Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 76 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
Elenahina
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
191
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:15:07 -
[241] - Quote
Murkar Omaristos wrote:And limit the number of entosis modules that can be activated against a target corp at one time so small gangs cant just all spread out to different systems and wreak total havoc.
Absolutely ******* no. This is exactly what small entites should be able to do - harrass their larger neighbors and conceal their true targets behind false flags.
Agony Unleashed is Recruiting - Small Gang PvP in Null Sec
|
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
584
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:15:13 -
[242] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:xttz wrote:Will an active Entosis Link prevent cloaking? Last time I checked you can't target anything while cloaked. that is not what "prevent cloaking" means |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
309
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:15:28 -
[243] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:I see coalitions full of super capitals and other 'bling bling' type stuff. You guys even refer to losing 250 billion ISK to a thief as 'chump change and doesn't affect the goon bottom line.'
So tell me, which is it. You are rich or you are poor? Because you can't flip flop around depending on the subject. If you are the later then maybe you should start to question why your leadership is hording all the money while you starve.
You're confusing alliance income and personal income there. Coalitions can afford to field supercapitals in numbers because a)they're almost never killed when deployed like that, and b)the alliances involved can afford to replace them, where the individual pilot might not easily do so. They're strategic assets, mostly.
Also, the 250b isk stolen was largely made in highsec - the Miniluv cache comes from selling off the loot from ganks. It's not that it 'doesn't affect the goon bottom line' because it's chump change - it doesn't impact the alliance finances because Miniluv is self-supporting. Organized highsec ganking is profitable, and the profits get rolled back into the Ministry's operations. |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
62
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:15:41 -
[244] - Quote
Murkar Omaristos wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Quote:As much as possible, the Entosis Link capture progress should reflect which group has effective military control of the grid. This will not happen if frigates are allowed to use it. Quote:The optimal strategy for fighting over a location with the Entosis Link should be to gain effective control of the grid.
Then make it disable prop mods as well, so people can't ***** out and kite their way through a sov capture. If their intent to attack the sov in a given system is genuine and not just trolling, then they'll have no problem fighting for control of the grid, instead of kiting until the other guy dies of boredom. One or both of those things should be implemented, if you are actually serious about making it matter who has control of the grid. Otherwise it will be a trolling contest. This......is actually a very good idea. No, this is not. That idea is basically throwing the baby out with the bathwater. So because you are worried about a handful of super fast ships you kill all propulsion to fix it? That is terrible. You address the key ships and make adjustments. Not turn the grid into 'Only Brick Tanked Slow Boats Allowed' game play. |
Eli Apol
Pro Synergy
328
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:15:42 -
[245] - Quote
Promiscuous Female wrote:Eli Apol wrote:Sbrodor wrote:250km is some time a offgrid distance, grid manipulation mechanics and other edge-mechanics; i think is better close range to 50km is good . Another good counter to the trollceptors: Grid fu to make them leave grid whilst orbitting and lose their locks Nice one :) this is not how grid fu works You can shrink a grid by extending the grids that surround it... I learned this from a goons .pdf
It's quite a common technique in Niarja and Uedema to make the grids surrounding the gates smaller so that they can gank offgrid without having to bump the freighters so far.
Grid Fu Guide wrote:How to Shrink Grids ItGÇÖs very easy to shrink a grid and is something that can be setup before a conflict and bookmarks can be made to quickly re-shrink the grid.
General Steps: 1. Pilot starts at the Tower and chooses a direction to fly towards. 2. Start burning away from the Tower. 3. When you fall off grid. Stop the ship, drop a can/corpse/etc, and make a Bookmark. - Name the bookmark something meaningful. 4. Start flying back towards the Tower. 5. When you get back on grid with the Tower, stop and turn back around. 6. When you fall off grid again you should see your first can/corpse/etc. Stop the ship, drop a can/corpse/etc, and make a Bookmark. 7. Repeat steps 4 - 6 until you hit a hard wall. - Normally, this will occur when you are about 140km from the Tower. |
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
612
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:16:11 -
[246] - Quote
afkalt wrote: 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.
an npc alt posting obviously incorrect information ad nauseum trying to win a discussion by sheer attrition, what a surprise
none of those things will ruin its day because it will trivially disengage |
DaeHan Minhyok
Multiplex Gaming The Bastion
50
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:17:26 -
[247] - Quote
What if the entosis link required charges each cycle and the quantity and volume of charges made it inpractical for T1/T2 frig/desi or tactical desi to run a link long enough to challenge any solar system sov with any single index above a 2-3?
Thus a small ship would have to sacrifice its low slots and rigs to cargo rxpansion hampering its speed, agility, dps, and tank.
This would also make battlecruisers and larger a necessity for taking systems with higher indices. |
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
584
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:17:28 -
[248] - Quote
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 |
xttz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
455
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:17:32 -
[249] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:xttz wrote:Will an active Entosis Link prevent cloaking? Last time I checked you can't target anything while cloaked.
It's a point about contesting without risk. Let's say a ship sits 200km+ off a structure with a link active. Can it simply hit the cloak button and be safe until the current cycle ends, then warp off? |
Soldarius
Kosher Nostra The 99 Percent
1172
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:17:55 -
[250] - Quote
Eli Apol wrote:Sbrodor wrote:250km is some time a offgrid distance, grid manipulation mechanics and other edge-mechanics; i think is better close range to 50km is good . Another good counter to the trollceptors: Grid fu to make them leave grid whilst orbitting and lose their locks
Last I checked intentionally shrinking a grid is considered an exploit and will get you banned. So don't do it.
As for trollceptors, a one-off troll link is no big concern. There are plenty of ways to counter that from snipers, to damps, to defensive links. But like my first post in the original thread, I'm more worried about a large enitity roaming around with 50 of them and reinforcing everything with little to no risk.
I still think that the easiest way to handle the problem is to treat the Entosis Link like a link and only be fittable on link-capable ships; ie CBCs, CS, and link T3s.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
|
John McCreedy
Eve Defence Force The Kadeshi
163
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:18:27 -
[251] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Murkar Omaristos wrote:Remove trollceptors as a possibility plz, kthx. And limit the number of entosis modules that can be activated against a target corp at one time so small gangs cant just all spread out to different systems and wreak total havoc. So this alliance that owns the sov can't spare enough guys to match that small gang in their prime time to defend the systems being contested? I don't get it. There seems to be a lot of cherry picking going around when creating these doomsday situations.
I don't know about you but the average player plays around 3-4 hours a day during the week. Your alliance is going to set the vulnerability window to the time you play Eve. I'm going to sit there in my cloaky interceptor. Am I there to annoy you? Or am I there to reinforce your sov? You can't probe me out because I'm cloaked. You can't stop me because I'm interdiction nullified. Do you want to take the chance I can reinforce G-E? More importantly, does Brave?
So you have a choice. Ignore me and hope I'm just there as an annoyance. Or risk sov in your Capital system. If you want to protect it, you've no choice but to set up a camps on the Station, the TCU and the iHub because gate camps are useless. So your entire play time is reduced to a camp to try catch a cloaky camper that may or may not attack your sov. No ratting for you. No mining for you. No roaming for you. All the other time zones in your alliance can rat or mine or roam. But not you. Not yours. You are on guard duty. Why? Because CCP decided it was a good idea to allow Interceptors to reinforce systems. Sound like fun to you? |
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
584
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:18:59 -
[252] - Quote
Eli Apol wrote:Promiscuous Female wrote:Eli Apol wrote:Sbrodor wrote:250km is some time a offgrid distance, grid manipulation mechanics and other edge-mechanics; i think is better close range to 50km is good . Another good counter to the trollceptors: Grid fu to make them leave grid whilst orbitting and lose their locks Nice one :) this is not how grid fu works You can shrink a grid by extending the grids that surround it... I learned this from a goons .pdf It's quite a common technique in Niarja and Uedema to make the grids surrounding the gates smaller so that they can gank offgrid without having to bump the freighters so far. you can only do this if there is no one else on grid holding it open
grid fu will never cause a stationary ship to suddenly slip out of a grid through no fault of its own |
Darius Caliente
The Pinecone Squad
101
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:21:29 -
[253] - Quote
It seems to me that the solution to ensure the Entosis link isn't abused is to merge the mechanics of two existing modules.
1) Cyno -- Staying stationary is probably overkill but providing an overview icon, visible across the entire system that anyone can warp to would be a good start.
2) Warp Disruption Field Generator -- Penalize the velocity bonus of MWDs and ABs.
Tying those two mechanics together would be a good start.
|
DeadDuck
The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance
135
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:22:14 -
[254] - Quote
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. |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
1741
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:22:22 -
[255] - Quote
I wonder how you want to establish effective military control with members of your own your own alliance on multiple grids at once against things like slippery Petes and bombers that kill anything that activates an entosis link. All while the entosing ship can't receive remote reps.
Build your empire !
Rent Space in Feythabolis and Omist
Contact me for details :)
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
720
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:22:25 -
[256] - Quote
Hopefully the person who keeps reporting my posts will not be able to get this one removed, fingers crossed:
The question about interceptors is a key one in terms of certain regions that are very difficult to get to, the first concept to work back to is the question of whether this requires regional defence or system defence. If you want it to be system defence the interceptors must be an option.
The issue of course comes in with the ability to get there, this is not Grrr Goons, but Goon Deklin is the example that I need to highlight, without the use of interceptors you give the Goons such a strategic advantage we might as well just give up, all they have to do is gate camp three gates, which will be behind other gate camps. Then you will give them free reign to run around doing what they want with very little fear about their home area.
It comes down to you CCP Fozzie thinking whether having people able to RF stuff with interceptors to grief balances off against the inability to get into Deklin space in any meaningful way.
I of course would prefer to have the ability to use interceptors as part of what I would call the softening up period, trying to throw the defender off balance by splitting their defence, but I would be happy to do that in a fair amount of 0.0 space without the ability of interceptors to get through bubbles and gate camps, but not killing me in terms of cost if lost, the only other ships that could do that are T3's but they cost.
So if you remove the ability to use interceptors you reduce the need for system defence!
Ella's Snack bar
|
xttz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
455
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:22:37 -
[257] - Quote
DaeHan Minhyok wrote:What if the entosis link required charges each cycle and the quantity and volume of charges made it inpractical for T1/T2 frig/desi or tactical desi to run a link long enough to challenge any solar system sov with any single index above a 2-3?
Thus a small ship would have to sacrifice its low slots and rigs to cargo rxpansion hampering its speed, agility, dps, and tank.
This would also make battlecruisers and larger a necessity for taking systems with higher indices.
This is a more elegant solution than preventing specific fits. If frigates could only run 1 or 2 cycles before needing to reload somewhere, they would at least require some form of support and/or teamwork.
It probably does make blockade runners the new Big Bad, but at least they're vulnerable to bubbles. |
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
584
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:23:29 -
[258] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Hopefully the person who keeps reporting my posts will not be able to get this one removed, fingers crossed:
The question about interceptors is a key one in terms of certain regions that are very difficult to get to, the first concept to work back to is the question of whether this requires regional defence or system defence. If you want it to system defence the interceptors must be an option.
The issue of course comes in with the ability to get there, this is not Grrr Goons, but Goon Deklin is the example that I need to highlight, without the use of interceptors you give the Goons such a strategic advantage we might as well just give up, all they have to do is gate camp three gates, which will be behind other gate camps. Then you will give them free reign to run around doing what they want with very little fear about their home area.
It comes down to you CCP Fozzie thinking whether having people able to RF stuff with interceptors to grief balances off against the inability to get into Deklin space in any meaningful way.
I of course would prefer to have the ability to use interceptors as part of what I would call the softening up period, trying to throw the defender off balance by splitting their defence, but I would be happy to do that in a fair amount of 0.0 space without the ability of interceptors to get through bubbles and gate camps, but not killing me in terms of cost if lost, the only other ships that could do that are T3's but they cost.
So if you remove the ability to use interceptors you reduce the need for system defence! i guess they don't have blops BS, covert cloaking ships, or wormholes where you live |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
62
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:24:21 -
[259] - Quote
xttz wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:xttz wrote:Will an active Entosis Link prevent cloaking? Last time I checked you can't target anything while cloaked. It's a point about contesting without risk. Let's say a ship sits 200km+ off a structure with a link active. Can it simply hit the cloak button and be safe until the current cycle ends, then warp off? Apologies. I miss read what you said.
I understand what you are saying now. I'm not opposed to the idea that it should not be possible to fit a cloak and Entosis Link at the same time. They could be cloaked with the Entosis Link and Depot in their cargo and just refit when the system is empty, but I don't see that as a deal breaker. After all, if the defending sov owner does not have a presence in the system in their prime time, then they don't need it. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
888
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:24:29 -
[260] - 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) |
|
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
225
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:24:34 -
[261] - Quote
You say you don't want to artificially skew the meta by allowing the entosis link on command ships and battleships only, but I still wouldn't want to see this module on frigate and destroyer class ships. At least not without significant drawback. I would approach this by using rather high fitting requirements, say around 150 for each cpu and powergrid.
This would ensure that entosis link fitted frigates and dessis would have seriously gimped fits and massive t1 cruiser fleets wouldn't be able to fit those things on mass without a certain penalty.
You should also consider "entosis link travel time". It shouldn't be a massive logistical challenge to get the link to the intended destination. But it should def. take longer than a ceptor would need. |
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
618
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:25:23 -
[262] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:It comes down to you CCP Fozzie thinking whether having people able to RF stuff with interceptors to grief balances off against the inability to get into Deklin space in any meaningful way. if deklein, the most populated and well-used 0.0 region in the entire game, isn't easily defensible what on earth do you think is going to happen to every single other region no matter what the defenders do |
Eli Apol
Pro Synergy
329
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:25:30 -
[263] - Quote
Promiscuous Female wrote:Eli Apol wrote:Promiscuous Female wrote:this is not how grid fu works You can shrink a grid by extending the grids that surround it... I learned this from a goons .pdf It's quite a common technique in Niarja and Uedema to make the grids surrounding the gates smaller so that they can gank offgrid without having to bump the freighters so far. you can only do this if there is no one else on grid holding it open grid fu will never cause a stationary ship to suddenly slip out of a grid through no fault of its own So now the trollceptors are stationary and a defensive group has no time in the preceeding days/weeks/months to grid-fu the environs around their susceptible structures before this cloud of stationary interceptors arrives and sits with zero transversal? Keep digging that hole. |
Groperson
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
60
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:27:08 -
[264] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Groperson wrote:Kinis Deren 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! Nope. We'd end up with a "bubble border" around every coalition to stop anyone from threatening the current sov null paradigm. Allowing inties and T3's to fit and use the Entosis module prevents bubble spam being an effective strategy in nullifying the proposed sov mechanics. Play the game and defend your systems then you won't have any issues coping with lone interceptors. The thing is, if you allow interceptors to attack sov. What do you risk as the attacker? Even in the most well defended region of space: deklein, you can just zoom interceptor gangs through with no risk because they are uncatchable. That' bubble spam' that you encounter is called 'the residents defending their space' You are advocating that even if residents defend their space, they will never be able to catch the people who are attacking it. That is broken, you risk nothing for attack and yet force the defenders to form a response and if it is insufficiently quick, do 10x the amount of work than the attackers. If you want to play at the sov game then you should have to risk something, if you allow entosis links on interceptors, the attacker risks nothing. Whilst the defender has everything at risk. Maybe you guys should leave some of the PvPers behind to protect the nullbears instead of deploying them to the other side of the map as ~honorable 3rd party~.
We do, we have pvp'ers at home, running bubbled gatecamps with instalockers and even they are unable to catch the interceptor gangs that come through. How would you suggest we counter the interceptor gangs? |
John McCreedy
Eve Defence Force The Kadeshi
165
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:27:09 -
[265] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Hopefully the person who keeps reporting my posts will not be able to get this one removed, fingers crossed:
The question about interceptors is a key one in terms of certain regions that are very difficult to get to, the first concept to work back to is the question of whether this requires regional defence or system defence. If you want it to be system defence the interceptors must be an option.
The issue of course comes in with the ability to get there, this is not Grrr Goons, but Goon Deklin is the example that I need to highlight, without the use of interceptors you give the Goons such a strategic advantage we might as well just give up, all they have to do is gate camp three gates, which will be behind other gate camps. Then you will give them free reign to run around doing what they want with very little fear about their home area.
It comes down to you CCP Fozzie thinking whether having people able to RF stuff with interceptors to grief balances off against the inability to get into Deklin space in any meaningful way.
I of course would prefer to have the ability to use interceptors as part of what I would call the softening up period, trying to throw the defender off balance by splitting their defence, but I would be happy to do that in a fair amount of 0.0 space without the ability of interceptors to get through bubbles and gate camps, but not killing me in terms of cost if lost, the only other ships that could do that are T3's but they cost.
So if you remove the ability to use interceptors you reduce the need for system defence!
No, it simply requires the attacker to put a little more planning in to their attack than simply jump in an especially fitted interceptor and burn all the way from Feythabolis to Deklien in order to knock VFK in to reinforce mode? What was that about nerfing power projection, CCP? |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
890
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:28:10 -
[266] - 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. |
Super Noodle
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:28:40 -
[267] - Quote
Fozzie, can you please scrap this entire plan you've come up with to rework sov and start over from scratch. It's garbage. |
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
588
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:29:01 -
[268] - Quote
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 |
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
618
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:29:08 -
[269] - Quote
Groperson wrote:[We do, we have pvp'ers at home, running bubbled gatecamps with instalockers and even they are unable to catch the interceptor gangs that come through. How would you suggest we counter the interceptor gangs? obviously by using neuting bumping nafalgars or whatever the latest theoretical approach is that anyone who has spent 5m in null knows won't work and why
i think smartbombs are the lastest hotness in theorycrafting because npc alts can't activate smartbombs where they live so they don't know you can't smartbomb if you'd hit a gate |
Killian Cormac
Cormac Distribution
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:29:09 -
[270] - Quote
John McCreedy wrote: you have a choice. Ignore me and hope I'm just there as an annoyance. Or risk sov in your Capital system.
False dichotomies work on five-year-olds, they should work fine here too. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 76 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |