|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Daneel Trevize
The Scope
Gallente Federation
4
   |
Posted - 2011.12.18 19:39:00 -
[1] - Quote
Call it Why2K?
Because it's questions (Why)
2 Ks (Kil2 & Kovorix)
and y'all oldschool (Y2K) |
Daneel Trevize
The Scope
Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 17:39:00 -
[2] - Quote
Fellblade wrote:Something I think it would be useful to cover is MWD vs AB tied in with the selection of long / short point and / or web. E.g, I (personally) don't tend to fit an MWD on ships with a scram, as if I'm in scram range, they're in scram range as well.
It'd be interesting to hear your views on the pros/cons. They might be in scram range but they might not need a scram to keep you pointed or to be close, they could just start off there or come in to do max dps and have far greater speed to still control range (Cynabal).
Scram and AB can't catch anything same-sized or smaller unless very lucky.
Blaster boat without mwd and scram (and web) is kinda crazy unless shield+nano+long point+range bonused. Even if you expect your enemies will have scrams, you need one - see frigates. |
Daneel Trevize
The Scope
Gallente Federation
67
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 14:48:00 -
[3] - Quote
Episode 5? |
Daneel Trevize
The Scope
Gallente Federation
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.12 22:15:00 -
[4] - Quote
Well that didn't take long, you ****** http://www.eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=12427139
Keep up the good work all  |
Daneel Trevize
The Scope
Gallente Federation
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 21:32:00 -
[5] - Quote
T2 ganglinks, on a maxed Loki, with a mindlink. 6.5km/s
Quafe Zero makes it >6.8km/s |
Daneel Trevize
The Scope
Gallente Federation
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 01:41:00 -
[6] - Quote
wallenbergaren wrote:389m/s before mwd Bzzt, wrong. PyFA says 486m/s before using the mwd. I'm guessing EFT isn't giving the "Special Ability: 25% bonus to max velocity..." |
Daneel Trevize
The Scope
Gallente Federation
82
|
Posted - 2012.03.11 12:32:00 -
[7] - Quote
Such high expectations for everything I have downloading right now 
Also, didn't you have another vid up on your channel last night, that's gone/private now? |
Daneel Trevize
The Scope
Gallente Federation
92
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 10:11:00 -
[8] - Quote
BSB, Y U NO UPLOAD MOAR GUD FITES?! |
Daneel Trevize
The Scope
Gallente Federation
92
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 11:59:00 -
[9] - Quote
Well that description sounds like music to my ears
Happy Easter
Edit: did you intent that you're left audio only, and Kovorix right?
With one talking only for most of the time, it's a bit awkward to listen to imho. |
Daneel Trevize
The Scope
Gallente Federation
123
|
Posted - 2012.05.21 12:12:00 -
[10] - Quote
Negative, afaik the Size column is static and doesn't react to mwd, painters, etc. And there's no Mass column. Haven't heard the latest podcast yes but oversized propmod should be identifiable by slow but steady speed build-up (because of terrible agility), obviously going mwd-ish speed under a scram, and inability to orbit close/turn tightly when it would be advantagous to (I think you get them to turn tightly if at the end of an AB cycle and you stop running it for a sec which loses the mass but coasts on the speed for a bit allowing a tighter turn & then burn but can't be done at just any time).
All prop mods increase mass. |
|
|
Daneel Trevize
The Scope
Gallente Federation
152
|
Posted - 2012.07.02 19:40:00 -
[11] - Quote
That roam vid is pretty epic, especially when at least an hour in you're panicked that's it's not recorded after such unexpected success. |
Daneel Trevize
The Scope
Gallente Federation
152
|
Posted - 2012.07.10 00:02:00 -
[12] - Quote
By god I hope your CCP communication is 2 way/that they listen to this and they get a handle on the tier3 and ASB issues already. |
Daneel Trevize
The Scope
Gallente Federation
166
|
Posted - 2012.07.14 23:09:00 -
[13] - Quote
Aldap, in Club Bear just like Kil2, and with good vids out here in My Eve.
Also Kil2 may have been meaning his Zealot, as in how it was fitted & rigged, or just how he was comfy with flying it, especially without 'force multipliers'.
Also IIRC it has fitting issues, especially CPU even after using Focused Pulses to sort the PG. |
Daneel Trevize
The Scope
Gallente Federation
167
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 00:09:00 -
[14] - Quote
Actually 3xnavy 400s in a T2 medium injector is better under neuts than 1x800. There are similar rare cases to use the greater numbers of weaker charges per reload.
ASBs are OP. Maybe CCP will tone them down and also give armour something better than they've had until now (excluding the terrible RAH). Or maybe they just keep adding new unbalanced things so we forget about the last even-worse-than-before issues like Tier3s, ECM, Tengus/Machs/etc, etc.
And IIRC w.r.t. EP17 and lack of tier2 BCs packing a link each, you briefly touched on the point that ganglinks need SP, but IMHO it's really a lot of dedicated SP to get decent links, and thus usually involving a remap to Charisma, which isn't something very tempting for anyone to do to their main if they want to unlock more direct PvP ships & weapons. There's a lot more people able to fly BCs than ever planning to be able to run even a T1 ganglink, let alone the skills for mindlinks & command processors.
A gang of 5 newer players can quickly be effective in BCs with medium weapons while also skilling for T2 things they want to & improving their isk-making options much before leadership skills seem worthwhile. I'd assume much more 10+ man gangs are organised enough to pack such cheap link ships, but that gangs smaller than that are liable to just learn to try pilot their unbonused ships better than their equally unbonused enemies.
Once they're decent & older they might decide the mindlink is worth acquiring and risking, as it vastly increases what they're putting on the line in nullsec with today's mindlink prices. It's got to be doubling your loss costs with each pod vs just an insured BC gang getting wiped.
Remember newer players are likely to use their initial remaps to get core int/mem skills, and older players can fund an alt to train stuff like ganglinks. By which point the older ones are perhaps happy in T2 ships, or larger fleets with T3 links, or solo BCs that have no ability to benefit from links they can fit. Link modules might need an SP/attributes requirements change if you want T1 destroyers/smaller than BCs to fit them for newer players to specialise into. Not to say that highly planned young characters couldnt go straight to powerful AT-style gangs, but how would many noobs know so much about mechanics to make such informed choices so early in their game lives for it to be a common thing?
P.S. forum ate part of my post and it's too late for me to hunt for missing minor edits, apologies in advance :/ |
Daneel Trevize
Give my 11percent back
179
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 23:50:00 -
[15] - Quote
A few points about the Prom/Honour/uncertain fights discussion:
Things that can take on more, i.e. shiny BSs, can't easily catch what they can comfortably take on & overwhelm (cruiser/nano BC gang). As you increase dps or range or tank without loses from these other stats you go up ship sizes, and that loses you mobility and basic things like lock speed. So as much as a powerful ship needs to seek out larger numbers or tougher ships to maintain uncertainty in the outcome, they also lose the ability to take the most easy wins/ganks. IIRC the largest mechanical enforcement of this reasonable power-matching is tracking. Second would be that tackle doesn't increase in range/power with other stats for a solo ship, and only T3s and linked pirate BSs really buck this.
Honour is a 'prisoner dilemma' style problem.
Focusing more on the ECM issue than blobbing, I see it that with the assumption people want those uncertain good close fights, they would agree that ECM is overpowered. If everyone was without ECM in any form, almost all fights would probably be better (at least more fun and better for your fun/isk or time invested). As you say, ignoring the direct 1v1s which would then have less uncertaintly, at least 1 or many v many would have more player-action-dependant outcomes.
But as soon as someone chooses not to bring the ec-300s because of this, but others still have them, you only weaken your chances of better fights. When you're caught in a bad situation that is or isn't avoidable, you can't easily escape/win, while the other people can, and also probably make the average fight go their way as much as dps/other ewar drones would have, or at least cause too many annoying RNG-based results than desired.
As for the tiny gangs/roam corp ideal, I think people just need a 'matchmaking' service to find a wingmate or two. If each day you could easily find someone in the same TZ/availability as yourself, and wants to fly in the same ship class/a complimentary setup as you were after at that moment, you would probably find loads of people happy to mix it up with a constantly changing bunch of fleetmates. As soon as they have a ship/setup they feel worth taking the risk on, they'll be out there flying & dying until they need a change of pace to cover the fun loses, or want to try another ship/setup they've skilled for/feel suits the changing meta.
My thoughts of a static corp are that people fixate on specific setups that outperform the average, that they find reliable, and will focus on using them and converting others to the flock, and min-maxing the fits around their strengths, rather than seeking another setup with comparable overall cost and abilities but very different hull sizes or tech levels. E.g. 3 nano BCs or 3 armour HACs are more likely to have a 4th person available in the same TZ pick up the same ship to ensure they're consistently able to field their gang each night, rather than swap to 3 frigs and a BS, or 2 t2 frigs and 2 t1 cruisers, or 2 frigs, 1 T3, 1 logi.
A 10+ man corp based in the same game area and activity TZ is surely most likely to be together due to overlapping SP and ship experience and then ensure all are keeping up with a gradually raising standard for 'their' fleet than because they can each bring very varied options to the table and develop some round-robin/daisy-chaining of passing setups & knowledge.
If I could find a couple of previously-unknown-to-me people that were online when I could be, and some basic was to ensure they were similarly-minded & competent, I wouldn't mind taking it in turns to try each other's crafted setups, be that as the only lynchpin T3 or logi or t1 frig in a brawling or kiting gang. As long as there was some way to convey that '**** happens' or you all knew you were taking a big risk and that's why it looks like you performed badly, reputations would be able to be sustained so that you could hook up with another player or 2 the next day/week and still be as trusted to bring the full envisioned fit & fly your best to have the rarer fights.
A concete implentation might be that people can upload gang fits & key required skills to a site, along with a TZ window, and others can draw slots to fill such gangs. You'd be able to assess if you thought the idea would work, even discuss with the creators before committing to buying & turning up, but then once all are willing to give it a go, you know what you'll be trying & that it wasn't missing something/someone key, and had a very wide selection of similar and different fleets to take a slot for instead. |
Daneel Trevize
Give my 11percent back
185
|
Posted - 2012.09.12 10:31:00 -
[16] - Quote
Hibernate until Winter is a go? |
Daneel Trevize
Give my 11percent back
259
|
Posted - 2012.12.22 14:03:00 -
[17] - Quote
kessah wrote:Very informative. Hey, you're back! |
Daneel Trevize
Give my 11percent back
382
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 18:06:00 -
[18] - Quote
maCH'EttE wrote:'am a crack head. |
|
|
| |
|