted - 2015.01.07 12:12:36 - [2202] - Quote Designing ships in EVE is a very hard thing to do, you have to think about solo use, small gang use, fleet use (same ship my have totally different fits/uses in these contexts and if possible should be useful in all of them to make for a richer game), further factor in how does this specific ship compare with it's same tiered peers (size wise among cruisers, isk wise bang for the buck versus T1, other T2, T3, Faction) and finally try to introduce new and interesting game play mechanics to make it fun / EVE a better game. I can understand the d scan immunity feature is an attempt to introduce some variety through a new unique mechanic however I still feel it doesn't really accomplish that (not a game changer or a big deal at the end of the day), it favors IMO regressive game play mechanics (ganking vs. roaming) and it further introduces unnecessary complexity in a system badly in need of a redesign, if you think about new player experience we now have to teach NP about d scan, then about cloaky ships and now also about d scan immune ships - they probably just want to find people to shoot and have good fights, this added complexity doesn't help in any way or bring value in terms of providing richer gameplay opportunities (IMO). I do agree the local / d scan intel system should be addressed by devs, either through ship design changes or a complete overhaul, this system should be a simple and easy tool aimed at helping players find what they want (engagements, structures, sites) and not a barrier between what they want to do and their goals which is currently what happens with this medieval sonar like interface we have. I know everyone likes to think they are d scan wizards however if you think about it honestly it's quite simple and repetitive and not exactly a triple A game play experience. Perhaps we can just replace the d scan with an elite like radar visual system, no more click click click rotate camera around click click click warp click click click, just a self refreshing visual radar thingy where you can see whats around you within 14 AU and right click objects on the radar to get a warp to menu like we have on the overview, if we treat groups of close ships as blobs we can also help differentiate solo/small gang/fleets and reduce load. I don't know if this is technically viable or if it will introduce lag / server overhead but any change that simplifies engagement generating mechanics and allows players to get to what they want - engagements - is a good thing since it will promote better game play in the end, both while finding fights and generating more fights as that's what matters, not all these pseudo complex pre engagement gameplay mechanics we have that in the end just just foster risk aversion.
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 63	Posted - 2015.01.07 12:24:02 - [2203] - Quote 2D34DLY4U wrote: Designing ships in EVE is a very hard thing to do, you have to think about solo use, small gang use, fleet use (same ship my have totally different fits/uses in these contexts and if possible should be useful in all of them to make for a richer game), further factor in how does this specific ship compare with it's same tiered peers (size wise among cruisers, isk wise bang for the buck versus T1, other T2, T3, Faction) and finally try to introduce new and interesting game play mechanics to make it fun / EVE a better game. I can understand the d scan immunity feature is an attempt to introduce some variety through a new unique mechanic however I still feel it doesn't really accomplish that (not a game changer or a big deal at the end of the day), it favors IMO regressive game play mechanics (ganking vs. roaming) and it further introduces unnecessary complexity in a system badly in need of a redesign, if you think about new player experience we now have to teach NP about d scan, then about cloaky ships and now also about d scan immune ships - they probably just want to find people to shoot and have good fights, this added complexity doesn't help in any way or bring value in terms of providing richer gameplay opportunities (IMO). I do agree the local / d scan intel system should be addressed by devs, either through ship design changes or a complete overhaul, this system should be a simple and easy tool aimed at helping players find what they want (engagements, structures, sites) and not a barrier between what they want to do and their goals which is currently what happens with this medieval sonar like interface we have. I know everyone likes to think they are d scan wizards however if you think about it honestly it's quite simple and repetitive and not exactly a triple A game play experience. Perhaps we can just replace the d scan with an elite like radar visual system, no more click click click rotate camera around click click click warp click click click, just a self refreshing visual radar thingy where you can see whats around you within 14 AU and right click objects on the radar to get a warp to menu like we have on the overview, if we treat groups of close ships as blobs we can also help differentiate solo/small gang/fleets and reduce load. I don't know if this is technically viable or if it will introduce lag / server overhead but any change that simplifies engagement generating mechanics and allows players to get to what they want - engagements - is a good thing since it will promote better game play in the end, both while finding fights and generating more fights as that's what matters, not all these pseudo complex pre engagement gameplay mechanics we have that in the end just just foster risk aversion. Good post but slightly off topic. I actually like your d-scan idea and it's probably worthy of a thread on its own. Be prepared for the whole "ur nerfing EVE and turning this into WOW carebear city!" from som folks. "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1075	Posted - 2015.01.07 13:20:38 - [2204] - Quote Kynric wrote: Before the change it is possible to fit the Huginn with weapons that project sufficient to match the webs without resorting to fitting modules. The proposed will have to use the new low for a reactor if arty is desired. A bit more powergrid to facilitate fitting artillery or a strong falloff bonus for autocannons or switching the ship back to launchers would make the vessel more attractive. As it stands it seems rather less interesting than the current version which rarely gets used as another ship always seems like a much better choice. mm.. a cloaky RLML rapier with same layout seems a better option Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
Ab'del Abu Atlantis Ascendant 197	Posted - 2015.01.07 14:46:02 - [2205] - 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.
Niskin League of the Lost 219	Posted - 2015.01.07 15:19:17 - [2206] - Quote Ab'del Abu wrote: Niskin wrote: 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. I can't speak to off-grid d-scan results, because I only have one account and have been playing solo the last few years, but when on-grid you are dead wrong. When I sit and watch a wormhole connection and something comes in and cloaks, I click scan and they are gone. No delay, no 4-5 seconds. They are just gone. Back when I played with a group, from 2006 to 2012, I never once heard of this delay. Maybe something has changed since then, I don't know. I'm just telling you what I'm seeing, and it's been 100% consistent so there was never a reason to doubt it. It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship. -MooMooDachshundCow
Alexis Nightwish 71	Posted - 2015.01.07 18:49:50 - [2207] - Quote 2D34DLY4U wrote: Designing ships in EVE is a very hard thing to do, you have to think about solo use, small gang use, fleet use (same ship my have totally different fits/uses in these contexts and if possible should be useful in all of them to make for a richer game), further factor in how does this specific ship compare with it's same tiered peers (size wise among cruisers, isk wise bang for the buck versus T1, other T2, T3, Faction) and finally try to introduce new and interesting game play mechanics to make it fun / EVE a better game. (snip) Yeah. It's too bad the devs don't have a huge resource of experience and knowledge of the game they could draw upon to help them make better choices when modifying such a profoundly complex system. Something like hundreds of players with thousands of combined hours of playtime who would be willing to put forth their thoughts on how to make the game better based on experience and passion for the game. CCP only approaches a problem in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 108	Posted - 2015.01.07 18:57:36 - [2208] - Quote Harvey James wrote: Kynric wrote: Before the change it is possible to fit the Huginn with weapons that project sufficient to match the webs without resorting to fitting modules. The proposed will have to use the new low for a reactor if arty is desired. A bit more powergrid to facilitate fitting artillery or a strong falloff bonus for autocannons or switching the ship back to launchers would make the vessel more attractive. As it stands it seems rather less interesting than the current version which rarely gets used as another ship always seems like a much better choice. mm.. a cloaky RLML rapier with same layout seems a better option It is. 400dps with furies, double web with roughly 35-40k EHP and goes 2100 m/s cold. It can cloak to avoid camps or setup BM to pounce on unsuspecting victims. I dont intend to touch a huginn because of sacrifices youll need to make to get ****** 650s to fit, let alone trying to squeeze 720s on it. Ive considered a ac kite fit.. but the dps will be so anemic at kite ranges without falloff bonuses, its better to use RLML.
Flyinghotpocket Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica 488	Posted - 2015.01.07 23:39:08 - [2209] - Quote Speedkermit Damo wrote: Have you nerfed Ishtars yet CCP Rise? Have you nerfed Logi yet? Getting bored with Ishtarceptors online. they shoulda nerf logi 2 years ago. infact they shouldnt have even come out with logi. this isnt WOW. its a space game. and logi in a fight dont make sense at ******* all Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
Topher Basquette Dusch-shur Montana Freedom Fighters 18	Posted - 2015.01.08 02:14:43 - [2210] - Quote I can't find anything posted, but some quick and dirty math gives the 720mm Huginn an alpha of about 2300 with republic plasma ammo. Does that seem right? What is the EHP of a Niarja?

Scheulagh Santorine The Math Department 24	Posted - 2015.01.08 06:21:52 - [2211] - Quote Alexis Nightwish wrote: 2D34DLY4U wrote: Designing ships in EVE is a very hard thing to do, you have to think about solo use, small gang use, fleet use (same ship my have totally different fits/uses in these contexts and if possible should be useful in all of them to make for a richer game), further factor in how does this specific ship compare with it's same tiered peers (size wise among cruisers, isk wise bang for the buck versus T1, other T2, T3, Faction) and finally try to introduce new and interesting game play mechanics to make it fun / EVE a better game. (snip) Yeah. It's too bad the devs don't have a huge resource of experience and knowledge of the game they could draw upon to help them make better choices when modifying such a profoundly complex system. Something like hundreds of players with thousands of combined hours of playtime who would be willing to put forth their thoughts on how to make the game better based on experience and passion for the game. I want to give you a hug. Its not sarcastic to think that devs could build on the experience of every player in the game. I tried to pursue this line of questioning at FanFest last year, trying to get Rise and Fozzie to explain what tools they use to categorize different play styles, and identify how different fits make ships more/less relevant for these different styles. They do claim to look at KB statistics gathered with in-house tools, but they never publish statistics or metrics in their dev blogs to motivate the changes they make in ship balance. If this lack of visual information was present for PLEX prices, the economy, industry or sov, they would have a great deal of difficulty justifying intervention in those aspects of the game. Perhaps we can advocate for more transparency in this area? S. Santorine ============================== I used to shoot things. Now I do math. S. Santorine Writings on some formal methods in EvE-Online: Ship Motion in EVE Online
Dun'Gal Myriad Contractors Inc. 182	Posted - 2015.01.08 06:27:22 - [2212] - Quote Niskin wrote: Ab'del Abu wrote: Niskin wrote: 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. I can't speak to off-grid d-scan results, because I only have one account and have been playing solo the last few years, but when on-grid you are dead wrong. When I sit and watch a wormhole connection and something comes in and cloaks, I click scan and they are gone. No delay, no 4-5 seconds. They are just gone. Back when I played with a group, from 2006 to 2012, I never once heard of this delay. Maybe something has changed since then, I don't know. I'm just telling you what I'm seeing, and it's been 100% consistent so there was never a reason to doubt it. If im reading this right you are speaking of physically watching a ship dissapear off overview while dscanning and seeing he disappears from dscan at the same time. What you are seeing is everything that takes place after the delay. Ie They clicked cloak 3ish seconds later they dissapear from your overview and dscan. It has always been this way.
Vincintius Agrippa F L O O D 71	Posted - 2015.01.08 07:06:11 - [2213] - Quote This has got to be one of the dumbest ideas in history, of all time. Its stupidity far exceeds that which was previously established by decisions unsupported by facts, data, or common sense. " D-scan immunity" The most Blasphemous words ever spoken in an MMO. While being forced to bring a prober may be more of an inconvenience for roaming fleets of lets say 20-50+, it gimps small gang pvp, and renders solo activities utterly useless without the use of alt. Seeing how probe scanning takes significantly longer than d-scanning and both are manual, and the need to scan every time someone enters system, why freaking bother. Its seems like an "I Win" button in far too many scenarios. At least with cloakies, theres a targeting delay, plus they cant enter a system, warp to a beacon, and button in without so much as being detected. Fail. `Only YOU can prevent internet bullying!`
Hellrain Choochoo Naked Women Drink Vodka 2	Posted - 2015.01.08 08:45:39 - [2214] - Quote Why Curse is having less low slot than the Pilgrim ? fighter recon aren't supposed to be more resistant than their cloaky counterpart ?
Keno Skir 724	Posted - 2015.01.08 11:10:17 - [2215] - Quote Not sure about the dscan thing tbh. I'll enjoy it, but isn't that just what a cloak is for? Gùï> 3 Week Buddy Trial + ISK Bonus & Starting Assistance <Gùï Feel free to contact me regarding my posts, or my 21 Day EvE Buddy Trials \o/
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1075	Posted - 2015.01.08 14:19:46 - [2216] - Quote Hellrain Choochoo wrote: Why Curse is having less low slot than the Pilgrim ? fighter recon aren't supposed to be more resistant than their cloaky counterpart ? Also why not a drone EV drain amount bonus ? it is ridiculous that they are happy with the curse being shield tanked, - it has -1 lowslot on the pilgrim, 4 slots is hard too armour tank with - lacks pg too effectively armour tank - pilgrim has more Armour HP - why do they need 2 droneboats? .. even the gallente don't have a drone based recon why? - curse should be treated as khanid thus missiles and strong armour tank Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 530	Posted - 2015.01.08 14:36:00 - [2217] - Quote As of two day ago the Recon changes are on SiSi for review. My first impressions so far are mixed and give me the headache. What most of them in common is that force recons are inferior versions of the combat recons / electronic attack cruisers (which is a far better name for them). Curse This one is cursed.. Though the increased drain and neut range is nice and the drone damage is not to ignore here. Pilgrim Lesser Curse with a covert ops cloak. Why both of them even have a tracking disruption bonus escapes me but both of them are nice shield tankers, as always with the Amarr line of ships. Lachesis This one is an amazing railgun boat at very long ranges. Arazu Inferior Lachesis with covert ops cloak. Both Gallente recons do just fine as always with shield tanks. Rook The worst of the recons with a weapon system that still hurts my feelings but no ship in New Eden. If you are lucky sometimes you can jam someone. The ancillery missile launcher range bonus was forgotten to put on - who might that have been?? Falcon Yeah Falcon oh Falcon, why wasn'r you changed? As long time running gag in Island, both Caldari recons didn't change at all. I am almost surprised.. All recons still have terrible capacitors, mobility but as racial flavor they all have some shield tanks. Maybe the Curse should move one low back to the meds again, so that the common shield Amarr doesn't look so weird in the line of Amarr ships. signature
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1075	Posted - 2015.01.08 16:12:18 - [2218] - Quote mm.. maybe renaming combat recons to Electronic Attack cruiser would make more sense and perhaps you could tie them in with the EAF's give them the same d-scan bonus and give them a stronger combat focus too match. maybe even separate the recon skillbook from the combat recons change it to Electronic Attack cruiser skillbook in its place. Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 63	Posted - 2015.01.08 16:32:27 - [2219] - Quote Harvey James wrote: mm.. maybe renaming combat recons to Electronic Attack cruiser would make more sense and perhaps you could tie them in with the EAF's give them the same d-scan bonus and give them a stronger combat focus too match. maybe even separate the recon skillbook from the combat recons change it to Electronic Attack cruiser skillbook in its place. Agreed on the EAC point. Several of us discussed the point in this thread. I don't know that you need to split the skill books. I think the CovOPs frigs are an excellent example for this class of cruisers to have followed. The frigs give you a stealthy surveillance and exploration platform in one boat and the bomber in an other under the same skill branch...two massively different boats that were split in function quite well. I seriously wished they had considered doing the same for the Recon ships. The d-scan piece I can take or leave, either way I'm fine. I tend to fly in small to medium gangs mostly and I was far more interested in the Electronic Attack aspect of the ships...my beef is that the T2 options are simply less desirable in many cases (cost vs difference in performance) than the T1 options. I'm still not sure why I would fly a Rook in a gang instead of a Blackbird or Falcon. Maybe I don't see it but I'm struggling a bit with that. "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1075	Posted - 2015.01.08 17:13:13 - [2220] - Quote Jaysen Larrisen wrote: Harvey James wrote: mm.. maybe renaming combat recons to Electronic Attack cruiser would make more sense and perhaps you could tie them in with the EAF's give them the same d-scan bonus and give them a stronger combat focus too match. maybe even separate the recon skillbook from the combat recons change it to Electronic Attack cruiser skillbook in its place. Agreed on the EAC point. Several of us discussed the point in this thread. I don't know that you need to split the skill books. I think the CovOPs frigs are an excellent example for this class of cruisers to have followed. The frigs give you a stealthy surveillance and exploration platform in one boat and the bomber in an other under the same skill branch...two massively different boats that were split in function quite well. I seriously wished they had considered doing the same for the Recon ships. The d-scan piece I can take or leave, either way I'm fine. I tend to fly in small to medium gangs mostly and I was far more interested in the Electronic Attack aspect of the ships...my beef is that the T2 options are simply less desirable in many cases (cost vs difference in performance) than the T1 options. I'm still not sure why I would fly a Rook in a gang instead of a Blackbird or Falcon. Maybe I don't see it but I'm struggling a bit with that. dps mainly .. a 400 plus dps rook could be quite handy in a small fleet, with much higher jam strength than the bb which is more about ecm range than strength, and the falcons strength is the cloak ofc, shame they don't want it too do any decent dps. Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.

Kynric Sky Fighters 239	Posted - 2015.01.08 17:15:09 - [2221] - Quote Harvey James wrote: Kynric wrote: Before the change it is possible to fit the Huginn with weapons that project sufficient to match the webs without resorting to fitting modules. The proposed will have to use the new low for a reactor if arty is desired. A bit more powergrid to facilitate fitting artillery or a strong falloff bonus for autocannons or switching the ship back to launchers would make the vessel more attractive. As it stands it seems rather less interesting than the current version which rarely gets used as another ship always seems like a much better choice. mm.. a cloaky RLML rapier with same layout seems a better option I have no complaints with the rapier. I use it now and it seems to only get better. The Huginn on the other hand goes from worse than the rapier to much worse than the rapier for anything other than c5 escalation fleets. I played with it in and cant find a fit for the new one which seems useful, I kept end up with dual reactor cores or dual t2 ancil current routers and still showed really bad dps. What is the reason for adding a low if the weapon change gobbles both it and another one? It is a weak ship which is getting weaker.
CW Itovuo The Executioners Capital Punishment. 54	Posted - 2015.01.09 04:55:13 - [2222] - Quote elitatwo wrote: As of two day ago the Recon changes are on SiSi for review. All recons still have terrible capacitors... That's disturbing. I was thinking the changes to plus-raw-cap, plus-cap-regen, & minus-warp-initiation would finally address one of classes most glaring faults.
Samchitto Ormand Serenity Collective 0	Posted - 2015.01.09 12:21:22 - [2223] - Quote The D-SCAN immunity just doesn't make sense to me. The thing is, that when using a cloaking mod, you have to pretty much make the whole fit around it and it kind of makes the ship pretty specific, when it comes to what it actually can do. Not that they might not have a specific use when this rebalance will be released as it is, but it just doesn't suit the game IMHO. It looks to me like these ships might be used a lot more to set up traps and just wait for somebody to get caught, which is not my kind of play style. There are more interesting things, that could be done with these ships, that might result into more fun gameplay. Just my opinion though
Cassius Invictus Thou shalt not kill A Nest of Vipers 119	Posted - 2015.01.09 13:55:12 - [2224] - Quote Hey guys does shield tank on curse really make sense? You need 3 slots for a mwd, scram and cap booster and are left with 3 slot tank. You should put in one tracking disruptor too... So whats the point? Make it 5/5 or 4/6 as a true amarr/khanid ship. If someone has such whish he can shield tank pilgrim as it is... edit: CCP Rise wrote: Align Recons around ship developer trends established in other classes (Roden Lachesis should not use missiles for example) Where appropriate, bonuses will be adjusted to match ship developer trends So maybe +4% armor res bonus instead of tracking disruption? you can keep 6/4 then .
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1076	Posted - 2015.01.09 14:38:25 - [2225] - Quote i see there already in the patch notes which means this thread is now dead ... what a shame so many useful ideas that should have been used have been ignored. Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 765	Posted - 2015.01.09 14:42:41 - [2226] - Quote I've always accepted that the shield curse is a support platform that can't do it all. Put the prop mod of your choice and your best shield tank. Leave the tackle, scramming and disruption to others. You can't have it all in one. You can make a really special cap stable full neut shield curse - which is powerful enough in my book. If you want to rock a cap stable, full nuet shield curse - bring friend(s). I mean heck, who wouldn't want to abuse a cap stable, nano, shield nueting curse w/ 5 sentries and ASB, med MJD and a faction point. This is obviously too much. I'm OK w/ where the shield curse is. If you push the fit and make it a shield platform, then you have to give a few things up.
2D34DLY4U BACKUPLEGION 22	Posted - 2015.01.09 15:02:28 - [2227] - Quote Harvey James wrote: i see there already in the patch notes which means this thread is now dead ... what a shame so many useful ideas that should have been used have been ignored. Not everything was wasted. Plan of training alt into Recons is now on hold and this just saved me a month of dual training. In a sense I just won a couple of beers. GG
Shilalasar Dead Sky Inc. 143	Posted - 2015.01.09 16:01:50 - [2228] - Quote Harvey James wrote: i see there already in the patch notes which means this thread is now dead ... what a shame so many useful ideas that should have been used have been ignored. Didn-¦t you just hear CCP Rise in the in-development video? It is still in the feedback-stage now. So that is how it works: 1. Announcementphase: Someone says something about something 2. Discussionphase: Features and Ideas sticky is created and used by players and Devs 3. Decicionphase: Dev(s) decide what they want and do it. Also known as "The last blue post". 4. Feedbackstage: Players keep pointing out the flaws but are completely ignored This last stage lasts for an unknown time, there are still Hyperion feedbackstickies in the wormholesection...
Faren Shalni Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 112	Posted - 2015.01.09 16:23:05 - [2229] - Quote Shilalasar wrote: there are still Hyperion feedbackstickies in the wormholesection... Because If they took them down players will create new ones. So Much Space
Lloyd Roses 786	Posted - 2015.01.09 16:27:00 - [2230] - Quote Cassius Invictus wrote: Hey guys does shield tank on curse really make sense? You need 3 slots for a mwd, scram and cap booster and are left with 3 slot tank. You should put in one tracking disruptor too... So whats the point? Make it 5/5 or 4/6 as a true amarr/khanid ship. If someone has such whish he can shield tank pilgrim as it is... edit: CCP Rise wrote: Align Recons around ship developer trends established in other classes (Roden Lachesis should not use missiles for example) Where appropriate, bonuses will be adjusted to match ship developer trends So maybe +4% armor res bonus instead of tracking disruption? you can keep 6/4 then . A resist bonus is roughly one free resist mod stats wise. Even then, wouldn't be enough to justify armortanking. Shieldtank Curse is the smartest choice, since you're naturally squishy but got moderate range to work with (35+, 40+ and 80+ depending on fit), and shields yield sufficient tank while allowing for DDAs and nanos to become better at what you're supposed to be good at: neuting people at range or screw over a turret ship. "I honestly thought I was in lowsec" Proud member of exactly one player-made chat channel.

Lady Rift What Shall We Call It 156	Posted - 2015.01.09 18:14:27 - [2231] - Quote Cassius Invictus wrote: Hey guys does shield tank on curse really make sense? You need 3 slots for a mwd, scram and cap booster and are left with 3 slot tank. You should put in one tracking disruptor too... So whats the point? Make it 5/5 or 4/6 as a true amarr/khanid ship. If someone has such whish he can shield tank pilgrim as it is... edit: CCP Rise wrote: Align Recons around ship developer trends established in other classes (Roden Lachesis should not use missiles for example) Where appropriate, bonuses will be adjusted to match ship developer trends So maybe +4% armor res bonus instead of tracking disruption? you can keep 6/4 then . why scram? you neut from 30+km your dmg is at 60 km. you either 4 slot tank it and use it as a neut boat or 3 slot tank and use it with a TD or you trust your logi to always feed you cap and you 4 slot tank and have a TD on it. Or you armor tank it with no damage mods and have full 6 slot mids to play with.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1076	Posted - 2015.01.09 18:42:13 - [2232] - Quote with a 3-2 neut/nos combo its actually capstable without a cap booster, but it is amarr so its still bizarre that he has left it as effectively a shield tanker especially with the lack of grid and 4 lows making armour tanking it pretty hard. Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
PastyWhiteDevil Mayhem and Ruin Point Blank Alliance 5	Posted - 2015.01.09 23:57:31 - [2233] - Quote Gabriel Karade wrote: PastyWhiteDevil wrote: this is quite literally my favorite ship in game. please don't ruin it. lest we forget that roden favors MISSILES The Roden missiles brain-bug has been stupid since the day it appeared. It's only taken like 5 years to get it squashed - now (as per my ancient 'Gallente Mk II' thread) at least there is some sense restored to the Gallente line: Duvolle - Blasters Roden - Railguns Creodron - Drones an un-damage-bonused rail lachesis is going to be absolute crap. secondly, weapon types are not split like that. it's hybrids, missiles, and drones. for example you don't have amarr ships that are considered to be pulse or beam laser. you have amarr laser ships, drone ships, and missile ships. the roden missile "brain-bug" needs to be expanded upon. give them the option to fit more missiles. I would love to see a missile ares -- it might actually be worth flying if you could missile fit it.
PastyWhiteDevil Mayhem and Ruin Point Blank Alliance 5	Posted - 2015.01.10 00:14:44 - [2234] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. 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. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ why have you chosen to nerf the lachesis' capacity to solo pvp? all the others look to have received an increase. because before it was possibly one of the best (up there with the curse). now it is probably the worst. the only way to really compensate is to either radically rework the shield scram fit or forget hybrids all together and fit either 425 autos, 200 autos, or smart bombs and then load up on as many drone damage amps as you can afford.
Ransu Asanari Powder and Ball Alchemists Union Mordus Angels 205	Posted - 2015.01.10 00:36:53 - [2235] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Actually this isn't correct. The Crow is a Kaalakiota ship, and the damage bonus was just changed from a Kinetic bonus to: 5% bonus to Light Missile and Rocket explosion radius 10% bonus to Light Missile and Rocket max velocity Please stop locking Caldari ships in to Kinetic damage types. The point of missiles is versatility, and this takes away from the situations where it would be useful to change ammo types to take advantage of that. P.S. Speaking of ammo reloads, how's that ammo swap mechanic for Rapid Missiles coming along? Are we still iterating on that after Rubicon 1.1? Powder and Ball Alchemists Union - "Turning Lead into Gold since 2008"
ASKEN KURLEE Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1	Posted - 2015.01.10 01:08:39 - [2236] - Quote I wanted to fly a Curse for so long so I trained and trained. I was happy. They were just so sexy....... then somebody changed em to look like every other ordinary ship. Why in the world would you do that? Really...why would you take something beautiful and make it plain? I just dont get it. I know this is probly a waste of time but I gotta say.....Can we bring back the real Curse plz.
Catherine Laartii Dominion Fleet Group Templis CALSF 459	Posted - 2015.01.10 02:55:44 - [2237] - Quote PastyWhiteDevil wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: PastyWhiteDevil wrote: this is quite literally my favorite ship in game. please don't ruin it. lest we forget that roden favors MISSILES The Roden missiles brain-bug has been stupid since the day it appeared. It's only taken like 5 years to get it squashed - now (as per my ancient 'Gallente Mk II' thread) at least there is some sense restored to the Gallente line: Duvolle - Blasters Roden - Railguns Creodron - Drones an un-damage-bonused rail lachesis is going to be absolute crap. secondly, weapon types are not split like that. it's hybrids, missiles, and drones. for example you don't have amarr ships that are considered to be pulse or beam laser. you have amarr laser ships, drone ships, and missile ships. the roden missile "brain-bug" needs to be expanded upon. give them the option to fit more missiles. I would love to see a missile ares -- it might actually be worth flying if you could missile fit it. I'm sorry but you're wrong with making the comparison between lasers and hybrids. Caldari get ishukone which is exclusively bonused around rails, with the double range bonus. The problem with it is that they're trying to shoehorn bonuses into a ship where it doesn't work in the least bit with only 2 combat skills...primary skills for Roden should be range and damage, not range and tracking. Rails are applicable mainly when they have decent alpha which the lach won't be doing. What will likely happen is you'll have the Lach have a web and be blaster fit, so anything that comes into close range gets smoked by its fast-tracking blasters. Sure rails are great for fleet when you can hit everything with it, but you'll be doing sh*t for dps with them. That said, I would like to see the falcon turned into a Lai Dai boat and given missiles. It has the worst offensive power out of all of these recons by an absolutely pathetically large margin.
PastyWhiteDevil Mayhem and Ruin Point Blank Alliance 5	Posted - 2015.01.10 03:17:29 - [2238] - Quote Catherine Laartii wrote: PastyWhiteDevil wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: PastyWhiteDevil wrote: this is quite literally my favorite ship in game. please don't ruin it. lest we forget that roden favors MISSILES The Roden missiles brain-bug has been stupid since the day it appeared. It's only taken like 5 years to get it squashed - now (as per my ancient 'Gallente Mk II' thread) at least there is some sense restored to the Gallente line: Duvolle - Blasters Roden - Railguns Creodron - Drones an un-damage-bonused rail lachesis is going to be absolute crap. secondly, weapon types are not split like that. it's hybrids, missiles, and drones. for example you don't have amarr ships that are considered to be pulse or beam laser. you have amarr laser ships, drone ships, and missile ships. the roden missile "brain-bug" needs to be expanded upon. give them the option to fit more missiles. I would love to see a missile ares -- it might actually be worth flying if you could missile fit it. I'm sorry but you're wrong with making the comparison between lasers and hybrids. Caldari get ishukone which is exclusively bonused around rails, with the double range bonus. The problem with it is that they're trying to shoehorn bonuses into a ship where it doesn't work in the least bit with only 2 combat skills...primary skills for Roden should be range and damage, not range and tracking. Rails are applicable mainly when they have decent alpha which the lach won't be doing. What will likely happen is you'll have the Lach have a web and be blaster fit, so anything that comes into close range gets smoked by its fast-tracking blasters. Sure rails are great for fleet when you can hit everything with it, but you'll be doing sht for dps with them. That said, I would like to see the falcon turned into a Lai Dai boat and given missiles. It has the worst offensive power out of all of these recons by an absolutely pathetically large margin. but since when are the enyo, eris, and phobos considered rail ships? and why would i want to fit blasters and a web when it is better as it currently is? single scram heavy missiles and 425 autos and basically 70k ehp before bonuses. that would mean a lot of tank being dropped. aren't we supposed to be buffing them so they get used more? the current lach beats the hell out of the one being put forward. those hybrid turrets will be useless rails won't do *** for dmg and blasters will put me in neut range were i don't want to be. all the other combat recons r not to bad off if things get close. this absolutely gimps the lachesis' solo capabilities.
SyntaxPD PowerDucks PowerDucks Alliance 30	Posted - 2015.01.10 10:23:07 - [2239] - Quote I think i have an idea. Maybe already said by someone: 0. No invisible dscan ships 1. Remove D-Scan. 2. Make a module for recons, that add D-Scan functionality. This way you will not restrict or affect existing tool, but you'll make a whole new role to play
Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 301	Posted - 2015.01.10 10:27:14 - [2240] - Quote SyntaxPD wrote: I think i have an idea. Maybe already said by someone: 0. No invisible dscan ships 1. Remove D-Scan. 2. Make a module for recons, that add D-Scan functionality. This way you will not restrict or affect existing tool, but you'll make a whole new role to play lol

Lugh Crow-Slave 429	Posted - 2015.01.10 12:00:05 - [2241] - Quote Cassius Invictus wrote: So maybe +4% armor res bonus instead of tracking disruption? you can keep 6/4 then . remove the E-War bonus from an E-war ship and you're doing it wrong
Gabriel Karade Noir. Suddenly Spaceships. 216	Posted - 2015.01.10 12:20:01 - [2242] - Quote PastyWhiteDevil wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: PastyWhiteDevil wrote: this is quite literally my favorite ship in game. please don't ruin it. lest we forget that roden favors MISSILES The Roden missiles brain-bug has been stupid since the day it appeared. It's only taken like 5 years to get it squashed - now (as per my ancient 'Gallente Mk II' thread) at least there is some sense restored to the Gallente line: Duvolle - Blasters Roden - Railguns Creodron - Drones an un-damage-bonused rail lachesis is going to be absolute crap. secondly, weapon types are not split like that. it's hybrids, missiles, and drones. for example you don't have amarr ships that are considered to be pulse or beam laser. you have amarr laser ships, drone ships, and missile ships. the roden missile "brain-bug" needs to be expanded upon. give them the option to fit more missiles. I would love to see a missile ares -- it might actually be worth flying if you could missile fit it. Then re train to fly Caldari... War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Yahrr The Tuskers The Tuskers Co. 25	Posted - 2015.01.10 13:04:50 - [2243] - Quote Catherine Laartii wrote: The problem with it is that they're trying to shoehorn bonuses into a ship where it doesn't work in the least bit with only 2 combat skills...primary skills for Roden should be range and damage, not range and tracking. Rails are applicable mainly when they have decent alpha which the lach won't be doing. What I don't get about CCP's balancing is that they stick to a set number of bonuses per ship. By limiting them to say, two, you invite crappy combinations like range and tracking. I don't care how many bonuses a ship has, as long as the result is balanced. Also if bringing ships in line with their maker brings the ship out of balance, maybe they should just rebalance the makers...
Big Lynx Chaotic Tranquility Warp to Cyno. 847	Posted - 2015.01.10 13:36:21 - [2244] - Quote Does the Moracha get a tuning too?
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 1908	Posted - 2015.01.10 14:28:55 - [2245] - Quote Probably too late for this release, but I'd like to bring up the idea of adding a cpu reduction bonus for probe launchers to recons again. I feel it would add extra value to these ships in both large engagements and smaller gangs. no bonuses to probe strength, but possibly a bonus to scan time.
Omnathious Deninard Novis Initiis 2671	Posted - 2015.01.10 15:46:01 - [2246] - Quote PastyWhiteDevil wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: PastyWhiteDevil wrote: this is quite literally my favorite ship in game. please don't ruin it. lest we forget that roden favors MISSILES The Roden missiles brain-bug has been stupid since the day it appeared. It's only taken like 5 years to get it squashed - now (as per my ancient 'Gallente Mk II' thread) at least there is some sense restored to the Gallente line: Duvolle - Blasters Roden - Railguns Creodron - Drones an un-damage-bonused rail lachesis is going to be absolute crap. secondly, weapon types are not split like that. it's hybrids, missiles, and drones. for example you don't have amarr ships that are considered to be pulse or beam laser. you have amarr laser ships, drone ships, and missile ships. the roden missile "brain-bug" needs to be expanded upon. give them the option to fit more missiles. I would love to see a missile ares -- it might actually be worth flying if you could missile fit it. CCP officially changed Rhiden to a rail based ship system.
Lee Crumbs Imperium Technologies Evictus. 0	Posted - 2015.01.10 18:10:22 - [2247] - Quote Could we get a before and after post so we can see the changes please? I have to search the current fittings/bonuses to compare at the moment. Lee
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1077	Posted - 2015.01.10 20:06:21 - [2248] - Quote Lee Crumbs wrote: Could we get a before and after post so we can see the changes please? I have to search the current fittings/bonuses to compare at the moment. Lee check the patch notes Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 64	Posted - 2015.01.10 20:26:59 - [2249] - Quote Lee Crumbs wrote: Could we get a before and after post so we can see the changes please? I have to search the current fittings/bonuses to compare at the moment. Lee Pretty sure the OP and patch notes has this. "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
AkJon Ferguson JC Ferguson and Son Ltd Ferguson Alliance 272	Posted - 2015.01.10 20:44:27 - [2250] - Quote I'm late to this party but the directional immunity idea is terrible. It rewards/encourages bad gameplay and is a solution in search of a problem. CCP has been so great lately, it's a shame this colossally bad idea is being implemented. If it were instead a bonus to directional range (giving recons like 20 or 25 AU dscanner) or even prevented recons from being dscanned from >1AU away, that would be fine.

pushbyte ii SiIhouette Shadow Cartel 1	Posted - 2015.01.11 18:15:51 - [2251] - Quote So, here's my two cents. I've been flying recons on all of my accounts since the old Nano Curse days, before you guys nerfed all that into oblivion. As sad as that was, it was required. Ever since then, I have transitioned to primarily using Force Recons. I have continually tried to make the Curse work for me, but it really just doesn't hold up to the Pilgrim for my uses, in my opinion. The biggest problem I see with every Recon, is the capacitor in regards to the amount required for warping. It's all fine and dandy that I can 120km point someone, or double web from 50km away, but none of that matters if I can't even warp to my target and still have enough cap to activate modules. The big issue with the Pilgrim was the neut range. A lot of people have a lot of feelings about this. The short range made the Pilgrim required to engage at close range, but also being armour tanked made it sluggish. I feel your changes for the Pilgrim to have a mix of neut range and amount is a good decision. The visibility of Combat Recons, as compared to their cloaky counterparts, has also been an issue. Everyone scatters when they see Lachesis, Huginn, and especially Curse on dscan. I really feel the decision to make the changes to the Combat Recons, in this regard, is a good one. I know many people feel negatively about this, but a Recon is supposed to be able to perform Reconnaissance work. You can't very well do that if everyone sees you from 14au away. At least the Combat Recons have a chance now, which was traditionally only afforded to Covert Cloaking Device capable ships. TL;DR: Recon Issues: 1. Capacitor consumption for initiating warp. 2. Pilgrim neut range. (Already being addressed.) 3. The ability to have some level of stealth when moving to engage a target. (Already being addressed.)
Kalihira Ultramar Independent Contracting 31	Posted - 2015.01.11 21:22:01 - [2252] - Quote pushbyte ii wrote: The visibility of Combat Recons, as compared to their cloaky counterparts, has also been an issue. Everyone scatters when they see Lachesis, Huginn, and especially Curse on dscan. I really feel the decision to make the changes to the Combat Recons, in this regard, is a good one. I know many people feel negatively about this, but a Recon is supposed to be able to perform Reconnaissance work. You can't very well do that if everyone sees you from 14au away. At least the Combat Recons have a chance now, which was traditionally only afforded to Covert Cloaking Device capable ships. In regards to the tanking ability changes, the raising of resistances was a poor decision in my opinion. The Recon is an EWAR ship. If you want to put out damage, and tank like a champ, then fly a HAC. The Recons bring something else to the table, though. Recons bring all the tricky/techie stuff that the HACs (and many other ships) can't do. I don't need a superior tank on a Recon, if I have my targets damped into oblivion, the ones that I can't damp are jammed, and everyone else is immobilised and drained of all resources. Tank is moot at that point. The sig radius change suggested, seems like it would fit with the rest of the concept of what a Recon is, just don't go overboard on it. Visibility of recons a problem?? You are fighting carebears or what? If I see a combat recon on dscan I pop out my drones which will eat him alive with his flimsy tank. An increase in tank is very much needed, why do you think the proteus and loki are used in fleets to point and web instead of lachs and huginns? If all enemies are 'damped, ecm-d and drained of all resources, ur not fighting in anything but small fleets... or you are fighting in recon only fleets....
Paynus Maiassus Capital Munitions 216	Posted - 2015.01.11 22:42:09 - [2253] - Quote pushbyte ii wrote: So, here's my two cents. I've been flying recons on all of my accounts since the old Nano Curse days, before you guys nerfed all that into oblivion. As sad as that was, it was required. Ever since then, I have transitioned to primarily using Force Recons. I have continually tried to make the Curse work for me, but it really just doesn't hold up to the Pilgrim for my uses, in my opinion. The biggest problem I see with every Recon, is the capacitor in regards to the amount required for warping. It's all fine and dandy that I can 120km point someone, or double web from 50km away, but none of that matters if I can't even warp to my target and still have enough cap to activate modules. The big issue with the Pilgrim was the neut range. A lot of people have a lot of feelings about this. The short range made the Pilgrim required to engage at close range, but also being armour tanked made it sluggish. I feel your changes for the Pilgrim to have a mix of neut range and amount is a good decision. The visibility of Combat Recons, as compared to their cloaky counterparts, has also been an issue. Everyone scatters when they see Lachesis, Huginn, and especially Curse on dscan. I really feel the decision to make the changes to the Combat Recons, in this regard, is a good one. I know many people feel negatively about this, but a Recon is supposed to be able to perform Reconnaissance work. You can't very well do that if everyone sees you from 14au away. At least the Combat Recons have a chance now, which was traditionally only afforded to Covert Cloaking Device capable ships. In regards to the tanking ability changes, the raising of resistances was a poor decision in my opinion. The Recon is an EWAR ship. If you want to put out damage, and tank like a champ, then fly a HAC. The Recons bring something else to the table, though. Recons bring all the tricky/techie stuff that the HACs (and many other ships) can't do. I don't need a superior tank on a Recon, if I have my targets damped into oblivion, the ones that I can't damp are jammed, and everyone else is immobilised and drained of all resources. Tank is moot at that point. The sig radius change suggested, seems like it would fit with the rest of the concept of what a Recon is, just don't go overboard on it. As for the Rook. I understand why you may wish to change it because very few people like the Rook, it seems. The Rook is also one of my least favourite ships, no matter how hard I really do wish to love it. The issue is not in the damage, or mobility. The issue is in the tank and EWAR capabilities both being present at the same time. It is a shield tanked ship, with an EWAR requirement that requires the same slots, in a high count. I would suggest changing the EWAR bonus to buff Multispec jammers to match what a racial jammer is on a Falcon. To contrast this, put a hefty penalty for running X+ amount of jammers on the ship, so people are basically required to run a moderate amount, instead of loading up up with 5 multis. If only two Multispec jammers can jam at the same strength as the buffed racial jammers do on a Falcon, then it can sufficiently act as a combat support ship, with a heavier focus on the combat side. TL;DR: Recon Issues: 1. Capacitor consumption for initiating warp. 2. Pilgrim neut range. (addressed) 3. The ability to have some level of stealth when moving to engage a target. (addressed) 4. Stick with the moderate change to sig radius in favour of the higher level of resistance changes. (addressed) 5. Modify the Rook's utilisation of its mid slots. I actually kind of like that the jams and tank compete for slots on the Caldari ships. Instead of changing around bonuses I think that basically the Caldari should just have high tank hit points and resists. So a fleet commander says, well, jams are the toughest for large fleets and generally not preferred, but the Rook is the only recon that tanks like a brick - now the question is, if we use it, how much tank do we want vs. jams? I'm with you on the Pilgrim. I was actually kind of sad to see the amount bonus get switched to range because in my BLOPSing I always warped to zero and wanted a quicker neut to keep the bad guy close (and weak) faster. I am aware that most Pilgrim pilots have been complaining about the range forever, though, and I think the mix of range and amount is great. The cap and cap to warp are going to be improved. Are you saying you are not satisfied with the improvements? I have not been on singularity for this release and have not played with any numbers. But it looks like this issue has been addressed. I also am a DSCAN immunity supporter. I only ever flew force recons though, and right now I fly what the alliance wants. So my greater curiosity is whether or not the changes are enough to get the big powers to use combat recons in the fleets. My main is in Brave and in the last battles between Brave and PL, it was all about EWAR (damps and TD for Brave and TP for PL). Frankly, for my own use, I found recons working well before the rebalance and these changes are nothing but improvements. I'm just curious if the community will take them. But I'm pretty much with you except that I am not as disdainful of the Rook (at least in terms of its slot layout and utilization) and I am not sure if you're complaining about the capacitor still being crappy or if you were just pointing out pre-change problems.
pushbyte ii SiIhouette Shadow Cartel 2	Posted - 2015.01.11 22:53:48 - [2254] - Quote Kalihira, perhaps they are miners and carebears, I cannot speak for everyone. I feel a Recon's place is not in the middle of a large fleet. The T3 ships already fill that role, and it's not what the word "reconnaissance" means. Paynus, I have not seen any specific details concerning the capacitor, nor have I played on the test server. So, I will have to take your word on their manner in which they are addressing that issue. However, I do feel the Rook needs a complete work over of the mids, still. All of the other Recons get to use their EWAR bonuses and their tank/dps/whatever at the same time. The Rook is the only one which seems to really be penalised for this choice, and it's specifically because of Multispec jams versus Racial jams, and how many racials are needed to be effective. I do not need four webs, or four target painters on a Huginn for it to be effective in it's EWAR role. So, I just feel the real solution is to give the Multispec a go, but not to the point that it can be abused by running a full rack of Multis.
Takeshi Kumamato Exiled Kings The Fearless Empire 1	Posted - 2015.01.12 02:13:35 - [2255] - Quote The Rook's missile velocity bonus doesn't apply to light missiles. Is that intentional?
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 64	Posted - 2015.01.12 03:33:25 - [2256] - Quote Takeshi Kumamato wrote: The Rook's missile velocity bonus doesn't apply to light missiles. Is that intentional? That would be a bit odd since Rise noted in this forum that was shaping the Rook for RLML usage. "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
Jaysen Larrisen Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 64	Posted - 2015.01.12 03:48:34 - [2257] - Quote pushbyte ii wrote: Kalihira, perhaps they are miners and carebears, I cannot speak for everyone. I feel a Recon's place is not in the middle of a large fleet. The T3 ships already fill that role, and it's not what the word "reconnaissance" means. Paynus, I have not seen any specific details concerning the capacitor, nor have I played on the test server. So, I will have to take your word on their manner in which they are addressing that issue. However, I do feel the Rook needs a complete work over of the mids, still. All of the other Recons get to use their EWAR bonuses and their tank/dps/whatever at the same time. The Rook is the only one which seems to really be penalised for this choice, and it's specifically because of Multispec jams versus Racial jams, and how many racials are needed to be effective. I do not need four webs, or four target painters on a Huginn for it to be effective in it's EWAR role. So, I just feel the real solution is to give the Multispec a go, but not to the point that it can be abused by running a full rack of Multis. This is one of the spots where I think the naming convention really confuses things. The Force Recon with CovOps cloak and cyano capability seem to really fit the bill for the "recon" flavor. The Combat Recons are THE primary platform for EWAR (of all stripes) in fleets and probably need to focus much more on that than "recon" in the truest since of the word...there are just too many other ships that can fill that function better and none that can preform EWAR as well. The beef I have with the current bonuses for the Rook and Falcon is that they have the exact same bonus. My opinion...i would much prefer a split range / intensity bonus to jams (ala the Blackbird) to do something that would further differentiate them. With the same bonus on each ship i'm hard pressed to pick the Rook over the Falcon for many application unless I simply prefer missiles. T3's often take over some of the ECM role, however, I strongly suspect that based on CCP Rise's comments that situation is probably going to get fairly directly addressed. They've been pretty upfront that T3 Cruisers need to be "good" at everything but by no means "best" at anything so that as a fleet option is probably on the way out. "Endless money forms the sinews of War" - Cicero Biomassed - Dust & EVE Podcast Twitter - @JaysynLarrissen
PastyWhiteDevil Mayhem and Ruin Point Blank Alliance 5	Posted - 2015.01.12 07:35:33 - [2258] - Quote Gabriel Karade wrote: PastyWhiteDevil wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: PastyWhiteDevil wrote: this is quite literally my favorite ship in game. please don't ruin it. lest we forget that roden favors MISSILES The Roden missiles brain-bug has been stupid since the day it appeared. It's only taken like 5 years to get it squashed - now (as per my ancient 'Gallente Mk II' thread) at least there is some sense restored to the Gallente line: Duvolle - Blasters Roden - Railguns Creodron - Drones an un-damage-bonused rail lachesis is going to be absolute crap. secondly, weapon types are not split like that. it's hybrids, missiles, and drones. for example you don't have amarr ships that are considered to be pulse or beam laser. you have amarr laser ships, drone ships, and missile ships. the roden missile "brain-bug" needs to be expanded upon. give them the option to fit more missiles. I would love to see a missile ares -- it might actually be worth flying if you could missile fit it. Then re train to fly Caldari... Edit: weapons were originally split like that in the earliest days of Eve, all that happened was the 'flavours' were ported to T2 ships, hence the likes of Creodron pushing the drone boundary, or Ishukone pushing railguns. If you want to dig further into the fluff, 'old school' Gallente doctrine revolved around long range bombardment (the drones came later), with more up to date Gallente doctrine involving blasters. So, no - Roden being a railgun 'flavour' makes perfect sense, glad to see CCP are putting things right.... I'm not really interested in all that. The main problem is that they r killing the solo lach. this is the solo lach fit. http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=20942352 the highs should be 3 heavy launchers and 2 425's (i refit cause i was chasing a frig gang.) and then 3 med drones 2 light. with recon 5 and heat the scram reaches 27 km. and it's basically impossible to avoid ur dmg. ecm is basically the only way. the lach is a shield ship and as such you really can't afford to swap it's shield tank for a web and a cap booster to make sure your dmg is applied. I don't care that it's more lore accurate because it's making it a worse ship. missiles you can't really avoid w/ drones you can't rally avoid w/ a scram you can't really avoid is like the perfect storm of awesomeness. why are we messing with this? also i can fly caldari. unfortunately they don't have any 27km scrams on their ships.
Ryan Paladin Filling The Void 14	Posted - 2015.01.12 08:44:26 - [2259] - Quote Jaysen Larrisen wrote: Takeshi Kumamato wrote: The Rook's missile velocity bonus doesn't apply to light missiles. Is that intentional? That would be a bit odd since Rise noted in this forum that was shaping the Rook for RLML usage. It should be included... Rise seemed keen on making the boat viable and enabling RLMLs. Without that range but their viability goes down tremendously as they can't reach out anywhere near your preferred engagement range which I consider 50km+. I can only hope this is an oversight or else my excitement for the Rook is now dampened significantly.
Delveling Glowing Goat Black Fence. 6	Posted - 2015.01.12 12:13:38 - [2260] - Quote Lim Hiaret wrote: Quote: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Did I miss something? Where Combat Recons temporarily "undetectable by directional scanners" sofar? And don't waste your time on this one, instead remove dscan. Its hardly used anyways, confusing, especially for newer players and also reasons. Realy! It's not worth your high paid DEV hours. Fix it later when you have proper time to revisit this one and such... Is that so.. Living in a WH I'm surprised the Scan button on my D-scan doesn't have a hole in it.

Cassius Invictus Thou shalt not kill A Nest of Vipers 119	Posted - 2015.01.12 12:44:06 - [2261] - Quote For all of you who are afraid of d-scan immunity: it's nothing that cannot be changed back :) For CCP: guys don't be afraid to make drastic changes and than cancel them if they prove to game-braking. Like HAC restistnce on Recons .
Apocalypse Solar Nova Solar Industries Inc. 8	Posted - 2015.01.12 14:51:29 - [2262] - Quote D-Scan immunity for combat recons sounds gimmicky, and totally unneeded as a ship bonus. I don't really understand the problem that CCP is trying to solve with this particular move. Are subs dropping so badly that you need to encourage everyone to have a pocket alt sitting on every plex entrance to get a visual on these ships? Seriously just drop this stupid gimmicky idea, and give them Covert Ops cloaks as well. It literally equates to the same thing. Having one ship class being immune to basic fundamental game mechanics which people have relied on over 10 years is ...
Soldarius Deadman W0nderland The 99 Percent 1018	Posted - 2015.01.12 17:46:52 - [2263] - Quote Takeshi Kumamato wrote: The Rook's missile velocity bonus doesn't apply to light missiles. Is that intentional? We asked for RLML bonuses on the Rook because they are an excellent point-defense system. He gave us a kinetic damage bonus to all missiles instead. That being said, light missile range is pretty decent with skills at 4s, and even without range bonuses, they will still hit any small tackle that can get within long point range, and rip through unbonused small and medium drones fast enough so as to not have to warp away. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Gabriel Karade Noir. Suddenly Spaceships. 216	Posted - 2015.01.12 23:55:27 - [2264] - Quote PastyWhiteDevil wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: PastyWhiteDevil wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: PastyWhiteDevil wrote: this is quite literally my favorite ship in game. please don't ruin it. lest we forget that roden favors MISSILES The Roden missiles brain-bug has been stupid since the day it appeared. It's only taken like 5 years to get it squashed - now (as per my ancient 'Gallente Mk II' thread) at least there is some sense restored to the Gallente line: Duvolle - Blasters Roden - Railguns Creodron - Drones an un-damage-bonused rail lachesis is going to be absolute crap. secondly, weapon types are not split like that. it's hybrids, missiles, and drones. for example you don't have amarr ships that are considered to be pulse or beam laser. you have amarr laser ships, drone ships, and missile ships. the roden missile "brain-bug" needs to be expanded upon. give them the option to fit more missiles. I would love to see a missile ares -- it might actually be worth flying if you could missile fit it. Then re train to fly Caldari... Edit: weapons were originally split like that in the earliest days of Eve, all that happened was the 'flavours' were ported to T2 ships, hence the likes of Creodron pushing the drone boundary, or Ishukone pushing railguns. If you want to dig further into the fluff, 'old school' Gallente doctrine revolved around long range bombardment (the drones came later), with more up to date Gallente doctrine involving blasters. So, no - Roden being a railgun 'flavour' makes perfect sense, glad to see CCP are putting things right.... I'm not really interested in all that. The main problem is that they r killing the solo lach. this is the solo lach fit. http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=20942352 the highs should be 3 heavy launchers and 2 425's (i refit cause i was chasing a frig gang.) and then 3 med drones 2 light. with recon 5 and heat the scram reaches 27 km. and it's basically impossible to avoid ur dmg. ecm is basically the only way. the lach is a shield ship and as such you really can't afford to swap it's shield tank for a web and a cap booster to make sure your dmg is applied. I don't care that it's more lore accurate because it's making it a worse ship. missiles you can't really avoid w/ drones you can't rally avoid w/ a scram you can't really avoid is like the perfect storm of awesomeness. why are we messing with this? also i can fly caldari. unfortunately they don't have any 27km scrams on their ships. So, are you saying the entire Roden lineup should revolve around missiles, because of one solo fit that ignores one bonus altogether and includes autocannons?.... Don't have an issue with people tinkering with solo fits, but then, that's not really the point of Recon's is it?... Edit: In any case, you're clearly having more fun with the Garmur, which is more suited to the task... War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Dun'Gal Myriad Contractors Inc. 186	Posted - 2015.01.13 00:08:30 - [2265] - Quote Apocalypse Solar wrote: Seriously just drop this stupid gimmicky idea, and give them Covert Ops cloaks instead. It literally equates to the same thing. If it "literally equates to the same thing" then I'm sure you must agree that Dscan immunity is just fine (much like Covert Ops cloaks are fine as is.) Can we move on now?
PastyWhiteDevil Mayhem and Ruin Point Blank Alliance 5	Posted - 2015.01.13 01:02:28 - [2266] - Quote an un-damage-bonused rail lachesis is going to be absolute crap. secondly, weapon types are not split like that. it's hybrids, missiles, and drones. for example you don't have amarr ships that are considered to be pulse or beam laser. you have amarr laser ships, drone ships, and missile ships. the roden missile "brain-bug" needs to be expanded upon. give them the option to fit more missiles. I would love to see a missile ares -- it might actually be worth flying if you could missile fit it. [/quote]Then re train to fly Caldari... Edit: weapons were originally split like that in the earliest days of Eve, all that happened was the 'flavours' were ported to T2 ships, hence the likes of Creodron pushing the drone boundary, or Ishukone pushing railguns. If you want to dig further into the fluff, 'old school' Gallente doctrine revolved around long range bombardment (the drones came later), with more up to date Gallente doctrine involving blasters. So, no - Roden being a railgun 'flavour' makes perfect sense, glad to see CCP are putting things right....[/quote] I'm not really interested in all that. The main problem is that they r killing the solo lach. this is the solo lach fit. http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=20942352 the highs should be 3 heavy launchers and 2 425's (i refit cause i was chasing a frig gang.) and then 3 med drones 2 light. with recon 5 and heat the scram reaches 27 km. and it's basically impossible to avoid ur dmg. ecm is basically the only way. the lach is a shield ship and as such you really can't afford to swap it's shield tank for a web and a cap booster to make sure your dmg is applied. I don't care that it's more lore accurate because it's making it a worse ship. missiles you can't really avoid w/ drones you can't rally avoid w/ a scram you can't really avoid is like the perfect storm of awesomeness. why are we messing with this? also i can fly caldari. unfortunately they don't have any 27km scrams on their ships.[/quote]So, are you saying the entire Roden lineup should revolve around missiles, because of one solo fit that ignores one bonus altogether and includes autocannons?.... Don't have an issue with people tinkering with solo fits, but then, that's not really the point of Recon's is it?... Edit: In any case, you're clearly having more fun with the Garmur, which is more suited to the task...[/quote] im not advocating they make roden revolve around missiles. originally i had said rather than force all guns give the option to fit all missiles as well. but, more than anything im saying dont take something thats great the way it is and make it terrible. the only reason i have 425's instead of rails is because of cap issues (and they are better in the event that im capped out). that lach can dual a curse and win if the curse stays or u get a lucky scram cycle off. garmur is not more suited to what u can do w/ my lach. u can jump into like 6 frigs, kill them all, and not worry u might get stuck there if some r kite. u can also do this --http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=20033503 that kill way on gate. the talos initially took gate fire and had to warp out and back. so, i basically had to take gate guns for a solid minute to minute 30 and i did fine. i was just over a third shield when it popped. we had no links or logi either. it's a wonderful ship as is and i dont feel like they should be messing with it in this manner. not only is it taking a hit in versatility, it's also taking a hit in dps. on a side note. if u swap one of ur hardeners for an eccm and the cn bcu for a low slot eccm, u can fight under falcon jams http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=20772245 http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=20772296 didn't get a single jam cycle off on me lol.
PastyWhiteDevil Mayhem and Ruin Point Blank Alliance 5	Posted - 2015.01.13 01:08:26 - [2267] - Quote also, d-scan immunity is some bs. you could completely alleviate all the worries of abuse in FW by making them only visible on d-scan from 0.5-1 au away. I don't understand why this kind of compromise is not being implemented. can anyone explain to me why it has not been set up this way? is it too hard to code?
CW Itovuo The Executioners Capital Punishment. 54	Posted - 2015.01.13 05:32:39 - [2268] - Quote PastyWhiteDevil wrote: also, d-scan immunity is some bs. you could completely alleviate all the worries of abuse in FW by making them only visible on d-scan from 0.5-1 au away. I don't understand why this kind of compromise is not being implemented. can anyone explain to me why it has not been set up this way? is it too hard to code? How bad do you want to know? What I'm about to show you is top secret, classified CCP work product: CCP Balancing Philosophy
lexa21 Raging Ducks Goonswarm Federation 10	Posted - 2015.01.13 11:32:01 - [2269] - Quote "With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure." NOOOOOOO! Ive been waiting for years unless Piligrim became something more than less than nothing cynoship! You RIPed this ship with your nosf rebalance. All the stuff you should do was transfering one low into med for and reducing mass for Curse and good range bonus for pilligrim! It was like a good bless for a piligrim when you wrote 40% bonus. Shame on you ccp. Stop killing the game i loved six years ago please. Also if you didnt notcie - arazu diruptor 60km (98 bonused), rapier web is up to 70, falcon 60, pilligrim - 24 yeah im certanly amazed! Dint you thought that bonuses for pilligrim and curse was counted for ages of nano, nosf and not rigged ships? Ages of 90% webs and useless scramblers! Now we have Curse that can be stopped by any cruser and piligrim that still close ranged but cant avoid death from the scram range.
Lordus Tran State War Academy Caldari State 1	Posted - 2015.01.13 13:26:35 - [2270] - Quote Rise, PLEASE give the recons more cargo space to be more solo viable. At least the force recons are supposed to work in enemy space with an extended range of operations, right? Cloaky, self sufficient scouts with some firepower and foxy e-war, right? They NEED more room for cap boosters to fulfil that role and to be viable solo ships. RECON SHIPS which have to run to their base for cap boosters all the time are just fail and pretty much all of them need cap boosters when solo. Sry for the caps, but that 315m2 rapier just makes me sad

Budda Kuha 24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2015.01.13 13:40:59 - [2271] - Quote Lordus Tran wrote: Rise, PLEASE give the recons more cargo space to be more solo viable. At least the force recons are supposed to work in enemy space with an extended range of operations, right? Cloaky, self sufficient scouts with some firepower and foxy e-war, right? They NEED more room for cap boosters to fulfil that role and to be viable solo ships. RECON SHIPS which have to run to their base for cap boosters all the time are just fail and pretty much all of them need cap boosters when solo. Sry for the caps, but that 315m2 rapier just makes me sad This! Also you might want to look into the pilgrim again. Since many things will kite and point at 28km + in terms of control it is a sitting duck compared to the other recons atm.
Thodir Ferrous Infernum 24	Posted - 2015.01.13 14:00:40 - [2272] - Quote Lordus Tran wrote: Rise, PLEASE give the recons more cargo space to be more solo viable. At least the force recons are supposed to work in enemy space with an extended range of operations, right? Cloaky, self sufficient scouts with some firepower and foxy e-war, right? They NEED more room for cap boosters to fulfil that role and to be viable solo ships. RECON SHIPS which have to run to their base for cap boosters all the time are just fail and pretty much all of them need cap boosters when solo. Sry for the caps, but that 315m2 rapier just makes me sad This is a nice idea, and I like it. I also suggest perhaps putting in a separate, larger cargo specifically for either cap booster OR liquid isotopes for the cynos and what-have-you. I know a few who still use them as cynos. Also, the Falcon needs higher jam bonuses BECAUSE OF FALCON! (that last bit wasn't meant to be taken seriously. kind of. sorta. it'd be nice though. falconplz)
Marie Orlenard Abduction Imminent 0	Posted - 2015.01.13 14:58:48 - [2273] - Quote This puts me at a huge advantage as a curse enthusiast living in wormhole space. D-scan immunity as a role bonus for me is basically covops cloak without the drawbacks (sacrificing a high slot, target locking and inbetween delays between "invisibility", decloaking by getting close to anything nearer than 2 klicks range) When I first read about this upcoming change, I thought this should have been a role-specific module utilizable only by combat recon ships. However, this does not make combat recon pilots absolute rulers of wh space. It just gives pacifist/explorer people in wormhole space a reason to actually make use of those combat scanner probes gathering dust in their cargoholds. Because there was simply none until now. Vadeim Rizen wrote: this is so hilariously OP. inb4 recon nerf. ratters now can't even just keep an eye on d-scan and warp out before someone comes in to tackle.... tbh all they needed was a hitpoint and cap buff. can't wait to sit in a medium plex with an insta-lock arty huginn and blap unsuspecting frigs. ... and if nothing else, "Warp to within x km".
Celestia Via Re-Awakened Technologies Inc The 11th Hour Alliance 0	Posted - 2015.01.13 16:25:01 - [2274] - Quote I wont go through all 100 pages of comments, I just wont, so I'm sure this has all been said before but here's my 2 cents: There are people trying to do combat plexes in lowsec or fight sleepers in Wspace. D-scan is the only thing that gives them a chance (especially the latter) against being brag material in someones killboard. Now, they stand no chance. They can easily be caught and killed even by the most casual aggressor with enough money to buy a Curse. And what about experienced aggressors with the means to field an invisible fleet of, say, ten Curses? What keeps them from sweeping wh after wh and killing everything thats not in a forcefield? This change feels unfair, it greatly enhances* ganger playstyle in expense of everyone else's. *"Enhances" as in "makes terribly easy and mindless" and not as in "giving depth and meaning". I am sure there are players that dont just look for easy kills, finding a challenging catch a more rewarding experience.
Aiyshimin Shiva Furnace 317	Posted - 2015.01.13 17:35:32 - [2275] - Quote Celestia Via wrote: I wont go through all 100 pages of comments, I just wont, so I'm sure this has all been said before but here's my 2 cents: There are people trying to do combat plexes in lowsec or fight sleepers in Wspace. D-scan is the only thing that gives them a chance (especially the latter) against being brag material in someones killboard. Now, they stand no chance. They can easily be caught and killed even by the most casual aggressor with enough money to buy a Curse. And what about experienced aggressors with the means to field an invisible fleet of, say, ten Curses? What keeps them from sweeping wh after wh and killing everything thats not in a forcefield? This change feels unfair, it greatly enhances* ganger playstyle in expense of everyone else's. "Enhances" as in "makes terribly easy and mindless" and not as in "giving depth and meaning". I am sure there are players that dont just look for easy kills, finding a challenging catch a more rewarding experience. I didn't read your post, I just won't, so I'm sure it's been all said before but here's my 2 euros: You don't stay at the warp-in point of any PVE site or ore belt or whatever in this game if you want to live. When a Suddenly Curse (why Curse, who gives a *** about Curses?), I mean Suddenly Lachesis lands in your room, you are 90km away from the warp in point, lol at him in local and warp out.
Thedaius Repercussus Goonswarm Federation 37	Posted - 2015.01.13 17:40:35 - [2276] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: ROOK Role Bonus: Cannot be detected by directional scanners Caldari Cruiser Bonuses: 7.5% bonus to kinetic missile damage (was 5% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile Launcher rate of fire) 10% reduction in ECM Target Jammer activation cost The in-game description still states 5% ROF. Haven't checked the bonuses; but is this not changing? Thanks.
Catherine Laartii Dominion Fleet Group Templis CALSF 461	Posted - 2015.01.13 19:18:37 - [2277] - Quote Just logged in today after patching, and I would like to say that the rook didn't get updated. Can anyone tell me if this is a bug, or a mistake of some kind? I seriously hope that update didn't get pulled at the last minute.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1078	Posted - 2015.01.13 19:20:38 - [2278] - Quote Catherine Laartii wrote: Just logged in today after patching, and I would like to say that the rook didn't get updated. Can anyone tell me if this is a bug, or a mistake of some kind? I seriously hope that update didn't get pulled at the last minute. the change has occured .. you can see the dscan immunity, and if you change the ammo you can see the dps difference, they just didnt change the wording on the missile ROF to a damage bonus Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
lachesis Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2015.01.13 20:18:01 - [2279] - Quote stop dissing my improvements mwahahaha ive been sitting on this alt account since 2003 ..I knew one day it would come in handy for something
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1971	Posted - 2015.01.13 22:32:23 - [2280] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. 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. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ Ok PG for the rook.. but what is the FIT in your mind for the Huggin? witht hatlimtied PG. And do nto tell me you expect a ship with 40 km webs to use medium AC. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment

Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 112	Posted - 2015.01.13 22:44:14 - [2281] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. 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. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ Ok PG for the rook.. but what is the FIT in your mind for the Huggin? witht hatlimtied PG. And do nto tell me you expect a ship with 40 km webs to use medium AC. CCP really just needs to reduce arty fitting. Every ship needs more grid to fit artillery and be viable. If they reduced fitting, then current huginn PG might work with a single PG mod.
Lug Muad'Dib Wise Humans Sword 34	Posted - 2015.01.13 23:11:43 - [2282] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: Kagura Nikon wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. 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. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ Ok PG for the rook.. but what is the FIT in your mind for the Huggin? witht hatlimtied PG. And do nto tell me you expect a ship with 40 km webs to use medium AC. CCP really just needs to reduce arty fitting. Every ship needs more grid to fit artillery and be viable. If they reduced fitting, then current huginn PG might work with a single PG mod. No, recon ship are primary support ship, not solo "lol dscan" pownmobile. D-Scan immunity is dumb.
Celestia Via Re-Awakened Technologies Inc The 11th Hour Alliance 2	Posted - 2015.01.14 00:02:48 - [2283] - Quote Aiyshimin wrote: You don't stay at the warp-in point of any PVE site or ore belt or whatever in this game if you want to live. When a Suddenly Curse (why Curse, who gives a **** about Curses?), I mean Suddenly Lachesis lands in your room, you are 90km away from the warp in point, lol at him in local and warp out. If by PvE site you mean belt rats that could be good advice. On sleeper sites however you kinda have to do it their way, or am I supposed to crack my whip and herd the sleepers to a location of my convenience like a true cowboy? Also, Lachesis is a terrible name for a ship who the hell flies such a terribly named ship? I am ashamed for them.
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 112	Posted - 2015.01.14 00:30:20 - [2284] - Quote Lug Muad'Dib wrote: Stitch Kaneland wrote: Kagura Nikon wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Okay, first major update just edited into the OP. Major changes: We're going to go with a lighter resist profile than originally described, setting all eight recons at the former combat recon resist profile. While we still like the goal of making them more fleet viable, their tank was one of their only stand-out weaknesses and we felt that removing it could make them oppressive at smaller scales. To compensate somewhat we've trimmed 5 more sig radius of each ship. With the Pilgrim we decided to split the difference between neut range and strength by wrapping both into one bonus. The amounts will be smaller than either of the singular bonuses but this should do a nice job of giving more engagement range flexibility while still allowing for plenty of cap pressure. 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. The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus. Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments. Have a great Christmas o/ Ok PG for the rook.. but what is the FIT in your mind for the Huggin? witht hatlimtied PG. And do nto tell me you expect a ship with 40 km webs to use medium AC. CCP really just needs to reduce arty fitting. Every ship needs more grid to fit artillery and be viable. If they reduced fitting, then current huginn PG might work with a single PG mod. No, recon ship are primary support ship, not solo "lol dscan" pownmobile. Then why name them COMBAT recons if you dont intend to apply some form of dps? Why choose a huginn over a rapier? Same slot layout, same resists, and rapier can use missiles, no fitting problem there. It will literally nuke any frig it catches with RLML and then vanish. Arty is what makes sense as the supporting weapon, since it synergizes with the web range. Youll probably get 280ish dps with a hi gank arty fit, with below 20k Ehp most likely. the rail lach wont have that issue, and its scram/damp bonus is far worse than the huginn. Itll have superb range, tracking and defense through EWAR. So it might be more favored to solo with.
Mario Putzo Welping and Dunking. 1087	Posted - 2015.01.14 03:34:36 - [2285] - Quote Any plans on increasing HM damage application so the Rook can actually be useful. We only get 2 rig slots on it, and stand lose 50% damage just through application because you made HMs ****.
Paynus Maiassus Capital Munitions 218	Posted - 2015.01.14 04:16:37 - [2286] - Quote Proteus is live and the Combat Recons are DSCAN immune. Has Eve been ruined?
Bienator II madmen of the skies 3109	Posted - 2015.01.14 04:28:50 - [2287] - Quote Paynus Maiassus wrote: Proteus is live and the Combat Recons are DSCAN immune. Has Eve been ruined? well, we just tried to fight two combat recons with two combat recons but we could not find each other for 20mins. eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 1869	Posted - 2015.01.14 05:07:06 - [2288] - Quote If only people had pushed CCP to give them a probe launcher fitting bonus so they could 'recon' without utterly ruining the rest of their fit...... Then you could have probed each other.
PastyWhiteDevil Mayhem and Ruin Point Blank Alliance 5	Posted - 2015.01.14 06:00:33 - [2289] - Quote I've come to the conclusion that we should make the arazu roden and make the lach creodron. I mean who doesn't want a lachtar?
TuCZnak Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 24	Posted - 2015.01.14 07:11:40 - [2290] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: If only people had pushed CCP to give them a probe launcher fitting bonus so they could 'recon' without utterly ruining the rest of their fit...... Then you could have probed each other. If only devs didn't stop reading this thread weeks ago without considering most of the feedback here...

Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 190	Posted - 2015.01.14 07:35:42 - [2291] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: If only people had pushed CCP to give them a probe launcher fitting bonus so they could 'recon' without utterly ruining the rest of their fit...... Then you could have probed each other. Sit without moving in d-scannles ship, to probe for a fight with ships that don't show on d-scan and also sit still. Probing without d-scan...sweet summer childs. You may find pve pilots that way or pilots that want to be find. Whole idea on d-scann immunity would be crap, wouldn't it? People want to fight and can't find themselfs Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
Syzygium Friends Of Harassment 91	Posted - 2015.01.14 10:38:22 - [2292] - Quote Paynus Maiassus wrote: Proteus is live and the Combat Recons are DSCAN immune. Has Eve been ruined? Nobody said EvE would be ruined as a whole. On the other hand, it took me like 5 minutes after login to farm the first guy who dared to warp to a plex in his cruiser. Not a lot he could do after landing on grid, being pointed and neuted. https://zkillboard.com/kill/43843780/ Spoke with other guys who tried the same and its hilarious what an easy meatgrinder CCP gave us pirates. Thanks a lot for buffing us gankers and showing the finger to every Beginner who cannot afford to bring a Probing-Alt to before making any step in Lowsec. Well done.
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 190	Posted - 2015.01.14 10:44:51 - [2293] - Quote Syzygium wrote: Spoke with other guys who tried the same and its hilarious what an easy meatgrinder CCP gave us pirates. Thanks a lot for buffing us gankers and showing the finger to every Beginner who cannot afford to bring a Probing-Alt to before making any step in Lowsec. Well done. As i thought and was easy predicted. Those ships will be ganking monsters. Game of alts incoming, just the oppossite what Rise wanted to do. Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
Apocalypse Solar Nova Solar Industries Inc. 8	Posted - 2015.01.14 11:13:46 - [2294] - Quote Jeremiah Saken wrote: As i thought and was easy predicted. Those ships will be ganking monsters. Game of alts incoming, just the oppossite what Rise wanted to do. I think anyone with half a brain knew how this d-scan immunity idea would turn out, clearly CCP did not think this one through fully. Speaking as a player who does not engage in much small gang or fleet activity ... the real problem with this is not many solo ships can run expanded probe launcher without severely gimping their fits. Some saw this as a threat to their playstyle (Solo Plexers in FW for example), but there were others who could see the ridiculous ganking potential of a d-scan invisible ship and were rubbing their hands with glee in anticipation. Most of this feedback has been largely ignored. In FW environments most combat is carried out by pilots in frigates / destroyers and occasionally cruiser hulls, so if you want to avoid a plex gank by a combat recon(s) you have to be extra cautious to get a visual when checking out a novice or small plex entrance, entering a medium is a huge risk unless you are suicidal, or already fit to counter combat recons. Also due to plex rewards mechanics people do not usually blob cap FW plexes, unless they specifically intend to do so. Anyway, what is clear is that this is a definite nerf to solo play styles, and does not really affect those who have a group centric play style. I am pretty sure the (un)intended side effect of this change will be more alt prober accounts, and CCP knew that was always a possibility and pushed ahead with the idea.
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 190	Posted - 2015.01.14 11:45:13 - [2295] - Quote Apocalypse Solar wrote: I am pretty sure the (un)intended side effect of this change will be more alt prober accounts, and CCP knew that was always a possibility and pushed ahead with the idea. It's quite the oppossite what Rise want to achieve. All those: ppl have too much intel, they don't jump into fight if they know to much etc. What we will have now? People will be training more alts to get even more intel. Frankly, if you need more than one ingame character to play this game effectively it's insane. There are no all in one ships in these game and expanded launcher eat high amount of ships fitting resources. Now we will possibly have ban for recons in FW. Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
Celestia Via Re-Awakened Technologies Inc The 11th Hour Alliance 2	Posted - 2015.01.14 12:10:43 - [2296] - Quote Alt probing account is a solution? Does it keep me safe while fighting c3 sites solo? It takes less time for an experienced assailant to find me and warp to the site than the actual scan time of the probe, let alone alt-tabbing while fighting sleepers. How often can I combat scan while dual boxing? And what about the actual me, who cant afford a second account? Oh, I know! lets just go back to highsec, dock and run missions! And since all solo wh and lowsec plex activity will drop to nothing soon, gankers will be running out of easy targets. Lets make combat recons immune to CONCORD as well, so they can gank in highsec missions! That will be fun! Sorry about all the irony above but it really gets to me, how stupidly unfair the dscan immunity is. Syzygium wrote: On the other hand, it took me like 5 minutes after login to farm the first guy who dared to warp to a plex in his cruiser. Not a lot he could do after landing on grid, being pointed and neuted. https://zkillboard.com/kill/43843780/ Spoke with other guys who tried the same and its hilarious what an easy meatgrinder CCP gave us pirates. Thanks a lot for buffing us gankers and showing the finger to every Beginner who cannot afford to bring a Probing-Alt to before making any step in Lowsec. Well done. Even the pirates themselves admit it, at least the ones who actually have a sense of fairness and arent in it just for the "wtfpwnzrz" laughs.
Kalihira Ultramar Independent Contracting 31	Posted - 2015.01.14 13:55:10 - [2297] - Quote Celestia Via wrote: Alt probing account is a solution? Does it keep me safe while fighting c3 sites solo? It takes less time for an experienced assailant to find me and warp to the site than the actual scan time of the probe, let alone alt-tabbing while fighting sleepers. How often can I combat scan while dual boxing? And what about the actual me, who cant afford a second account? Oh, I know! lets just go back to highsec, dock and run missions! And since all solo wh and lowsec plex activity will drop to nothing soon, gankers will be running out of easy targets. Lets make combat recons immune to CONCORD as well, so they can gank in highsec missions! That will be fun! Sorry about all the irony above but it really gets to me, how stupidly unfair the dscan immunity is. Syzygium wrote: On the other hand, it took me like 5 minutes after login to farm the first guy who dared to warp to a plex in his cruiser. Not a lot he could do after landing on grid, being pointed and neuted. https://zkillboard.com/kill/43843780/ Spoke with other guys who tried the same and its hilarious what an easy meatgrinder CCP gave us pirates. Thanks a lot for buffing us gankers and showing the finger to every Beginner who cannot afford to bring a Probing-Alt to before making any step in Lowsec. Well done. Even the pirates themselves admit it, at least the ones who actually have a sense of fairness and arent in it just for the "wtfpwnzrz" laughs. /wave, its an awesome tool now. That dscan immunity makes it op for that kind of work. I still feel that its a totally unnecessary buff to the combat recons. Hell, my shield fit lach is friggin cap stable with invul/em ward, mwd, long point and damp running, and last long enough with 4 250 shooting too. Haven't tested with longer range ammo yet, which uses less cap. But a (nearly) cap stable 43k ehp, 1800m/s, 300 dps ship is good enough allready. It really doesnt need the ganking gimmick...
Bienator II madmen of the skies 3123	Posted - 2015.01.14 19:42:14 - [2298] - Quote medium plexes http://i.imgur.com/eLQUuWo.png eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 191	Posted - 2015.01.14 20:06:04 - [2299] - Quote Bienator II wrote: medium plexes http://i.imgur.com/eLQUuWo.png we told you Rise. Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
Mario Putzo Welping and Dunking. 1091	Posted - 2015.01.14 20:23:20 - [2300] - Quote RIP in Peace FW.

Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 112	Posted - 2015.01.14 20:47:36 - [2301] - Quote Bienator II wrote: medium plexes http://i.imgur.com/eLQUuWo.png Note to self. Do not warp into medium plexes when Bienator is in local.
Catherine Laartii State Protectorate Caldari State 461	Posted - 2015.01.14 21:13:07 - [2302] - Quote Jeremiah Saken wrote: Bienator II wrote: medium plexes http://i.imgur.com/eLQUuWo.png we told you Rise. Solution: mob the **** out of them with a frig fleet and shower yourself and your buds with expensive killmails. Just be sure to send the right guys in beforehand to get point...
Syzygium Friends Of Harassment 93	Posted - 2015.01.14 21:37:17 - [2303] - Quote Catherine Laartii wrote: Jeremiah Saken wrote: Bienator II wrote: medium plexes http://i.imgur.com/eLQUuWo.png we told you Rise. Solution: mob the **** out of them with a frig fleet and shower yourself and your buds with expensive killmails. Just be sure to send the right guys in beforehand to get point... What exactly is your idea for warping into that plex that can tackle one of these Recons long enough for your support to arrive while being neuted, jammed, damped and webbed? A triple-ECCMed, triple-Sensorboosted, dualcapboosted, dual 1600mm plated, 100MN AB Cynabal maybe? Oh wait... there could be a medslot/powergid problem. On the other hand, what again was your solution for the SOLO (!!!!!!!!!!) beginner who wants to join LowSec FW in his first Frig/Destroyer/Cruiser? Ah wait...: "Don't do FW in Lowsec until you can come with a 10+ Gang!" Yeah thats a great idea, because the concept of "just bring the blob" is what everyone out there wants and needs for having a fun time in Blob Online...
Lug Muad'Dib Wise Humans Sword 34	Posted - 2015.01.14 22:22:41 - [2304] - Quote stupid as intended.. D-Scan immunity is dumb.
Lvzbel Ixtab Mayhem Devolved 48	Posted - 2015.01.15 00:18:34 - [2305] - Quote Lug Muad'Dib wrote: stupid as intended.. How is this a good mechanic? https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873567/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873581/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873587/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873620/ GG FW
Thorin Matarielle Shirak SkunkWorks 12	Posted - 2015.01.15 00:46:49 - [2306] - Quote Bienator II wrote: medium plexes http://i.imgur.com/eLQUuWo.png They were looking for gank. Ran away of our 2 cruisers. Then we follow them to the next system. They ran again. As much as i like Recons i have to say, i dont like this feature.
Dani Maulerant Order of the Valkyrie LOADED-DICE 15	Posted - 2015.01.15 00:46:52 - [2307] - Quote At this point, how about we just use this thread now to post the KM's or at least name characters known to pull this BS, killing solo/FW, and all us sensible people can then add them to a 'dont-warp-to--any-plex-if-in-local' listing.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 799	Posted - 2015.01.15 00:49:37 - [2308] - Quote Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: Lug Muad'Dib wrote: stupid as intended.. How is this a good mechanic? https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873567/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873581/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873587/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873620/ GG FW How is it any different if they had a Falcon? Or any other cloaked ship? The Greatest Ship Ever. Credit to Shahfluffers.
Dani Maulerant Order of the Valkyrie LOADED-DICE 15	Posted - 2015.01.15 00:54:42 - [2309] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: Lug Muad'Dib wrote: stupid as intended.. How is this a good mechanic? https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873567/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873581/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873587/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873620/ GG FW How is it any different if they had a Falcon? Or any other cloaked ship? Cloak hulls have a targeting delay. D-scan immune are inta-lock soon as you make visual contact with it.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 799	Posted - 2015.01.15 01:01:30 - [2310] - Quote Dani Maulerant wrote: FT Diomedes wrote: Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: Lug Muad'Dib wrote: stupid as intended.. How is this a good mechanic? https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873567/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873581/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873587/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873620/ GG FW How is it any different if they had a Falcon? Or any other cloaked ship? Cloak hulls have a targeting delay. D-scan immune are inta-lock soon as you make visual contact with it. He's using a Curse and a Dragoon. Presumably these poor souls are warping in thinking they will be fighting just a Dragoon. When they land, there is also a Curse there. Still not much different if he had any other cloaked ship present. As for the lack of decloaking delay - he could achieve the same effect by decloaking the cloaky as soon as you appear on close d-scan. By the time you land, the cloaking delay would be gone. The Greatest Ship Ever. Credit to Shahfluffers.

Thorin Matarielle Shirak SkunkWorks 12	Posted - 2015.01.15 02:06:31 - [2311] - Quote Dani Maulerant wrote: At this point, how about we just use this thread now to post the KM's or at least name characters known to pull this BS, killing solo/FW, and all us sensible people can then add them to a 'dont-warp-to--any-plex-if-in-local' listing. Pretty much everone does this... I cant mark half of lowsec becuse he did it once or twice. :) This is just lame and I dont say this because i died to them (not yet at least) but they are using a cruiser as bait and 4 recons sitting next to it. If you decide to go in and do a nice cruiser brawl...well...just dont do it. http://i.imgur.com/eLQUuWo.png ^^ Caracal in medium. RIP Brave cruiser pilots. And as I've said earlier, we wanted to go in with two cruisers and they ran away saying: thats too much we cant fight those. SlavaKing << this nerd and his friends cant recall their names. Guess this is his only way to ***** on some kills. As one of my friend have said this today: I can imagine the CCP game design meeting "what if we take the falcon, make it stronger and remove it from dscan" "LETS DO IT" These changes are killing solo pvp and im kinda disappointed to see that...
Dani Maulerant Order of the Valkyrie LOADED-DICE 15	Posted - 2015.01.15 03:57:47 - [2312] - Quote Thorin Matarielle wrote: Pretty much everone does this... I cant mark half of lowsec becuse he did it once or twice. :) This is just lame and I dont say this because i died to them (not yet at least) but they are using a cruiser as bait and 4 recons sitting next to it. If you decide to go in and do a nice cruiser brawl...well...just dont do it. http://i.imgur.com/eLQUuWo.png ^^ Caracal in medium. RIP Brave cruiser pilots. And as I've said earlier, we wanted to go in with two cruisers and they ran away saying: thats too much we cant fight those. SlavaKing << this nerd and his friends cant recall their names. Guess this is his only way to ***** on some kills. As one of my friend have said this today: I can imagine the CCP game design meeting "what if we take the falcon, make it stronger and remove it from dscan" "LETS DO IT" These changes are killing solo pvp and im kinda disappointed to see that... FW already has a major problem of people rarely bringing out anything larger than frigs/dessies on repeat, and this sort of thing just really hammers it more securely in that novices and smalls look more appealing with the added fact of these recons can't enter. Sad to see it be this way, and now staying this way a while longer is even sadder.
Lady Rift What Shall We Call It 159	Posted - 2015.01.15 05:25:27 - [2313] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: Dani Maulerant wrote: FT Diomedes wrote: Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: Lug Muad'Dib wrote: stupid as intended.. How is this a good mechanic? https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873567/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873581/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873587/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873620/ GG FW How is it any different if they had a Falcon? Or any other cloaked ship? Cloak hulls have a targeting delay. D-scan immune are inta-lock soon as you make visual contact with it. He's using a Curse and a Dragoon. Presumably these poor souls are warping in thinking they will be fighting just a Dragoon. When they land, there is also a Curse there. Still not much different if he had any other cloaked ship present. As for the lack of decloaking delay - he could achieve the same effect by decloaking the cloaky as soon as you appear on close d-scan. By the time you land, the cloaking delay would be gone. you cant cloak in a plex anymore. It use to be really fun to sit in plex and kill things with cloakies
Celestia Via Re-Awakened Technologies Inc The 11th Hour Alliance 4	Posted - 2015.01.15 07:57:57 - [2314] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: How is it any different if they had a Falcon? Or any other cloaked ship? Perhaps not very different in this case, I guess any cloaked one could take a cheap fitted t1 cruiser trying to solo a FW plex. VERY different when talking about Wspace. Major differences are: If you dscan like a maniac (as you should) you can always catch the cloakies when entering the system, at the split second they decloak-recloak at the entrance and avoid the fight alltogether. Cloaked recons do not have the same combat potential as their dscan immune cousins and are not a real match for any sleeper fitted T3 cruiser. Or maybe they are a match when skillfuly used but you wouldn't call it an easy kill. So, even when you risk taking on an anomaly outside of the entrances scan range you just took the risk of fighting the occasional Pilgrim who was brave enough to take you on. In most cases and with the help of sleeper site mechanics, I would manage to blow up these brave souls even before their reinforcements could land on site. Note of interest : The cloaked ones come first in an attempt to catch me unawares, if they all try to land on me at once d-scan will inform me of it. Well, NOT ANYMORE since we can now have whole fleets of dscan immune "bastards" (:P) coming and going as they please and ganking people silly. I said it before and I'll say it again (and again and again) : This stupidly unfair immunity does not even give people (targets) a chance to defend themselves. I am not the kind of person to nag in the forums about this and that, but this is an exception. It will kill solo plexing and smalltime WH activity, and unless thats what is intended please consider taking it back, we will all agree it was a bad dream of sorts.
Orange Faeces Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 43	Posted - 2015.01.15 08:40:25 - [2315] - Quote Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: ... https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873567/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873581/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873587/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873620/ I want you to post all your losses to Combat Recons in this thread. All of you. Lets get this thread up to 400 pages so we can have a one-stop shop for your tears. Post them all. O. Faeces
Ciba Lexlulu Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 53	Posted - 2015.01.15 08:51:14 - [2316] - Quote From the posted KMs, CCP can conclude that the rebalancing is a complete success! Prior to proteus you hardly see any Combat Recons. You see them much more often nowadays. Soon pilots will learn about it and there will be glorious combat recons loss mails. I know at least one of our corpmates already lost his combat recon. GJ CCP! Loves the Recon rebalance..
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 191	Posted - 2015.01.15 09:13:50 - [2317] - Quote Ciba Lexlulu wrote: GJ CCP! Loves the Recon rebalance.. They want to made them proper small gang/fleet vessels, what we got is gank mobile in FW, make sense... Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
Faren Shalni Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 123	Posted - 2015.01.15 10:18:59 - [2318] - Quote Dont worry it wont take long for CCP to not allow Recons into medium Plex's........ There for applying another stupid exception to cover up their poor decision. So Much Space
Gregor Parud 909	Posted - 2015.01.15 11:32:54 - [2319] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: He's using a Curse and a Dragoon. Presumably these poor souls are warping in thinking they will be fighting just a Dragoon. When they land, there is also a Curse there. Still not much different if he had any other cloaked ship present. As for the lack of decloaking delay - he could achieve the same effect by decloaking the cloaky as soon as you appear on close d-scan. By the time you land, the cloaking delay would be gone. On top of all that it's in Tama and they're both of the came corp and part of an alliance that effectively has shares in the local pod industry. So you'd have to be REALLY MORONICALLY STUPID to think that would be a good plan. Simply put it makes no difference; they'll get tackled by the dessy and then either a recon uncloaks and helps out or doesn't have to uncloak and helps out. Outcome: exactly the same.
Soldarius Kosher Nostra The 99 Percent 1028	Posted - 2015.01.15 15:45:09 - [2320] - Quote 36. Posting of kill reports outside of the Crime & Punishment forum channel is prohibited. ISDs are from what I've seen a little bit flexible and tolerant on this rule. But if you turn this thread into a kill report thread, I guarantee bad things will happen. This is not in any way an endorsement of the d-scan immunity of Combat Recons. I'm rather neutral on it tbh. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

Nyjil Lizaru Aideron Robotics 38	Posted - 2015.01.15 16:10:41 - [2321] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: Lug Muad'Dib wrote: stupid as intended.. How is this a good mechanic? https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873567/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873581/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873587/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873620/ GG FW How is it any different if they had a Falcon? Or any other cloaked ship? I keep seeing this question from characters who should be old enough to understand and I ask myself: troll or truly ignorant? If you don't understand how a cloak is different from d-scan immunity, you might want to spend a bit more time investigating, reading and thinking before wasting electrons with such willful badposting. If you're trolling, then carry on. Nyjil's corollary to Malcanis' Law: -á "Any attempt by CCP to smooth the learning curve of EVE Online will be carried out via the addition of extra factors and 'features' such that there is a net increase in complexity."
Lug Muad'Dib Wise Humans Sword 35	Posted - 2015.01.15 16:53:29 - [2322] - Quote Orange Faeces wrote: Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: ... https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873567/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873581/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873587/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873620/ I want you to post all your losses to Combat Recons in this thread. All of you. Lets get this thread up to 400 pages so we can have a one-stop shop for your tears. Post them all. O. Faeces Personnaly i use scouts so since update i just kill one curse, no loose. I ask my corpmates to never go in med plex already open that did'nt been scout. But it's so boring that for now i'm back playing to CK2.. will see later. Anyway FW 's local is full of "lol hookbill in med with 2 suspect in local", as intended people avoid fight, what a good mechanic.. D-Scan immunity is dumb.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 675	Posted - 2015.01.15 17:25:14 - [2323] - Quote Nyjil Lizaru wrote: FT Diomedes wrote: Lvzbel Ixtab wrote: Lug Muad'Dib wrote: stupid as intended.. How is this a good mechanic? https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873567/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873581/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873587/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/43873620/ GG FW How is it any different if they had a Falcon? Or any other cloaked ship? I keep seeing this question from characters who should be old enough to understand and I ask myself: troll or truly ignorant? If you don't understand how a cloak is different from d-scan immunity, you might want to spend a bit more time investigating, reading and thinking before wasting electrons with such willful badposting. If you're trolling, then carry on. If they weren't using the dragoon for the actual tackle, you might have a point. Decloaking delay is irrelevant if that ship is not the one holding tackle. This doesnt take a rocket scientist as the dragoon is doing way more damage (drones unassistable intially as they show on dscan). Also a dragoon would crap all over half those ships on its own anyway. And lastly, there's NOTHING stopping a half dozen recons warping into that plex and chewing out the other two ships. Door goes both ways.
X Gallentius Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop 2756	Posted - 2015.01.15 19:19:21 - [2324] - Quote Dani Maulerant wrote: Cloak hulls have a targeting delay. D-scan immune are inta-lock soon as you make visual contact with it. Targeting delay doesn't matter once your ship is tackled. The only REAL difference is that you have a chance of spotting a cloaky recon with your D-Scan when he gets decloaked (which is unlikely if they are already set up when you jump into system). If you don't have eyes directly on the combat recon you'll never know he's there even if you are in system.
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 113	Posted - 2015.01.15 19:31:50 - [2325] - Quote My solo perspective the past couple days in minny FW. Havent been ganked by a recon dunk squad yet. Ive seen them warping around, hitting gates and such. But havent warped into a plex with em waiting. If i suspect recon dunk squad i warp at 100 to larges, or, open a new medium. Right now if im missing people on dscan compared to local then i move on to the next system. For example, i saw 7 people in local, warped around dscanning like a mofo. No one on scan? Good chance its a recon squad. I was roaming in a bc and occasionally my newly buffed rapier (which is almost immune to this issue). i think there is going to be an adjustment phase for everyone , but its not "gg fw". You will have to rely on the available tools and common sense instead of dscan telling us everything. There are PLENTY of systems to cap, not all of them are occupied. If you cant plex a system or are unsure of whats waiting, move on. Its not like EVE doesnt have thousands of systems. FW is a group effort for actual progress. If you really want to have a semi level playing field, invite your militia buddies into a fleet. Otherwise pick your plexes carefully.
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 191	Posted - 2015.01.15 20:08:12 - [2326] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: was roaming in a bc and occasionally my newly buffed rapier (which is almost immune to this issue). i think there is going to be an adjustment phase for everyone , but its not "gg fw". You will have to rely on the available tools and common sense instead of dscan telling us everything. There are PLENTY of systems to cap, not all of them are occupied. If you cant plex a system or are unsure of whats waiting, move on. Its not like EVE doesnt have thousands of systems. but... but... what happend to: CCP Rise wrote: 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. Yes Rise, and after they lose some ships that way they will start to: CCP Rise wrote: The negative side for me is your other bullet point. Because people don't want to take unnecessary risk they will work very hard, sometimes doing something very boring or difficult, just to get at those last pieces of information. And they should. But we would want to avoid mechanics that obligate people to this kind of behavior too heavily without enough positive side to make the mechanic worthwhile. So instead of fighting ppl will bring alts or scanning ships, scan plexes and move to the systems without recons waiting to gain some killmails. afkalt wrote: And lastly, there's NOTHING stopping a half dozen recons warping into that plex and chewing out the other two ships. Door goes both ways. How fun, game build around one type of ships with ceratin trait. Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
Celestia Via Re-Awakened Technologies Inc The 11th Hour Alliance 5	Posted - 2015.01.15 21:04:07 - [2327] - Quote Jeremiah Saken wrote: How fun, game build around one type of ships with ceratin trait. My uncanny powers of foresight predict low and w space soon empty of everything but combat recons trying hopelessly to gang each other. At least the rest of us can have fun watching them endure this exercise in futility. Jokes aside, there will be people discouraged from their current activities since they now includes being ganked stupid without any means of defense. Some of them may find other, uninteresting ways to occupy themselves but some might lose the interest in the game alltogether. Example : Stitch Kaneland wrote: If i suspect recon dunk squad i warp at 100 to larges, or, open a new medium. Right now if im missing people on dscan compared to local then i move on to the next system. For example, i saw 7 people in local, warped around dscanning like a mofo. No one on scan? Good chance its a recon squad. I was roaming in a bc and occasionally my newly buffed rapier (which is almost immune to this issue). i think there is going to be an adjustment phase for everyone , but its not "gg fw". You will have to rely on the available tools and common sense instead of dscan telling us everything. There are PLENTY of systems to cap, not all of them are occupied. If you cant plex a system or are unsure of whats waiting, move on. Its not like EVE doesnt have thousands of systems. FW is a group effort for actual progress. If you really want to have a semi level playing field, invite your militia buddies into a fleet. Otherwise pick your plexes carefully. This I summarize as : Where I did plexes before, now it takes ALOT of work and time to do one, IF i am lucky enough to find a system with no one in local. I admire your persistence and optimism Stitch but most people would be discouraged and with every right to be. Also, lets not forget that not all plexes are in FW, every single solo activity in non highsec space is actually now hindered. Could I ignore everything and still warp my ship to a solo site and hope for the best? Sure but no thanks, I dont wish to be victimized SO easily. I like to give my killers good sport at least. So, if a small percentage of my predictions are correct, we have what? 1) Activities prone to stupid immunity ganking dropping to minimum 2) Some people being driven away from the game since their favorite activity is now a big no-no (for "some" use your own estimate, for me even one is too many) 3) Pirates losing interest in PvP and start training trade skills since the two above clauses will eventually make them run out of targets. ...and all this is good for Eve WHY?
Mario Putzo Welping and Dunking. 1098	Posted - 2015.01.15 21:04:10 - [2328] - Quote Should have just given the combat recons cloaking devices, dropped their EWAR, added another combat trait (imo 4% resists). Split them from Force Recons, make the unique in their ability to be Covert Ops combat cruisers (currently the Stratios and T3s are the only ships that fill this role). But killing FW is cool, I mean its not like LS is already dead as **** everywhere but FW space, may as well make LS dead everywhere.
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 113	Posted - 2015.01.15 21:27:59 - [2329] - Quote Celestia Via wrote: Jeremiah Saken wrote: How fun, game build around one type of ships with certain trait. My uncanny powers of foresight predict low and w space soon empty of everything but combat recons trying hopelessly to gang each other. At least the rest of us can have fun watching them endure this exercise in futility. Jokes aside, there will be people discouraged from their current activities since they now include being ganked stupid without any means of defense. Some of them may find other, uninteresting ways to occupy themselves but some might lose the interest in the game alltogether. Example : Stitch Kaneland wrote: If i suspect recon dunk squad i warp at 100 to larges, or, open a new medium. Right now if im missing people on dscan compared to local then i move on to the next system. For example, i saw 7 people in local, warped around dscanning like a mofo. No one on scan? Good chance its a recon squad. I was roaming in a bc and occasionally my newly buffed rapier (which is almost immune to this issue). i think there is going to be an adjustment phase for everyone , but its not "gg fw". You will have to rely on the available tools and common sense instead of dscan telling us everything. There are PLENTY of systems to cap, not all of them are occupied. If you cant plex a system or are unsure of whats waiting, move on. Its not like EVE doesnt have thousands of systems. FW is a group effort for actual progress. If you really want to have a semi level playing field, invite your militia buddies into a fleet. Otherwise pick your plexes carefully. This I summarize as : Where I did plexes before, now it takes ALOT of work and time to do one, IF i am lucky enough to find a system with no one in local. I admire your persistence and optimism Stitch but most people would be discouraged and with every right to be. Also, lets not forget that not all plexes are in FW, every single solo activity in non highsec space is actually now hindered. Could I ignore everything and still warp my ship to a solo site and hope for the best? Sure but no thanks, I dont wish to be victimized SO easily. I like to give my killers good sport at least. So, if a small percentage of my predictions are correct, we have what? 1) Activities prone to stupid immunity ganking dropping to minimum 2) Some people being driven away from the game since their favorite activity is now a big no-no (for "some" use your own estimate, for me even one is too many) 3) Pirates losing interest in PvP and start training trade skills since the two above clauses will eventually make them run out of targets. ...and all this is good for Eve WHY? Doesnt really take much time. Added an extra 5min at most. Im not looking for only empty systems. Just less populated ones. Again, not every system is going to have recon dunk squads. Thats a strawman argument. Maybe CCP is saying that dscan was too strong a tool. So they nerfed it. Im sure theres a plan in the future. Plus with new t3 dessies all having combat probe fitting reductions, that will make them a powerful solo boat to scan other sites or FW plexes before entering. Pretty sure 300ish dps is enough to kill the rats in a medium plex. Granted, this may not be ideal, but it is one option available to those more risk averse. Or, use KB, look up pilots name, see recon kills. Move along.
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 191	Posted - 2015.01.15 21:45:21 - [2330] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: Maybe CCP is saying that dscan was too strong a tool. Then change the way it works. Make it depend on ships class, role, range etc. Lazy "lets add d-scan immunity and see how it goes" solves what exactly? Wrong aproach from the beginning. I would jump into fight without knowing the recons are there for the first time. I won't do it again, because there might be recons...where do we have benefits from that situation? Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration

Sugar Smacks State War Academy Caldari State 15	Posted - 2015.01.15 21:54:50 - [2331] - Quote Now that you have your ship that can't be picked up on D-scan and can cloak making it virtually invisible. When will i get my ship that has the ability to not be picked up on local chat? Seems CCP hates wh ppl and blows nullsecers.
Thorin Matarielle Shirak SkunkWorks 13	Posted - 2015.01.15 22:21:18 - [2332] - Quote Celestia Via wrote: My uncanny powers of foresight predict low and w space soon empty of everything but combat recons trying hopelessly to gang each other Bienator II wrote: well, we just tried to fight two combat recons with two combat recons but we could not find each other for 20mins.
SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 278	Posted - 2015.01.15 22:58:57 - [2333] - Quote Nuthin stopping you from asking in local to just fight at the sun...
PastyWhiteDevil Mayhem and Ruin Point Blank Alliance 5	Posted - 2015.01.16 02:52:17 - [2334] - Quote Syzygium wrote: Catherine Laartii wrote: Jeremiah Saken wrote: Bienator II wrote: medium plexes http://i.imgur.com/eLQUuWo.png we told you Rise. Solution: mob the **** out of them with a frig fleet and shower yourself and your buds with expensive killmails. Just be sure to send the right guys in beforehand to get point... What exactly is your idea for warping into that plex that can tackle one of these Recons long enough for your support to arrive while being neuted, jammed, damped and webbed? A triple-ECCMed, triple-Sensorboosted, dualcapboosted, dual 1600mm plated, 100MN AB Cynabal maybe? Oh wait... there could be a medslot/powergid problem. On the other hand, what again was your solution for the SOLO (!!!!!!!!!!) beginner who wants to join LowSec FW in his first Frig/Destroyer/Cruiser? Ah wait...: "Don't do FW in Lowsec until you can come with a 10+ Gang!" Yeah thats a great idea, because the concept of "just bring the blob" is what everyone out there wants and needs for having a fun time in Blob Online... it would basically have to be a specially fitted lachesis with long point, no prop, cap booster (maybe 2) 1 eccm mod, and probably dual buffer tanked w/ transverse bulkheads, with information links.
Seraph IX Basarab Hades Effect 516	Posted - 2015.01.16 04:25:17 - [2335] - Quote All this change does is make the "other recons" actually viable and useful. Don't understand why people are running around like their hair's on fire. htfu Hades Effect
Lug Muad'Dib Wise Humans Sword 35	Posted - 2015.01.16 05:35:07 - [2336] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: Doesnt really take much time. Added an extra 5min at most. Im not [u]looking for only empty systems. Just less populated ones. Again, not every system is going to have recon dunk squads. Thats a strawman argument. .. Or, use KB, look up pilots name, see recon kills. Move along. And this is why it's a stupid mechanic. D-Scan immunity is dumb.
Tectonic Tetris Tribal Core Defiant Legacy 0	Posted - 2015.01.17 11:23:03 - [2337] - Quote Please roll back this change. I appreciate the intention of providing interesting new parameters, but this is just way off. The d-scan is an integral tool for anyone roaming in small gangs or solo. If we can no longer trust it, it will lead to more cautious behavior, slower gameplay and less fights. This is the last thing that low sec and fw needs, and will lead to further desolation. You could make a case saying that cloaks already makes d-scan results non trustworthy. This is true to some extent, but the targeting delay and the inferior combat performance of cov ops enabled ships makes it less of an issue. Also as soon as any cloaked ship has committed to a fight, it is no longer invisible. I will personally probably stop fighting solo or in small gangs in systems with overwhelmingly red locals. Previously you could dodge most scenarios semi effectively in a fast cruiser or smaller. Of course not risk free, but still worth it for the fun. With potential sensor-boosted, instalocking lachesises, rooks or huginns lurking at every beacon or celestial, the caution needed would tip the scale towards boredom. I'm sure that I am not the only one who will change their behavior in space like this, and I'm pretty sure it's not a good thing.
Wander Prian Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light 56	Posted - 2015.01.17 11:39:18 - [2338] - Quote The time it takes from showing up on your overview and you getting locked up is about the same, be it from warping in or from decloaking. You have exactly the same warning, except that combat recon might be too far away to point you right away, instead of decloaking by bumping you from alignment. Besides, you can find the combat recon with probes. You cannot find the cloaky ship unless he wants to be found.
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 192	Posted - 2015.01.17 13:37:18 - [2339] - Quote D-scan immunity will only extend the time you will jump into fight. Before you just hop into ship and jump into plex. Now you have to scan a plex and if there are recons, you have to decide if you want to take a risk and jump into instalocking ecming camp...rubbish. Wander Prian wrote: Besides, you can find the combat recon with probes. You cannot find the cloaky ship unless he wants to be found. Same applies to combat recons, you won't find them unless they want to be find. It seems like d-scan change made a mess with FW and have no real impact on fleets. Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears. I am the night. I'm Bantam. More exploration in exploration
Arla Sarain 245	Posted - 2015.01.17 14:59:01 - [2340] - Quote Tectonic Tetris wrote: The d-scan is an integral tool for anyone roaming in small gangs or solo. If we can no longer trust it, it will lead to more cautious behavior, slower gameplay and less fights. Pretty much it This phenomenon has been noticed through out countless games. The less information you provide the more cautious players become and tend to risk less. EVE is already an extremely proactive heavy game. I never understood the example CCP provided - if someone who wouldn't have had engaged an enemy because a recon was on D-SCAN decides to do so now because the DSCAN fools him into believing the recon is not present, NOW people will die once and never be bothered to engage in that activity again. Whatever global benefit this change had will be short term.

Celestia Via Re-Awakened Technologies Inc The 11th Hour Alliance 6	Posted - 2015.01.17 22:28:35 - [2341] - Quote Wander Prian wrote: The time it takes from showing up on your overview and you getting locked up is about the same, be it from warping in or from decloaking. You have exactly the same warning, except that combat recon might be too far away to point you right away, instead of decloaking by bumping you from alignment. Besides, you can find the combat recon with probes. You cannot find the cloaky ship unless he wants to be found. one point about that, There is always a chance to see the cloaked invader when he decloacs/cloacs when passing through gates or wormholes. You have to be working inside the gates scan range ofcourse but still, its a technique that kept me alive for years in w-space. So, cloaks do have a weakness, a point where they can be seen. Its not as same as you claim. If CCP wants to encourage PvP as they say, just increase the loot and salvage of players wrecks or something and find a way to reward a small fleet for being small. Simple things like that might lure more people to bravery. Don't make some kind of ship invisible and some other invincible, these moves help to the opposite.
Nano Sito 19	Posted - 2015.01.18 19:23:42 - [2342] - Quote Terrible idea. Can't think of a better way to discourage people in high sec from ever going to low and/or null sec systems. This change renders the most trusted and dependable tool in all EVE useless. CCP, get your act together! Don't screw the game for everyone because you just feel the need to fix a single type of ship!!
Ciba Lexlulu Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 54	Posted - 2015.01.19 05:59:10 - [2343] - Quote Nano Sito wrote: Terrible idea. Can't think of a better way to discourage people in high sec from ever going to low and/or null sec systems. This change renders the most trusted and dependable tool in all EVE useless. CCP, get your act together! Don't screw the game for everyone because you just feel the need to fix a single type of ship!! You must be one of those people who thinks once click jump from highsec to lowsec, they will be ganked and explode instantly. Have you fly around lowsec recently post Proteus? How many total kills do you think involve combat recon? I suspect not that many vs. Total kills in lowsec. For certain the usage has increased. But my suspicion is Rifter probably has more kills than the whole line of Combat Recon. I personally do not see that many of them. And I fly exclusively in lowsec FW space.
SmarncaV2 Snuff Box Snuffed Out 69	Posted - 2015.01.19 08:17:04 - [2344] - Quote So today I personally discovered that DSCAN immunity is terrible. Why? I was in warp with my solo Wolf with no scout towards my destination gate in nullsec. I didnt warp directly there so I wouldnt get caught in the bubble. I warped from nearby celestial to gate and landed on 0m on gate. Guess what was sitting on the bubble? Hugin and Rook Please guys. You dont have to make them scanable on 14 AU just make it so I can see it on close range scanner like 1 AU or something. Not everyone flies around with alts all the time or has probes fitted on everything (it's not possible) o7
Nano Sito 19	Posted - 2015.01.19 22:12:58 - [2345] - Quote Ciba Lexlulu wrote: Nano Sito wrote: Terrible idea. Can't think of a better way to discourage people in high sec from ever going to low and/or null sec systems. This change renders the most trusted and dependable tool in all EVE useless. CCP, get your act together! Don't screw the game for everyone because you just feel the need to fix a single type of ship!! You must be one of those people who thinks once click jump from highsec to lowsec, they will be ganked and explode instantly. Have you fly around lowsec recently post Proteus? How many total kills do you think involve combat recon? I suspect not that many vs. Total kills in lowsec. For certain the usage has increased. But my suspicion is Rifter probably has more kills than the whole line of Combat Recon. I personally do not see that many of them. And I fly exclusively in lowsec FW space. Recon ships were among the least used in Eve, not seeing lots of them only a few days after the uber buff doesn't prove anything. All I'm saying is that if you can't trust the D-Scan sometimes, you can't trust it period. This change is hostile to newbies. I'm sure you would like more people taking the plunge and roam around low sec, but this change makes it even more difficult for them to feel inclined to do so.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 257	Posted - 2015.01.19 22:17:00 - [2346] - Quote Today i found that bombers and cloaks are terrible. Why i dscaned and saw nothing. Warp from a planet and like 20 bombers decloaked and killed me. Oh and they had a rapier and a falcon. Seriously. Losing a ship does not make something terrible. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
SmarncaV2 Snuff Box Snuffed Out 69	Posted - 2015.01.20 00:32:13 - [2347] - Quote Delt0r Garsk wrote: Today i found that bombers and cloaks are terrible. Why i dscaned and saw nothing. Warp from a planet and like 20 bombers decloaked and killed me. Oh and they had a rapier and a falcon. Seriously. Losing a ship does not make something terrible. Before Rapier and Falcon manage to decloak I'll kill atleast one bomber or warp off. I must also add that I have abused recon dscan immunity in lowsec inside a medium complex and got quite a few kills. It was quite funny when people were warping in not knowing that there are a few sensor boosted recons inside. If you are abusing the same tactic you probably think that it's really amazing because you get many kills. It's not
Dun'Gal Myriad Contractors Inc. 187	Posted - 2015.01.20 01:32:48 - [2348] - Quote SmarncaV2 wrote: Before Rapier and Falcon manage to decloak I'll kill atleast one bomber or warp off. Oh please, you know damn well that this is not how that engagement goes. Falcon instalocks and permajams, bombers have low sp, and so it takes hours to kill you while you flail about like a cat on lsd trying to get away, before eventually dieing in a ball of anticlimactic fire... in Tama... because reasons. (couldn't help myself, aaaanyway) Yes it can be abused, but so can any number of other things that annoy the hell out of vast swaths of the player base. But it's things like these that eve is built around, and like it or not, keep people coming back. These things seem to be intended to **** you off, frustrate you and force you to pull your head out of your ass and not be just a lazy dscan monkey. More surprise buttsex was needed in Eve. Whether it's a fleet of bombers decloaking, smart bombing battleships being hotdropped on your out gate, or suddenly falcons permajamming you while you get shot to death by a rookie ship, or any other annoying way to die, it happens. More explosions are good, and if you or I explode more because of this change, then god bless - ccp has done there job. ALSO eventually the novelty will wear off and you will find that most people will get bored of plex camping, and the only ones left doing it will be the same ones who sit on lowsec gates smart bombing every pod, frig, etc that dares try and pass through the system, as it has always been. So instead of dieing to a smart bombing proteus on your low sec fw pipes, you die to a recon waiting in a plex, and honestly I don't even think the guys smartbombing will stop and switch to recons. Less killmails overall i suspect.
Evora Pirkibo Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 58	Posted - 2015.01.20 07:40:54 - [2349] - Quote There's a difference between a good conflict driver and a gimmick. On a long enough timeline, the life expectancy of everyone drops to zero.
Hamish McRothimay Norse Complex Inc 2	Posted - 2015.01.21 18:23:13 - [2350] - Quote Dun'Gal wrote: SmarncaV2 wrote: Before Rapier and Falcon manage to decloak I'll kill atleast one bomber or warp off. Oh please, you know damn well that this is not how that engagement goes. Falcon instalocks and permajams, bombers have low sp, and so it takes hours to kill you while you flail about like a cat on lsd trying to get away, before eventually dieing in a ball of anticlimactic fire... in Tama... because reasons. (couldn't help myself, aaaanyway) Yes it can be abused, but so can any number of other things that annoy the hell out of vast swaths of the player base. But it's things like these that eve is built around, and like it or not, keep people coming back. These things seem to be intended to **** you off, frustrate you and force you to pull your head out of your ass and not be just a lazy dscan monkey. More surprise buttsex was needed in Eve. Whether it's a fleet of bombers decloaking, smart bombing battleships being hotdropped on your out gate, or suddenly falcons permajamming you while you get shot to death by a rookie ship, or any other annoying way to die, it happens. More explosions are good, and if you or I explode more because of this change, then god bless - ccp has done there job. ALSO eventually the novelty will wear off and you will find that most people will get bored of plex camping, and the only ones left doing it will be the same ones who sit on lowsec gates smart bombing every pod, frig, etc that dares try and pass through the system, as it has always been. So instead of dieing to a smart bombing proteus on your low sec fw pipes, you die to a recon waiting in a plex, and honestly I don't even think the guys smartbombing will stop and switch to recons. Less killmails overall i suspect. Cats don't flail about in LSD they purr a lot and move slowly as if being stroked .... but no one is touching them Behavioral effects of LSD in the cat: proposal of an animal behavior model for studying the actions of hallucinogenic drugs. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19128 LOL

Dun'Gal Myriad Contractors Inc. 188	Posted - 2015.01.22 07:59:53 - [2351] - Quote Hamish McRothimay wrote: Cats don't flail about in LSD they purr a lot and move slowly as if being stroked .... but no one is touching them Behavioral effects of LSD in the cat: proposal of an animal behavior model for studying the actions of hallucinogenic drugs. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19128 LOL clearly this is about the accuracy of cats on lsd and not everything else i said, but if it interests you search cat on lsd on youtube and you can see what i meant.
ISD Ezwal ISD Community Communications Liaisons 3684	Posted - 2015.01.22 08:43:27 - [2352] - Quote I have removed a rule breaking post. The Rules: 27. Off-topic posting is prohibited. Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued to the off-topic poster. ISD Ezwal Vice Admiral Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department
W0lf Crendraven Doctrine. FEARLESS. 262	Posted - 2015.01.28 15:33:46 - [2353] - Quote Terrible change, combat recons were fine as their were, high skill capped flimsy support ship only truely good in the hand of a proper pilot in a nano gang. Now they are all falcons.
Lugh Crow-Slave 644	Posted - 2015.02.01 12:29:07 - [2354] - Quote games changed change with it fit probes use that mobile depo or get a friend don't go into a med plex w/o a scout or scanning or tbh i feel combat recons should be removed from med plexes overall but the d-scan immunity i have found to be pretty good in WH i have gotten fights when i thought i was just getting a venture kill Fuel block colors
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 842	Posted - 2015.02.03 19:23:55 - [2355] - Quote Wh ganks are now layups as predicted. We've swapped from tactical bubble BM and other shinanigans to find guy, hop in recons, kill guy. It's not exactly fun, but it is a lot faster. If you like ganking in easy mode - get a sensor boosted lachesis.
Ranger 1 Ranger Corp Vae. Victis. 6149	Posted - 2015.02.04 01:16:24 - [2356] - Quote I'm really not seeing where a cloaked recon wasn't capable of doing the exact same thing before. View the latest EVE Online developments and War Thunder game play by visiting Ranger 1 Presents.
Celestia Via Re-Awakened Technologies Inc The 11th Hour Alliance 13	Posted - 2015.02.05 21:47:18 - [2357] - Quote Ranger 1 wrote: I'm really not seeing where a cloaked recon wasn't capable of doing the exact same thing before. aww, this again? Sorry, not your fault but its been said before. Theres alot of factors like targeting delay, uncloaking at gates and more that make the cloaked recon a balanced threat and not the ultimate silly-mode ganking tool that the combat recons have become. this change is for the worst, all the negative effects we predicted are now a reality and it has been getting negative publicity even by some that use it to their advantage. Enough said. I am waiting for the dev team to either supply data on how this change helped, or just do the honorable thing, admit the mistake and reconsider taking it back alltogether.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 1949	Posted - 2015.02.05 23:05:23 - [2358] - Quote Celestia Via wrote: Ranger 1 wrote: I'm really not seeing where a cloaked recon wasn't capable of doing the exact same thing before. aww, this again? Sorry, not your fault but its been said before. Theres alot of factors like targeting delay, uncloaking at gates and more that make the cloaked recon a balanced threat and not the ultimate silly-mode ganking tool that the combat recons have become. this change is for the worst, all the negative effects we predicted are now a reality and it has been getting negative publicity even by some that use it to their advantage. Enough said. I am waiting for the dev team to either supply data on how this change helped, or just do the honorable thing, admit the mistake and reconsider taking it back alltogether. And what, combat recons don't appear until they're out of warp? E: also, if you're waiting on the dev team to supply data, how can you say your claims all came true?
Celestia Via Re-Awakened Technologies Inc The 11th Hour Alliance 14	Posted - 2015.02.05 23:14:47 - [2359] - Quote Rowells wrote: And what, combat recons don't appear until they're out of warp? E: also, if you're waiting on the dev team to supply data, how can you say your claims all came true? 1: uh, what? they dont appear at all on dscan. Its not just them warping on you, its also them waiting at warpin point inside plexes and getting easy mindless kills. 2: from personal observation, talking with people, reading these forums. Real game statistic data can prove me wrong so lets see it. Actual proof that this actually helped in more ways than it harmed. Are you making me state the obvious just for the sake of argument? Or you have something to discuss?
Ranger 1 Ranger Corp Vae. Victis. 6157	Posted - 2015.02.06 00:36:58 - [2360] - Quote Celestia Via wrote: Rowells wrote: And what, combat recons don't appear until they're out of warp? E: also, if you're waiting on the dev team to supply data, how can you say your claims all came true? 1: uh, what? they dont appear at all on dscan. Its not just them warping on you, its also them waiting at warpin point inside plexes and getting easy mindless kills. 2: from personal observation, talking with people, reading these forums. Real game statistic data can prove me wrong so lets see it. Actual proof that this actually helped in more ways than it harmed. Are you making me state the obvious just for the sake of argument? Or you have something to discuss? Celestia, you are obviously passionate about this, but you're not really thinking about the realities of how a Force Recon can be used. 1: A Combat recon warps in, is visible for several seconds as it comes out of warp, and then can commence to maneuver and target from a dead stop. When warping in a Combat Recon must also take in the situation and react appropriately within a few seconds. A Force Recon can warp in and maneuver to their desired position and maintain their desired speed while doing so, decloak, and target in pretty close to the same amount of time from when they become visible as it takes for other ships to come out of warp and do the same. They are also at liberty to make part of their maneuvers include closing for a bump at speed to ensure that their target cannot easily align and jump out. When warping in a Force Recon has all the time in the world to assess the situation, place himself appropriately, call in back-up, leave, etc, before he decloaks and commits to the attack. These are all powerful advantages a cloaking Force Recon has over a Combat Recon when warping in on a target, advantages that can easily be leveraged with practice and experience. As to your assertion that Combat Recons are dangerous because they can lie in wait inside a plex, this is true. The only situation that I can think of where a person cannot cloak and a target will drop out of warp in a set place does indeed play to a Combat Recons advantage more than a Force Recon. You have to admit that it's a pretty big leap to take from "we need a small tweak in this one small area of the game" to "the entire class is now unbalanced and this special ability is far too powerful". That's a pretty simple tweak ask for, to disallow them from Faction Warfare plexes... ship restrictions are common in that mechanic as it is. 2: I shouldn't need to point this out, but confused people repeating the same misinformation doesn't make it any more valid... and a single minor flaw does not necessitate sweeping revision. CCP's design philosophy has always been to observe closely what the player base does with a changed game mechanic and make adjustments appropriately. In fact the desire to enact needed tweaks in a more timely manner was one of the driving forces behind the shorter development cycle they are now following. So if you wish to campaign for Combat Recons to be restricted from Faction Warfare Plexes, I'd be pleased to raise my voice with yours. However if you're attempting to portray the "invisibility to D-scan" ability as something which is vastly overpowered, especially in comparison to their cloak capable cousins, I'm afraid I'm going to have to firmly disagree. View the latest EVE Online developments and War Thunder game play by visiting Ranger 1 Presents.

Celestia Via Re-Awakened Technologies Inc The 11th Hour Alliance 14	Posted - 2015.02.06 05:26:43 - [2361] - Quote Ranger1, i wrote a long and eloquent response to your post but it got lost. Long story short, my counterarguments are these: I agree that cloaked versions can hunt effectively but are alot weaker in combat than the recently overhauled CRs. Also, it takes skill and effort to accomplish, its a hunt and not a silly warpin camp gimmick. another difference is that cloakies do need to decloak at somepoints, gates, acc gates, wormholes, making them visible to dscan and warning the vigilant of danger, while with CRs you never see them coming until they warp in on you (or you on them). This is a major difference, this split second one can see the cloaker in dscan has kept me safe for two years in wspace. right now, most FW plexes are being camped by CRs, making our predictions a sad reality. If the immunity sticks, banning the CRs from FW plexes may be necessary, but I find it illogical to give a strong buff to a ship and then start banning it from things because the buff you gave was too strong, dont you agree? Seems to me you would rather need to reevaluate the buff. i dont think its a solution to see how people abuse the immunity and ban them from doing so. I wish to see the immunity gone because it promotes stale gameplay (silly camping) and also because I really fail to see the slightest advantage in it. Even some people that use it (properly, not camping) criticize it, since it takes away the thrill of the hunt. all its disadvantages have been analyzed thoroughly and we agree on at least one, the plex camping thing. I have yet to hear of any advantages. You seem like a proper conversationist, if you can see any positive side to the immunity, please help me see it as well, at least until we have the dev data to prove one or the other. There's no place like space
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 847	Posted - 2015.02.06 14:37:38 - [2362] - Quote You can argue all the this and thats you want to. I'm flat out telling you - it's been great in wh space w/ no local and no d-scan. In the past we would have to do some planning, maybe make a bm between a POS and a site to warp a dictor to or some other up front work. Now we find them, hop in and kill them. We do it every night. It is easier. The sad part is, they are weaker than other ships we've used in the past. That results in us dog piling a larger number of recons on a given gank. We do this to keep the dps high. We've come close to losing the odd recon to sleepers. To compensate, we try to bring more to damage tank the whole situation. We're posting some extra lopsided kills because of this. Our new term for ganking someone w/ recons is 'snack'. Usage: 'we grabbed a quick proteus snack in C3a' Term is copyrighted by Rahmiro, so send isk to him if you use it.
Celestia Via Re-Awakened Technologies Inc The 11th Hour Alliance 17	Posted - 2015.02.06 15:50:16 - [2363] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: You can argue all the this and thats you want to. I'm flat out telling you - it's been great in wh space w/ no local and no d-scan. In the past we would have to do some planning, maybe make a bm between a POS and a site to warp a dictor to or some other up front work. Now we find them, hop in and kill them. We do it every night. It is easier. The sad part is, they are weaker than other ships we've used in the past. That results in us dog piling a larger number of recons on a given gank. We do this to keep the dps high. We've come close to losing the odd recon to sleepers. To compensate, we try to bring more to damage tank the whole situation. We're posting some extra lopsided kills because of this. Our new term for ganking someone w/ recons is 'snack'. Usage: 'we grabbed a quick proteus snack in C3a' Term is copyrighted by Rahmiro, so send isk to him if you use it. I predicted this as well, my posts on it are a couple of pages back. You seem honest enough, please tell us, what effect do you think this will have on wh activity? Here's my take on it : If as you say kills are way easier now, logically more people will turn to employing your tactic to fill their killboards. Does anyone here believe that wormholers will just be ok with losing 1bil ships every other night, without any form of defense possible? I, for one, think not. I think they will go inactive, evacuate or just stop paying their sub. Following the ruin of FWplex comes the ruin of all w-space pve, and therefore w-space pvp as well. Solutions? ban CR's from w-space as well as from FW plexes? We can all see where this is going, the way i see it, is the immunity ruining one activity after the other and getting banned from them accordingly. You will excuse me, but that is pure bollocks. Still looking to hear positive feedback about the immunity. And I mean positive for the game as a whole, not "Its better now cause i get easy kills", spare me that, i beg you. There's no place like space
Celestia Via Re-Awakened Technologies Inc The 11th Hour Alliance 17	Posted - 2015.02.06 16:02:03 - [2364] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: You can argue all the this and thats you want to. I'm flat out telling you - it's been great in wh space w/ no local and no d-scan. In the past we would have to do some planning, maybe make a bm between a POS and a site to warp a dictor to or some other up front work. Now we find them, hop in and kill them. We do it every night. It is easier. The sad part is, they are weaker than other ships we've used in the past. That results in us dog piling a larger number of recons on a given gank. We do this to keep the dps high. We've come close to losing the odd recon to sleepers. To compensate, we try to bring more to damage tank the whole situation. We're posting some extra lopsided kills because of this. Our new term for ganking someone w/ recons is 'snack'. Usage: 'we grabbed a quick proteus snack in C3a' Term is copyrighted by Rahmiro, so send isk to him if you use it. I predicted this as well, my posts on it are a couple of pages back. You seem honest enough, please tell us, what effect do you think this will have on wh activity? Here's my take on it : If as you say kills are way easier now, logically more people will turn to employing your tactic to fill their killboards. Does anyone here believe that wormholers will just be ok with losing 1bil ships every other night, without any form of defense possible? I, for one, think not. I think they will go inactive, evacuate or just stop paying their sub. Following the ruin of FWplex comes the ruin of all w-space pve, and therefore w-space pvp as well. Solutions? ban CR's from w-space as well as from FW plexes? We can all see where this is going, the way i see it, is the immunity ruining one activity after the other and getting banned from them accordingly. You will excuse me, but that is pure bollocks. Still looking to hear positive feedback about the immunity. And I mean positive for the game as a whole, not "Its better now cause i get easy kills", spare me that, i beg you. There's no place like space
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 279	Posted - 2015.02.06 17:19:21 - [2365] - Quote Celestia Via wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: You can argue all the this and thats you want to. I'm flat out telling you - it's been great in wh space w/ no local and no d-scan. In the past we would have to do some planning, maybe make a bm between a POS and a site to warp a dictor to or some other up front work. Now we find them, hop in and kill them. We do it every night. It is easier. The sad part is, they are weaker than other ships we've used in the past. That results in us dog piling a larger number of recons on a given gank. We do this to keep the dps high. We've come close to losing the odd recon to sleepers. To compensate, we try to bring more to damage tank the whole situation. We're posting some extra lopsided kills because of this. Our new term for ganking someone w/ recons is 'snack'. Usage: 'we grabbed a quick proteus snack in C3a' Term is copyrighted by Rahmiro, so send isk to him if you use it. I predicted this as well, my posts on it are a couple of pages back. You seem honest enough, please tell us, what effect do you think this will have on wh activity? Here's my take on it : If as you say kills are way easier now, logically more people will turn to employing your tactic to fill their killboards. Does anyone here believe that wormholers will just be ok with losing 1bil ships every other night, without any form of defense possible? I, for one, think not. I think they will go inactive, evacuate or just stop paying their sub. Following the ruin of FWplex comes the ruin of all w-space pve, and therefore w-space pvp as well. Solutions? ban CR's from w-space as well as from FW plexes? We can all see where this is going, the way i see it, is the immunity ruining one activity after the other and getting banned from them accordingly. You will excuse me, but that is pure bollocks. Still looking to hear positive feedback about the immunity. And I mean positive for the game as a whole, not "Its better now cause i get easy kills", spare me that, i beg you. You don't know wormholers. We aren't going anywhere and well stuff not showing on DScan? what else is new? Seriously DScan imune makes the lest difference to wormhole corps, if they are not dirty farmers that is. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Celestia Via Re-Awakened Technologies Inc The 11th Hour Alliance 17	Posted - 2015.02.06 18:07:17 - [2366] - Quote Delt0r Garsk wrote: You don't know wormholers. We aren't going anywhere and well stuff not showing on DScan? what else is new? Seriously DScan imune makes the lest difference to wormhole corps, if they are not dirty farmers that is. I dont know all of them, but i used to be one, for a couple of years. Perhaps you're talking about c4 or above where the fleet needed for PvE also provides a certain level of safety. Agreed on that. For c3 or below though, we are talking solo/duo PvE, very susceptible to dscan-less gankfleets. If for one person to PvE in a c2 for example, another 5 people are needed to guard him, well it defeats the whole point of small-scale operations, which some poeple are fond of. And really? dscan makes no difference?? I dont know where you base that remark, from personal experience its the opposite, dscan has saved me more times than i can remember, without it my isk balance would be negative tens of billions. Dont get me wrong, I dont wish for all this to happen inorder to say "I told you so". I wish I am wrong, but I have a Cassandra-type gift, the ability to accurately foresee disasters. And since I dont see any positive feedback yet, perhaps ill start a new thread about it. There's no place like space
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode ISD Community Communications Liaisons 4230	Posted - 2015.02.06 19:44:13 - [2367] - Quote Removed a double post. ISD Dorrim Barstorlode Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department
Celestia Via Re-Awakened Technologies Inc The 11th Hour Alliance 17	Posted - 2015.02.06 21:11:16 - [2368] - Quote Aaand my thread was locked as redundant, was told to continue the discussion here. However, a few people did manage to post constructively, I will try to carry their words here. Abrazzar wrote: I believe the d-scan immunity on Recons is good because it further breaks a method of intel gathering and thus allows investigation of the effect unreliable intel gathering has on the game and play styles. This information can then be used in a future development of new or altered intel gathering mechanics. tl;dr You have to cut the body open for an autopsy. Thank you! You make a very good point. Some might argue however that tests are what test servers are for, but I think that we could not see the full effects until the change goes live for a while. Nathan Galbadia wrote: The definition of Reconnaissance is military observation of a region to locate an enemy or ascertain strategic features. This is normally done by hidden and undiscovered units. A recon ship should excel at that, or it wouldn't be specialized for recon. This is good as it allows intel gathering from all sides, which could then lead to more moves made against one another. Conflict and desire for increased power are the driving factors of EVE. Alliances moving against one another create some of the best content in EVE. Gathering intel on one another will generate conflict, either from an alliance finding a vulnerable target or from the recon being discovered. IMO this can only be a good thing. If someone AFK cloaks in your system, and you all dock up until he leaves, you are missing out on some fun times. This is when you should be planning to counter whatever action the recon ship is there for. The ability to influence actions from other players it what the D-Scan immunity is going to enable. When you see someone enter local and can't scan the ship, docking miners and undocking PVP ships should be your action. Hibernator X wrote: It strengthens an entire playstyle: The fleet prober I believe both posters above comment on the new mechanic's value for large fleet/alliance. A truly valid point. Thank you both. Keep them coming people. Positive sides to the immunity. There's no place like space
Vyl Vit 1041	Posted - 2015.02.07 06:34:26 - [2369] - Quote Celestia Via wrote: Aaand my thread was locked as redundant, was told to continue the discussion here. However, a few people did manage to post constructively, I will try to carry their words here. Abrazzar wrote: I believe the d-scan immunity on Recons is good because it further breaks a method of intel gathering and thus allows investigation of the effect unreliable intel gathering has on the game and play styles. This information can then be used in a future development of new or altered intel gathering mechanics. tl;dr You have to cut the body open for an autopsy. Thank you! You make a very good point. Some might argue however that tests are what test servers are for, but I think that we could not see the full effects until the change goes live for a while. Nathan Galbadia wrote: The definition of Reconnaissance is military observation of a region to locate an enemy or ascertain strategic features. This is normally done by hidden and undiscovered units. A recon ship should excel at that, or it wouldn't be specialized for recon. This is good as it allows intel gathering from all sides, which could then lead to more moves made against one another. Conflict and desire for increased power are the driving factors of EVE. Alliances moving against one another create some of the best content in EVE. Gathering intel on one another will generate conflict, either from an alliance finding a vulnerable target or from the recon being discovered. IMO this can only be a good thing. If someone AFK cloaks in your system, and you all dock up until he leaves, you are missing out on some fun times. This is when you should be planning to counter whatever action the recon ship is there for. The ability to influence actions from other players it what the D-Scan immunity is going to enable. When you see someone enter local and can't scan the ship, docking miners and undocking PVP ships should be your action. Hibernator X wrote: It strengthens an entire playstyle: The fleet prober I believe both posters above comment on the new mechanic's value for large fleet/alliance. A truly valid point. Thank you both. Keep them coming people. Positive sides to the immunity. Enamored with our own words, are we? Anyone with any sense has already left town.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 279	Posted - 2015.02.07 08:50:44 - [2370] - Quote Celestia Via wrote: Delt0r Garsk wrote: You don't know wormholers. We aren't going anywhere and well stuff not showing on DScan? what else is new? Seriously DScan imune makes the lest difference to wormhole corps, if they are not dirty farmers that is. I dont know all of them, but i used to be one, for a couple of years. Perhaps you're talking about c4 or above where the fleet needed for PvE also provides a certain level of safety. Agreed on that. For c3 or below though, we are talking solo/duo PvE, very susceptible to dscan-less gankfleets. If for one person to PvE in a c2 for example, another 5 people are needed to guard him, well it defeats the whole point of small-scale operations, which some people are fond of. And really? dscan makes no difference?? I dont know where you base that remark, from personal experience its the opposite, dscan has saved me more times than i can remember, without it my isk balance would be negative tens of billions. Dont get me wrong, I dont wish for all this to happen in order to say "I told you so". I wish I am wrong, but I have a Cassandra-type gift, the ability to accurately foresee disasters. And since I dont see any positive feedback yet, perhaps ill start a new thread about it. Well we are in a C5 now, but we were in a c2-c4. We got dropped all the time even in the c2. By cloaky t3s and bombers. DScan is about as useful as staring at the sun. Right now wtih the warp speed changes, sabers can catch you faster than you can dscan+hit warp in anything that can run even c2s. We have rooks and hugins yet we still find our selves almost 100% using rapiers and falcons mostly because cloaks are better than dscan immunity. It really has changed nothing for us. And damit what is wrong with not having perfect safety. Get over it. Get use to it. We solo in c3s all the time. We mostly make more than we lose. And really of all places that are affected by this. It has least impact in WHs where the only things that popup on dscan are after your tackled, where a bomber probably works better anyway. The rest has local. Just look at the killboards, not much combat recons on there at all. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.

Celestia Via Re-Awakened Technologies Inc The 11th Hour Alliance 17	Posted - 2015.02.07 08:54:36 - [2371] - Quote Vyl Vit wrote: Enamored with our own words, are we? so many bytes on your post, no actual value. I have extensively babbled about the negatives of the immunity so all I am trying to do is find positives, so we can all have a better picture, weigh pros/cons and have a better picture of this. If you think it pointless, feel free to not participate. There's no place like space
Celestia Via Re-Awakened Technologies Inc The 11th Hour Alliance 18	Posted - 2015.02.07 09:08:31 - [2372] - Quote Delt0r Garsk wrote: And damit what is wrong with not having perfect safety. Get over it. Get use to it. Do not misunderstand, this is not about perfect safety. TBH I am totally against perfect safety. This is about my concern that even the minimal safety dscan provided going to waste, leading people away from smallscale wspace ops. Although I dont agree with you 100% on dscan being completely useless, I trust your experience. I do hope you are right, and that this immunity wont play the detrimental role I foresaw. EDIT: More experience-based input from people involved in FW and Wormholes is invaluable, please spare 5 minutes and tell us your own take on this people. Thanks. There's no place like space
Dun'Gal Myriad Contractors Inc. 195	Posted - 2015.02.07 11:33:39 - [2373] - Quote Continuing from your previous thread..... Dscan immunity on recons is good..... because ccp said so /thread
infra52x University of Caille Gallente Federation 31	Posted - 2015.02.09 06:33:56 - [2374] - Quote Delt0r Garsk wrote: Celestia Via wrote: Delt0r Garsk wrote: You don't know wormholers. We aren't going anywhere and well stuff not showing on DScan? what else is new? Seriously DScan imune makes the lest difference to wormhole corps, if they are not dirty farmers that is. I dont know all of them, but i used to be one, for a couple of years. Perhaps you're talking about c4 or above where the fleet needed for PvE also provides a certain level of safety. Agreed on that. For c3 or below though, we are talking solo/duo PvE, very susceptible to dscan-less gankfleets. If for one person to PvE in a c2 for example, another 5 people are needed to guard him, well it defeats the whole point of small-scale operations, which some people are fond of. And really? dscan makes no difference?? I dont know where you base that remark, from personal experience its the opposite, dscan has saved me more times than i can remember, without it my isk balance would be negative tens of billions. Dont get me wrong, I dont wish for all this to happen in order to say "I told you so". I wish I am wrong, but I have a Cassandra-type gift, the ability to accurately foresee disasters. And since I dont see any positive feedback yet, perhaps ill start a new thread about it. Well we are in a C5 now, but we were in a c2-c4. We got dropped all the time even in the c2. By cloaky t3s and bombers. DScan is about as useful as staring at the sun. Right now wtih the warp speed changes, sabers can catch you faster than you can dscan+hit warp in anything that can run even c2s. We have rooks and hugins yet we still find our selves almost 100% using rapiers and falcons mostly because cloaks are better than dscan immunity. It really has changed nothing for us. And damit what is wrong with not having perfect safety. Get over it. Get use to it. We solo in c3s all the time. We mostly make more than we lose. And really of all places that are affected by this. It has least impact in WHs where the only things that popup on dscan are after your tackled, where a bomber probably works better anyway. The rest has local. Just look at the killboards, not much combat recons on there at all. WE and SOLO dont go well together.......
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 279	Posted - 2015.02.09 12:53:37 - [2375] - Quote Our corp is small.. So it may be "our" fits, that I then fly solo fairly often, as in one person from corp is online. Most of us have a few accounts, but even then i still solo with one pilot no links, and last time i also forgot drugs. I mostly pad others killboards in this case. But meh. Today i used a Hugin for the first time since the change. Its pretty good, but i still prefer a cloak to dscan immunity in the WH. Also the smaller CPU makes some of the fits a little tighter. Oh and we are a little bit schizo, so i sometimes have arguments with myself. [edit] of course the C5 is different. Not much you can solo in there. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Ares Desideratus Star Children Of Cain 202	Posted - 2015.02.11 21:41:19 - [2376] - Quote I'm just going to voice my opinion here real quick because I have a problem with the changes to the Pilgrim. I really liked the Pilgrim before these changes took place. I actually liked the fact that it had to more or less operate within 12 to 14km as I thought this really differentiated it's role from that of the Curse. On the other hand I am really glad that it got a buff but I am saddened that it received a RANGE bonus. Now with this new change there is basically no reason at all to go anywhere near your target in a Pilgrim, so it has effectively been turned into a kiter. Yet it is actually quite slow for a kiter I would much rather have seen it get a boost to it's performance with normal-range energy neutralizers rather than getting a similar range bonus as the Curse. A simple buff to it's capacitor or it's tank or even it's speed, or all of the above, would have been much better IMO, to make it excel at the role that it had. Now, as a ship, it operates much differently from the way that it used to based on range. There will be almost no reason to use a dual-prop Pilgrim any more, and there will be much more reason to shield tank it as well. This is a mistake IMO. I'm a creator, preserver, destroyer, I like makin' stuff and doin' things ~~~~~~ 0% Efficiency in Fucks Given ~~~~~~~ nun wow mom unu
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1094	Posted - 2015.02.11 22:49:24 - [2377] - Quote leaving the curse as shield tanked is a mistake ..being khanid it doesn't really reflect that at all... even though that was a stated goal in the OP .. weird... a more ashimmu with missiles (TD's instead of webs) approach would make more sense. Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone/fighter assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
Nienna Leralonde Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2015.02.18 02:35:11 - [2378] - Quote curse -op as ****,and not being detectable by scanner its even worse.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 289	Posted - 2015.02.19 16:57:00 - [2379] - Quote Yea like all everyone ever does is fly curses... oh wait no they don't. So let me guess you lost a ship? That doesn't make it OP. A ship being effective or a good counter to a particular fleet composition does not make it OP. A ship being a good force multiplier does not make it OP. These are t2 cruisers, they are suppose to be good. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Mike Flynn Energy Energy Alliance 18	Posted - 2015.02.21 14:11:43 - [2380] - Quote RTSAvalanche wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Those goals lead us to the following major changes: Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners Well that's just complete and utter bullsh!t... As if Solo pvp wasn't hard enough, we can not even rely on our D-Scan now?? somthing that we have relied on for the past 10 years.. You are basicaly breaking around some core mechanics here. Faction Warefare has been completely broken since Incarna, now you are telling me that recons with web, neut, damp & ECM bonuses will be able to hide in plain site in FW plexes and there is no conventional way to find them. Even if combats work to find them, we would have to do that for every plex... I smelt somthing bad in the air when the mobile scan inhib came into game, didn't realise things were going to be this bad. POWER CREEP is getting excessive.. Maybe you just need to turn your boosting alt into a probing alt now lol.

Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 483	Posted - 2015.02.22 07:59:06 - [2381] - Quote Dun'Gal wrote: Continuing from your previous thread..... Dscan immunity on recons is good..... because ccp said so /thread Combat recons don't belong in gated FW plexes. Prove me wrong. They're a cheap gimmick ship and way too effective to receive that kind of environmental advantage. Faction warfare pilot and solo/small gang PVP advocate


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]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.