|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
864
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 13:19:18 -
[1] - Quote
Trollceptors are a myth do not buy it. They'll be shattered by missile boats. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
864
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 13:34:30 -
[2] - Quote
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.
A 100m isk, 2k EHP ship with a billion isk pod?
I'm sure they'll be ten-a-penny |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
865
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 13:45:00 -
[3] - Quote
You need to make who is using a link appear on the overview (like scrams/ewar to players do at the moment).
A purely "visual" effect will be impossible to get a hold of the right ship to target.
We also need some clarity on the following points (there are probably more) >How will warping be blocked >Does this affect MJDs/MWDs (i.e. is it a scram or a point effect) >What happens if the ship loses lock >Capital cycle time was discussed to be longer - is the capture time also longer >Will cynoing OUT with an active link be allowed i.e. does this fully "tackle" caps and supers too? >Are other high slot mods blocked at the time the link is active - bastion/triage/etc/etc
Also - make the module drop rate 100% - encourage hunting non-committal attempts to troll. It'll pay better than ratting |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
867
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 13:46:04 -
[4] - Quote
Anya Solette wrote:afkalt 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. A 100m isk, 2k EHP ship with a billion isk pod? I'm sure they'll be ten-a-penny 100m isk is literally an hour of ratting on an afk alt, i sneeze and more isk comes out my nose than that. Also, unless you have a dictor with perfect coordination and a good warpin at the instant you alpha the trollceptor, you're not catching that snaked pod.
Because totally no-one runs smartbomb camps. No-one.
These will definitely not increase in popularity if snaked pods become "normal". Nope. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
867
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 13:48:45 -
[5] - Quote
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. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
867
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 13:54:42 -
[6] - Quote
Quesa wrote: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.
That was actually a typo. I meant to say "defending ship" |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
868
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 14:11:43 -
[7] - Quote
Add occupancy bonuses in reverse to defenders recapturing - so a fully upgraded object can be recapped by defenders in <2.5 minutes.
Make undoing trivial, half attacks a 2 minute job. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
869
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 14:22:13 -
[8] - Quote
Arkon Olacar wrote:Jessy Andersteen wrote:About the trollceptor. It's stupid. Ok, u can't kill the "trollceptor" but...
Remember: targeting range of the interceptor. Put a single Maulus, hyena,keres, rapier, huggin, razzu or a griffin on the field...
Bye bye trollceptor.
Trollceptor is a troll. Don't feed the troll. Awesome. Hero owns 98 systems in Catch, and 38 stations. We now need 136 mauluses to spend 4 hours a night sitting on an ihub/station. Except of course if these trollceptors have any kind of weapons, it can kill the maulus, so we partner them with a RLML caracal to prevent that from happening. There, we've kept one of the most densely populated regions in the game save from trollceptors, and it only costs us 1088 man hours per night!
Well, not really. You need response teams - which shouldn't be THAT big a deal for guys living in the area. It's not like it's an instant flip - you've got 8-38 minutes to get there and stomp them.
And every two kills you get, on average that's 80m isk |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
875
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 14:25:57 -
[9] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Eli Apol wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Eli Apol wrote: Do not remove the potential for specific ship types that are able to penetrate into enemy space from using the module otherwise we'll just see blob heavy gatecamps and iron curtains around empty rental space.
I'm curious what the problem is with that. Fozziebear wrote:Goal #3: Minimize the systemic pressure to bring more people or larger ships than would be required to simply defeat your enemies on the field of battle.
Goal #4: Drastically reduce the time and effort required to conquer undefended space.
Goal #5: Provide significant strategic benefits from living in your space.
Goal #6: Spread the largest Sovereignty battles over multiple star systems to take advantage of New EdenGÇÖs varied geography and to better manage server load. None of those things stop being true, whether CCP takes the necessary step to restrict frigates from using these modules or not. Try again.
So how is camping a gate at chokes for 4 hours different from defending structures for 4 hours? How is that not the same overhead on the players? |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
878
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:02:03 -
[10] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:afkalt wrote:So how is camping a gate at chokes for 4 hours different from defending structures for 4 hours? How is that not the same overhead on the players? because choke points require significantly less man hours, for a start.
So over-extended entities can easily hold their space by concentrating scarce player resources? It's almost as if these very changes were designed to shatter that paradigm isn't it?
Trollceptors are an myth who will only threaten the over extended, the owners huge tracts of empty space out there.
If you live in the space, these things are a fly to swat away (and get some juicy loot drops in the process). If you don't - they'll be a scourge - by design by all accounts.
You'll have up to 40 minutes to stop them.
NB: I do think that the defender should have occupancy bonuses applied inversely to defence timers - so at max level they "defend" an uncontested node 4x faster thus taking ~2 minutes of their time. |
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
878
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 15:06:39 -
[11] - Quote
John McCreedy wrote:The Mittani wrote:Though it may come as a surprise to some, I'm a big fan of the new system, with some tweaks around the edges - tweak the links a little and I'm happy with them. Here are some options I'd be in favor of w/r/t Entosis Links . None of these ideas are mine - they come from Xttz, Progodlegend, or are otherwise ubiquitous across the community.
- Interdiction Nullifiers could interfere with the activation of an Entosis Link - T3s would need to refit a different subsystem once at a target via a moble depot, and the mods would not work at all with interceptors.
- Once activated, the Entosis Link could disable any fitted propulsion mod, like siege/triage currently.
- Progodlegend's idea - we could limit the link module to cruiser class hulls and above via cpu/pg.
I'd be happy with any/all of the above three tweaks. Cheers! That still doesn't address the fundamental issue of any single pilot in your local has to be treated as a potential threat to your sovereignty during a four hour window which means boring the socks off some of your pilots. The problem with this thread is its looking solely at the Entosis link where as the problem with the Entosis link is when its coupled with a vulnerability window. The two issues go hand in hand. None of these ideas address that issue and all of them are dismissed in the initial post of this thread. I agree the sov proposal is a fine starting position but it needs refinement and none of these ideas achieve that.
You have warning - you can wait until they start.
A cyno alt can stop their progress forcing them to either **** off, or come in to engage you. If you force them to engage, they can be trapped, caught and killed.
Who doesnt have a bunch of cyno alts? |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
883
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:04:55 -
[12] - Quote
EvilweaselFinance wrote:davet517 wrote:Ok, but how many different "troll" doctrines are you demand be nerfed? You know that someone can do the same thing to you with a "frigs and recons" black ops gang, right? Frigs for the links covered by falcons to shut down a few defenders. Things get hot, just cloak up and bounce.
that requires placing actual assets at risk, so i don't have an issue with it: you can get away with skill and luck but it's not so stupidly easy the risk is essentially zero the trollceptor is never at risk unless you pass out on your keyboard
Or a cerberus is on field. Or a linked rapier/huginn/lachesis/garmur. Or a sniper fit turret ship. Or a smartbombing camp is in the way. Or it comes in close to kill the ship with damps on it or that is running its own link.
It's never at risk if you're remotely not serious about contesting the structure. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
887
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:14:33 -
[13] - Quote
Promiscuous Female wrote:Veskrashen wrote:Promiscuous Female wrote:what is it about the concept "the interceptor can travel at will and disengage at will" are you chuckleheads failing to grasp The fact that it can't "disengage at will" while an Entosis Link is active? Which gives a defender up to 2 minutes to close and kill it? Especially when the fight starts at less than 80km due to combat probes? how do you close on an interceptor before it burns off grid exactly hint: they go fast, can't be bubbled, and scrams have a very short range on anything that can keep up with them
Unless they're linked, drugged and on high grade slaves, a Cerberus will ruin their day. So will a cloaky recon.
But let's not let realities get in the way of the propaganda machine. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
888
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:24:29 -
[14] - Quote
Promiscuous Female wrote:afkalt wrote:Promiscuous Female wrote:Veskrashen wrote:Promiscuous Female wrote:what is it about the concept "the interceptor can travel at will and disengage at will" are you chuckleheads failing to grasp The fact that it can't "disengage at will" while an Entosis Link is active? Which gives a defender up to 2 minutes to close and kill it? Especially when the fight starts at less than 80km due to combat probes? how do you close on an interceptor before it burns off grid exactly hint: they go fast, can't be bubbled, and scrams have a very short range on anything that can keep up with them Unless they're linked, drugged and on high grade slaves, a Cerberus will ruin their day. So will a cloaky recon. But let's not let realities get in the way of the propaganda machine. A rapier can only web to 100km with gang boners An arazu scram is under 75km A cerberus has a maximum engagement window of 125km, its missiles take 12 seconds to go that far, while the interceptor starts at 110km (malediction) and has the benefit of dscan, a 2 second minimum warp deceleration window, and a cruiser's terrible lock time in which to heat its MWD and start burning away none of these things require the malediction to have drugs, boners, or implants
100km is plenty. 75km is plenty as it will either be orbiting or stationary, you'll catch it.
Also, territory defended. Op success.
A NOOB SHIP with a link can stop this nonsense, never mind something with weapons.
These are never in a million years going to be the terrors you're making out if you live in your space. I recall of a lot of chat about siphons and this exact thing being bandied about. "It's too easy", "we'll siphon every moon in the cosmos just because".
If you think the eve collective can't come up with creative ways to stop these (hint: 80m modules assumed to be on EVERY 'ceptor in a given window is a big incentive to pop these) I don't know what to tell you (but I'm buying up smartbombs before it's too late) |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
890
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:28:10 -
[15] - Quote
DeadDuck wrote:The danger is not in the single guy that comes along in a fast ship to mess with your sov.
The abuse will be in a group of 5-10 fast ships protecting the "troll ceptor(s)" that can pretty much mess up the sov of a solid alliance without much effort or risk. That's it...
Bring 2 troll ceptors, 1 of grid booster, 3-5 ortrus/cynabals/Ishtars + 1 or 2 keres + 1 Logistic and you have a winner, to turn sov a nightmare to keep to 99,99% of the alliances in game.
This WILL happen unless there is a penalty to ship velocity of some kind even if It would make so much more sense to restrict the enthosis link to cap ships.
So roaming gangs get a fight? The HORROR! The abject HORROR!
If you live in your space and you cant handle this crap in your own, designated prime time....you deserve to lose it.
Good lord, you'd think these things are going to come crawling out from under your beds whilst you sleep. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
890
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:32:08 -
[16] - Quote
Promiscuous Female wrote:afkalt wrote: 100km is plenty. 75km is plenty as it will either be orbiting or stationary, you'll catch it.
Also, territory defended. Op success.
A NOOB SHIP with a link can stop this nonsense, never mind something with weapons.
These are never in a million years going to be the terrors you're making out if you live in your space. I recall of a lot of chat about siphons and this exact thing being bandied about. "It's too easy", "we'll siphon every moon in the cosmos just because".
If you think the eve collective can't come up with creative ways to stop these (hint: 80m modules assumed to be on EVERY 'ceptor in a given window is a big incentive to pop these) I don't know what to tell you (but I'm buying up smartbombs before it's too late)
why do you keep repeating the part about stopping the capture when we keep telling you that isn't where our concerns lie hell I will repeat it the issue is the ability for the interceptor to run away once a force comes to stop it, the fact that it cannot be killed outside of serious pilot error also you seem to have a funny concept of how distances work hint: 110km > 100km
Recons are cloaky.
Also seeing as the posts seem to be disappearing - I guess I'm not allowed to contest the trollceptors even though it is directly on topic. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
892
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:39:21 -
[17] - Quote
EvilweaselFinance wrote:afkalt wrote:Smartbomb camps will pop up. I GUARANTEE it. no they won't considering they don't work, as anyone who has ever tried one against inties knows
You heard it here first. No intys have ever died to a SB battleship gang.
I get it, you're all terrified of interceptors and want to hide behind hell bubbled gate camps. But let's not make out they're the boogieman here.
It is a game changer. We must adapt or fade into insignificance.
And yes, I'm eagerly awaiting the doomsayer threats of people RFing the whole of null...
People catch and kill quad stabbed frigates in FW....they'll catch these too. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
907
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 21:03:37 -
[18] - Quote
M1k3y Koontz wrote:Assassn Gallic 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. Except that doesn't "stop" the interceptor, it negates it until one of the two get bored and leave. That's not how sov should be working, you fight for your space not kite for your space. For the nay sayers one of the more likely fits with stats using an interceptor : [Raptor, trollceptor fit] Overdrive Injector System II - 447k isk Overdrive Injector System II -447k isk Overdrive Injector System II -447k isk Coreli A-Type 1MN Microwarpdrive -27.4m isk Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Script 1m isk Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Script 1m isk Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Script 1m isk [Empty High slot] [Empty High slot] [Empty High slot] Small Low Friction Nozzle Joints II 2.34m isk Small Low Friction Nozzle Joints II - 2.34m isk Fittings spare : 138 cpu (69%), 29.5 powergrid (62.11%). Implants : Eifyr and Co. 'Rogue' Navigation NN-603 -12m isk Fit moves @ 5,093m/s before heat and can target out to 124km. With heat : 7,278m/s Full stats can be found here : http://puu.sh/gt5GV/d49e6babaf.png Total isk with implants : 71,580,000. (assuming you always lose the pod) Amount of these you could see isk generated for per hour based on average income from varying sources : Nullsec anomaly afk ishtar 1 per hour Nullsec anomaly carrier 2 per hour Highsec "HQ" incursions 2 per hour ( can double that occasionally) Highsec "Vanguard" Incursions 1.8 per hour Highsec ice mining with perfect boosts 0.5 per hour This is per person assuming they have spent at least a day or two getting familiar with doing their activity. https://i.imgur.com/dZoUBJK.jpg 45 DPS at 124km, your interceptor is dead in under a minute (55.5 seconds, yes I did the math) It's also a fifth the cost. Your move. Also, yes it has remote sebos. If you can't get two guys together to defend your space against an interceptor in your prime time, what are you doing in sov?
But it'll run away! Apparently that represents an unsuccessful defence op....or some such garbage by people scared of the big bad interceptor. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
913
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 08:44:02 -
[19] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:I guess I will post it again and maybe it won't be drowned out in tears and rage: In regards to the Entosis Link using fuel:I think this is a good idea. Using one Strontium every time you turn the module on would do a few good things.
- As Mike pointed out earlier along with the original people I'm sure; it would mean there is some form of logistics taking place to contest these systems. Especially when it comes to the outer lying systems.
- Smaller ships, such as interceptors *hint hint*, will have to be somewhat selective on what systems to contest and how many times they are willing to try to contest it. If they find themselves dealing with actual defenders active in the system and negating their Entosis Link with their own, they will have wasted time and will need to move on.
- Even if super zippy, untouchable (allegedly... ) ships do their thing, they can only do it so long before they run out of fuel.
- The defenders have the luxary of nearby stations and POS's that are common for alliances that own sov to resupply their Entosis Links.
- Overdrive Injectors, which is used to gain fast speed, have a penalty to cargo space. Food for thought.
- If players do not like the idea of having to resupply so often with small fast ships, they can use larger ships with bigger cargo bays. These larger ships tend to be much, much slower than tiny fast frigates. Getting the picture now?
What the over all effect is it still means abandoned systems can still be captured just as easy as this new sov system wants, without having to subject itself to the mythical Trollceptors that terrorize the dreams of certain groups. What are your thoughts? Entosis fuel is a good idea. +1
No, but that is because of the 4 hour stalemate which can occur. Nothing will have fuel for that, thus making it an n+1 proposition again.
UNLESS it is fuel to activate ONLY and it doesnt burn for the duration of the laser. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
914
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 08:59:24 -
[20] - Quote
Sigras wrote:IMHO skirmish ships do not constitute "effective military control" of a grid if they constantly have to run away... For that reason I feel that the entosis link should disable propulsion mods the same way the HIC bubble does.
People keep saying this....but if the ship flies off, it loses control of the grid and the structure is not RF'd.
If they are allowed to remain uncontested, then yes....even a noob ship is controlling the grid by virtue of nothing else being there.
Intys are countered and sov defended by a single ship on grid. Apparently though, this is :effort: that is somehow unfair and everyone should neatly line up to die in camp duck shoots instead.
Other common facets are "we'll send 500 people in!!!" well....those 500 would rip stuff up today, too. Those 500 would rip stuff up tomorrow even if inties COULDN'T fit the link.
The whole thing is hyperbolic melodrama that will settle down within a few weeks of the changes going live. |
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
914
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 09:01:14 -
[21] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:afkalt wrote:Aiyshimin wrote:Entosis fuel is a good idea. +1 No, but that is because of the 4 hour stalemate which can occur. Nothing will have fuel for that, thus making it an n+1 proposition again. UNLESS it is fuel to activate ONLY and it doesnt burn for the duration of the laser. It could be just one unit to activate it and then it lasts until you no longer are on grid/dead/win/lose lock. Then it would last the whole four hours. Then again, maybe it shouldn't last the whole four hours and clearing the grid of hostiles before you go activating the Entosis Link is the way to go. Which I think is the better solution.
It kinda has to, otherwise the defenders can keep rolling the timer back if the attackers are under fuel pressure. Fuel badger DoctrineGäó shouldn't be a thing (for this). |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
914
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 09:22:44 -
[22] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:afkalt wrote:Aiyshimin wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:I guess I will post it again and maybe it won't be drowned out in tears and rage: In regards to the Entosis Link using fuel:I think this is a good idea. Using one Strontium every time you turn the module on would do a few good things.
- As Mike pointed out earlier along with the original people I'm sure; it would mean there is some form of logistics taking place to contest these systems. Especially when it comes to the outer lying systems.
- Smaller ships, such as interceptors *hint hint*, will have to be somewhat selective on what systems to contest and how many times they are willing to try to contest it. If they find themselves dealing with actual defenders active in the system and negating their Entosis Link with their own, they will have wasted time and will need to move on.
- Even if super zippy, untouchable (allegedly... ) ships do their thing, they can only do it so long before they run out of fuel.
- The defenders have the luxary of nearby stations and POS's that are common for alliances that own sov to resupply their Entosis Links.
- Overdrive Injectors, which is used to gain fast speed, have a penalty to cargo space. Food for thought.
- If players do not like the idea of having to resupply so often with small fast ships, they can use larger ships with bigger cargo bays. These larger ships tend to be much, much slower than tiny fast frigates. Getting the picture now?
What the over all effect is it still means abandoned systems can still be captured just as easy as this new sov system wants, without having to subject itself to the mythical Trollceptors that terrorize the dreams of certain groups. What are your thoughts? Entosis fuel is a good idea. +1 No, but that is because of the 4 hour stalemate which can occur. Nothing will have fuel for that, thus making it an n+1 proposition again. UNLESS it is fuel to activate ONLY and it doesnt burn for the duration of the laser. Wait what, a solo ship will keep the sov beam running for 4 hours in what scenario? I don't see fleetmates bringing you fuel as any kind of n+1 issue, as much as I love solo PVP, sov warfare is not the arena for that.
In an actual contested scenario - links from each side force a tie - then it comes down to who brought most fuel. I don't think that is the way to go.
So you have two fleets duking it out with links rolling - this can go on some hours at times. It could easily come down to who has more fuel, which will probably be the defenders.
An ACTIVATION only cost would mitigate this, just don't think it should burn fuel from initiation UNTIL module deactiviation given the indeterminate time it might be active for. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
914
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 09:27:46 -
[23] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:afkalt wrote: Intys are countered and sov defended by a single ship on grid. Apparently though, this is :effort: that is somehow unfair and everyone should neatly line up to die in camp duck shoots instead.
Your dogged insistence on misconstruing other people's arguments aside, you're still totally wrong. People feel like it's unacceptable that a single "can't touch me!" interceptor ship can force them to have to remain on grid with every structure in their alliance four hours per day. That's not a fun mechanic, it's not using the sov you live in, and it's not promoting conflict. It's just babysitting.
And the effort bar to stop them is lower than safely transporting a hauler though high sec (you know, that low effort thing people keep talking about) so make the effort to defend the space.
You're also willfully misconstruing the mechanics. I don't need to stay on grid, I can relax until such time as the timer is nearly done. I can then undock a cyno alt and contest it, thus driving you off having wasted all your time.
What do I lose.....? Nothing. You **** time up the wall in a futile action we can counter with a mere inactive ALT. Or are you going to try and tell me cyno alts are otherwise engaged all the time? Waffle. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
917
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 18:56:54 -
[24] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Eli Apol wrote:baltec1 wrote:I rubbished every one of your counters and you are still not understanding why these ships would be so bad for the game. So far you only come across as all for cepters because grr goons I honestly don't care for any sov group of any size. The fact that goons have been pushing an obvious agenda is the only reason I might appear to be 'grrr goons' They've honestly NEVER had any affect on my online experience except very tedious local spam when I've been in the same systems as them so I'm not sure why I'd be grrr goons except on your say so. My motive is just discussing the mechanics and pointing out they're not as flawed as you insist. A few pages back I suggested that IF the harbingers of doom were correct then make it a midslot module or add a targetting range nerf to it. Then people started with the whole 'but you're just a salvager' shtick which got really tired the first time around, it's nearly as monotonous as the whole 'just where on the doll....' but anyway. I digress. grrrr goons just say "No! Ban ceptors, they're OP because of an article published by our in-house blog!" So yeah if you think the counters don't work, from grid fu to sniping HACs to boosted ceptors to tac dessies with oversized propmods... then just a simple slight tweak of the module stats can completely negate this terrifying tactic WITHOUT removing nullified ships from the potential threats to vacant sov. There are only two ways to go about this. Remove destroyers and frigates from being able to fit this mod Reduce to range of said sov laser down to no more than 50km.
Seeing as the "complaint" is people will run away and even an idiot can get a cruisers to a <3s align/3s warp and still be fully combat effective, never mind the ridiculous eft warrior crap being vomited forth....this will fix nothing.
Of course, the main point of contention is....being able to run away is nowhere near as game breaking as the walls, literal WALLS of posts from half a dozen people would have us believe. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
921
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 20:16:24 -
[25] - Quote
Amyclas Amatin wrote:Sigras wrote:Really this whole thread is trying to answer one question, what is "effective military control"?
If I have 20 battleships and 10 guardians on grid and you have 30 vagabonds and 10 scimitars on grid who has "effective military control"? Sure I cant catch you, but you cannot come near my fleet or you die.
Does a super kite-y fleet with the ability to run away exert military control?
The biggest problem is that the answer to that question IS going to effect the fleet meta out in 0.0 and there is no getting around that. You have 20 battleships and 10 guardians on one one system. You have no presence in another 5 systems of the constellation but somehow feel entitled to "hold" them.
Fixed that there. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
922
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 20:29:27 -
[26] - Quote
Amyclas Amatin wrote:afkalt wrote:Amyclas Amatin wrote:Sigras wrote:Really this whole thread is trying to answer one question, what is "effective military control"?
If I have 20 battleships and 10 guardians on grid and you have 30 vagabonds and 10 scimitars on grid who has "effective military control"? Sure I cant catch you, but you cannot come near my fleet or you die.
Does a super kite-y fleet with the ability to run away exert military control?
The biggest problem is that the answer to that question IS going to effect the fleet meta out in 0.0 and there is no getting around that. You have 20 battleships and 10 guardians on one one system. I have 5 ceptors spread in 5 systems of the constellation and give you the finger. You have no presence in another 5 systems of the constellation but somehow feel entitled to "hold" them. Fixed that there. A doesn't imply B.
Well then there's no problem.
Speaking of, I'm still curious as to the problem. I could fail fit a battlecruiser that aligns so fast it couldnt even be caught by an inty entering the system and troll you with that and still breaks 6.3km/s to break grids. Were I so clinically dumb.
So really...when we get down to it...it's the bubbles. People hate that the can't hide behind walls of bubbles. I get that but what is the eve mantra...ah yes...HTFU.
Or maybe people just have a fundamental hate for the module and are masking it behind the inty smokescreen. I don't know, I just know I can smell the bullshit wafting from this thread on Saturn. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
923
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 20:54:07 -
[27] - Quote
Amyclas Amatin wrote:afkalt wrote: Speaking of, I'm still curious as to the problem. I could fail fit a battlecruiser that aligns so fast it couldnt even be caught by an inty entering the system and troll you with that and still breaks 6.3km/s to break grids. Were I so clinically dumb.
So really...when we get down to it...it's the bubbles. People hate that the can't hide behind walls of bubbles. I get that but what is the eve mantra...ah yes...HTFU.
Or maybe people just have a fundamental hate for the module and are masking it behind the inty smokescreen. I don't know, I just know I can smell the bullshit wafting from this thread on Saturn.
Going by that logic, bubbles shouldn't exist. Honor brawls with module points only right? HTFU and all...
Or maybe I have higher expectations of what defending things ought to be.
So at least we've bottomed it out now. The "problem"...sorry - witch you're trying hunt - is nullification. The same thing regularly cried about, because it makes inattentive bears, sad pandas. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
924
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 23:46:15 -
[28] - Quote
Borachon wrote:50% chance of losing your 1.5b ISK ihub
That's a very off assumption - in moderately upgraded system, the deck is stacked hard in the defenders favor.
>>If the Sovereignty structure exiting its reinforcement period has an owner, then occupancy defense bonuses apply to all of the Command Nodes for that structureGÇÖs event
In other words, defenders always cap in 10 minutes, attackers in 10-40. Multiply that by the 10 nodes required and even a 5 minute difference starts adding up fast.
Unless you blob them - but blobbing to take sov is hardly new and has no bearing on these debates. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
924
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 13:28:58 -
[29] - Quote
Borachon wrote:afkalt wrote: Unless you blob them - but blobbing to take sov... has no bearing on these debates.
My point is that big groups will show up exactly because ihubs are , valuable, hard to replace, and the event is scheduled. We've all seen how PL has farmed BRAVE at timers, we know how many supers NC. has to throw around, and we all know exactly who Fozzie is referring to when he talks about "weaponinzing boredom". Even assuming you're right though, if you contested 95% of ihub pings:
- If it costs the attacker 25m per ihub ping (riiiight...), you'd have to win 75% of ihub reinforces to break even
- If it costs the attacker 10m per ihub ping, you'd have to win almost 90% of ihub reinforces to break even
- If it costs the attacker 5m per ihub ping, you'd have to win 94% of ihub reinforces to break even
Having to win 95% of ihub pings and 95% of ihub reinforcements to break even is a pretty heavy burden.
See now this, this is worth talking about. Much better than about 95% of the other posts in here!
This point is valid almost IRRESPECTIVE of the (subcap) hulls this is mounted on. So this should be concentrated on as a priority and NOT the hulls - we all know how easy it is for a dedicated effort to get behind lines. Your point (I've assumed the numbers are valid) is a huge one and hinges around the entire mechanic and not the ships/modules themselves.
I do wonder if it will take us into a M.A.D. type policy though.
That being said, there are already a LOT of RF's done simply to cause grief/poke a fight with no intention of taking the asset RF'd. It is possible we are overestimating the level of harassment, as it it very possible to harass today. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
924
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 13:57:54 -
[30] - Quote
hanabal drake wrote:it will also make it very hard for smaller alliances to fend of attacks from larger ones and dosent help them at all
They're (smalls) hardly smacking them around today either.
As I posted above, with the data from Borachon - the hull makes literally no cost difference until you hit capitals.
ANY T1 is going to be trivial because of insurance.
We should not be focused on hulls so much as the entire mechanic. |
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
924
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 15:29:01 -
[31] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Then disallow Interceptors, and anything else smaller than a Cruiser, from carrying the Entosis Link. Your "problem" is solved. My "problem" is solved.
If we're assuming bypassing camps, cruisers fitting it do NOT solve the problem in the slightest. Neither, frankly, do battlecruisers.
You can fit a cruiser to a 3 second time to enter warp. They can do up over 5200m/s before links. That's without oversizing the prop mod. You can get a stabber up past 10k no problems with an oversized mod.
Point being, they can disengage JUST as easily as an interceptor.
The fundamental "problem" is that some people feel the mechanic is broken (I'm on the fence in light of the math post). Sure, people have got some notions on how to control it, but the blunt truth is you CANNOT realistically control it. You can comfortably fit any subcap class to go so fast that anything which can actually realistically catch it will die in a fire.
If people have issue with "disengage trolling", there are NO arbitrary ship class limits (subcap) which will stop this. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
924
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 15:33:30 -
[32] - Quote
Borachon wrote:afkalt wrote: This point is valid almost IRRESPECTIVE of the (subcap) hulls this is mounted on. So this should be concentrated on as a priority and NOT the hulls - we all know how easy it is for a dedicated effort to get behind lines. Your point (I've assumed the numbers are valid) is a huge one and hinges around the entire mechanic and not the ships/modules themselves.
I got sick of running these numbers by hand and made a google docs spreadsheet to handle it. It's linked below, so you can make a copy and you can play with the costs of each ping and the cost of the sov structure yourself. Set the cost per ping by hand, and set the cost of the ihub by setting the number of upgrades of each level in it. Results are on the second (Net Cost) sheet. A few examples from running numbers: At 10M isk risked per ping and the defender winning 90% (9 out of 10!) of all ihub reinforces:
- With an ihub with two L2 upgrades, you would need to win 90% of all ihub pings.
- With an ihub with two L3 upgrades, you would need to win 95% of all ihub pings.
- With an ihub with two L4 upgrades, you would need to win 97% of all ihub pings
Try it out yourself at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XFFmVyn6Ov-paaHjmMuq8OMgfMTMiF2Z3WHyEsRikX8/edit?usp=sharing
I believe you, my quoted post was an effort to direct the discussions towards THIS and AWAY from the hulls. Because the hulls basically don't matter a damn.
Ban intys, people will use cruisers, ban cruisers and people will use battlecruisers and so it continues. I still am assuming your numbers to be correct and on that assumption there is a fundamental problem here (to my eyes) and it has nothing to do with ship types.
I think that one of the easier ways to attack this, is to have the module affect targeting like stabs do (numbers TBH). Bringing people in closer - you can still upship to known snipers and SeBo your arse off, but then you've a heap of other sacrifices on the cards. Thing is, though, that the defence of burning off grid the minute dscan pops is....essentially unassailable. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
924
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 15:47:56 -
[33] - Quote
Borachon wrote: *or* by making sov upgrades cheaper.
I'd be fully supportive of this. You should want to save them because you're using them and they're GOOD. Not for the sole reason that it's a bastard to replace them. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
924
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 16:22:08 -
[34] - Quote
@Fozzie any word on the questions in the post of mine on page 1?
Quoted for reference
afkalt wrote:You need to make who is using a link appear on the overview (like scrams/ewar to players do at the moment). A purely "visual" effect will be impossible to get a hold of the right ship to target. We also need some clarity on the following points (there are probably more) >How will warping be blocked >Does this affect MJDs/MWDs (i.e. is it a scram or a point effect) >What happens if the ship loses lock >Capital cycle time was discussed to be longer - is the capture time also longer >Will cynoing OUT with an active link be allowed i.e. does this fully "tackle" caps and supers too? >Are other high slot mods blocked at the time the link is active - bastion/triage/etc/etc Also - make the module drop rate 100% - encourage hunting non-committal attempts to troll. It'll pay better than ratting Add occupancy bonuses in reverse to defenders recapturing - so a fully upgraded object can be recapped by defenders in <2.5 minutes. ed: start the alert at the cycle start, not end.
I'm specifically interested in the tackle mechanics around supers/MJDs and synergy with things like bastion/triage. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
925
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 17:24:52 -
[35] - Quote
Appreciate the response. I'll edit them into post #2 so it's obvious.
Thanks Fozzie.
Ed: Turns out there are too many quotes so I just linked it. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
928
|
Posted - 2015.03.13 10:01:32 -
[36] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:That argument is invalid and your point is moot.
A trollceptor really doesn't need any targeting rigs, it can keep the agility/speed rigs. It can simply stay within it's innate targeting range envelope while running the entosis link, and if anything that poses a real threat appears on grid, he can start to burn away from the structure at max speed. This way, trollceptor either ends up getting the defenders chase him, but not really able to catch him until a time that he can activate his warp drive again, or if the defenders don't chase him, the grid breaks. Either option makes it so that the trollceptor will remain perfectly safe.
Let me get this right .
From this thread they're broken because:
They'll be moving too fast to be caught They'll be sitting still They'll be too far away at 100+km They'll be in normal lock range They'll be targeting range fit They'll be pure speed fit They'll kill the defender They'll not fight the defender They'll burn off as soon as something is on dscan They'll burn off as soon as they land on grid It'll troll you alone It'll have a full support fleet behind it. It'll contest sov It's not there to contest sov .... ....
It's very hard to keep track, can you guys make your minds up about which form the boogieceptor is going to take, please? |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
969
|
Posted - 2015.03.25 12:24:35 -
[37] - Quote
Or dont bother and use the legions of cyno alts to counter link the structure?
Or let it sit on the timer until near the end and waste its time then contest it yourself.
Why are we still freaking out about this non-problem? There are many and varied ways to neuter this, we're smart people - we've probably not even found the best one yet. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
970
|
Posted - 2015.03.25 13:30:36 -
[38] - Quote
If they're serious about contesting sov, it WILL generate fights. If they are out to troll you, troll 'em right back. Even a moderately upgraded system makes this pretty easy. They'll waste active pilot time and more of it when you waste...12 minutes out a sensor damped alts otherwise inactive evening. I doubt that'll go on for more than 6 weeks (after sov readjusts itself) before people get bored and you see the serious attempts pretty much in exclusivity.
Small fast craft could be considered a vanguard - penetration testing. But when it comes to the crunch, it wont be frigates contesting sov. Not by a long shot. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
970
|
Posted - 2015.03.25 13:58:34 -
[39] - Quote
Remember there are warm bodies on both sides. The attacker wastes more time than the defender in all used systems. I suspect this will go the way of the siphons - remember how so many of those were going to be deployed they'd blot out the sun.....or uh...not as actually transpired.
These will hit an equilibrium over (a fairly short time) and heavy trolling will not really happen. Most likely I see the harassment being a tool for roaming gangs to force the locals to respond.
I could be wrong, but there's a lot of heavy agendas in play here, hell bent on being able to defend space by not being there. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
971
|
Posted - 2015.03.25 17:39:43 -
[40] - Quote
Or run it down and kill it in a 10mn T3 destroyer. PS: The caldari one will be picture perfect for this, by the way.
No the "problem" here is that people don't want to have to commit an equivalent ship to defence as the attacker does. They don't want to have to live in the space they own and they want to dig big moats and pull up the bridges via gate camps. They want to maintain the status quo or bring bigger guns and more of them. They paint a spectre of a mythical ship that will barely see the light of day this time next year and will not be used to contest sov in any meaningful way provided (and this is the sticking point) people live in the space they own. |
|
|
|
|