Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 85 post(s) |
CoffinBait
Colonial Cartel Praetorian Directorate
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 13:44:58 -
[301] - Quote
Also , is it normal for a system to remain in vulnerable state after the window passes ?
Our window should have closed around 19:30 , 19:40 , but PL were able to continue capturing for at least an hour - even after breaking locks momentarily. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13026
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 14:17:16 -
[302] - Quote
To make your structures secure after the vulnerability period ends you need to regain full control of them. If a structure is in a partially contested state it will remain vulnerable until one side or the other takes full control.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Lebowski
C C P C C P Alliance
622
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 14:18:08 -
[303] - Quote
The issue with Strategic index persistence should be resolved now, let us know if your systems index looks incorrect!
CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0
@CCP_Lebowski
|
|
CoffinBait
Colonial Cartel Praetorian Directorate
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 15:18:36 -
[304] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:To make your structures secure after the vulnerability period ends you need to regain full control of them. If a structure is in a partially contested state it will remain vulnerable until one side or the other takes full control. thanks for the clarification |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
320
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 16:28:26 -
[305] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:I want to make sure we're clear that this was never intended to be a test of fleet compositions and tactics. Unfortunately there was no way to make those aspects realistic on a test server.
This test is intended to help find bugs, to help us improve the UI and how the system is communicated in the client, and to allow players and alliances to try out the mechanical nuts and bolts and understand them better (which helps us get better feedback). Out of curiosity, is it possible to see the logged in player count for Duality during this playtest competition?
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13026
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 16:31:02 -
[306] - Quote
Latest reinforcement timers:
Exit Time Solar System Structure Owning Alliance Defense Multiplier Ongoing YWS0-Z IHub Brave Collective 4.6 Ongoing 4B-NQN Station Freeport Freeport 4.8 Ongoing H-GKI6 Station Freeport Freeport 3.4 Ongoing G-5EN2 Station Freeport Freeport 3.4 Ongoing 9-F0B2 Station Freeport Freeport 2.2 2015.06.25 16:47 Shintaht IHub Fidelas Constans 3.5 2015.06.25 16:53 H6-CX8 Station Fidelas Constans 5.6 2015.06.25 17:01 Y-MPWL Station Fidelas Constans 3.2 2015.06.25 17:08 Y-MPWL TCU Fidelas Constans 3.2 2015.06.25 17:09 VKI-T7 Station Freeport Freeport 3.7 2015.06.25 17:14 H6-CX8 IHub Fidelas Constans 5.6 2015.06.25 17:18 H6-CX8 TCU Fidelas Constans 5.6 2015.06.25 17:35 Shintaht TCU Fidelas Constans 3.5 2015.06.25 17:37 Y-MPWL IHub Fidelas Constans 3.2 2015.06.25 17:39 SI-I89 Station Fidelas Constans 4.8 2015.06.25 17:49 SI-I89 TCU Fidelas Constans 4.8 2015.06.25 18:00 SI-I89 IHub Fidelas Constans 4.8 2015.06.25 18:06 Shintaht Station Freeport Freeport 3.5 2015.06.25 18:15 E-YJ8G Station Freeport Freeport 4.4 2015.06.25 18:32 D61A-G Station Freeport Freeport 2 2015.06.25 19:37 VKI-T7 TCU Pandemic Legion 3.7 2015.06.25 19:43 UL-7I8 Station Praetorian Directorate 3.7 2015.06.25 19:50 F-YH5B TCU Suddenly Spaceships. 6 2015.06.25 20:00 7MD-S1 TCU Praetorian Directorate 4.3 2015.06.25 20:02 UL-7I8 TCU Praetorian Directorate 3.7 2015.06.25 20:03 ERVK-P IHub Praetorian Directorate 4.3 2015.06.25 20:17 BR-N97 TCU Praetorian Directorate 5.6 2015.06.25 20:22 S25C-K Station Praetorian Directorate 3.8 2015.06.25 20:29 IS-R7P TCU Praetorian Directorate 5.6 2015.06.25 20:31 18XA-C IHub I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 1 2015.06.25 20:33 IS-R7P IHub Praetorian Directorate 5.6 2015.06.25 20:34 S25C-K TCU Praetorian Directorate 3.8 2015.06.25 20:34 IS-R7P Station Praetorian Directorate 6 2015.06.25 20:41 ERVK-P Station Praetorian Directorate 3.4 2015.06.25 21:06 BR-N97 IHub Praetorian Directorate 5.6 2015.06.25 21:27 8P9-BM Station Suddenly Spaceships. 3.9 2015.06.25 21:44 F-YH5B IHub Suddenly Spaceships. 6 2015.06.25 21:59 H-GKI6 IHub Suddenly Spaceships. 3.4 2015.06.25 22:18 18XA-C Station I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 2.2 2015.06.25 23:24 D-6WS1 IHub Brave Collective 2.2 2015.06.25 23:29 D61A-G IHub Spectre Fleet Alliance 1.6 2015.06.25 23:51 Z-RFE3 Station I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 3.3 2015.06.26 00:27 0B-HLZ IHub I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 3.7 2015.06.26 00:40 0B-HLZ TCU I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 3.7 2015.06.26 01:23 I-MGAB IHub I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 5.2 2015.06.26 01:29 I-MGAB Station I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 5.2 2015.06.26 01:36 I-MGAB TCU I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 5.2 2015.06.26 01:43 KA6D-K Station No Not Believing 1.6 2015.06.26 01:47 G-5EN2 TCU Brave Collective 3.4 2015.06.26 02:14 3KB-J0 TCU I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 4.3 2015.06.26 02:16 9UY4-H TCU Brave Collective 5.2 2015.06.26 02:19 3KB-J0 IHub I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 4.3 2015.06.26 02:50...
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13026
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 16:32:15 -
[307] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:I want to make sure we're clear that this was never intended to be a test of fleet compositions and tactics. Unfortunately there was no way to make those aspects realistic on a test server.
This test is intended to help find bugs, to help us improve the UI and how the system is communicated in the client, and to allow players and alliances to try out the mechanical nuts and bolts and understand them better (which helps us get better feedback). Out of curiosity, is it possible to see the logged in player count for Duality during this playtest competition? Chribba has you covered.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
320
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 16:57:12 -
[308] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:I want to make sure we're clear that this was never intended to be a test of fleet compositions and tactics. Unfortunately there was no way to make those aspects realistic on a test server.
This test is intended to help find bugs, to help us improve the UI and how the system is communicated in the client, and to allow players and alliances to try out the mechanical nuts and bolts and understand them better (which helps us get better feedback). Out of curiosity, is it possible to see the logged in player count for Duality during this playtest competition? Chribba has you covered. What is your thought of player participation the last week go from about 350 peak steadily decline down to just a little over a hundred at the peak?
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13026
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 16:59:54 -
[309] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:I want to make sure we're clear that this was never intended to be a test of fleet compositions and tactics. Unfortunately there was no way to make those aspects realistic on a test server.
This test is intended to help find bugs, to help us improve the UI and how the system is communicated in the client, and to allow players and alliances to try out the mechanical nuts and bolts and understand them better (which helps us get better feedback). Out of curiosity, is it possible to see the logged in player count for Duality during this playtest competition? Chribba has you covered. What is your thought of player participation the last week go from about 350 peak steadily decline down to just a little over a hundred at the peak? Numbers have been high enough for us to get a lot of good bug reports and feedback. From our perspective they've been fine.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Masterplan
C C P C C P Alliance
1703
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 21:59:22 -
[310] - Quote
Dreamer Targaryen wrote:The system "YWS0-Z" is somehow bugged: - When you are in the system, you are unable to see the HUD (systeminfo, route, opportunities) - The status was: freeported station, brave ihub, no tcu. - After putting up a tcu and activating my entosis-module on it, I went through the warmup-cycle, then the 10min capture-time (white arrow-circle) and after that nothing happened. The tcu seems to be still owned by Concorde and my module is still cycling without doing anything. (De-activating and re-trying to entosify it had no effect either.) - The sovereign-tab of the system is blank. Hopefully most of these bugged systems have now been sorted, and structures should explode and be replaceable in a working manner. Of course if you have any other cases of the UI breaking or s structure doing something odd, please send a bug report from your client (and maybe report it here as well to see if anyone else if having similar issues).
Greygal wrote:On the solar system show info window, sovereignty tab, I like how it now states clearly "Station secure" or "Station vulnerable now".
However, there is no way to see what the vulnerability time window is for the system now. Also, the displaying of the current time followed by a timer that is always starting at two hours continues to cause confusion. I think all the places where that fake 2-hour countdown was happening have now been replaced with real data. (At least they have in the build going out tomorrow, if not already in the one you have)
Greygal wrote:That's odd... show-info on alliances always shows 10:00 to me, which is our default vulnerability window. Is your default vulnerability window 02:00 by chance? You don't realize how much you use and depend on Dotlan until you can't use it, WTB Dotlan for Duality! Yup we've got a defect on the default vulnerability window always showing your own setting when you look at another alliance. Hopefully fixed soon.
We've got a nice update to the alliance's dashboard coming tomorrow that hooks it up to real data from the server, so you should be able to see at a glance all your own structures
"This one time, on patch day..."
@ccp_masterplan | Team Five-0: Rewriting the law
|
|
|
DNLeviathan
Dead Or Alive Inc. Praetorian Directorate
46
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 22:18:22 -
[311] - Quote
Heres a little something that has been bugging the crap out of me although its not a bug. The display in the top left has blue status going left ti right, but when you open system info and view it has blue status going right to left. Can you make them both left to right please? :D |
Ken Cook
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 22:23:22 -
[312] - Quote
So just to be clear about this... Do you can set the individual systems to different vulnerability times? or can you set each of the individual structures i.e. station/tcu/ihun? or is the vulnerability window for all the sov set though the alliance sov window centrally?
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2756
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 00:44:55 -
[313] - Quote
@CCP Fozzie
I was under the impression that anything involving entosis links and capitals was x5.
This to me meant that if you had a 10 minute warm up cycle in a sub cap you'd have a 50 minute warm up time in a capital.
This was a really good way to avoid capital blobs owning the new system.
It turns out thats not the case, and I'm telling you right now that capitals will ruin your system by becoming unstopable entosis machines because it turns out its only EIGHT FRICKIN MINUTES LONGER IN A CAPITAL THAN IT IS IN A SUB CAP.
Seriously, how mad am I right now? I've been a huge fan of this new system thinking you finally had something and understood something and you do this with cap ships?
How can you not see how terrible it is that its only EIGHT frickin minutes longer to use a cap ship?
Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
michael chasseur
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
58
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 00:55:31 -
[314] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:@CCP Fozzie
I was under the impression that anything involving entosis links and capitals was x5.
This to me meant that if you had a 10 minute warm up cycle in a sub cap you'd have a 50 minute warm up time in a capital.
This was a really good way to avoid capital blobs owning the new system.
It turns out thats not the case, and I'm telling you right now that capitals will ruin your system by becoming unstopable entosis machines because it turns out its only EIGHT FRICKIN MINUTES LONGER IN A CAPITAL THAN IT IS IN A SUB CAP.
Seriously, how mad am I right now? I've been a huge fan of this new system thinking you finally had something and understood something and you do this with cap ships?
How can you not see how terrible it is that its only EIGHT frickin minutes longer to use a cap ship?
yeah this has been awesome practice for dual-boxing archons so far, but if it's meant to empower low SP people to take sov, they're in for a rude awakening in slowcat+triage form |
Lucas Quaan
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
101
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 01:03:46 -
[315] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:@CCP Fozzie
I was under the impression that anything involving entosis links and capitals was x5.
This to me meant that if you had a 10 minute warm up cycle in a sub cap you'd have a 50 minute warm up time in a capital.
This was a really good way to avoid capital blobs owning the new system.
It turns out thats not the case, and I'm telling you right now that capitals will ruin your system by becoming unstopable entosis machines because it turns out its only EIGHT FRICKIN MINUTES LONGER IN A CAPITAL THAN IT IS IN A SUB CAP.
Seriously, how mad am I right now? I've been a huge fan of this new system thinking you finally had something and understood something and you do this with cap ships?
How can you not see how terrible it is that its only EIGHT frickin minutes longer to use a cap ship? Um... the cycle time is 5x the normal one. A t2 entosis has a cycle time of 120 s and when you fit it to a capital ship that becomes 1200 s. You can easily change the base time or multiplier if you like, but this is pretty much working as intended.
Are you saying you want a higher multiplier or a longer base cycle here? |
Greygal
Redemption Road Affirmative.
459
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 01:15:44 -
[316] - Quote
Lucas Quaan wrote:Um... the cycle time is 5x the normal one. A t2 entosis has a cycle time of 120 s and when you fit it to a capital ship that becomes 1200 s. You can easily change the base time or multiplier if you like, but this is pretty much working as intended.
Are you saying you want a higher multiplier or a longer base cycle here?
120 seconds times 5 is 600 seconds, not 1200 seconds :)
Grath is correct, taking only 8 minutes longer to capture a node with a capital ship does not seem to be as intended.
If it takes 12 minutes to capture a non-bonused command node with a subcap (2 minute warmup and 5 cycles at 2 minutes each for a 10 minute capture), then on a capital it should take 10 minute warmup and 5 cycles at 10 minutes each for a total of 60 minutes for a capital to capture a non-bonused command node.
If it's only taking 8 minutes longer total in a capital ship, that does not seem to be as intended, and definitely will encourage greater use of capitals as entosis links, because if it is taking 45-60 minutes anyways and a capital only adds 8 minutes, why wouldn't you use capitals?
What you do for yourself dies with you, what you do for others is immortal.
Free weekly public roams & monthly NewBro new player roams!
Visit Redemption Road or join mailing list REDEMPTION ROAMS for information
|
Eve Talaminada
Chao3 Chao3 Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 02:30:06 -
[317] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:@CCP Fozzie
I was under the impression that anything involving entosis links and capitals was x5.
This to me meant that if you had a 10 minute warm up cycle in a sub cap you'd have a 50 minute warm up time in a capital.
This was a really good way to avoid capital blobs owning the new system.
It turns out thats not the case, and I'm telling you right now that capitals will ruin your system by becoming unstopable entosis machines because it turns out its only EIGHT FRICKIN MINUTES LONGER IN A CAPITAL THAN IT IS IN A SUB CAP.
Seriously, how mad am I right now? I've been a huge fan of this new system thinking you finally had something and understood something and you do this with cap ships?
How can you not see how terrible it is that its only EIGHT frickin minutes longer to use a cap ship?
Fully supported!
Using caps for entosis cannot be just a mere minutes longer than subcaps. A significant differences of capture time between sub caps and caps, forcing the caps on the field much longer, is the only thing that will make pilots hesitate to bring a cap as an entosis ship.. They can still easily bring them as powerful grid control ships.
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2756
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 03:33:24 -
[318] - Quote
Lucas Quaan wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:@CCP Fozzie
I was under the impression that anything involving entosis links and capitals was x5.
This to me meant that if you had a 10 minute warm up cycle in a sub cap you'd have a 50 minute warm up time in a capital.
This was a really good way to avoid capital blobs owning the new system.
It turns out thats not the case, and I'm telling you right now that capitals will ruin your system by becoming unstopable entosis machines because it turns out its only EIGHT FRICKIN MINUTES LONGER IN A CAPITAL THAN IT IS IN A SUB CAP.
Seriously, how mad am I right now? I've been a huge fan of this new system thinking you finally had something and understood something and you do this with cap ships?
How can you not see how terrible it is that its only EIGHT frickin minutes longer to use a cap ship? Um... the cycle time is 5x the normal one. A t2 entosis has a cycle time of 120 s and when you fit it to a capital ship that becomes 1200 s. You can easily change the base time or multiplier if you like, but this is pretty much working as intended. Are you saying you want a higher multiplier or a longer base cycle here?
ALL of it should be five times longer.
So if the cycle is normally 2 minutes, it should be five times longer, however if you need to entos a thing for `10 minutes in a sub cap, it should take FIVE TIMES LONGER in a cap, or fifty minutes.
If you do anything else than make it insanely time inefficient to use caps, caps is exactly what will be used because an attacker/defenders initial strain point has been shown to be the entosis ship itself. There isn't a singular subcap that you can make immune to alpha, however carriers -which already see heavy use that CCP d- turn out to be really good at entosis work under fire, regardless of its ability to get help.
I can't stress this enough, if you don't do something about capitals doing entosis work, in the vein of how long it takes them, as in make it super super long in every regard, you're asking for what comes from this.
Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 03:41:31 -
[319] - Quote
i think you guys are mixing up t1 and t2 modules
t1 entosis - normal cycle time - 5 min, capital cycle time - 25 min t2 entosis - normal cycle time - 2 min, capital cycle time - 10 min
that's how multipliers work, if you start with lower base you get x times lower result the alternative would be to either increase the multiplier so it would only make sense to use t2 module on capitals, or to just give them a flat penalty, which is not something CCP likes to do iirc
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2756
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 03:50:22 -
[320] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:i think you guys are mixing up t1 and t2 modules
t1 entosis - normal cycle time - 5 min, capital cycle time - 25 min t2 entosis - normal cycle time - 2 min, capital cycle time - 10 min
that's how multipliers work, if you start with lower base you get x times lower result the alternative would be to either increase the multiplier so it would only make sense to use t2 module on capitals, or to just give them a flat penalty, which is not something CCP likes to do iirc
Nobody will bother with t1 entosis links on a carrier so disregard that, you're already putting a couple billion out there, you'll use t2, so its 10 minutes.
Now, unless they find a way to extend the length of time you need to entos the thing by 5 as well then its never going to work.
Testing has shown that its EIGHT MINUTES longer to use a capital.
That is an unacceptably low barrier to entry for the capital ships that will have terrible results for this sov system and what CCP wants to achieve.
Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 03:58:29 -
[321] - Quote
yeah i just realised that you guys are complaining about the fact that capture times are not affected by cycle times, apart from initial warm up cycle |
Lucas Quaan
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
102
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 06:46:51 -
[322] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:ALL of it should be five times longer. So you're saying not just the cycle time but also the actual capture time then? Gotcha.
Also, ignore my terrible 3AM math above, cycle time is ofc 600 s and nothing else. |
DNLeviathan
Dead Or Alive Inc. Praetorian Directorate
46
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 07:07:34 -
[323] - Quote
why not just make the entosis links non fittable to caps? even with the extended capture time i can guarentee that people will use caps to entosis if they are desperate to capture a system. |
Dreamer Targaryen
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 08:57:52 -
[324] - Quote
Huh, I was under the impression that a capital-ship was ment to capture 5x slower than a "normal" ship. If it really only effects the cycle-time, then this should be indeed corrected.
On a related note: From my understanding, the 5x penalty-multiplier is a compensation for capital ships being ecm-immune (dreads: siege; carrier: triage; supers: in general), so the only counter would be to kill them. Why don't have marauders, who have the same capability (bastion) a similar penalty? |
Salem Kane
Project Pendragon
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 08:58:08 -
[325] - Quote
You should keep in mind that this is a drawback, as also a minor plus for the Capital. The Capital is pinned down for a 10min cycle, but in return, it can run 10min cycles for 1 stront, where smal ships would need 5 stront with thier 2min cycles, which makes a capital more fitting for nodes with high defence multipliers.
What i personally find more anoying, that the cycle runs on when a node is captured. If you run a capital, and you capture the node at 5% on the next cycle, you have to stay around for another 95% = 9 1/2 minutes+1min aggro timer for jumpdrives.
I personally would find it more fitting, to reset the cycle with the capture of a node, or if the cycle is below 50% on capture.
Just my Five cent. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 09:17:27 -
[326] - Quote
Salem Kane wrote: What i personally find more anoying, that the cycle runs on when a node is captured. If you run a capital, and you capture the node at 5% on the next cycle, you have to stay around for another 95% = 9 1/2 minutes+1min aggro timer for jumpdrives. .
that's a good thing though, cause it increases the risk for capitals, discouraging their use (hopefully) |
Salem Kane
Project Pendragon
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 09:20:43 -
[327] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Salem Kane wrote: What i personally find more anoying, that the cycle runs on when a node is captured. If you run a capital, and you capture the node at 5% on the next cycle, you have to stay around for another 95% = 9 1/2 minutes+1min aggro timer for jumpdrives. .
that's a good thing though, cause it increases the risk for capitals, discouraging their use (hopefully)
Yes, but if people really want caps to also have a 5x progress multiplier, you won't see them cap at all. Just tryhard carrier blobs defending the one ship capturing. But you're right, this is a good risk/use balance, keeping a cap pinned for 10mins all the time, but CCP shouldn't touch the capture progress on capitals.
PS.: Totally capturing nodes in a carrier atm.. and F5 dosn't update this site.. but deactivated my entosis link.. rekt. |
BlitZ Kotare
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
133
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 10:38:01 -
[328] - Quote
The entosis module also has a 'cool down' cycle much like going red on a cyno, triage or siege module. So while the node may be won in ~8 minutes faster than a subcap could have done it using a T2 entosis link, the capital ship is stuck there for up to another 10min after that waiting for the module to cycle off completely. In practice, due to server ticks, this means it takes a capital ship ~30 minutes to do what a T2 entosis link subcap can do in 12, because the "cooldown" doesn't start until the node captures, and the node captures at EXACTLY 10 minutes, assuming it was only a 10min node. Of course, this would be even longer if you're attacking something.
To be honest I feel like the 10 minute cycle time on a T2 entosis link is fine, it's 5 minutes longer than a normal triage cycle and puts an unsupported capital ship, which can't receive any friendly support at all, in ongoing mortal danger. Despite how OP this might look on Duality, anyone who uses unsupported triage carriers as entosis ships on TQ is going to get their **** stomped on.
Also please keep in mind we're not talking about one node here, or two, but 5 or more at at time, per sov object that has come out of reinforced. We've seen systems with 50+ nodes in them at once, and that's just on Duality. That's a lot of triage carriers even for PL to field at once, let alone Podunk Alliance. And you have to find some way to defend all of them, spread out around a constellation at the same time. If you attack one and they respond by jumping stuff in? Move on to the next one, there's plenty of multi-billion isk triage carriers to kill (in our fictional scenario where someone tries to capture all the nodes with triage carriers). |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13029
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 10:48:14 -
[329] - Quote
Like BlitZ mentions, the primary purpose of the longer cycle time is to force the capital ship into longer periods of vulnerability (where it cannot be repped, warp or jump) to compensate for their EHP. The cooldown after capturing is also a big deal when we're talking about fights over multiple nodes.
We do expect the 5x cycle time multiplier to be a significant penalty for the system on TQ, just as it is for station services on TQ now. However if capitals turn out to be a problem, it's trivial for us to adjust that cycle time penalty in a minor point release.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13029
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 10:48:41 -
[330] - Quote
New timers list:
Exit Time Solar System Structure Owning Alliance Defense Multiplier Ongoing Shintaht IHub Fidelas Constans 3.5 Ongoing Y-MPWL Station Fidelas Constans 3.2 Ongoing Y-MPWL TCU Fidelas Constans 3.2 Ongoing H6-CX8 IHub Fidelas Constans 5.6 Ongoing Shintaht TCU Fidelas Constans 3.5 Ongoing Y-MPWL IHub Fidelas Constans 3.2 Ongoing Shintaht Station Freeport Freeport 3.5 Ongoing D61A-G Station Freeport Freeport 2 Ongoing F-YH5B TCU Suddenly Spaceships. 6 Ongoing S25C-K Station Praetorian Directorate 3.8 Ongoing 18XA-C IHub I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 1 Ongoing 8P9-BM Station Suddenly Spaceships. 3.9 Ongoing F-YH5B IHub Suddenly Spaceships. 6 Ongoing H-GKI6 IHub Suddenly Spaceships. 3.4 Ongoing 18XA-C Station I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 2.2 Ongoing D-6WS1 IHub Brave Collective 2.2 Ongoing D61A-G IHub Spectre Fleet Alliance 1.6 Ongoing Z-RFE3 Station I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 3.3 Ongoing 0B-HLZ IHub I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 3.7 Ongoing 0B-HLZ TCU I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 3.7 Ongoing I-MGAB IHub I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 5.2 Ongoing I-MGAB Station I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 5.2 Ongoing I-MGAB TCU I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 5.2 Ongoing G-5EN2 TCU Brave Collective 3.4 Ongoing 3KB-J0 TCU I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 4.3 Ongoing 3KB-J0 IHub I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 4.3 Ongoing G-5EN2 IHub Brave Collective 3.4 Ongoing 3KB-J0 Station Freeport Freeport 4.3 2015.06.26 12:29 3D-CQU Station Freeport Freeport 2.7 2015.06.26 21:03 D61A-G TCU Spectre Fleet Alliance 1.6 2015.06.26 23:11 IS-R7P Station Freeport Freeport 6 2015.06.27 00:44 YWS0-Z TCU Brave Collective 3.7 2015.06.27 03:12 SI-I89 Station Freeport Freeport 4.4 2015.06.27 07:58 UL-7I8 Station Freeport Freeport 2.8 2015.06.27 09:14 ERVK-P Station Freeport Freeport 3.4
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |