|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
Quesa
Burning Napalm
Northern Coalition.
53
   |
Posted - 2015.03.09 13:46:19 -
[1] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:EvilweaselFinance wrote:Trollceptors fundamentally don't fit the "effective control of the grid" argument. The things that can hit an orbiting snaked-out interceptor are few and far between and require very specific fits to counter, allowing a trollceptor to easily keep a link alive without effective control of the grid. This also forces specific metas, in opposition to the view that they should not affect the meta - you have to be able to blap interceptors in your fleet composition.
They also simply allow you to evade committing anything to a fight, and if you're attacking sov at the very least you should be risking a single ship. fortunately you don't have to hit a trollceptor to stop it, just activate your own link.
Yet again, this doesn't fit the effective military control of the grid. |
Quesa
Burning Napalm
Northern Coalition.
53
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 13:51:10 -
[2] - Quote
I have always believed that there needs to be a risk to the asset deployed for the taking/defending of sovereignty to be a worthwhile process for both attacker and defender. Trollcepters don't really risk an asset to mess with Sov as they are incredibly fast warping and nullfied. These two attributes combined on a ship offer an incredible amount of power if they are also able to exert sovereignty pressure with the proposed system.
I would suggest that a few modifications be made to the Entosis mod that will disallow the use of any prop mod OR be locked in place for the duration of the Entosis cycle (much like a cyno). This would force an attacker/defender to risk an asset, which is and has to continue to be part of the sovereignty mechanics. Even if the above were implimented, it would not hamper ones ability to take sov from an AFK alliance. |
Quesa
Burning Napalm
Northern Coalition.
53
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 13:53:29 -
[3] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Quesa wrote:Dave Stark wrote:EvilweaselFinance wrote:Trollceptors fundamentally don't fit the "effective control of the grid" argument. The things that can hit an orbiting snaked-out interceptor are few and far between and require very specific fits to counter, allowing a trollceptor to easily keep a link alive without effective control of the grid. This also forces specific metas, in opposition to the view that they should not affect the meta - you have to be able to blap interceptors in your fleet composition.
They also simply allow you to evade committing anything to a fight, and if you're attacking sov at the very least you should be risking a single ship. fortunately you don't have to hit a trollceptor to stop it, just activate your own link. Yet again, this doesn't fit the effective military control of the grid. Neither does not being able to kill an interceptor.
Chasing an intercepter off the grid is an example of military control so in a way, yeah it is. |
|
|
| |
|