Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |

Winter Archipelago
Furtherance.
398
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 18:59:06 -
[61] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Winter Archipelago wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:Along with all existing broadcastable items Could you elaborate a bit on what you mean by this? Does this mean that, if we broadcast a location (such as a scanned target), the fleet can warp via the broadcast? Or will this be limited to the aforementioned locations that were already warpable? Or am I missing the mark entirely? You can't broadcast a probe result as a Warp-to now, so it won't be broadcastable after the changes. Minchurra wrote:1. Can I fleet warp my fleet to a fleet member as I can now, or does it require extra steps? (Right click watch list > Warp fleet to) 2. Can I fleet warp my fleet to a personal bookmark I made a couple years ago as I can now, or does it require extra steps? (Right click in space > Warp fleet to) 3. Can I fleet warp my fleet to a personal bookmark, or one belonging to somebody else once it has been broadcast? 1. You can fleet-warp to a fleet member as you can now. 2. You can not fleet-warp to a personal bookmark or probe result. Instead, you can broadcast that bookmark and fleet members can warp themselves. Or a fleet member can warp to the bookmark, then you can fleet-warp to the fleet member. 3. You can't fleet-warp to broadcast bookmarks. It's still disproportionately harsher on small gangs than large, since we can't always spare the single person (which may be 15-50% of the DPS) as a dedicated prober / scout, and it's still bloody pointless to send the gimped prober ship (again, 15-50% of the fleet) in to be a suicide bookmark. I suppose it's better than it was, though. Now instead of a shotgun to the face, it's just a crowbar to the legs.
Planning a trip to Thera? Check out http://eve-scout.com/ for a list of the current connections.
Once you've made your choice, join the channels EVE-Scout or Furtherance Public and request a scout to make sure your connection is clear!
|

SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
314
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 19:28:42 -
[62] - Quote
Mostlyharmlesss wrote:Uh what. I don't understand what you mean with stopping bubbles and slippery petes - They're bubble immune. This change will make them harder to catch(?) and thus making everyone fly them. The only counter to slippery petes are combat probing and landing right ontop of them with scrams. Y'know, the very thing you just made harder. You are right and wrong.
Yes, Slipper Petes are bubble immune and doing any kind of defensive bubbling or offensive is not helpful.
No, this change does not mean they are unstoppable. You are forgetting that because bombing runs will not be super easy for the casual like now. So that means proper snipping battleships and battle cruisers will be a major threat to Slipper Petes. Petes sport no tank while conventional snipping battleships and battle cruisers do.
Overall this change is very good. 
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!
|

Dominous Nolen
Powder and Ball Alchemists Union Mordus Angels
77
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 19:47:06 -
[63] - Quote
knobber Jobbler wrote:You could just solve the bombing problem by making them decloak each other again under 2k and put the actual skill back in being a bomber FC and pilot. It would remedy so many of the issues you're trying to solve.
Oh please no... They brought this one to table 6 months+ ago and the decloak changes were to wide reaching outside of bombers. unless they put some way to see cloaked fleet members this would be utter chaos.
This is EVE, Not Hello Kitty: Island Adventure
===================================
Powder and Ball Alchemists Union - "Turning Lead into Gold since 2008"
|

Dermeisen
20
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 19:47:27 -
[64] - Quote
+1 a good compromise - you have effective addressed: the worm-hole contingent and mission runners while excluding the bombers and fleet fights, your stated goal in fact. I hope you stick to a reasonable delay for newly created bookmarks, a few mins + should be ample.
"Not the Boreworms!"
|

P3ps1 Max
Hedion University Amarr Empire
28
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 19:49:57 -
[65] - Quote
This means you cannot fleet-warp to the following: Bookmarks weGÇÖve done some magic on our code and now a wider range of objects will be broadcastable as a Warp-To: Bookmarks.
 |

TigerXtrm
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
1174
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 19:51:02 -
[66] - Quote
In before tears... oh. Aw 
My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!
My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
|

Winter Archipelago
Furtherance.
399
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 19:51:13 -
[67] - Quote
Dermeisen wrote:+1 a good compromise - you have effective addressed all: the worm-hole contingent Like Hell it does. Get out of the NPC corp and try spending some time in a wormhole corp before making such an asinine statement.
Planning a trip to Thera? Check out http://eve-scout.com/ for a list of the current connections.
Once you've made your choice, join the channels EVE-Scout or Furtherance Public and request a scout to make sure your connection is clear!
|

Dermeisen
20
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 19:53:16 -
[68] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Mostlyharmlesss wrote:Uh what. I don't understand what you mean with stopping bubbles and slippery petes - They're bubble immune. This change will make them harder to catch(?) and thus making everyone fly them. The only counter to slippery petes are combat probing and landing right ontop of them with scrams. Y'know, the very thing you just made harder. You are right and wrong. Yes, Slipper Petes are bubble immune and doing any kind of defensive bubbling or offensive is not helpful. No, this change does not mean they are unstoppable. You are forgetting that because bombing runs will not be super easy for the casual like now. So that means proper snipping battleships and battle cruisers will be a major threat to Slipper Petes. Petes sport no tank while conventional snipping battleships and battle cruisers do. Overall this change is very good. 
This comment is really over due thanks!
"O wonder! How many godly doctrines are there here! How beauteous they are!
O brave new world, That has such doctrines in it"
"Not the Boreworms!"
|

Dermeisen
20
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 20:01:42 -
[69] - Quote
Winter Archipelago wrote:Dermeisen wrote:+1 a good compromise - you have effective addressed all: the worm-hole contingent Like Hell it does. Get out of the NPC corp and try spending some time in a wormhole corp before making such an asinine statement.
Honestly dude you're ad hominem aside I've been playing this game an order of magnitude longer that the age of this toon. That aside why exactly is my comment asinine?
"Not the Boreworms!"
|

Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
363
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 20:09:00 -
[70] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Mostlyharmlesss wrote:Uh what. I don't understand what you mean with stopping bubbles and slippery petes - They're bubble immune. This change will make them harder to catch(?) and thus making everyone fly them. The only counter to slippery petes are combat probing and landing right ontop of them with scrams. Y'know, the very thing you just made harder. You are right and wrong. Yes, Slipper Petes are bubble immune and doing any kind of defensive bubbling or offensive is not helpful. No, this change does not mean they are unstoppable. You are forgetting that because bombing runs will not be super easy for the casual like now. So that means proper snipping battleships and battle cruisers will be a major threat to Slipper Petes. Petes sport no tank while conventional snipping battleships and battle cruisers do. Overall this change is very good. 
Except, of course, that Petes lock battleships and ABCs much faster than Battleships and Attack Battlecruisers lock cruisers with no sig bloom. Lock, volley, warp off. Every time you warp off, the FC is repositioning his cloaky prober by warping off in a different direction, refreshing probes, warping back at 70. Fleet warp from similar direction to the cloaky @70-100, et voila! perfect warp-ins via fleet warp, Petes align, lock, volley, repeat.
Edit to add: also, no, to do a real sniping battlecruiser (ie: an attack battlecruiser), they generally don't have the room for a tank. Too busy mounting tracking computers, sensor boosters, etc. |
|

Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
363
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 20:11:09 -
[71] - Quote
Dermeisen wrote: This comment is really over due thanks!
"O wonder! How many godly doctrines are there here! How beauteous they are!
O brave new world, That has such doctrines in it"
Except for the part where he's pretty much completely wrong. |

Dermeisen
21
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 20:14:49 -
[72] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Mostlyharmlesss wrote:Uh what. I don't understand what you mean with stopping bubbles and slippery petes - They're bubble immune. This change will make them harder to catch(?) and thus making everyone fly them. The only counter to slippery petes are combat probing and landing right ontop of them with scrams. Y'know, the very thing you just made harder. You are right and wrong. Yes, Slipper Petes are bubble immune and doing any kind of defensive bubbling or offensive is not helpful. No, this change does not mean they are unstoppable. You are forgetting that because bombing runs will not be super easy for the casual like now. So that means proper snipping battleships and battle cruisers will be a major threat to Slipper Petes. Petes sport no tank while conventional snipping battleships and battle cruisers do. Overall this change is very good.  Except, of course, that Petes lock battleships and ABCs much faster than Battleships and Attack Battlecruisers lock cruisers with no sig bloom. Lock, volley, warp off. Every time you warp off, the FC is repositioning his cloaky prober by warping off in a different direction, refreshing probes, warping back at 70. Fleet warp from similar direction to the cloaky @70-100, et voila! perfect warp-ins via fleet warp, Petes align, lock, volley, repeat. Edit to add: also, no, to do a real sniping battlecruiser (ie: an attack battlecruiser), they generally don't have the room for a tank. Too busy mounting tracking computers, sensor boosters, etc.
It's a grey area, and perhaps the balance needs a tweak, but doesn't it just bode well you old sourpuss :)
"Not the Boreworms!"
|

Vic Jefferson
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
453
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 20:18:07 -
[73] - Quote
I don't see why you want to enable more kiting tactics in general here. Fleets in the same system should have a very hard time avoiding each other. Big battles are continuing to produce smaller and smaller body counts because all the kiting doctrines allow it to be so easy to either not engage, or disengage after the fact. It creates boring, one dimensional game play. People want to see big numbers on both sides, and have a fight worth remembering. The toxic range and speed meta is killing this at every level.
Now obviously, no one really has man-mode brawls any more, especially at large scale...because bombs, and because a kiting fleet will decimate a brawling one, especially in the wake of these changes. Brawling is dead in this game period now really, or at the very least a few steps closer to it.
You needed a bandaid to deal with bombing runs, and you prescribed instead a game changing frontal lobotomy which still skirts around actually solving bombers.
Adding more tedium to an already tedious game, where you literally need to work to squeeze the fun out of it, is really only a way to keep masochists subscribed.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X
|

Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
363
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 20:25:12 -
[74] - Quote
Dermeisen wrote:It's a grey area, and perhaps the balance needs a tweak, but doesn't it just bode well you old sourpuss :)
No, it doesn't. They've just done their pass on T3s, and that pass did nothing about Petes. Just like the Ishtar changes don't even slightly address the idea that you just have to leave your drones w/in 70km of the enemy fleet, and then you can fart off to 150km+, (in the other direction!) still table to target, still able to give those drones 220km away from you orders to shoot new targets, etc.
The idea that this does anything about Petes - by making it harder to drop your tackle on top of them - is patently ridiculous. If anything, this magnifies the usefulness of Petes, and pretty solidly establishes them as the only snipers worth using.
|

SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
316
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 20:33:34 -
[75] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Mostlyharmlesss wrote:Uh what. I don't understand what you mean with stopping bubbles and slippery petes - They're bubble immune. This change will make them harder to catch(?) and thus making everyone fly them. The only counter to slippery petes are combat probing and landing right ontop of them with scrams. Y'know, the very thing you just made harder. You are right and wrong. Yes, Slipper Petes are bubble immune and doing any kind of defensive bubbling or offensive is not helpful. No, this change does not mean they are unstoppable. You are forgetting that because bombing runs will not be super easy for the casual like now. So that means proper snipping battleships and battle cruisers will be a major threat to Slipper Petes. Petes sport no tank while conventional snipping battleships and battle cruisers do. Overall this change is very good.  Except, of course, that Petes lock battleships and ABCs much faster than Battleships and Attack Battlecruisers lock cruisers with no sig bloom. Lock, volley, warp off. Every time you warp off, the FC is repositioning his cloaky prober by warping off in a different direction, refreshing probes, warping back at 70. Fleet warp from similar direction to the cloaky @70-100, et voila! perfect warp-ins via fleet warp, Petes align, lock, volley, repeat. Edit to add: also, no, to do a real sniping battlecruiser (ie: an attack battlecruiser), they generally don't have the room for a tank. Too busy mounting tracking computers, sensor boosters, etc. So instead of alpha'ing multiple ships before they had to reposition, they can only do one before having to warp. Sounds like they are a less effective doctrine after these changes.
Petes have ZERO tank fit. None. Proper sniper battleships and battlecruisers have at least a damage control. I'll pull some real numbers of EFT tonight, but I suspect you will stab your head in the sand about that as well. Another thing is CCP has already stated that they are at the plate ready to unleash the nerd bat on Petes if they become out of control. Waiting to see if they will be a problem before needing them is a good call.
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!
|

Dermeisen
23
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 20:34:20 -
[76] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Dermeisen wrote:It's a grey area, and perhaps the balance needs a tweak, but doesn't it just bode well you old sourpuss :) No, it doesn't. They've just done their pass on T3s, and that pass did nothing about Petes. Just like the Ishtar changes don't even slightly address the idea that you just have to leave your drones w/in 70km of the enemy fleet, and then you can fart off to 150km+, (in the other direction!) still table to target, still able to give those drones 220km away from you orders to shoot new targets, etc. The idea that this does anything about Petes - by making it harder to drop your tackle on top of them - is patently ridiculous. If anything, this magnifies the usefulness of Petes, and pretty solidly establishes them as the only snipers worth using.
Oh, tish and pish I believe that we've been given a clear indication that these kind of tweaks may well be on the cards. If all this not leading to a viable battleship doctrines then I'll be as sorely disappointed as you appear to be.
"Not the Boreworms!"
|

Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
364
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 20:51:41 -
[77] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:So instead of alpha'ing multiple ships before they had to reposition, they can only do one before having to warp. Sounds like they are a less effective doctrine after these changes.
Petes have ZERO tank fit. None. Proper sniper battleships and battlecruisers have at least a damage control. I'll pull some real numbers of EFT tonight, but I suspect you will stab your head in the sand about that as well. Another thing is CCP has already stated that they are at the plate ready to unleash the nerd bat on Petes if they become out of control. Waiting to see if they will be a problem before needing them is a good call.
If you can't touch me, it doesn't matter how slowly I have to work - I'll still win.
CCP's also been saying they had the nerf bat out for Ishtars for... a year now? Even this latest round of changes doesn't really hurt them much at all. |

Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
160
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 21:05:38 -
[78] - Quote
This is much better now and will not make wormhole and NPSI life horrible. Timed fleetwarps are still a concern though. But you should really tell the name of the programmer who made the broadcasting of bookmarks possible. He did something ithin a few days that was on the wishlist for years. |

Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
234
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 21:07:38 -
[79] - Quote
Vic Jefferson wrote:I don't see why you want to enable more kiting tactics in general here. Fleets in the same system should have a very hard time avoiding each other. Big battles are continuing to produce smaller and smaller body counts because all the kiting doctrines allow it to be so easy to either not engage, or disengage after the fact. It creates boring, one dimensional game play. People want to see big numbers on both sides, and have a fight worth remembering. The toxic range and speed meta is killing this at every level.
Now obviously, no one really has man-mode brawls any more, especially at large scale...because bombs, and because a kiting fleet will decimate a brawling one, especially in the wake of these changes. Brawling is dead in this game period now really, or at the very least a few steps closer to it.
You needed a bandaid to deal with bombing runs, and you prescribed instead a game changing frontal lobotomy which still skirts around actually solving bombers.
Adding more tedium to an already tedious game, where you literally need to work to squeeze the fun out of it, is really only a way to keep masochists subscribed.
Basically, this. ^^ CAS is a brawling sort of NPSI, and we already have enough difficulty getting kiting gangs to engage. Encouraging kiting/sniping even more will simply mean fewer fights. We usually just wait for long-range gangs on the other side of a gate, but if they're smart they won't come into us and decloak within scram range. In which case, we simply go on about our business and ignore them as they have no ability to catch us either, and maybe we run into Clockwork Pineapple or similar brawlers and many explosions and much fun is had by all participants. Or if we do manage to be in a position to catch something, either via fleet warp to a scan probe result which is as often done by a line member as the FC, or some fleet member has a previous bookmark near the hostiles, the kiting gangs often bug out and we're left with only a single uneventful kill.
On one hand we have game mechanics like weapon timers preventing gate jumping in order to force conflict, while on the other hand we have new game mechanics promoting conflicts from beyond 150 km promoting the ability to disengage... Seems a bit of cognitive dissonance there.
Kiting gangs have the tools (speed, range) to execute their style of combat - don't take away punting from the toolbox of the brawling gang.
(I guess it is a luxury for us that we can be a mobile combat force - we don't mind ignoring and bypassing a long-range fleet if we judge we can't get any kills from it. However if we were concerned about a static structure, like a TCU, I guess it'd be different - we'd have to engage regardless in which case, I suppose, kiting/sniping vs kiting/sniping it is. -shrug-) |

Zappity
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
2250
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 21:15:20 -
[80] - Quote
You have several design goals. Why does a single change have to achieve all of them? Why can't you make some changes to tick the bombers and kiting fleet goals and then a separate change go address participation?
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
|

Zappity
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
2255
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 21:23:22 -
[81] - Quote
1. What about catching OGB? 2. How does this address the problem brought up in the wormhole soundcloud about the tight timing of catching PvE fleets? The same is true for my hunting style in null.
In both examples you need to get either a fleet or fast tackle onto a probe result very quickly. I understand this is not desirable for large fleets but why is this a problem for small fleets in these scenarios?
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|

Dermeisen
23
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 21:37:22 -
[82] - Quote
This reminds me of that old chestnut: hard cases make for bad law - which is to say that laying down a new framework for the health of this game necessarily requires we look beyond the exception case to the broader issues. Slippery pets are over powered but fozzisov is going to change everything. I sill think it would have been better to have retained squad warp and to to disallow automating warp for cloaked ships, but this will do.
"Not the Boreworms!"
|

Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
258
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 21:47:48 -
[83] - Quote
FearlessLittleToaster wrote:To fix this problem I suggest a second change to go along with the fleetwarp nerf. Make Covops able to run a prop mod while cloaked, but make their decloak radius expand by the same percentage (or even more) as their speed is boosted. This would enable FCs to use scouts to get ahead of fleets that didn't change direction occasionally, make wrecks and debris on the battlefield meaningful, and generally make somebody who really understood how to fly their ship in space worth their weight in gold. Instead of "align to thing ---> call targets ---> see hostiles coming, laugh, punch warp" FCs would have to be constantly asking themselves "is anyone sneaking up on me right now?"
Wow, that sounds like an incredibly cool role bonus, best gameplay suggestion I've heard all year, although I think to keep it simple it should be a fixed radius when using afterburners and another fixed radius when using microwarpdrives. Perhaps 5000m for afterburners, 15000m for MWD. |

Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
258
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 22:01:56 -
[84] - Quote
After the addition of bookmark broadcasts this is... probably not game breaking to deploy any more, although it's still concerning, especially since it is not really possible to get into the same warp bubble reliably by any means but a fleet warp. That said I'm actually pretty interested in the potential of bookmark broadcasts independently of the fleet warp change. Can we also broadcast align to a bookmark? If not, please add that. |

Naglerr
Sanguine Penguin Rote Kapelle
47
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 22:14:52 -
[85] - Quote
Quote:As announced: Fleet Commanders, Wing Commanders and Squad Commanders will only be able to fleet-warp to public objects and other fleet members. This means you cannot fleet-warp to the following:
Probe Results Bookmarks Mission locations After feedback and discussion, weGÇÖve done some magic on our code and now a wider range of objects will be broadcastable as a Warp-To:
Mission locations Bookmarks (newly created bookmarks will have a delay before being broadcastable) Fleet members Along with all existing broadcastable items
Quote:The delay is unrelated to corporate bookmark propagation delay. We'll tell everyone the delay between creating a bookmark and broadcasting it soon! =)
First, legitimate thank you to CCP for considering any change to their plans at all as a result of player feedback. I'm a bit surprised.
Unfortunately this still does not make the proposed changes acceptable for me. You still can't warp to probe results(squad style or broadcast) and you still can't warp to bookmarks without waiting for whatever duration delay they are talking about adding on top of propagation time. Any delay more than the current system makes landing a target much more of an unlikely proposition.
I'd be willing to adapt to the new style of play, but there is one thing that bothers me: CCP has now openly stated that they want to specifically nerf/remove the style of EVE play that I use. I fly in a very small gang with many sets of probes and we land on targets with usually single digit seconds to spare. This change will reduce and remove fights that I am currently getting when it goes live. CCP is intentionally driving this game to be one that makes initiating a fight with tackle landed on the enemy fleet much harder. Without tackle kills will simply not happen as often unless you are in a sniper fleet or something. I guess I'll take this not so subtle hint from CCP that EVE is no longer the game for me.
If/when these changes are reverted/canceled then I'll probably be back. Until then I suppose I'll go do something useful with my new-found free time. |

Leeluvv
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
26
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 22:15:43 -
[86] - Quote
In war you manoeuvre into battle as a formation, not as individuals. Once the fight has begun, tactical manoeuvring becomes important, but not at the expense of the formation's mission. I haven't got a clue what CCP are trying to achieve with these changes, but I'm looking forward to defensive fleets picking off the hostiles as they land, because the opposing force is no longer capable of manoeuvring as a formation.
|

Zappity
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
2255
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 22:18:14 -
[87] - Quote
Naglerr wrote:CCP has now openly stated that they want to specifically nerf/remove the style of EVE play that I use. I fly in a very small gang with many sets of probes and we land on targets with usually single digit seconds to spare. This change will reduce and remove fights that I am currently getting after the change. Pretty much sums it up for me. It is frustrating. Leave my gameplay alone.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|

Naglerr
Sanguine Penguin Rote Kapelle
47
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 22:19:36 -
[88] - Quote
I'm not sure why a new thread was created, but the previous related discussion on this topic can be found here(original fleet warp thread): https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=429367 |

KanmanDS
Sanguine Penguin Rote Kapelle
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 22:28:59 -
[89] - Quote
The changes are still completely game breaking for my style of gameplay (which is very engaging for my small gang of pilots, not F1 jockeys). The changes you are making will only make it harder to get in to fights while having no impact on a ship/fleet's ability to get out of a fight. This will decrease the amount of ship explosions in the game.
The reason that fleet meta evolved to 'close range only' is that fights against ships that aren't tackled is a complete waste of time. They can simply warp off when things aren't going their way. Lame. This change encourages fights where ships simply warp away before blowing up.
You are creating a system where ships that do not wish to fight will be very easily capable of evading combat situations, virtually eliminating piracy in the game. If they just go to tacs over gates all the time, it will be impossible to get the fleet to them before they warp again. If they go to safe spots to evade gate camps, it will be impossible for the prober to get tackle ships to the probe results before it warps again.
I have been conducting extensive piracy in HED-GP for about a year. I can assure you that the windows of opportunity to be in the right place at the right time to achieve tackle before it MWDs away or warps off is 3-8 seconds, and that's with fast-locking, fast-warping frigates. We miss tackle on about 60% of the ships we warp to (entering warp to the bubble they will be stopped in while the target itself is also in warp). That's how narrow the time margin is. We have to predict where they are warping and meet them there. We can't wait to see where they go. Introducing delays of any kind to the fleet mobility ends piracy.
Too much chasing, kiting, sniping, and running around. Not enough Pew Pew.
As for using probers as tackle, I will not be using 3 billion isk worth of Virtue implanted, faction-fit scanner ship with barely 1,000 ehp to tackle a T3 'unscannable' booster for a killmail of maybe 300-700 million. The risk isn't worth the reward.
As stated in my previous comment on the other thread, I will be allowing all of my accounts to lapse, because this change takes away the play-style that I enjoy about this game. |

Nanar DeNanardon
Babylon Knights DARKNESS.
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 23:15:49 -
[90] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Minchurra wrote:1. Can I fleet warp my fleet to a fleet member as I can now, or does it require extra steps? (Right click watch list > Warp fleet to) 2. Can I fleet warp my fleet to a personal bookmark I made a couple years ago as I can now, or does it require extra steps? (Right click in space > Warp fleet to) 3. Can I fleet warp my fleet to a personal bookmark, or one belonging to somebody else once it has been broadcast? 1. You can fleet-warp to a fleet member as you can now. 2. You can not fleet-warp to a personal bookmark or probe result. Instead, you can broadcast that bookmark and fleet members can warp themselves. Or a fleet member can warp to the bookmark, then you can fleet-warp to the fleet member. 3. You can't fleet-warp to broadcast bookmarks.
This is still really annoying for multi-accounts mining fleet as it still deny to warp to a bookmark closed to the belt (200-300km) to warp to a choosen asteroid. And no, experimented null sec miners don't warp directly into belt. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |