| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
758
   |
Posted - 2015.02.27 11:08:10 -
[1] - Quote
I'm happy with warping fighters. |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
796
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 08:52:55 -
[2] - Quote
I'm still waiting for even one of these risk averse cowards to explain why, in a world where people are against off grid boosting, they think off grid DPS is somehow "ok"....Cost and training time are not a reason.
Man up, put it on grid. If you don't have the fortitude for that risk, stop flying it.
Hell you get change out 1.5b for an archon these days. People lose ships worth that on a daily basis. |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
796
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 12:12:17 -
[3] - Quote
Nope, but the problem is that game mechanics exist which prevent the carrier ever being at risk even if POS and station did not exist.
Fixing all the edge cases that may be manufactured by clever players is probably not even possible much less practical.
There have been a great many things in the history of eve destroyed due to the actions of a few - caps are not unique in this respect. Usually I have sympathy for those who lost, but in this case, I've none. Just like I'll have none when links are forced on grid.
At the end of the day, people put faction fit marauders/T3/battleship on the line on field on a regular basis, but people are too scared to do the same with a capital which doesnt cost significantly more*....because why? Hell people fly in pods with multiple billions in low sec.
People need to get over the mental hurdles of committing caps to a fight, on grid.
*supers being stupid not withstanding |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
796
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 12:37:12 -
[4] - Quote
Rroff wrote:afkalt wrote:
At the end of the day, people put faction fit marauders/T3/battleship on the line on field on a regular basis, but people are too scared to do the same with a capital which doesnt cost significantly more*....because why? Hell people fly in pods with multiple billions in low sec.
People need to get over the mental hurdles of committing caps to a fight, on grid.
*supers being stupid not withstanding
Somewhat its due to the logistics of replacing a capital and/or for some people a capital is the product of years of training and investment which is generally a higher order than even a pimp marauder. You get over it a bit after losing the first capital - but I've still got my first thanny (survived 5-6 fights) and a bit of attachment to that particular one and while I'm not afraid to risk it on grid and have done so won't just throw it away.
There is also the proclivity of the ENTIRE sector to dogpile - which no-one does for a mere pirate battleship. But that's because they are so rare, it becomes self-fulfilling.
The problems are psychological. I mean, let's take for example a common RnK hotdrop: 3 nestors, probably deadspace/faction fit. Half a dozen vindis in the same position, various other bits and bobs. I'd be willing to bet that the nestors alone would have an almost comparable cost to "cheaper" (i.e. not pimped) archons but are far squisher.
The barriers are purely in players minds - though you're right to mention the logistics of replacement, but that's not the end of the world.
I'd understand it more if there was skill point loss, nobody wants to retrain carrier V!
For me, I'm looking at it objectively, ignoring the cost and train (because that's NEVER a balance point - perhaps more specifically never a justification to something being broken) - imagine the reaction if high sec mission bears asked to project DPS from offgrid in essentially complete safety (given sufficient planning)? It would be an outrage - and rightly so.
The other acid test is - if these didn't exist today but people proposed adding them - what would the reaction be? You and I both know the answer to that. |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
796
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 13:06:24 -
[5] - Quote
Very much so, if you consider it a carrier only thing.
However....."Gecko V2.0 - Super heavy drone 50m3, can be assigned to off grid fleet mates, battleship only drone".
Same mechanic, cost and skill time irrelevant (as they ought to be)...you honestly think people would go for that? I seriously doubt it. |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
796
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 14:00:47 -
[6] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:afkalt wrote:I'm still waiting for even one of these risk averse cowards to explain why, in a world where people are against off grid boosting, they think off grid DPS is somehow "ok"....Cost and training time are not a reason.
Man up, put it on grid. If you don't have the fortitude for that risk, stop flying it.
Hell you get change out 1.5b for an archon these days. People lose ships worth that on a daily basis. It has been explained countless times in this thread, but we forgive you for not reading. All one has to do is look at the Revenant KM to be able to laugh at anyone saying skynetting is 100% safe, but we are willing to sacrifice a bit; namely, have a bubble around a POS from which you cannot delegate fighters from.
So because bad players are bad; unbalanced broken mechanics should stay?
I assume you're well aware of the deadspace method of protecting supers? |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
796
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 14:04:03 -
[7] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Nolak Ataru wrote:afkalt wrote:I'm still waiting for even one of these risk averse cowards to explain why, in a world where people are against off grid boosting, they think off grid DPS is somehow "ok"....Cost and training time are not a reason.
Man up, put it on grid. If you don't have the fortitude for that risk, stop flying it.
Hell you get change out 1.5b for an archon these days. People lose ships worth that on a daily basis. It has been explained countless times in this thread, but we forgive you for not reading. All one has to do is look at the Revenant KM to be able to laugh at anyone saying skynetting is 100% safe, but we are willing to sacrifice a bit; namely, have a bubble around a POS from which you cannot delegate fighters from. Yeah we should totally all setup logoff traps over a week and then wait for our watchlist to go blinky a few days later to hot drop some titans so a roaming gang can jump a gate after their scout got wrecked by assisted fighters...
None of which matters a single iota if the super is 5000km deep in deadspace.
But bless, they're really trying to show that because people not doing it properly die, it is therefore balanced. |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
796
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 14:50:58 -
[8] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:CCP Rise wrote:Hello
Appreciate all the feedback very much.
Based on what you've said here we are planning to leave Fighter warping in, but stick with removing assist.
We hear the concerns about the state of capitals and loss of return on investment from training towards them and we absolutely want to make sure that caps of all kinds are not only viable but exciting and powerful. We still feel this change is necessary, but we are looking into ways to improve on the state of capitals and capital balance. No news on that front for now but it's something we are committed to improving.
Thanks again. Removing it compeletely is not the right solution. Please spend some actual effort in solving the risk-free aspect of POS skynet, and go ahead with rebalancing capital ships. No reason to wait with that.
Because they'll spend time and money sorting POS mechanics and people will just hide in dead space pockets and nothing will change. They don't do that today because the POS is mechanically easier but if there's one thing we know about EVE players - effort knows no bounds when it gives a stupid advantage.
So the list is actually stations, POS AND deadspace - and you can bet your bottom dollar that's some legacy ass code so old it's probably haunted. |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
796
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 15:11:45 -
[9] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:We already disproved this. If you figure out where in the general system he and the POS are located, you can set up a stop or a drag bubble, wait for him to warp, and then drop him. Hell you only really need a single Armageddon to neut out a carrier now, especially if he's fit for fighter DPS. Toss in a few Talos or torpedo bombers, and you have a newly acquired killmail.
I don't think you know how the mechanic to which I refer actually works.
@Rroff: It is not ideal, I'll fully admit - but it was likely the most pragmatic fix available. I would hope that any capital rebalance is sooner than later and this is taken into account. In many ways, maybe it is better to lose this NOW than after a rebalance. It gives a rebalance a better shot of working well. |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
796
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 15:38:10 -
[10] - Quote
Rroff wrote:Nolak Ataru wrote:afkalt wrote:I don't think you know how the mechanic to which I refer actually works. Then please do educate me. If you're referring, however, to the instance where an interceptor warps into a gated pocket, burns just out of grid, has the carrier warp to him, slowboat inside the grid, finish the pocket so that the gate despawns, that has been ruled an exploit and will result in one getting banned. Not directed at you but on that topic even removing assignment and forcing carriers on grid there is always going to be some cases where they can take advantage of mechanics to reduce the risk to themselves either via grid-fu or just sitting on the edge of the fight and cynoing out if anything threatens them and so on - sure they are a lot less safe than now - what next remove grids :D and cynos :S.
That's new, last I checked it was ruled ok. GM ConsistencyGäó FTW.
As I say, I would seriously hope that the rebalance is a) soon and b) takes this new change into account (For example now they are forced on grid, there's no reason to not have really awesome fighter/FB abilities).
This had to die, it really did. Efforts to get some neat ideas together for the rebalance might be a good way to go forward. |
| |
|