EVE Search - Sticky:Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

Sticky:Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two

» 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 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 136 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 6 post(s)
Devi Loches Red Phoenix Rising Alternate Allegiance 1	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:25:18 - [1891] - Quote afkalt wrote: Devi Loches wrote: Axloth Okiah wrote: It is incredible how many posts are devoted to interceptors while we have no idea about the fitting... imho one of the more elegant solutions (assuming its even an issue) would be making the entosis module thingy relatively cap hungry. Even if it's super cap hungry, you will only be going through 1 cycle. So you turn everything off, start up the E-Link, and then go back to burning around. They have stated that they are looking to have E-Link have low fitting requirements. Most people are assuming it'll be about the same as fitting a turret or a launcher. There a lot of other issues with the new sov, interceptors are just the most obvious and easily picked at. There is still very little benefit to owning sov. The indecies are still very crude guides (especially the Industry one). Seriously, who cares? There's not an interceptor with the lock range needed in existence that missiles can't trash. Yay, CCP fixed missiles. You have a sniping missile ship that can hit a frigate orbiting 110km away at 4km/s? Post it.
Sullen Decimus Polaris Rising The Bastion 10	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:25:20 - [1892] - Quote Sullen Decimus wrote: If this is the new sov mechanic there should be a 90% reduction to using jump bridges that your alliance owns. I can understand that using other alliances JB would give you a longer time but it would give alliances actually benefits to owning their space if they can respond to threats faster. Furthermore under the new mechanic sprawling JB networks wouldn't be feasible because under the new mechanics long reaching ones would be easy to shut down while internal JB's in systems under constant use would be very difficult.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 804	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:25:30 - [1893] - Quote Promiscuous Female wrote: afkalt wrote: Promiscuous Female wrote: Eli Apol wrote: Vincent Athena wrote: On the entire interceptor thing: If it really does become a big issue, a simple change would be: "Activating an Entosis Link also causes ships to become extremely vulnerable for the duration of the moduleGÇÖs cycle: the equipped ship cannot warp, MICROWARP, MICROJUMP, dock, jump or receive remote assistance until the cycle completes." New idea added in caps. Its not as limiting as being stuck in place, but my guess is it's enough. Sniper ship at zero running a defensive link = dead ceptor. Enough about the ceptors already. the only thing that hits an interceptor at 100km+ is praying for a wrecking shot That's odd, my Cerberus ***** on them. Are yours broken? i guess if they are standing still, sure if you rig for misl distance you are getting about 125km range on a cerb with a flight time of 12s an interceptor orbiting at 120km covers 48 km in this time 120 + 48 > 125 They cut corners, that only applies if they inty is straight lining away. Alternatively, use an orth with 20+km/s light missiles.
Eli Apol Pro Synergy 196	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:25:34 - [1894] - Quote Promiscuous Female wrote: afkalt wrote: That's odd, my Cerberus ***** on them. Are yours broken? i guess if they are standing still, sure if you rig for misl distance you are getting about 125km range on a cerb with a flight time of 12s an interceptor orbiting at 120km covers 48 km in this time 120 + 48 > 125 Fine we'll go back to the easy way: Drop a kitsune at zero, jam out the ceptor. What you gonna do about it all that far out?
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 805	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:27:07 - [1895] - Quote Devi Loches wrote: afkalt wrote: Devi Loches wrote: Axloth Okiah wrote: It is incredible how many posts are devoted to interceptors while we have no idea about the fitting... imho one of the more elegant solutions (assuming its even an issue) would be making the entosis module thingy relatively cap hungry. Even if it's super cap hungry, you will only be going through 1 cycle. So you turn everything off, start up the E-Link, and then go back to burning around. They have stated that they are looking to have E-Link have low fitting requirements. Most people are assuming it'll be about the same as fitting a turret or a launcher. There a lot of other issues with the new sov, interceptors are just the most obvious and easily picked at. There is still very little benefit to owning sov. The indecies are still very crude guides (especially the Industry one). Seriously, who cares? There's not an interceptor with the lock range needed in existence that missiles can't trash. Yay, CCP fixed missiles. You have a sniping missile ship that can hit a frigate orbiting 110km away at 4km/s? Post it. With the time you have, a RAVEN will kill them
Agnahr The Executives Executive Outcomes 1	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:27:30 - [1896] - Quote Interesting idea, but as a lot of people pointed out, the proposed mechanic makes it way too easy to grief populated area. You can come in outside the resident prime time and reinforce their structures in at most 40 minutes. It doesn't matter if you are actually coming back to conquer those structures, you can just smirk at the knowledge that you've just cause those people to have to spend 100 minutes conquering the 10 command nodes. Do this every day on their different stations, iHub and TCUs and the defenders will spend most of their prime time taking command nodes back. So this will become very boring very quickly. So I approve the idea in principle, but please find a way to make the attacker commit to take the structures when the come out of reinforcement. Maybe if they don't show, after a certain amount of time the command nodes de-spawn and things are back to what they were before. Similarly with the freeport mode. Come in when the alliance is asleep, spend 40 minutes reinforcing the station, then their station is your to enjoy for the the next 2 days. A bit too easy in my view. You could have an Australian alliance freely living in an European alliance space. Null sec has enough stations that when one come out of reinforcement, you can just move on to the next one few jumps away.

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 12272	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:30:19 - [1897] - Quote Finally caught up with the thread. :) Hey folks, thanks for the feedback so far. I spent most of the day at work today reading feedback (here, on twitter, on reddit, in slack and just about everywhere else), taking notes, and discussing the feedback with the CSM and with our team here in the office. Thanks to all the people that have posted constructive feedback so far, in any of those places. I want to reassure people that we've announced these plans this early for a reason. We want to take advantage of the time this gives us to carefully look at feedback and respond without needing to rush anything. In the past we probably would have waited until Fanfest just to get the reveal moment, but at this point we've learned as a company how much more important substance is than spectacle. I've noticed a fair bit of skepticism about my comments that this design is built to be flexible, since similar phrases were used back in 2009. I too remember the launch of Dominion sov from the perspective of a player (I'm on record that Dominion is my least favourite EVE expansion) and I can't blame people for being cautious. This is the kind of thing where actions always speak louder than words, so I'll just say that I hope that for many of you the actions you've seen from CCP recently have increased your trust that we will follow through. And for those of you that are still unconvinced, my goal is to change some of your minds with our upcoming actions in this area of Nullsec and Sov. Since this thread is a bit hectic, we're currently planning to do approach some of the conversation surrounding these changes a little differently. We'll be reading all the feedback here and elsewhere, and then pulling specific issues into their own dev blogs and own threads for further targeted discussion with fewer distractions. It's a bit of an experiment but I think it has a lot of potential. After discussing the early feedback with the team here, we've decided to begin this feedback and iteration process with a focus on the time zone mechanics. We're seeing a ton of discussion and quite a bit of displeasure over the time zone mechanics as they are laid out in the blog. So you're going to see us asking a lot of questions in a number of different areas to the players who have opinions on the way we handle time zones in Sov. The goal is to get to the core of the concerns people are expressing about these mechanics, figure out what player needs we are missing in this draft, and see if we can't design a system that meets more of those needs more effectively. I don't expect we're going to make everybody happy, as time zone mechanics are one of the stickiest design issues in a worldwide single shard MMO. However we do think it's likely that your feedback can help get us to a better design than what we have right now. I'll also probably be quickly spinning off a discussion of the module balance surrounding the Entosis Link, since that's an area where I expect we can calm some fears relatively easily. The short version is that we have all the tools of EVE's module design at our disposal to ensure that no specific tactics get out of hand. So if problems show up in discussion and playtesting we're happy to let players try to find a counter and then relatively easily step in if that counter doesn't materialize. There's a lot of other areas where we're seeing your concern, and we're not forgetting about any of them. Keep posting your feedback calmly and constructively, keep talking to each other, keep theorycrafting and blogging and podcasting. As people spend more time discussing and thinking about the implications of these changes, we know that the collective EVE hive mind will have a lot to offer, as it has in the past. I'm gonna call it a night, but expect some of the first issue breakout threads tomorrow (we'll link to them from this thread) and try to leave me with a reasonable number of posts to catch up on in the morning ok? Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

Eli Apol Pro Synergy 196	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:30:39 - [1898] - Quote Violent Morgana wrote: So I have gang of 20 ceptors, fit for extreme speed (20km/s for example and 150km locking range) and t2 Entosis Link. Who/What can stop my gang from reinforcing the whole region? The module needs to either disable any prop mods or make the ship stationary like siege does. That will give you the fights you are trying to force. Also whats up with this prime time? Should we only have USTZ alliance, EUTZ alliance etc in huge blocks focused on very specific 4hour window in time? 20 (or fewer) Kitsunes. So thats 2bil in intys countered by 400mil in ewar frigs.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 805	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:33:32 - [1899] - Quote Eli Apol wrote: Violent Morgana wrote: So I have gang of 20 ceptors, fit for extreme speed (20km/s for example and 150km locking range) and t2 Entosis Link. Who/What can stop my gang from reinforcing the whole region? The module needs to either disable any prop mods or make the ship stationary like siege does. That will give you the fights you are trying to force. Also whats up with this prime time? Should we only have USTZ alliance, EUTZ alliance etc in huge blocks focused on very specific 4hour window in time? 20 (or fewer) Kitsunes. So thats 2bil in intys countered by 400mil in ewar frigs. Or a maulus. Cheaper again.
Gevlin House of the Dead Monkey SpaceMonkey's Alliance 255	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:34:26 - [1900] - Quote Might have an NPC Defense force installed in the system. Spending isk into the system to have Alliance owned NPC to defend the system vs small skirmishes. Then it would be fun to simply Rat in enemy space and collect their wrecks they have paid for. I am sure there are Maltia off of planet that would love the opportunity to defend their homes. Some day I will have the internet and be able to play again.
Devi Loches Red Phoenix Rising Alternate Allegiance 1	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:36:01 - [1901] - Quote Eli Apol wrote: Violent Morgana wrote: So I have gang of 20 ceptors, fit for extreme speed (20km/s for example and 150km locking range) and t2 Entosis Link. Who/What can stop my gang from reinforcing the whole region? The module needs to either disable any prop mods or make the ship stationary like siege does. That will give you the fights you are trying to force. Also whats up with this prime time? Should we only have USTZ alliance, EUTZ alliance etc in huge blocks focused on very specific 4hour window in time? 20 (or fewer) Kitsunes. So thats 2bil in intys countered by 400mil in ewar frigs. So far this seems like the only reasonable counter to the trollceptors I've seen. It keeps the risks of defense roughly equal to that of the attackers. (Not the insanely expensive interceptors mentioned above, just the basic interceptors that would be common. Interceptor fleets vs ewar fleets.)
Mr Omniblivion GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 438	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:37:04 - [1902] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Finally caught up with the thread. :) Good stuff, thanks.
Promiscuous Female GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 559	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:37:07 - [1903] - Quote afkalt wrote: Promiscuous Female wrote: i guess if they are standing still, sure if you rig for misl distance you are getting about 125km range on a cerb with a flight time of 12s an interceptor orbiting at 120km covers 48 km in this time 120 + 48 > 125 They cut corners, that only applies if they inty is straight lining away. Alternatively, use an orth with 20+km/s light missiles. a misl range rigged orthrus only has an engagement envelope of 100km, and that is while further gimping the tank to include the sensor booster needed to lock that far an interceptor also beats a heated orthrus's speed by a good kilometer a second or so
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 806	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:37:44 - [1904] - Quote Devi Loches wrote: Eli Apol wrote: Violent Morgana wrote: So I have gang of 20 ceptors, fit for extreme speed (20km/s for example and 150km locking range) and t2 Entosis Link. Who/What can stop my gang from reinforcing the whole region? The module needs to either disable any prop mods or make the ship stationary like siege does. That will give you the fights you are trying to force. Also whats up with this prime time? Should we only have USTZ alliance, EUTZ alliance etc in huge blocks focused on very specific 4hour window in time? 20 (or fewer) Kitsunes. So thats 2bil in intys countered by 400mil in ewar frigs. So far this seems like the only reasonable counter to the trollceptors I've seen. It keeps the risks of defense roughly equal to that of the attackers. (Not the insanely expensive interceptors mentioned above, just the basic interceptors that would be common. Interceptor fleets vs ewar fleets.) And as I've said "basic" interceptors will die in a fire to missile ships. Even the "speed" ones will die. At 100m+ per SHIP at the death rate, they'll quickly stop becoming "throwaway".
Eli Apol Pro Synergy 197	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:37:55 - [1905] - Quote Devi Loches wrote: So far this seems like the only reasonable counter to the trollceptors I've seen. It keeps the risks of defense roughly equal to that of the attackers. (Not the insanely expensive interceptors mentioned above, just the basic interceptors that would be common. Interceptor fleets vs ewar fleets.) The T2 module is 100m iirc so either the inties are orbitting within easy web scram range with the T1 version, or they cost 100m+ Which is also gonna be hilarious if they hit a smartbomb camp on the way out
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 806	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:38:40 - [1906] - Quote Promiscuous Female wrote: afkalt wrote: Promiscuous Female wrote: i guess if they are standing still, sure if you rig for misl distance you are getting about 125km range on a cerb with a flight time of 12s an interceptor orbiting at 120km covers 48 km in this time 120 + 48 > 125 They cut corners, that only applies if they inty is straight lining away. Alternatively, use an orth with 20+km/s light missiles. a misl range rigged orthrus only has an engagement envelope of 100km, and that is while further gimping the tank to include the sensor booster needed to lock that far an interceptor also beats a heated orthrus's speed by a good kilometer a second or so And the trollceptor will kill it, right? Or not. People are talking about snakes and quafe, what is a missile speed implant against that?
Gevlin House of the Dead Monkey SpaceMonkey's Alliance 256	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:38:59 - [1907] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Finally caught up with the thread. :) ... and try to leave me with a reasonable number of posts to catch up on in the morning ok? You so know that will never happen! Some day I will have the internet and be able to play again.
ISD Ezwal ISD Community Communications Liaisons 3955	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:40:00 - [1908] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Finally caught up with the thread. :) Slacker, I was already across the finish line.... ISD Ezwal Vice Admiral Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 806	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:40:46 - [1909] - Quote ISD Ezwal wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Finally caught up with the thread. :) Slacker, I was already across the finish line.... Red Queen scenario.....
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2112	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:42:39 - [1910] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: I'm gonna call it a night, but expect some of the first issue breakout threads tomorrow (we'll link to them from this thread) and try to leave me with a reasonable number of posts to catch up on in the morning ok? Big smile yay blogs \o/
Devi Loches Red Phoenix Rising Alternate Allegiance 1	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:42:40 - [1911] - Quote Eli Apol wrote: Devi Loches wrote: So far this seems like the only reasonable counter to the trollceptors I've seen. It keeps the risks of defense roughly equal to that of the attackers. (Not the insanely expensive interceptors mentioned above, just the basic interceptors that would be common. Interceptor fleets vs ewar fleets.) The T2 module is 100m iirc so either the inties are orbitting within easy web scram range with the T1 version, or they cost 100m+ Which is also gonna be hilarious if they hit a smartbomb camp on the way out While 100mil is not exactly chump change, large coalitions have already shown that they have isk to throw at cap ship SRP. The cost might keep small corps and alliances from doing this, but not the large ones. They can replace 20 of these interceptors compared to 1 dread.
Devi Loches Red Phoenix Rising Alternate Allegiance 1	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:44:22 - [1912] - Quote afkalt wrote: Devi Loches wrote: Eli Apol wrote: Violent Morgana wrote: So I have gang of 20 ceptors, fit for extreme speed (20km/s for example and 150km locking range) and t2 Entosis Link. Who/What can stop my gang from reinforcing the whole region? The module needs to either disable any prop mods or make the ship stationary like siege does. That will give you the fights you are trying to force. Also whats up with this prime time? Should we only have USTZ alliance, EUTZ alliance etc in huge blocks focused on very specific 4hour window in time? 20 (or fewer) Kitsunes. So thats 2bil in intys countered by 400mil in ewar frigs. So far this seems like the only reasonable counter to the trollceptors I've seen. It keeps the risks of defense roughly equal to that of the attackers. (Not the insanely expensive interceptors mentioned above, just the basic interceptors that would be common. Interceptor fleets vs ewar fleets.) And as I've said "basic" interceptors will die in a fire to missile ships. Even the "speed" ones will die. At 100m+ per SHIP at the death rate, they'll quickly stop becoming "throwaway". And so people actually start using defender missiles to protect themselves from the ones they can't outrun.
Promiscuous Female GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 559	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:44:45 - [1913] - Quote afkalt wrote: Promiscuous Female wrote: afkalt wrote: Promiscuous Female wrote: i guess if they are standing still, sure if you rig for misl distance you are getting about 125km range on a cerb with a flight time of 12s an interceptor orbiting at 120km covers 48 km in this time 120 + 48 > 125 They cut corners, that only applies if they inty is straight lining away. Alternatively, use an orth with 20+km/s light missiles. a misl range rigged orthrus only has an engagement envelope of 100km, and that is while further gimping the tank to include the sensor booster needed to lock that far an interceptor also beats a heated orthrus's speed by a good kilometer a second or so And the trollceptor will kill it, right? Or not. People are talking about snakes and quafe, what is a missile speed implant against that? it doesn't have to beat the orthrus, just not die to it until the artosis link finishes the job also i do like that you are having to use a 280m ship and 750m of implants to kill a 20m frig with an 80m module
Galphii Caldari Provisions Caldari State 299	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:46:03 - [1914] - Quote An interesting system with a few flaws which, if addressed, would make it worth trying on TQ. * Reduce the range on the T2 entosis link to 50km. You want to bring ships in at a reasonable range for a fight to happen, and not just have a bunch of inty's circling the target at max range. * Consider the minimum PG requirements of the entosis module to require a battlecruiser or above to use, again, to force actual fights instead of kiting/trolling crap. * Perhaps the entosis module also prevents propulsion mods from activating? Just a thought. * It might be more interesting to use the hacking minigame in some fashion instead of adding a 'sov laser'. "Wow, that internet argument completely changed my fundamental belief system," said no one, ever.
Aryth GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1701	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:47:06 - [1915] - Quote Devi Loches wrote: Eli Apol wrote: Violent Morgana wrote: So I have gang of 20 ceptors, fit for extreme speed (20km/s for example and 150km locking range) and t2 Entosis Link. Who/What can stop my gang from reinforcing the whole region? The module needs to either disable any prop mods or make the ship stationary like siege does. That will give you the fights you are trying to force. Also whats up with this prime time? Should we only have USTZ alliance, EUTZ alliance etc in huge blocks focused on very specific 4hour window in time? 20 (or fewer) Kitsunes. So thats 2bil in intys countered by 400mil in ewar frigs. So far this seems like the only reasonable counter to the trollceptors I've seen. It keeps the risks of defense roughly equal to that of the attackers. (Not the insanely expensive interceptors mentioned above, just the basic interceptors that would be common. Interceptor fleets vs ewar fleets.) The main issue is not the ISK vs ISK. It is the huge imbalance of afk cloaking attacker time vs defender vigilance. Because the system quickly spirals into massive consequences with minimal time investment on the part of attackers it will result in a horribly lopsided mechanic. For example, lets say blackops/reavers park 20-50 dudes afk cloaking in a region and their only goal is to flip/kill things the moment people aren't looking. So your choice as a defender is to have hyper vigilance every day during your period across all assets or suffer massive consequences. I doubt how many people realize how bad IHuBs are to deal with. The only investment on an attackers part is an alt and some brief attention spans when they feel like watching. The investment on the defenders part is a period of hyper vigilance across every system they own. Multiply this by the attackers being able to do this across all of null at random and you see the problem. If you tell people they can lock dudes out of their capital with a single real fight then lawl. Why would anyone store any amount of material in a null station. Move to NPC null or a lowsec border system. This is going to heavily incentivize ice-bergging again. The timers basically need to preserve 2-3 fights before huge consequences (freeport) and have a FAR bigger bonus to high indexes. A 5/5 index system should take at least 1 hour if not 2. At least until someone fixes freaking industry indexes god. Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal. Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 806	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:48:14 - [1916] - Quote Promiscuous Female wrote: afkalt wrote: Promiscuous Female wrote: afkalt wrote: Promiscuous Female wrote: i guess if they are standing still, sure if you rig for misl distance you are getting about 125km range on a cerb with a flight time of 12s an interceptor orbiting at 120km covers 48 km in this time 120 + 48 > 125 They cut corners, that only applies if they inty is straight lining away. Alternatively, use an orth with 20+km/s light missiles. a misl range rigged orthrus only has an engagement envelope of 100km, and that is while further gimping the tank to include the sensor booster needed to lock that far an interceptor also beats a heated orthrus's speed by a good kilometer a second or so And the trollceptor will kill it, right? Or not. People are talking about snakes and quafe, what is a missile speed implant against that? it doesn't have to beat the orthrus, just not die to it until the artosis link finishes the job also i do like that you are having to use a 280m ship and 750m of implants to kill a 20m frig with an 80m module Or I could use a cheapass cruiser and block the link.... Stop the melodrama. Interceptors threaten sprawling, indefensible empires. NOTHING MORE. Stop being bad, stop derailing with FUD about "trollceptors" and maybe we can all get a decent future. These phantom interceptors threats are nothing short of a nonsense if you live in your space.
Speedkermit Damo Demonic Retribution 404	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:49:08 - [1917] - Quote Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote: Alp Khan wrote: Mr Omniblivion wrote: Here is a suggestion: CCP needs to actually listen to the nullsec CSM representatives (they are largely disregarding input from CSM reps with Sov changes). Or hire someone that is well versed in nullsec to actually work at CCP. Indeed, they should. I don't think we can name any other game on MMO market that has a developer team with a chronic inability to understand it's player driven dynamics and narratives. Two things... First, CSM..I am yet to actually see a swath of stories this time around on how the CSM wasn't consulted or ignored on the proposed changes. In leiu of that we must assume then the bulk of the CSM gave nodding approval to these changes, and their silence now is approval after the fact (or pansied waiting to see which way popular vote blows first...). Second, CCP obviously isn't trying to ruin the game. They are perhaps just trying to ruin your game. Lol. I like this 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.
Devi Loches Red Phoenix Rising Alternate Allegiance 1	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:49:39 - [1918] - Quote Galphii wrote: An interesting system with a few flaws which, if addressed, would make it worth trying on TQ. * Reduce the range on the T2 entosis link to 50km. You want to bring ships in at a reasonable range for a fight to happen, and not just have a bunch of inty's circling the target at max range. * Consider the minimum PG requirements of the entosis module to require a battlecruiser or above to use, again, to force actual fights instead of kiting/trolling crap. * Perhaps the entosis module also prevents propulsion mods from activating? Just a thought. * It might be more interesting to use the hacking minigame in some fashion instead of adding a 'sov laser'. Yes Yes, though personally I'd say cruisers Yes, or a speed penalty like cloaking devices No, sov is a game already, you don't need to 'hack' sov. It should be a sign of brute force.
Eli Apol Pro Synergy 198	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:50:28 - [1919] - Quote afkalt wrote: These phantom interceptors threats are nothing short of a nonsense if you live in your space. Precisely, it's no surprise that they're being hyped up as gamebreaking by TMC and on this thread - it's because goons don't want them to threaten their sprawl and want to get rid of them now.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2113	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:52:41 - [1920] - Quote Promiscuous Female wrote: afkalt wrote: Promiscuous Female wrote: afkalt wrote: Promiscuous Female wrote: i guess if they are standing still, sure if you rig for misl distance you are getting about 125km range on a cerb with a flight time of 12s an interceptor orbiting at 120km covers 48 km in this time 120 + 48 > 125 They cut corners, that only applies if they inty is straight lining away. Alternatively, use an orth with 20+km/s light missiles. a misl range rigged orthrus only has an engagement envelope of 100km, and that is while further gimping the tank to include the sensor booster needed to lock that far an interceptor also beats a heated orthrus's speed by a good kilometer a second or so And the trollceptor will kill it, right? Or not. People are talking about snakes and quafe, what is a missile speed implant against that? it doesn't have to beat the orthrus, just not die to it until the artosis link finishes the job also i do like that you are having to use a 280m ship and 750m of implants to kill a 20m frig with an 80m module 1 keres with its own link, damp them down back to normal target range and then bring in a cheap caracal. isk balanced enough?

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 136 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.