Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 26 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 14 post(s) |
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
1580
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 22:22:40 -
[271] - Quote
god these are so broken.......
Links... god why more links...
WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
Yaay!!!!
|
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
15
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 22:26:23 -
[272] - Quote
I don't believe we've ruled out incursions. ISK/HOUR isn't the argument. Losing your ship because one person pressed one button is what bugs me. He isn't going to vaporize in 5 seconds if suspect. And bringing dedicated tackle, ie HIC is absurd as the only reason they would be in fleet is for anti-tackle roles. Not to mention a fleet of folks in these ships. If 10 talwars can reach the incursion fleet to kill one blinged ship, so could 10 command destroyers, but the catch is the whole fleet. With a much bigger payout too. How many HICs do you need to have on hand? Is the fleet warping the moment the destroyer gang lands on the gate? That dooms anyone currently tackled by the rats. So the destroyers don't even have to use their MJD to get kills.
Change the volume of isk from incursions to a tenth of what it is currently, people will still run them, and my argument of easy disruption stands. Battleships are not designed to track destroyers. And HICs don't have the dps to be included, especially if tackle is their only role. They have the tank but are taking up space that a dps could be sitting in. Gankers can be scaled up, infinitely. HIC's can't.
Add to all this discussion about suspect flags, the limited engagement timer. Destroyer lands, is pointed by HIC and popped by fleet. Pilot reships and comes back in a PvP ship. Fleet can't help the people who engaged the suspect earlier without getting a timer themselves. Which adds to the growing chaos. Logi for the ganker comes in and now limited engagement timers are spread across the fleet. So tell me, how is this intended play? Its content for sure. But it's no where near the intended activity of PvE.
Criminal flag reflects the side cases where use can be devastating. Whether the main or majority use is different is irrelevant. The potential for abuse is so high that it cannot be allowed in high sec without a heavy penalty.
Talk about the sandbox all you want. You want freedom to play, go to null. Leave high sec for the bears, the newbies, and the afk. There are enough current mechanics to force people to pay attention. Adding substantial ones like this into high sec will only lead to more ragequits and a less healthy game. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2431
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 22:32:42 -
[273] - Quote
We're never going to see eye to eye because you want to put "PvE" in one bucket and "PvP" in another. Essentially you're wanting a risk free area to grind isk in. You can't do that.
I mean, most people do the same (ref: afk cloaking threads), but you can't do that.
No-one in their right minds is going to say with a straight face incursion isk is balanced by risk. Whether or not THIS would be the nerf that many feel it needs so badly is neither here nor there, the problem is the arguments revolve around isk/hour and the (in)ability to be effectively disrupted.
In the name of protecting the incursioners, all other possibilities are stifled. That's pretty uncool. |
Aivlis Eldelbar
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve Curatores Veritatis Alliance
140
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 22:35:44 -
[274] - Quote
Much of what I have to say has already been repeated by dozens of players, but here it goes, for the record:
1. Stork is a pretty bland name, even for people who don't have english as their first language and don't immediately asociate it to a frog-eating, mute bird with a silly walk.
2. Give the Caldari destroyer railguns! I was already a bummer when you made the Jackdaw (another meh name, but w/e) a missile boat.
3. Give the Amarr destroyer lasers, maybe? At least we got the Confessor as a laser platform, so it's not as annoying as 2. above. |
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
15
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 22:40:44 -
[275] - Quote
afkalt wrote:We're never going to see eye to eye because you want to put "PvE" in one bucket and "PvP" in another. Essentially you're wanting a risk free area to grind isk in. You can't do that.
I mean, most people do the same (ref: afk cloaking threads), but you can't do that.
No-one in their right minds is going to say with a straight face incursion isk is balanced by risk. Whether or not THIS would be the nerf that many feel it needs so badly is neither here nor there, the problem is the arguments revolve around isk/hour and the (in)ability to be effectively disrupted.
In the name of protecting the incursioners, all other possibilities are stifled. That's pretty uncool.
I agree with that. Incursions are stifling neat possibilities that would exist otherwise. I would be fine with incursions reducing payouts, increasing risk, or going away completely (as was hinted at earlier).
On a different subject, I'm surprised people are crying over the links. A 1 link combat ship or 2 link tissue is not going to change the meta while 4+ link T3's are commonplace. Command processors have 150 cpu, each. Requirements to use links have not changed, its still loads of time to learn to use even the T1 link. All this ship does is make it slightly faster to step into a bonused link ship, which can only be a good thing for newer players. By the way, don't forget a T1 battlecruiser can fit links. Several in fact while keeping a tank as well. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
2709
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 22:49:42 -
[276] - Quote
1. I'm very disappointed with an area MJD effect being given to a class that didn't even have a personal MJD before this ship. The area MJDF would have been much better given to a BC or BS class ship.
2. For everyone wailing on incursions, firstly, it's not just incursions, secondly, your 'counterplay' arguments are all ridiculous since the destroyer can't be engaged as soon as it lands on grid, and ignore all the other abuses of it that WOULD occur in highsec as well. It's not 'protecting' incursions. It's just that Incursions are the best fleet example in highsec to show how much griefing you can do with a MJDF in highsec. |
Ovv Topik
Hoplite Brigade
756
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 22:58:23 -
[277] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Lord Jasta wrote:Yet another item that can't be used in high sec, :( why not have this with a criminal timer? We really wanted to but even with a criminal timer you would pretty easily be able to destroy incursion fleets, which seemed over the top :( Couldn't they be allowed in hisec, but the Incursion 'effects' block their use?
"Nicknack, I'm in a shoe in space, on my computer, in my house, with a cup of coffee, in't that something." - Fly Safe PopPaddi. o7
|
Boyamin
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
10
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 23:14:18 -
[278] - Quote
-1
Fix links first, then develop ships to provide on-grid support. Why on earth would you poop before you pull your pants off ? |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1736
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 23:15:45 -
[279] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Lord Jasta wrote:Yet another item that can't be used in high sec, :( why not have this with a criminal timer? We really wanted to but even with a criminal timer you would pretty easily be able to destroy incursion fleets, which seemed over the top :( Is this truly just for incursion fleets or are there other highsec abuses you are trying to prevent? If the former that reasoning seems weak, if the latter it makes more sense. |
Archetype 66
Shiva Northern Coalition.
194
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 23:27:22 -
[280] - Quote
Awesome ! I don't know where it will lead us but that will shake the meta for sure. Long time we didn't such kind of introduction to the game.
One remark a lot of others made in this thread: please consider more diversity between the four hulls and bonus.
One question: I suppose it will not jump ships in invulnerable states, correct ? Even cloacked after a jump ?
As for counters, I think their is a lot of options even for BS doctrines. 6km is a really limited range and within range of smartbombs...50 BS activating SMB should be enough to kill those desto, nah ?! |
|
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
530
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 23:29:53 -
[281] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:Flyinghotpocket wrote:still no t2 coercer and no t2 cormorant. but yet minmatar and gallente get to enjoy mixed weapon t2 destroyers. yay. because the eris is such a great ship right its the only t2 turret destroyer with armor res. sooo yeah it actually is pretty good.
Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
|
Thirdsin
The Red Island Foundation Shadow Cartel
32
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 23:35:40 -
[282] - Quote
I'm still not a fan on the mechanic. It's a cheap feeling gimmick that requires basically no pilot skill and has overpowered impact in how it disrupts organized fleets against the (expected) cost of the ship. Want to balance the risk reward? 5 second cool down to the ships engines after activation. Sure you can jump out those 6 ships, but when you all land you're ******. Still, those 6 ships out of the fight for a minute or more could swing a battle.
What can i say, I dislike kitey stuff and prefer slugfests. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1950
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 23:48:49 -
[283] - Quote
Thirdsin wrote:I'm still not a fan on the mechanic. It's a cheap feeling gimmick that requires basically no pilot skill and has overpowered impact in how it disrupts organized fleets against the (expected) cost of the ship. Want to balance the risk reward? 5 second cool down to the ships engines after activation. Sure you can jump out those 6 ships, but when you all land you're ******. Still, those 6 ships out of the fight for a minute or more could swing a battle.
What can i say, I dislike kitey stuff and prefer slugfests.
Brawling fits generally use at least some warp scramblers, those generally have 9km range, this ship has to be within 6km to have any impact, scramblers shut off this module.
This is going to be fun.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Lelob
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
207
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 23:52:40 -
[284] - Quote
I see no reason to use these over t3s if I cannot run 3 links with a tank. In a game where isk is no longer a real constraint (incursions, whs, etc.) I will choose the better links time and time again. Instead of making these vastly inferior to t3 cruisers at running links, allow them to actually run enough links to be worth a damn and not just be a gimmicky mjd platform that every fleet is forced to bring.
Incidentally, these are so game breaking via the mjd that they will be GURANTEED to be primaried every single time for fear that they will simply sit on top of the FC or the logi wing and just mjd them off into space. It is legitimately stupid to mix the two roles because it means that your links will never, ever live long enough on grid to be useful to the fleet because of how powerful the mjd function is.
What you have created is a link boat that not only cannot do links to any reasonable degree, but a ship so broken that it is guranteed that even if it could do links it will be killed at the outset of every single engagement. |
Alexis Nightwish
347
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 00:05:26 -
[285] - Quote
I absolutely LOVE the direction you went with the drones on these ships! I have always thought that the Amarr drone ships should have more drone bay and/or tougher drones, while the Gallente should have more drone bandwidth and/or higher DPS drones.
I can only hope that with future ships and ship rebalancing this trend will continue!
CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Fixing bombs, not the bombers
|
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
1581
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 00:16:44 -
[286] - Quote
Boyamin wrote:-1
Fix links first, then develop ships to provide on-grid support. Why on earth would you poop before you pull your pants off ?
Ok this made me chuckle.
Yaay!!!!
|
Lelob
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
207
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 00:23:43 -
[287] - Quote
Oh, I almost forgot, this is a massive nerf to shield fleets because they need at least a few people, including logi, to fit scrams to counter-act a few of these dessies to come in and mjd away 1/2 a fleet away. |
Lauren Vaille
The Scope Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 00:30:54 -
[288] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:Design process:
"Battleships and battlecruisers have one unique feature, and they are almost viable for some situations- let's remove the uniqueness quickly"
"Oh and one more thing, let's make only the caldari one useful for links"
I find this point quite amusing - if you have a spare person in a command dessie in a BC/BS fleet - it removes the need for the other BS'es to fit MJD's themselves.
Get everyone to cuddle the dessie, spool it up and bam, saved fleet.
Easy +1 mid slot for tank or cap.
|
Tanya Deering
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 00:31:27 -
[289] - Quote
It is group jumping open to a lot of abuse. I can already see it being used for things such as hyperdunking and griefing of pve fleets. Just-a-saying. |
Ncc 1709
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Phoenix Company Alliance
220
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 00:35:05 -
[290] - Quote
Information warfare is a gallente bonus, yet the Magus hasn't got it? why is this? |
|
LT Alter
Death By Design Did he say Jump
201
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 00:39:43 -
[291] - Quote
Personally I feel that the jump distance should be reduced, something like 50km or even 30km. There are several reasons for this, the most prominent being that with many smaller engagements 100km is much further than engagement range, so you're not repositioning ships so much as jumping them entirely out of combat. It also allows more precise movement of friendly and enemy ships, which I feel gives more options for the module rather than less, especially when you consider chaining jumps. |
Midori Tsu
Evolution Northern Coalition.
143
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 00:40:04 -
[292] - Quote
Ncc 1709 wrote:Information warfare is a gallente bonus, yet the Magus hasn't got it? why is this?
It's because they are worried people won't want to use it. Its kind of dumb really, no one is going to use the pontifex for that reason. |
Nituspar
Shiva Northern Coalition.
32
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 00:59:47 -
[293] - Quote
I honestly feel like CCP needs to look through these changes again, especially the scalability of the MJFG modules for larger fleets.
The second 20-50 of these things land near an opposing fleet, or the fleet's logi wing, one of them is pretty much guaranteed to get the extremely gamebreaking effect off, ending most fights instantly with very little counterplay being available. While I can see the module bringing a fun mechanic for small-gang warfare or when there's only one or two around, scaling into larger fleet fights they'd only bring horrible gameplay IMO.
Especially in nullsec the remainders of the fleet in the original position can be bubbled to death and finished off easily, shortly after just one single succesful activation of the MJFG module, which is frankly just extremely broken and dumb gameplay. Especially considering the cost of these ships probably won't be anywhere close to the point where it'd balance out the extreme effect it can have on a fight.
If these modules actually get implemented you might want to look at making something like a 100km AoE cooldown of a minute or so where another module activation attempt can't occurr, and making the ship currently activating the module extremely visually noticeable for some real counterplay to be available when larger amounts of these ships are brought on grid.
If these ships and modules get implemented in their current form, the mechanics will favour kitey doctrines to a ridiculous extent and might just spell the end of all brawling AB and battleship doctrines, which quite a bit of people seem to enjoy, and frankly probably kill off the little doctrinal variance that we see in nowadays' fleet fights.
Really hoping CCP will revisit this before it's implemented, beacuse as it stands the mechanic itself is borderline overpowered, and scales about as well as the old aoe doomsdays into larger numbers. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1950
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 01:07:19 -
[294] - Quote
Nituspar wrote:I honestly feel like you need to look at the scalability of the MJFG modules for larger fleets.
The second 20-50 of these things land near an opposing fleet, or the fleet's logi wing, one of them is pretty much guaranteed to get the extremely gamebreaking effect off, ending most fights instantly with very little counterplay being available. While I can see the module bringing a fun mechanic for small-gang warfare or when there's only one or two around, scaling into larger fleet fights they'd only bring horrible gameplay IMO.
Especially in nullsec the remainders of the fleet in the original position can be bubbled to death and finished off easily shortly after just one single succesful activation of the MJFG module, which is frankly just extremely broken and dumb gameplay. Especially considering the cost of these ships probably won't be anywhere close to the point where it'd balance out the extreme effect it can have on a fight.
If these modules actually get implemented you might want to look at making something like an AoE cooldown of a minute or so where another module activation attempt can't occurr, and making the ship currently activating the module extremely visually noticeable for some real counterplay to be available when larger amounts of these ships are brought on grid.
If these ships and modules get implemented in their current form, it will favour kitey doctrines to a ridiculous extent and might just be the end of all brawling AB and battleship doctrines, which quite a bit of people seem to enjoy, and frankly kill off the little doctrinal variance that we see in nowadays' fleet fights.
Really hoping CCP will revisit this before it's implemented, beacuse as it stands the mechanic itself is borderline overpowered in fleet fights, and scales about as well as the old aoe doomsdays into larger numbers.
It still only has a 6km area of effect. Don't blob up too much, or if you do, have a proper support wing to counter them. If the enemy has 30-50 pilots in these ships, that's 30-50 pilots you could put into a hard counter (or more of something else) - assuming equal numbers. And, if the enemy outnumbers you that much anyway, then it's not like it will change the outcome that much.
These things have fairly high skill requirements. Even if they are as cheap as Interdictors, I do not expect to see everyone and his dog flying them right away. They will die a lot and can be shut down with a single warp scrambler.
How will this kill brawling? The ship has to come within 6km to do anything to your fleet. Well within even unbonused scram range.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1950
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 01:09:29 -
[295] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:ChromeStriker wrote:Are there any prerequisites for the command destroyer skill??
Also does this mean your going ot change the weapon types on interdictors to match their T1 counterparts and continue the weapon progression? (Hybrids on the flycatcher?) Command Destroyer Prereqs: Warfare link Specialist 4 and Spaceship Command 5
So, this is to train the Command Destroyer skill. Do you need any of the racial specialties to fly a specific ship?
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Nituspar
Shiva Northern Coalition.
32
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 01:18:18 -
[296] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Nituspar wrote:I honestly feel like you need to look at the scalability of the MJFG modules for larger fleets.
The second 20-50 of these things land near an opposing fleet, or the fleet's logi wing, one of them is pretty much guaranteed to get the extremely gamebreaking effect off, ending most fights instantly with very little counterplay being available. While I can see the module bringing a fun mechanic for small-gang warfare or when there's only one or two around, scaling into larger fleet fights they'd only bring horrible gameplay IMO.
Especially in nullsec the remainders of the fleet in the original position can be bubbled to death and finished off easily shortly after just one single succesful activation of the MJFG module, which is frankly just extremely broken and dumb gameplay. Especially considering the cost of these ships probably won't be anywhere close to the point where it'd balance out the extreme effect it can have on a fight.
If these modules actually get implemented you might want to look at making something like an AoE cooldown of a minute or so where another module activation attempt can't occurr, and making the ship currently activating the module extremely visually noticeable for some real counterplay to be available when larger amounts of these ships are brought on grid.
If these ships and modules get implemented in their current form, it will favour kitey doctrines to a ridiculous extent and might just be the end of all brawling AB and battleship doctrines, which quite a bit of people seem to enjoy, and frankly kill off the little doctrinal variance that we see in nowadays' fleet fights.
Really hoping CCP will revisit this before it's implemented, beacuse as it stands the mechanic itself is borderline overpowered in fleet fights, and scales about as well as the old aoe doomsdays into larger numbers. It still only has a 6km area of effect. Don't blob up too much, or if you do, have a proper support wing to counter them. If the enemy has 30-50 pilots in these ships, that's 30-50 pilots you could put into a hard counter (or more of something else) - assuming equal numbers. And, if the enemy outnumbers you that much anyway, then it's not like it will change the outcome that much. These things have fairly high skill requirements. Even if they are as cheap as Interdictors, I do not expect to see everyone and his dog flying them right away. They will die a lot and can be shut down with a single warp scrambler. How will this kill brawling? The ship has to come within 6km to do anything to your fleet. Well within even unbonused scram range.
Even with a proper support wing shutting down every single one of a large group's modules is nigh-impossible, as a single one's effect getting through can be gamebreaking.
6KM is also a large area considering only the ship model's edge has to be in the AoE, and everything within is for all intents and purposes removed from the rest of a large fleet fight.
The reason it affects brawling fleets more than kitey fleets is pretty obvious, they'll have a much harder time dodging these ships and the effect brought with them, especially en masse. |
Jen Moriarty
Snuff Box Snuffed Out
54
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 01:36:28 -
[297] - Quote
Aside from the fact that cyno ships can be moved back to safety, the opposite is also true:
Light a cyno on a station and your ship is moved out and smartbombed together with your pod. And there's absolutely nothing you can do to prevent it except use an empty clone. |
Alexis Nightwish
348
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 01:36:35 -
[298] - Quote
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:Moraguth wrote:Will activating the MJFG flag the person in any way (to give you a good 5 or 6 seconds to blow the ship up or get a scram on it without gate guns lighting you up)?
Are there any limitations (like with smartbombs) on how close you can be to a station/gate to activate the module?
If someone does catch me, and move me 100km away, does that flag me with a capsuleer pvp timer or anything similar?
Do semi-capital ships get moved? (Freighter, Orca, etc)
Will marauders with bastion mode activated be moved?
Will concord be moved? does that count as a hostile action towards concord?
I saw that bombs/drones will be moved... will corpses and wrecks be moved? Will a wreck still be moved if it has an MTU tractoring it in?
......
When we see the full extent of how this module works, will it be the exact same mechanic (except for the 100km in a straight line part) for the Hand of God doomsday weapon that the titans will get? I know your group can be slow, but did you read any of this? Why would a flag be needed, Its banned from Hi-sec. If your moving orca/freighter in low/null without support it deserves to die. Why would Concord be involved? Did you even read the OP? Let Tazzy keep you updated on new things, reading is not your strong point. Its in the OP for all your hi-sec needs. Wow you're pretty stupid huh? I'll try to explain using small words.
"Why would a flag be needed, Its banned from Hi-sec." Have you heard of Low Sec? Did you know you can get flags there too? It's true! Gaining a flag on activation use is important a big deal because of things like gate guns. You know, the things the OP mentioned said in his post?
"If your moving orca/freighter in low/null without support it deserves to die." It's 'you're'*. I agree with you on this, which is why it is important a big deal to know if you can blink a JF away from a station it is cynoing to.
"Why would Concord be involved?" Rub your two brain cells together and try thinking about it. If CONCORD can be blinked and does not make them target the CD, then the CD can be used in HS ganking to remove CONCORD from the field giving the gankers' ships more time to apply damage hurt the target. This would lower the cost to gank vs value of target... you know what? Forget it.
"Did you even read the OP?" His language "knowing how to use words" skill is clearly superior better than yours which is why he asked these important big deal questions.
CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Fixing bombs, not the bombers
|
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
312
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 02:06:26 -
[299] - Quote
I like the concept overall and look forward to testing these out. Also: nice that a frigate/destroyer class hull will be able to sport links effectively for fast roaming groups. |
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
2901
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 02:12:26 -
[300] - Quote
I think this is overall a pretty cool development.
However, a few niggles.
#1 - Stork? No. Come on, can't you make it something cool like the Shrike, or Peregrine, or even the Swallow (African or Eropean)?
#2 - MJD'ing yourself I think that the point which was made about the Bifrost being the fastest missile-chucking kitefag dessie (with shield resists!) and a MJD is very apt. The Bifrost will get LML's, MJFG, midslots MWD - Dissy - MSE - Invul - TD, lows RCU, DC, BCU, etc, and a decent 15K EHP at least, and unlike other small ships it will have the MJD ability. If you aren't even within range of another ship, you just MJD yourself.
I think that's a bit unwarranted. You should be able to MJFG other ships and not move yourself, which means it's an offensive module, not a defensive module like the MJD. You can fling away your foes, but you stay behind.
Yeah, it's cool to see if people can chain up jumps, but this also then becomes a tool for a whole gang to kitefag around and escape en-masse.
#3 - Suspect timer I like the idea of dropping these on gate campers who are hugging a gate and attempt to deaggress and jump, and you pull them 100km off gate. Same for smartbombing BS. That's cool. But certainly activating a MJFG needs the suspect timer and to cause gate guns to shoot you as well, because I can see these being used for ala kachuu people who are trying to burn back to gate. Especially the Bifrost/Stork; web off with a Daredevil or Vigilant, CD pulls you 100 off gate and your victim can't even get back to gate. Great.
#4 - Highsec use Ugh. Afkalt just never shuts up. But the idea of restricting the use of MJFG from deadspace pockets (like inside dungeons, incursions, etc) is a neat workaround to allow the use of the MJFG in hisec for other things, like deafeating gate campers (Marmites, etc), defeating station campers (or their logis).
I'm not arguing any further on incursions, bt if there's a way to preserve the safety of PVE and allow these to b used in highsec, then fine. Although, i think the point that this should be a low-null-wh ship, and people need to leave highsec to enjoy it, is also valid.
Yeah, you might find people trying this on for laffs on hulks in a belt. But really, hulks in belts only die if the pilot is AFK. if you're AFK enough to not warp out when the CD lands, you were going to die to a pair of Catalysts anyway.
#5 - HIC interplay I like the infinipoint 37km scram HICs, and the fact their points allow armour fleets to dominate (non-link bonused faction point/arazu-lach) kite fleets. I also love the idea of dumping a bubble on some RR domis and bringing in a CD for some ala kachuu on one or two of them to break spider domis. This will, finally, be a great remedy against domiballs in C4 Cataclysmics, where the Russians overuse these fleets. Being able to ala kacuu apart such fleets is going to be great craic.
#6 - Frig holes These will be amazeballs for frig hole doctrines, especially with the upcoming T2 Logistic frigates and Navy EWAR frigates; I definitely like the interplay of these small ships and their strong EWAR.
I think the tactical execution won't be as easy as some people think, because no one can be scrammed (target or CD) for the tactic to work, so there's a bunch of ships that will be difficult to ala kachuu - DST's, Ventures, etc.; you'll need to long point, web them down, and then ala kachuu, and get the CD within 6km at the right time.
#6.B boosts I also think these dessies will be useful with links in some situations. Like, frig/dessie roams. Also in frig hole situations. I personally think the boost magnitudes are fine, bearing in mind level 5 will be 10% from the ship, plus the link skills, and (if you dare) an implant.
#7 - Fittings and ship capabilities I'm not sure what the stats will be, as I have yet to plug these in to PYFA and fiddle around, but I also agree; - the Gallente one needs more drone bay capacity - what's with the 1 launcher hardpoint on the Magus? Like...wtf - I think the Bifrost needs more PG (+2?) - I think there's a distinct difference between the armour CD's and shield CD's in that the armour CD's get the spare highs to fit a MJFG and a link, but the shield CD's can only really opt for one or the other without dropping a launcher hardpoint. This means the armour CD's are much more flexible and viable
#8 - Odds and sods - adding my voice for the Marauder in Bastion Y/N? I'd expect a no. - will this move depots? They technically aren't anchored, just launched. It's an edge case, i guess. But I'd expect this won't move depots which would be great for separating a Rattler from its refits, for example.
Doctor Prince Field Marshall of Prolapse. Alliance and Grand Sasquatch of Bob
We take Batphones. Contact us at Hola Batmanuel - Free call 1800-UR-MOMMA
~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 26 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |