| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Swiftstrike1
Swiftstrike Incorporated
870
   |
Posted - 2015.03.05 20:38:32 -
[31] - Quote
Arla Sarain wrote:Instead of panicking and doing some kneejerk reaction change
wait and see if people find enough counters with what he have.
They're called damps. Plz Mr. Interceptor, tell me more about your 250km lock range...
Targeting, Sensors and ECM Overhaul
|
Antillie Sa'Kan
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
939
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 20:52:32 -
[32] - Quote
Make activating the module set your max speed to 0 just like siege/triage/bastion. Problem solved. |
Lienzo
Amanuensis
43
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 05:58:37 -
[33] - Quote
I really don't like that we are throwing out one extreme of gameplay for another. In this case, we are throwing out big fleets centered around high HP barriers in favor of making everything susceptible to individuals.
We the players have developed networks to accommodate the former, but the latter aim at getting more people involved. I think we need content for both groups, all TZs, and all FCs interested in sov skirmishes. These networks are important for the game, so it would be better to add new goals and let organization spring up around them rather than wholesale deprecate them
To that end, keep the requirements for entosis modules low, but restrict their effects to SBUs or a few other infrastructure components. Leave the other structures the way they've traditionally been. Let's rely on skirmish fleets to make systems vulnerable or invulnerable to heavy ship deployments. Entosis links are a great way to regulate the viability of cyno inhibitors, or other invulnerability mechanics. This puts a soft limit on super cap deployments since they aren't going to split up and be spread all over a constellation, and rely on skirmish fleets to make objectives vulnerable.
I really don't think it would be a problem if the capitol systems of player empires had big generators that made their core structures largely invincible if their peripheral systems are not harassed, even against massive blobs. No headshotting player empires without a sustained campaign.
It was important in that past that we had an ecology of big HP walls and small HP walls upon which the big walls depend, and we just didn't have that, which was why we felt sov wasn't fun since you could only participate directly with a large group. Fozziesov as presently conceived simply doesn't promise content for all.
An ambitious approach would have content for individuals, content for small gangs, and content geared to large groups. At present, we are making large group content rely solely on player escalation, which could be somewhat problematic, and potentially just as dull as timers. A better approach puts timers a little varied in time, and allows lots of content for smaller groups between timers. The very best and most pitched form of skirmish content would be the kind that moves timers back and forth in time based on successful contests over these new sov buttons. |
Catherine Laartii
Imperium Technologies
Evictus.
486
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 06:39:57 -
[34] - Quote
How about instead of having the module limited to a ship type, have ship types be limited to the module? Giving them the same fitting stats as command links would alleviate concerns all around, as they'd mostly be usable on bc upwards, although cruisers could pull it off with a little effort.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
827
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 08:16:14 -
[35] - Quote
Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:Make activating the module set your max speed to 0 just like siege/triage/bastion. Problem solved.
You're solving a problem that doesn't exist.
There's more hyperbole and utter bullshit around these modules and ships that may fit them than the next i-gizmo 98987987 |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
3554
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 16:58:01 -
[36] - Quote
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:suid0 wrote:Alvatore DiMarco wrote:Yeah, um... no.
Every hull should have it. Looks like patrolling your space and dealing with trolls is going to become part of the new "So you want Sov, eh?" paradigm. QFT. If an Inty can reinforce your stuff within a 4 hour window inside your 'prime time' then you probably need to ask yourself, do you really use that space? and do you actually deserve it? lol coming from a player of a mostly sovless entity, yah i would expect you to be entirely in the griefing camp on this.
Thus spake the forum alt. |
Soldarius
Kosher Nostra
The 99 Percent
1170
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 17:48:31 -
[37] - Quote
The modules in question have been named as a Link. So I think there is a reasonable possibility they may be restricted to CBCs, CS, and link T3s.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
121
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 18:17:57 -
[38] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Promiscuous Medusa wrote:Make it Battleship only solving the "why would we fly BS?" problem -¼_-¼ I would like to point out that removing the ability to activate prop mods would functionally have an effect close to this. You know, seeing as battleships are hurt the least by lack of prop mod.
This is a much more reasonable solution to the perceived problem. It keeps uncontested space easy to win. It keeps contested space highly contested. It squashes kite trolling without outright excluding small or poor groups.
You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
|
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1104
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 18:20:44 -
[39] - Quote
Petrified wrote:After chewing on this over the last day I have come to slightly agree with those who are concerned with harassing gangs roaming about in Inties and Bombers with an Entosis modules just to grief (sorry, ibis invasions are too easy to pop to be taken seriously). Hulls capable of cloaking, hulls capable of bypassing gates easily, and interdiction nullification should not have it.
So, simply, the Entosis module should be restricted to Battlecruiser Hulls and only Battlecruiser class hulls.
CBC's not ABC's though
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 sentries.
Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |